Explanation 3
Zi Zhi served as chancellor of Yan and became powerful and autocratic. Su Dai was sent as an envoy from Qi to Yan. The king of Yan asked him, “What sort of ruler is the king of Qi?” Su Dai replied, “He will certainly not become a hegemon.” The king of Yan asked, “Why?” Su Dai said, “When Duke Huan of Qi became hegemon, he entrusted domestic affairs to Bao Shu and foreign affairs to Guan Zhong, while he himself let his hair hang loose, attended by women, and roamed the markets daily. Now the king of Qi does not trust his great ministers.” Hearing this, the king of Yan placed even greater trust in Zi Zhi. When Zi Zhi heard of it, he sent Su Dai one hundred yi of gold and placed himself at Su Dai’s disposal.
Another version says: Su Dai was sent from Qi to Yan. Seeing that he could not benefit Zi Zhi, he knew he would return without accomplishing his mission and without receiving gifts from Yan. So when he saw the king of Yan, he praised the king of Qi. The king of Yan asked, “Is the king of Qi really so worthy? Will he surely become king?” Su Dai said, “He will not have time to save himself from ruin – how could he become king?” The king asked, “Why?” Su Dai said, “He does not distribute power evenly among those he favors.” The king asked, “Why will he perish?” Su Dai said, “In the past, Duke Huan of Qi favored Guan Zhong, honored him as Second Father, entrusted him with domestic administration and foreign decisions, and committed the whole state to him. Thus he rectified the realm and nine times assembled the feudal lords. Now the king of Qi does not distribute power evenly among those he favors, so I know he will perish.” The king of Yan said, “I now appoint Zi Zhi, though the world has not yet heard of it?” The next day, he held court and entrusted affairs to Zi Zhi.
Pan Shou said to the king of Yan, “It would be better for Your Majesty to yield the state to Zi Zhi. The reason people call Yao worthy is that he yielded the realm to Xu You; Xu You would certainly not accept, so Yao gained the name of yielding to Xu You without actually losing the realm. Now if Your Majesty yields the state to Zi Zhi, Zi Zhi will certainly not accept, and Your Majesty will gain the name of yielding to Zi Zhi and walk the same path as Yao.” The king of Yan then committed the whole state to Zi Zhi, and Zi Zhi’s power greatly increased.
Another version says: Pan Shou was a recluse. Yan sent envoys to invite him. Pan Shou saw the king of Yan and said, “I fear that Zi Zhi will end up like Yi.” The king asked, “What Yi?” Pan Shou replied, “In ancient times, when Yu died, he intended to transmit the realm to Yi, but the followers of Qi attacked Yi together and set up Qi. Now Your Majesty trusts and favors Zi Zhi and intends to transmit the state to him, yet all those who hold seals are men of the crown prince, and not a single man of Zi Zhi is at court. If Your Majesty should unfortunately die and abandon your ministers, Zi Zhi will suffer the fate of Yi.” The king then collected the officials’ seals and handed over all appointments of three hundred shi and above to Zi Zhi, and Zi Zhi’s power greatly increased.
Another version says: The king of Yan wished to transmit the state to Zi Zhi and asked Pan Shou. Pan Shou replied, “Yu favored Yi and entrusted the realm to him, yet he also appointed Qi’s men as officials. When he grew old, he judged Qi unfit to bear the realm, so he transmitted it to Yi, but the real power remained entirely with Qi. Later Qi and his partisans attacked Yi and seized the realm. Thus Yu transmitted the realm to Yi in name, but in effect allowed Qi to take it for himself. That Yu fell short of Yao and Shun is clear. Now Your Majesty wishes to transmit the state to Zi Zhi, yet there is no official who is not a man of the crown prince. This is to transmit it in name while in effect allowing the crown prince to take it for himself.” The king then collected the seals and handed over all appointments of three hundred shi and above to Zi Zhi, and Zi Zhi’s power thereby increased.
Fang Wuzi said, “I have heard that according to ancient ritual, one does not share a carriage with those who wear the same dress, nor share a household with those of the same clan. How much more should a ruler not lend out his authority and hand over his power to others!”
Wu Zhang said to King Xuan of Han, “A ruler must not pretend to love someone, for one day he will find he cannot hate him; nor must he pretend to hate someone, for one day he will find he cannot love him. Once signs of pretended love or hatred appear, flatterers will exploit them to slander or praise. Even an enlightened ruler cannot regain control, much less if he has sincerely lent power to another!”
The king of Zhao was roaming in his garden. His attendants gave a rabbit to a tiger, which stopped eating and stared with round, fierce eyes. The king said, “How hateful are the eyes of a tiger!” His attendants said, “The eyes of Lord Pingyang are even more hateful than these. To see a tiger like this may bring no harm, but to see Lord Pingyang’s eyes like this means certain death.” The next day, Lord Pingyang heard of it and sent men to kill the speaker, yet the king did not punish him.
The ruler of Wei went to pay court to Zhou. The Zhou usher asked his name, and he replied, “The feudal lord Bi Jiang.” The usher rejected him, saying, “A feudal lord may not share the same name as the Son of Heaven.” The ruler of Wei then changed his name to “Hui,” and only then was he admitted. When Confucius heard of it, he said, “How far-reaching are these prohibitions against encroachment! Even an empty name must not be lent to others, much less actual power.”
Note
This Han Feizi‑Chapter 35.8 Legalist collection of anecdotes warns rulers against lending real authority. It cautions against revealing simulated likes‑dislikes, showing how misplaced trust enables ministers to seize political power.
Han Feizi / Legalism:
Han Fei argues that a ruler must keep authority undivided. Ministers may administer, but the ruler must never surrender the power to reward, punish, appoint, or decide life and death.
Zi Zhi and the king of Yan:
Zi Zhi was a powerful chancellor of Yan. The king’s excessive trust in him eventually led to a crisis in Yan, showing Han Fei’s warning that yielding power to a minister is dangerous.
Su Dai:
A strategist and envoy of the Warring States period. Here he manipulates the king of Yan by comparing him with Duke Huan of Qi, thereby increasing Zi Zhi’s influence.
Duke Huan of Qi, Guan Zhong, Bao Shu:
Duke Huan was the first hegemon of the Spring and Autumn period. Guan Zhong was his able chancellor; Bao Shu helped bring Guan Zhong to power. Han Fei uses this example to discuss delegation and trust.
“Yielding the state”:
A classical political motif. Yao is said to have offered the throne to Xu You, who refused. Han Fei treats such “yielding” as politically dangerous if it gives a minister real authority.
Yu, Yi, and Qi:
Yu the Great was a legendary founder-king. After his death, his designated successor Yi (Hou Yi) was overthrown by Yu’s son Qi. Han Fei uses this to show that nominal succession means little without real control of officials and power.
Seals and three hundred shi:
Official seals symbolized appointment and authority. “Three hundred shi” refers to a salary grade; handing over these appointments meant handing over real bureaucratic power.
Fang Wuzi:
A figure cited by Han Fei to argue that a ruler should not share authority, just as ancient ritual kept certain social boundaries.
Wu Zhang and King Xuan of Han:
Wu Zhang warns that rulers should not pretend love or hatred, because flatterers will exploit such signals. Once a ruler shows fixed favor or dislike, he loses flexibility.
Lord Pingyang:
A powerful noble of Zhao. The story shows how a minister’s private power can become more feared than a tiger, and how the ruler fails to punish him.
The ruler of Wei and the Zhou usher:
The Zhou court still claimed ritual superiority. The name “Bi Jiang” was rejected because it resembled the Son of Heaven’s title. Confucius’s comment turns this into a Legalist point: if even a name must not be lent, how much less should real power be lent.
The founder of Confucianism. Han Fei often cites him, sometimes repurposing his words to support Legalist arguments about authority and names.
说三
子之相燕，贵而主断。苏代为齐使燕，王问之曰：“齐王亦何如主也？”对曰：“必不霸矣。”燕王曰：“何也？”对曰：“昔桓公之霸也，内事属鲍叔，外事属管仲，桓公被发而御妇人，日游于市。今齐王不信其大臣。”于是燕王因益大信子之。子之闻之，使人遗苏代金百镒，而听其所使。
一曰：苏代为齐使燕，见无益子之，则必不得事而还，贡赐又不出，于是见燕王，乃誉齐王。燕王曰：“齐王何若是之贤也？则将必王乎？”苏代曰：“救亡不暇，安得王哉？”燕王曰：“何也？”曰：“其任所爱不均。”燕王曰：“其亡何也？”曰：“昔者齐桓公爱管仲，置以为仲父，内事理焉，外事断焉，举国而归之，故一匡天下，九合诸侯。今齐任所爱不均，是以知其亡也。”燕王曰：“今吾任子之，天下未之闻也？”于是明日张朝而听子之。
潘寿谓燕王曰：“王不如以国让子之。人所以谓尧贤者，以其让天下于许由，许由必不受也，则是尧有让许由之名而实不失天下也。今王以国让子之，子之必不受也，则是王有让子之之名而与尧同行也。”于是燕王因举国而属之，子之大重。
一曰：潘寿，隐者。燕使人聘之。潘寿见燕王曰：“臣恐子之之如益也。”王曰：“何益哉？对曰：“古者禹死，将传天下于益，启之人因相与攻益而立启。今王信爱子之，将传国子之，太子之人尽怀印，为子之之人无一人在朝廷者。王不幸弃群臣，则子之亦益也。”王因收吏玺，自三百石以上皆效之子之，子之大重。夫人主之所以镜照者，诸侯之士徒也，今诸侯之士徒皆私门之党也。人主之所以自浅娋者，岩穴之士徒也，今岩穴之士徒皆私门之舍人也。是何也？夺褫之资在子之也。故吴章曰：“人主不佯僧爱人。佯爱人，不得复憎也；佯憎人，不得复爱也。”
一曰：燕王欲传国于子之也，问之潘寿，对曰：“禹爱益而任天下于益，已而以启人为吏。及老，而以启为不足任天下，故传天下于益，而势重尽在启也。已而启与友党攻益而夺之天下，是禹名传天下子益，而实令启自取之也。此禹之不及尧、舜明矣。今王欲传之子之，而吏无非太子之人者也，是名传之而实令太于自取之也。”燕王乃收玺，自三百石以上皆效之子之，子之遂重。
方吾子曰：“吾闻之古礼：行不与同服者同车，不与同族者共家，而况君人者乃借其权而外其势乎！“
吴章谓韩宣王曰：“人主不可佯爱人，一日不可复憎万；不可以佯憎人，一日不可复爱也。故佯憎佯爱之征见，则谀者因资而毁誉之。虽有明主，不能复收，而况于以诚借人也！”
赵天游于圃中，左右以兔与虎而辍，盻然环其眼。王曰：“可恶哉，虎目也！”左右曰：“平阳君之目可恶过此。见此未有害也，见平阳君之目如此者，则必死矣。”其明日，平阳君闻之，使人杀言者，而王不诛也。
卫君入朝于周，周行人问其号，对曰：“诸侯辟疆。”周行人却之曰：“诸侯不得与天子同号。”卫君乃自更曰：“诸侯燬。”而后内之。什尼闻之曰：“远哉禁逼！虚名不以借人，况实事乎？”
Leave a Reply