Chapter 35: Condemnation of Fatalism – Part I
Master Mozi said: “The ancient kings and high ministers who governed states all desired their states to be wealthy, their people to be numerous, and their laws and administration to be orderly. Yet, instead of wealth, they obtained poverty; instead of a large population, a small one; instead of order, chaos. They fundamentally lost what they desired and obtained what they abhorred. Why is this?”
Master Mozi said: “It is because there are many people in the world who advocate fatalism. The advocates of fatalism say, ‘If fate decrees wealth, there will be wealth; if fate decrees poverty, there will be poverty. If fate decrees a large population, there will be many; if fate decrees a small population, there will be few. If fate decrees order, there will be order; if fate decrees chaos, there will be chaos. If fate decrees longevity, one will live long; if fate decrees an early death, one will die young. Since everything is determined by fate, what good is it to be strong and vigorous?’ These words are used above to persuade kings and ministers, and below to hinder the common people from engaging in productive work. Therefore, advocates of fatalism are uncharitable. Thus, the words of those who advocate fatalism must be clearly examined.”
How, then, can we clearly examine this doctrine? Master Mozi said: “We must establish a standard. To speak without a standard is like trying to tell the time of day on a spinning potter’s wheel; it is impossible to clearly distinguish right from wrong, or benefit from harm. Therefore, all statements must be tested by the ‘Three Prongs’ (San Biao). What are the Three Prongs? Master Mozi said: ‘There is the test of historical precedent, the test of empirical evidence, and the test of practical application.’ Where do we find historical precedent? We look upward to the deeds of the ancient sage kings. Where do we find empirical evidence? We look downward to the actual experiences of the common people as heard and seen by their ears and eyes. Where do we find practical application? We apply the doctrine to laws and administration, and observe whether it benefits the state and the people. This is what is meant by the Three Prongs.”
Yet today, some scholars and gentlemen believe that fate exists. Have they not looked upward to the deeds of the sage kings? In ancient times, Jie brought chaos to the world, and Tang took over and brought order. Zhou brought chaos to the world, and King Wu took over and brought order. The era had not changed, and the people had not changed; under Jie and Zhou, the world was in chaos; under Tang and Wu, the world was orderly. How can we say that fate exists!
Some scholars and gentlemen believe that fate exists. Have they not looked upward to the books of the ancient kings? The books of the ancient kings, used to govern states and distribute benefits to the people, are the constitutional laws. Did the constitutional laws of the ancient kings ever say, ‘Blessings cannot be prayed for, disasters cannot be avoided, reverence is useless, and violence is harmless’? The penal codes used to judge cases and determine crimes – are there such statements in them? The military oaths used to organize armies and direct their advances and retreats – are there such statements in them?
Therefore, Master Mozi said: “I have not yet fully enumerated them, but the good books of the world are too numerous to count. Broadly speaking, they fall into these five categories. Even if we do not seek out the words of the fatalists, we will certainly not find such statements in these books. Can we not then discard their doctrine?”
If we adopt the words of the fatalists now, we will overturn the righteousness of the world. To overturn the righteousness of the world is to establish fatalism, which is a doctrine that harms the people. Those who advocate this harmful doctrine are destroying the people of the world. Why, then, do we desire righteous men to be in power? Because when a righteous man is in power, the world will certainly be well-governed; the Supreme God, mountains, rivers, and spirits will have a proper host; and the ten thousand people will receive great benefits. How do we know this? Master Mozi said: “In ancient times, Tang was enfeoffed at Bo. Taking territory from the long and adding to the short, his land was a hundred li square. He loved his people universally and sought mutual benefit; when he had surplus, he distributed it. He led his people to revere Heaven and serve the spirits. Therefore, Heaven and the spirits enriched him, the feudal lords allied with him, the people were attached to him, and worthy scholars flocked to him. Before the end of his lifetime, he became king of the world and ruled the feudal lords.”
“In the past, King Wen was enfeoffed at Qi Zhou. His land was also a hundred li square. He loved his people universally and sought mutual benefit. Therefore, those nearby were content with his government, and those far away were attracted by his virtue. Those who heard of King Wen all arose and went to him. Even the exhausted, the unworthy, and the disabled sat and wished, saying, ‘How can we make King Wen’s territory reach us so that we may benefit and be just like the people of King Wen!’ Therefore, Heaven and the spirits enriched him, the feudal lords allied with him, the people were attached to him, and worthy scholars flocked to him. Before the end of his lifetime, he became king of the world and ruled the feudal lords. I just said that when a righteous man is in power, the world will be well-governed, the Supreme God and the spirits will have a proper host, and the people will receive great benefits. I know this from these examples.”
Therefore, the ancient sage kings issued laws and established rewards and punishments to encourage the worthy. As a result, at home they were filial and kind to their relatives; abroad they respected elders in their communities; their sitting and standing were measured; their comings and goings were regulated; and men and women were properly distinguished. Therefore, when appointed to govern offices, they did not steal; when defending cities, they did not rebel; when their lord faced danger, they died for him; when he was exiled, they escorted him. These are rewarded by superiors and praised by the people. But the advocates of fatalism say, ‘What superiors reward is what fate destined to be rewarded, not because of worthiness. What superiors punish is what fate destined to be punished, not because of violence.’ Consequently, at home they are unfilial and unkind; abroad they disrespect elders; their behavior is unmeasured and unregulated; men and women are not distinguished. Therefore, when governing offices, they steal; when defending cities, they rebel; when their lord faces danger, they do not die for him; when he is exiled, they do not escort him. These are punished by superiors and condemned by the people. But the advocates of fatalism say, ‘What superiors punish is what fate destined to be punished, not because of violence. What superiors reward is what fate destined to be rewarded, not because of worthiness.’ Holding such views makes a ruler unrighteous, a minister disloyal, a father unkind, a son unfilial, an elder brother ungentle, and a younger brother disrespectful. Those who stubbornly hold this doctrine are the source of evil words and the way of violent men!
How do we know that fatalism is the way of violent men? In ancient times, impoverished people who were greedy for food and drink and lazy in their work found themselves lacking in clothing and food, and suffering from hunger and cold. Instead of saying, ‘I am lazy and unworthy; I do not work diligently,’ they invariably say, ‘My fate is destined to be poor.’ In ancient times, violent kings who could not restrain their sensual desires and whose minds were depraved, and who did not obey their relatives, ended up losing their states and overturning their altars of state. Instead of saying, ‘I am lazy and unworthy; my governance is poor,’ they invariably say, ‘My fate is destined to lose the world.’ The Zhonghui Zhi Gao says, ‘I have heard that the Xia people falsified the Mandate of Heaven and spread the doctrine of fate among the people. The Supreme Lord punished their wickedness and utterly destroyed their army.’ This is how Tang condemned Jie’s advocacy of fatalism. The Tai Shi says, ‘Zhou lived arrogantly and refused to serve the Supreme God and the spirits. He brought disaster upon his ancestral spirits and ceased to sacrifice, yet said, “My people have a mandate.” He made no effort to correct his faults, and Heaven therefore abandoned him and ceased to protect him.’ This is how King Wu condemned Zhou’s advocacy of fatalism.”
If we adopt the words of the fatalists now, superiors will not listen to governance, and subordinates will not engage in work. If superiors do not govern, laws and administration will be chaotic; if subordinates do not work, wealth will be insufficient. Above, there will be nothing to provide pure grain and wine to sacrifice to the Supreme God and the spirits; below, there will be nothing to attract and soothe the worthy scholars of the world; outwardly, there will be nothing to host the guests of the feudal lords; inwardly, there will be nothing to feed the hungry, clothe the cold, and nourish the old and weak. Therefore, fatalism is unbeneficial above to Heaven, in the middle to the spirits, and below to the people. Those who stubbornly hold this doctrine are the source of evil words and the way of violent men!
Therefore, Master Mozi said: “Today, if the scholars and gentlemen of the world truly desire the wealth of the world and abhor its poverty, and desire its order and abhor its chaos, they must condemn the words of those who advocate fatalism. This doctrine is a great harm to the world.”
Note
This chapter refutes fatalism via Mozi’s Three Tests of truth. It argues fate excuses laziness and tyranny, citing sage kings’ virtuous rule and tyrants’ reckless ruin to prove human effort shapes fortune and order.
Tang and King Wu:
The founding kings of the Shang and Zhou dynasties, respectively. Mozi uses them as the ultimate historical proof that human effort, virtue, and good governance – not predetermined fate – bring about prosperity and order.
Jie and Zhou:
The infamous last rulers of the Xia and Shang dynasties. They are cited as examples of leaders who blamed “fate” for their inevitable downfall rather than taking responsibility for their own tyranny and incompetence.
The virtuous founder of the Zhou dynasty’s legacy, whose benevolent governance attracted people from neighboring states, further proving that human action dictates outcomes.
Fatalism:
In ancient China, fatalism was often used by the ruling elite or the lazy as an excuse to avoid moral responsibility and hard work. Mozi vehemently opposes this because it undermines his core philosophy of active effort, universal love, and utilitarian governance.
The Three Prongs / Three Tests (三表):
This is one of the most significant epistemological contributions in Chinese philosophy. Mozi establishes an empirical and pragmatic framework for verifying truth: 1) Historical precedent (ancient sage kings), 2) Empirical evidence (the sensory experience of the masses), and 3) Practical utility (does it benefit the state and people?). This makes Mozi one of the earliest pragmatists in human history.
Zhonghui Zhi Gao (《仲虺之告》) and Tai Shi (《太誓》):
These are ancient historical texts (now largely lost or existing in fragments). Mozi cites them to show that even the foundational texts of the Zhou dynasty explicitly condemned the fatalistic excuses of tyrants, proving that “fate” was merely a rhetorical shield for wickedness.
子墨子言曰：古者王公大人，为政国家者，皆欲国家之富，人民之众，刑政之治。然而不得富而得贫，不得众而得寡，不得治而得乱，则是本失其所欲，得其所恶，是故何也？
子墨子言曰：执有命者以杂于民间者众。执有命者之言曰：“命富则富，命贫则贫；命众则众，命寡则寡；命治则治，命乱则乱；命寿则寿，命夭则夭。命……虽强劲，何益哉？”上以说王公大人，下以驵百姓之从事，故执有命者不仁。故当执有命者之言，不可不明辨。
然则明辨此之说，将奈何哉？子墨子言曰：必立仪。言而毋仪，譬犹运钧之上，而立朝夕者也，是非利害之辨，不可得而明知也。故言必有三表。何谓三表？子墨子言曰：有本之者，有原之者，有用之者。于何本之？上本之于古者圣王之事；于何原之？下原察百姓耳目之实；于何用之？废以为刑政，观其中国家百姓人民之利，此所谓言有三表也。
然而今天下之士君子，或以命为有。盖尝尚观于圣王之事？古者桀之所乱，汤受而治之；纣之所乱，武王受而治之。此世未易，民未渝，在于桀、纣，则天下乱；在于汤、武，则天下治。岂可谓有命哉！
然而今天下之士君子，或以命为有，盖尝尚观于先王之书？先王之书，所以出国家、布施百姓者，宪也；先王之宪亦尝有曰：“福不可请，而祸不可讳，敬无益、暴无伤者乎？”所以听狱制罪者，刑也；先王之刑亦尝有曰：“福不可请，祸不可讳，敬无益，暴无伤者乎？”所以整设师旅，进退师徒者，誓也；先王之誓亦尝有曰：“福不可请，祸不可讳，敬无益、暴无伤者乎？”
是故子墨子言曰：吾当未盐数，天下之良书，不可尽计数，大方论数，而五者是也。今虽毋求执有命者之言，不必得，不亦可错乎？
今用执有命者之言，是覆天下之义。覆天下之义者，是立命者也，百姓之谇也。说百姓之谇者，是灭天下之人也。然则所为欲义在上者，何也？曰：义人在上，天下必治，上帝、山川、鬼神，必有干主，万民被其大利。何以知之？子墨子曰：古者汤封于亳，绝长继短，方地百里，与其百姓兼相爱，交相利，移则分，率其百姓以上尊天事鬼，是以天鬼富之，诸侯与之，百姓亲之，贤士归之，未殁其世而王天下，政诸侯。
昔者文王封于歧周，绝长继短，方地百里，与其百姓兼相爱，交相利则，是以近者安其政，远者归其德。闻文王者，皆起而趋之；罢不肖、股肱不利者，处而愿之，曰：“奈何乎使文王之地及我，吾则吾利，岂不亦犹文王之民也哉！”是以天鬼富之，诸侯与之，百姓亲之，贤士归之。未殁其世而王天下，政诸侯。乡者言曰：义人在上，天下必治，上帝、山川、鬼神，必有干主，万民被其大利。吾用此知之。
是故古之圣王，发宪出令，设以为赏罚以劝贤。是以入则孝慈于亲戚，出则弟长于乡里，坐处有度，出入有节，男女有辨。是故使治官府，则不盗窃；守城，则不崩叛；君有难则死，出亡则送。此上之所赏，而百姓之所誉也。执有命者之言曰：上之所赏，命固且赏，非贤故赏也；上之所罚，命固且罚，不暴故罚也。是故入则不慈孝于亲戚，出则不弟长于乡里，坐处不度，出入无节，男女无辨。是故治官府，则盗窃；守城，则崩叛；君有难则不死，出亡则不送。此上之所罚，百姓之所非毁也。执有命者言曰：上之所罚，命固且罚，不暴故罚也；上之所赏，命固且赏，非贤故赏也。以此为君则不义，为臣则不忠，为父则不慈，为子则不孝，为兄则不良，为弟则不弟。而强执此者，此特凶言之所自生，而暴人之道也。
然则何以知命之为暴人之道？昔上世之穷民，贪于饮食，惰于从事，是以衣食之财不足，而饥寒冻馁之忧至；不知曰我罢不肖，从事不疾，必曰我命固且贫。昔上世暴王，不忍其耳目之淫，心涂之辟，不顺其亲戚，遂以亡失国家，倾覆社稷；不知曰我罢不肖，为政不善，必曰吾命固失之。于《仲虺之告》曰：“我闻于夏人矫天命，布命于下。帝伐之恶，龚丧厥师。”此言汤之所以非桀之执有命也。于太誓曰：“纣夷处，不肯事上帝鬼神，祸厥先神禔不祀，乃曰：’吾民有命。’无廖排漏，天亦纵弃之而弗葆。”此言武王所以非纣执有命也。
今用执有命者之言，则上不听治，下不从事。上不听治，则刑政乱；下不从事，则财用不足；上无以供粢盛酒醴祭祀上帝鬼神，下无以降绥天下贤可之士，外无以应持诸侯之宾客，内无以食饥衣寒，将养老弱。故命上不利于天，中不利于鬼，下不利于人。而强执此者，此特凶言之所自生，而暴人之道也！
是故子墨子言曰：“今天下之士君子，忠实欲天下之富而恶其贫，欲天下之治而恶其乱，执有命者之言，不可不非。此天下之大害也。
Leave a Reply