Mencius said:
“Ran Qiu served as steward to the powerful Ji family in Lu.
Not only did he fail to help them improve their virtue, but he actually doubled their grain taxes.”
“When Confucius heard this, he was furious and declared:
‘Ran Qiu is no longer my disciple! You young men may beat your drums and openly denounce him!’
From this we can see:
If a ruler refuses to practice benevolent governance yet seeks only to enrich the state,
then anyone who helps him accumulate wealth – like Ran Qiu – is rejected by Confucius.
And what of those who go even further – those who wage war on the ruler’s behalf?
When states fight over territory, corpses fill the fields;
when they battle for cities, the streets run with blood.
This is nothing less than using land as an excuse to devour human flesh –
a crime so heinous that death itself is too light a punishment!
Those most skilled in warfare should receive the harshest penalty;
next are the diplomats who incite alliances and conflicts among feudal lords;
and third are those who clear wild lands and exploit territory solely to increase tax revenue.”
孟子曰：「求也為季氏宰，無能改於其德，而賦粟倍他日。孔子曰：『求非我徒也，小子鳴鼓而攻之可也。』由此觀之，君不行仁政而富之，皆棄於孔子者也。況於為之強戰？爭地以戰，殺人盈野；爭城以戰，殺人盈城。此所謂率土地而食人肉，罪不容於死。故善戰者服上刑，連諸侯者次之，辟草萊、任土地者次之。」
Note
This passage from Mencius: Li Lou I delivers a scathing moral indictment of militarism, economic exploitation, and political pragmatism – affirming the Confucian principle that benevolent governance and human life must always outweigh territorial gain or state wealth.
Ran Qiu as a cautionary tale
Ran Qiu, once a top disciple of Confucius, became an administrator for the tyrannical Ji clan. His technical competence in taxation was condemned not for inefficiency, but for serving injustice. Confucius’s rebuke – “He is no longer my disciple!” – shows that moral alignment trumps talent in Confucian ethics.
Wealth without benevolence is theft
In an age obsessed with “enriching the state and strengthening the military,” Mencius insists: economic growth without ethical foundations is merely organized plunder.
This directly challenges Legalist policies (e.g., Shang Yang’s land reforms in Qin state) that prioritized state revenue over people’s welfare.
“Feeding on human flesh”: A moral condemnation of war
The phrase “leading land to eat human flesh” is one of the most powerful anti-war statements in world literature. It reframes war not as glory, but as institutionalized cannibalism – where land, meant to sustain life, becomes a pretext for mass killing.
“Leading land to devour people” vs. “Leading beasts to devour people”
In this passage above, Mencius uses the metaphor to criticize the annexation wars and tyrannical rule of the Warring States period. It implies that rulers waged wars to expand their territories, causing massive casualties among the people, equating territorial expansion directly with “devouring human flesh” and exposing its bloody nature.
This people-oriented philosophy of Mencius finds expression in numerous other chapters, such as the “leading beasts to devour people” and killing people by policy.
From above linked post, we can find that Mencius claimed that when rulers indulged in extravagance and excess, became addicted to wine and meat, or even used grain to feed robust horses while the people suffered from hunger, cold, and starvation, their governance was akin to “leading beasts to devour people” – that is, leading beasts (metaphorically referring to the people under tyranny) to prey on their own kind. Through this metaphor, Mencius criticized rulers for failing to fulfill their moral duty as “parents of the people” and highlighted how their tyrannical policies led to the collapse of social order, even extending to the civilizational crisis of “people devouring one another.”
A radical hierarchy of crimes
Mencius inverts conventional values:
- Top criminals: “skilled warriors” (celebrated heroes);
- Second: alliance-makers (diplomatic strategists like Su Qin, Zhang Yi);
- Third: agricultural developers who enable over-taxation.
Punishment is measured not by intent, but by scale of human suffering caused.
Historical Legacy: From Confucius to late imperial critics
- Confucius had already condemned human sacrifice (“The first to make burial figurines (burial effigies) – may his line end!“).
- Mencius radicalized this into a full theory of just governance.
- Later thinkers like Huang Zongxi (17th c.) would echo his view that rulers who treat the people as expendable commit the ultimate betrayal.
Modern Relevance: Challenging GDP Fetishism and Militarism
Today’s obsession with economic growth at the cost of lives (e.g., unsafe labor, environmental degradation) or geopolitical rivalry mirrors the “enrich without benevolence” mindset.
Mencius reminds us: any system that sacrifices human dignity for land, profit, or power is morally bankrupt.
In sum, this passage reveals Confucianism not as passive morality, but as a fierce defense of human life against the machinery of state violence and greed.
Leave a Reply