Xu Qu asked Tian Jiu, “I have heard that wise men need not begin in low posts before meeting their ruler, and sages need not first display merit before approaching those above. Yangcheng Yiqu was a brilliant general, yet he was placed in the post of Mao Bo. Gongsun Danhui was a sage-like minister, yet he had to pass through the examinations of the local offices. Why was this?”
Tian Jiu replied, “There is no other reason. It is because the ruler has standards and those above have methods of examination. Have you not heard that when Chu appointed Song Gu as general, it lost control of its administration, and when Wei appointed Feng Li as minister, it brought about the ruin of its state? Those two rulers were driven by reputation and speech and dazzled by disputation. They did not test their men in minor posts, nor did they subject them to examination in local offices. Hence they suffered the calamities of failed administration and ruined states. From this it follows that without trial in minor posts and scrutiny in local offices, how can a wise ruler provide for proper safeguards?”
Tangxi Gong said to Han Fei, “I have heard that observing ritual and yielding to others is a way of preserving oneself, and cultivating conduct while restraining one’s wisdom is a way of succeeding. Now, sir, you establish laws and methods and set up institutions. I fear that this endangers your person and threatens your life. How can this be shown? I have heard you say, ‘Chu did not employ Wu Qi, and so its territory was reduced and its administration fell into disorder. Qin implemented the laws of Shang Jun and thereby became rich and strong. The words of these two men proved correct, yet Wu Qi was dismembered and Shang Jun was torn apart by chariots, because they did not meet a fitting age or an enlightened ruler.’ One cannot be certain of meeting such a ruler, nor can one drive away disaster. To abandon the way of self-preservation and success and to indulge in dangerous conduct is, in my humble opinion, not advisable for you.”
Han Fei said, “I understand what you mean, sir. The handle by which the world is governed and the standard by which the common people are ordered are indeed difficult to manage. Nevertheless, the reason I set aside the teachings of the former kings and carry out what a humble minister like me advocates is that I believe establishing laws and methods and setting up institutions is the way to benefit the common people and make life easier for the masses. Therefore, not fearing the disasters brought by disordered rulers and benighted superiors, I am determined to use these means to provide resources and advantages for the people. This is the conduct of benevolence and wisdom. To fear the disasters caused by disordered rulers and benighted superiors, to avoid the danger of death, to appear wise while ignoring the people’s benefit and caring only for one’s own safety, is the conduct of greed and baseness. I cannot bear to practice greed and baseness, nor dare I injure the conduct of benevolence and wisdom. The former king may have had the intention of treating me as a favored minister, yet in fact he greatly harmed me.”
Note
This Han Feizi ‑ Chapter 42 covers two dialogues. It stresses testing officials in low‑level posts, and records Han Fei’s stance: reformers should pursue public benefit via laws despite personal peril, rejecting self‑preserving cowardice.
Testing officials in low posts:
Han Fei insists that officials should not be appointed only because of reputation or eloquence. They must first be tested in minor offices and local administration.
Mao Bo and Zhou Bu:
These refer to low-ranking or local administrative posts. Han Fei uses them to show that capable men should pass practical examinations before receiving high office.
Song Gu and Feng Li:
Little-known figures cited here as examples of men appointed on the basis of reputation rather than tested ability, leading to administrative failure.
Tangxi Gong:
A figure who appears in the Han Feizi as an interlocutor warning Han Fei about the dangers of political reform.
Wu Qi:
A famous Warring States reformer and general. He strengthened Chu but was killed by aristocratic opponents after the death of his patron.
Shang Yang / Shang Jun:
Dismemberment and chariot tearing:
These were severe punishments in early China. Han Fei uses them to show that even successful reformers could suffer violent deaths when they lacked a secure political position.
Former kings’ teachings:
Confucians often appealed to the moral teachings of ancient sage-kings. Han Fei argues that such teachings are not enough for governing a complex state.
Benevolence and wisdom:
Han Fei redefines moral courage. For him, true benevolence is not avoiding danger, but creating laws that benefit the people.
Legalist view of risk:
Reformers may face personal danger, but Han Fei believes abandoning reform out of fear is morally inferior to pursuing public benefit.
问田第四十二
徐渠问田鸠曰：“臣闻智士不袭下而遇君，圣人不见功而接上。令阳城义渠，明将也，而措于毛伯；公孙亶回，圣相也，而关于州部，何哉？”田鸠曰：“此无他故异物，主有度、上有术之故也。且足下独不闻楚将宋觚而失其政，魏相冯离而亡其国？二君者驱于声词，眩乎辩说，不试于毛伯，不关乎州部，故有失政亡国之患。由是观之，夫无毛伯之试，州部之关，岂明主之备哉！”
堂谿公谓韩子曰：“臣闻服礼辞让，全之术也；修行退智，遂之道也。今先生立法术，设度数，臣窃以为危于身而殆于躯。何以效之？所闻先生术曰：‘楚不用吴起而削乱，秦行商君而富强。二子之言已当矣，然而吴起支解而商君车裂者，不逢世遇主之患也。’逢遇不可必也，患祸不可斥也。夫舍乎全遂之道而肆乎危殆之行，窃为先生无取焉。”韩子曰：“明先生之言矣。夫治天下之柄，齐民萌之度，甚未易处也。然所以废先王之教，而行贱臣之所取者，窃以为立法术，设度数，所以利民萌便众庶之道也。故不惮乱主暗上之患祸，而必思以齐民萌之资利者，仁智之行也。惮乱主暗上之患祸，而避乎死亡之害，知明而不见民萌之资夫科身者，贪鄙之为也。臣不忍向贪鄙之为，不敢伤仁智之行。先王有幸臣之意，然有大伤臣之实。”
Leave a Reply