Chapter 46: Geng Zhu
On Rebuke and Education
Master Mo Zi became angry with his disciple Geng Zhu Zi. Geng Zhu Zi asked, “Am I inferior to others?” Master Mo Zi said, “I am about to ascend Mount Taihang. If I have a thoroughbred horse and a sheep to pull a cart, which would you drive?” Geng Zhu Zi replied, “I would drive the thoroughbred horse.” Master Mo Zi asked, “Why drive the thoroughbred?” Geng Zhu Zi answered, “Because the thoroughbred is worthy of being spurred.” Master Mo Zi said, “I also consider you worthy of being spurred.”
On the Wisdom of Spirits and Sages
Wu Ma Zi said to Master Mo Zi, “Who is wiser, spirits and ghosts or sages?” Master Mo Zi replied, “The wisdom of spirits and ghosts surpasses that of sages, just as sharp ears and clear eyes surpass the deaf and the blind. In the past, Qi of Xia sent Fei Lian to mine metals in the mountains and rivers, and to cast them at Kunwu. He then had Weng Nan divine using a turtle shell from Bairuo, saying, ‘When the tripod is cast with four square legs, it will cook by itself without fire, store itself without being moved, and walk by itself without being relocated.’ When they sacrificed at the ruins of Kunwu with the tripod facing upward, the diviner read the cracks and said, ‘The spirits have accepted the offering! White clouds billow, drifting south, north, west, and east. Now that the Nine Tripods are cast, they will pass through three dynasties.’ The Xia lost them, and the Yin (Shang) received them. The Yin lost them, and the Zhou received them. This succession among the Xia, Yin, and Zhou has lasted for hundreds of years. If sages were to gather their best ministers and outstanding chancellors to deliberate, could they foresee events hundreds of years into the future? Yet the spirits and ghosts can. Therefore, the wisdom of spirits and ghosts surpassing sages is like sharp hearing and clear sight surpassing deafness and blindness.”
On the Division of Labor in Righteousness
Zhi Tu Yu and Xian Zi Shuo asked Master Mo Zi, “What is the most important task in promoting righteousness?” Master Mo Zi said, “It is like building a wall: those who can build should build, those who can fill the earth should fill, and those who can level should level; only then is the wall completed. Promoting righteousness is the same: those who can debate should debate, those who can expound texts should expound, and those who can do practical work should work; only then is the work of righteousness accomplished.”
On Judging Intentions
Wu Ma Zi said to Master Mo Zi, “You advocate universal love for the world, yet no benefit has materialized; I do not love the world, yet no harm has materialized. Since neither outcome has arrived, why do you alone claim to be right and condemn me?” Master Mo Zi said, “Suppose a fire breaks out here. One person carries water intending to extinguish it, while another carries firewood intending to fuel it. Although neither has yet achieved their goal, which of the two do you value?” Wu Ma Zi said, “I value the intention of the one carrying water and condemn the intention of the one carrying firewood.” Master Mo Zi said, “I likewise value my intention and condemn yours.”
On Not Hasty to Judge Others
Master Mo Zi sent Geng Zhu Zi to serve in Chu. Some disciples passed by him there. Geng Zhu Zi fed them only three sheng of grain and treated them poorly. The disciples returned and reported to Master Mo Zi, “Geng Zhu Zi is of no use in Chu! We passed by, and he only gave us three sheng of food, treating guests so poorly.” Master Mo Zi said, “It is not yet known.” Not long after, Geng Zhu Zi sent ten yi of gold to Master Mo Zi, saying, “Your junior dares not risk his life in vain. Here are ten yi of gold; may the Master find use for them.” Master Mo Zi said, “Indeed, it was not yet known.”
On True Morality and “Madness”
Wu Ma Zi said to Master Mo Zi, “In your pursuit of righteousness, humans do not see it to reward you, and ghosts do not see it to enrich you, yet you still do it. You must have a mad disease.” Master Mo Zi said, “Suppose you have two servants here. One works only when he sees you and stops when you are absent; the other works whether he sees you or not. Which do you value?” Wu Ma Zi said, “I value the one who works whether he sees me or not.” Master Mo Zi said, “Then you also value the one with a ‘mad disease.’”
On Gentlemen and Fighting
A disciple of Zi Xia asked Master Mo Zi, “Do gentlemen fight?” Master Mo Zi said, “Gentlemen do not fight.” The disciple retorted, “Even dogs and pigs fight; how can there be scholars who do not fight?” Master Mo Zi sighed, “How sorrowful! In words, they praise Tang and Wen, but in actions, they compare themselves to dogs and pigs. How sorrowful!”
On Praising Ancient Kings
Wu Ma Zi said to Master Mo Zi, “Abandoning people of today to praise ancient kings is like praising dry bones. It is like a carpenter who knows dry wood but does not know living trees.” Master Mo Zi replied, “The reason the world survives is because of the teachings of the ancient kings’ Way. To praise the ancient kings today is to praise the source of the world’s survival. Failing to praise what deserves praise is not benevolent.”
On Righteousness as the True Treasure
Master Mo Zi said, “The He Shi Bi (Jade of He), the Pearl of Marquis Sui, and the Nine Tripods are what feudal lords call fine treasures. Can they enrich a state, multiply the population, bring order to laws and government, and secure the altars of state? No. The reason treasures are valued is that they can bring benefit. Since these cannot benefit people, they are not the true treasures of the world. But if righteousness is used to govern a state, the population will multiply, government will be orderly, and the state will be secure. Since the value of a treasure lies in benefiting people, and righteousness can benefit people, it is said: Righteousness is the true treasure of the world.”
On Confucius’ Inadequate Answer
Ye Gong Zi Gao asked Confucius about governance, saying, “What is a good ruler like?” Confucius answered, “A good ruler makes the distant approach and renews old relationships.” When Master Mo Zi heard this, he said, “Ye Gong Zi Gao did not ask the right question, and Confucius did not give the right answer. Did Ye Gong Zi Gao not already know that a good ruler makes the distant approach and renews old relationships? He was asking how to achieve this. Failing to tell people what they do not know, and merely repeating what they already know, means neither of them got to the point.”
On Great States Attacking Small States
Master Mo Zi said to Lu Yang Wen Jun, “A great state attacking a small state is like a child pretending to be a horse. A child acting as a horse may be useful for riding, but it is exhausting. Today, when a great state attacks a small state, the farmers of the attacked state cannot farm, and the women cannot weave, as they are occupied with defense. The farmers and women of the attacking state also cannot farm or weave, as they are occupied with offense. Therefore, a great state attacking a small state is like a child pretending to be a horse.”
On Matching Words with Deeds
Master Mo Zi said, “If words are sufficient to be carried out in action, speak them often; if they are insufficient for action, do not speak them often. Speaking often without the ability to act is mere empty talk.”
On Gao Shi Zi Resigning Office
Master Mo Zi sent Guan Qian Ao to recommend Gao Shi Zi for office in Wei. The Lord of Wei offered him a generous salary and appointed him as a minister. Gao Shi Zi spoke exhaustively in three consecutive audiences, but his words were not put into practice. He then left for Qi, met Master Mo Zi, and said, “Because of you, Master, the Lord of Wei gave me a generous salary and made me a minister. I spoke exhaustively in three audiences, but my words were not acted upon, so I left. Will the Lord of Wei think I am mad?” Master Mo Zi said, “If leaving is in accordance with the Way, what harm is there in being called mad? In ancient times, Zhou Gong Dan rebuked Guan Shu, resigned from his position as one of the Three Dukes, and lived in the east at Shanggai. People called him mad, but later generations praised his virtue and spread his fame, which continues to this day. Moreover, I have heard, ‘Pursuing righteousness is not about avoiding blame and seeking praise.’ If leaving is right, what harm is there in being called mad!” Gao Shi Zi said, “How would I dare to deviate from the Way in leaving! Master, you once said, ‘When the world lacks the Way, a benevolent scholar does not accept generous rewards.’ Now the Lord of Wei lacks the Way; if I were greedy for his salary and rank, I would be compromising my integrity for mere survival.” Master Mo Zi was pleased and called Zi Qin Zi (Qin Huali), saying, “Listen to this! I have often heard of those who betray righteousness for salary, but in Gao Shi Zi, I have seen one who betrays salary for righteousness.”
On the Hypocrisy of Worldly Gentlemen
Master Mo Zi said, “Worldly gentlemen, if called rich when poor, become angry; if called righteous when unrighteous, become pleased. Is this not absurd!”
On Gong Meng Zi’s “Three Things”
Gong Meng Zi said, “The ancients had only three things.” Master Mo Zi replied, “Who says the ancients had only three things? You do not understand that the ancients had both predecessors and successors.”
On the Absurdity of a Deserting Soldier Seeking Reward
A man who had rebelled against Master Mo Zi later returned, saying, “Am I guilty? I returned later.” Master Mo Zi said, “This is like a soldier who fled in a defeated army and then demands a reward because he was the last to fall behind.”
On Transmitting the Old and Creating the New
Gong Meng Zi said, “A gentleman does not create; he only transmits.” Master Mo Zi replied, “Not so. Those who are not gentlemen do not transmit the good of the ancients, nor do they create the good of today. The next worst do not transmit the good of the ancients, but when they have something good, they create it, wanting the good to originate from themselves. Now, if you transmit but do not create, you are no different from those who dislike transmitting but like creating. I believe the good of the ancients should be transmitted, and the good of today should be created, so that the good in the world may increase.”
On the Logical Paradox of Extreme Egoism
Wu Ma Zi said to Master Mo Zi, “I differ from you; I cannot practice universal love. I love the people of Zou more than the people of Yue, the people of Lu more than the people of Zou, my fellow villagers more than the people of Lu, my family more than my fellow villagers, my parents more than my family, and myself more than my parents, because they are closer to me. If I am struck, I feel pain; if another is struck, it does not pain me. Why should I relieve what pains me but not what does not? Therefore, I can kill another to benefit myself, but I would never kill myself to benefit another.” Master Mo Zi asked, “Do you intend to keep this doctrine hidden, or will you tell it to others?” Wu Ma Zi said, “Why should I hide my doctrine? I will tell it to others.” Master Mo Zi said, “Then, if one person approves of you, he will want to kill you to benefit himself; if ten people approve of you, ten will want to kill you to benefit themselves; if the whole world approves of you, the whole world will want to kill you to benefit themselves. Conversely, if one person disapproves of you, he will want to kill you, considering you a spreader of inauspicious words; if ten disapprove, ten will want to kill you; if the whole world disapproves, the whole world will want to kill you. Whether people approve or disapprove, they will want to kill you. This is called a mouth that brings about its own execution.” Master Mo Zi added, “Does your speech seek no benefit? If there is no benefit in speaking, it is mere empty talk.”
On the “Kleptomania” of Great States
Master Mo Zi said to Lu Yang Wen Jun, “Suppose there is a man here who has abundant sheep, cattle, and pigs. The chef slaughters and seasons them, providing more food than he can consume. Yet, seeing someone making cakes, he secretly steals them, saying, ‘Leave me some food.’ Is he truly lacking in food, or does he suffer from kleptomania?” Lu Yang Wen Jun replied, “He certainly suffers from kleptomania.” Master Mo Zi said, “The lands within the four borders of Chu are vast and desolate, more than can be reclaimed; its forests and lakes number in the thousands, more than can be counted. Yet, seeing the towns between Song and Zheng, he goes to steal them. How is this different from the man who steals cakes?” Lu Yang Wen Jun replied, “It is exactly the same; he truly suffers from kleptomania.”
On the Absurdity of Praying with Closed Eyes
Master Mo Zi said, “Ji Sun Shao and Meng Bo Chang governed the state of Lu together. Unable to trust each other, they prayed at the Cong Shrine, saying, ‘May the spirits make us harmonious.’ This is like praying at the shrine with one’s eyes covered, saying, ‘May the spirits allow me to see.’ Is this not absurd!”
On Loving Bravery vs. Hating Bravery
Master Mo Zi said to Luo Hua Li, “I hear you love bravery.” Luo Hua Li replied, “Yes. Whenever I hear of a brave man in my village, I will certainly go and kill him.” Master Mo Zi said, “No one in the world does not wish to associate with what they love and distance themselves from what they hate. Now, hearing of a brave man, you go and kill him. This is not loving bravery; it is hating bravery.”
Note
This dialogue chapter collects Mozi’s debates with disciples and opponents. It defends universal love against egoism, condemns offensive wars, prioritizes righteousness over wealth, and refutes conservative Confucian views with vivid analogies.
Geng Zhu Zi (耕柱子):
A disciple of Mo Zi. This chapter highlights Mo Zi’s pedagogical approach, showing that he was strict with his most capable students because he believed they had the highest potential.
Wu Ma Zi (巫马子):
A frequent interlocutor and philosophical opponent of Mo Zi in this chapter. He advocates for extreme egoism and graded love based on proximity, serving as a perfect foil for Mo Zi’s doctrine of universal love.
Gao Shi Zi (高石子):
A disciple of Mo Zi who famously resigned from a high-paying ministerial position in the state of Wei because his advice was ignored by the ruler. Mo Zi praises him for prioritizing righteousness over wealth.
Ye Gong Zi Gao (叶公子高) & Confucius (仲尼):
Ye Gong Zi Gao asks Confucius about governance. Mo Zi criticizes Confucius’ answer (“make the distant approach and renew old relationships”) as a mere platitude that fails to provide actionable methodology.
Lu Yang Wen Jun (鲁阳文君):
A ruler of the state of Chu. Mo Zi uses the analogy of “kleptomania” to expose the hypocrisy of a state that possesses vast, uncultivated lands but still wages aggressive wars to steal smaller states’ territories.
Zhou Gong Dan (周公旦):
The Duke of Zhou, a legendary regent in ancient China. Mo Zi cites him as a historical example of someone who was called “mad” by his contemporaries for his principled political withdrawals, but whose moral integrity was vindicated by history.
Utilitarian Pragmatism vs. Traditional Ritual:
Mo Zi redefines “treasure.” While feudal lords prized jade and bronze tripods (like the Nine Tripods cast by Yu the Great), Mo Zi argues that true value lies solely in practical utility. “Righteousness” is the ultimate treasure because it tangibly enriches the state and secures peace.
Mohist Epistemology of Action:
Mo Zi insists on the alignment of intention and action. He uses the analogy of a fire – one person bringing water and another bringing wood – to prove that moral judgment can and should be made based on intentions, even before the final outcome is realized.
Critique of Confucian Conservatism:
Mo Zi challenges the Confucian ideal of “transmitting but not creating” (述而不作). He advocates for a dual approach: preserving the good of the past while actively creating new good in the present to continually improve society.
Anti-War Philosophy (Non-Aggression):
The chapter contains vivid analogies condemning offensive warfare. The comparison of large-scale military campaigns to “a child pretending to be a horse” brilliantly illustrates how war is a mutually destructive endeavor that exhausts the agricultural and economic foundations of both the aggressor and the defender.
The Nine Tripods (九鼎):
Cast by Yu the Great, these bronze vessels symbolized the legitimate mandate to rule over China. Mo Zi uses their mythical prophecy (foretold by spirits) to prove that divine wisdom surpasses human sagacity.
He Shi Bi (和氏璧) & Pearl of Marquis Sui (隋侯珠):
Famous legendary treasures of ancient China. Mo Zi uses them as the ultimate examples of aesthetically or politically valued objects that fail the Mohist test of utilitarian benefit.
Kleptomania (窃疾):
Mo Zi’s brilliant rhetorical trap for Lu Yang Wen Jun. By comparing imperial expansion to a man stealing cakes despite having a banquet, Mo Zi forces the ruler to condemn his own nation’s foreign policy as a psychological illness.
子墨子怒耕柱子。耕柱子曰：“我毋俞于人乎？”子墨子曰：“我将上大行，驾骥与羊，子将谁驱？”耕柱子曰：“将驱骥也。”子墨子曰：“何故驱骥也？”耕柱子曰：“骥足以责。”子墨子曰：“我亦以子为足以责。”
巫马子谓子墨子曰：“鬼神孰与圣人明智？”子墨子曰：“鬼神之明智于圣人，犹聪耳明目之与聋瞽也。昔者夏后开使蜚廉折金于山川，而陶铸之于昆吾；是使翁难卜于白若之龟，曰：鼎成四足而方，不炊而自烹，不举而自臧，不迁而自行。以祭于昆吾之虚，上乡！卜人言兆之由曰：飨矣！逢逢白云，一南一北，一西一东，九鼎既成，迁于二国。夏后氏失之，殷人受之。殷人失之，周人受之。夏后、殷、周之相受也，数百岁矣。使圣人聚其良臣，与其桀相而谋，岂能智数百岁之后哉？而鬼神智之。是故曰，鬼神之明智于圣人也，犹聪耳明目之与聋瞽也。”
治徒娱、县子硕问于子墨子曰：“为义孰为大务？”子墨子曰：“譬若筑墙然，能筑者筑，能实壤者实壤，能欣者欣，然后墙成也。为义犹是也，能谈辩者谈辩，能说书者说书，能从事者从事，然后义事成也。”
巫马子谓子墨子曰：“子兼爱天下，未云利也；我不爱天下，未云贼也。功皆未至，子何独自是而非我哉？”子墨子曰：“今有燎者于此，一人奉水将灌之，一人掺火将益之，功皆未至，子何贵于二人？”巫马子曰：“我是彼奉水者之意，而非夫掺火者之意。”子墨子曰：“吾亦是吾意，而非子之意也。”
子墨子游荆耕柱子于楚。二三子过之。食之三升，客之不厚。二三子复于子墨子曰：“耕柱子处楚无益矣！二三子过之，食之三升，客之不厚。”子墨子曰：“未可智也。”毋几何而遗十金于子墨子，曰：“后生不敢死，有十金于此，愿夫子之用也。”子墨子曰：“果未可智也。”
巫马子谓子墨子曰：“子之为义也，人不见而耶，鬼而不见而富，而子为之，有狂疾。”子墨子曰：“今使子有二臣于此，其一人者见子从事，不见子则不从事；其一人者见子亦从事，不见子亦从事，子谁贵于此二人？”巫马子曰：“我贵其见我亦从事，不见我亦从事者。”子墨子曰：“然则是子亦贵有狂疾也。”
子夏之徒问于子墨子曰：“君子有斗乎？”子墨子曰：“君子无斗。”子夏之徒曰：“狗豨犹有斗，恶有士而无斗矣？”子墨子曰：“伤矣哉！言则称于汤文，行则譬于狗豨，伤矣哉！”
巫马子谓子墨子曰：“舍今之人而誉先王，是誉槁骨也。譬若匠人然，智槁木也，而不智生木。”子墨子曰：“天下之所以生者，以先王之道教也。今誉先王，是誉天下之所以生也。可誉而不誉，非仁也。”
子墨子曰：“和氏之璧、隋侯之珠、三棘六异，此诸侯之所谓良宝也。可以富国家，众人民，治刑政，安社稷乎？曰：不可。所谓贵良宝者，为其可以利也。而和氏之璧、隋侯之珠、三棘六异，不可以利人，是非天下之良宝也。今用义为政于国家，人民必众，刑政必治，社稷必安。所为贵良宝者，可以利民也，而义可以利人，故曰：义，天下之良宝也。”
叶公子高问政于仲尼曰：“善为政者若之何？”仲尼对曰：“善为政者，远者近之，而旧者新之。”子墨子闻之曰：“叶公子高未得其问也，仲尼亦未得其所以对也。叶公子高岂不知善为政者之远者近也，而旧者新是哉？问所以为之若之何也。不以人之所不智告人，以所智告之，故叶公子高未得其问也，仲尼亦未得其所以对也。”
子墨子谓鲁阳文君曰：“大国之攻小国，譬犹童子之为马也。童子之为马，足用而劳。今大国之攻小国也，攻者，农夫不得耕，妇人不得织，以守为事；攻人者，亦农夫不得耕，妇人不得织，以攻为事。故大国之攻小国也，譬犹童子之为马也。”
子墨子曰：“言足以复行者，常之；不足以举行者，勿常。不足以举行而常之，是荡口也。”
子墨子使管黔敖游高石子于卫，卫君致禄甚厚，设之于卿。高石子三朝必尽言，而言无行者。去而之齐，见子墨子曰：“卫君以夫子之故，致禄甚厚，设我于卿，石三朝必尽言，而言无行，是以去之也。卫君无乃以石为狂乎？”子墨子曰：“去之苟道，受狂何伤！古者周公旦非关叔，辞三公，东处于商盖，人皆谓之狂，后世称其德，扬其名，至今不息。且翟闻之：‘为义非避毁就誉。’去之苟道，受狂何伤！”高石子曰：“石去之，焉敢不道也！昔者夫子有言曰：‘天下无道，仁士不处厚焉。’今卫君无道，而贪其禄爵，则是我为苟陷人长也。”子墨子说，而召子禽子曰：“姑听此乎！夫倍义而乡禄者，我常闻之矣；倍禄而乡义者，于高石子焉见之也。”
子墨子曰：“世俗之君子，贫而谓之富则怒，无义而谓之有义则喜。岂不悖哉！”
公孟子曰：“先人有，则三而已矣。”子墨子曰：“孰先人而曰有，则三而已矣？子未智人之先有后生。”
有反子墨子而反者，“我岂有罪哉？吾反后。”子墨子曰：“是犹三军北，失后之人求赏也。”
公孟子曰：“君子不作，术而已。”子墨子曰：“不然。人之其不君子者，古之善者不诛，今也善者不作。其次不君子者，古之善者不遂，己有善则作之，欲善之自己出也。今诛而不作，是无所异于不好遂而作者矣。吾以为古之善者则述之，今之善者则作之，欲善之益多也。”
巫马子谓子墨子曰：“我与子异，我不能兼爱。我爱邹人于越人，爱鲁人于邹人，爱我乡人于鲁人，爱我家人于乡人，爱我亲于我家人，爱我身于吾亲，以为近我也。击我则疾，击彼则不疾于我，我何故疾者之不拂，而不疾者之拂？故有我有杀彼以我，无杀我以利。”子墨子曰：“子之义将匿邪，意将以告人乎？”巫马子曰：“我何故匿我义？吾将以告人。”子墨子曰：“然则一人说子，一人欲杀子以利己；十人说子，十人欲杀子以利己；天下说子，天下欲杀子以利己。一人不说子，一人欲杀子，以子为施不祥言者也；十人不说子，十人欲杀子，以子为施不祥言者也；天下不说子，天下欲杀子，以子为施不祥言者也。说子亦欲杀子，不说子亦欲杀子，是所谓经者口也，杀常之身者也。”子墨子曰：“子之言恶利也？若无所利而不言，是荡口也。”
子墨子谓鲁阳文君曰：“今有一人于此，羊牛犓豢，维人但割而和之，食之不可胜食也，见人之作饼，则还然窃之，曰：‘舍余食。’不知日月安不足乎？其有窃疾乎？”鲁阳文君曰：“有窃疾也。”子墨子曰：“楚四竟之田，旷芜而不可胜辟，呼灵数千，不可胜，见宋、郑之闲邑，则还然窃之，此与彼异乎？”鲁阳文君曰：“是犹彼也，实有窃疾也。”
子墨子曰：“季孙绍与孟伯常治鲁国之政，不能相信，而祝于丛社曰：‘苟使我和。’是犹弇其目而祝于丛社也，‘若使我皆视。’岂不缪哉！”
子墨子谓骆滑氂曰：“吾闻子好勇。”骆滑氂曰：“然。我闻其乡有勇士焉，吾必从而杀之。”子墨子曰：“天下莫不欲与其所好，度其所恶。今子闻其乡有勇士焉，必从而杀之，是非好勇也，是恶勇也。”
Leave a Reply