The academic society largely have two opinions about the position of Huang Zong-xi's interpretation of Menzi in the history of thought: first, Huang belongs to the tradition of Wang Yang-ming's doctrine of mind, and second, they see Huang as a naturalist or materialist. Chan Wing-cheuk tries to make a critical review about the immanence of Huang's idea of "qi" based on these two opinions, pointing out that these two opinions do not show completely the limitations and mistakes of Huang's interpretations of Menzi and that Huang's interpretations of Menzi do not surpass the position of his master, Liu Zong-zhou. However, Huang admitted in "Foreword," Mengzi Shi Shuo, that he was worried whether he might have deviated from Liu's doctrine, which reminds us of one thing: we should be cautious about possibility of Huang's interpretations about Liu's doctrine deviated from his master's insights when we inquire Huang's textual interpretations of Menzi and clarify how Huang grasped Liu's interpretations. Examining the interpretations about the concepts of mind and nature in "Hao-ran Chapter," Menzi Shi Shuo, this article is intended to explain how Huang understood the textual meanings of Mengzi based on mind and the monism of qi as well as how his interpretations of Mengzi surpassed the author's intentions. In the meantime, we will contemplate the significance of "Haoran Chapter," Menzi Shi Shuo in the hermeneutic tradition of the doctrine of Mengzi. In attempt to explore this question, we turn to German philosopher, Hans-Georg Gadamer, for his insights about the "historicity of understanding," which concerns the impact of "temporal distance" to understanding.