Why is false exegesis of analects 9:6 that one cannot be a gentleman and have many skills? Why is it true its about that one doesn't necessarily have to have so many skills as Confucius to be a gentleman?

The Analects 9:6 The original text, annotations, translation and related interpretations are as follows:

原文：太宰问于子贡曰：“夫子圣者与？何其多能也？” 子贡曰：“固天纵之将圣，又多能也。” 子闻之，曰：“太宰知我乎？吾少也贱，故多能鄙事。君子多乎哉？不多也。”

Translation: Taizai asked Zigong: "Is your teacher a saint? How come he has so many skills?" Zigong said: "Maybe God wants him to be a saint, so he has so many skills." After hearing this, Confucius said: "Does Taizai understand me? When I was young, I was of low status, so I learned a lot of crude skills. Does a gentleman need so many skills? Not so many."

Interpretation:

This chapter discusses the relationship between saints and abilities. At that time, "saint" had two meanings: one was "saintly knowledge", that is, having extensive knowledge and multiple talents; the other was noble virtue. Later generations tended to favor the latter, and "saint" also referred to people of great virtue.

Taizai questioned whether Confucius was a saint, because he believed that saints should not have so many specific abilities. Zigong replied that it was God who made Confucius a saint and versatile. Confucius said that he had so many abilities because he was of low status when he was young and learned them for survival. A true gentleman does not need so many skills. This also shows that Confucius' understanding of "gentleman" focuses more on morality and cultivation, rather than simple skills or talents.

Simply put:

Confucius believed that having many skills is not a necessary condition for being a saint or a gentleman; having a high moral character is a necessary condition.

Of course, having more skills is better. Having a high moral character and having more skills are not mutually exclusive, it’s just that “having a high moral character” is more important.