Section 3.1
The usual terminology of the
Spring and Autumn grants that the Central States participate in proper ritual, but not the Yi and Di peoples. Why, on the contrary, is this [principle] contravened when it comes to the battle of Bi?
1The answer is: The
Spring and Autumn does not employ consistent terminology but rather
follows alterations [in circumstances]
by shifting [its phrasing].
Now if Jin changes and acts like the Yi and Di peoples, or conversely, if Chu changes and acts like a noble man, then it shifts its terminology to reflect these facts. When King Zhuang of Chu yielded to [the entreaties of the earl of] Zheng, he exhibited an inner beauty that was truly admirable.
2 The man of Jin [i.e., Xun Lin Fu] did not understand his goodness and wanted to attack him. What he wanted to rescue [i.e., Zheng] had already been spared, and yet he still wanted to provoke [Chu] into battle. This was to disparage the good-heartedness [of King Zhuang] and to slight his intention to spare the people [of Zheng]. This is why the
Spring and Autumn degrades [the Jin general] and does not grant that he was equal to the worthy who engaged in proper ritual.
Earl Mu of Qin insulted Qian Shu, and he was soundly defeated.
3Duke Wen of Zheng slighted the masses and [had to] mourn his troops.
4The Spring and Autumn respects the worthy and values the people in this way. Therefore, although there were several hundred instances of battles, assaults, incursions, and attacks [in its 242 years of history], it recorded them all one by one, being grieved at the great extent of their destruction.
Someone raising a question said: [The Spring and Autumn] records battles and attacks in great detail. Why, then, are there no expressions indicating that it despised such battles and attacks?
The answer is:
[When the Spring and Autumn records] meetings and assemblies,
large states [are described as having] hosted small states;
[when the Spring and Autumn records] battles and attacks,
[states] mentioned later [are described as having] hosted the ones [mentioned] first.
5If the Spring and Autumn did not despise warfare, why would it place the state that initiated the aggression in an inferior position? This was an expression indicating its hatred of warfare.
Moreover, it also is a standard of the
Spring and Autumn that renovations not be carried out in years of bad harvests.
6 The intention is to not inflict suffering on the people. If the
Spring and Autumn despises causing the people to suffer, how much more is this the case of harming them. If the
Spring and Autumn grieves at harming the people, how much more is this the case of killing them! Therefore it states: “Those who renovate the old during years of bad harvests are criticized; those who fortify a city during years of bad harvests are concealed.”
7When the people are harmed in a small way, [the
Spring and Autumn] despises this to a small degree.
When the people are harmed in a great way, [the Spring and Autumn] despises this to a great degree.
How great is the harm suffered by the people during warfare! Examine its intentions and observe its precepts, and you will discover that the Spring and Autumn despises those who rely on force rather than virtue and those who coerce and devastate the people, but it cherishes those who rely on humaneness and righteousness to win the submission of the people. An Ode declares:
“Spreading the virtue of his governance throughout the lands.”
8
This is what the Spring and Autumn considers to be praiseworthy.
If there are those whose virtue is not sufficient to bind to them those who are near
and whose cultural achievements are not sufficient to attract those who are distant,
but who instead rely on warfare to accomplish these things, the Spring and Autumn will certainly deeply despise them because they lack righteousness.
Someone raising an objection said: When the Spring and Autumn records battles and attacks, it expresses disdain for some while praising others.
It despises deceitful assaults,
but it praises prearranged battles.
9It scorns those who attack during the mourning period,
but it glorifies those who avenge a grievance.
How, then, can you claim that the Spring and Autumn holds that there is no such thing as a righteous war and that it despises all wars, without exception?
The answer is: When the Spring and Autumn records calamities and anomalies, [even] though a plot of land contains a few stalks of wheat or rice, it still refers to such a plot as lacking wheat and rice. Throughout the vast territories and during the lengthy three hundred years that it describes, the instances of battles, punitive expeditions, invasions, and attacks cannot be counted, whereas there are only two instances of military revenge. How is this different from the plot of land that contains a few stalks but is referred to as lacking wheat and rice? This is not sufficient to challenge the Spring and Autumn; therefore I state that there are no righteous wars.
If you do not accept that there are no righteous wars, then likewise you cannot accept that there are lands devoid of wheat and rice.
If you accept that there are lands devoid of wheat and rice, then you also must accept that there are wars devoid of righteousness.
In the case of prearranged battles, the
Spring and Autumn praises the fact that [the two sides] arranged the battle in advance; it does not praise the battle. There is evidence that this is so. The
Spring and Autumn loves the people, and warfare kills them. What pleasure does a noble man derive from killing what he loves? Thus in the case of prearranged battles, the
Spring and Autumn [takes a] similar view, as it does in the case of the [Sinitic] states. When describing the state of Lu, it refers to [the other states as] external; when describing the Yi and Di peoples, it refers to [the other states] as internal.
10 Compared with a deceitful assault, a prearranged battle is considered righteous. Compared with [the alternative of] not fighting, a prearranged battle is not righteous. Therefore no alliance is better than an alliance, and yet there are references to praiseworthy alliances. No battles are better than engaging in battle, and yet there are references to praiseworthy battles. Within an unrighteous act, righteousness may dwell. Within a righteous act, unrighteousness may dwell. When the terminology cannot be explicit, in every case [the explanation] rests with the guiding principles [of the
Spring and Autumn]. How could one who lacks a refined mind and penetrating thoughts understand this! An
Ode declares:
“The flowers of the cherry tree, how they wave about!
It is not that I do not think of you, but your home is far away.”
Confucius commented: “He did not really think of her. If he did, there would be no such thing as being far away.”
11 From this, we see that you must observe its guiding principles and not take its words too literally. When you do not take its words too literally, you will head toward the proper path. [3/6/5–29]
Section 3.2
While acting as an envoy for his lord [King Zhuang of Chu], Commander Zi Fan disregarded his orders and informed the enemy of the true situation [in the ranks of the Chu army]. He complied with [the enemy’s] request and achieved peace with Song.
12 This is a case of usurping political authority inside your state while trading on the good reputation [of your lord] outside your state.
To usurp political authority is to slight the ruler;
to trade on the good reputation of your lord is to fail to be a minister.
Why, then, does the Spring and Autumn praise Zi Fan?
The answer is: Because Zi Fan possessed compassion rooted in empathy, he could not bear to starve the people of a single state or cause them to eat one another.
Those who extend their compassion are far-reaching in their greatness;
those who act humanely are spontaneous in their goodness.
Now Zi Fan revealed his [compassionate] heart and pitied the people of Song. He did not plan to disobey [his lord’s commands]. Thus [the Spring and Autumn] glorifies this event.
Someone raising an objection stated: The standards of the Spring and Autumn dictate that
ministers must not shoulder the anxieties of the Lords of the Land,
and political power must not devolve into the hands of the great officers.
Zi Fan was a Chu minister, yet he pitied the people of Song. This is a case of shouldering the anxieties of the Lords of the Land. He did not report to his lord but made peace with the enemy. This is a case of political authority devolving into the hands of the great officers. The covenant at Ku Liang rested on trust between the great officers. The
Spring and Autumn criticized this because the great officers usurped the respect due their lord.
13 [In the case of Zi Fan,] peace was concluded between the great officers [of Chu and Song], but the
Spring and Autumn glorified this event. This is what causes me doubt. Moreover, it is a righteous principle of the
Spring and Autumn to despise the minister who trades on the good reputation of his lord. Therefore, loyal ministers do not openly criticize their lords, hoping that the right conduct will emanate from the lord himself. The
Documents states: “When you possess a good plan or counsel, enter the lord’s palace and inform the ruler. Thereafter, when you are acting abroad in accordance with [these plans or counsel,] say, ‘This plan, this counsel, is due to the virtue of my ruler.’”
14 This is a standard of a true minister. The good ministers of antiquity all served their ruler in this way. Now Zi Fan departed from his ruler only a short distance, yet he did not turn back to him; he could see King Zhuang of Chu, yet he did not report to him. Most people think that to resolve the problem between the two states [of Chu and Song], he could not help but act in this way. But why did he trade on the good reputation of his lord? This is what confuses me.
[Someone] stated [in response]: The Way of the Spring and Autumn certainly includes both constancy and flexibility. [It]
employs flexibility in extraordinary circumstances
and employs constancy in ordinary circumstances.
Each stays in its category and does not interfere with the other.
Now what the various masters recognize are the constancies of the world. Their righteousness is [like] a thunderclap.
15 The conduct of Zi Fan responded to sudden change. His was the righteousness cultivated in a particular instance.
When the eyes are startled, the body loses its proper posture;
when the heart is startled, [some] matters are forgotten.
Such are the emotional responses of human beings. Penetrating bewildering emotions, the Spring and Autumn grasps a single act of goodness and does not exhaustively [describe] a person’s mistakes. An Ode declares:
“He who plucks greens, plucks cabbage,
does not judge by the lower parts.”
16This expresses my meaning. Now when Zi Fan went to observe the state of Song, he heard that people were eating one another. He was deeply startled and pitied them. He did not anticipate that the people of Song would be driven to such an extreme. It was because his heart was alarmed and his eyes were startled that he violated the propriety that applies under ordinary circumstances.
17 Propriety derives from humaneness. It refines one’s inner substance and completes one’s person. Now when [the Chu army besieged the capital of Song] and compelled the people to eat one another, their humaneness was greatly lost. How, then, could they exhibit propriety? When you are endeavoring to rescue the inner substance of humaneness, how can you think of the outer refinement of propriety?
18 Thus it is said: “One ought to be humane and not submit [to the demands of form].”
19 This expresses my meaning.
Regarding the terminology of the Spring and Autumn, there is what is referred to as lowly and what is referred to as lower than lowly. Now if there is the lower than lowly, so too is there the loftier than lofty. Submitting to a superior’s demand is something that the Spring and Autumn esteems. However, when one sees people eating one another and one becomes startled and moves to save them while forgetting to submit [to one’s ruler], this is the Way of the Noble Man that is loftier than submission. Therefore, when those who discuss the Spring and Autumn do not question the greatness of changing ancient precedents based on the constant righteousness governing usual circumstance, then righteousness will be proclaimed.
However, when one sees people eating one another and one becomes startled and moves to save them while forgetting to submit [to one’s ruler], this is the Way of the Noble Man that is loftier than submission. Therefore, when those who discuss the
Spring and Autumn do not, on account of the constant righteousness governing usual circumstances, question the righteousness of altering precedents, then righteousness can truly be judged. [3/7/1–20]
Section 3.3
The Spring and Autumn records the successes and failures of the world. It reveals what causes events to be as they are.
Though deeply hidden, they are nevertheless made clear;
without being [directly] transmitted, they are nevertheless recorded.
One must not fail to examine this. Now Mount Tai is quite large, but if you do not observe it, you will not see it. How much more is this the case of those things that are subtle and profound!
Therefore, examine the Spring and Autumn and compare the events of the past that it describes; carefully deduce the origins of events and observe their causes. A ruler who has realized his ambitions is a person who knows contentment. One must not fail to be cautious.
Duke Qing of Qi was a blood relative of Duke Huan of Qi, being his grandson.
The puissance of his state was expansive and great.
The strategic position of his territory was advantageous and beneficial.
He also inherited the accumulated prestige [of his grandfather’s status] as a hegemonic leader, so he could realize his ambition to dominate the other Lords of the Land. For these reasons,
it was difficult to compel the duke to attend interstate meetings and assemblies,
while it was quite easy to cause him to feel proud and arrogant.
In the nine years that he was established on the throne, there is not a single confirmation that he participated in a meeting or an assembly. He was angered by the ambitions of Lu and Wey and he refused to follow the other Lords of the Land at Qing Qiu or Duan Dao.
20 In the spring [of the second year of Duke Cheng], he attacked Lu, entering the state from its northern border.
21 On his way home, he attacked the state of Wey, defeating its army at Xin Zhu.
22 At that time, the duke’s mind was still filled with the glory of recent success so that when the great states paid him court respects, their messengers were insulted and treated rudely.
23 The states of Jin and Lu grew angry at [Duke Qing of Qi]. Internally, Jin and Lu gathered together their multitudes while externally they joined forces with the states of Cao and Wey. By supporting one another, these four states were able to utterly defeat Qi at An.
24 Consequently, they captured Duke Qing of Qi and decapitated Feng Choufu.
25 If we examine deeply the roots that caused Duke Qing of Qi to bring insult to his person, lose his state, and become the laughingstock of the land, we will discover that their beginnings may be traced to [the time when he] subdued the state of Lu and defeated the state of Wey. When he attacked Lu, Lu did not dare array troops to battle. When he attacked Wey, he soundly defeated it. Because he had achieved his ambitions and thought that there was no one in the world that could match him, he precipitated his own disaster. Therefore it is said: Those who achieve their ambition and are content must not fail to be alert. Here is the proof. From this time onward, Duke Qing was filled with fear and trepidation. He did not listen to music, drink wine, or eat meat.
Within the borders of his state, he showed affection for his people, asking about their illnesses and mourning at their burials.
Beyond the borders of his state, he was respectful of the Lords of the Land, submitting to convene with them and establish alliances.
In this way, he was able to preserve his person and bring peace and security to his state. This is a case in which
the roots of prosperity are born of anxiety
and the roots of calamity are born of contentment.
The causes of events are closely bound up with human beings. Is it possible not to contemplate them? [3/7/22–3/8/3]
Section 3.4
Feng Choufu sacrificed his life to save his ruler. Why does the
Spring and Autumn not grant that he understood expediency? Choufu deceived [the state of] Jin, and Zhai Zhong complied with [the demands of] Song.
26 Both deviated from what was correct to preserve their rulers. Moreover, what [Feng] Choufu accomplished was more difficult than what Zhai Zhong achieved. Why is Zhai Zhong shown to be worthy, and Choufu is shown to be wrong?
The answer is: The difficulty of distinguishing between right and wrong lies in [cases like] this. These cases, which are deceptively similar to one another but are not identical in their principles, cannot help but be investigated. When [a ruler] abdicated the throne to avoid trouble with his brother, the Noble Man treated such cases with deep respect.
27 When [a ruler] was captured and fled, the Noble Man treated such cases with deep condemnation. To save his ruler’s life, Zhai Zhong placed him in that position that others respect. Thus the
Spring and Autumn considers that he understood expediency and treats him as a worthy. To save his ruler’s life, however, Choufu placed his ruler in that position that others disrespect. Thus the
Spring and Autumn considers that he did not understand expediency and treats him in an abbreviated manner. The two ministers resemble each other in that both deviated from what was proper in order to save their rulers. But causing the ruler to be honored and causing the ruler to be disgraced are not identical with respect to inner principles. Thus in all cases in which human beings intervene, if they first deviate from what is proper but later achieve righteousness, the
Spring and Autumn refers to this as hitting the mark of expediency.
28 Even if they are unsuccessful, the
Spring and Autumn praises them.
29 This is the case with Duke Yin of Lu and Zhai Zhong of Zheng. However, if they first do what is proper but later deviate from what is proper, [the
Spring and Autumn] refers to this as an abominable course. Even if they are successful, the
Spring and Autumn does not cherish them. This is the case with Duke Qing of Qi and Feng Choufu. If a person must suffer a great insult to survive, his feelings will be bereft of joy. Therefore worthies do not act in this way. But the majority of people would have doubts about that. The
Spring and Autumn [upholds a standard of] righteousness that most people do not understand and therefore doubt. Thus it instructs them in righteousness by stating: “If the state perishes and the ruler dies, this is proper.” “What is proper” refers to what is proper with respect to the Heaven-conferred nature and destiny of human beings. The Heaven-conferred nature and destiny of human beings enable them to practice humaneness and righteousness, to feel shame for what is shameful, and to not be like the birds and beasts that seek only to survive and benefit themselves. This is why the
Spring and Autumn esteems what Heaven bestows and complies with the principles of human [nature]. It holds that those who occupy the highest positions must not suffer extreme disgrace or great slights, so when [a ruler] is captured [by an enemy], it cuts off the narrative about him. It also holds that those who suffer great disgrace may not be elevated to a position of high rank. Therefore suppose that a ruler loses his position of authority; then it no longer treats him as the ruler of a state. Even after the ruler returns to his state and resumes his position, the
Spring and Autumn will not employ terms that designate him as ruler. How much more is this the case when a ruler suffers great dangers and is captured by others!
If we discuss this from the perspective of righteousness, we can confirm that [Duke Qing of Qi] was no longer the ruler of his state. If he was not the ruler of his state, then how can we say that Feng Choufu understood expediency? Choufu deceived the [Jin] forces,
30 committing a serious offense against the state of Jin. In allowing Duke Qing to escape, he disgraced the ancestral temple of the state of Qi. Thus, although his circumstances were quite difficult, the
Spring and Autumn does not cherish him. If Choufu [had understood] the principles of righteousness, it would have been proper for him to say to Duke Qing: “You, my lord, have acted negligently and angered the Lords of the Land. You have lost all propriety. Today, after suffering such great disgrace, if you are unable to submit to death, this is shameless and will double your offenses. Please let us die together so that you will not disgrace the ancestral temple and slight the altar of grain [of the state of Qi].” If Choufu had acted in this way, although he would have given up his life, he still would have left behind an honorable reputation. In this instance, death was worthier than life. This is why, according to the Noble Man, choosing life and suffering disgrace does not compare with choosing death and achieving renown. This is what “proper” refers to here.
If we discuss this case from the perspective of standards, then Choufu is guilty of deceit and did not hit the mark of expediency. He was loyal but he did not hit the mark of righteousness. If you do not think that this is so, then look again at the
Spring and Autumn. The
Spring and Autumn arranges its terms in a particular order. When it places the word “king” between the word “spring” and the word “rectify,” is it not saying: If you show respect for Heaven above and you rectify the people below, then you can become a true king?
To praise good, despise the bad,
cherish renown, and loathe disgrace;
these proclivities cannot be engendered by human beings on their own accord; they are bestowed on human beings by Heaven. The Noble Man judged human beings based on what Heaven bestows on human beings. Thus from this perspective, Choufu was not loyal. What Heaven bestows on human beings enables them to possess a sense of shame. Those who possess a sense of shame will not suffer profound disgrace. There is no disgrace that surpasses a lord’s losing his position of authority and being taken captive. Zeng Zi said: “If disgrace can be avoided, then avoid it. But when you cannot avoid it, then a noble man will look upon death as if returning home.” Such comments were directed at men like Duke Qing. [3/8/5–27]
Section 3.5
The
Spring and Autumn states: “Zheng attacked Xu.”
31 Why does [the
Spring and Autumn] express disapproval of [Duke Xiang of] Zheng and treat him as if he were no different from the Yi and Di peoples?
[Someone] stated: Marquis Wei of Su died and Zheng troops invaded Wey. This [is a case of] attacking [a state] in mourning. Zheng made a covenant with the other Lords of the Land at Shu. After the covenant was concluded and the Lords of the Land returned to their states, Zheng attacked Xu. This [is a case of] betraying a covenant.
To attack [a state] in mourning is unrighteous;
to defy an oath is untrustworthy.
[The ruler of Zheng] was untrustworthy and unrighteous. Consequently, [the Spring and Autumn] expressed great disapproval toward him.
Someone raising a question said: That ruler [Duke Xiang of] Zheng died and his son [Duke Dao] succeeded to the throne before a year had passed. The
Spring and Autumn refers to [Duke Xiang’s] son as the earl of Zheng and does not refer to him as a son.
32 According to the standards expressed [in the
Spring and Autumn], what crime did he commit?
The answer is: The regulations of the former kings dictate that for three years, no one must call at the gates of those who are [engaged in] the great mourning [for their parents]. This is to comply with their state of mind, which is not attuned to official duties. The
Documents state: “Gao Zong grieved in a thatched hut and for three years did not speak a word.”
33 This is an example of the righteousness of mourning. Even if [Duke Dao] were incapable of acting in this way, how could he, before [even] a year had passed since his father died, raise troops during the mourning period?! Because his gratitude [for his deceased father] was wanting and because he lacked the heart proper to a son, the
Spring and Autumn would not again grant [Duke Dao] the designation of “son.” It referred to him as “the earl of Zheng” to degrade him. Furthermore, the previous ruler, Duke Xiang, attacked [states] in mourning and defied covenants. Having committed numerous offenses against the Lords of the Land, their anger had not yet subsided, and their hatred for the state of Zheng had not yet dissipated. Having inherited his father’s legacy, Duke Dao should have exerted himself to accomplish good deeds and thereby overturn [the bad legacy of his father]. But instead, he exacerbated them by attacking others without cause when he himself [should have been] in mourning [for his father].
The father attacked others while they mourned;
the son attacked others while he mourned.
The father was unrighteous toward others;
the son lacked gratitude toward his father,
thus transgressing against the Central States.
This was a case in which:
his father committed bad deeds in the past,
and he himself committed worse ones later.
Naturally, the Lords of the Land were angered and despised him. They met to discuss a united attack against the state of Zheng. Only then did [Duke Dao of] Zheng grow frightened and anxious. He abandoned Chu and convened and concluded a covenant at Gulao [with Jin, Qi, Lu, Song, and others].
34 Chu and the Central States united and attacked Zheng. Zheng was exhausted and annihilated, and Duke Dao lived out his life in misery. Tracing the outcome to the source, I find that he was defeated because he was unrighteous. He was like this because his heart was irreverent. Confucius said: “When guiding a state of a thousand chariots, approach your duties with reverence and be trustworthy.”
35 He understood the importance of the causes of success and failure; therefore he was respectful and wary of them. Now the earl of Zheng lacked the gratitude proper to a son, and he did not make plans with care. He raised troops at an unsuitable time on one occasion, and he brought endless misery upon his state. This is something that he brought on himself. Therefore throughout his life, [the
Spring and Autumn] does not refer to him as a “son” [to reveal how much] he had departed from righteousness. After he died, [the
Spring and Autumn] does not record his burial, in order to reveal the fact that he was utterly lost. Thus I say: “If those who possess a state do not abandon righteousness when conducting themselves and do not disregard the times when initiating events, how could they come to such ends? [3/8/29–3/9/12]