Innate Evil of Human Nature,Law,Technique,and Position:Inquiring into the Essence of Han Fei’s Thinking

Xia Hai

Abstract:Han Fei was well known as a great thinker synthesizing different intellectual threads of the Legalist school in pre-imperial China.Centered on the idea of law,he created his own Legalist theory with rich content and a well-rounded structure,and laid the theoretical foundation for the traditional centralized feudal monarchy.Han Fei based his ideas on the assertion that human nature was inherently evil,his theories therefore mainly related to the interrelation and integration of law,administrative technique,and position.In Han Fei’s edif ice,law was paramount;administrative technique indicates the technical measures of governance;and position,the superior position of governing people.It should be noted that Han Fei’s government by law is basically diff erent from the modern rule-oflaw concept.Identifying their differences is helpful to China’s endeavor to build a better society based on law and order.

Keywords:Han Fei,government by law,government by technique,government by position

Han Fei 韩非 (ca.280—233 BCE) is one of the greatest ancient Chinese thinkers,noted for his brilliant efforts in syncretizing different threads of Legalist thought.He inherited the concept offa法 (law) as developed by Shang Yang 商鞅 (ca.390—338 BCE),shu术(administrative techniques or statecraft) formulated by Shen Buhai 申不害 (ca.385—337 BCE),andshi势 (position) elaborated upon by Shen Dao 慎到 (390—315 BCE).Based on the assertion that human nature was inherently evil,Han Fei built a Legalist edifice underpinned by the tri-unity offa,shu,andshi,withfaas the central idea.Han Fei’s intellectual reconstruction of Legalism prepared a theoretical cornerstone for the traditional Chinese centralized mode of power conf iguration.

A Common Human Nature:Love for Prof its and Dislike of Disadvantages[Refer to page 89 for Chinese.Similarly hereinaft er]

There have always been debates on human nature regardless of age,region,and nationality.Theories of human nature constitute the intellectual basis of political thinking.Different theories of human nature result in diff erent modes of governance.For example,those who believe in the innate good of human nature will emphasize the individual’s awakening and consciousness and aspire to create a social mode of government by virtue.Conversely,those who hold that human nature is inherently evil will lay stress on external regulations and constraints and strive for a social mode of government by law.

In theory,all thinkers of the pre-Qin period discussed the issue of human nature,hoping that their political ideas could be disseminated widely along with these discussions.Mencius was renowned for his unshakable belief in the innate goodness of human nature.He contended that humans were born with good nature,f iguratively saying,“The goodness of human nature is like the downward course of water.There is no human being lacking in the tendency to do good,just as there is no water lacking in the tendency to flow downward.”1Mencius 6A:2.The English translation of theMencius is based on Irene Bloom’s version,121,with some alterations.Contrary to Mencius,Xunzi stressed the innate evil of human nature,contending that,“People’s nature is bad.Their goodness is a matter of deliberate eff ort.”2“Human Nature Is Bad” [性恶],in Xunzi.The English translations of theXunzi in this article are based on Eric L.Hutton’s version,with some alterations.Because Han Fei had been tutored by Xunzi,he accepted his master’s assertion that human was inherently evil but renamed it with the idea that everyone experiences a “love for prof its(li利).” Han Fei’s rephrasing was as follows:

To love prof it and dislike injury is the tendency everybody has.3“Criticisms of the Ancients,Series Two” [难二],inHanfeizi.The English translations of theHanfeizi in this article are based on W.K.Liao’s version,with some alterations.

By nature,man has neither fur nor feather.If he wears no clothes at all,he cannot resist the cold.Above he does not belong to the heavens;below he is not attached to the earth.His stomach and intestines are what he takes as the roots of his life.Unless he eats,he cannot live.Therefore,he cannot avoid having an avaricious mind.(Hanfeizi,“Commentaries on Laozi’s Teachings” [解老])

Han Fei fully revealed the true face of human relationships by completely tearing aside the veil of tender feelings,relentlessly arguing that the relationships between father and son,husband and wife,sovereign and ministers,and among friends were all treated by “the calculating mind” (“Six Contrarieties” [六反]).Consequently,Xunzi’s theory concerning the innate evil of human nature was carried to its limits.Some scholars noted,“As regards the Chinese philosophical exploration of innate evil of human nature,it is generally held that Xunzi,a Confucian scholar,pioneered in the discussion and Han Fei,a Legalist thinker,carried it its limits.Thanks to Han Fei’s eff orts,the ancient Chinese theory on the innate evil of human nature was consummated.”4Cen Xian’an 岑贤安 et al.,Nature [性],The Quintessence of Chinese Philosophical Categories [中国哲学范畴精粹丛书],ed.Zhang Liwen 张立文 (Beijing:China Renmin University Press,1995),54.

Although Han Fei did inherit Xunzi’s theory on human nature,he differed himself from his master in his conception of human nature,the relevant criteria of judgment,and his logical conclusions.The most notable diff erence was the two thinkers’ conceptual reconstruction of human nature.Xunzi discoursed on the innate evil of human nature,while Han Fei focused on human’s avaricious disposition.The main reason for such a diff erence was that Xunzi and Han Fei had different criteria of judgment.Xunzi,formulating an analytical framework based on the dichotomy of good and evil,applied value judgment to our love for prof its and concluded that human nature was inherently evil.It is thus clear that Xunzi’s criteria of judgment were value and rational speculation.Unlike his master,Han Fei did not choose the abstract concepts of good and evil,but instead considered practical actions and their interrelations in history and reality as his starting point,contending that all human behaviors were based on love for prof it.Obviously,Han Fei’s criteria of judgment were facts and experience.Prof it in Han Fei’s discourse referred not only to economic prof its but also to social needs such as fame and popularity.In this regard,Han Fei said,“If people do anything at all,if it is done for prof it,it is done for repute” (“Inner Congeries of Sayings,the Upper Series:Seven Techniques” [内储说上七术]);and sometimes “people seek fame more urgently than they look for profit” (“Absurd Encouragements” [诡使]).The most signif icant diff erence between the two thinkers in terms of human nature lay in their logical conclusions.For Xunzi,although he explicitly held that human nature was inherently evil,he believed that human nature could possibly be made good by means of Confucian virtues.Therefore,Master Xunzi said,

In ancient times,the sage kings saw that because people’s nature was bad,they were deviant,dangerous,and not correct,unruly,chaotic,and not well ordered.Therefore,for their sake they set up ritual (li礼) and righteousness (yi义) [codified etiquettes],and established proper models and measures.They did this in order to straighten out and beautify people’s inborn dispositions and nature and thereby correct them.(Xunzi,“Human Nature Is Bad” [性恶])

On the contrary,Han Fei completely negated the role that Confucian virtues could play,arguing instead that humankind was innately profit-seeking and there was no need to change this unchangeable tendency,which could actually be used by the sovereign to implement government by law.He boldly asserted,“Generally speaking,the order of Allunder-Heaven must accord with human feelings” (Hanfeizi,“Eight Canons” [八经]).Han Fei broke away from the dichotomous analytic framework concerned with the good or evil of human nature and produced a naturalistic,factual description of human nature,which refrained from evaluating human nature through the prism of morality.For this reason,he became the most towering representative f igure of Legalism.

As far as Han Fei was concerned,the love for profits and dislike of disadvantages perfectly voiced the general tendency of human beings.No matter what status a person held,noble or commoners alike,and no matter what the matter was,all were self ishly purposeful.Setting forth these ideas,Han Fei said,

Indeed,tillage requires physical force,and is toil.But the people who perform it say,“Through it we can become wealthy.” Again,warfare,as a matter of fact,involves risks.But the people who wage it say,“Through it we can become noble.” (“Five Vermin:A Pathological Analysis of Politics” [五蠹])

The physician sucks patients’ cuts and holds their blood in his mouth,not because he is intimate with them like a blood relation,but because he expects profits from them.Likewise,when the cartwright f inishes making carriages,he wants people to be rich and noble;when the carpenter f inishes making coffi ns,he wants people to die early.Not that the cartwright is benevolent (ren仁) and the carpenter is cruel,but that unless people are noble,the carriages will not sell,and unless people die,the coffi ns will not be bought.

Thus,the carpenter’s motive is not a hatred for anybody but his prof its are due to people’s death.For the same reason,when the clique of the queen,the princess,the concubine,or the crown prince,is formed,they want the sovereign to die early.For,unless the sovereign dies,their positions will not be powerful.Their motive is not a hatred for the sovereign,but their prof its are dependent on the sovereign’s death.Therefore,the sovereign must specially mind those who will prof it by his death.(“Guarding against the Interior” [备内])

The selfish and utilitarian understanding of profits and disadvantages had actually aff ected the blood relations.Han Fei wrote down,

If one receives no good care in his childhood from his parents,when he grows up,as a son he shows resentment toward them.Though the son grows to be a big and strong man,his provisions for his parents will be rather scanty.Then the parents will become angry and reprimand him.Now,father and son are the closest relatives.Yet they either reprimand or show resentment toward each other simply because they are driven together by force of circumstances and neither can accomplish his self-seeking purpose.(“Outer Congeries of Sayings,the Upper Left Series” [外储说左上])

The situation described above existed not only between parents and children,and husbands and wives,but also between blood brothers,just as Duke Huan of Qi (r.685—643 BCE) in his actions toward his own elder brother.Duke Huan’s story went:“If the millionaire’s son is not benevolent,it is because everybody is by nature anxious to gain prof it.Duke Huan was the first of the Five Hegemons,but in struggling for the throne,he killed his elder brother because the prof it was great” (“Criticisms of the Ancients,Series Four” [难四]).

When it comes to the relationship between the sovereign and ministers,it was a much more distinct embodiment of self ishness and utilitarianism.Han Fei said,“Thus,the relationship of sovereign and minister is not as intimate as the bond of father and son;It is an outcome of mutual calculations” (“Criticisms of the Ancients,Series One” [难一]).He agreed with Guan Zhong’s 管仲 (ca.723—645 BCE) idea that ministers were driven by their desires for prof its.Therefore,Han Fei admonished:“The diffi culty of the sovereign lies in his putting conf idence in men.Conf iding in men,he is restrained by men” (“Guarding against the Interior”).But at the same time,he suggested the sovereign,who should not trust any persons,make use of the popular love for profits and dislike of disadvantages to manage ministers and govern the country.Han’s observation was that “if the sovereign follows the right Way (dao道),ministers will exert their strength and no crook will appear.If he misses the right Way,ministers will delude the sovereign on the one hand and accomplish their self ish designs on the other” (“Criticisms of the Ancients,Series One”).The key of the“right Way” was the sovereign’s f irm control of the power to reward and punish,just as Han said,“The sovereign sees the meritorious service rendered by the rewarded and knows the criminal off ense committed by the punished;in seeing and knowing he is not mistaken;and in matters of reward and punishment he is not unjust” (ibid.).

‘Law Should be Made Visible’[91]

Fabelongs to the highest category in Han Fei’s thinking.It consisted of all his political ideas and methods.Han Fei’s idea offawas extraordinarily extensive and profound.It was an aggregate of legal provisions,governing methods,and codes of conduct.According to Han Fei,the def inition offawas that “the law is codif ied in books,kept in governmental offi ces,and promulgated among the people” (Hanfeizi,“Criticisms of the Ancients,Series Three”[难三]) and the basic content offawas that “law includes mandates and ordinances that are manifest in the official bureaux,penalties that are definite in the mind of the people,rewards that are due to the careful observance of laws,and punishments that are inf licted on the off enders against orders” (“Deciding between Two Legalistic Doctrines” [定法]).

Han Fei held that “there is no one constant method for the government of men but the law alone leads to political order” (“Surmising the Mentality of the People:A Psychological Analysis of Politics” [心度]).In other words,“Casting law and technique aside and trusting to personal judgments,even Yao 尧 could not rectify a state....Supposing an average sovereign bides by law and technique and an unskillful carpenter used compasses,squares,and sovereigns,certainly there would be no mistake in myriad cases” (“How to Use Men:Problems of Personnel Administration” [用人]).After all,“If the sovereign attempts to suppress wickedness throughout the whole country by his own strength alone,then he can hardly succeed” (“Criticisms of the Ancients,Series Three”).The reason was that,“If the sovereign has to inspect all offi cials himself,[he]f inds the day not long enough and his energy not great enough” (“Having Regulations” [有度]).Only when the sovereign chooses to rely on law would he remain in power.Han explained this further,saying,“[As soon as government by law was implemented]within the four seas,the cunning could not apply their fabrications;the deceitful could not practice their mendacity;and the wicked would f ind no means to resort to” (ibid.).

The essence of Han Fei’s thinking was embodied in one of his assertions,which read:“Therefore,in the state of the enlightened sovereign,there is no literature written on bamboo slips,the law is the only teaching;there are no quoted sayings of the early kings,the magistrates are the only instructors” (“Five Vermin:A Pathological Analysis of Politics”).In a nutshell,good governance depends on law and offi cers enforcing the law.The reasons that a sovereign could successfully govern a country were that law played a decisive role in regulating human behaviors and offi cers effi ciently enforced laws and regulations,just as Han Fei said,“Thus,as the enlightened sovereign has the supreme power in his grip,the superior is held in high esteem;as he unif ies the administrative organs,the state is in order.Hence law is the origin of supremacy and penalty is the beginning of love” (“Surmising the Mentality of the People:A Psychological Analysis of Politics”).

Government by law was the most basic method adopted by an enlightened sovereign to govern the country.The dual nuclei of government by law were strict rules concerning reward and punishment and strict enforcement of these rules.On this point,Han Fei said,

Therefore, the skillful sovereign makes rewards clear and displays advantages to encourage the people and rewards them for meritorious services but off ers no prize for any act of benevolence and righteousness.He makes penalties severe and punishments heavy to restrain the people and censure for criminal off ences but off ers no pardon by love and grace.(“Ministers Apt to Betray,Molest,and Murder the Ruler” [奸劫弑臣])

The criteria of reward and punishment were made in accordance with the idea of love for prof its and dislike of disadvantages.Han Fei’s explanation was as follows:Human feelings have likes and dislikes,wherefore reward and punishment can be applied.If reward and punishment are applicable,prohibitions and orders will prevail and the course of government will be accomplished.As the sovereign holds the reins and thereby upholds his august position,orders are carried out and what is prohibited stops.(“Eight Canons”)

In addition,Han Fei expounded on the diff erent roles that reward and punishment played,saying:“When a sage-king makes laws,he makes rewards sufficient to encourage the good,his authority sufficient to subjugate the violent,and his preparation sufficient to accomplish a task” (“The Way to Maintain the State” [守道]).Through handsome rewards and severe punishment,people could be fully mobilized to work for the sovereign,and good governance could thus be realized nationwide.Han Fei therefore concluded:

Now,rewards should not be otherwise than liberal,so that the people will consider them prof itable;honors should not be otherwise than attractive,so that the people will consider them glorious;censures should not be otherwise than strict,so that the people will consider them severe;and blame should not be otherwise than odious,so that the people will consider it disgraceful.Thereaft er,the sovereign will universally enforce his laws.Prohibitions and censures of private families mean no harm to the people.(“Eight Canons”)

Han Fei frequently put reward on a par with punishment.But in general,he was a believer of the doctrine of severe punishment.He firmly held that a sovereign could secure his position and social stability by means of severe punishments.Setting forth this point,Han Fei wrote:

If heavy penalties are clear and if the people are always well disciplined and then if men are engaged in case of emergency,the superior will have all the advantage.In inf licting penalties,light off ences should be punished severely;if light off ences do not occur,heavy off ences will not follow.This is said to be to abolish penalties by means of penalties.And the state will certainly become strong.If crimes are serious but penalties are light,light penalties breed further troubles.This is said to create penalties through penalties,and such a state will infallibly be dismembered.(“Making Orders Trim” [饬令])

Handsome reward and severe punishment were the legislative principles and the most basic principle of enforcement of law was impartiality.Thus,Han Fei said,“The strickle is for adjusting the measure.The offi cial is for adjusting the law.[Those]who govern a state should not lose sight of the means of adjustment” (“Outer Congeries of Sayings,the Lower Left Series” [外储说左下]).In order that impartiality could be well done,reward and punishment must be,fairly and appropriately,meted out.Han Fei discussed this in detail:“If the sovereign expects profit from what ought to be prohibited and prohibits what is prof itable,be he superhuman,he cannot enforce his policy.If the honors men held guilty and disgraces the rewarded,be he as great as Yao,he cannot attain any political order” (ibid.).At the same time private grudges and favors should be abandoned completely.If “censured for a crime,nobody feels bitter against the superior,and rewarded for merit,no subject feels grateful to the sovereign” (ibid.),and “therefore,men of real merit,however distant and humble,must be rewarded;those of real demerit,however near and dear,must be censured”(“The Way of the Sovereign” [主道]).We should bear in mind that equality was relative in ancient times,because the sovereign had absolute power and was privileged to be exempted from being punished.Taking this into account,the Han Fei-style of law actually provided security for the entirety of the population,even though it did not challenge the sovereign’s privilege.It was genuinely progressive,on the grounds that Han Fei’s law,an embodiment of the increased consciousness of equality,not only recognized the status of commoners but also dealt a blow to the old aristocracy.

Han Fei held that government by law must be carried out strictly and carefully,and at the same time avoid being excessively benevolent or punitive.He said,

Who is benevolent,is tender-hearted and benef icent and makes light of money;who is violent,has a stubborn mind and censures people easily.If tender-hearted and benef icent,he will be unable to bear executions;if easy in money,he will like to bestow favors.If he has a stubborn mind,he will reveal his ill will to the inferiors;if he censures people easily,he will inflict the death penalty upon anybody.Unable to bear executions,one would remit most punishments;fond of bestowing favors,one would mostly reward men of no merit.When ill will is revealed,the inferiors will hate the superiors;when arbitrary censure prevails,the people will rebel.Therefore,when a benevolent man is on the throne,the inferiors are wild,easily violate laws and prohibitions,expect undue gift s,and hope for personal favors from the superior.When a violent man is on the throne,laws and decrees are arbitrary;sovereign and minister oppose each other;the people grumble and beget the spirit of disorder.Hence the saying:“Both benevolence and tyranny drive the state to ruin.” (“Eight Fallacies” [八说])

Han Fei himself was opposed to the Confucian concept of government by benevolence and righteousness,because he regarded the Confucian program as not only contrary to the government-by-law principle,but also much less effi cient than the Legalist program.

When it came to the enforcement of the law,Han Fei stressed that law should never bend to the aristocracy.The unyielding quality of law was the most valuable element in Han Fei’s thinking,radiating with the light of wisdom and reason.At this point,Han Fei assertively wrote,“The law does not fawn on the noble;the plumbline does not yield to the crooked.Whatever the law applies to,the wise cannot reject nor can the brave defy.Punishment for fault never skips ministers,reward for good never misses commoners”(“Having Regulations”).In ancient times lasting for over two thousand years,the idea that even nobles violating the law would be punished the same as commoners was not only the people’s sincere expectation but also one of the hallmarks of clean politics.This indicated that law must be the only compulsory code of conduct that was recognized society-wide for reward and punishment no matter how heavy,the making of law,and enforcement of law.

‘Techniques Should Remain Hidden’[93]

Han Fei’s thinking was used to meet the needs of governance.Han Fei applied hisfato the management of offi cials of all levels and at the same time provided sovereign withshu,the technical measures of management.Elaborating on this,he said,“If the sovereign is lacking in techniques,delusion will come to that superior;if the subjects and ministers are lawless,disorder will appear among those inferiors.Thus,neither can be dispensed with:both are implements of emperors and kings” (Hanfeizi,“Deciding between Two Legalistic Doctrines”).As foregoing discussions have shown,the sovereign and his offi cials’ diff erent ways of judging gains and losses determined that each of them could only be an ends for the other’s means.In other words,shuthat could be used to manage offi cials,was created out of the sovereign’s perpetual distrust in his inferiors.Guo Moruo 郭沫若 (1892—1978),a brilliant Marxist historian,analytically noted,“Because Han Fei built his edifice from the standpoint of the sovereign,he showed very special interest inshu,technical measures reining in his subordinates,and thus over sixty percent of his book was invested in discoursing on and praisingshu.”5Guo Moruo 郭沫若,Book of Ten Critiques [十批判书](Beijing:Oriental Press,1996),359,369.The present author contends that,although Han Fei’s Legalist edif ice was based onfa,intellectually,it attached greater importance to the role thatshuplayed in the politics and government.

Han Fei’sshuwas the essence of his thinking.But on the other hand,it remained highly controversial to later generations.According to Han Fei,the meaning ofshuwas twofold.First,shuwas a measure,by which the sovereign could select the best candidates for administrative posts.Han Fei illuminated the role thatshucould play,saying,“Administrative techniques are the means whereby to create posts according to responsibilities,hold the content of services accountable according to official’s titles,exercise power over life and death,and examine the abilities of offi cials.It is what the sovereign has in his grip” (ibid.).Second,shureferred to political measures taken to supervise officials and prevent crafty sycophants from entering into politics.Han Fei’s explanation was that “the technique is hidden in the bosom and useful in comparing the diverse motivating factors of human conduct and in manipulating the body of officials secretly” (“Criticisms of the Ancients,Series Three”).Comparatively,fawas open and transparent whilstshuwas kept secret and mysterious.As regardsshuitself,the measures for selecting talented people for offi cial service were relatively more transparent than those that were applied to the management of offi cials.

The measures for selecting talented people were also known as art of norms—names(xing—ming形名).Xingdenoted the true state of all objective things andmingwas the formal designation of a thing.Each thing had bothxingandming.Xingwas the substance ofmingandmingwas the form ofxing.In the context of personnel management,the art ofxing—mingwas a method investigating whether an offi cial’s words and deeds accorded with each other or not.Han Fei thus wrote,

The sovereign,whenever he wants to suppress culprits,must see norms accord with names and words never diff ering from the task set.Whenever a minister utters a word,the sovereign should,in accordance with his word,assign him a task to accomplish and,in accordance with the task,hold the work to account.If the work corresponds with the task,and the task corresponds with the word,he should be rewarded.On the contrary,if the work is not equivalent to the task,and the task not equivalent to the word,he should be punished.(“The Two Handles” [二柄])

If words wereming,deeds and merits according with words would bexing.The art ofxing—mingrequired that deeds and merits must be in accord with words.If laws and decrees wereming,the enforcement of them would bexing.If reward,punishment,blame and praise wereming,successes and blunders of these would bexing.Therefore,reward,punishment,blame and praise must be consistent with relevant successes and blunders.If official positions and social status wereming,authority and achievements would bexing.Similarly,authority and achievement must conform to position and status.

The purpose of the sovereign’s eff ort to “see norms accord with names” was threefold.First,by doing so,the sovereign could make sure whether offi cials were able to match word to deed.Han Fei discussed this,saying,

Accordingly,any minister whose word is big but whose work is small should be punished.Not because the work is small,but because the work is not equivalent to the name.Again,any minister whose word is small but whose work is big should also be punished.Not because big work is not desirable but because of the discrepancy between the work and the name is worse than the accomplishment of the big work.Hence the minister should be punished.(Ibid.)

Second,by doing so,the sovereign could f ind out the truth about an offi cial’s morality and capability and avoid appointing immoral and incapable candidates to offi cial posts.Han Fei vividly expounded on this by telling a well-known story,which was as follows:

King Xuan of Qi (d.301 BCE) ordered men to play theyüinstrument (a kind of reed pipes),and always had three hundred men in the orchestra.Thereupon,private gentlemen from the southern suburbs of the capital asked to play the same music for the King.Delighted at them,the King fed several hundreds of them.Upon the death of King Xuan,King Min (d.284 BCE) ascended the throne and wanted to listen to each one of them.The men went away.(“Inner Congeries of Sayings,the Upper Series:Seven Techniques”)

This story was actually a criticism against King Xuan of Qi,who was unable to employ the proper methods to tell able,virtuous candidates from incompetent and wicked ones.Third,by doing so,the sovereign could assess offi cials’ performance during their tenure of offi ce so as not to allow offi cials to work poorly or act beyond their authority.Therefore,Han Fei concluded:

Thus,when an intelligent sovereign keeps ministers in service,no minister is allowed either to override his post and get merits thereby nor to utter any word not equivalent to a fact.Whoever overrides his post is put to death;whoever makes a word not equivalent to a fact is punished.If everyone has to do his offi cial duty,and if whatever he says has to be earnest,then the ministers cannot associate for treasonable purposes.(“The Two Handles”)

In comparison with the measures for selecting talented people,the measures for managing offi cials did have a few less reasonable elements.As politico-intellectual resources,the forme r measures could be inherited and adopted,whilst in contrast,the latter must continually be critically reexamined.The present author contends that the measures for managing offi cials were actually kept secret.According to Han Fei,the prerequisite for the successful management of officials was the sovereign’s self-deification achieved by creating a facade of vacancy,stillness,and non-action.That is to say,a sovereign should make his or her own desires,likes,and ideas unknown to anyone so that the subordinates could not comprehend what he or she favored and intended,but instead stand in awe and veneration of the sovereign.Han Fei explicitly proposed seven methods managing offi cials,which were as follows:

Of the seven techniques,the first is said to be “comparing and inspecting all available different theories”;the second,“making punishment definite and authority clear”;the third,“bestowing rewards faithfully and allowing everybody to exert his ability”;the fourth,“listening to all sides of every story and holding every speaker responsible for their words”;the f ift h,“issuing spurious edicts and making pretentious appointments”;the sixth,“inquiring into cases by manipulating various information”;and the seventh,“inverting words and reversing tasks.” These seven are what the sovereign ought to employ.(“Inner Congeries of Sayings,the Upper Series:Seven Techniques”)We should never simplistically regard these “seven techniques” as secret schemes.In a highly centralized power framework,these techniques constituted an integral part of the management of officials and could be divided into three groups.The first group was comprised of the first and the fourth techniques,both of which emphasized that the sovereign should understand the true situation and thoroughly investigate the words and deeds of his or her subordinates.The first technique warns,“If the sovereign does not compare what he sees and hears,he will never get at the truth.If what he hears comes through any other channels,he will be deluded by ministers” (ibid.).In the same vein,the fourth technique suggests that the sovereign supervise what his ministers really did and grasp the true state concerning offi cials’ capability and morality,in case incompetent and immoral persons would f ill offi cial posts.The second group consisted of the second and the third techniques,stressing that the sovereign mobilizes offi cials to work to the best of their abilities by means of reward and punishment.The second technique remonstrates,“If the sovereign is too compassionate,the law will never prevail.If the authority is too weak,the inferior will off end the superior.For this reason,if penalties are not def inite,prohibitions and decrees will have no effect” (ibid.).It suggested that the sovereign should never be excessively benevolent.Otherwise,his authority and government by law would be damaged.According to the third technique,“If reward and honor are insufficient and faithless,the inferior would not obey.If reward and honor are great and are reliable,the inferiors will make light of death” (ibid.).In other words,the sovereign must keep his promise and reward those who perform meritorious service.In doing so,offi cials would work do their utmost to improve their performance.The third group included the f ift h,the sixth and the seventh techniques,which underlined the importance of testing loyalty to detect and purge wicked and treacherous persons.The fifth technique was the ruler measuring the loyalty of his offi cials.Specif ically,“If someone has frequent audience with his superior and is accorded a long reception,but is not appointed to any offi ce,then villainous men will disperse in his presence like deer in all directions.If the superior sends men out to find anything other than what is in question,the inferior would not dare to sell private favors” (ibid.).The sixth technique could be used to make sure whether offi cials’ words were true or false in the light of available information and at the same time obtain more information and gauge the degree of their faithfulness.The seventh technique was a tool of detection,by which “[the suspect can be cross examined and the sovereign]will get at the reality of culprits” (ibid.).Han Fei illuminated this by telling a story of one of the governing lords of Wei,which was as follows:

Duke Si of Wei (r.337—296 BCE) once sent men out to go through the pass as travelers.There the offi cers made them serious trouble,wherefore they bribed the offi cers with gold.The offi cers,accordingly,released them.Later,Duke Si said to the offi cers,“At a certain time there came certain travelers to go through the pass.Since they gave you gold,you sent them away,did you?” Thereby the offi cers were frightened and thought Duke Si was clear-minded.(Ibid.)

‘Position Is a Means of Overcoming the Masses’[96]

In Han Fei’s thinking,fa,shu,andshiwere so interconnected and so inseparable that they formed an organic whole.Shiwas the prerequisite forfaandshu,both of which were,in fact,the implementation ofshi.Only when sovereigns were able to “make use of their august position” could they “uphold the law” and perform technical measures (Hanfeizi,“A Critique of the Doctrine of Position” [难势]).In this sense,shican be said to outweigh evenfaandshu.

Han Fei attached greater importance toshi,because “position is the means of overcoming the masses” (“Eight Canons”).He used natural phenomena to explain thatshiwas a very important [political]booster.His analogies were as follows:

Indeed,if the bow is weak and the arrow flies high,it is because it is driven up by the wind.(“A Critique of the Doctrine of Position”)

A weight of one thousandjun(an ancient Chinese unit of weight),if aboard a ship,f loats;but the utmost farthing,if overboard,sinks.Not that one thousandjunis light and the utmost farthing is heavy,but that the former has a favorable position while the latter has none.(“Achievement and Reputation” [功名])

Similar analogies in human society were more available,such as:

Indeed,the possessor of talent who has no position,even though he is worthy,cannot control the unworthy.(Ibid.)

When Yao was teaching in an inferior status,the people did not listen to him;but,as soon as he faced the south,and became sovereign of All-under-Heaven,whatever he ordered took eff ect and whatever he forbade stopped.From such a viewpoint I see that virtue and wisdom are not sufficient to subdue the masses,and that position and status may well subject even worthies.(“A Critique of the Doctrine of Position”)

Han Fei dividedshiinto natural and man-made ones.The naturalshireferred to the inborn power of a person,similar to a right of inheritance.Han Fei explained this,writing:

Indeed,if Yao and Shun 舜 were born in the superior status,then even ten [bad rulers such as]Jie 桀 and Zhou 纣 could not create any commotion,the political order would then be due to the force of circumstances.If Jie and Zhou were born in a superior status,then even ten [good sovereigns such as]Yao and Shun could not attain order,political chaos would then be due to the force of circumstances.Hence the saying:“Where there is order by force of circumstances,there can be no chaos;where there is chaos by force of circumstances,there can be no order.” Such is theshidue to nature;it cannot be created by man.(Ibid.)

Han Fei seldom paid attention to the naturalshibut instead focused on the man-madeshi,just as he said,“What is meant byshithat I speak of is theshicreated by man” (ibid.).The human-madeshirequired that government by law must be upheld and government by worthiness should be abandoned.Han Fei did hold that government by law and government by worthiness were incompatible with each other,asserting:

Worthiness employed as a form ofshicannot forbid anything,butshiemployed as a way of government forbids everything.Now,to bring together worthiness that cannot forbid anything andshithat forbids everything is a “halberd-and-shield” fallacy (a contradictory set of circumstances).Clearly enough,worthiness and circumstances are incompatible with each other.(Ibid.)

Han Fei went further,stating that good sovereigns such as Yao and Shun and bad rulers such as Jie and Zhou were all rarely seen in history and that average sovereigns could achieve good governance so long as they were able to “make use of their august position”and “uphold the law.”

Han Fei strongly advocated a highly centralized mode of power conf iguration,advising the sovereign to assume the highest authority and hold the highest position.On the one hand,he metaphysically justif ied this by means ofdao道 (the Way),saying:“Daodoes not identify itself with anything but itself....The sovereign does not identify himself with the ministers....Daois never a pair.Hence it is called One (yi一).Therefore,the intelligent sovereign esteems singularity,the characteristic feature ofdao” (“Wielding the Sceptre”[扬权]).On the other hand,Han Fei tried to prove his point by analogies,such as,“Where there are two males in one nest,there the f ighting will continue....When there are two masters in one house,nothing can be accomplished.When both man and wife manage the household,the children will not know whom to obey” (ibid.).

As required by the highly centralized mode of power configuration,the sovereign should never give power or superiority to his or her ministers.Han Fei said,“High authority is the pool of the sovereign.Ministers are the fish swimming in high authority.Just as the fish once lost outside the pool cannot be recovered,so can the high authority of the sovereign once lost to the ministers not be recovered” (“Inner Congeries of Sayings,the Lower Series:Six Minutiae” [内储说下六微]).As soon as power is lent to ministers,the authority and position of sovereign would be under threat.Han Fei warned:

When ministers impede the sovereign,the sovereign loses his viewpoint.When they control public resources and revenues,he loses his advantages.When they issue decrees at random,he loses his ruling authority.When they distribute personal favors,he loses his name.When they feed their dependents,he loses his supporters.All their doings as such should be based on the initiative of the sovereign and should not be started by the ministers at their pleasure.(“The Way of the Sovereign”)

Most importantly,the sovereign should never allow the right to reward and punish to be leftto others.The reason was that:

Reward and punishment are sharp weapons.By handling them,the sovereign controls ministers.By appropriating them,ministers delude the sovereign.Therefore,if the sovereign let ministers see any reward before he bestows it upon anybody,ministers would sell it as a personal favor;if the sovereign let ministers see any punishment before he inf licts it upon anybody,ministers would use it as a personal threat.Hence the saying:“The weapons of the state should not be shown to anybody.” (“Inner Congeries of Sayings,the Lower Series:Six Minutiae”)

Under no circumstances should sovereign and ministers share power and position.Otherwise,exactly because of decentralized power,“If reward and punishment are carried out jointly by the sovereign and his minister,consequently prohibitions and ordinances will take no eff ect” (“Outer Congeries of Sayings,the Lower Right Series” [外储说右下]).

In order that the centralized mode of power conf iguration should be strengthened,the power of ministers should be weakened.On this point,Han Fei said,

The reason why the sovereign finds himself endangered and sees his state ruined is that chief vassals are too inf luential and the attendants are too powerful.Who is called powerful,observes no law but simply acts at random and manipulates the reins of the state for facilitating his self-seeking purposes? Who is called powerful,that exercises undue powers and influence at his pleasure and makes arbitrary determinations of right and wrong? These two types of officials the sovereign must observe carefully....Now suppose chief vassals gain the sovereign’s prestige and attendants abuse the august position.Then the sovereign will lose his strength.The sovereign who has lost his strength and is still able to keep the state,is none out of a thousand.(“The Lord of Men” [人主])

Using tree metaphor,Han Fei stressed again the importance of the above points and made some suggestions as follows:

The sovereign should allow the tree to grow tall,but never allow its branches to f lourish.Luxuriant branches will cover the gates of public buildings,till private houses become full,public halls empty,and the sovereign deluded.So,allow the tree to grow tall,but never allow any branch to grow outward.Any branch that grows outward will molest the position of the sovereign.Again,allow the tree to grow tall,but never allow any branch to grow larger than the trunk.When the branches are large and the trunk is small,the tree will be unable to endure spring winds.When the tree cannot endure spring winds,the branches will damage its center.Similarly,when illegitimate sons are many,the heir apparent will have worries and anxieties.The only way to check them is to allow the tree to grow tall,but never let its branches f lourish.(“Wielding the Sceptre”)

Conclusion [99]

Han Fei laid stress on government by law.His thinking prepared a weapon of thought for the First Emperor of Qin (r.221—210 BCE) who unified entire China and laid the theoretical foundation of the traditional Chinese centralized mode of power conf iguration.It is true that Han Fei’s ideas were signif icant to Chinese history,regardless of whether we agree with the ideas themselves or not.But on the other hand,Han Fei’s government by law was essentially diff erent from the modern rule of law;we should be wary of obfuscating the former with the latter.In terms of the logical starting point,Han Fei built his edifice from the standpoint of the sovereign,in the hope that the sovereign’s governance could be bettered and well maintained.In contrast,the modern rule of law proceeds from the rights of the citizen and aspires to safeguard citizenship and restrict government power.In terms of value orientation,Han Fei attempted to strengthen the centralized power of government by law whereas the modern rule of law is focused on decentralization and power balance.In terms of the spiritual content,Han Fei’s government by law was a tool,which employed power to counter rights and could be used by the sovereign to manage ministers and govern the people.Contrastingly,the modern rule of law,which employs rights to counter power,can be used by the masses to institutionally protect their own rights and restrict the state power.In terms of humanistic connotations,Han Fei’s idea of government by law did not have a strong humanistic consciousness and was characterized by severe punishments,which intended to prevent the centralized mode of power configuration from being damaged by mobs.Diff ering from this,the modern rule of law,which respects human life and voices a humanistic spirit,aspires to prevent the state power from encroaching upon citizenship.In terms of its theoretical foundation,Han Fei’s government by law attached greater importance to power and concerned itself exclusively with whether power would be reduced or weakened.Contrary to this,the modern rule of law is forever watchful of power and concerned about the ramif ications of unchecked power and the natural expansion and aggrandization of power.

The modern rule of law is not only a political principle,but also a strategy of governance.It is based on democracy,purposing to have all citizens equally enjoying their rights according to law,with restrictions on political power so as to maintain the normal social order and promote people’s full and free development.The present author contends that,due to the essential differences between Han Fei’s government by law and modern rule of law,some threads of Han Fei’s thinking gradually paled in the chaos of centralized power in the long course of history,such as “the law does not fawn on the noble” and “if conformers to law are strong,the country is strong” (Hanfeizi,“Having Regulations”).Therefore,we should not overestimate nor overly praise the historical role and realistic signif icance of Han Fei’s idea of government by law.Especially in modern times,we should never confuse the two concepts so that we can avoid falling into the wrong path in building a rule-of-law country and rule-of-law society.

Bibliography of Cited Translations

Bloom,Irene,trans.Mencius.New York:Columbia University Press,2009.

Hutton,Eric L.,tran.Xunzi:The Complete Text.Princeton,NJ:Princeton University Press,2014.Liao,W.K.,trans.The Complete Works of Han Fei Tzu:A Classic of Chinese Political Science.2 vols.London:Arthur Probsthain,1939.