Post date: Oct 16, 2016 5:38:25 AM
This is the fourth post in a series for those who:
1- desire to read or teach Confucius' Analects as philosophy, but
2- lack knowledge about classical Chinese language, culture, history, philosophy.
(The translations from Chinese are my own; bear in mind, I'm still learning and practicing.)
Part 1, On The Analects | Part 2, On Confucius | Part 3, On the Zhōu |
-----------------------------------------------------
On Militarism and Legalism
Knowing something about the social and political situation to which Confucius is responding also helps with understanding his approach to living well. He does not develop his approach from leisurely reflection or scholarly curiosity. His motivation is more urgent, more concrete, and more political.
Symptoms of Decline
Confucius died well before rising to cultural prominence (see Analects 9.2). He lived toward the end of the Spring and Autumn Period (771 – 475 BCE), born in 551 BCE and dying in 479 BCE. He was well aware of the trajectory set by territorial resistance to the Zhōu rulers. Confucius judged the resistance as unwarranted, an artifact of corruption among rulers in the territories rather than flaws on the part of the Zhōu. For example, in Analects 3.1 Confucius criticizes the Jī (姬) family, charged with governing the State of Xíng (邢), for improper conduct:
孔子謂季氏： 「八佾舞於庭，是可忍也，孰不可忍也？」
Kǒngzǐ wèi jì shì: “Bā yì wǔ yú ting, shì kě rěn yě, shú bù kě rěn yě?”
Master Kong spoke thus of the Jì family: “Eight rows of dancers dance in their courtyard. If they can tolerate this, what can they not tolerate?”
(See also Analects 3.5, 11.17.) Confucius thereby understood the Zhōu as retaining the mandate of heaven (天命 tiānmìng), and he devoted his life to convincing others to respect their mandate.
The problem, as Confucius understood it, was that rulers in the territories were out of line. Despite owing loyalty and respect to the Zhōu royalty, the local rulers nurtured ambitions of overthrowing the Zhōu in order to establish their own dynasties. These ambitions, by virtue of being unwarranted, had led to growing chaos and disorder, both within and between the states controlled by the Zhōu. Rulers in the territories plotted against Zhōu royalty, resulting in tension (and eventually war) among the states. Ministers were disloyal to their rulers, pursuing personal gain at the expense of public welfare. Citizens, in turn, disobeyed commands of their ministers, resulting in theft and pillaging. Even children resisted the authority of their parents, undermining a necessary foundation for social order.
The School of the Military
Other intellectuals shared Confucius’ understanding. Social harmony was declining rapidly, threatening to spill into full-blown warfare. Perhaps the most famous of Confucius’ contemporaries is Sūnzǐ (孫子), reputed author for the influential Art of War (兵法 Bīngfǎ). Sūnzǐ’s work recommends restoring social order through swift and decisive military victory. Here, for example, is Art of War 1.1:
孫子曰：兵者，國之大事，死生之地，存亡之道，不可不察也。
Sūnzǐ yuē: “Bīng zhě, guó zhī dà shì, sǐ shēng zhī de, cún wáng zhī dào. Bù kě bù chá yě.”
Sūnzǐ said: “Warfare is the greatest matter for the state, the ground of its life or death, its way for surviving or perishing. One must not avoid examining it.
Analects 16.2 records Confucius’ objection to solutions offered by the School of the Military (兵家 Bīng Jiā):
孔子曰：「天下有道，則禮樂征伐自天子出；天下無道，則禮樂征伐自諸侯出。自諸侯出，蓋十世希不失矣。… 天下有道，則庶人不議。」
Kǒngzǐ yuē: “Tiān xià yǒu dào, zé lǐ yuè zhēng fá zì tiān zǐ chū; tiān xià wú dào, zé lǐ yuè zhēng fá zì zhū hóu chū. Zì zhū hóu chū gě shí shì xī bù shī yǐ.… Tiān xià yǒu dào, zé shù rén bú yì.”
Master Kong said, “When the world below heaven has the way, ritual convention, music, and punitive expeditions arise from the rightful emperor [Son of Heaven]; when the world below heaven lacks the way, rituals, music, and punitive expeditions arise from feudal princes. When they arise from feudal princes, the most to hope for is ten generations without losing [power]…. When the world below heaven has the way, the common people do not comment [upon government].”
Confucius’ criticism, in brief, is that strong militaries, while perhaps necessary for social order, are not sufficient. For if those in power rule poorly, misplaced military pursuits and ignorance of (or inattention to) proper conduct erode trust and loyalty among subjects toward their rulers, planting seeds for eventual rebellion.
The Legalist School
Also prominent in Confucius’ day were those associated with the Legalist School (法家 Fǎ Jiā). These thinkers, inclined to complement military pursuits with management solutions, recommended a centralized bureaucracy and strong military, as well as strict regulations and harsh punishments designed to secure social order by force. Consider, for example, remarks from the “Rewards andPunishment” (賞刑Shǎng Xíng) chapter in the Book of Lord Shāng (商君書Shāng Jūn Shū):
聖人之為國也：壹賞，壹刑，壹教。…所謂壹賞者，利祿官爵，摶出於兵，無有異施也。…所謂壹刑者，刑無等級。自卿相將軍以至大夫庶人，有不從王令，犯國禁，亂上制者，罪死不赦。
Shèngrén zhī wéi guó yě: yī shǎng, yī xíng…. Suǒ wèi yī shǎng zhě: lì lù guān jué, tuán chū yú bing, wú yǒu yì shī yě…. Suǒ wèi yī xíng zhě: xíng wú děng jí. Zì qīng xiāng jiàng jūn yǐ zhì dà fū shù rén, yǒu bù cóng wáng ling, fàn guó jīn, luàn shǎng zhì zhě, zuì sǐ bú shè….
The sage governs his state as follows: bestow one reward, bestow one punishment…. Bestowing one reward means that benefits, salary, and official rank are fixed entirely by military merit…. Bestowing one punishment means that punishments lack grade and rank. From high-ranking officials and military generals down to elders, workers, and common people, the ruler and his commands are unyielding, their violation forbidden by the state, and those who violate them sentenced to death without pardon.
Although written during the Qín Dynasty (秦朝 Qín Cháo) in the third century BCE, after Confucius’ death, this excerpt represents ideas with which Confucius would have been familiar.
Confucius rejected the Legalist way of thinking. The objection is explicit in Analects 2.3:
子曰： 「道之以政，齊之以刑，民免而無恥；道之以德，齊之以，有恥且格。」
Zǐ yuē: “Dào zhī yǐ zhèng, qí zhī yǐ xíng, mín miǎn ér wú chǐ; dào zhī yǐ dé, qí zhī yǐ lǐ, yǒu chǐ qiě gé.”
The Master said: “Directing them according to governmental policies, keeping them together with punishments, the people make excuses and so lack any sense of shame; directing them according to charismatic virtue, keeping them together with ritual convention, [the people] have shame and, moreover, a ruling standard.”
(See also Analects 20.2.) According to Confucius, laws and punishments promise to restore social order, but in fact they reinforce the kinds of self-centered behavior responsible for social disorder. Faced with laws against certain behaviors, we find loopholes rather than reform our desires. Similarly, faced with punishments, we find ways to escape, either by co-opting those charged with enforcement or by acting more secretively. When our efforts to avoid law and punishment fail, we make excuses, hiring lawyers to defend us or pleading with authorities to forgive us. Moreover, success in avoiding law and punishment demands, according to this approach, instituting harsher laws and more severe punishments. This trajectory thereby endangers the legitimacy of the ruling power, because retaining the mandate of heaven requires preserving just laws and fair punishments.