Many scholars recognize that Kongzi 孔子is a complex figure, inviting diverse and competing readings since antiquity. Indeed we can distinguish between the dominant figure of the Master as the revered, immaculate sage of institutionalized Confucianism, and the unsuccessful, limited, and dubious Kongzi. In this paper I explore the philosophical implications of taking this latter Kongzi seriously. I look at passages from the Lunyu 论语 where the Master is viewed as incapable of living up to his own teachings. In other words, instances where he is “bad.” There are at least four areas where Kongzi’s conduct is seemingly incorrect or bad: lying and pretense, sarcasm, lack of restraint, and self-importance. However, we may also take these behaviors in the broader context of Confucian morality, which is highly context-sensitive, tolerant of contradiction, appreciative of complexity and spontaneity, and on the whole unconcerned with the attainment of absolute moral perfection. In this way we can see Kongzi’s misbehaviors not as deviations from an otherwise immaculate behavior, but as expressions of moral behavior in and of themselves. Thus, the bad Kongzi is not the negative counterpart of the utmost sage of the Confucian tradition—we do not need to make excuses for deception, sarcasm, and other imperfections. Being “bad” is part of the Confucian path.