Why should we translate xiao as "being good to parents" and not the prevailing "filial piety" or the less common "being a dutiful son"? Here are two pieces explaining why:

Some people ask me why I translate xiao into English as "being good to parents" rather than the prevalent translation of "filial piety". That's because "filial piety" is open to cultish interpretation.

What cultish interpretation? Well, around 1000 C.E., an intellectual movement came into dominance in China, and some people in that intellectual movement added some tendencies toward absolutes, excesses, metaphysics and cultish thinking onto Confucianism, originally a set of reasonable and practical tenets.

When it came to xiao some people with this mode of thinking advocated a sort of god-like worship of one's living parents, a self-deprecating all-pervasive guilt feeling, constant self-punishment as a form of "offering" and piety, excessive emphasis on obedience and prostration, excessive grieving to the point of quitting all duty and staying night and day next to the parent's grave for a full three years, and so forth and so on.

It was precisely when this mode of thinking was at its zenith, during the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644), that the Jesuit missionaries working at the Emperor's court coined "filial piety" as the term for xiao.

As advocated by the authoritative Confucian classic Xiao Jing, I think that xiao should mostly be a normal day-to-day activity of being good to parents and acting in their fundamental interests. No god-like worship of one's living parents is needed, no self-deprecating all-pervasive guilt feeling is called for, and no extraordinarily painful, self-punishing, excruciating exertion or sacrifice need be involved, except under certain special circumstances. Instead of a subjective state of mind, a "piety", I think xiao is more of an objective state, i.e. a way of conduct, indeed a whole way of living one's life.

Thus I think it is more accurate to translate xiao as "being good to parents" than as "filial piety".

People ask me why I translate xiao as being good to parents and not being dutiful to parents or being dutiful as a son or daughter. It's because xiao is more than just duty; it is a whole way of living one's life. Xiao Jing, the first and most authoritative Confucian work on xiao, says that the xiao of people occupying various positions in society, such as emperors, ministers, officers, commoners, and so forth, is to be good at their callings. Xiao Jing also says that to be xiao, one must not only serve and provide for one's parents well, but must also engage in good conduct both inside and outside the family.

Also, being dutiful often conjures up grim-faced carrying out of some painful task or of some sort of sacrifice, but xiao also includes the normal day-to-day life, the normal day-to-day interactions with parents, some of which may be joyful, like playing and not drudgery. One example is keeping parents up-to-date on one's activities and situation, which is one of the demands of xiao (see verse 12, p.7 Di Zi Gui): often truly xiao offspring have such a good relationship with the parents that updating them means enjoyable and relaxing conversation that all parties look forward to. Another example is respectfully listening when parents teach: offspring should have a relation with parents healthy enough that offspring realize the teaching from parents are greatly beneficial and something to look forward to. Teaching by parents can be fun and enjoyable: I remember well myself looking forward to and greatly enjoying the Sunday afternoon teaching of Chinese classics by my father to my brothers and me as young children.

Therefore, I feel xiao is better translated as "being good to parents".

有人問我，為甚麼把“孝”用英語翻譯為“對父母好”而不是通行的“子女的虔誠（filial piety）”呢？因為“子女的虔誠”一詞，很容易讓人用狂熱崇拜的角度來解釋孝。

甚麼狂熱崇拜？就是公元一千年左右，有一股思潮在中國上升為主流，而這思潮中的一些人，對本來是一套合理和實用原則的孔教，加上了絕對、過分、形而上學、狂熱崇拜等傾向。

說到孝時，那思潮中的一些人提倡好像對神那樣崇拜還活著的父母，對父母懷著一種貶責自己、滲透一切言行的內疚，用不斷的自我懲罰來作為“奉獻”和“虔誠”，過分強調服從和俯拜，過分哀悼父母乃至丟掉所有職責、在墓旁日夜守整三年等等。

正是當這學說處於巔峰時，即明朝時（公元1368－1644年)，在朝廷工作的耶穌會傳教士把孝翻譯為“子女的虔誠”。

好像孔教權威古典《孝經》所說那樣，我認為孝主要是日常行為對父母好，為父母的根本利益行事。不需要對還活著的父母好像神那樣崇拜，不需要那種貶責自己、滲透一切言行的內疚，同時，除非特殊情況之下，也不需要異常痛苦的、自我懲罰性的、不必要的辛勞和犧牲。我認為孝的主要成分，並非是主觀的一種心態或 "虔誠" ，而是一個客觀的狀態，是一種行為，事實上是一整套生活方式。

所以，我認為把孝翻譯為“對父母好”比“子女的虔誠”更為正確。

有人問我，為甚麼把孝翻譯為“對父母好”而不是“對父母盡義務”或“執行子女的義務”呢？這是因為孝不單是義務，孝是整個生活的方式。《孝經》是孔教解說孝的最早和最具權威性的經典；它說，社會不同地位的人，例如天子、大臣、吏士、庶人等，他們的孝，都是要把自己的職責做好。《孝經》又說，要孝就不光只是供養侍奉父母好，還須要家庭內外的行為都好。

另外，“盡義務”令人聯想起辛苦的事務或某樣的犧牲，但孝也包括普通的日常生活，跟父母普通的日常相處。這些都不一定是勞工，亦有愉快、好像是玩遊戲的。例如孝要求子女對父母報道活動和情況（見《弟子規》第七頁第12句）：很多時候真正孝的子女跟父母關係很好，報道就是個很開心、很輕鬆、雙方都盼望的會話。另一個例子就是孝要求，父母教導時要恭敬會心地聽。子女跟父母的健康關係應該達到這個程度：子女們知道父母教導是非常有益的、應該歡迎的，而父母的教導，是可以有樂趣的，令人愉快的。我記得小孩子時，爸爸每星期日教我和我哥哥學古文，我那時覺得這教導多麼好玩、多麼令人盼望。

所以，我覺得把孝翻譯為“對父母好”比較適合一些。