(Section 49)
In the most ancient times, when men were few and creatures numerous, human beings could not overcome the birds, beasts, insects, and reptiles. Then a sage appeared who fashioned nests of wood to protect men from harm. The people were delighted and made him ruler of the world, calling him the Nest Builder. The people lived on fruits, berries, mussels, and clams—things rank and evil-smelling that hurt their bellies, so that many of them fell ill. Then a sage appeared who drilled with sticks and produced fire with which to transform the rank and putrid foods. The people were delighted and made him ruler of the world, calling him the Drill Man.
In the age of middle antiquity there was a great flood in the world, but Gun and Yu of the Xia dynasty opened up channels for the water.
In the age of recent antiquity Jie and Zhou ruled in a violent and perverse way, but Tang of the Yin dynasty and Wu of the Zhou dynasty overthrew them.
Now if anyone had built wooden nests or drilled for fire in the time of the Xia dynasty, Gun and Yu would have laughed at him, and if anyone had tried to open channels for the water during the Yin or Zhou dynasties, Tang and Wu would have laughed at him. This being so, if people in the present age go about exalting the ways of Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, and Wu, the sages of today are bound to laugh at them. For the sage does not try to practice the ways of antiquity or to abide by a fixed standard, but examines the affairs of the age and takes what precautions are necessary.+++(5)+++
There was a farmer of Song who tilled the land, and in his field was a stump. One day a rabbit, racing across the field, bumped into the stump, broke its neck, and died. Thereupon the farmer laid aside his plow and took up watch beside the stump, hoping that he would get another rabbit in the same way. But he got no more rabbits, and instead became the laughing stock of Song. Those who think they can take the ways of the ancient kings and use them to govern the people of today all belong in the category of stump-watchers!+++(4)+++
In ancient times husbands did not have to till the fields, for the seeds of grass and the fruit of the trees were enough for people to eat.+++(4)+++ Wives did not have to weave, for the skins of birds and beasts provided sufficient clothing.+++(4)+++ No one had to struggle to keep himself supplied. The people were few, there was an abundance of goods, and so no one quarreled.+++(4)+++ Therefore, no rich rewards were doled out, no harsh punishments were administered, and yet the people of themselves were orderly.
But nowadays no one regards five sons as a large number, and these five sons in turn have five sons each, so that before the grandfather has died, he has twenty-five grandchildren. Hence the number of people increases, goods grow scarce, and men have to struggle and slave for a meager living.+++(4)+++
Therefore they fall to quarreling, and though rewards are doubled and punishments are piled on, they cannot be prevented from growing disorderly.
When Yao ruled the world, he left the thatch of his roof untrimmed, and his speckled beams were not planed. He ate coarse millet and a soup of greens, wore deerskin in winter days and rough fiber robes in summer.+++(4)+++ Even a lowly gatekeeper was no worse clothed and provided for than he.
When Yu ruled the world, he took plow and spade in hand to lead his people, working until there was no more down on his thighs or hair on his shins. Even the toil of a slave taken prisoner in the wars was no bitterer than his. Therefore those men in ancient times who abdicated and relinquished the rule of the world were, in a manner of speaking, merely forsaking the life of a gatekeeper and escaping from the toil of a slave. Therefore they thought little of handing over the rule of the world to someone else.
Nowadays, however, the magistrate of a district dies and his sons and grandsons are able to go riding about in carriages for generations after. Therefore people prize such offices. In the matter of relinquishing things, people thought nothing of stepping down from the position of Son of Heaven in ancient times, yet they are very reluctant to give up the post of district magistrate today; this is because of the difference in the actual benefits received.
Those who live in the mountains and must descend to the valley to fetch their water give each other gifts of water at festival time. Those who live in the swamps and are troubled by dampness actually hire laborers to dig ditches to drain off the water. In the spring following a famine year even the little boys of the family get no food; in the fall of a year of plenty even casual visitors are feasted. It is not that men are indifferent to their own flesh and blood and generous to passing visitors; it is because of the difference in the amount of food to be had.
Hence, when men of ancient times made light of material goods, it was not because they were benevolent, but because there was a surplus of goods; and when men quarrel and snatch today, it is not because they are vicious, but because goods have grown scarce.
When men lightly relinquish the position of Son of Heaven, it is not because they are high-minded, but because the advantages of the post are slight; when men strive for sinecures in the government, it is not because they are base, but because the power they will acquire is great.
When the sage rules, he takes into consideration the quantity of things and deliberates on scarcity and plenty. Though his punishments may be light, this is not due to his compassion; though his penalties may be severe, this is not because he is cruel; he simply follows the custom appropriate to the time. Circumstances change according to the age, and ways of dealing with them change with the circumstances.
In ancient times King Wen lived in the area between Feng and Hao, his domain no more than a hundred li square, but he practiced benevolence and righteousness, won over the Western Barbarians, and eventually became ruler of the world. King Yan of Xu lived east of the Han River in a territory five hundred li square. He practiced benevolence and righteousness, and thirty-six states came with gifts of territory to pay him tribute, until King Wen of Jing, fearing for his own safety, called out his troops, attacked Xu, and wiped it out.1
Thus King Wen practiced benevolence and righteousness and became ruler of the world, but King Yan practiced benevolence and righteousness and destroyed his state. This is because benevolence
and righteousness served for ancient times, but no longer serve today. So I say that circumstances differ with the age.
In the time of Shun the Miao tribes were unsubmissive, and Yu proposed to attack them. But Shun said, “That will not do! To take up arms while the virtue of the ruler is not yet perfected would be a violation of the Way.” Shun taught the ways of good government for the following three years, and then took up shield and battle-ax and performed the war dance, and the Miao submitted. But in the war with the Gonggong, 2 men used iron lances with steel heads that reached to the enemy, so that unless one was protected by a stout helmet and armor he was likely to be wounded. Hence shields and battle-axes served for ancient times, but no longer serve today. So I say that as circumstances change the ways of dealing with them alter too.
Men of high antiquity strove for moral virtue; men of middle times sought out wise schemes; men of today vie to be known for strength and spirit. Qi was once planning an attack on Lu. Lu dispatched Zigong3 to dissuade the men of Qi, but they replied, “Your words are eloquent enough. But what we want is territory, and that is the one thing you have not mentioned.” So in the end Qi called out its troops, attacked Lu, and fixed its boundary line only ten li away from the Lu capital gate.
King Yan practiced benevolence and righteousness and the state of Xu was wiped out; Zigong employed eloquence and wisdom and Lu lost territory. So it is obvious that benevolence, righteousness, eloquence, and wisdom are not the means by which to maintain the state. Discard the benevolence of King Yan and put an end to Zigong’s wisdom; build up the might of Xu and Lu until they can stand face to face with a state of ten thousand war chariots—then Qi and Jing will no longer be able to do with them as they please!
Past and present have different customs; new and old adopt different measures. To try to use the ways of a generous and lenient government to rule the people of a critical age is like trying to drive a runaway horse without using reins or whip. This is the misfortune that ignorance invites.
Now the Confucians and Mohists all praise the ancient kings for their universal love of the world, saying that they looked after the
people as parents look after a beloved child. 4 And how do they prove this contention? They say, “Whenever the minister of justice administered some punishment, the ruler would purposely cancel all musical performances; and whenever the ruler learned that the death sentence had been passed on someone, he would shed tears.” For this reason they praise the ancient kings.
Now if ruler and subject must become like father and son before there can be order, then we must suppose that there is no such thing as an unruly father or son. Among human affections none takes priority over the love of parents for their children. But though all parents may show love for their children, the children are not always well behaved. And though the parents may love them even more, will this prevent the children from becoming unruly? Now the love of the ancient kings for their people was no greater than the love of parents for their children. And if such love cannot prevent children from becoming unruly, then how can it bring the people to order?
As for the ruler’s shedding tears when punishments are carried out in accordance with the law—this is a fine display of benevolence but contributes nothing to the achievement of order. Benevolence may make one shed tears and be reluctant to apply penalties; but law makes it clear that such penalties must be applied. The ancient kings allowed law to be supreme and did not give in to their tearful longings. Hence it is obvious that benevolence cannot be used to achieve order in the state.
Moreover, the people will bow naturally to authority, but few of them can be moved by righteousness. Confucius was one of the greatest sages of the world. He perfected his conduct, made clear the Way, and traveled throughout the area within the four seas, but in all that area those who rejoiced in his benevolence, admired his righteousness, and were willing to become his disciples numbered only seventy. For to honor benevolence is a rare thing, and to adhere to righteousness is hard. Therefore within the vast area of the world only seventy men became his disciples, and only one man—he himself—was truly benevolent and righteous.
Duke Ai of Lu was a mediocre ruler, yet when he ascended the throne and faced south as sovereign of the state, there was no one within its boundaries who did not acknowledge allegiance to him.
The people will bow naturally to authority, and he who wields authority may easily command men to submit; therefore Confucius remained a subject and Duke Ai continued to be his ruler. It was not that Confucius was won by the duke’s righteousness; he simply bowed before his authority. On the basis of righteousness alone, Confucius would never have bowed before Duke Ai; but because the duke wielded authority, he was able to make Confucius acknowledge his sovereignty.
Nowadays, when scholars counsel a ruler, they do not urge him to wield authority, which is the certain way to success, but instead insist that he must practice benevolence and righteousness before he can become a true king. This is, in effect, to demand that the ruler rise to the level of Confucius, and that all the ordinary people of the time be like Confucius’ disciples. Such a policy is bound to fail.
Now here is a young man of bad character. His parents rail at him but he does not reform; the neighbors scold but he is unmoved; his teachers instruct him but he refuses to change his ways. Thus, although three fine influences are brought to bear on him—the love of his parents, the efforts of the neighbors, the wisdom of his teachers—yet he remains unmoved and refuses to change so much as a hair on his shin. But let the local magistrate send out the government soldiers to enforce the law and search for evildoers, and then he is filled with terror, reforms his conduct, and changes his ways. Thus the love of parents is not enough to make children learn what is right, but must be backed up by the strict penalties of the local officials; for people by nature grow proud on love, but they listen to authority.
Even the nimble Louji could not climb a city wall ten spans high, because it is too precipitous; but lame sheep may easily graze up and down a mountain a hundred times as high, because the slope is gradual. Therefore the enlightened ruler makes his laws precipitous and his punishments severe. Ordinary people are unwilling to discard a few feet of cloth, but even Robber Zhi would not pick up a hundred taels of molten gold. As long as there is no harm involved, people will not discard a few feet of cloth, but because they are certain to hurt their hands they refuse to pick up a hundred taels of
molten gold. Therefore the enlightened ruler makes his punishments certain.
For this reason, the best rewards are those which are generous and predictable, so that the people may profit by them. The best penalties are those which are severe and inescapable, so that the people will fear them. The best laws are those which are uniform and inflexible, so that the people can understand them. Therefore the ruler should never delay in handing out rewards, nor be merciful in administering punishments. If praise accompanies the reward, and censure follows on the heels of punishment, then worthy and unworthy men alike will put forth their best efforts.
But this is not the way things are done at present. The rulers hand out official titles to men who have achieved merit but assign them to insignificant posts. They give rewards to the farmers but in practice actually reduce their means of livelihood. They dissociate themselves from those who spurn official position but at the same time praise their contempt for the world. They punish those who violate the prohibitions but at the same time admire their bravery.
Thus the things which they censure or praise are completely at odds with those which they reward or punish.
Nowadays, he who makes certain to avenge any wrong done to his brother is called an upright man, and he who joins his friend in attacking the perpetrator of an insult is called a man of honor. Such a man performs deeds that are regarded as upright and honorable, and in doing so violates the laws and prohibitions of the ruler. But the ruler, lost in admiration for such upright and honorable deeds, forgets to punish the violation of his laws, and hence the people outdo each other in shows of valor and the magistrates can no longer control them.
Likewise, he who manages to get clothing and food without working for them is called an able man, and he who wins esteem without having achieved any merit in battle is called a worthy man.
But the deeds of such able and worthy men actually weaken the army and bring waste to the land. If the ruler rejoices in the deeds of such men, and forgets the harm they do by weakening the army and bringing waste to the land, then private interests will prevail and public profit will come to naught.
The Confucians with their learning bring confusion to the law; the knights with their military prowess violate the prohibitions. 5 Yet the ruler treats both groups with respect, and so we have disorder.
People who deviate from the law should be treated as criminals, and yet the scholars actually attain posts in the government because of their literary accomplishments. People who violate the prohibitions ought to be punished, and yet the bands of knights are able to make a living by wielding their swords in a private cause. Hence, those whom the law condemns, the ruler accepts, and those whom the magistrates seek to punish, the higher officials patronize. Thus law and practice, high official and lowly magistrate, are all set at odds, and there is no fixed standard. Under such circumstances even ten Yellow Emperors could not bring the state to order. Those who practice benevolence and righteousness should not be praised, for to praise them is to cast aspersion on military achievements; men of literary accomplishment should not be employed in the government, for to employ them is to bring confusion to the law.
In the state of Chu there was a man named Honest Gong. When his father stole a sheep, he reported the theft to the authorities. But the local magistrate, considering that the man was honest in the service of his sovereign but a villain to his own father, replied, “Put him to death!”, and the man was accordingly sentenced and executed. Thus we see that a man who is an honest subject of his sovereign may be an infamous son to his father.
There was a man of Lu who accompanied his sovereign to war.
Three times he went into battle, and three times he ran away. When Confucius asked him the reason, he replied, “I have an aged father and, if I should die, there would be no one to take care of him.”
Confucius, considering the man filial, recommended him and had him promoted to a post in the government. Thus we see that a man who is a filial son to his father may be a traitorous subject to his lord.
The magistrate of Chu executed a man, and as a result the felonies of the state were never reported to the authorities; Confucius rewarded a man, and as a result the people of Lu thought nothing of surrendering or running away in battle. Since the interests of superior and inferior are as disparate as all this, it is hopeless for the ruler to praise the actions of the private individual and at the
same time try to insure blessing to the state’s altars of the soil and grain.
In ancient times when Cang Jie created the system of writing, he used the character for “private” to express the idea of self-centeredness, and combined the elements for “private” and
“opposed to” to form the character for “public.” The fact that public and private are mutually opposed was already well understood at the time of Cang Jie. To regard the two as being identical in interest is a disaster which comes from lack of consideration.
If I were to give advice from the point of view of the private individual, I would say the best thing is to practice benevolence6 and
righteousness and cultivate the literary arts. By practicing benevolence and righteousness, you become trusted, and when you have become trusted you may receive official appointment. Similarly, by cultivating the literary arts you may become an eminent teacher, and when you have become an eminent teacher you will win honor and renown. This is the highest goal of the private individual. But when this happens, then, from the point of view of the state, someone who has performed no meritorious service to the nation is receiving official appointment, and someone who holds no government title is enjoying honor and renown. If the government is conducted in this fashion, then the state will face certain disorder and the ruler will surely be in peril. Hence the interests of the state and the individual are mutually at odds, and both cannot prevail at the same time.
To reward those who cut off the heads of the enemy and yet to admire acts of mercy and compassion; to hand out titles and stipends to those who capture the enemy’s cities and yet to give ear to doctrines of universal7 love; to strengthen one’s armor and sharpen one’s weapons in preparation for the time of trouble, and yet praise the elegant attire of the civil gentry; to hope to enrich the nation through agriculture and ward off the enemy with trained soldiers, and yet to pay honor to men of literary accomplishment; to spurn those people who respect their rulers and fear the law, and instead to patronize the bands of wandering knights and private swordsmen—to indulge in contradictory acts like these is to insure that the state will never be well ordered. The nation at peace may
patronize Confucian scholars and cavaliers; but the nation in danger must call upon its fighting men. Thus those who are of real profit to the state are not used and those who are used are of no profit. As a result, those who attend to government business become careless in their jobs and wandering scholars increase in number day by day.
Hence the disorder of our age.
The world calls worthy those whose conduct is marked by integrity and good faith, and wise those whose words are subtle and mysterious. But even the wisest man has difficulty understanding words that are subtle and mysterious. Now if you want to set up laws for the masses and you try to base them on doctrines that even the wisest men have difficulty in understanding, how can the common people comprehend them? A man who cannot even get his fill of the coarsest grain does not insist on meat and fine millet; a man with a short coat all in rags does not insist on waiting for embroidered robes. It is the same in government affairs; if you cannot find the solution to critical problems, you have no business worrying about unimportant ones. Now in administering your rule and dealing with the people, if you do not speak in terms that any man and woman can plainly understand, but long to apply the doctrines of the wise men, then you will defeat your own efforts at rule. Subtle and mysterious words are no business of the people.
If people regard8 those who act with integrity and good faith as worthy, it must be because they value9 men who have no deceit, and they value men of no deceit because they themselves have no means to protect themselves from deceit. The common people in selecting their friends, for example, have no wealth by which to win others over, and no authority by which to intimidate others. For that reason they seek for men who are without deceit to be their friends.
But the ruler occupies a position whereby he may impose his will upon others, and he has the whole wealth of the nation at his disposal; he may dispense lavish rewards and severe penalties and, by wielding these two handles, may illuminate all things through his wise policies.10 In that case, even traitorous ministers like Tian Chang and Zihan would not dare to deceive him.11 Why should he have to wait for men who are by nature not deceitful?
Hardly ten men of true integrity and good faith can be found today, and yet the offices of the state number in the hundreds. If they must be filled by men of integrity and good faith, then there will never be enough men to go around; and if the offices are left unfilled, then those whose business it is to govern will dwindle in numbers while disorderly men increase. Therefore the way of the enlightened ruler is to unify the laws instead of seeking for wise men, to lay down firm policies instead of longing for men of good faith. Hence his laws never fail him, and there is no felony or deceit among his officials.
These days, when the ruler listens to men’s words, he delights in their eloquence and does not bother to inquire if they are apt, and when he embarks upon some undertaking, he is thrilled by the report of what is to be accomplished and does not demand to see actual results. For this reason the people of the world, when they come to make a speech, strive for eloquence and disregard the question of whether their words are practical. Hence the court is filled with men discoursing on the former kings and discussing benevolence and righteousness, and the government cannot escape disorder.
Likewise, in the matter of personal conduct, men try to outdo each other in high-minded deeds, regardless of whether they produce any useful results. Hence, men of wisdom retire from government service and go off to live in caves, refusing the stipends that are offered them, and as a result the armies grow weaker and the government cannot escape disorder. What is the cause of all this? The fact that what the people praise and the ruler honors are actually policies that lead to the ruin of the state.
Now the people of the state all discuss good government, and everyone has a copy of the works on law by Shang Yang and Guan Zhong in his house,12 and yet the state gets poorer and poorer, for though many people talk about farming, very few put their hands to a plow. The people of the state all discuss military affairs, and everyone has a copy of the works of Sun Wu and Wu Qi in his
house,13 and yet the armies grow weaker and weaker, for though many people talk about war, very few buckle on armor. Therefore an enlightened ruler will make use of men’s strength but will not heed their words, will reward their accomplishments but will prohibit
useless activities. Then the people will be willing to exert themselves to the point of death in the service of their sovereign.
Farming requires a lot of hard work but people will do it because they say, “This way we can get rich.” War is a dangerous undertaking but people will take part in it because they say, “This way we can become eminent.” Now if men who devote themselves to literature or study the art of persuasive speaking are able to get the fruits of wealth without the hard work of the farmer, and can gain the advantages of eminence without the danger of battle, then who will not take up such pursuits? So for every man who works with his hands there will be a hundred devoting themselves to the pursuit of wisdom. If those who pursue wisdom are numerous, the laws will be defeated, and if those who labor with their hands are few, the state will grow poor. Hence the age will become disordered.
Therefore, in the state of an enlightened ruler there are no books written on bamboo slips; law supplies the only instruction. There are no sermons on the former kings; the officials serve as the only teachers. There are no fierce feuds of private swordsmen; cutting off the heads of the enemy is the only deed of valor. Hence, when the people of such a state make a speech, they say nothing that is in contradiction to the law; when they act, it is in some way that will bring useful results; and when they do brave deeds, they do them in the army. Therefore, in times of peace the state is rich, and in times of trouble its armies are strong. These are what are called the resources of the ruler. The ruler must store them up, and then wait for an opening to strike at his enemy. He who would surpass the Five Emperors of antiquity and rival the Three Kings must proceed by this method.
But this is not the way things are now. Within the state the people behave as they please, while the speechmakers work to spread their influence abroad. With those at home and abroad both up to mischief and hoping for the intervention of powerful enemy states, how can the state escape danger? When the ministers speak on foreign affairs, they are either acting as spokesmen for the Horizontal or Vertical alliances14 or trying to enlist the aid of the state to avenge some personal wrong. But neither the Vertical Alliance, in which one joins with a number of weak states in hopes of attacking a
strong one, nor the Horizontal Alliance, in which one serves a strong state for the purpose of attacking a number of weak ones, can insure the survival of one’s own state.
Those ministers who urge the Horizontal Alliance all say, “If we do not enter the service of a powerful state, we will be attacked by enemies and will face disaster!” Now when you enter the service of a powerful state, you cannot yet be certain of the practical advantages, and yet you must hand over all the maps of your territory and present your official seals when you request military aid. Once the maps have been presented, you will be stripped of territory, and once your official seals have been put into the hands of another, your prestige will vanish. If your territory is stripped away, the state will be weakened, and if your prestige vanishes, the government will fall into disorder. So you gain no benefit by entering the Horizontal Alliance in the service of a powerful state, but merely lose territory and undermine the government.
Those ministers who urge the Vertical Alliance all say, “If we do not rescue the smaller states and attack the powerful one, the whole world will be lost and, when the rest of the world is lost, our own state will be in peril and our ruler will face contempt!” Now you are not yet certain that you can actually save the smaller states, and yet you must call out your troops and face a powerful enemy. When you try to save the smaller states, you cannot always be sure of preserving them from destruction; and when you face a powerful enemy, 15 you cannot always be sure that your allies will remain loyal.
And if your allies break with you, you will be at the mercy of the powerful state. Then if you send out troops to battle, your armies will be defeated, and if you withdraw and try to protect your own realm, your cities will fall. So you gain no benefit by entering the Vertical Alliance in an attempt to save the smaller states, but lose your own lands and destroy your own army.
Hence, if you enter the service of a powerful state, it will dispatch its own men of authority to take over the offices in your government; and if you work to rescue the smaller states, your own important ministers will take advantage of the situation to further their interests abroad. No benefit will come to the state as a whole, but only fiefs and rich rewards for its ministers. They will enjoy all the honor, while
the ruler is despised; their families will grow rich, while the state is stripped of its lands. If their schemes succeed, they will use their power to prolong their eminence; if their schemes fail, they will retire with all their wealth intact.
But if the ruler, when he heeds such urgings, honors his ministers and rewards them with titles and stipends before their advice has produced successful results, and fails to punish them when it has proved unsuccessful, then who among the wandering theorists will not come forward with some hit-or-miss scheme in hopes of benefiting by a stroke of luck?
Why do the rulers listen to the wild theories of the speechmakers, and bring destruction to the state and ruin to themselves? Because they do not distinguish clearly between public and private interests, do not examine the aptness of the words they hear, and do not make certain that punishments are meted out where they are deserved.
Each ruler says, “By attending to foreign affairs I can perhaps become a king, and if not I will at least ensure security for myself.” A true king is one who is in a position to attack others, and a ruler whose state is secure cannot be attacked. But a powerful ruler can also attack others, and a ruler whose state is well ordered likewise cannot be attacked. Neither power nor order, however, can be sought abroad—they are wholly a matter of internal government.
Now if the ruler does not apply the proper laws and procedures within his state, but stakes all on the wisdom of his foreign policy, his state will never become powerful and well ordered.
The proverb says, “If you have long sleeves, you’ll be good at dancing; if you have lots of money, you’ll be good at business.” This means that it is easy to become skillful when you have ample resources. Hence, it is easy to scheme for a state that is powerful and orderly but difficult to make any plan for one that is weak and chaotic. Those who scheme for the state of Qin can make ten changes and still their plans will seldom fail; but those who plan for the state of Yan can scarcely make one change and still hope for success. It is not that those who plan for Qin are necessarily wise and those who plan for Yan are stupid—it is simply that the resources they have to work with—order in one case, disorder in the other—are different.
Zhou deserted the side of Qin and joined the Vertical Alliance, and within a year it had lost everything.16 Wey turned its back on Wei to join the Horizontal Alliance, and in half a year it was ruined.17 Thus Zhou was ruined by the Vertical Alliance and Wey was destroyed by the Horizontal Alliance. Instead of being so hasty in their plans to join an alliance, they should have worked to strengthen the order within their domains, to make their laws clear and their rewards and punishments certain, to utilize the full resources of the land in building up stores of provisions, and to train their people to defend the cities to the point of death, thus ensuring that any other ruler would gain little profit by trying to seize their lands, but on the contrary would suffer great injury if he attempted to attack their states. In that case, even the ruler of a state of ten thousand war chariots would have been unwilling to wear out his armies before their strong walls and, in his exhausted condition, invite the attack of powerful enemies. This would have been the way to escape destruction. To abandon a way which assures escape from destruction, and follow instead a path that leads to certain downfall, is the greatest error one can make in governing a state. Once the wisdom of its foreign18 policy is exhausted and its internal government has fallen into disorder, no state can be saved from ruin.
The people, in planning for their welfare, are most concerned in finding security and profit and avoiding danger and poverty. But if they must go off to fight foreign wars for the state, they face death at the hands of the enemy should they advance and death from official punishment should they retreat—hence they are in danger. If they must abandon their domestic affairs and go off to endure the sweat and hardship of battle, their families will grow poor and the ruler is likely never to reward them for their services—hence they face poverty. If such poverty and danger lie before them, how can you expect the people not to try to escape them? So they flock to the gates of influential men seeking a guarantee of exemption from military service, for with such a guarantee they may stay far from the scene of battle and live in safety. Likewise they slip bribes to the men in office in order to get some appointment, for with such an appointment they may insure their private security. If they can obtain anything so profitable as private security, how can you expect them
not to resort to such measures? Hence men who are concerned with public welfare grow fewer, and those who think only of private interests increase in number.
An enlightened ruler will administer his state in such a way as to decrease the number of merchants, artisans, and other men who make their living by wandering from place to place, and will see to it that such men are looked down upon. In this way he lessens the number of people who abandon19 primary pursuits [i.e., agriculture]
to take up secondary occupations. Nowadays, however, if a man can enlist the private pleading of someone at court, he can buy offices and titles. When offices and titles can be bought, you may be sure that merchants and artisans will not remain despised for long; and when wealth and money, no matter how dishonestly gotten, can buy what is in the market, you may be sure that the number of merchants will not remain small for long. When a man who sits back and collects taxes makes twice as much as the farmer and enjoys greater honor than the plowman or the soldier, then public-spirited men will grow few and merchants and tradesmen will increase in number.
These are the customs of a disordered state: Its scholars praise the ways of the former kings and imitate their benevolence and righteousness, put on a fair appearance and speak in elegant phrases, thus casting doubt upon the laws of the time and causing the ruler to be of two minds. Its speech-makers20 propound false schemes and borrow influence from abroad, furthering their private interests and forgetting the welfare of the state’s altars of the soil and grain. Its swordsmen gather bands of followers about them and perform deeds of honor, making a fine name for themselves and violating the prohibitions of the five government bureaus. Those of its people who are worried about military service21 flock to the gates of private individuals and pour out their wealth in bribes to influential men who will plead for them, in this way escaping the hardship of battle. Its merchants and artisans spend their time making articles of no practical use and gathering stores of luxury goods, accumulating riches, waiting for the best time to sell, and exploiting the farmers.
These five groups are the vermin of the state. If the rulers do not wipe out such vermin, and in their place encourage men of integrity
and public spirit, then they should not be surprised, when they look about the area within the four seas, to see states perish and ruling houses wane and die.
1The story of King Yan of Xu appears in many different forms in early works.
Because there is so much disagreement on the facts, it is impossible to assign the events to any particular date, or even to determine whether they have any basis in historical fact.
2Gonggong is usually mentioned as a legendary figure of the time of Yao or earlier, but Han Feizi apparently has some other meaning of the name in mind. Perhaps Gonggong here refers to a tribe that traced its ancestry back to the figure of that name.
3Zigong was a disciple of Confucius noted for his eloquence. The Zuozhuan, Duke Ai, 1 5th year, mentions his mission to Qi in 480 B.C., but the rest of the anecdote appears to be apocryphal.
4Supplying the words zhi ai zi in accordance with the suggestion of Chen Qiyou.
5When the Confucians wished to oppose some political measure, they customarily declared that it was not in accord with ancient practice and cited some early text in proof. The knights or cavaliers, noted for their daring and strict code of honor, often acted as local “bosses” in defiance of the government authorities, guaranteeing protection to people who sought their aid or hiring out their services in the conduct of private vendettas.
6Reading ren instead of xing here and in the clause following.
7Reading jian instead of lian.
8Omitting the *liang, * which is superfluous.
9Following texts which read gui at the beginning of this clause.
10The text of the last part of the sentence appears to be corrupt and the translation is tentative.
11For Tian Chang and Zihan, see above, p. 30.
12The Book of Lord Shang and the Guanzi, Legalist works which stressed the importance of agriculture.
13The Sunzi and Wuzi, works on military science.
14The Horizontal Alliance was an east-west alignment of states under the leadership of the powerful state of Qin in the west. The Vertical Alliance, a north-south alignment, was designed to preserve the independence of the weaker states and block Qin’s expansion. Smaller states frequently changed their alliance according to the political expedience of the moment.
15Reading di instead of jiao.
16In 256 B.C. King Nan of the Zhou dynasty joined with the leaders of the Vertical Alliance in an attack on Qin which failed miserably. To make amends, he was obliged the same year to turn over all his territory to Qin.
17The event to which Han Feizi is probably referring occurred in 241 B.C., though the details are not known. The names of the two states are romanized the same way in modern Chinese, but I have spelled the name of the older state “Wey” to distinguish them.
18Reversing the position of the nei and wai.
19Reading she instead of qu.
20Reading tan instead of gu.
21Reading yi instead of yu.