奸劫弒臣

All treacherous ministers seek to conform to the ruler's heart in order to seize the leverage of intimate favor. Therefore, whatever the ruler approves, the minister follows by praising it; whatever the ruler dislikes, the minister follows by condemning it. As a general rule of human nature, those who share the same preferences affirm one another, and those who differ in their preferences reject one another. What the minister praises is what the ruler affirms -- this is called 'shared approval.' What the minister condemns is what the ruler rejects -- this is called 'shared rejection.' When preferences align, mutual opposition has never been heard of. This is the means by which ministers win trust and favor.

When a treacherous minister has ridden the leverage of trust and favor to control the advancement and demotion of other ministers through praise and condemnation, and the ruler has no techniques of governance to check him, no cross-referencing and verification to audit him -- then the ruler will inevitably trust the minister's present words because of their past agreement. This is how favored ministers deceive the ruler and achieve their private ends.

Therefore the ruler is inevitably obstructed above, and the minister inevitably grows powerful below. This is called a minister who has usurped the ruler.

When a state has a minister who has usurped the ruler, then the subordinates below cannot fully employ their intelligence and strength to demonstrate loyalty, and the officials cannot uphold the law to achieve results. How can this be demonstrated?

People pursue what is safe and profitable and avoid what is dangerous and harmful -- this is human nature. Today, a minister who exerts his strength to achieve results and exhausts his wisdom to demonstrate loyalty finds his person in difficulty and his family in poverty, with father and son suffering the consequences. A minister who practices treacherous profiteering to obstruct the ruler and distributes wealth to serve powerful ministers finds his person honored and his family wealthy, with father and son enjoying the benefits. How can people be expected to abandon the path of safety and profit and embrace danger and harm?

When governing a state goes this wrong, for the ruler to expect his subordinates to be free of treachery and his officials to uphold the law -- the impossibility is obvious.

Therefore those at the ruler's side, knowing that integrity and honesty cannot bring safety and profit, will inevitably say: 'If I serve the ruler with loyalty and honesty, accumulating merit to seek security -- that is like a blind man trying to distinguish black from white; it simply cannot be done. If I follow the Way and practice correct principles, not pursuing wealth and rank while serving the ruler and seeking security -- that is like a deaf man trying to discern pure from muddy tones; it is even less possible. Since neither path can bring security, how can I not form factions and cliques, obstruct the ruler, and practice treachery to please the powerful?' Such a person will certainly disregard the ruler's principles.

The officials likewise know that uprightness cannot bring security, and will inevitably say: 'If I serve the ruler with integrity and seek security -- that is like trying to draw squares and circles without compass and straightedge; it simply cannot be done. If I uphold the law, refuse factions, and administer my office properly while seeking security -- that is like trying to scratch the top of one's head with one's foot; it is even less possible. Since neither path can bring security, how can I not abandon the law, pursue private interests, and please the powerful?' Such a person will certainly disregard the ruler's law.

Therefore those who serve the powerful through private channels are many, while those who serve the ruler through law are few. This is why the ruler stands isolated above while ministers form factions below. This is how Tian Cheng was able to murder Duke Jian of Qi.

When a man of institutional technique serves as minister, he is able to put forward measured and systematic proposals: above, he clarifies the ruler's laws; below, he constrains treacherous ministers -- thereby honoring the ruler and stabilizing the state. When systematic proposals are proven effective beforehand, rewards and punishments will inevitably be applied afterward.

If the ruler truly understands the sage's techniques, refuses to indulge in the fashionable rhetoric of the age, holds names to realities in determining right and wrong, and employs cross-referencing and verification to audit all claims -- then the intimate attendants, knowing that deception and fraud cannot bring them security, will inevitably say: 'If I do not abandon treacherous and private conduct, exerting my strength and exhausting my wisdom to serve the ruler, but instead form factions, make reckless praise and condemnation to seek security -- that is like bearing a thousand-jun weight and sinking into a fathomless abyss while hoping to survive; it simply cannot be done.'

The officials likewise, knowing that treacherous profiteering cannot bring them security, will inevitably say: 'If I do not uphold the law with integrity and uprightness, but instead with a corrupt and greedy heart bend the law for private gain -- that is like climbing to the summit of a high ridge and plunging into a steep valley while hoping to survive; it simply cannot be done.'

When the paths to security and danger are this clear, how can attendants confuse the ruler with empty words, and how dare officials plunder the people below? Thus ministers are able to demonstrate their loyalty without obstruction, and subordinates are able to keep their posts without resentment. This is how Guan Zhong governed Qi, and how Lord Shang strengthened Qin.

From this perspective, when the sage governs a state, he possesses methods that make it so people cannot help but serve him -- he does not rely on people voluntarily loving and serving him. To rely on people serving you out of love is dangerous; to rely on making it so they cannot avoid serving you is safe.

Between ruler and minister there are no bonds of flesh and blood. When the path of uprightness can bring profit, ministers exert their full strength to serve the ruler. When the path of uprightness cannot bring safety, ministers pursue private interests to manipulate the ruler. The enlightened ruler understands this, and therefore simply establishes the paths of advantage and harm and displays them to All-Under-Heaven.

Thus the ruler, though he does not personally instruct every official with his mouth or personally seek out every treachery with his eyes, finds the state already well-governed. A ruler need not have eyes like Li Lou to be called perceptive, nor ears like Music Master Kuang to be called discerning. If he does not employ systematic methods but relies on his own eyes for perception, what he sees will be very little -- this is not a technique for avoiding obstruction. If he does not exploit his positional advantage but relies on his own ears for discernment, what he hears will be meager -- this is not a method for avoiding deception.

The enlightened ruler makes it so All-Under-Heaven cannot help but see on his behalf, and cannot help but hear on his behalf. Thus he sits within the deep palace yet illuminates everything within the Four Seas, and All-Under-Heaven can neither obstruct nor deceive him. Why? Because the paths of darkness and disorder have been abolished, and the leverage of perceptiveness and discernment has been established. Therefore one who is skilled at employing positional advantage keeps the state secure; one who does not know how to exploit positional advantage puts the state in danger.

In the old customs of Qin, ruler and ministers alike abandoned the law and served private interests. The state was therefore disordered, its armies weak, and its ruler debased. Lord Shang persuaded Duke Xiao of Qin to change the laws, transform customs, and make public principles clear -- rewarding those who reported crimes, restricting secondary occupations, and promoting agriculture.

At that time, the people of Qin were accustomed to the old ways, where the guilty could obtain pardons and those without merit could gain honor and prominence. They therefore made light of the new laws and violated them freely. The punishments for violations were then made severe and certain, and the rewards for informing were made generous and reliable. Consequently, no criminal went undetected, those punished were numerous, and the people were resentful and bitter -- transgressions were heard of daily.

Duke Xiao did not waver, and continued to enforce Lord Shang's laws. The people eventually came to understand that punishment for crimes was certain and that those who informed on private lawbreaking were many. Therefore the people ceased to violate the law, and punishments had nowhere to be applied. The state was well-governed and its armies strong, its territory expanded and its ruler honored.

The reason for this was that the penalties for concealing crimes were severe and the rewards for reporting treachery were generous. This too was a method of making All-Under-Heaven see and hear on the ruler's behalf. The laws and techniques of perfect governance have been made clear -- yet the scholars of the age do not understand.

The foolish scholars of the age are ignorant of the nature of disorder. They mumble and recite the books of high antiquity to confuse contemporary governance. Their intelligence is insufficient to avoid falling into a well, yet they presume to criticize those who possess institutional techniques. Those who heed their words face danger; those who employ their plans face chaos. This is foolishness of the greatest magnitude and affliction of the utmost severity. They share the name of 'scholars' with men of technique, but in substance the distance between them is immeasurable. The foolish scholars of the age compared to men of institutional technique are like an anthill compared to a great mountain -- the gap between them could not be wider.

The sage is precise about the substance of right and wrong, and penetrating in his understanding of the dynamics of order and disorder. Therefore when he governs a state, he establishes clear laws and displays severe punishments -- in order to rescue the multitude from chaos, remove the calamities of All-Under-Heaven, prevent the strong from bullying the weak and the many from oppressing the few, enable the elderly to live out their years and orphaned children to grow up, keep the borders from invasion, ensure that ministers look after one another and fathers and sons protect one another, and eliminate the disasters of death, captivity, and enslavement. This is achievement of the most profound kind.

Fools do not understand this and instead regard it as tyranny. Fools invariably desire good governance while hating the means by which governance is achieved. They all fear danger while delighting in the very things that create it. How do I know? Severe punishments and heavy penalties are what the people hate, yet they are what makes the state well-governed. Pitying the commoners and lightening punishments is what the people delight in, yet it is what endangers the state.

The sage who establishes laws for a state must go against the age but accord with moral principle. Those who understand this align with righteousness but differ from convention; those who do not understand align with convention but differ from righteousness. Since few in All-Under-Heaven understand, righteousness itself is condemned.

The scholars of the age counsel rulers not by saying 'Ride the leverage of authority and severity to constrain treacherous ministers,' but instead all say: 'Benevolence, righteousness, kindness, and love -- nothing more!' Rulers of the age admire the name of benevolence and righteousness without examining its substance. As a result, in severe cases their states perish and they die; in milder cases their territory is diminished and their authority debased.

How can this be demonstrated? Giving to the poor and destitute -- this is what the age calls benevolence and righteousness. Pitying the commoners and lightening punishments -- this is what the age calls kindness and love. But when there are gifts to the poor, then those without merit receive rewards. When punishments are not enforced, violent and disorderly people are not stopped. When a state has people gaining rewards without merit, then the populace will not strive externally to face the enemy and take heads in battle, nor internally to labor hard at farming. Everyone will seek to trade in wealth, serve the rich and powerful, perform private favors, and establish personal reputations in order to obtain high offices and generous stipends. Thus treacherous and private-minded ministers multiply, while violent and disorderly people grow more dominant -- when will such a state not perish?

Severe punishments are what the people fear; heavy penalties are what the people hate. The sage displays what they fear to prohibit their wickedness and establishes what they hate to prevent their treachery. Thus the state is secure and violent disorder does not arise. From this I demonstrate that benevolence, righteousness, kindness, and love are insufficient, while severe punishments and heavy penalties can govern a state.

Without the authority of whip and goad and the equipment of bit and bridle, even Zaofu could not control horses. Without the laws of compass and square and the standard of the inked line, even Wang Er could not draw circles and squares. Without the leverage of authority and severity and the laws of reward and punishment, even Shun could not achieve good governance.

Today's rulers all lightly abandon heavy penalties and severe punishments, practice kindness and love, and yet desire the achievements of a hegemon-king -- this simply cannot be achieved.

Therefore the skilled ruler establishes clear rewards and obvious incentives to encourage the people, so that the people are rewarded for merit and not gifted through benevolence. He establishes severe punishments and heavy penalties to prohibit them, so that the people are punished for crimes and not exempted through kindness. Thus those without merit do not harbor false hopes, and those with crimes do not count on luck.

Mounting a sturdy chariot drawn by fine horses, one can traverse hilly and obstructed terrain on land. Riding a stable boat and holding a useful oar, one can cross the hazards of great rivers on water. Wielding the methods of law and technique, enforcing heavy penalties and severe punishments, one can achieve the accomplishments of a hegemon-king.

Law, technique, reward, and punishment in governing a state are like sturdy chariots and fine horses for land travel, or light boats and handy oars for water travel -- those who ride them achieve their goals.

Yi Yin grasped this, and Tang became king. Guan Zhong grasped this, and Qi achieved hegemony. Lord Shang grasped this, and Qin became strong. These three men all understood the techniques of hegemon-kings and perceived the methods of governance and strength. They were not dragged along by the fashionable rhetoric of the age. When they suited the intentions of an enlightened ruler of their time, then commoners could be appointed directly to the rank of minister and chancellor. When they held office and governed the state, there was the substance of honoring the ruler and expanding the territory. These are what may be called truly valuable ministers.

Tang gained Yi Yin, and from a territory of a hundred li became Son of Heaven. Duke Huan gained Guan Zhong, became chief of the Five Hegemons, united the feudal lords nine times, and rectified All-Under-Heaven. Duke Xiao gained Lord Shang, and his territory expanded and his armies strengthened. Therefore one who has a loyal minister faces no threat from rival states externally, no worry from rebellious ministers internally, enjoys lasting peace in All-Under-Heaven, and leaves a name for posterity. This is what is meant by a loyal minister.

The proverb says: 'The leper pities the king.' This sounds disrespectful. However, ancient proverbs are never empty -- they must be examined. This proverb speaks of rulers who are coerced, murdered, and destroyed.

When a ruler lacks law and technique to control his ministers, no matter how long-lived or talented he may be, great ministers will still seize power, monopolize affairs, make decisions in the ruler's name, and each urgently pursue his own private interests. Fearing that outstanding men among the ruler's kin might borrow the ruler's authority to investigate and punish them, they kill the worthy and mature to install the young and weak, depose the legitimate to install the illegitimate.

Thus the Spring and Autumn Annals records: 'Prince Wei of Chu was about to go on a diplomatic mission to Zheng. Before leaving the border, he heard that the king was ill and turned back. He entered to inquire about the illness, and strangled the king with his own hat-strings, then proclaimed himself king.'

Also: 'Cui Zhu of Qi had a beautiful wife, and Duke Zhuang was having an affair with her, frequently visiting the Cui household. When the duke came, Jia Ju, a follower of Cui Zhu, led Cui's men to attack the duke. The duke retreated into a room and offered to divide the state with Cui -- Cui refused. The duke asked to be allowed to kill himself in the ancestral temple -- Cui refused again. The duke fled and tried to climb over the north wall. Jia Ju shot him, hitting him in the thigh. The duke fell, and Cui's men hacked him to death with halberds, then installed his younger brother as Duke Jing.'

In more recent times, what we have witnessed: when Li Dui held power in Zhao, he starved Lord Wuling to death over a hundred days. When Zhuo Chi held power in Qi, he ripped out King Min's sinews, hung him from a temple beam, and he died overnight.

Thus the leper, though afflicted with sores, swelling, and ulcers -- comparing upward to the Spring and Autumn era, his suffering does not reach the point of strangulation and arrow wounds; comparing downward to recent times, it does not reach the point of starvation and sinew-ripping. The anguish of heart and agony of body suffered by rulers who are coerced and murdered must certainly exceed that of a leper.

From this perspective, 'the leper pities the king' is entirely apt.