難勢

Shenzi said: The flying dragon rides the clouds; the soaring serpent glides through the mist. When the clouds disperse and the mist clears, the dragon and serpent are no different from earthworms and ants -- they have lost what carried them. When a worthy man is subordinated to an unworthy one, it is because his authority is light and his position low. When an unworthy man can command the obedience of the worthy, it is because his authority is heavy and his position high. If Yao had been a commoner, he could not have governed three people. Yet Jie, as Son of Heaven, was able to bring chaos to All-Under-Heaven. From this I know that positional advantage is sufficient to rely upon, while worthiness and wisdom are not worth admiring. When a weak crossbow sends its bolt high, it is propelled by the wind. When an unworthy person issues commands that are obeyed, it is because he receives the support of the multitude. When Yao taught among common subjects, the people did not heed him. Once he faced south and ruled All-Under-Heaven, his commands were carried out and his prohibitions were observed. From this we can see that worthiness and wisdom are not sufficient to command the multitude, but positional advantage is sufficient to humble the worthy.

In response to Shenzi: The flying dragon rides the clouds and the soaring serpent glides through the mist -- I do not deny that the dragon and serpent depend upon the positional advantage of clouds and mist. Even so, can one abandon the selection of the worthy and rely solely on positional advantage to achieve good governance? I have never seen this work. Those who can ride and glide when clouds and mist exist do so because of the fine innate quality of the dragon and serpent. Yet when clouds are thick, the earthworm cannot ride them; when mist is dense, the ant cannot glide through it. Those who possess the abundant positional advantage of clouds and mist yet cannot ride and glide through them do so because of the meager innate quality of earthworms and ants. When Jie and Zhou faced south and ruled All-Under-Heaven, using the authority of the Son of Heaven as their clouds and mist, yet All-Under-Heaven could not escape great chaos -- it was because the innate quality of Jie and Zhou was meager.

Moreover, Yao governed All-Under-Heaven from the same position of advantage -- how did his positional advantage differ from Jie's, which brought chaos to All-Under-Heaven? Positional advantage cannot ensure that the worthy will occupy it and the unworthy will not. When the worthy occupy it, All-Under-Heaven is well governed; when the unworthy occupy it, All-Under-Heaven falls into chaos. By human nature, the worthy are few and the unworthy are many. If the power of positional advantage serves the unworthy men of a chaotic age, then those who use positional advantage to bring chaos to All-Under-Heaven will be many, and those who use it to govern will be few. Positional advantage facilitates both order and chaos alike. Therefore the Book of Zhou says: 'Do not give wings to a tiger, lest it fly into the towns and devour the people.' To elevate an unworthy man upon positional advantage is to give wings to a tiger. Jie and Zhou built tall terraces and deep pools to exhaust the people's strength, and used roasting pillars to injure the people's nature. That Jie and Zhou were able to act so wantonly was because the authority of facing south gave them wings. Had Jie and Zhou been commoners, they could not have committed a single such act before finding themselves under punishment. Positional advantage is what nourishes the hearts of tigers and wolves and brings about the work of storms and chaos -- it is the great calamity of All-Under-Heaven. The relationship of positional advantage to order and chaos has a proper hierarchy of root and branch, and to speak exclusively of positional advantage as sufficient to govern All-Under-Heaven shows shallow understanding.

With fine horses and a sturdy chariot, if a slave drives it, people laugh; if Wang Liang drives it, he covers a thousand li in a day. The chariot and horses are no different, yet one reaches a thousand li while the other is laughed at -- the gap between skill and clumsiness is vast indeed. Now if we take the state's position as the chariot, positional advantage as the horses, commands as the reins, and punishments as the whip, then when Yao and Shun drive it, All-Under-Heaven is well governed, and when Jie and Zhou drive it, All-Under-Heaven falls into chaos. The gap between the worthy and the unworthy is equally vast. To desire speed over great distances without knowing to entrust the task to Wang Liang; to desire to advance benefit and eliminate harm without knowing to entrust the task to the worthy and capable -- this is the error of failing to reason by analogy. Yao and Shun were the Wang Liangs of governing the people.

The counter-response says: Shen Dao's position is that positional advantage is sufficient to rely upon for governing. The critic says governance requires waiting for the worthy -- but this is wrong. Positional advantage is a single name encompassing countless variations. If we must speak of positional advantage that arises from nature, then there is nothing to discuss about positional advantage at all. What I mean by positional advantage is that which humans can construct. If Yao and Shun were born into the supreme position, even ten Jies and Zhous could not create chaos -- because the positional advantage produces order. If Jie and Zhou were born into the supreme position, even ten Yaos and Shuns could not establish order -- because the positional advantage produces chaos. Therefore it is said: 'When positional advantage tends toward order, it cannot be made chaotic; when positional advantage tends toward chaos, it cannot be made orderly.' This is natural positional advantage, not something humans can construct. What I speak of is only the positional advantage that humans can construct -- what has worthiness to do with it? How do we know this is so? The critic gave an analogy: 'A man was selling a spear and a shield. He praised his shield's hardness: "Nothing can pierce it." Then he praised his spear: "My spear is so sharp that nothing cannot be pierced." Someone responded: "What happens if you use your spear against your shield?" The man could not answer.' He held that an impenetrable shield and an all-penetrating spear cannot both exist. If worthiness as positional advantage cannot be suppressed, while positional advantage as a principle suppresses all, then claiming an unsuppressible force exists alongside an all-suppressing force is the paradox of the spear and shield. That worthiness and positional advantage are incompatible is clear.

Yao, Shun, Jie, and Zhou appear once in a thousand generations -- they follow one another at the rarest intervals. The rulers who govern the world without interruption are the average ones. What I speak of regarding positional advantage is designed for the average ruler. The average ruler does not reach the level of Yao and Shun above, nor sink to the level of Jie and Zhou below. Embrace the law and occupy the position of advantage, and there is order; abandon the law and relinquish positional advantage, and there is chaos. Now, if we discard positional advantage and abandon the law to wait for Yao and Shun -- order comes only when they arrive, meaning a thousand generations of chaos for one generation of order. But if we embrace the law and occupy positional advantage and wait for Jie and Zhou -- chaos comes only when they arrive, meaning a thousand generations of order for one generation of chaos. A thousand in order and one in chaos, versus one in order and a thousand in chaos -- the difference is as vast as racing thoroughbreds in opposite directions. Discard the compass and the straightening frame, abandon measures and standards, and even Xi Zhong could not complete a single wheel. Without the incentive of rewards and the deterrent of punishments, without positional advantage and the law, even Yao and Shun going door to door to reason with people could not govern three households. That positional advantage is effective is therefore clear, and to say 'one must wait for the worthy' is simply wrong.

To go a hundred days without food, waiting for fine grain and meat -- the starving man will not survive. To wait for sages of Yao and Shun's caliber before governing the people of the present age is like waiting for fine cuisine to rescue the starving -- it will not work. The critic says: 'With fine horses and a sturdy chariot, a slave driving it is laughed at, while Wang Liang covers a thousand li a day.' I disagree. To wait for a man of Yue skilled in ocean swimming to rescue someone drowning in the Central States -- the Yue man may be a fine swimmer, but the drowning man will not be saved. To wait for the ancient Wang Liang to drive today's horses is like the Yue swimmer rescuing the drowning -- clearly it will not work. With fine horses and a sturdy chariot, placing relay stations every fifty li and using average drivers, one can pursue speed over great distances and cover a thousand li in a day. Why must one wait for the ancient Wang Liang? Moreover, the critic argues that if one does not employ Wang Liang as driver, one must have a slave who ruins things; if one does not employ Yao and Shun to govern, one must have Jie and Zhou who create chaos. As if flavors were either honey or bitter herbs, with nothing in between. This is piled-up debate and accumulated rhetoric that departs from reason and loses sight of method -- an argument that recognizes only two extremes. How can it challenge the words of the true Way? The critic's argument has not reached this level of discourse.