|<Previous Section>||<Next Section>|
景公過晏子，曰：「子宮小，近市，請徙子家豫章之圃。」晏子再拜而辭曰： 「且嬰家貧，待市食，而朝暮趨之，不可以遠。」景公笑曰：「子家習市，識貴賤乎？」是時景公繁於刑， 晏子對曰：「踴貴而屨賤。」景公曰：「何故？」對曰：「刑多也。」景公造然變色曰：「寡人其暴乎！」於是損刑五。
或曰：晏子之貴踴，非其誠也，欲便辭以止多刑也。此不察治之患也。 夫刑當無多，不當無少。無以不當聞，而以太多說，無術之患也。敗軍之誅以千百數，猶（且）〔北〕不止； 即治亂之刑如恐不勝，而姦尚不盡。今晏子不察其當否，而以太多為說，不亦妄乎？夫惜草茅者耗禾穗， 惠盜賊者傷良民。今緩刑罰，行寬惠，是利姦邪而害善人也，此非所以為治也。
或曰：管仲雪桓公之恥於小人，而生桓公之恥於君子矣。使桓公發倉囷而賜貧窮， 論囹圄而出薄罪，非義也，不可以雪恥；使之而義也，桓公宿義，須遺冠而後行之，則是桓公行義， 非為遺冠也？是雖雪遺冠之恥於小人，而亦〔生〕遺義之恥於君子矣。且夫發囷倉而賜貧窮者， 是賞無功也；論囹圄而出薄罪者，是不誅過也。夫賞無功，則民偷幸而望於上；不誅過，則民不懲而易為非。 此亂之本也，安可以雪恥哉？
昔者文王侵（孟）〔盂〕、克莒、舉酆，三舉事而紂惡之。文王乃懼， 請入洛西之地、赤壤之國方千里，以請解炮烙之刑。天下皆說。仲尼聞之，曰： 「仁哉，文王！輕千里之國而請解炮烙之刑。智哉，文王！出千里之地而得天下之心。」
或曰：仲尼以文王為智也，不亦過乎？夫智者，知禍難之地而辟之者也， 是以身不及於患也。使文王所以見惡於紂者，以其不得人心耶？則雖索人心以解惡可也。 紂以其大得人心而惡之，已又輕地以收人心，是重見疑也，固其所以桎梏、囚於羑里也。 鄭長者有言：「體道，無為無見也。」此最宜於文王矣，不使人疑之也。仲尼以文王為智，未及此論也。
晉平公問叔向曰：「昔者齊桓公九合諸侯，一匡天下，不識臣之力也， 〔君之力也〕？」叔向對曰：「管仲善制割，賓胥無善削縫，隰朋善純緣，衣成，君舉而服之。 亦臣之力也，君何力之有？」師曠伏琴而笑之。公曰：「太師奚笑也？」師曠對曰： 「臣笑叔向之對君也。凡為人臣者，猶炮宰和五味而進之君，君弗食，孰敢強之也？臣請譬之： 君者，壤地也；臣者，草木也。必壤地美，然後草木碩大。亦君之力〔也〕，臣何力之有？」
或曰：叔向、師曠之對，皆偏辭也。夫一匡天下，九合諸侯，美之大者也， 非專君之力也，又非專臣之力也。昔者宮之奇在虞，僖負羈在曹，二臣之智，言中事，發中功， 虞、曹俱亡者，何也？此有其臣而無其君者也。且蹇叔處干而干亡，〔處〕秦而秦霸，非蹇叔愚於干而智於秦也， 此有君與無（臣）〔君〕也。向曰「臣之力也」，不然矣。
昔者桓公宮中二市，婦閭二百，披髮而御婦人。 得管仲，為五伯長；失管仲、得豎刁而身死，蟲流出（尸）〔戶〕不葬。以為非臣之力也，且不以管仲為霸； 以為君之力也，且不以豎刁為亂。昔者，晉文公慕於齊女而亡歸，咎犯極諫，故使反晉國。故桓公以管仲合， 文公〔以〕舅犯霸。而師曠曰「君之力也」，又不然矣。凡五霸所以能成功名於天下者，必君臣俱有力焉。 故曰：叔向、師曠之對，皆偏辭也。
齊桓公之時，晉客至，有司請禮。桓公曰「告仲父」者三。而優笑曰： 「易哉，為君！一曰仲父，二曰仲父。」桓公曰：「吾聞『君人者勞於索人，佚於使人』。 吾得仲父已難矣，得仲父之後，何為不易乎哉？」
或曰：桓公之所應優，非君人者之言也。桓公以君人為勞於索人，何索人為勞哉？ 伊尹自以為宰干湯，百里奚自以為虜干穆公。虜，所辱也；宰，所羞也。蒙羞辱而接君上， 賢者之憂世急也。然則君人者無（道）〔逆〕賢而已矣，索賢不為人主難。
且官職，所以任賢也； 爵祿，所以賞功也。設官職，陳爵祿，而士自至，君人者奚其勞哉！使人又非所佚也。人主雖使人， 必〔以〕度量準之，以刑名參之；以事遇於法則行，不遇於法則止；功當其言則賞，不當則誅。 以刑名收臣，以度量準下，此不可釋也，君人者焉佚哉？
已得管仲之後，奚遽易哉？管仲非周公旦。周公旦假為天子七年，成王壯，授之以政，非為天下計也， 為其職也。夫不奪子而行天下者，必不背死君而事其讎；背死君而事其讎者，必不難奪子而行天下； 不難奪子而行天下者，必不難奪其君國矣。管仲，公子糾之臣也，謀殺桓公而不能，其君死而臣桓公。 管仲之取舍非周公旦，（未）可知也。若使管仲大賢也，且為湯、武。〔湯、武〕，桀、紂之臣也； 桀、紂作亂，湯、武奪之。今桓公以易居其上，是以桀、紂之行，居湯、武之上，桓公危矣。 若使管仲不肖人也，且為田常。田常，簡公之臣也，而弒其君。今桓公以易居其上，是以簡公之易， 居田常之上也，桓公又危矣。
管仲非周公旦以明矣，然為湯、武與田常，未可知也。為湯、武有桀、紂之危； 為田常有簡公之亂也。已得仲父之後，桓公奚遽易哉？若使桓公之任管仲，必知不欺己也， 是知不欺主之臣也。然雖知不欺主之臣，今桓公以任管仲之專，借豎刁、易牙，蟲流出（尸）〔戶〕而（作）〔不〕葬， 桓公不知臣欺主與不欺主已明矣，而任臣如彼其專也，故曰桓公闇主。
李（兌）〔克〕治中山，苦陘令上計而入多。李（兌）〔克〕曰： 「語言辨，聽之說，不度於義，謂之窕言。無山林澤谷之利而入多者，謂之窕貨。君子不聽窕言， 不受窕貨。（之）〔子〕姑免矣。」
或曰：李子設辭曰：「夫言語辨，聽之說，不度於義者，謂之窕言。」 辯在言者，說在聽者，言非聽者也。所謂不度於義，非謂聽者，必謂所聽也。聽者，非小人，則君子也。 小人無義，必不能度之義也；君子度之義，必不肯說也。夫曰「言語辯，聽之說，不度於義」者， 必不誠之言也。
入多之為窕貨也，未可遠行也。李子之姦弗蚤禁，使至於計，是遂過也。 無術以知而入多，入多者，穰也，雖倍入，將柰何？舉事慎陰陽之和，種樹節四時之適， 無早晚之失，寒溫之災，則入多。不以小功妨大務，不以（和）私欲害人事，丈夫盡於耕農， 婦人力於織紝，則入多。務於畜養之理，察於土地之宜，六畜遂，五穀殖，則入多。明於權計， 審於地形、舟車、機械之利，用力少，致功大，則入多。利商市關梁之行，能以所有致所無， 客商歸之，外貨留之，儉於財用，節於衣食，宮室器械周於資用，不事玩好，則入多。入多， 皆人為也。若天事，風雨時，寒溫適，土地不加大，而有豐年之功，則入多。人事、天功， 二物者皆入多，非山林澤谷之利也。夫無山林澤谷之利入多，因謂之窕貨者，無術之（害）〔言〕也。
趙簡子圍衛之郛郭，犀楯、犀櫓，立於矢石之所〔不〕及，鼓之而士不起。 簡子投枹曰：「烏乎！吾之士數弊也。」行人燭過免冑而對曰：「臣聞之：亦有君之不能耳， 〔士〕無弊者。昔者吾先君獻公并國十七，服國三十八，戰十有二勝，是民之用也。獻公沒， 惠公即位，淫衍暴亂，身好玉女，秦人恣侵，去絳十七里，亦是人之用也。惠公沒，文公授之， 圍衛，取鄴，城濮之戰，五敗荊人，取尊名於天下，亦此人之用也。亦有君不能（士）耳，士無弊也。」 簡子乃去楯、櫓，立矢石之所及，鼓之而士乘之，戰大勝。簡子曰：「與吾得革車千乘，不如聞行人燭過之一言也。」
或曰：行人未有以說也，乃道惠公以此人是敗，文公以此人是霸，未見所以用人也。 簡子未可以速去（脅）〔楯〕、櫓也。嚴親在圍，輕犯矢石，孝子之所〔以〕愛親也。孝子愛親， 百數之一也。今以為身處危而人尚可戰，是以百族之子於上皆若孝子之愛親也，是行人之誣也。 好利惡害，夫人之所有也。賞厚而信，人輕敵矣；刑重而必，（失）〔夫〕人不北矣。長行徇上， 數百不一（失）〔人〕，喜利畏罪，人莫不然。將眾者不出乎莫不然之數，而道乎百無（失）〔一〕人之行， 〔行〕人未知〔用〕眾之道也。
Chapter XXXVII. Criticisms of the Ancients, Series Two
1Duke Ching passed by the house of Yen Tzŭ and said, "Your residence is small and close by the market. Pray move your home to the Garden of Yü-chang." Repeating his bows, Yen Tzŭ declined the offer, saying, "The home of thy servant 2 , Ying, is poor and dependent on the market for daily supplies. As every morning and evening we have to run to the market, we cannot live too far away from the place." Duke Ching laughed and said, "If your family is used to shopping at the market, do you know the prices of goods?" At that time Duke Ching was busy inflicting many punishments. Therefore, Yen Tzŭ replied, "The shoes of the footless men are dear; the ordinary shoes cheap." "Why?" asked the Duke. "Because there are many punishments of foot-cutting," replied Yen Tzŭ. Astonished thereat, Duke Ching changed his colour and said, "Am I as cruel as that?" Meanwhile he abolished five articles under the criminal law.
Some critic says: Yen Tzŭ's making dear the shoes of footless men was not sincere. He simply wanted to utilize the words to eliminate the number of punishments. This was the calamity of his ignorance of the bases of political order. Indeed, punishments equivalent to crimes are never too many; punishments not equivalent to crimes are never too few. 3 Instead of informing the ruler about the punishments that were not equivalent to crimes, Yen Tzŭ persuaded him that the punishments were too many. This was the calamity of his tactlessness. When defeated troops are censured, though the punishments number hundreds and thousands, yet they still keep running away. When penalties for settling order out of confusion are inflicted, though the punishments seem innumerable, yet the culprits are still not exterminated. Now that Yen Tzŭ never considered whether or not the punishments were equivalent to the crimes but took their extraordinary number as the basis of his remark, was his counsel not absurd? Verily, who spares weeds and reeds, hurts the ears of the rice-plants; who tolerates thieves and robbers, injures good citizens. Similarly, to loosen censure and punishment and give pardons and favours, is to benefit the crooks and injure the good. It is not the way to attain political order.
Once Duke Huan of Ch`i was drunk and dropped his crown. Feeling
disgraced thereby, he did not hold court for three days. Kuan Chung said, "This
is not what the ruler of a state should feel disgraced by. Why does Your
Highness not wipe away such disgrace by means
of good government?" "Right," replied the Duke, and, accordingly, opened the
granaries and gave aid to the poor, and made a thorough investigation of the
convicts and let out the misdemeanants. In the course of three days, the people
began to sing his praises, saying:
Some critic says: Kuan Chung wiped away Duke Huan's disgrace among small men but displayed his disgrace before superior men. 4 To make Duke Huan open the granaries, give aid to the poor, investigate the convicts, and let out the misdemeanants, was not righteous and not able to wipe away the disgrace. Granting it to be a righteous act, Duke Huan and neglected such righteousness that he dropped his crown, and then began to act righteously. If so, the righteous act was done because Duke Huan had neglected 5righteousness rather than because he had dropped his crown. Thus, though he might have wiped away the disgrace of dropping the crown among small men, yet he had already left the disgrace of neglecting 6 righteousness before gentlemen. Moreover, to open the granaries and give aid to the poor was to reward men of no merit; to investigate the convicts and let out the misdemeanants was to inflict no punishment upon offenders. Indeed, if men of no merit are rewarded, then the people will enjoy the godsends and hope for the same from the sovereign; if offenders are not punished, then the people will take no warning and become liable to misconduct. This is the root of confusion. How could it wipe away any disgrace at all?
In bygone days, King Wên invaded Yü, defeated Chü, and took Fêng. After he had waged these three campaigns, King Chow came to dislike him. Afraid thereof, he offered to present the King with the land to the west of the Lo River and the country of the Red Soil, altogether one thousand li square in area, and asked him to abolish the punishment of climbing the roasting pillar. Thereat All-under-Heaven were delighted. Hearing about this, Chung-ni said: "How benevolent King Wên was! By making light of a country of one thousand li square, he asked for the abolishment of the punishment of climbing the roasting pillar. How wise King Wên was! By offering the land of one thousand li square, he won the hearts of All-under-Heaven."
Some critic says: Chung-ni thought King Wên was wise. Was he not mistaken? Indeed, the wise man knows the unlucky and dangerous zone and can avoid it, so that he never suffers the calamity himself. Suppose the reason why King Wên was disliked by Chow was his inability to win the hearts of the people. Then though he might seek to win the hearts of the people in order thereby to dispel Chow's dislike, yet Chow would dislike him the more because he made a great success in winning the hearts of the people. Besides, he made light of his territory and thereby won the hearts of the people, which would double Chow's suspicion of him. No wonder, he was fettered in jail at Yu-li. The saying of the elder of Chêng, "Have personal experience of the Way of Nature, do not do anything, and reveal nothing," would be the most suitable warning to King Wên. It is the way to incur nobody's suspicion. Thus, Chung-ni in regarding King Wên as wise fell short of this saying.
Duke P`ing of Chin asked Shu Hsiang, saying: "Formerly Duke Huan of Ch`i called nine conferences of the feudal lords and brought All-under-Heaven under one rule. Was that due to the abilities of the ministers or the ability of the ruler?" In reply Shu Hsiang said, "Kuan Chung was skilful in cutting the shape of the dress; Pin Hsü-wu was skilful in sewing 7 the seams of the dress; and Hsi Pêng was skilful in decorating the dress with plaits and bindings. When the dress was ready, the ruler took it and wore it. The dress-making was thus due to the minister's abilities. What ability did the Ruler have?" Thereat Musician K`uang lay down upon the harp and laughed. "Grand Tutor, why are you laughing?" asked the Duke. "Thy servant," replied the Musician K`uang, "is laughing at the reply Shu Hsiang has given to Your Highness. As a rule, who ministers to a ruler is like a cook synthesizing the five tastes and serving the food to the master. If the master refuses to eat it, who dare force him? May thy servant compare the ruler to farming soil and ministers to grass and trees. The soil must be fertile before grass and trees grow big. Similarly, the Hegemony of Duke Huan was due to the ruler's ability. What abilities did the ministers have?"
Some critic says: The replies of both Shu Hsiang and Musician K`uang were equally eccentric views. Verily, to bring All-under-Heaven under one rule and call nine conferences of the feudal lords was a brilliant achievement. However, it was neither entirely due to the ability of the ruler nor entirely due to the abilities of the ministers. Formerly, Kung Chi-ch`i served Yü, Hsi Fu-ch`i served Ts`ao. Both ministers were so wise that their words always hit the truth of affairs and the execution of the counsels could always harvest successful results. Yet why did Yü and Ts`ao go to ruin? It was because they had able ministers but no able rulers. Likewise, Ch`ien Shu 8 served Yü, 9 but Yü went to ruin; then he served Ch`in, which attained Hegemony. Not that Ch`ien Shu was stupid in Yü and wise in Ch`in, but that serving under an able ruler was different from serving under an unable ruler. 10 Therefore, Hsiang's saying that the success was due to the abilities of the ministers was not true.
Formerly, Duke Huan built two markets inside the palace and two hundred gates of harems between them. Everyday he wore no hat and took drives with women. After he got Kuan Chung, he became the first of the Five Hegemonic Rulers. 11 After he lost Kuan Chung, he got Shu Tiao with the result that following his death worms crawled outdoors12 while the corpse still lay unburied. If success was not due to the ability of the minister, Duke Huan would not have attained Hegemony because of Kuan Chung. Were it entirely due to the ability of the ruler, he would not have suffered any disturbance because of Shu Tiao. Formerly, Duke Wên was so much in love with his Ch`i wife that he forgot the necessity to return to his native country. Therefore, Uncle 13 Fan made a forceful remonstration with him and thereby enabled him to go back to the Chin State. Thus, Duke Huan brought All-under-Heaven under one rule because of Kuan Chung while Duke Wên attained Hegemony because of Uncle Fan. Therefore, Musician K`uang's saying that the success was due to the ability of the ruler was also not true. On the whole, the Five Hegemonic Rulers could accomplish their achievements and reputations in All-underHeaven because in every case both ruler and minister had abilities. Hence the saying: "The replies of both Shu Hsiang and Musician K`uang were equally eccentric views."
At the time of Duke Huan of Ch`i, once an envoy from Chin arrived. When the chief usher asked about the kind of treatment he should be accorded, Duke Huan thrice said, "Ask Uncle Chung about it." Therefore the clown laughed, saying, "How easy it is to be a ruler! First Your Highness says, `Ask Uncle Chung!' and next also says, `Ask Uncle Chung!' " In response Duke Huan said: "I have heard that the ruler of men has a hard time to find right men for office but has an easy time when making use of them. I already had a hard time to find Uncle Chung. After having found him, why should I not have an easy time?"
Some critic says: The reply of Duke Huan to the clown was not what the ruler of men ought to have made. Duke Huan thought the ruler of men must undergo the hardship of finding right men for office. Why should finding men be a hardship at all? Yi Yin became a cook and thereby 14 ingratiated himself with King T`ang; Pai-li Hsi became a war prisoner and thereby ingratiated himself with Duke Mu. To become a war prisoner is a humiliation; to become a cook is a disgrace. Yet because the worthy's worry about the world is urgent, he would go through humiliation and disgrace and thereby approach the ruler. If so, the rulers of men should cause only the worthies no obstacle. Verily, to find right men for office does not constitute any difficulty to the lord of men. Moreover, to offices and commissions worthies are appointed; with titles and bounties men of merit are rewarded. Once offices and commissions are established and titles and bounties are paraded, talented men will appear of themselves. Then why should the ruler of men have any hardship at all?
Likewise, personnel administration is not an easy thing. The lord of men, while using men, must regulate them with rules and measures, and compare their deeds with their words in the way forms are compared with names. If any project is lawful, it should be carried out; if unlawful, it should be stopped. If the result is equivalent to the proposal, the proposer should be rewarded; if not, he should be punished. Rectify the ministers with forms and names, regulate the subordinates with rules and measures. This principle should not be neglected. Then what ease does the ruler of men have?
Thus finding men is not a hardship; using men is not easy. Consequently, Duke Huan's saying, "The ruler has a hard time to find men but has an easy time when using them," was not true. Moreover, Duke Huan went through no hardship to find Kuan Chung. Kuan Chung did not die in the cause of loyalty to his first master, but surrendered himself to Duke Huan. Besides, Pao Shu made light of his own official position, gave way to the able man, and recommended him for the post of premiership. Clearly enough, Duke Huan's finding Kuan Chung was not any hardship at all.
After having found Kuan Chung, how could he have an easy time all at once? Kuan Chung was not like Duke T`an of Chou. Duke T`an of Chou acted for the Son of Heaven for seven years till King Ch`êng reached full age, when he returned the reins of government to him. This was not because he thought of the welfare of All-under-Heaven, but because he wanted to perform his duty. Indeed, who does not usurp the orphan's throne and thereby rule over All-under-Heaven, never will desert the dead ruler and serve the enemy; who deserts the dead ruler and serves the enemy, will not always hesitate to usurp the orphan's throne and thereby rule over All-under-Heaven; and who does not hesitate to usurp the orphan's throne and thereby rule over All-under-Heaven, will not hesitate to usurp the ruler's state. Now Kuan Chung was originally a minister under Prince Chiu. Once he even schemed to assassinate Duke Huan, but in vain. Following the death of his old master, he served Duke Huan. Clearly enough, in matters of submission and desertion Kuan Chung was not as great as Duke T`an of Chou. 15 Nobody could tell whether or not he would remain worthy. 16 Supposing he would remain worthy, then he might do the same as King T`ang and King Wu. T`ang and Wu were originally ministers under Chieh and Chow respectively. Chieh and Chow caused confusion, wherefore T`ang and Wu deprived them of the throne. Now that Duke Huan easily stood above Kuan Chung, he was doing the same as Chieh and Chow did standing above T`ang and Wu. Duke Huan was in danger then. Supposing Kuan Chung should become an unworthy man, then he might do the same as T`ien Ch`ang. T`ien Ch`ang was a minister to Duke Chien but murdered his master. Now that Duke Huan stood easily above Kuan Chung, he was doing the same as Duke Chien standing easily above T`ien Ch`ang. Again Duke Huan was in danger.
Thus clearly 17 enough, Kuan Chung was not as great as Duke T`an of Chou. However, nobody could tell whether he would do the same as T`ang and Wu or as T`ieh Ch`ang. Should he do the same as T`ang and Wu, there would be the danger of Chieh and Chow; should he do the same as T`ien Ch`ang, there would be the catastrophe of Duke Chien. After having found Uncle Chung, how could he have an easy time all at once? Supposing Duke Huan took Kuan Chung into service because he was sure he would never deceive him, then he could direct ministers who were not deceitful. However, though at one time he could direct ministers who were not deceitful, yet as he later entrusted Shu Tiao and I Ya with the same affairs which he had committed to the hands of Kuan Chung with the result that worms crawled outdoors 18 while his corpse lay unburied, it goes without saying that Duke Huan could not tell between ministers who would deceive the ruler and those who would not deceive the ruler. Nevertheless, so exclusively he put his trust in ministers when he took them into service! Hence the saying: "Duke Huan was a stupid sovereign."
Li K`o 19 governed Central Hills. The magistrate of Hard Paths presented his fiscal report, in which the annual revenue appeared enormous in amount. Therefore, Li K`o said: "Speeches, eloquent and delightful to the ear but in discord with the cause of righteousness, are called `entrancing words.' The revenue, enormous in amount but not due to the products from mountains, forests, swamps, and valleys, is called `an attractive income.' The gentleman never listens to attractive words nor accepts any attractive income. You had better leave your office."
Some critic says: Li Tzŭ proclaimed the theory, "Speeches, eloquent and delightful to the ear but in discord with the cause of righteousness, are called `attractive words'." To be sure, the eloquence of speeches depends upon the speaker while their delight rests with the listener. Thus, the speaker is not the listener. What he called "discord with the cause of righteousness" is not concerned with the listener. It must be concerned with what is heard. The listener must be either a rascal or a gentleman. The rascal, having no cause of righteousness, must be unable to estimate the speeches from the standpoint of righteousness; whereas the gentleman, estimating them from the standpoint of righteousness, is certainly not delighted at them. Verily, the argument that speeches, eloquent and delightful to the ear, are in discord with the cause of righteousness must be an absurd saying.
The argument that a revenue enormous in amount is an attractive income is not applicable to many cases. Li Tzŭ did not stop corruptions early enough and let them creep into the fiscal report. In this way he allowed criminal offences to be accomplished. He had no way of knowing why the revenue was enormous. If the enormous revenue was due to a bountiful harvest, then though the amount was doubled, what could be done about it? If in doing any kind of work people look after the harmony of the positive and negative factors 20 ; if in planting trees they follow the suitable periods of the four seasons; and if at dawn and at dusk there is no suffering from cold or heat; then revenue will be enormous. If important duties are not obstructed by small profits; if public welfare is not injured by private interest; if men exert their strength to tillage; and if women devote their energies to weaving; then revenue will be enormous. If the methods of animal husbandry are improved, the qualities of the soil are examined, the six animals 21 flourish, and the five cereals abound, then revenue will be enormous. If weights and measures are made clear; if topographical features are carefully surveyed; and if through the utilization of boats, carts, and other mechanical devices, the minimum amount of energy is used to produce the maximum amount of efficiency; then revenue will be enormous. If traffic on markets, cities, passes, and bridges is facilitated, so that needy places are supplied with sufficient commodities; if merchants from abroad flock to the country and foreign goods and money come in; if any unnecessary expenditure is cut down, extravagant clothing and food are saved, houses and furniture are all limited to necessities, and amusements and recreations are never over-emphasized; then revenue will be enormous. In these cases, the increase in revenue is due to human effort. Granted that natural events, winds, rain, seasons, cold, and heat are normal and the territory remains the same, then if the people can reap the fruits of the abundant year, then revenue will be enormous too. Thus, human effort and heavenly support both are the main factors of increases in revenue, but the products from mountains, forests, swamps, and valleys are not. Verily, to call the enormous revenue not due to the products from mountains, forests, swamps, and valleys "an attractive income," is a tactless saying.
When Viscount Chien of Chao was laying siege to the outer walls 22 of the capital of Wei, he covered himself with a shield and a turret both made of rhinoceros-hide and stood at a spot beyond the reach of arrow-heads. Therefrom he beat the drum, but the warriors made no progress. Throwing down the drumsticks, Duke Chien said, "Alas! My men are already exhausted." In response a herald named Chu Kuo took off his helmet and said: "Thy servant has heard, `The ruler may be incapable, but no warrior is ever exhausted.' In bygone days, 23 our former ruler, Duke Hsien, annexed seventeen states, subdued thirty-eight states, and won twelve wars, which altogether was due to his way of making use of the people. Following the death of Duke Hsien, Duke Hui ascended the throne. As he continued lewd, flighty, cruel, and violent, and pleasured himself in beautiful women, the Ch`ins invaded the country at their pleasure and came within the distance of seventeen li from the city of Chiang, which also was due to his way of using the people. Following the death of Duke Hui, Duke Wên accepted the reins of government, besieged Wei, took Yeh, and at the battle of Ch`êng-p`u defeated the Chings five times, till he attained the highest fame in All-under-Heaven, which also was due to his way of using men. Thus, the ruler may be incapable, but no warrior is ever exhausted." Accordingly, Duke Chien discarded the shield and the turret and stood on a spot within the reach of arrow-heads. Therefrom he beat the drum, under whose influence the warriors fought and won a great victory. Thereupon Duke Chien said, "One thousand armoured chariots given to me would not be as effective as one counsel heard from Chu Kuo."
Some critic says: The herald did not speak to the point. He simply reminded his master that Duke Hui on account of his personnel administration failed while Duke Wên on account of his personnel administration attained hegemony, but did not yet explain to him the right technique of personnel administration. Therefore, Duke Chien should not have discarded the shield and the turret so soon. When the father is besieged, to slight personal safety and venture the arrowheads is the way the dutiful son loves his father. However, among one hundred there may be one dutiful son loving his father to such an extent. Now that the herald thought the people could fight even in the face of personal dangers, he presumed that all the sons of the hundred clans 24 would serve the superior in the same way as the dutiful son loves his father. Such was the absurd idea of the herald. To love profit and dislike injury is the tendency everybody has. Therefore, if reward is big and trusted, everybody will rush at enemies with ease. If punishment is heavy and definite, nobody 25 will run 26 away from enemies. Among one hundred men there is not even one who would practise high virtue and die in the cause of loyalty to the superior, yet everybody is equally fond of profit and afraid of punishment. Therefore, in advising the leader of the masses not to go on the way which they would follow by necessity but to count on such virtue as none out of a hundred would practise, the herald was certainly not yet aware of the right method of making use of the people.
2. With Wang Hsien-shên 且 above 嬰 should be 臣 ch`ên, minister.
3. Unjust punishments, however few in number, are still unjust.
4. With Wang Hsien-shên, small men regard dropping the crown as a disgrace while gentlemen regard dropping righteousness as a disgrace.
5. With Ku Kuang-ts`ê 行 should be 遺.
6. 宿 should be supplied below 遺.
7. With Kao Hêng 削 bove 縫 means 縫, too.
8. As a matter of fact, it was Pai Hsi who first served Yü and later went to Ch`in. Chien Shu was brought in by Pai-li Hsi, but he never served Yü.
9. With Yü Yüeh 干 should be 虞, and so throughout the criticism.
10. With Ku Kuang-ts`ê 臣 should be 君.
11. 五百 should be 五伯 which means 五霸.
12. With Wang Haien-shen 尸 should be 戶.
13. 咎犯 should be 舅犯.
14. With Yü Yüeh 自 in both cases should be 由.
15. With Chang P`ang and Wang Hsien-shen 亦以明矣 should be supplied below 非周公旦.
16. With Chang and Wang 然其賢與不賢 should be supplied above 未可知也.
17. With Wang 以 above 明 should be 已.
18. With Wang 尸 should be 戶.
19. 兌 should be 克 (v. supra, Work XXXIII, p. 68).
21. Namely, horses, oxen, sheep, chickens, dogs, and pigs.
22. With Wang Hsien-shen 郛郭 should be 附郭.
23. Hirazawa's edition has 臣聞之 above 昔者, which is wrong.
24. 百族 like 百姓 "the hundred surnames" means the masses of people
25. With Ku Kuang-ts`ê 失 above 人 should be 夫.
26. With Wang Hsien-shën, Chao Yung-hsien's edition has 北 in place of 比.
|<Previous Section>||<Next Section>|
|Published by The Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities, © Copyright 2003 by Anne Kinney and the University of Virginia|