It is not that I, Han Fei, find speaking difficult in itself. The true difficulty lies in this:
If my words are smooth‑flowing, elegant and elaborate, I am deemed flashy yet insubstantial.
If I am sincere, respectful, upright and prudent, I am considered clumsy and illogical.
If I speak extensively with numerous citations and analogies, I am regarded as empty and useless.
If my arguments are concise, direct and unadorned, I am seen as harsh and unpersuasive.
If I speak sharply to those close to the ruler and discern human nature, I am accused of slander and disrespect.
If my discourse is broad‑ranging, profound and unfathomable, I is labeled boastful and impractical.
If I discuss trivial daily matters with detailed examples, I am judged shallow.
If I speak about current affairs without opposing the ruler, I am suspected of craving survival and flattering superiors.
If I depart from common customs and sound eccentric, I am called absurd.
If I am quick‑witted and eloquent with ornate language, I am taken for a pretentious chronicler.
If I abandon literary polish and speak plainly and sincerely, I am deemed vulgar.
If I often quote The Book of Songs and The Book of Documents, following ancient ways, I is mocked as merely memorizing classics.
These are the reasons why I find speaking difficult and face great distress.
Note
This passage reveals the tragic reality of ancient court politics: loyal advice is often misjudged, and all forms of speech may become grounds for blame, making sincere persuasion extremely dangerous.
Han Fei
The last great Legalist thinker of the Warring States Period. This passage is from his famous essay On the Difficulties of Persuasion (Shuonan), in which he analyzes the dangers and paradoxes of persuading autocratic rulers.
Persuasion Politics in Warring States Period
Wandering scholars, notably Su Qin and Zhang Yi, traveled between states to advise kings. Yet no matter what rhetorical style they used, they risked misunderstanding, suspicion or punishment by autocratic rulers. This is known as the core paradox of political persuasion.
Rhetorical Dilemma
Legalists believed rulers were self‑interested, emotional and arbitrary. Advisors could easily be slandered no matter how loyal they were.
Han Fei lists nine rhetorical styles and their negative interpretations, showing that truth and logic matter less than ruler’s subjective judgment. Any speaking style can be twisted into a fault.
Classic Texts
*The Book of Songs* and *The Book of Documents* were core Confucian classics. Quoting them could be seen as either wise tradition or rigid memorization, depending on the ruler’s mood.
臣非非难言也，所以难言者：言顺比滑泽，洋洋纚纚然，则见以 为华而不实。敦祗恭厚，鲠固慎完，则见以为掘而不伦。多言繁称， 连类比物，则见以为虚而无用。捴微说约，径省而不饰，则见以为刿 而不辩。激急亲近，探知人情，则见以为谮而不让。闳大广博，妙远不测，则见以为夸而无用。家计小谈，以具数言，则见以为陋。言而近世，辞不悖逆，则见以为贪生而谀上。言而远俗，诡躁人间，则见以为诞。捷敏辩给，繁于文采，则见以为史。殊释文学，以质信言，则见以为鄙。时称诗书，道法往古，则见以为诵。此臣非之所以难言而重患也。
Leave a Reply