飾邪

Zhao bored tortoise shells and counted the yarrow stalks; the omen read 'greatly auspicious,' and with this Zhao attacked Yan. Yan bored tortoise shells and counted the yarrow stalks; the omen read 'greatly auspicious,' and with this Yan attacked Zhao. Ju Xin served Yan but achieved nothing, and the altars of state were endangered; Zou Yan served Yan but achieved nothing, and the way of the state was severed. Zhao at first prevailed against Yan, then prevailed against Qi, yet the state fell into disorder even as its prestige was high. It fancied itself the equal of Qin on the balance -- not because Zhao's tortoise was divine and Yan's tortoise was deceitful.

Zhao again bored tortoise shells and counted yarrow stalks to march north against Yan, intending to coerce Yan into opposing Qin; the omen read 'greatly auspicious.' But when Zhao had barely begun attacking Daliang, Qin was already advancing out of Shangdang. By the time Zhao's forces reached Li, six cities had fallen; by the time they reached Yangcheng, Qin had taken Ye. Pang Yuan withdrew his troops southward, and all the border defenses were lost.

Therefore I say: though Zhao's tortoise lacked foresight regarding Yan, it should at least have shown near-sight regarding Qin. Qin's 'greatly auspicious' omen yielded real territorial gains and the fame of rescuing Yan. Zhao's 'greatly auspicious' omen yielded loss of territory, humiliation of its army, and the death of its ruler in frustration. This was not because Qin's tortoise was divine and Zhao's tortoise was deceitful.

In earlier times, Wei spent years attacking eastward and conquered all of Tao and Wey, then spent years facing westward only to lose its own territory. This was not because the astrological signs of Fenlong, the Five Phases, Taiyi, Wangxiang, Sheti, the Six Spirits, the Five Brackets, the Celestial River, Yinqiang, and the Year Star were all in the west for those years, nor because the Celestial Gap, Reversed Arc, Punishment Star, Yinghuo, and Kuitai were all in the east. Therefore I say: tortoise shells, yarrow stalks, and ghosts and spirits are insufficient to secure victory; left and right, advance and retreat are insufficient to determine battle. To rely on such things -- there is no greater folly.

The ancient former kings devoted their efforts to drawing close to the people and applied themselves to clarifying the law. When the law is clear, loyal ministers are encouraged; when punishments are certain, wicked ministers desist. Where the loyal are encouraged and the wicked desist, territory expands and the ruler is exalted -- this describes Qin. Where groups of ministers form factions and cliques to obscure the correct way and pursue private crookedness, territory is diminished and the ruler is abased -- this describes the states east of the mountains.

That the disordered and weak perish is human nature; that the well-governed and strong become kings is the way of antiquity. King Goujian of Yue relied on the great tortoise of Pengcheng when fighting Wu, yet could not prevail, and was himself reduced to serving as a menial in Wu. When he returned to his state, he cast aside the tortoise, clarified the law, drew close to the people, and took his revenge on Wu -- whereupon Fuchai was captured.

Thus those who rely on ghosts and spirits grow negligent toward the law; those who rely on other lords endanger their own states. Cao relied on Qi and disregarded Song -- when Qi attacked Chu, Song destroyed Cao. Xing relied on Wu and disregarded Qi -- when Yue attacked Wu, Qi destroyed Xing. Xu relied on Chu and disregarded Wei -- when Chu attacked Song, Wei destroyed Xu. Zheng relied on Wei and disregarded Han -- when Wei attacked Chu, Han destroyed Zheng.

Today the state of Han is small yet relies on great powers; its ruler is negligent, heeding Qin and Wei while counting on Qi and Chu for support, and the small state grows ever closer to ruin. Thus relying on others is insufficient to expand one's territory -- yet Han does not see this. Chu attacked Wei but sent its troops against Xu and Yan; Qi attacked Ren and Hu and thereby diminished Wei, yet this was insufficient to preserve Zheng -- and Han did not perceive it. All these are cases of states that failed to clarify their laws and prohibitions to govern their own states, and instead relied on external powers until their altars of state were destroyed.

Therefore I say: when one understands the principles of governance, then even if the state is small, it will be wealthy; when rewards and punishments are respected and trusted, then even if the people are few, they will be strong. When rewards and punishments lack proper measure, then even if the state is large, its army will be weak -- for the territory is not truly its territory, and the people are not truly its people. Without territory and without people, even Yao and Shun could not become kings, and the Three Dynasties could not have grown strong.

When the ruler gives excessive rewards, and ministers take what they have not earned; when men set aside the law and invoke the ancient kings to illuminate the achievements of antiquity, and the ruler on that basis entrusts them with the state -- I say this is tracing back to the merits of antiquity and using ancient standards of reward to reward people of today.

When the ruler gives excessively, ministers grow complacent and rely on luck; when ministers take without merit, achievement is not honored. When those without merit receive rewards, the treasury is depleted and the people grow resentful. When the treasury is depleted and the people resentful, the people will not exert their full effort. Thus one who over-applies rewards loses the people; one who over-applies punishments finds the people unafraid. When rewards are insufficient to encourage and punishments insufficient to deter, then even if the state is large, it will assuredly be in danger.

Therefore it is said: those of small wisdom must not be entrusted with planning affairs, and those of small loyalty must not be put in charge of the law.

King Gong of Chu fought King Li of Jin at Yanling. The Chu army was defeated and King Gong was wounded. In the heat of battle, the Marshal Zifan grew thirsty and asked for a drink. His attendant Shu Guyang presented a goblet of wine. Zifan said, 'Take it away -- this is wine.' Shu Guyang said, 'It is not.' Zifan accepted it and drank. Zifan was by nature fond of wine; finding it sweet, he could not stop himself, and became drunk and collapsed.

King Gong wished to resume battle and deliberate on strategy, so he sent a man to summon Zifan. Zifan excused himself with a complaint of heart ailment. King Gong drove to see him in person, entered the tent, smelled wine, and turned back, saying: 'In today's battle, I myself was wounded before my own eyes. My one reliance was the Marshal, and the Marshal has come to this -- this is to destroy the altars of Chu and show no concern for my people. I have no one with whom to resume battle.' He withdrew the army and departed, then executed Zifan as a public punishment.

Therefore I say: when Shu Guyang offered the wine, it was not out of deliberate malice toward Zifan. He acted from a sincere heart of loyal affection -- yet this was precisely what got Zifan killed. This is a case of practicing small loyalty to undermine great loyalty. Therefore it is said: small loyalty is the enemy of great loyalty. If those of small loyalty are put in charge of the law, they will inevitably pardon offenses, pardoning offenses out of mutual affection. This may bring ease to those below, yet it obstructs the governance of the people.

When Wei was upholding the 'Established Penalties' and implementing its constitutional orders, those with merit were invariably rewarded and those with offenses invariably punished. It was strong enough to rectify All-Under-Heaven, and its authority prevailed among the four neighbors. But once the law grew lax and rewards were bestowed recklessly, the state was diminished day by day.

When Zhao was upholding the 'State Code' and following its military system, its population was large and its army strong, conquering territory from Qi and Yan. But once the State Code fell into disuse and those who applied it grew weak, the state was diminished day by day.

When Yan was upholding 'Compliance with the Law' and rigorously adjudicating official matters, in the east it annexed Qi's territory and in the south took all of Zhongshan's land. But once 'Compliance with the Law' was abandoned and official adjudication was no longer employed, those on the left and right competed with one another, and deliberation followed the wishes of those below. Then the army weakened, territory was diminished, and the state was controlled by its neighbors and enemies.

Therefore I say: those who uphold the law are strong; those who neglect the law are weak. The difference between strength and weakness is this clear -- yet the rulers of the age do not act accordingly. That their states perish is only fitting.

The saying goes: 'A household with a regular livelihood, though hungry, will not starve; a state with a constant law, though endangered, will not perish.' If one abandons the constant law to follow private inclinations, then ministers below will adorn themselves with cleverness. When ministers adorn themselves with cleverness, the laws and prohibitions will not be established. This is the way of ruin gaining ground while the way of governance is abandoned. The way of governing a state is to remove those who harm the law, and then one will not be confused by cleverness or distorted by reputation.

In antiquity, Shun dispatched officials to control the Great Flood. One who had previously rendered merit carried out his orders, yet Shun executed him. Yu convened the lords at Kuaiji, and the Lord of Fangfeng arrived late, so Yu beheaded him. From this we can see that the one who preceded orders was killed, and the one who lagged behind orders was beheaded -- thus the ancients prized compliance with orders above all.

A mirror, held clean and still, has no agenda of its own -- beauty and ugliness present themselves before it accordingly. A balance, held true and still, has no agenda of its own -- lightness and heaviness register upon it accordingly. If you shake the mirror, it cannot show things clearly; if you shake the balance, it cannot weigh things correctly. So it is with the law.

Thus the former kings took the Way as their constant and the law as their foundation. When the foundation is well-governed, the name is exalted; when the foundation is disordered, the name is extinguished. Cleverness and intelligence, when they have a basis, may be employed; without a basis, they should cease. Individual cleverness travels a single path and cannot be transmitted to others. But the Way and the law are infallible, while cleverness and intelligence often err. To hang a balance and thereby know what is level, to set a compass and thereby know what is round -- this is the infallible Way.

An enlightened ruler causes the people to adorn themselves with the Way, and thus achieves results with ease. To abandon the compass and rely on personal skill, to abandon the law and rely on personal intelligence -- this is the way of confusion and disorder. A disordered ruler causes the people to adorn themselves with cleverness, not understanding the Way, and thus labors without results.

When one abandons the laws and prohibitions to heed petitions and audiences, the ministers sell offices above and take rewards below. Thus profit accrues to private households and authority resides with the ministers. The people then have no heart to serve the ruler with full effort, but instead devote themselves to forging connections above. When the people are eager to make connections above, wealth flows upward and glib speakers are employed. Under such conditions, those with real merit grow ever fewer. Treacherous ministers advance while talented ministers retreat. The ruler is confused and does not know which way to act; the people gather and do not know which way to follow. This is the failure that comes from abandoning the laws, neglecting merit, elevating reputation, and heeding petitions.

The way of an enlightened ruler must make clear the distinction between public and private, clarify the legal system, and eliminate private favoritism.

That orders must be carried out and prohibitions must be observed -- this is the ruler's public duty. That a minister must pursue his private interests, keeping faith with friends, undeterred by rewards and undismayed by punishments -- this is the minister's private duty. When private duty prevails, there is disorder; when public duty prevails, there is good governance. Therefore public and private must be distinguished.

Ministers have private inclinations and public obligations. To cultivate one's person in purity and integrity, to act with fairness and correctness, to hold office without self-interest -- this is the minister's public obligation. To engage in corrupt conduct following one's desires, securing one's person and profiting one's household -- this is the minister's private inclination.

When an enlightened ruler sits above, ministers abandon their private inclinations and practice public obligation. When a disordered ruler sits above, ministers abandon their public obligation and follow their private inclinations.

Therefore ruler and minister have different interests. The ruler maintains ministers through calculation; ministers serve the ruler through calculation. The relationship between ruler and minister is one of calculation. To harm oneself for the benefit of the state -- a minister will not do this. To harm the state for the benefit of a minister -- the ruler will not do this. The minister's natural disposition is to avoid what harms his person without benefit; the ruler's natural disposition is to reject what harms the state without affinity.

Ruler and minister are joined by calculation. As for facing danger and accepting death, exhausting one's wisdom and expending one's strength -- these are done for the sake of the law. Therefore the former kings made rewards clear to encourage such conduct and made punishments severe to inspire awe. When rewards and punishments are clear, the people will fight to the death; when the people fight to the death, the army is strong and the ruler is exalted. When rewards and punishments are not scrutinized, the people seek gain without merit and hope to escape despite guilt; then the army is weak and the ruler is debased.

Therefore the worthy ministers of the former kings exhausted their strength and expended their wisdom. Thus I say: the distinction between public and private must be made clear, the laws and prohibitions must be carefully examined -- the former kings understood this.