A History of China (14 page)

He and his disciples linked their championing of universal love to their ­condemnation of offensive warfare. They encouraged fellow Mohists to ­support and to come to the defense of weaker states threatened by bellicose states. Manifesting their love for the less powerful and the endangered, they sided with the weak and ultimately became skilled in warfare, earning a reputation as adept military strategists. Yet Mo Zi surely did not have this in mind when he first expounded his views about universal love and the destructiveness and wastefulness of warfare.

Another questionable ramification of his views related to his attempted ­justification of his moral order. He repeatedly appealed to the supernatural as a force that sanctioned his vision. Believing that spirits and ghosts could intervene in human affairs, he asserted that they could punish or reward behavior. The Supreme Spirit was the dominant deity, the progenitor of all creatures, which worked its will through its earthly representative, the Son of Heaven. Mo Zi, seeking to induce fear, depicted the Supreme Spirit as awesome. This turn to the supernatural did not jibe with the developing rationalism of this era and may have alienated potential adherents.

Mohism’s appeal was also undermined by other flaws, one of which was confusion concerning the audience for Mo Zi’s views. He was critical of the lifestyles and morals of the aristocracy and many of the ideas he expounded, including his abhorrence of waste and his utilitarianism, reflected lower-class or middle-class attitudes. Yet he devoted much of his career to appeals to the aristocracy, which contributed to a blurring of his message and confusion and contradictions in his philosophy. Moreover, Mohism was too simplistic for many aristocrats. Mo Zi’s repeated injunctions against waste and luxury did not endear him to the elite, nor did his references to ghosts and spirits mesh with the growing rationalism and secularism of the age. Similarly, his emphasis on universal love clashed with the Chinese esteem of family. Finally, his utilitarianism did not offer a systematic, cohesive morality. The repetitiousness of his style also diminished its wider appeal. In short, Mo Zi did not identify sufficiently with any specific group or class in China, nor did he take into account Chinese sensitivities and sensibilities.

The Legalist thinkers, who have been given credit for the Qin dynasty’s ­success in unifying the country (see Chapter 3 ), have been termed un-Chinese because of the harshness of their philosophy and the severity of the sanctions they ­proposed to enforce their views. Reacting to the crises of fragmentation and disorder, the Legalists prescribed policies aimed at unity and centralization. These objectives were not in themselves objectionable; however, the methods of implementing them eventually provoked unrest. The Legalists’ doctrines had become so discredited that, once the Qin dynasty fell, no statesman in Chinese history who wished to be successful could propound the philosophy, though it continued to influence Chinese governmental practices.

Most students associate Legalism with the Qin, but the development of its principles predated the rise of that absolutist dynasty. According to earlier sources, Guan Zhong (d. 645
BCE
), a minister of the state of Qi, had attempted to persuade his ruler, Duke Huan, to initiate policies that would strengthen the state. In a work entitled
Guan zi
(
Master Guan
), which actually appears to have been compiled several centuries later, Guan Zhong’s later disciples described the institution of the
ba
(hegemon), a powerful figure who imposed peace and stability on the fractious states of his era in the name of the Zhou king, whose survival he perceived to be essential. He proposed the granting of authority to a ruler who had a mandate to strengthen the military, to enact laws governing an extraordinary range of behavior, to promote a growth in population (since a large population was said to be an indication of state power), and to enrich the state through government monopolies on salt, iron, and wine and other fiscal practices. Guan Zhong’s realistic statecraft, as well as his emphasis on law and a powerful state with great influence over its subjects’ lives, presaged and perhaps influenced the Legalist thinkers of later centuries.

Like Guan Zhong, Wei Yang (d. 338
BCE
) or Gongsun Yang (more commonly known as Lord Shang) was a political actor as well as a principal exponent of Legalism. Born in the state of Wei, he subsequently shifted his allegiance to the state of Qin, served Duke Xiao, and helped to subjugate his own native land. Later sources credit Lord Shang with unifying and centralizing the “feudal” lands of Qin and with curbing the nobility’s authority. The centralized state of Qin appointed officials to enforce its will on the population. He argued that peasants should own their land and should be obligated to pay taxes directly to the state rather than turning over a share of their produce to “feudal” nobles. A state with full granaries would be both prosperous and powerful. Lord Shang also proposed that the population be organized into groups of five or ten men who would be encouraged to denounce subversives or those among them who challenged the state.

Lord Shang relied on law (
fa
) to regulate society. In this turbulent time, he believed in a strong state that would conquer the rest of China and ensure stability and peace. The state needed to be prosperous and seemingly invincible to achieve this goal, a task that entailed control of its people. A system of rewards and punishments had to be instituted in order to enforce state power. The state’s interest would prevail over the individual’s rights and concerns, and obedience to the law was the single most important value to be impressed upon the people. The values associated with Confucianism (righteousness, benevolence, and wisdom), as well as the rituals of music, dance, and filial piety, were irrelevant, if not harmful. Lord Shang was unabashedly amoral, for he believed that the Confucian virtues would create a weaker state. He ­proposed a system that would enable governments to be the absolute ­masters, and argued that laws were essential in restraining the evil and depraved nature of mankind. Though the rare gifted man could overcome the general depravity, laws and administrative methods could not be abandoned if the state wished to avert chaos. Most men could not control their evil ways without the sanction of harsh punishments to keep them in line. Thus, the ruler needed to enforce the laws evenhandedly and punish transgressors from any and all classes. For the first time, the nobility would be treated in the same way as the rest of the population and would be liable to the same sanctions as ­ordinary people.

Lord Shang’s views reputedly influenced Duke Xiao, who adopted many of his adviser’s suggestions to strengthen Qin. However, Lord Shang did not benefit from the Qin state’s success. When his patron died, the new ruler turned out to be one of his earlier antagonists, which compelled him to flee in order to survive. The army he quickly organized was routed, and he was captured and torn apart by chariots, a grisly end for a man who, ironically, advocated harsh punishments.

In the following century, Han Fei Zi (? 280 – 233
BCE
) emerged as the leading Legalist philosopher. Born to a noble family in the small state of Han, as a young adult he studied with the renowned Confucian Xun Zi in Chu. Returning to his own state, he continually offered advice to the rulers, but they repeatedly rejected his suggestions. Thus, he disseminated his ideas by writing a work that attracted the attention of the Qin king, who eventually subjugated and united China and became the first emperor in the Chinese tradition. Qin attacked Han Fei Zi’s native land in 234
BCE
, and the panicked rulers called upon the philosopher whom they had earlier rebuffed to serve as an envoy to their attackers. The Qin king was, at first, hospitable to Han Fei Zi, but his chief minister, Li Si, who had also studied with the Confucian Xun Zi, persuaded the king that Han Fei Zi was duplicitous and treacherous. Han Fei Zi was imprisoned and subsequently committed suicide with poison provided by Li Si.

Han Fei Zi’s death serves an ironic counterpoint to his realistic, tough-minded political philosophy. He appealed to the rulers of the “feudal” states, counseling them to tighten control over the economy and government and to crush dissenting and troublesome individuals. Like the Lord of Shang, he emphasized law and governing policies rather than morality and family as the principal means of social control. Harsh laws were required in turbulent times, such as the late Zhou period, and proper administrative regulations were essential in controlling the aristocracy as well as the bureaucracy that the ruler recruited to govern the state. The ruler had to be all-powerful yet he ought to refrain from day-to-day decision making, turning that responsibility over to his administrators. Han Fei Zi had an extremely harsh view of human motivations, advising the ruler to be wary of his closest associates. The ruler also ought not to show much compassion because mercy would undermine state stability. Only by severe laws would the ruler manage to dominate the five ­vermin – the scholars who question the laws, the speechmakers who champion deceitful policies, the wealthy who seek to evade military service, the soldiers who transgress upon the laws, and the merchants and craftsmen who produce wasteful, luxury goods. Han Fei Zi argued that the ruler should encourage agriculture, develop a powerful military, and enforce harsh laws. Only then would China achieve stability and order.

Legalism thus offered a severe though initially effective philosophy. The emphasis on harsh punishments, centralized government, promotion of agriculture, growth of the military, and authoritarianism and curbs on the aristocracy enabled Qin to expand its power and to enlarge the territory under its control. Initially situated in the Wei river valley in the modern province of Shaanxi, Qin had a splendid base from which to annex neighboring lands. The “feudal” states on the eastern coast of China were hemmed in whereas Qin was not surrounded. It faced no states to the west since non-Chinese nomadic peoples roamed the region. Encounters with these foreigners exposed the Qin to cavalry warfare and refined their military skills. The Qin thus had definite advantages when it began to move eastward, seeking to ­centralize and unify China.

Although this golden age of Chinese philosophy played a vital role in the definition of Chinese civilization, social changes (including the eventual ­centralization of the country and the rise of the
shi
, or merit-based class) and also military and technological developments (such as the use of cavalry, more sophisticated irrigation works, and bronze and jade ornaments, weapons, and coinage) were also significant in the rise of a great empire.

The Chinese literary tradition, especially poetry, also developed during the Zhou. The Chinese have traditionally excelled in the writing of poetry, yet very few pre-Han dynasty works are extant. Many more poems were written, but most have not survived. The most renowned early anthology of poetry was the
Book of Odes
(
Shijing
), which consists of about three hundred poems. The poems were designed to be sung and were edited to incorporate rhymes within a specific dialect. Over the centuries, Chinese commentators interpreted these poems to fit the specific social and political values their society wished to inculcate. The poems assumed a didactic and moralistic tone. In the commentators’ hands, love poems were transformed into paeans advocating filial piety and proper performance of rituals. Similarly, songs lamenting the absence of a loved one became critiques of student truants. Such far-fetched and moralistic interpretations persisted for a long time. Because the
Book of Odes
was accepted as one of the Five Confucian Classics, these interpretations, even if outlandish, need to be considered because of their pervasive influence.

The poems derive from diverse origins. The largest number, the so-called “airs” section, is composed of folk songs that were probably revised and refined at court. These short poems yield insights into the daily lives, aspirations, and activities of ordinary people. They deal with love and marriage, festivals, work, and rituals. The songs give voice to soldiers lamenting separation from their loved ones and to wives or husbands betrayed or ignored by their spouses. Some clearly express discontent with the inequities in Chinese society. They criticize oppressive officials, avaricious kings, and constant turbulence and warfare. Commentators naturally read political judgments and criticism into other seemingly bland poems. They did so often by reinterpreting the nature symbolism found in the songs. Because the contemporary meaning of various animals, birds, and natural phenomena was unknown, later commentators could assert that they represented criticisms of political and social conditions of the time. Despite the numerous over-interpretations, however, this section of the
Odes
reveals the common people’s dissatisfactions with the chaos, ­misrule, and exploitation that enveloped them.

Other sections in the
Book of Odes
have distinctly different themes, reflecting, in particular, the interests and activities of the nobility. The
xiaoya
and
daya
(“lesser odes” and “greater odes”) describe festivals, hunts, music and dancing, and sacrifices and provide details about clothing, meals, and transport. Surprisingly, a few poems offer social critiques, consisting of denunciations of officials who do not perform their assigned tasks, of oppressive governments, and of scandalously opulent lifestyles for some in the nobility in the face of poverty and starvation for many commoners.

These complaints attest to the unsettled times and to exploitation and misgovernment. The hymns (
song
), the final section of the
Odes
, differ from the rest because they do not include a litany of complaints, laments, and accusations. Instead they offer praise for the kings’ military victories and proper performance of rituals and for the dynasty’s accomplishments. They glow with optimism about the deeds of the nobility, and few rumblings of discontent emerge.