A Short History of Chinese Philosophy (26 page)

Actualities, being concrete, are individual cases, while names, being abstract, represent general categories or rules. When one tries to disprove general rules by individual exceptions, the result is a corruption of the name by the actuality. Thus a particular abyss that happens to be located on a high mountain may indeed be on the same level as a particular mountain that happens to be on low land. But one cannot infer from this exceptional instance that all abysses are on the same level with all mountains.

The third class is what Hsiin Tzu calls "the fallacy of corrupting actualities with names. (Ibid.) Here he includes the Mohist argument that "ox-and-horse are not horse, an argument which is the same in kind as Kung—sun Lung's statement that "a white horse is not a horse." If one examines the name of ox-and-horse, one sees that it is indeed not equivalent to that of the name horse. Yet as a matter of fact some of the creatures belonging to the group known as "ox-and-horse" are, as actualities, indeed horses.

Hsiin Tzu then concludes that the rise of all these fallacies is due to the fact that no sage-king exists.

Were there to be such a sage-king, he would use his political authority to unify the minds of the people, and lead them to the true way of life in which there is no place or need for disputation and argument.

Hsiin Tzu here reflects the spirit of the troubled age of his time. It was an age in which men longed desperately for a political unification which would bring these troubles to an end. Such a unification, though in actual fact one of China only, was regarded, by these people, as equivalent to a unification of the whole world.

Among Hsiin Tzu s disciples, the two most famous were Li Ssu and Han Fei Tzu, both of whom were to have a great influence on Chinese history. Li Ssu later became Prime Minister of the First Emperor of the Ch'in dynasty, the man who finally forcibly unified China in 2.21 B.C. Together with his

2-48 . THE REALISTIC WING OF CONFUCIANISM: HSUN TZU

master, he labored not only for a political but an ideological unification as well, a movement which culminated in the Burning of the Books in 213 B.C. The other disciple, Han Fei Tzu, became a leading figure in the Legalist school which supplied the theoretical justification for this political and ideological unification. The ideas of this school will be described in the next chapter.

2.50.

THE REALISTIC WING OF CONFUCIANISM: HSUN TZU

CHAPTER 14

AN FEI TZU AND THE LEGALIST SCHOOL

1 HE feudalistic society of the early Chou dynasty operated according to two principles: one was that of the li (rituals, ceremonies, rules of conduct, mores); the other was that of the hsing (penalties, punishments). The li formed the unwritten code of honor governing the conduct of the aristocrats, who were known as chiin tzu (a term literally meaning son of a prince, princely man, or gentleman); the hsing, on the contrary, applied only to the people of ordinary birth who were known as shu jen (common men) or hsiao jen (small men). This is the meaning of the saying in the Li Chi (Book of Rites): "The li do not go down to the common people; the hsing do not go up to the ministers." (Ch.

10.)

Social Background of the Legalists

This was possible because the structure of Chinese feudalistic society was comparatively simple.

Kings, princes, and feudal lords were all related to each other either by blood or by marriage. In theory the princes of each state were subordinate to the king, and the feudal lords within these states were in turn subordinate to their prince. But in actual fact, these nobles, having long inherited their rights from their ancestors, came in the course of lime to regard these rights as existing independently of their theoretical allegiance to their superiors. Thus the many states that belonged to the hegemony theoretically controlled by the central Chou King were in actual fact semi-independent, and within each of these states there were likewise many semi-independent "houses of lesser nobles. Being relatives, these various feudatories maintained social and diplomatic contacts, and transacted business, if any, according to their unwritten code of gentleman s agreements. That is to say, their conduct was governed by li.

The kings and princes at the top had no direct dealings with the common people. They left such matters to the lesser feudal lords, each of whom ruled the common people living within his own fief.

Since such fiefs were usually

252.

HAN FEI TZU AND THE LEGALIST SCHOOL

not large, their populations were limited. Hence the nobles were able in considerable measure lo rule the people under them on a personal basis. Punishments were applied to keep their subjects obedient. Thus we find that in early Chinese feudalistic society, relationships, both high and low, were maintained on a basis of personal influence and personal contact.

The distintcgration of this type of society in the later centuries of the Chou dynasty brought with it far-reaching social and political changes. The social distinctions between the class of princely men on the one hand and small men on the other were no longer so absolutely demarcated. Already in the time of Confucius, we sec how aristocrats somelimes lost their land and titles, and how members of the common people, either by talent or good luck, succeeded in becoming socially and politically prominent. The old fixity of social classes was breaking down. Likewise, as time wore on, the territories of the larger states became ever larger through aggression and conquest. In order to carry on warfare or prepare for war, these states needed a strong government, thai is, a government with a high concentration of power. As a consequence, the structure as well as ihe functions of government became ever more complex than formerly.

New situations brought with them new problems. Such were the conditions faced by all the rulers of the feudal states of the time, and it was the common endeavor of all the schools of thought since Confucius to solve these problems. Most of their proposed solutions, however, were not realistic e-nough to be practical. What the rulers needed were not idealistic programs for doing good to their people, but realistic methods for dealing with the new situations faced by their government.

There were certain men who had a keen understanding of real and practical polities. The rulers of the time used to seek the advice of these men, and if their suggestions proved effective, they often became trusted advisers of the rulers, and in some cases became Prime Ministers. Such advisers were known as fang shu chih shih or men of method.

They were so (tailed because they developed methods for governing large areas; methods which left a high concentration of power in the person of the ruler, and which they boasted were foolproof.

According to them, it was quite unnecessary that a ruler be a sage or superman. By faithfully applying their methods, a person of even merely average intelligence could govern, and govern well. There were also some "men of melhod ' who went further and supplied a rational justification or theoretical expression for their techniques. It was this that constituted the thought of the Legalist school.

Thus it is wrong to associate ihe thought of the Legalist school with jurisprudence. In modem terms, what this school taught was the theory and melhod of organization and leadership. If one wants to organize people and be their leader, one will find that the Legalist theory and practice are still instructive and useful, but only if one is willing to follow totalitarian lines.

254 , HAN FEI TZU AND THE LEGALIST SCHOOL

Han Fei Tzu, the Synthesizer of the Legalist School

In this chapter, 1 take Han Fei Tzu as the culminating representative of the Legalist school. He was a descendant of the royal house of the state of Han, in present Western Honan province. The Shih Chi or Historical Records says of him: "Together with Li Ssu, he studied under Hsiln Tzu. Li Ssu considered himself not equal to Han Fei. (Ch. 63.) He was an able writer and composed a lengthy work bearing his name in fifty—five chapters. Ironically enough, it was in Ch'in, the state which more than any other applied his principles and thus conquered the other states, that he died in prison in 2.33 B.C. The cause was a political intrigue on the part of his former fellow student, Li Ssu, who was an official in Ch in, and who may have been jealous of the growing favor accorded to Han Fei Tzu.

Before Han Fei Tzu, who was the last and greatest theorizer of the legalist school, there had been three groups, each with its own line of thought. One was headed by Shen Tao, a contemporary of Mencius, who held that shih was the most important factor in politics and government. Another was headed by Shen Pu-hai (died 337 B.C.), who stressed that shu was the most important factor. Still another was headed by Shang Yang, also known as Lord Shang (died 33$ B.C.), who, for his part, emphasized fa. Shih means power or authority; fa means law or regulation; shu means the method or art of conducting affairs and handling men, i.e., "statecraft.

Han Fei Tzu considered all three alike as indispensable. He said: The intelligent ruler carries out his regulations as would Heaven, and handles men as if he were a divine being. Being like Heaven, he commits no wrong, and being like a divine being, he falls into no difficulties. His shih [power] enforces his strict orders, and nothing that he encounters resists him....Only when this is so can his laws [fa] be carried out in concert." (Han-fei-tzu, ch. 48-) The intelligent ruler is like Heaven because he acts in accordance with law fairly and impartially. This is the function of fa. He is like a divine being, because he has the art of handling men, so that men are handled without knowing how they are handled. This is the function of the shu. And he has the authority or power to enforce his orders. This is the function of shih. These three together are "the implements of emperors and kings" (ch. 43), no one of which can be neglected.

Legalist Philosophy of HLslory

Perhaps the Chinese traditional respect for past experience stems from the ways of thought of their overwhelmingly agrarian population. Farmers arc rooted to the soil and travel but rarely. They cultivate their land in accordance with seasonal changes which repeat themselves year after year. Past experience is a sufficient guide for their work, so that whenever they want to try something new, they first look back to past experience for precedent.

256 HAN FEI TZU AND THE LEGALIST SCHOOL

This mentality has influenced Chinese philosophy a great deal, so that since the time of Confucius, most philosophers have appealed to ancient authority as justification for their own teaching. Thus Confucius ancient authorities were King Wen and the Duke of Chou, of the beginning of the Chou dynasty. In order to improve upon Confucius, Mo Tzu appealed to the au-ihority of the legendary Yii, who supposedly lived a thousand years earlier than King Wen and the Duke of Chou. Mencius, to gel the better of the Mohists, went still further back to Yao and Shun, who were supposed to have antedated Yii. And finally the Taoists, in order to gain a hearing for their ideas against those of both the Confucianists and Mohists, appealed to the authority of Fu Hsi and Shcn Nung, who were reputed to have lived several centuries earlier than either Yao or Shun.

By thus looking to the past, these philosophers created a regressive view of history. Although belonging to different schools, they all agreed that the golden age of man lies in the past rather than the future. The movement of history since then has been one of progressive degeneration. Hence man s salvation consists not in the creation of something new, but in a return to what has already existed.

To this view of history the Legalists, the last major school of the Chou period, took sharp exception.

They fully understood the changing needs of the time and viewed them realistically. Although admitting that the people of ancient times were more innocent and in this sense perhaps more virtuous, they maintained that this was due to material circumstances rather than to any inherent superior goodness.

Thus according to Han Fei Tzu, anciently there were few people but plenty of supplies, and therefore the people did not quarrel. But nowadays people do not consider a family of five children as large, and each child having again five children, before the death of the grandfather there may be twenty—five grandchildren. The result is that there are many people but few supplies, and that one has to work hard for a meager return. So the people fall to quarreling." (Han-fei-tzu, ch. 49.) Because of these completely new circumstances, according to Han Fei Tzu, new problems can only be solved by new measures. Only a fool can fail to realize this obvious fact. Han Fei Tzu illustrates this kind of folly with a story: "There was once a man of Sung who tilled his field. In the midst of the field stood a stem of a tree, and one day a hare in full course rushed against that stem, broke its neck, and died. Thereupon the man left his plough and stood waiting at that tree in the hope that he would catch another hare. But he never caught another hare and was ridiculed by the people of Sung. If, however, you wish to rule the people of today by the methods of government of the early kings, you do exactly the same thing as the man who waited by the tree....Therefore affairs go according to their time, and preparations are made in accordance with affairs. (Ibid.)

Before Han Fei Tzu, Lord Shang already said similarly: "When the guiding principles of the people become unsuited to the circumstances, their