The growing deployment of large language models (LLMs) in socially consequential settings makes it increasingly important to understand the value systems they encode and the moral judgments they produce. However, existing evaluations are largely grounded in Western ethical traditions, leaving non-Western moral perspectives underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce Sage, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs through the lens of Classical Chinese philosophy. Sage is grounded in major Pre-Qin philosophical debates and represents normative alignment in a continuous six-dimensional value space. It includes three task types and is constructed from over 4,000 passages spanning ten philosophical schools. Experiments on eight leading LLMs reveal that models occupy highly similar regions in the proposed value space, exhibit a clear gap between self-declared philosophical identities and benchmark-measured behavior, and show systematically different reasoning patterns across task granularities. Code and data will be released after publication.