University of Virginia Library

Chapter XLVII

EIGHT FALLACIES[1]

Who does private favours to old acquaintances, is called a
kind-hearted alter ego. Who distributes alms with public
money, is called a benevolent man. Who makes light of
bounties but thinks much of himself, is called a superior man.
Who strains the law to shield his relatives, is called a virtuous
man. Who deserts official posts for cultivating personal
friendships, is called a chivalrous man. Who keeps aloof
from the world and avoids all superiors, is called lofty. Who
quarrels with people and disobeys orders, is called an
unyielding hero. Who bestows favours and attracts the
masses of people, is called a popular idol.

However, the presence of kind-hearted men implies the
existence of culprits among the magistrates; the presence of
benevolent men, the losses of public funds; the presence of
superior men, the difficulty in employing the people; the
presence of virtuous men, the violation of laws and statutes;
the appearance of chivalrous men, vacancies of official posts;
the appearance of lofty men, the people's neglect of their
proper duties; the emergence of unyielding heroes, the
inefficacy of orders; and the appearance of popular idols, the
isolation of the sovereign from the subjects.

These eight involve private honours to ruffians but great
damage to the lord of men. The opposite of these eight
involve private damage to ruffians but public benefits to the
lord of men. If the lord of men does not consider the benefits

and damage to the Altar of the Spirits of Land and Grain
but promotes the private honours of ruffians, to find neither
danger nor chaos in the state will be impossible.

To entrust men with state affairs is the pivot between life
and death, between order and chaos. If the superior has no
tact to appoint men to office, every appointment to office will
end in failure. Now, those who are taken into office by the
ruler of men are either eloquent and astute or refined and
polished. To entrust men is to let them have influence. Yet
astute men are not necessarily trustworthy. Inasmuch as the
ruler makes much of their wisdom, he is thereby misled to
trust them. If such astute men, with their calculating mind,
take advantage of their official influence and work after their
own private needs, the ruler will, no doubt, be deceived. For
astute men are not trustworthy. For the same reason, to
appoint refined gentlemen to office is to let them decide on
state affairs. Yet the refined gentlemen are not necessarily
wise. Inasmuch as the ruler makes much of their polished
manners, he is thereby misled to regard them as wise. If
such stupid men,[2] despite their mental confusion, take
advantage of their administrative posts and do as they please,
the state affairs will fall into turmoil. Thus, if the ruler has
no tact to use men, when astute men are taken into service,
he will be deceived; when refined men are appointed to
office, the state affairs[3] will fall into turmoil. Such is the
calamity of tactlessness.

According to the Tao of the enlightened ruler, the humble
can[4] criticize the faults of the noble; the inferiors must

denounce the crimes of the superiors; sincerity is judged by
the comparison of diverse opinions; and information has no
biased channel. Consequently, wise men can not practise
fraud and deceit; rewards are bestowed according to
meritorious services; men are assigned different duties
according to their respective talents; and failures are
determined in the light of original purposes. Whoever
commits an offence, is convicted; whoever has a special
talent, is given a post. Therefore, stupid men can not be
entrusted with state affairs. If astute men dare not deceive
the superior and stupid men can not decide on any state
affair, then nothing will fail.

What can be understood only by clear-sighted scholars
should not be made an order, because the people are not all
clear-sighted. What can be practised only by wise men
should not be made a law, because the people are not all wise.
Yang Chu and Mo Ti were regarded as clear-sighted by Allunder-Heaven.
Though their teachings have alleviated the
chaos of the world, yet they have not brought the world
into order. However enlightened, the creeds should not be
promulgated as decrees by any governmental organ. Pao
Chiao and Hua Chioh were regarded as wise by All-underHeaven.
Yet Pao Chiao dried up to death like a tree while
Hua Chioh drowned himself in a river. However wise, they
could not be turned into farmers and warriors. Therefore,
whoever is regarded by the lord of men as clear-sighted, must
be a wise man who would exert his eloquence; whoever is
regarded by the lord of men as honourable, must be an able
man who would do his best. Now that sovereigns of this age
give ear to useless eloquence and uphold fruitless conduct,
to strive after the wealth and strength of the state is impossible.

Erudite, learned, eloquent, and wise, as Confucius and
Mo Tzŭ were, if Confucius and Mo Tzŭ would never till and
weed farming land, what could they contribute to the state?
Cultivating the spirit of filial piety and eliminating desires as
Tsêng Shan and Shih Ch`iu did, if Tsêng Shan and Shih
Ch`iu would never fight and attack, how could they benefit
the state? The ruffians have their private advantages, the
lord of men has his public benefits. Acquiring enough
provisions without hard work and cultivating fame without
holding office, are private advantages. Clarifying laws
and statutes by forbidding literary learning and concentrating
on meritorious services by suppressing private
advantages, are public benefits. To enact the law is to lead
the people, whereas if the superior esteems literary learning,
the people will become sceptical in following[5] the law. To
reward for merit is to encourage the people, whereas if the
superior honours the cultivation of virtuous conduct, the
people will become lazy in producing profits. If the superior
holds literary learning in high esteem and thereby causes
doubt in the law, and if he honours the cultivation of virtuous
conduct and thereby causes disbelief in meritorious work, to
strive after the wealth and strength of the state is impossible.

Neither the official tablet inserted in the girdle nor the
dancer's shield and small axe can rival[6] the real halberd[7] and
the iron harpoon. The manners of ascending and descending
the steps and standing and turning in the court can not be
compared with the march[8] of one hundred li a day. Shooting

the feigned badger's head[9] is not equivalent to discharging
swift arrows from the wide-drawn cross-bow. Shield and
walls as well as huge war chariots[10] are not as good defence
works as earthen forts, trenches, and under-ground bellows.

Men of antiquity strove to be known as virtuous; those of
the middle age struggled to be known as wise; and now men
fight for the reputation of being powerful. In antiquity,
events were few; measures were simple, naïve, crude, and
incomplete. Therefore there were men using spears made of
mother-of-pearl, and those pushing carts. In antiquity, again
people were few and therefore kind to one another; things
being few, they made light of profits and made alienations
easy. Hence followed alienations of the throne by courtesy
and transfer of the rule over All-under-Heaven. That being
so, to do courteous alienations, promote compassion and
beneficence, and follow benevolence and favour, was to run
the government in the primitive way. In the age of numerous
affairs, to employ the instruments of the management of
affairs that were few, is not the wise man's measure. Again,
in the age of great struggles, to follow the track of courteous
alienations, is not the sage's policy. For this reason, wise men
do not personally push carts and sages do not run any
government in the primitive way.

Laws are means of controlling affairs. Affairs are means of
celebrating merits. When laws are made and found to involve
difficulties, then the ruler must estimate the difficulties. If he
finds the tasks can be accomplished, then he must enact them.
If he finds the accomplishment of the tasks involves losses,

then he must estimate the losses. If he finds gains will exceed
losses, then he must transact them. For there are in Allunder-Heaven
neither laws without difficulties nor gains
without losses. For this reason, whoever takes a city whose
walls are ten thousand feet long and defeats any army of one
hundred thousand troops, though he has to lose at least one
third[11] of his men and see his arms and weapons either
crushed or broken and his officers and soldiers either killed or
injured, yet he celebrates his victory in the war and his gain
of new territory because by calculation he has harvested great
gains at the cost of small losses. Indeed, the washer of the
head has falling hair, the curer of boils hurts blood and flesh.
Who governs men, encounters difficulties in the way, and
therefore gives up the work, is a tactless man. The early
sages said: "When compasses have aberrations, or when
water has waves, though I want to correct them, nothing can
be done." This is a dictum well used in the doctrine of
expediency. For this reason, there are theories that are
plausible but far from practical and there are speeches that have
poor wording but are urgently useful. The sages, accordingly,
never looked for any harmless word but attended to difficult
tasks.

Men make no fuss about balance and weight. This is not
because they are upright and honest and would ward off
profits, but because the weight can not change the quantities
of things according to human wants nor can the balance
make things lighter or heavier according to human wishes.
Acquiescing in the inability to get what they want, people
make no fuss. In the state of an intelligent sovereign, officials

dare not bend the law, magistrates dare not practise selfishness,
and bribery does not prevail. It is because all tasks
within the boundary work like weight and balance, wherefore
any wicked minister is always found out and anybody known
for wickedness is always censured. For this reason, the
sovereign upholding the true path, instead of seeking
magistrates who are pure and honest, strives after
omniscience.

The compassionate mother, in loving her little child, is
surpassed by none. Yet, when the child has mischievous
actions, she sends him to follow the teacher; when he is
badly ill, she sends him to see the physician. For without
following the teacher he is liable to penalty; without seeing
the physician he is susceptible to death. Thus, though the
compassionate mother loves the child, she is helpless in
saving him from penalty and from death. If so, what preserves
the child is not love.

The bond of mother and child is love, the relationship of
ruler and minister is expediency. If the mother can not
preserve the family by virtue of love, how can the ruler
maintain order in the state by means of love? The intelligent
sovereign, if well versed in the principles of wealth and
strength, can get what he wants. Thus, prudence in heeding
memorials and managing affairs is the royal road to wealth
and strength. He makes his laws and prohibitions clear and
considers his schemes and plans carefully. If laws are clear,
at home there will be no worry about any emergency or
disturbance; if plans are right, there will be no disaster of
either death or captivity abroad. Therefore, what preserves
the state is not benevolence and righteousness. Who is
benevolent, is tender-hearted and beneficent and makes light of

money; who is violent, has a stubborn mind and censures
people easily. If tender-hearted and beneficent, he will be
unable to bear executions; if easy in money, he will like to
bestow favours. If he has a stubborn mind, he will reveal
his ill will to the inferiors; if he censures people easily, he
will inflict the death penalty upon anybody. Unable to bear
executions, one would remit most punishments; fond of
bestowing favours, one would mostly reward men of no
merit. When ill will is revealed, the inferiors will hate
the superiors; when arbitrary censure prevails, the people
will rebel. Therefore, when a benevolent man is on the
throne, the inferiors are wild, easily violate laws and prohibitions,
expect undue gifts, and hope for personal favours
from the superior. When a violent man is on the throne,
laws and decrees are arbitrary; ruler and minister oppose
each other; the people grumble and beget the spirit of disorder.
Hence the saying: "Both benevolence and violence
drive the state to ruin."

Who can not prepare good food but invites starvelings to
diet, can not save their lives. Who can not mow grass and
grow rice but promotes the distribution of loans, alms, prizes,
and gifts, can not enrich the people. The learned men of
today, in their speeches, do not emphasize the need of primary
callings but are fond of advocating secondary works and
preach the gospel of emptiness and saintliness so as to delight
the people. To do this is as fallacious as to invite people to
poor diet. Any persuasion of the "invitation-to-poor-diet"[12]
type the intelligent sovereign never accepts.

When writings are too sketchy, pupils debate; when laws

are too vague, vagabonds dispute[13] . For this reason, the
writings of the sages always illustrate their discussions, the
laws of the intelligent ruler always penetrate the minute details
of fact. To exert thought and consideration and forecast
gains and losses, is hard even to wise men; to hold the
antecedent word accountable for the consequent result, is
easy even to fools. The intelligent sovereign accepts what is
easy to stupid men but rejects[14] what is difficult to wise men.
Therefore, without resorting to wisdom and thought, the
state is in good order.

If the taste, whether sour or sweet, salty or insipid, is not
judged by the mouth of the sovereign but determined by the
chef, then all the cooks will slight the ruler and revere the
chef. If the note, whether high or low, clear or mixed, is not
judged by the ear of the sovereign but by the head musician,
then the blind[15] players will slight the ruler and revere the
head musician. Similarly, if the government of the state,
whether right or wrong, is not judged by the sovereign's
own tact but determined by his favourites, then the ministers
and inferiors will slight the ruler and revere the favourites.
The lord of men, who does not personally observe deeds and
examine words but merely entrusts the inferiors with all
matters of restriction and judgment, is nobody other than a
lodger and boarder in the state.

Suppose people have neither clothes nor food and suffer
neither hunger nor cold and, moreover, do not fear death,
then they will have no intention to serve the superior. If
they intend not to be ruled by the ruler, the ruler can not

employ them. Now, if the power over life and death is vested
in the chief vassals, then no decree of the sovereign can ever
prevail. Should tigers and leopards make no use of their
claws and fangs, in influence they would become the same as
rats and mice; should families worth ten thousand pieces of
gold make no use of their riches, in status they would become
the same as gate-keepers. If the ruler of a country could
neither benefit men he approves nor injure men he disapproves,
to make men fear and revere him would be impossible.

Ministers who act at random and give rein to their wants,
are said to be chivalrous; the lord of men who acts at random
and gives rein to his wants, is said to be outrageous. Ministers
who slight the superior, are said to be brave[16] ; the lord of
men who slights the inferiors is said to be violent. While the
principles of conduct follow the same track, the inferiors
thereby receive praises and the superior thereby incurs blame.
If the ministers gain so much, the lord of men will lose so
much. In the state of an intelligent sovereign, however, there
are noble ministers but no powerful ministers. By noble
ministers are meant those whose raʼnks are high and whose
posts are big; by powerful ministers are meant those whose
counsels are adopted and whose influences are enormous.
In the state of the intelligent sovereign, again, officials are
raised and ranks are granted according to their respective
merits,[17] wherefore there are noble ministers; words always
turn into deeds[18] and any fraud is always censured, wherefore
there are no powerful ministers.