University of Virginia Library

Chapter L

LEARNED CELEBRITIES[1]
A CRITICAL ESTIMATE OF CONFUCIANS
AND MOHISTS

In the present age, the celebrities for learning are the Literati
and the Mohists. The highest figure of the Literati was K`ung
Ch`iu; the highest figure of the Mohists was Mo Ti. Since
the death of Confucius, there have appeared the School of
Tzŭ-chang, the School of Tzŭ-ssŭ, the School of the Yen
Clan, the School of the Mêng Clan, the School of the Ch`i-tiao
Clan, the School of the Chung Liang Clan, the School of the
Sun Clan, and the School of the Yo-chêng Clan. Since the
death of Mo Tzŭ, there have appeared the Mohists of the
Hsiang-li Clan, the Mohists of the Hsiang-fu Clan, and the
Mohists of Têng Ling's School. Thus, after Confucius and
Mo Tzŭ, the Literati have divided into eight schools and the
Mohists into three. In what they accept and what they reject
they are contrary to and different from one another but each
claims to be orthodox Confucian or Mohist. Now that
Confucius and Mo Tzŭ cannot come to life again, who can
determine the orthodoxy of learned men?

Confucius and Mo Tzŭ both followed Yao and Shun;
they differed in matters of acceptance and rejection, yet each
claimed to be the true Yao and Shun. Now that Yao and
Shun cannot come to life again, who is going to determine
genuineness as between the Literati and the Mohists? For
our people, who have passed through the time of Yü and

Hsia upwards of seven hundred years, and through the Yin
and Chou[2] Dynasties upwards of two thousand years, it is
impossible to determine whether the Literati or the Mohists
are right. Now, if anybody wants to scrutinize the ways of
Yao and Shun that appeared three thousand years ago, it
seems far from possible merely to imagine that! To be sure
of anything that has no corroborating evidence, is stupid;
to abide by anything that one can not be sure of, is self-deceptive.
Therefore, those who openly quote the early
kings and dogmatically uphold Yao and Shun, must be
deceitful, if not stupid. Such stupid and deceptive learning
and heretical and contradictory conduct, the intelligent
sovereign never approves.

The Mohists, for funeral rites wear winter clothes in winter
days and summer clothes in summer days, make coffins three
inches thick of Paulownia wood, and observe only three
months' mourning. Regarding this as restraint, sovereigns
of this age respect them. The Literati, on the contrary, for
funeral rites break up the household property and give sons
in pawn to compensate for the losses,[3] observe three years'
mourning till they break down in health and have to walk
with the aid of canes. Regarding this as an act of filial piety,
sovereigns of this age respect them. But, in fact, to approve
the restraint of Mo Tzŭ one has to reprove Confucius for his
extravagance; to approve the filial piety of Confucius one has
to reprove Mo Tzŭ for his impiety. Now, piety and impiety,
restraint and extravagance, all are found among the Literati
and the Mohists, and the superiors respect them equally.

According to the theory of Ch`i-tiao,[4] a man should not
change his facial colour in front of others[5] nor should he
blink even in the face of danger[6] ; if he acts wrongly, he should
give way to bondmen and bondwomen; and if he acts
aright, he should assert himself even before the feudal lords.
Regarding this as an act of integrity, sovereigns of this age
respect him. Again, according to the teaching of Sung
Yung Tzŭ, a man should delight[7] in a non-combatant
attitude towards opponents and approve of non-retaliatory
actions against enemies; if cast into prison, he should not be
ashamed; and, if insulted, he should not feel humiliated.
Regarding this as an attitude of generosity, sovereigns of this
age respect him. But, in fact, to approve the integrity of
Ch`i-tiao one has to reprove Sung Yung for his forgiveness;
to approve the generosity of Sung Yung one has to reprove
Ch`i-tiao for his fierceness. Now, generosity and integrity,
forgiveness and fierceness, all are found in these two philosophers,
and the lords of men respect them equally.

Inasmuch as stupid and deceptive studies and heretical and
contradictory theories are in conflict while the lords of men
tolerate them equally, the gentry within the seas have neither
definite forms of speech nor constant standards of conduct.
Indeed, ice and charcoal do not share the same vessel and
last long; winter and summer do not come at the same time.
Likewise, heretical and contradictory studies do not stand
together and have peace. Now that heretical studies are
equally listened to and contradictory theories are absurdly
acted upon, how can there be other than chaos? If the ruler

listens so carelessly and acts so absurdly, the same must be
true when he rules over men.

The learned gentlemen of the present age, when they speak
on political order, mostly say: "Give the poor and the
destitute land and thereby provide men of no property with
enough." However, if there are men who were originally the
same as others but have independently become able to be
perfectly self-supporting, even without prosperous years or
other income, it must be due to their diligence or to their
frugality. Again, if there are men who were originally the
same as others but have independently become poor and
destitute without suffering from any misfortune of famine and
drought or illness and malignancy or calamity and lawsuit,
it must be due to their extravagance or to their laziness.
Extravagant and lazy persons are poor; diligent and frugal
persons are rich. Now, if the superior levies money from the
rich in order to distribute alms among the poor, it means that
he robs the diligent and frugal and rewards the extravagant
and lazy. Naturally it is impossible to force people to speed
up their work and also restrain their expenditure.

Now suppose there is a man, who, holding fast to his self-righteous
principle, would not enter any city that was in
danger, would not stay in military camps, and would not
exchange a hair from his shin for any great profit in All-underHeaven.
Then be sure the sovereign of this age will respect
him therefor, honouring his wisdom, exalting his conduct,
and regarding him as a gentleman despising material trifles
and esteeming meaningful life. Indeed, the reason that the
superior lines up good fields and large houses and establishes
ranks and bounties, is to make people exert their strength to
the point of death. Yet as long as the superior honours the

gentlemen who despise material trifles and esteem meaningful
life, it is impossible to expect the people to sacrifice their
lives for his royal cause.

Suppose you keep a number of books, practise the art of
speaking, gather a band of pupils, indulge in culture and
learning, and discuss theories, then be sure sovereigns of this
age will respect you therefor, saying, "To respect worthies
is the way of the early kings." Indeed, those who are taxed
by the magistrates are farmers while those who are fed by the
superior are learned gentlemen. Being farmers, the former
are more heavily taxed; being learned gentlemen, the latter
are more liberally rewarded. Hence it is impossible to force
the people to work hard and talk little.

Again, suppose you build a standard of estimation, blend
all clever principles,[8] maintain strict self-control, and do not
act aggressively, and are sure to pursue anybody with your
sword whenever his reproachful words pass into your ears,
then sovereigns of this age will honour you as a self-respecting
gentleman. Indeed, as long as the merit of beheading in
war is not rewarded but the bravery of family quarrels is
celebrated with honours, it is impossible to force the people
to fight hard and resist enemies and have no private quarrels.
In time of peace, the state feeds the literati and the cavaliers,
but in case of emergency, it uses the armed officers. Thus,
those who have been fed, are not taken into service; those
who are taken into service, have not been fed. That is the
reason why the age is chaotic.

Further, the lord of men, in listening to a learned man, if
he approves his words, should officially put them into practice

and appoint the person to office, and, if he reproves him for
his words, should get rid of the person and put an end to
his heretical doctrine. Today, however, what is regarded as
right is not officially put into practice, and what is regarded
as wrong is not extinguished as heretical doctrine. Thus, the
right is not used, the wrong not stopped; this is the way to
chaos and ruin.

T`an-t`ai Tzŭ-yü had the manners of a gentleman. Considering
him a man of promise, Chung-ni took him into service,
and, after having dealt with him for a long time, found his
deeds not equal to his looks. Again, Tsai Yü's speech was
elegant and refined. Considering him a man of promise,
Chung-ni took him into service, and, after having dealt with
him for a long time, found his wisdom falling short of his
eloquence. Hence Confucius said: "In taking a man on the
basis of his manners I made a mistake in choosing Tzŭ-yü;
in taking a man on the basis of his words I made a mistake in
choosing Tsai Yü." Thus, notwithstanding his wisdom,
Chung-ni expressed regretful sighs for his misjudgment of
realities. Now that the new debaters of today are even more
reckless than Tsai Yü and sovereigns of this age in listening
to them are even more susceptible to delusion than Chung-ni,
if the superior appoints any debater to office on account of
delight in his words, how can a mistake be avoided? For
instance, Wey trusted to the eloquence of Mêng Mao[9] and
met disaster at the foot of Mt. Hua. Again, Chao trusted
to the eloquence of Ma-fu[10] and experienced the calamity of
Ch`ang-p`ing. These two instances well illustrate the error
in trusting to eloquence.

Indeed, if only the heated and hammered tin[11] is inspected
and only the blue and yellow glearns are observed, even Ou[12]
Yeh can not ascertain the quality of a sword. But if you hit
herons and wild geese in water with the sword and kill ponies
and horses on land with it, then even bondmen and bondwomen,
ignorant as they are, are not in doubt whether the
sword is blunt or sharp. If the teeth in the mouth are
examined and the formal features are surveyed, then even
Pai Lo could not be sure of the quality of a horse. But if you
harness it to a cart and observe it till the end of the drive,
then even bondmen and bondwomen are not in doubt
whether it is a hack or a good horse. Similarly, if only
manners and clothes are looked at and only words and phrases
are listened to, then even Chung-ni can not ascertain the
personality of a gentleman. But if you test him with an
official commission and hold him responsible for any work
done, then even the mediocre man is not in doubt whether
he is stupid or intelligent.

Therefore, as to the subordinates of the intelligent
sovereign, prime ministers must have arisen from among the
district-magistrates and gallant generals must have emerged
from among the squads of soldiers. If persons who have
rendered meritorious services are always rewarded, then the
greater ranks and bounties become the better encouraged
they will be. Again, if offices are elevated and ranks are raised,
then the greater the official responsibilities become the more
they will promote political order. Indeed, according as
ranks and bounties are raised official responsibilities promote
political order, this is the royal road to supremacy.

The possessor of a thousand li of rocky land, can not be
called rich; the possessor of a million puppets can not be
called strong. Not because the rocks are not big and the
puppets[13] are not numerous. The possessors can not be called
rich and strong, simply because great rocks do not produce
grain and puppets can not be used to resist enemies. Now,
men who get office through purchase and practise artful craft,
eat without cultivating the land. They are thus as unproductive
as uncultivated land, in the same category as great
rocks. Likewise, the literati and the cavaliers who have
rendered no meritorious service in the army but are celebrated
and prosperous,[14] are useless people, in the same class
as puppets. Those who know the calamity of great rocks and
puppets but never know that the office-purchasers, the literati,
and the cavaliers, are as harmful as uncultivated land and
useless people, do not know the similarity of one thing to
another.

For such reasons, in the cases of the princes and kings of
enemy states, though they are delighted at our righteousness,
we can not lay them under tribute as vassals[15] ; but in the
case of the feudal lords inside the passes[16] , though they disapprove

our doings, we can always make them bring birds[17]
to visit our court. Thus, whoever has great strength sees
others visit his court; whoever has little strength visits the
courts of others. Therefore the enlightened ruler strives
after might.

Indeed, the strictly kept household sees no fierce servants,
but a compassionate mother has spoilt children. From this
I know that authority and position are able to suppress
violence, but that virtue and favour are not sufficient to stop
disorder.

Indeed, the sage, in ruling the state, does not count on
people's doing him good, but utilizes their inability to do
him wrong. If he counts on people's doing him good, within
the boundary there will never be enough such persons to
count by tens. But if he utilizes people's inability to do him
wrong, an entire state can be uniformed.[18] Therefore, the
administrator of the state affairs ought to consider the many

but disregard the few. Hence his devotion not to virtue but
to law.

Similarly, if one should always count on arrows which are
straight of themselves, there would be no arrow in a hundred
generations; if one should only count on pieces of wood
which are round of themselves, there would be no wheel in a
thousand generations. Though in a hundred generations
there is neither an arrow that is straight of itself nor a wheel
that is round of itself, yet how is it then that people of every
generation ride in carts and shoot birds? It is because the tools
for straightening and bending are used. To rely not on the
tools for straightening and bending[19] but on[20] arrows straight
of themselves and wheels round of themselves, is not thought
much of by the skilful carpenter. Why? Because riding is
not a matter of one man alone, nor is archery a question of a
single shot. Reliance not on rewards and punishments but on
people who are righteous of themselves, is not highly considered
by the enlightened sovereign. Why? Because the
law of the state must not be dispensed with and whom it
regulates is not one man only. Therefore, the tactful ruler
does not follow the good that happens by accident but
practises the Tao that prevails by necessity.

Now supposing some one addressed a person, saying, "I
will make you to be wise and to live long," the world would
certainly think he was practising deception.[21] Indeed, wisdom
is a matter of nature, longevity is a matter of fate. As nature,
and fate are not what one can learn from others, to assert to
a person what men can not really do, that is what the world

calls deception. To call anybody what he can not really be,
is flattery.[22] Flattery[23] is a matter of nature, indeed. To instruct
men in benevolence and righteousness is the same as to make
assertions in the matters of intelligence and longevity, which
the sovereign with a legal standard does not heed. For
illustration, admiring the beauty of Mao-ch`iang[24] and Hsi-shih
gains one's facial looks nothing; but applying rouge,
pomade, powder, and eyebrow-paint, makes one's appearance
twice as good as before. Similarly, speaking about the
benevolence and righteousness of the early kings gains
nothing for political order; but understanding clearly our
laws and measures and determining our rewards and punishments
is the rouge, pomade, powder, and eyebrow-paint of
the state. So the enlightened sovereign urgently seeks real
aids, and regards as secondary all empty compliments. Hence
no talk about benevolence and righteousness.

Now, witches and priests, in praying for somebody, all say,
"May your age last as long as one thousand autumns and ten
thousand years." Then the sounds, "one thousand autumns
and ten thousand years", echo through the ears. As a matter
of fact, however, nobody ever testifies to the addition of a
single day to his age. That is the reason why people despise
witches and priests. Likewise, the literati of the present age,
when they counsel the lord of men, instead of speaking about
methods to attain political order at present, talk about the
achievement of political order in the past. They neither
study affairs pertaining to regulations for the officials nor
observe the conditions of the wicked and the villainous, but
all speak on the reputed glories of remote antiquity and on

the achievements of the early kings. Ornamenting their
speeches, the literati say, "If you listen to our words, you
will thereby become Hegemonic Ruler." Such people are
but witches and priests among the itinerants, whom the
sovereign with a legal standard does not heed. Therefore,
the enlightened sovereign exalts real facts, discards useless
things, and does not speak about benevolence and righteousness.
He accordingly does not listen to the words of the
learned men.

Men of today who do not know the right way to political
order, all say, "Win the hearts of the people." If they should
think of winning the hearts of the people and thereby attaining
political order, then even Yi Yin and Kuan Chung would
find no use for their statesmanship and the superior would
listen to the people only. The intelligence of the people,
however, can not be depended upon just like the mind of the
baby. If the baby does not have his head shaved, the ache
will recur[25] ; if his boil is not cut open, his trouble will turn
from bad to worse. However, to shave his head or to open
his boil someone has to hold the baby while the compassionate
mother is performing this work. Yet he keeps crying and
yelling incessantly as he does not know that suffering the
small pain will gain him a great benefit.

Now, the superior urges the tillage of rice fields and the
cultivation of grassy lands in order to increase the production
of the people, but they think the superior is cruel.
To perfect penalties and increase punishments is to suppress
wickedness, but they think the superior is severe. Again, he
levies taxes in cash and in grain to fill up the storehouses and

treasures in order thereby to relieve famine and drought and
provide for corps and battalions, but they think the superior
is greedy. Finally, he traces out every culprit within the
boundary, discriminates[26] among men without personal
favouritism. . . .[27] , and unites the forces for fierce struggle,
in order thereby to take his enemies captive, but they think
the superior is violent. These four measures are methods to
attain order and maintain peace, but the people do not know
that they ought to rejoice in them.

Indeed, the superior seeks for saintly and well-informed
men, because the intelligence of the people is not adequate for
use as directive. For instance, of old, Yü opened the Kiang[28]
and deepened the Ho[29] for draining the Great Deluge away,
but the people gathered tiles and stones to hit him. Likewise,
Tzŭ-ch`an cleared fields and planted mulberry-trees, but the
people of Chêng slandered and reviled him. Yü benefited
All-under-Heaven and Tzŭ-ch`an preserved Chêng, but both
incurred slander. Clearly enough, indeed, the intelligence of
the people is not adequately dependable. Therefore, in
appointing officials, to seek for the worthy and the wise; in
administering the government, to expect to suit the people:
both alike are causes of confusion, and can not be employed
for the attainment of political order.