Someone presented an elixir of immortality to the King of Chu. The palace usher carried the medicine inside. A royal guard asked: “May this be eaten?” The usher replied: “Yes.” The guard then snatched the medicine and swallowed it.
Enraged, the king ordered the guard to be executed. The guard sent someone to plead his case: “I asked the usher, who said it was edible, so I took it. I am innocent, and the fault lies with the usher. Besides, the guest offered an elixir of immortality. If I die after taking it, the medicine is clearly fake, which means the guest deceived Your Majesty. To kill an innocent man while exposing the deception would be unwise. It is better to spare me.” The king finally spared his life.
Note
This text is excerpted from Han Feizi, Chapter: The Forest of Persuasions (Part I).
Superstitious beliefs are often full of logical flaws. With sharp thinking and reasonable argument, people can break a predicament and expose falsehoods.
Late Warring States Legalist philosopher. He records this story to demonstrate logical wit and rhetorical skills.
King of Chu
Ruler of the State of Chu, who believed in the legend of immortality elixirs.
Palace usher
A servant in charge of receiving guests and delivering items inside the palace.
Royal guard
A soldier serving in the royal court, quick-witted and skilled at logical argument.
Anonymous presenter
A person who claimed to offer the immortality medicine.
Elixir of Immortality
The pursuit of immortality was popular among ancient nobles and monarchs. Many so-called magic medicines were actually frauds.
Ambiguity in Words
The guard seized the ambiguous meaning of the phrase “may be eaten” to defend himself, a typical skill in ancient debates.
Logical Paradox
The “immortality medicine” creates a contradiction: if the taker is killed, the medicine proves useless and deceptive.
Royal Power and Remonstrance
Ordinary people could sometimes reverse a dangerous situation through reasonable persuasion even when facing the ruler’s anger.
有献不死之药于荆王者，谒者操之以入。中射之士问曰：”可食乎？”曰：”可。”因夺而食之。王大怒，使人杀中射之士。中射之士使人说王曰：”臣问谒者，曰’可食’，臣故食之，是臣无罪，而罪在谒者也。且客献不死之药，臣食之而王杀臣，是死药也，是客欺王也。夫杀无罪之臣，而明人之欺王也，不如释臣。”王乃不杀。
Leave a Reply