The Everlasting Empire (17 page)

-79-

people].”
⁸
This concept of self-realization is intrinsically linked to
shi
involvement in government service, as discussed below; but its implications are much broader. In particular, their declared public-mindedness allowed the
shi
to assert themselves as moral and intellectual leaders of society, the only men able to cure its maladies. This attainment of moral and intellectual leadership by the
shi
was the second major by-product of their political ascendance.

The
shi
discourse of the Warring States period, which is reflected in a great variety of contemporaneous texts, unequivocally identifies the
shi
as exclusive possessors of the True Way (
Dao
)—the ultimate remedy for all social ills. While the precise content of the True Way was continuously debated by rival thinkers, and their practical recommendations varied considerably, there was a consensus among them that the Way rested with members of their stratum and not with the rulers. At least prior to the appearance of the future True Monarch, the
shi
were prone to claim intellectual autonomy from and superiority over the courts of regional lords.
⁹

The attainment of intellectual autonomy and the subsequent intellectual hegemony of the
shi
is one of the most exciting developments of the Warring States period. Our sources indicate that prior to Confucius, ideological activity was concentrated exclusively in the courts—first in the Zhou royal court and then in the courts of regional lords.
¹⁰
Soon after Confucius, however, this situation changed dramatically. Courts of the Warring States appear to have been devoid of any intellectual authority; the true source of such authority was thenceforth the
shi
Masters (
zi
), such as Confucius and his followers or major opponents. Ideological debates about the nature of the True Way were conducted within the
shi
stratum; the rulers were, of course, the primary addressees of these debates and potential employers of the Masters and of their disciples; but they had no power to determine ideological orthodoxy. Thus, amid profound administrative centralization and overall empowerment of the rulers, as discussed in the previous chapter, the field of intellectual activity became entirely independent of the power-holders. Rather than deferring to the rulers’ wishes, the
shi
unequivocally claimed the right to teach the rulers and direct them toward morally and politically appropriate courses.

Our sources for the Warring States period—most of which were produced by the
shi
and for the
shi
—may somewhat exaggerate the degree of their intellectual dominance, but there is no doubt that the Masters decisively shaped the political and ethical discourse of their age. Contemporaneous texts routinely portray the rulers as deferential, seeking the advice of the
shi
about political matters and about matters of individual behavior, and we have no evidence whatsoever of external challenges to
shi
ideological dominance, either from the rulers or from other social groups. In the long term, the position of the
shi
as moral and intellectual

-80-

guides of society would remain their single most important asset, which would preserve the indispensability of this stratum under a variety of imperial regimes.

By the end of the Warring States period, texts associated with the
shi
reflect an immense sense of pride on the part of the members of this stratum and their strong sense of collective identity. This feeling permeates most of the texts of competing thinkers, even those who, like Xunzi, were quite critical of the excessive boastfulness of fellow
shi
.
¹¹
Sometimes the pride of members of this elite attained almost shameless proportions, as exemplified in the
Liishi chunqiu
, a multiauthored text, composed by a group of
shi
on the very eve of the imperial unification:

Shi
are the men who, when acting in accord with [proper] patterns, do
not escape the difficulties; when facing the troubles, forget the profits;
they cast aside life to follow righteousness and consider death as re-
turning home. If there are such men, the ruler of a state will not be able
to befriend them, the Son of Heaven will not be able to make them
servants. At best, stabilization of All-under-Heaven, or, second to it,
stabilization of a single state must come from these men. Hence a ruler
who wants to attain great achievements and fame cannot but devote
himself to searching for these men. A worthy sovereign works hard
looking for [proper] men and is at rest when maintaining affairs.
¹²

This somewhat embarrassingly effusive panegyric epitomizes the enormous self-confidence of the
shi
at the end of the Warring States period. Pride, a feeling of moral superiority, the conviction that the
shi
possess the remedies to all political maladies—all these motifs recur in the
Liishi chunqiu
and in many other contemporary texts. Of particular interest is the authors’ haughty stance vis-à-vis the rulers, who are portrayed as being unable to make these proud
shi
their servants, or even to befriend them. Yet behind this veneer of haughtiness we can also discern the authors’ anxiety to be employed; hence they urge the ruler “to devote himself to searching for these men.” This curious contradiction (why should the ruler search for men whom he cannot turn into his servants?) is indicative of the deep and lasting tension between
shi
self-confidence and their political dependence on the rulers—the tension that was to inform the lives of Chinese intellectuals for millennia to come.

SHI IN THE MARKET OF TALENT

Voluntary attachment to government service became the single most important choice of the
shi
of the Warring States period, the choice that shaped the intellectuals’ political role throughout Chinese history. Office holding attracted many
shi
because of its sheer advantages in terms of

-81-

emoluments, prestige, and power: this was a way to “avoid the bitterness of tilling and sowing” and to persuade “the rulers to part with their gold, jade, silk, and brocade” for the sake of their aides.
¹³
Yet while seeking a career for its material benefits was common in the Warring States period and beyond, ideologically these selfish motives were discouraged. Instead, several leading thinkers promulgated the concept of government service as a means of moral self-realization. Their vision had a lasting impact on the lives of Chinese intellectuals.

Confucius appears, once again, as an initiator of the moral interpretation of political involvement. He wandered relentlessly throughout the Zhou world in search of appropriate appointment and seems to have been deeply frustrated by his failure to find an employer who would enable him “to revive the Zhou [dynasty] in the east.”
¹⁴
A similar sequence of wanderings and frustration characterizes the life of one of Confucius’s most eminent followers, Mengzi, who even averred that “service for a
shi
is like tilling for a peasant,” meaning that a government career was the only appropriate mode of existence for an intellectual. The service, as Mengzi acknowledged, was important economically, but its true aim was moral. Mengzi explained that his mission was “to rectify the wrongs in the ruler’s heart,” thereby instilling morality first in the ruler and then through him in all of the subjects: “Just rectify the ruler and the state will be stabilized.” In Mengzi’s eyes this noble goal justified repeated attempts to find employment with the regional lords, whom he otherwise bitterly criticized as “criminals,” “devourers of human flesh,” and men with “the proclivity to kill humans.”
¹⁵

From the very beginning, the political commitment of the
shi
was accompanied by deep tension. These proud intellectuals, who considered themselves the ruler’s guides and teachers, vied for the position of servants in the ruler-centered polity, which they themselves had designed. Balancing between their sense of moral superiority and political subjugation to the throne was a challenging task for lofty-minded
shi
. The solution, promulgated by Confucius and his followers, and adopted by many other
shi
, was to claim that they served not the ruler personally but rather the True Way; practically this meant that the ruler could—and should— be defied in the name of superior moral values. Thus, while these and other thinkers maintained that loyalty to the sovereign is one of the most important moral obligations of an intellectual, they interpreted this loyalty in such a way as to preserve their freedom of action.
¹⁶
Xunzi, the greatest synthesizer of political thought of the Warring States period, summarizes this stance in his essay “The Way of the Minister”:

He who obeys the orders and benefits the ruler is called compliant; he
who obeys the orders and does not benefit the ruler is called servile; he

-82-

who contradicts the orders and benefits the ruler is called loyal; he
who contradicts the orders and does not benefit the ruler is called a
usurper.
¹⁷

The minister should be loyal, but his loyalty does not preclude criticism: it is distinct from servility and flattery. An intellectual in the ruler’s service may have an understanding of the ruler’s interests superior to that of the sovereign himself; hence, if need be, he may disobey the ruler’s commands. Xunzi’s dictum, “Follow the Way, do not follow the ruler,”
¹⁸
remained the guiding premise for lofty-minded intellectuals throughout the ages. To be sure, this was not an assault on monarchy: the ruler was supposed to be the supreme beneficiary of ministerial action; but the minister knew better how to benefit the ruler and society as a whole. Thus, while remaining ostensibly loyal to the throne, the intellectual preserved considerable freedom of action, and, most importantly, his dignity and integrity, while dealing with the monarch. In contrast, servile sycophants and flatterers were despised as “petty men,” from whom a true
shi
had to distinguish himself.

From the very beginning the desire of lofty
shi
to maintain their pride while remaining in the ruler’s service was fraught with contradictions. Not every ruler was fond of critical-minded servants who routinely opted to admonish him and defy his orders in the name of the Way. It is not surprising, then, that the lives of many high-minded intellectuals, Confucius and Mengzi included, became an almost endless chain of appointments and resignations, or of unfulfilled appointments. In principle, this tension with the rulers could become detrimental to the intellectuals’ political involvement; but during the Warring States period it did not damage the career aspirations of most
shi
. Even the most critical-minded individuals of that age could hope to find an appropriate patron. The reason for this odd situation was political: the world of the Warring States can be seen as a huge market of talent in which rival courts competed to attract the best of the
shi
, while the latter were free to cross boundaries in search of better appointments. Given the acute competition for gifted personnel, it was expedient for the ruler to tolerate the affronts of prestigious intellectuals in his service: punishing a critical-minded aide could backfire, causing a massive exodus of other
shi
from his court and inflicting a severe brain drain on the state. Unable to prevent free movement of the
shi
across boundaries, the rulers had little choice but to accept the haughty behavior of some of their subordinates.
¹⁹

The multipolar world of the Warring States therefore ensured multiple employment opportunities for the
shi
, and this occupational autonomy was the true precondition for both their intellectual autonomy and their exceptional audacity when dealing with the throne. Indeed, the remark

-83-

ably tolerant atmosphere of that age emboldened many of the
shi
to conceive of their relations with the rulers as reciprocal rather than hierarchical: relations resembling those between friends or even between a teacher and his disciple, rather than between a subject and the master. Feeling secure from prosecution, these
shi
were always ready to distinguish themselves from despicable flatterers by adopting an overtly critical tone when dealing with the rulers. For instance, Mengzi, who eventually became one of the most celebrated thinkers in the eyes of the imperial literati, was renowned for his outspokenness, bold criticism of contemporaneous sovereigns, frequent démarches, and even direct affronts to his employers. The following example illustrates his stance toward the monarchs:

Mengzi said to King Xuan of Qi: “Suppose your subject had entrusted
his wife and children to a friend, and traveled to Chu. When he re-
turned, he discovered that his friend had let his wife and children suf-
fer cold and hunger. What should be done about it?”

—“Cast [the friend] away.”

—“When the Master of the
shi
is unable to rule the
shi
properly,
what should be done about it?”

—“Remove him.”

—“If there is no proper rule within the domain, what should be
done about it?”