Moreover, the foolish scholars of the age do not understand the realities of order and chaos. They chatter endlessly, reciting ancient books at length to disrupt present‑day governance. Their wisdom cannot even avoid pitfalls and dry wells, yet they recklessly criticize statecraft‑wise men. Listening to their words endangers the state; adopting their plans brings chaos. This is the height of folly and the gravest disaster.
Though they share the reputation of political speakers with statecraft‑wise men, their real worth differs by thousands of miles – same in name yet utterly different in substance. Comparing foolish scholars to statecraft‑wise men is like comparing an ant‑hill mound to a great mountain; the gap is immense.
Sages judge the truth of right and wrong and observe the roots of order and chaos. Therefore, in governing a state, they clarify strict laws and enforce severe punishments, to rescue people from disorder and eliminate universal calamities. They ensure the strong do not bully the weak, the many do not oppress the few, the elderly live out their days, orphans grow safely, borders remain uninvaded, rulers and ministers trust each other, fathers and sons protect one another, and no one suffers death or captivity. This is an immense achievement.
Foolish people do not understand this and instead regard strict law as cruelty. Foolish men desire order yet hate the means that create it; they fear danger yet favor what brings danger. How do we know? Severe punishments are hated by the people yet bring state order; compassion for commoners and light penalties please the people yet bring state peril.
Sages who govern by law must go against popular customs yet follow true political morality. Those who understand this uphold justice against convention; those who do not follow convention against justice. Since few under heaven understand true statecraft, the right principles are condemned by the masses.
Note
This passage defends Legalist realpolitik: strict law and heavy punishment are essential for stability, even if disliked by ordinary people. Blind populism and nostalgic traditionalism bring chaos, while wise rulers prioritize long‑term national security over temporary public approval.
Late Warring‑States Legalist political philosopher. This passage is from Traitors, Usurpers, and Assassins (Jian Jie Shi Chen). He sharply criticizes traditional Confucian scholars as impractical conservatives and defends strict Legalist governance.
Foolish Traditional Scholars
Han Fei’s term for Confucian literati who blindly idealize ancient times, recite old classics, and offer empty impractical advice unsuitable for the Warring‑States crisis.
Strict Punishment vs Light Penalty
A core Legalist‑Confucian debate: Confucians advocate lenient, moral governance; Legalists argue severe law is necessary to maintain social order, even if unpopular.
Against Custom for Justice
Legalist political realism: good governance often conflicts with public emotion and short‑term popular preferences. Rulers must uphold long‑term state interests over public favor.
Ant‑hill vs Great Mountain Metaphor
Han Fei uses this vivid comparison to emphasize the enormous gap between useless traditional scholars and practical statecraft reformers.
且夫世之愚學，皆不知治亂之情，讘䛟多誦先古之書，以亂當世之治；智慮不足以避阱井之陷，又妄非有術之士。聽其言者危，用其計者亂，此亦愚之至大，而患之至甚者也。俱與有術之士，有談說之名，而實相去千萬也，此夫名同而實有異者也。夫世愚學之人比有術之士也，猶螘垤之比大陵也，其相去遠矣。而聖人者，審於是非之實，察於治亂之情也。故其治國也，正明法，陳嚴刑，將以救群生之亂，去天下之禍，使強不陵弱，眾不暴寡，耆老得遂，幼孤得長，邊境不侵，君臣相親，父子相保，而無死亡係虜之患，此亦功之至厚者也。愚人不知，顧以為暴。愚者固欲治而惡其所以治，皆惡危而喜其所以危者。何以知之？夫嚴刑重罰者，民之所惡也，而國之所以治也；哀憐百姓、輕刑罰者，民之所喜，而國之所以危也。聖人為法國者，必逆於世，而順於道德。知之者，同於義而異於俗；弗知之者，異於義而同於俗。天下知之者少，則義非矣。
Leave a Reply