The "Philosophy of Giving" in Reading: The Millennia-Old Debate Between Absorption and Giving Back give-philosophy-reading-en

 Is reading a one-way act of absorption, or a two-way exchange? On the surface, reading appears to be a process in which the reader extracts knowledge, wisdom, and emotion from a book — the book gives, and we receive. But upon deeper reflection, reading itself embodies a subtle "philosophy of giving": what do we invest in the act of reading? And what do we keep for ourselves from the books we read? The answers to these questions may be far older than you imagine.

A Cantonese song puts it with wry humor: "Sending someone borscht, only your nose gets to smell the aroma." (Click to read original) This seemingly playful lyric touches on a profound question in classical philosophy: when giving becomes one-way depletion, when the giver cannot even nourish themselves, the halo of "selfless dedication" turns deeply ironic. Apply this logic to reading, and it becomes equally thought-provoking — if reading is purely about "acquiring," greedily flipping through one book after another without ever leaving time to digest, ruminate, and reflect, then have we not also become that person with "only a nose left to smell the aroma"?

The Confucian tradition vigorously champions the altruistic spirit of "the benevolent person loves others." In Mencius: King Hui of Liang, Mencius tells the king: "The virtuous person delights in these things only after caring for others; the unvirtuous, even if they possess them, find no joy." The emphasis is on the virtuous first attending to others before considering themselves. Projected onto reading, this becomes "broadly learned in culture, restrained by ritual" — widely absorbing knowledge and then giving back to society. Confucius himself was the paragon of "learning without tiring, teaching without wearying," with reading and educating forming a complete cycle. Yet if reading devolves into pure "knowledge hoarding" — hundreds of books consumed without沉淀, output, or practice — has the meaning of reading not been hollowed out as well?

Zhuangzi: The Mountain Tree offers a sobering perspective: while traveling through the mountains, Zhuangzi saw a large tree with lush foliage that the woodcutters would not touch. When asked why, they replied, "It is of no use." Zhuangzi sighed: "This tree lives out its natural years precisely because it is useless." This is not an exhortation to selfishness, but a reminder that excessive giving, like excessive taking, deviates from the essence of life. Applied to reading, the good reader is not one who "devours" books one after another, but one who knows when to pause and leave room for reflection — just as the song asks: "Can you leave a sip for me to drink?"

Mencius's maxim may offer the best conclusion: "In success, benefit the whole world; in hardship, cultivate oneself alone." Reading is much the same: when you have surplus energy, share the wisdom from books with others; when you need to recharge, quietly read a book for yourself. Reading is not a competition — not about who reads more or faster — but about finding, between each turn of the page, the balance between absorption and沉淀, reception and giving. Save a sip of that "borscht" for yourself, and the taste of reading will truly endure.