by Confucius
What Ji Kangzi proposed would have been easier for the ruler to carry out—all he had to do was to get rid of the undesirable elements under his authority. Confucius’ idea of a good government, however, puts the responsibility on the ruler, on his cultivation and conduct, and though it has gone through many transformations in the twenty-five hundred years since, the idea remains a principal tenet in Confucian political thought.
12.20 Zizhang asked, “What must an educated professional [shi] be like before he can be said to possess a gentleman’s adroitness [da] in all he does?”
The Master said, “You tell me first what you mean by possessing a gentleman’s adroitness.”
Zizhang replied, “Being a person that everyone would know, whether he is in the service of the state or in the service of a hereditary family.”
The Master said, “You are talking about fame [wen], not about possessing a gentleman’s adroitness. A person who is gentlemanly and adroit is by nature fair-minded and upright, and he is bent on aiming at what is right. He also listens to what others have to say and is observant of their expressions and moods. He is ever mindful of not being high-handed. Such a man possesses a gentlemanly adroitness whether he is in the service of the state or in the service of a hereditary family. A person who covets fame takes on the appearance of humaneness, which is belied by his deeds, and he is not troubled by his hypocrisy. Surely people would know him or his reputation whether he is in the service of the state of in the service of a hereditary family.”
One of the most difficult Chinese words to render into English is da, which can mean “to reach,” “to have arrived,” “to be accomplished,” or “to have gotten through.” Da is often associated with tong, “connectibility” or “interchangeability,” which is the case here, and when applied to a person’s character, it suggests fluency and adroitness, which is my translation. Liu Baonan writes, “Da means to connect, to have a thorough understanding of things [tong]. A person who has a thorough understanding of the correct way to relate to others will find no obstacle to his action.” And this, Liu says, is what Confucius means when he tells Zizhang in 15.6 that “if you impart sincerity and trust in your words, and integrity and respect in your deeds, you will get on even in the lands of the barbarians.”
Liu Baonan also points out that Confucius was most suspicious of those who coveted fame because they would do anything to have their name known. Such were the ways of “the village goody men,” men he berated as “the ruin of virtue.”
12.21 Fan Chi accompanied the Master on an outing to a clearing below the rain altar. He said, “If I may, I would like to ask how one takes virtue to a higher level, how one corrects moral transgressions, and how one knows when one’s judgment is clouded.”
The Master said, “Excellent questions! To get things done before thinking about the reward—is this not taking virtue to a higher level? To attack what is wrongful and not what is wrongful in a particular person, is this not the way to correct the moral transgressions [of another] [xiuni]? To let a sudden fit of anger make you forget the dangers you risk for yourself and for those who are nearest and dearest to you—is this not clouded judgment?”
My translation of the second sentence in Confucius’ response follows that of D. C. Lau. But nearly all the other scholars offer a different interpretation. They understand the first part of it to read: “to criticize what is wrongful in yourself and not what is wrongful in other people.” This, they say, was what Confucius thought of as the correct and the most effective way “to rectify moral transgressions.” I find their reading weaker than what D. C. Lau suggests. To get the other person to reform by first scrutinizing yourself for mistakes represents the thinking of Zengzi and, later, Mencius, which does not fully encompass what Confucius taught about emotions and their relationship to perception and moral rightness. If Confucius did say—as I believe he did—that to correct the moral transgressions of other people, one should criticize “what is wrongful and not what is wrongful in a particular person,” he was separating out the wrongful act from the person who committed it. This is smart, because anyone who has erred will have a clearer view of what he has done if you, as the observer, choose to examine his mistake—why it is wrong—and not him.
There has also been some discussion in the commentaries about a possible reason this conversation took place. Some scholars feel that the visit to the rain altar evoked, in Fan Chi’s mind, the events of 517 BC. In that year, the Jisun family expelled the ruler, Duke Zhao, from Lu, and when there was a severe drought in the autumn, a major sacrifice was conducted at the rain altar. When the drought persisted, another sacrifice was performed. Early historians say that the second appeal to the gods was a pretext “to assemble a crowd in order to drive out the Jisuns.” The present conversation must have taken place more than thirty-five years later, after Confucius had returned to Lu, because Fan Chi belonged to the younger group of disciples. This, again, was a time when Lu was faced with natural disasters and the possibility of usurpation by the Jisun family. Thus, these scholars argue, Fan Chi asked these questions to see if his teacher felt that were sufficient moral grounds to depose the Jisuns. Qian Mu, however, feels that, “without solid evidence,” one simply cannot know what Fan Chi was thinking when he was at the rain altar.
12.22 Fan Chi asked about humaneness. The Master said, “Love others.”
He asked about wisdom. The Master said, “Know others.”
Fan Chi failed to grasp what the Master meant.
The Master explained, “Raise the upright and place them above the crooked—this will cause the crooked to be upright.”
After Fan Chi left his teacher, he saw Zixia, and he said, “A while ago, I saw the Master, and when I asked him about wisdom, the Master said, ‘Raise the upright and place them above the crooked—this will cause the crooked to be upright.’ What did he mean?”
Zixia said, “What a wealth of riches is in these words! After Shun had gained possession of the empire, he searched from among the multitude [for someone of worth] and raised Gao Yao to a position at the top, and because he did so, those who were without humaneness stayed away. After Tang gained possession of the empire, he searched from the multitude [for someone of worth] and raised Yi Yin to a position at the top, and because he did so, those who were without humaneness stayed away.”
I think there are two reasons why Fan Chi had difficulty understanding his teacher’s words. First, Confucius did not make clear the relationship of “love others” and “know others.” And second, his statement about the upright and the crooked did not seem to be a direct response to Fan Chi’s question about “wisdom.” Zixia’s gloss answered Fan Chi’s second question—“know others” means to know how to search from among the multitude for the talented and upright, and when they are raised above others, as in the case of the counselors Gao Yao and Yi Yin, those who lack humanity will “stay away.” But what is also implied in Zixia’s response is this: A humane ruler needs to be wise. He cannot just say that he loves his people; he has to have insight into human nature—he must “know others”—and he has to select the most worthy to assist him in government. By so doing, he realizes his love and concern. The Elder Dai’s Book of Rites says, “The mark of a humane man is no more than loving others. The mark of a wise man is no more than being able to know who is a worthy.” Yet a ruler cannot be said to be humane unless he is also wise.
12.23 Zigong asked about the way of being a friend. The Master said, “Be honest when there is a reason to reprove a friend, and guide him with a deft hand. But if he is unwilling to listen, you should stop, because you don’t want to be humiliated.”
One might compare what Confucius says here about the way of being a friend with what he says in 4.18 about the way of being a son. Even though both statements are about how to dissuade another person from wrongdoing, his advice on how to approach the problem varies depending on whether one is dealing with a friend or with a parent.
12.24 The gentleman makes
friends by way of his interest and his education in the arts and in culture. He finds support from his friends in the cultivation of his humanity.
Qian Mu feels that it is helpful to read this statement of Confucius with 9.30. “The first sentence is about how to find a partner in learning,” Qian writes. “The second sentence is about how to find a partner in the quest for moral meaning, in one’s attempt to steady the self through the rites, and in the act of exercising moral discretion.”
BOOK THIRTEEN
13.1 Zilu asked about the way of governing. The Master said, “Take the lead, and then put the people to work.”
Zilu asked him to elaborate. The Master said, “Do not let up on your effort.”
Kong Anguo understands Confucius’ first statement to read: “Guide them first with the force of your integrity to gain their trust, and then put them to work.” His interpretation resonates with what Zixia says in 19.10: “The gentleman earns the trust of his people first, before he subjects them to arduous labor. If he does not have their trust, they will think that he is trying to abuse them.” But most scholars prefer a more straightforward reading of that sentence, which is reflected in my translation and in this statement from the Elder Dai’s Book of Rites: “If a ruler wants to run his government efficiently, there is no better way than taking the lead himself and getting to work first.”
13.2 Zhonggong, after being appointed as a steward in the Ji family, asked about the way of governing. The Master said, “The first thing is [to assemble your staff and] to assign them to the right positions. Try to overlook their minor shortcomings. Promote those of outstanding talent.”
“How can I recognize those of outstanding talent in order to promote them?”
The Master said, “Promote those you recognize to be outstanding. As for those that you miss, will other people let them slip by you?”
Once a person has been appointed to a high position in government, the first order of affairs is to assemble a strong team—this, Liu Baonan believes, was Confucius’ message for Zhonggong. And Liu observes a similar argument in Mr. Lü’s Spring and Autumn Annals, a work from the late third century BC, which says, “To do something well, it is harder to do it oneself than to assign the work [to qualified men]. How do I know this? In walking, man cannot compete with a fine horse. But if he gets into a carriage and drives the horse, the horse becomes the lesser of the two. The ruler who likes to get involved in the business of every official in his government is like the man who thinks that he can compete against a fine horse in walking, and in the end he is the one to lose.”
If delegating power is important in governing, how does one assemble a strong team, and how does one search for talented men? This is Zhonggong’s second question. As a start, Confucius says, he should appoint those he knows to be capable, and then others will for sure put forth names of people who have escaped his attention. The Qing scholar Song Xiangfeng says that these words of Confucius resonate with a line from the eleventh hexagram, tai (“Peace”), in the Book of Changes: “When one pulls up the rush plant, it pulls up others of the same kind with it.”
13.3 Zilu asked, “If the ruler of Wei were to wait for you to take charge of his government, what would you do first?”
The Master said, “It would have to be rectifying names.”
Zilu said, “Are you really so out of touch? How does one rectify names?”
The Master replied, “How boorish you are! With things he does not understand, a gentleman would know to keep quiet. If names are not rectified, what is said will not seem reasonable. When what is said does not seem reasonable, nothing will get accomplished. When nothing gets accomplished, rites and music will not flourish. When rites and music do not flourish, punishments and penalties [will take their place, and they] will fail to be just when put into use. And when punishments and penalties fail to be just in practice, people will not know where to put their hands and feet. Thus when a gentleman names something, the name can surely hold up in speech. When he says something, his words can surely be carried out in action. When a gentleman speaks, there is nothing casual or careless about what he says.”
When names have lost their integrity, words can no longer be trusted, and when words cannot be trusted, nothing can get done: government will cease to function, and the state will come to its demise. This is the reason why Confucius says that if he were put in charge of an administration, he would rectify names first. And because Zilu mentions specifically the state of Wei, some scholars think that Confucius’ response was directed toward its young ruler, Zhe, who did not behave like a son to his father during the succession crisis of 492; when asked indirectly about his view of this man in 7.15, Confucius expressed his disapproval. Given this background, it does seem to make sense that Confucius would want to rectify names first—let the ruler Zhe be a son to his father—and then words and deeds will fall into place: rites and music will flourish, and there probably will be no need for punishments and penalties. But should there be a need to institutionalize punishments and penalties, fairness would prevail. And people would not be confused about what to do because they would not be under the threat of arbitrary rule.
Xunzi gave further consideration to this subject in his essay “Rectifying Names.” In antiquity, he says, when there were “clear-eyed and keen-sighted rulers,” “it was easy to unify the people.” These men simply “presided over their people with authority” and gravity, and “the people were converted to the moral path as though by some divine force.” But “the sage kings are gone,” Xunzi observes, and no one, not even a gentleman, can wield that kind of magic anymore. All rulers since then have had to rely on words—on disquisitions and argumentation—to conduct business, and the best among them have understood that rectifying names was their first and most important task, for it would inspire trust and keep “crooked theories and deceitful words” at bay.
13.4 Fan Chi wanted to learn [from his teacher] how to grow grain crops. The Master said, “An old farmer would be a better person to ask.” He wanted to learn how to grow vegetables. The Master said, “An old gardener would be a better person to ask.”
After Fan Chi had left, the Master said, “What a simple-minded person [xiaoren] Fan Xu [Fan Chi] is! If those above love the rites, then none of the common people will dare to be disrespectful. If those above love rightness, then none of the common people will dare to be disobedient. If those above love trustworthiness, then none of the common people will dare not to be forthcoming about the truth of things. When [the governing principle of a place] is like this, then people will flock to it from all directions with their babies strapped to their backs. What need is there to learn about growing grain crops?”
Confucius called Fan Chi a xiaoren, which, here, means a commoner, a “simple-minded” fellow, because Fan Chi did not know that, as someone who aspired to have a political career, he did not have to learn the skills of a farmer. Mencius expressed a similar sentiment in reproaching an agriculturalist who urged rulers to work side by side with their people in the field. He said, “There are affairs of great men [daren] and affairs of the common people [xiaoren]. . . . Hence it is said, ‘There are those who use their minds and there are those who use their muscles. The former rule; the latter are ruled. . . .’ This is a principle accepted by the whole empire.” Mencius also pointed out that sage rulers worried about every aspect of the people’s lives, whether they had warm clothes and enough to eat and whether they knew how to conduct themselves in human relationships. With so much on their minds, Mencius said, “how could these rulers have the leisure to plough the fields?” Rulers such as Yao and Shun used their minds, he added, but not on how to plough the fields.
13.5 The Master said, “A person may be able to recite the three hundred poems, but if he is unable to put [this knowledge] to full use when he is given a political assignment, or if he is unable to hold his own in a diplomatic exchange when he is sent abroad on a mission, no matter how many poems he has learned, what good will it d
o?”
Recitation of the three hundred poems was, for Confucius, a mark of a person’s education and moral refinement. He tells his son, in 16.13, “Unless you learn the Odes, you won’t be able to speak.” But this knowledge was also an aid in government and in diplomacy, and its most prominent example is found in the records in the Zuo Commentary. The occasion was the visit of Prince Zha (Ji Zha), a royal descendant from the state of Wu, to the state of Lu in the year 544 BC. This prince had shunned political power only to become the supreme arbiter of manners and conduct. According to the Zuo Commentary, when he was a guest at the court of Lu, his host, Duke Xiang, asked the musicians to play selections from all four sections of the Book of Odes, and Prince Zha’s appreciation of the regional differences among these songs, of their aesthetic quality, and of their moral and historical dimensions, which he declaimed in a series of comments, made the visit a diplomatic success. And so even though he wanted no part in politics, his performance as a representative of his own state had a strong political element. Confucius was only seven when this event took place, but examples like that of Prince Zha must have had a profound influence on his deliberations about the function of poetry.
13.6 The Master said, “If he himself is upright, he does not have to give orders and things will get done. If he himself is not upright, even though he gives orders, they will not be obeyed.”
Most scholars assume that the subject of the present discussion is the ruler, but Confucius could have been referring to anyone in a superior position. And his point here falls in with what he says in 2.1, 2.3, 12.17, and 13.13. It receives further elaboration in Xunzi’s essays “Nothing Indecorous” (Bugou) and “Rectifying Names” (Zhengming).
