University of Virginia Library

BOOK TWENTY

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.

Chapter LII

THE LORD OF MEN[1]

The reason why the lord of men finds himself endangered
and sees his state ruined is that chief vassals are too influential
and the attendants are too rampant. Who is called powerful,
observes no law but simply acts at random and manipulates
the handles of the state for facilitating his self-seeking
purposes. Who is called rampant, exercises all undue powers

and influence at his pleasure and makes arbitrary determinations
of right and wrong. These two types of officials the
lord of men must observe carefully.

Indeed, the horse can carry a heavy load, pull the wagon,
and make a distant trip, because of its muscular strength;
the sovereign of ten thousand chariots and the ruler of one
thousand chariots can rule over the world and subdue the
feudal lords, because of their prestige and position. Thus,
prestige and position are the muscular strength of the lord of
men. Now suppose chief vassals gain the sovereign's prestige
and attendants abuse the august position. Then the lord of
men will lose his strength. The lord of men who has lost his
strength and is still able to keep the state, is none out of a
thousand.

The tiger and the leopard can overcome men and catch the
hundred beasts[2] by virtue of their claws and fangs. Supposing
the tiger and the leopard lost their claws and fangs, they
would fall under the control of men. Now that the august
position is the claws and fangs of the lord of men, if any ruler
of men loses his claws and fangs, he will be like the tiger and
the leopard that have lost theirs. For instance, the Ruler of
Sung lost his claws and fangs to Tzŭ-han, and Duke Chien
lost his claws and fangs to T`ien Ch`ang. Because they failed
to recover them early enough, they were themselves killed and
their states were ruined.

Today, the tactless sovereigns all know very well the
errors of the Ruler of Sung and Duke Chien, but never
comprehend their own mistakes. For they never observe
closely the similarities between things.

Moreover, upholders of law and tact and the authorities
in power are incompatible with each other. How can this
be proved? Well, if the sovereign has upholders of tact
around, then chief vassals will not be able to control matters
of decision and the courtiers will not dare to abuse their
privileges. Once the power and influence of the chief
vassals and attendants stop, the Tao of the lord of men will
become illustrious.

The same is not so in these days. The ministers in power
arrogate favourable positions and manage the state affairs
at random in order to further[3] their private interests.
The attendants and the courtiers would form juntas and
associate for the wicked purpose of checking distant officials.
If so, when will the upholders of law and tact be able to
go into the ruler's service? And when will the lord of men
settle his opinion and make his decision? Naturally the
upholders of tact are not necessarily engaged by the ruler and
cannot stand together with the authorities in power. Then
how can the upholders of law and tact have no danger?

For such reasons, unless the ruler of men can reject the
chief vassals' counsels, oppose the attendants' opinions, and
conform independently to reasonable theories, how can the
upholders of law and tact venture their lives in presenting
their ideas to the Throne? This is the reason why the present
age is not orderly.

The intelligent sovereign confers ranks and bounties
according to merits and assigns offices and tasks in correspondence
with abilities. Therefore, the persons appointed always
have worthy qualities; those taken into service always have

required abilities. If worthy and able men are in governmental
service, all requests by private clans will disappear.
Indeed, if men of merit receive great bounties and men of
ability attain high offices, then private swordsmen will
infallibly stop their self-seeking bravery and attack[4] public
enemies. So will the itinerant politicians stop handing around
the private residences of influential clans and start striving
for purity and cleanliness. This is the way to gather the worthy
and able men and scatter the dependents of influential clans.

Now the courtiers are not necessarily wise. Yet, if the lord
of men in his personnel administration first considers somebody
wise[5] and heeds his advice, and, after going inside, if
he esteems the advice of the courtiers and listens to them
regardless of the adviser's wisdom, he will thereby esteem the
wise with the stupid. Again, the authorities in power are
not necessarily worthy. Yet, if the lord of men in his personnel
administration first considers somebody worthy and
respects him, and, after going inside, if he esteems the worthy's
conduct with the authorities in power and listens to them
regardless of his worthiness, he will thereby esteem the
worthy with the worthless. Therefore, if wise men have to
see their plans acknowledged by fools and worthies have
to see their characters estimated by worthless men, when will
the men of worthiness and wisdom be able to enter the ruler's
service? So will the lord of men's sight be obscured.

Of old, Kuan Lung-p`êng admonished Chieh but had his
four limbs injured; Prince Pi-kan remonstrated with Chow
but had his heart cut open; and Tzŭ-hsü was loyal and

honest to Fu-ch`a but was censured with the Shu-lou[6]
sword. These three personages, while ministering to their
rulers, were not disloyal; nor were their counsels untrue.
However, they could not evade the disaster of unjust death
penalties, because of the calamity that their sovereigns never
deliberated carefully on the words of the wise and the worthy
but were deluded by the stupid and the worthless.

In these days, if the lord of men does not want to engage
upholders of law and tact but listens only to stupid and unworthy
ministers, then who among the worthy and wise men
dare face the risk of these three personages in presenting
their wisdom and ability to the Throne? This is the reason
why the present age is disorderly.

Chapter LIII

MAKING ORDERS TRIM[1]

If orders are made trim, laws never deviate;[2] if laws are
equable, there will be no culprit among the officials. Once
the law is fixed, nobody can damage[3] it by means of virtuous
words. If men of merit are appointed to office, the people
will have little to say; if men of virtue are appointed to office
the people will have much to talk about. The enforcement of
laws depends[4] upon the method of judicial administration.

Who administers judicial affairs with the ease of making a
distance of five li[5] , attains supremacy; who administers
judicial affairs with the effort of making nine li, attains mere
strength. Whoever procrastinates in creating order, will see
his state dismembered.

Govern by penalties;[6] wage war by rewards; and enlarge
the bounties so as to put the principles of statecraft into
practice. If so, there will be no wicked people in the state
nor will there be any wicked trade at the market. If things
are many and trifles are numerous, and if farming is relaxed
and villainy prevails, the state will certainly be dismembered.

If the people have a surplus of food, make them receive
rank by giving grain to the state. If only through their own
effort they can receive rank,[7] then farmers[8] will not idle.

If a tube three inches long has no bottom, it can never be
filled. Conferring office and rank or granting profit and
bounty without reference to merit, is like a tube having
no bottom.

If the state confers office and bestows rank, it can
be said to devise plans with complete[9] wisdom and wage war
with complete courage. Such a state will find a rival. Again,
if the state confers office and bestows rank according to
merit, then rules[10] will be simplified and opponents barred;

this can be said to abolish government by means of
government, abolish words by means of words, and bestow
rank according to merit.[11] Therefore the state will have much
strength and none else in All-under-Heaven will dare to
invade it. When its soldiers march out, they will take the
objective and, having taken it, will certainly be able to hold
it. When it keeps its soldiers in reserve and does not attack,
it will certainly become rich.[12]

The affairs of the government, however small, should
never be abandoned. For instance, office and rank are always
obtained according to the acquired merit; though there
may be flattering words, it will be impossible thereby to make
any interference in the state affairs. This is said to be
"government by figures."[13] For instance, in attacking with
force, ten points are taken for every point given out; but
in attacking with words, one hundred are lost for every one
marched out. If a state is fond of force, it is called hard to
attack; if a state is fond of words, it is called easy to attack.

If the ability of the official is equal to his post,[14] if his duty
is lightened and he never reserves[15] any surplus energy in
mind, and if he does not shift any responsibility of additional
offices[16] back to the ruler, then there will be no hidden
grudge inside. If the intelligent ruler makes the state affairs

never mutually interfere,[17] there will be no dispute; if he
allows no official to hold any kind of additional post, everybody
will develop his talent or skill; and if he allows no two
persons to share the same meritorious achievement, there
will be no quarrel.[18]

If penalties are heavy and rewards are few, it means that
the superior loves the people, wherefore the people will die
for rewards. If rewards are many and penalties are light,
it means that the superior does not love the people, wherefore
the people will never die for rewards.

If the profit issues from one outlet[19] only, the state will
have no rival; if it issues from two outlets, its soldiers
will be half useful; and if the profit comes from ten outlets,
the people will not observe the law. If heavy penalties are
clear and if the people are always well disciplined and then if
men are engaged in case of emergency, the superior will have
all the advantage.

In inflicting penalties light offences ahould be punished
severely; if light offences do not appear, heavy offences will
not come. This is said to be to abolish penalties by means of
penalties. And the state will certainly become strong.[20] If crimes
are serious but penalties are light, light penalties breed further
troubles. This is said to create penalties through penalties,
and such a state will infallibly be dismembered.

Chapter LIV

SURMISING THE MENTALITY OF THE PEOPLE[1]
A PSYCHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF POLITICS

The sage in governing the people considers their springs of
action, never tolerates their wicked desires, but seeks only
for the people's benefit. Therefore, the penalty he inflicts
is not due to any hatred for the people but to his motive
of loving the people. If penalty triumphs, the people are
quiet; if reward over-flows, culprits appear. Therefore the
triumph of penalty is the beginning of order; the overflow
of reward, the origin of chaos.

Indeed, it is the people's nature to delight in disorder and
detach themselves from legal restraints. Therefore, when the
intelligent sovereign governs the state, if he makes rewards
clear, the people will be encouraged to render meritorious
services; if he makes penalties severe, the people will attach
themselves to the law. If they are encouraged to render
meritorious services, public affairs will not be obstructed;
if they attach themselves to the law, culprits will not appear.
Therefore, he who governs the people should nip the evil in
the bud; he who commands troops, should inculcate warfare
in the people's mind. If prohibitions can uproot causes of
villainy, there will always be order; if soldiers can imagine
warfare in mind, there will always be victory. When the sage
is governing the people, he attains order first, wherefore he
is strong; he prepares for war first, wherefore he wins.

Indeed, the administration of the state affairs requires the
attention to the causes of human action so as to unify the
people's mental trends; the exclusive elevation of public
welfare so as to stop self-seeking elements; the reward for
denunciation of crime so as to suppress culprits; and finally
the clarification of laws so as to facilitate governmental procedures.
Whoever is able to apply these four measures,
will become strong; whoever is unable to apply these four
measures, will become weak. Indeed, the strength of the
state is due to the administration of its political affairs; the
honour of the sovereign is due to his supreme power. Now,
the enlightened ruler possesses the supreme power and the
administrative organs; the ignoble ruler possesses both
the supreme power and the administrative organs,[2] too. Yet
the results are not the same, because their standpoints are
different. Thus, as the enlightened ruler has the supreme
power in his grip, the superior is held in high esteem; as he
unifies the administrative organs, the state is in order. Hence
law is the origin of supremacy and penalty is the beginning
of love.

Indeed, it is the people's nature to abhor toil and enjoy
ease. However, if they pursue ease, the land will waste; if
the land wastes, the state will not be in order. If the state is
not orderly, it will become chaotic. If reward and penalty

take no effect among the inferiors,[3] government[4] will come
to a deadlock. Therefore, he who wants to accomplish a great
achievement but hesitates to apply his[5] full strength, can not
hope for the accomplishment of the achievement; he who
wants to settle the people's disorder[6] but hesitates to change
their traditions, can not hope to banish the people's disorder.
Hence there is no constant method for the government of
men. The law alone leads to political order.[7] If laws are
adjusted to the time, there is good government. If government
fits the age, there will be great accomplishment. Therefore,
when the people are naîve, if you regulate them with
fame, there will be good government; when everybody
in the world is intelligent,[8] if you discipline them with penalties,
they will obey. While time is moving on, if laws do not shift[9]
accordingly, there will be misrule; while abilities are diverse,[10]
if prohibitions are not changed, the state will be dismembered.
Therefore, the sage in governing the people makes laws[11]
move with time and prohibitions change with abilities.
Who can exert[12] his forces to land-utilization, will become rich;
who can rush his forces at enemies, will become strong. The
strong man not obstructed in his way will attain supremacy.

Therefore, the way to supremacy[13] lies in the way of
shutting[14] culprits off and the way of blocking up wicked men.
Who is able to block up wicked men, will eventually attain
supremacy. The policy of attaining supremacy relies not on
foreign states' abstention from disturbing your state, but on
their inability to disturb your state. Who has to rely on foreign
powers' abstention from disturbing his state before he can
maintain his own independence,[15] will see his state dismembered;
who relies on their inability to disturb his state
and willingly enacts the law, will prosper.

Therefore, the worthy ruler in governing the state follows[16]
the statecraft of invulnerability. When rank is esteemed, the
superior will increase his dignity. He will accordingly
bestow rewards on men of merit, confer ranks upon holders
of posts, and appoint wicked men to no office.[17] Who devotes
himself to practical forces, gets a high rank. If the rank is
esteemed, the superior will be honoured. The superior, if
honoured, will attain supremacy. On the contrary, if the
state does not strive after practical forces but counts on
private studies, its rank will be lowered. If the rank is lowered,
the superior will be humbled. If the superior is humbled,
the state will be dismembered. Therefore, if the way of
founding the state and using the people can shut off foreign
invaders and block up self-seeking subjects, and if the
superior relies on himself, supremacy will be attained.

Chapter LV

REGULATIONS AND DISTINCTIONS[1]

In general,[2] wherever the state is extensive and the ruler
is honourable, there laws are so strict that whatever is ordered
works and whatever is prohibited stops. Therefore, the ruler
of men who distinguishes between ranks and regulates
bounties, makes laws severe and thereby makes the distinction
strict.

Indeed, if the state is orderly, the people are safe; if
affairs are confused, the country falls into peril. Who makes
laws strict, hits on the true nature of mankind; who makes
prohibitions lenient, misses the apparent fact. Moreover,
everybody is, indeed, gifted with desperate courage. To
exert desperate courage to get what one wants, is human
nature. Yet everybody's likes and dislikes should be regulated
by the superior. Now the people like to have profit and bounty
and hate to be punished, if the superior catches their likes and
dislikes and thereby holds their desperate courage under
control, he will not[3] miss the realities of affairs.

However, if prohibitions are lenient and facts are missed,
reward and penalty will be misused. Again, when governing
the people, if you do not regard[4] conformity to law as right,
you will eventually observe no law. Therefore, the science
and philosophy of politics[5] should by all means emphasize

the distinction between degrees of penalty and of reward.

Who governs the state, should always uphold the law.
In life there are ups and downs. If any ruler goes down, it is
because in regulating rewards and penalties he makes no
distinction between different degrees. Who governs the
state, always distinguishes between reward and punishment.
Therefore, some people might regard the distinction between
reward and punishment as distinction, which should not be
called distinction in the strict sense.

As regards the distinction made by the clear-sighted
ruler, it is the distinction between different grades of reward
and of punishment. Therefore, his subjects respect laws and
fear prohibitions. They try to avoid crime rather than
dare to expect any reward. Hence the saying: "Without expecting
penalty and reward the people attend to public affairs."

For this reason, the state at the height of order is able to
take the suppression of villainy for its duty. Why? Because
its law comprehends human nature and accords with the
principles of government.

If so, how to get rid of delicate villainy? By making the
people watch[6] one another in their hidden affairs. Then how
to make them watch one another? By implicating the people
of the same hamlet in one another's crime. When everyone
knows that the penalty or reward will directly affect him, if
the people of the same hamlet[7] fail to watch one another,
they will fear they may not be able to escape the implication,
and those who are evil-minded, will not be allowed to forget
so many people watching them. Were such the law, everybody
would mind his own doings, watch everybody else, and

disclose the secrets of any culprit. For, whosoever denounces
a criminal offence, is not held guilty but is given a reward;
whosoever misses any culprit, is definitely censured and given
the same penalty as the culprit. Were such the law, all types
of culprits would be detected. If the minutest villainy is not
tolerated, it is due to the system of personal denunciation
and mutual implication.

Indeed, the most enlightened method of governing a
state is to trust measures and not men. For this reason, the
tactful state is never mistaken if it does not trust the empty
fame of men. If the land within the boundary is always in
order it is because measures are employed. If any falling
state lets foreign soldiers walk all over its territory and can
neither resist nor prevent them, it is because that state trusts
men and uses no measures. Men may jeopardize their own
country, but measures can invade others' countries.
Therefore, the tactful state spurns words and trusts laws.

Broadly speaking, it is hard to uncover a crooked merit
that appears to fulfil the promise; it is hard to disclose the
feature[8] of the fault that is ornamented with beautiful words.
Therefore, penalty and reward are often misled by double-dealers.
What is alleged to be fulfilling the promise but is hard
to uncover, is a villainous merit. Any minister's fault is hard
to disclose, because its motive is missed. However, if by
following reason you can not disclose the false merit and by
analyzing feelings you are still deceived by the villainous
motive, then can both reward and punishment have no
mistake respectively?

For such reasons, false scholars establish names inside,
while itinerants devise plans outside, till the stupid and the
coward mix themselves with the brave and the clever.
Inasmuch as the false path is customary, they are tolerated
by their age. Therefore, their law does not work and their
penalty affects nobody. If so, both reward and penalty
have to be double-dealings.[9]

Therefore,[10] concrete facts have their limits of extension,
but abstract principles involve no accurate measures. The
absence of such measures is due not to the law but to the
abandonment of law[11] and the dependence on cleverness.
If the law is abandoned and cleverness is employed, how can
the appointee to office perform his duty? If duty and office
are not equivalent to each other, then how can the law evade
mistakes and how can penalty evade troubles? For this reason
reward and punishment will be thrown into confusion and
disorder, and the state policy will deviate and err, because
neither penalty nor reward has any clear distinction of degree
as in the difference between black[12] and white.