University of Virginia Library

Chapter LI

LOYALTY AND FILIAL PIETY[1] : A MEMORIAL

All-under-Heaven approve the Tao of filial piety, fraternal
respect, loyalty, and obedience, but never carefully investigate
the Tao of filial piety, fraternal respect, loyalty, and
obedience; nor do they act intelligently upon these; wherefor
All-under-Heaven is in disorder.

As everybody approves the Tao of Yao and Shun and
conforms to it, there are murderers of rulers and rebels
against fathers. Yao, Shun, T`ang, and Wu, each in his turn,
acted contrary to the right relationship of ruler and minister,
and the moral of the subsequent generations has consequently
been upset. Yao, while ruler of men, made a minister his ruler.
Shun, while ministering to a ruler, made the ruler a minister.
T`ang and Wu, while ministering to rulers, murdered the
sovereigns and dismembered their bodies. Yet All-underHeaven
have honoured them. This is the reason why Allunder-Heaven
has hitherto not attained political order.

Indeed, the so-called intelligent ruler is one who is able to
keep his ministers in his service; the so-called worthy
minister is one who is able to make laws and crimes clear
and attend to his official duties so as to support his master.
Now, Yao, assuming himself to be enlightened, could not
keep Shun in his service; Shun, assuming himself to be
worthy, could not continue supporting Yao; and T`ang and
Wu, assuming themselves to be righteous, murdered their
masters and superiors. That was the way "enlightened"

rulers would give and "worthy" ministers would take. In
consequence, hitherto there have been sons robbing their
fathers' houses and ministers robbing their masters' states.
Thus, fathers give way to sons and rulers give way to
ministers. Such is not the right way to determine the
distinction of rank between ruler and minister and unify the
system of morale between father and son.

Thy servant has heard, "Minister serving ruler, son serving
father, and wife serving husband, if these three relationships
run in harmony, All-under-Heaven will have order; if these
three relationships run in discord, All-under-Heaven will
have disorder." If this is an immutable principle of the world,
which neither the intelligent king nor the worthy minister
dares to depart from, then even though the lord of men
might be unworthy, no minister would dare to infringe his
prerogative. In these days, however, the exaltation of the
worthy, the appointment of the wise, and the lack of a
constant principle, all follow the wrong way; but All-underHeaven
always regard it as the royal road to order. For this
reason, the T`ien Clan replaced the Lü Clan in Ch`i and the
Tai Clan replaced the Tzŭ Clan in Sung. Both T`ien Hêng
and Tzŭ-han were worthy and astute and never were stupid
and worthless. Thus, when the immutable principle is
abolished and worthies are exalted, confusion appears; when
the law is discarded and astute men are taken into service,
danger arises. Hence the saying: "Exalt law but never
exalt worthiness."[2]

The ancient Records says: "Shun, when he saw his father,
Ku-sou, looked uneasy".[3] On this Confucius remarked:

"How critical the age was! For All-under-Heaven was
then hanging by a hair. If anybody was a follower of the
true path, even his father could not treat him as a son, and,
even his ruler could not treat him as a minister."

However, thy servant would say, "Confucius in the first
place did not understand the Tao of filial piety, fraternal
respect, loyalty, and obedience." By that remark did he mean
that a follower of the true path, when in the court, could not
be a minister to the sovereign,[4] and, when at home, could not
be a son of the father? The reason why fathers want to have
worthy sons, is that the family, if poor, will be enriched by
them, and the fathers, when suffering, will be gladdened by
them. The reason why the ruler wants to have worthy
ministers, is that the state, if in chaos, will be put into order
by them, and the sovereign, when humbled, will be elevated
by them. Now supposing there were a son never doing his
father any good, then the father in managing the domestic
affairs would suffer. Again, supposing there were a worthy
minister never doing the ruler any good, then the ruler while
safeguarding his throne would be jeopardized. If so, to have
a worthy son and to have a worthy minister will constitute a
harm to the father and the ruler respectively. Then how can
they get any benefit at all?

They say the loyal minister never endangers his ruler and
the dutiful son never disowns his parents. Now, Shun, by
pretending to worthiness, took the ruler's state; T`ang and
Wu, by pretending to righteousness, dethroned and murdered
their rulers. Though all these people endangered their
sovereigns by pretending to worthiness, yet All-underHeaven
has considered them really worthy.

The heroes of antiquity, when in public, would never
minister to any ruler, and, when in private, would never
serve their families. By so doing, they disowned their rulers
in public and their parents in private. Moreover, to minister
to no ruler when active in public and serve no family when
retired in private, is the road to world-confusion and family-extinction.
Therefore, to regard Yao, Shun, T`ang, and Wu,
as worthy, and approve ancient heroes, is a disturbing craft
in All-under-Heaven.

Ku-sou was Shun's father but Shun exiled him; Hsiang
was Shun's brother but Shun[5] killed him. Who exiled his
father and killed his brother, could not be called benevolent.
Nor could one who married the emperor's two daughters[6]
and took the rule over All-under-Heaven be called righteous.
Who was neither benevolent nor righteous, could not be
called enlightened. It is said in the Book of Poetry:

As against the principle of this poem, Shun in public made
his ruler a minister, and in private made his father a manservant,
his mother a woman-servant, and his master's
daughters wives.

For the same reason, every hero in private never did his
family any good; disturbing the world and exterminating
his posterity, and in public attempting to oppose the ruler

in every way. Though his decaying bones and spoilt flesh
might eventually lie unburied on the open ground or flow on
the mountain-stream, he never avoided going through water
and fire in order to make All-under-Heaven take him as
model, whereby he would make everybody in the world
die and end his life young without regret. This type of man
would always desert the world and never care about political
order.

Similarly, whoever is a hero in this age, acts contrary to
the masses,[8] practises his own creed, prefers differences from
others, pursues the philosophy of peace and quietude,[9] and
expounds the doctrine of vagueness and illusion.[10] Thy
servant, however, thinks the philosophy of peace and
quietude is a useless creed and the doctrine of vagueness and
illusion is a lawless theory. He whose word is lawless and
whose creed is useless, is regarded by the world as observing.
Thy servant, however, maintains: Everybody during his
life-time should serve the ruler and support the parents, but
serving the ruler and supporting the parents can not depend
upon the philosophy of peace and quietude; again everybody
during his life-time[11] should live up to his word and
doctrine, loyalty and sincerity, law and tact,[12] but word and
doctrine, loyalty and sincerity, law and tact, can not be based
on the teaching of vagueness and illusion; wherefore the
teaching of vagueness and illusion and the philosophy of

peace and quietude are nothing but bewildering crafts in the
world.

A dutiful son, in serving his father, never fights with his
brothers for the father's household; a loyal minister, in
serving the ruler, never struggles with other ministers for the
ruler's state. Indeed, if a son always praises other people's
parents, saying, for instance, "The parents of Mr. So and So
go to bed late at night and get up early in the morning and
work hard to make money and thereby support their children
and grandchildren and keep so many men and women
servants," he is a defamer of his parents. Similarly, if a
minister always praises the early kings for the greatness of
their virtues and longs after them, he is a defamer of his ruler.
Now, one who defames his parents is called undutiful;
whereas one who defames his ruler, the world considers
worthy. This is the reason why there is chaos.

Therefore, the minister who neither extols the worthiness
of Yao and Shun, nor admires the achievement of T`ang and
Wu, nor speaks well of the nobleness of the ancient heroes,
but applies all his strength to observing the law and devotes
his mind to serving the sovereign, is a loyal minister, indeed.

In antiquity the black headed[13] were mindless and stupid.
Therefore, it was possible to win their homage by means of
empty fame. The people of today, however, are alert and
astute and apt to preen themselves and disobey the superior.
Therefore, the superior needs to encourage them with

rewards, so that they will advance, and to terrify them with
punishments, so that they will never dare to retreat.

However, people of this age all say: "As Hsü Yu declined
the rule over All-under-Heaven, mere reward would not be
sufficient to encourage worthies. As Robber Chê purposely
transgressed the penal law and bravely underwent the consequent
disaster, punishment would not be sufficient to
prevent culprits." In response thy servant would say:
"Who had never had the rule over All-under-Heaven and
left All-under-Heaven out of consideration, was Hsü Yu.
Who had already acquired the rule over All-under-Heaven
but left All-under-Heaven out of consideration, were Yao
and Shun. Who ruined his personal integrity for seeking
money, violated the criminal law in seizing on profit, and
forgot the impending death penalty, was Robber Chê. The
two persons[14] were extremes. The right way of governing
the state and employing the people should not take these rare
persons as standards. For government is to govern the
ordinary persons; its true path is to lead the ordinary
persons; wherefore extreme things and eccentric words are
detrimental to political order.

The highest[15] man of the world can not be encouraged with
reward; nor can the lowest[16] man of the world be restrained
by penalty. However, if on account of the highest man
reward is not established, and on account of the lowest man
punishment is not established, the right way of governing the
state and employing the people will be missed.

For that reason, most men of this age never speak of the
law of the state but advocate the Perpendicular Union or the
Horizontal Alliance. The advocates of the Union[17] say, "No
Union, no Hegemony." The advocates of the Alliance say,
"No Alliance, no supremacy." Now, to the east of the
Mountain[18] advocates of the Alliance have never stopped
for a single day speaking on the subject. Yet if no achievement
nor any reputation has been accomplished nor any
Hegemonic Ruler has emerged, it is because empty words
are not means of attaining political order. The king enjoys
independent actions, wherefore he is called "supreme". For
this reason, the Three Kings never strove for any kind of
union or separation; nor did the Five Hegemonic Rulers[19]
attempt to form any kind of Perpendicular Union or Horizontal
Alliance. They only investigate ways and means of
managing home affairs and thereby fix foreign policies.