As i observe people passing their lives, I find that they do more evil and foolish things than they think in their hearts, and do not achieve so much success as they had planned. But no matter how wicked people are, there is no one who devotes his whole life to doing only evil deeds. Yet, meeting with opportunities in the course of daily life, a person may suddenly be tempted to do evil, even though he knows quite well that it is so. He may make selfish excuses of various sorts to console himself. Or when he does some evil to another, he may not at all think that it was wrong, and so feel no shame. He may even think that he has done something good, so that when another holds a different view on the matter, he becomes angry and resentful. But as the months and years pass by and he reflects further upon his past deed, he will be filled with shame, realizing that he was in fact at great fault.
In human nature there are differences in intelligence and strength, but there are no people who think that they are inferior to the birds and beasts in intelligence. Sometimes a person chooses a task in society he thinks is suited to his own capability, but as he gets into his work he unexpectedly makes many blunders. His original estimation had been a miscalculation. He will be laughed at by people and come to regret that he ever set his blunder in motion. We onlookers may regard his miscalculation as something truly ridiculous. But the person who planned this was not necessarily so stupid. Further inquiry may show that he was indeed justified in making the attempt he did. In the busy world of men, changes of fortune are not easily predictable. Because of this, even wise men do more foolish things than they intend.
A person’s prospects are always grand, and it is extremely difficult to calculate the difficulty and size of an undertaking with the length of time it will take. [Benjamin] Franklin [1706–90] once said that at first one may calculate a time-frame to be satisfactory, but as he actually attends to it, he will end up finding that it is not.† How true this is! When we instruct a carpenter to do some work, or order a tailor to make a suit of clothes, they will end up behind schedule eight or nine times out of ten. They do not necessarily do this out of rudeness. They simply did not make an accurate calculation regarding how long the work would take in the first place, and consequently ended up breaking their promises.
It is not uncommon for people to reproach carpenters or tailors for breaking their promises. They may offer some reason for doing so; carpenters and tailors are always coming up with excuses and the customers are always forced to be understanding. But have these gentlemen themselves ever finished promised work on schedule? After a student leaves his home in the country promising to endure every hardship to complete his course of studies in three years, does he fulfill his promise? Does the person who raised money with difficulty and bought original sources which he had longed for and promised himself to read through in three months’ time ever really fulfill his intention? If a concerned public-spirited gentlemen makes a repeated petition to come into government office so to introduce sweeping reforms, etc., does he ever remain true to his word after coming into office? If a needy student says that if he had ten thousand ryō of gold he would build schools tomorrow throughout the country to provide education for all, would he be true to his word if by chance some millionaire family like Mitsui or Kōnoike‡ adopted him? There is no end to fancies of this sort. They are all dreams caused by the fact that people do not compare the difficulty of a project with the duration of time it will take, and so are too generous and yet too superficial in their calculations.
Again, as I listen to those who undertake some business venture, I find that the majority say that they will accomplish it in, say, ten years time or within their lifetime. A small number reckon in one or three years, and hardly any say within a month, or right away. But I have never seen anyone who has already completed a project begun ten years ago. When people speak of something in the far-off future, they seem to be planning some great exploit, but when the scheduled date of completion finally draws near, they cannot clearly explain what the original project was. And this trouble is due, after all, to the fact that in the planning stage there was insufficient consideration of the time it would take to complete.
As I said above in reference to human affairs, men do more evil and more foolish things than they think. And they do not accomplish as much as they plan to accomplish. There are several ways to prevent this problem, but here is one which people seldom take notice of. And then what is it? It is occasionally to weigh in one’s mind the success and failure, the gains and losses of an undertaking. To use a business analogy, it is a matter of taking stock and settling up accounts.
No one plans a business venture which will fail from the start. A man first thinks of his ability and capital, and looks over the business conditions of the world before beginning the undertaking. The business then sometimes succeeds and sometimes fails, depending on changing economic conditions. He may fail to stock some articles, or succeed in some sale. When he settles accounts at the end of a month or a year, sometimes things have gone as hoped, and sometimes not. Or when pressed with business he thinks that a certain article will sell well, but it sometimes turns out, contrary to his expectations, to be a loss on the balance sheet. Sometimes he thinks he is understocking himself. The reverse is true when it takes him more time than he expected to work off the unsold goods by the inventory day. Therefore it is most important in business to try to be timely in calculating sales potential, and to make a precise balance of accounts every day.
The same principle applies to other human affairs. Since the active business of human life begins from about one’s tenth year when a person attains to the use of reason, people should endeavor daily to make a precise balance of accounts in the activities of business and in the attainment of knowledge and virtue, so as not to suffer losses in either. When a person examines his account books, he will always find some troublesome areas in regard to past or present actions. He should inquire: What have been the losses and gains in the past ten years? What business are you now engaged in, and how is it going? What articles are you now buying in, and when and where are they to be sold? Have you carefully supervised your store, or have you suffered losses because of the dissipation and laziness of your employees? Do you have sure prospects for the coming year? Are there other ways to increase your knowledge and virtue? Let me give one or two examples of these below.
The samurai who used to say that poverty was the usual lot of the samurai and the most important things were loyalty and patriotism, while they indiscriminately ate up the peasants’ rice with haughty mien—but who today are in reality hard up—were like people who stocked swords, not knowing that there were foreign-made rifles. They made temporary profits, and then took great losses. Similarly, those who strongly believe in ancient things, who study only the old books of China and Japan to the exclusion of the ever-advancing Western Learning, are like persons who stock mosquito nets with the coming of winter, still mindful of the good business they enjoyed in the summer past. And young students who suddenly enter government service before their learning has matured, and therefore wander through the lowest-grade posts all their careers, are like those who pawn their half-made clothes and forfeit them. A person ignorant of the first steps in geography and history, who finds it difficult even to write everyday letters, but tries to plunge into works of high sophistication only to turn to another book after reading the first few pages, also resembles one who begins a business without capital and changes that business every day.
To continue this metaphor, a person who reads Japanese, Chinese, and Western books but does not know the world and national situation and can hardly manage himself and his family is like one who runs a general store without an abacus. A person who knows how to rule the country but not how to cultivate himself is comparable to one who advises his neighbors how to balance their accounts while his own house is being robbed. A man who likes to talk about the fashionable modern world but has no thoughts of his own in his head, even about himself, is like a person who knows the names but not the prices of goods. These faults are not uncommon in present-day Japan. They are caused by people drifting through life, never paying attention to their own situations and never examining their deeds from birth up to the present, or what they are doing now or should be in the future. Therefore I say that the final settlement of the account books is what clarifies business conditions and decides future prospects. In like manner, careful attention to his balance of knowledge and virtue as well as in business is what will clarify a person’s present and future course.
The term sewa has two meanings: (i) “protection” and (ii) “direct.” The former means to stand by the side and watch over a person, or give him money or things, or spend time with him so that he will not lose profits or honor. The latter is something done for the good of a person. It means to give instructions concerning what is good and to protest against what is bad for another. It means to give advice to some one to the best of one’s ability.
“Care” of others will be really meaningful and conducive to social order if it is done with both of the above meanings in mind. For example, if parents will take care of their children by providing for their everyday needs, children will obey their counsels and their home life will be tranquil. If the government makes good laws and takes good care of the people’s lives, honor, and private property, and “protects” them by maintaining public order, the people will obey the government. Thus if nothing goes against this “counsel,” the government and the people will be in harmony.
Therefore, “protection” and “counsel” have an area common to both in which they are coextensive, with not even the slightest difference between them: where “protection” is provided, counsel should also be offered; where “counsel” is given, protection should necessarily be extended. But when they work at cross-purposes with each another, immediately trouble brews resulting in misfortune. There are not a few examples of this in society; they occur because people misinterpret the meaning of the word sewa. They sometimes interpret it to mean “protection” and sometimes to mean “counsel,” but always one-sidedly, and this can lead to serious mistakes.
For example, if parents do not refrain from giving their dissolute son more money, and thereby foster his dissolute life, they may be giving him protective but not counseling care. And even if a child studies hard and obeys his parents’ orders, for them to have him enter the harsh, uneducated and illiterate world without giving him enough food and clothing, means the parents have conversely only counseled him but been lax in protecting him. The former is an example of lack of filial piety, the latter of compassion. Both should be called evil human deeds.
There is an old saying about wearing out a welcome mat by calling on a friend too often. This means that excessive concern to advise someone who does not want it, or imprudent protesting to that person without knowing his temperament, will on the contrary result in that person hating, or resenting, or ridiculing us. As there is no benefit in this, the saying tells us to be careful not to bother him. This also means that where counsel does not apply, neither does protection.
Again, an elderly country gent in favor of the “good old days” may take out the genealogy of his main-family line and proceed to stir up trouble for a branch family. Or an uncle without money may summon his niece and give instruction to her about managing her own household, or may reproach her heartlessness and carelessness. Or even worse, he may try to take away her family’s property, saying that it was in her grandfather’s secret will. This would be a case of excessive counsel, without the slightest regard for protection. It is what a proverb calls unsolicited meddling.
Take also the instance of what is called relief for the poor, which looks only to the outward appearance of poverty and gives rice and money to the poor, regardless of whether they are good or not, and without inquiring about the causes of their poverty. It is reasonable to relieve those who are alone in the world without anyone to rely upon. But there are others who convert over half of their relief rice into sake. If they are indiscriminately given rice without anyone being able to counsel them to give up sake, it means that the protection far exceeds the counsel. Another proverb calls this “excessive sympathy.” It is said that England has the same trouble with her own relief laws.
Broadening this principle and applying it to the national level, we find that people pay taxes and supply the needs of the government, thus supporting the household aspects of the government; but a despotic government disregards the suggestions of the people and blocks avenues of expression. Here protection has been accepted, but counsel has been blocked. From the point of view of the people, we can say that the government is also giving unsolicited protection.
It would be impossible to enumerate all the examples of this. Since the meaning of the word sewa is a most important part of economic theory, people of every walk of life should pay attention to it in their daily lives. The principle may seem to be entirely calculating and cold. But if a person tries to be sympathetic when he ought to be dispassionate, or colors the facts to make them seem more emotional than they are, and thereby ignores sincere feelings and makes human association unpleasant, it would be to give precedence to name over substance.
I have stated my main position above, but since I fear people’s misunderstanding I will add a few more words here by way of further clarification. Some moral teachings seem to go contrary to economic laws. But in fact private virtue by no means affects the national economy. Sometimes a person will give money to a beggar who is a total stranger, without asking any questions. This may be a form of protection, but it is not given together with counsel.
If we discuss this problem [giving money to a beggar without counseling] by narrowing it down to the sphere of public economics, this act may seem to be improper, but the idea of giving a charitable donation should be most highly esteemed as a private virtue. For example, it is reasonable to have a law prohibiting beggars, but we should not reproach individuals who show charity to beggars. Dispassionate calculation cannot decide everything. It is essential to distinguish the proper spheres in which dispassionate calculation is appropriate. Scholars who are intoxicated with rational economic arguments should not forget that there is also room for the private virtues of love and kindness.
