Loading...
Chapter 9 of 25
皇极经世
When Confucius praised and annotated the Book of Changes, he began his discussion from Fu Xi and Xuanyuan [the Yellow Emperor]; when he sequentially edited the Book of Documents, he compiled it starting from Yao and Shun; when he selected and edited the Book of Songs, he collected poems beginning with King Wen and King Wu of Zhou; when he composed the Spring and Autumn Annals, he recorded events starting from Duke Huan of Qi and Duke Wen of Jin. 🌱
Beginning from Fu Xi and Xuanyuan marks the honoring of the Three Sovereigns as ancestral founders; beginning from Yao and Shun marks the exaltation of the Five Emperors as patriarchal authorities; beginning from King Wen and King Wu marks the viewing of the Three Kings as descendants; beginning from Duke Huan of Qi and Duke Wen of Jin marks the viewing of the Five Hegemons as grandchildren. Honoring the Three Sovereigns reveres worthiness; exalting the Five Emperors also reveres worthiness. The Three Sovereigns revered worthiness through the Way; the Five Emperors revered worthiness through Virtue. Viewing the Three Kings as descendants honors kinship; viewing the Five Hegemons as grandchildren also honors kinship. The Three Kings maintained kinship through meritorious achievement; the Five Hegemons maintained kinship through military force. ⛰️
Alas! Hundreds of millions of years have already passed, and hundreds of millions more lie ahead. That Confucius happened to be born precisely in the middle as a human being—why are the ancestors he honored so few, while the descendants he relegated are so many? This is precisely why he repeatedly praised Yao and Shun, yet when speaking of Yu he said, "For Yu, I have nothing to criticize."
Confucius was distanced from Yu by over fifteen hundred years, and now [in Shao Yong's era] another fifteen hundred years separate us from Confucius. Though we dare not compare ourselves to Confucius who looked upward in praise of Yao, Shun, and Yu, how could we not dare to compare ourselves to Mencius, who looked upward in praise of Confucius?
Some say it is a pity that Confucius held no territory of his own. I beg to differ: a commoner takes his hundred mu of fields as his territory, a high minister takes his fief of a hundred li as his territory, a feudal lord takes his four bordered domains as his territory, and the Son of Heaven takes all within the four seas as his territory—but Confucius took ten thousand generations as his territory. Thus, when Mencius said, "Since humanity came into being, there has never been one greater than Confucius," these words are not excessive. 🌊
We cannot enrich ourselves by our own efforts; we must await Heaven to bestow wealth before we can become wealthy. We cannot ennoble ourselves by our own efforts; we must await Heaven to bestow honor before we can become honored. Thus, wealth and honor rest with Heaven, not with ourselves. Some who pray receive, and some who pray do not receive—this depends on Heaven.
Merit and virtue rest with the person, not with Heaven. They can be attained through cultivation, and without cultivation they cannot be attained. This does not depend on Heaven but on the person. If one can pray and obtain wealth and honor, it is because what one seeks is something that can be sought. Those things that cannot be sought after are precisely what prayer cannot obtain. Ignorant people who do not understand why they were able to obtain something say that they obtained it through their own ability, and so they become arrogant and boastful; when their prayers go unanswered, they say others refuse to give, and so they become resentful. If people understood what they themselves could obtain and what others could give, how could there ever be those who do not know their own measure?
The wealthiest person under heaven is none other than the Son of Heaven; the most honored is likewise the Son of Heaven. Could this possibly be obtained through delusional wishing? Although we speak of the Mandate of Heaven, it is also always because of accumulating merit and accumulating virtue—sage rulers endure hardship to accomplish kingship, while decadent rulers destroy their dynasties through cruelty. Is this ultimately Heaven's will, or is it human agency? From this we can see that faults one has caused oneself are inherently difficult to escape; for disasters sent down by Heaven, of what use is praying to avert them? 🔥
Accumulating merit and accumulating virtue are matters within the proper scope of the noble person; they are not done because one seeks something in return. Undertaking them only because of seeking makes virtue merely a tool for profit. How could the noble person have anything extraneous mixed in? Nevertheless, there are those who are fortunate and those who are unfortunate—only then can we speak of fate or the Mandate of Heaven.
Xia Yu possessed the world through merit, and Xia Jie lost it through tyranny; Tang of Yin possessed the world through merit, and Zhou of Yin [King Zhou of Shang] lost it through tyranny; King Wu of Zhou possessed the world through merit, and King You of Zhou lost it through tyranny. Though the three eras differed, the pattern of success and failure was identical.
When King Ping of Zhou moved the capital eastward to Luoyang, he had no merit by which to restore the royal enterprise; when King Nan of Zhou fled westward, although he was not tyrannical, he still lost the royal house. The Son of Heaven's sovereign commands could not even exert authority over a single small state, and he could only rely on the Five Hegemons to maintain his continued existence. What is there worth saying about this? It was simply that no true king appeared in that age; though possessing the empty title of Son of Heaven, what real difference was there between him and the insignificant states of Qi and Song? In such an age, was not the composition of the Spring and Autumn Annals precisely appropriate?
When Confucius compiled the classics, he was precisely in the time of King Ping of Zhou: the Book of Documents ends with Marquis Wen of Jin, the Book of Songs places the poems of Zhou among the "Airs of the Royal Domain," the Spring and Autumn Annals begins with Duke Yin of Lu, and the Book of Changes ends with the hexagram Weiji (Before Completion). I do not claim to understand Confucius; I am merely one who studies Confucius. 🌬️
Rites, music, rewards, and punishments were meant to issue from the Son of Heaven, yet they issued from the feudal lords—thus the authority of the Son of Heaven was lost. The virtue of the Zhou ruling house originally derived from Kings Wen and Wu, yet it issued from Kings You and Li—thus the enterprise of Kings Wen and Wu was brought to an end. And so the Quanrong barbarians were able to invade and humiliate the Central Kingdom. Among the Zhou feudal lords, it was not only Jin that could expel the barbarian peoples, but it was precisely Jin that escorted the Zhou king eastward to Luoyang, preserving the royal name and becoming the leader among all under heaven who upheld the royal house. When the Zhou king bestowed ritual vessels of black millet wine and jade scepters upon Jin, how could Jin have declined such honors?
The Analects records that Zi Gong wished to remove the living sheep offered at the monthly announcement ceremony. Confucius said, "Ci, you love that sheep; I love that ritual." From this, we know that something preserving a mere name while its substance is gone still surpasses something whose name and substance have both vanished. Though the ritual had fallen into disuse, the sheep remained—how could future generations not produce someone who would restore the practice? When Duke Wen of Jin honored the Zhou king, though he used an empty title, it nevertheless served to let all the feudal lords under heaven know that the Zhou Son of Heaven still existed and dared not use military force against him. But when Jin declined, Qin consequently dared to extinguish Zhou. Thus, Confucius's words about loving the ritual were indeed not empty words.
Duke Jing of Qi once asked Confucius about governance. Confucius answered, "Let the ruler be a ruler, the minister be a minister, the father be a father, and the son be a son." Duke Jing said, "Well said! If the ruler is not a ruler, the minister is not a minister, the father is not a father, and the son is not a son, even if there were grain, could I eat it?" But at that time, feudal lords were overstepping their bounds by appropriating the rites of the Son of Heaven, retainer ministers were grasping state power, titles and emoluments had slipped away from the ducal house, and governmental orders issued from private families. Duke Jing himself could not honor the Zhou Son of Heaven above, yet he wanted his ministers to honor him below—was this not very difficult? In the aftermath, the state of Qi was ultimately usurped by the Tian family. 🌊
Qi having the Tian family is like Jin having the Three Ministers (Han, Zhao, Wei); Jin having the Three Ministers is like Zhou having the Five Hegemons. As for Han, Zhao, and Wei in Jin—they established merits, but also carved up the territory; they lowered the ruler's status, but also seized the state. As for the Tian family in Qi—they obtained rank and emolument, but also monopolized authority; they assassinated the ruler, but also transferred the dynasty. Do the affairs of the world never exhibit gradual, escalating signs? The admonition of "treading on frost leads to solid ice" —is it not worth deep reflection? ⛰️
The Commentary says: "A king is one to whom all under heaven turn. Only one who can make all under heaven turn to him can be called king." After the decline of Zhou, the feudal lords had not paid court to the Son of Heaven for a long time. When Chu joined the alliance of the Central states, Confucius for the first time in the Spring and Autumn Annals conferred upon Chu the noble rank of "Viscount"—compared to Chu's own arrogant claim to kingship, did this not further expose its impropriety?
Those who defeat others by military might will also be defeated by others through military might. Wu once broke Yue, and thus conceived contempt for Chu; when it broke Chu, it further developed arrogance toward Qi. Greedy for advantage and disregarding virtue and righteousness, it insulted Qi and Jin, and exclusively practiced the ways of the barbarian tribes. In the end, Wu was destroyed by Yue. Yue, in turn, failed to take warning and was later destroyed by Chu. Chu, in turn, failed to take warning and was later destroyed by Qin. Qin, in turn, failed to take warning and was finally superseded by Han. Relying on strength to oppress the weak—how is this different from wolves and leopards or tigers? Neither can be called the righteous army of the Central Kingdom. 🔥
Song, as a state, was high in rank but weak in substance. When attending alliances it did not measure its own virtue; when assembling in conferences it did not assess its own strength. It strained to compete among the feudal lords for dominance in the Central Plains and was ashamed to rank behind others. Was it not too difficult for it to pursue hegemony?
Among the Zhou rulers of the same surname, the only one that could endure for a long time was Yan. Yan was situated in the far northern border region, especially distant from the Central Plains. If it did not vie with Han, Zhao, Wei, Qi, or Chu for martial advantage, nor strive for empty fame, it would have been sufficient enough to nourish virtue, await the opportune moment and observe the changes among the feudal lords. Even Qin, though fierce as a tiger or wolf, could not necessarily have easily harmed it. Had Yan merely prolonged itself another fifteen or sixteen years, the great trends under heaven remains unknowable.
The Central Plains stretch nine thousand li in length and breadth. Ancient times were not larger, nor are present times smaller. Yet some dynasties had long reigns and some had short, some had vast territories and some had small ones—this is caused by differences in strategies of attack and defense. ☯️
Since the Three Dynasties of Xia, Shang, and Zhou, the ages of Han and Tang were the most flourishing, while Qin existed at the juncture between Zhou and Han. Qin was initially strong under Duke Mu, developed through the middle period under Duke Xiao, and achieved ultimate unification under the First Emperor. It rose from the western barbarian regions, moved to Mount Qi, and subsequently relocated its capital to Xianyang. Its weapons stirred all under heaven; its bloodshed flowed across the four seas. It annexed all the eight wildernesses and transformed both ancient and present ways. Though it cannot be compared to the virtuous governance of the Three Dynasties, it is also not comparable to kingdoms like Jin or Sui. Was not its short-lived dynasty the result of legal measures applied too ruthlessly and too many lives taken? Thus, when Confucius compiled the Book of Documents, he ended it with the chapter of the **"Oath at Qinke"*—is his intention not deeply significant? 🔥
Those who cherish life belong to the category of life; those who cherish killing belong to the category of death. Zhou's love of life arose from righteousness, and Han's love of life also arose from righteousness; Qin's love of killing arose from self-interest, and Chu's love of killing also arose from self-interest. Zhou's good-hearted cultivation of life arose from righteousness, though even Han could not fully match it; Qin's love of killing arose from self-interest, and Chu surpassed it still further. As for the principles of Heaven and the feelings of humans, why would they deliberately choose among Zhou, Qin, Han, and Chu? They choose merely between good and evil.
Thus, we know that goodness is invincible in all under heaven, and all people jointly praise it; evil is likewise invincible in all under heaven, and all people jointly abhor it. As for the principles of Heaven and the feelings of humans, why would they deliberately choose among Zhou, Qin, Han, and Chu? They choose merely between good and evil. 🌱
This section is a historical-philosophical discourse from the "Observing Things" chapter of the Huangji Jingshi. It does not involve any BaZi case examples (Qian Zao/Kun Zao), and therefore does not contain `
` tags.
The core of this section establishes a hierarchical model of historical decline, and through it explains the value scale of historical writing:
| Layer | Representative Figures | Sustaining Principle | Core Driving Force |
|---|---|---|---|
| Three Sovereigns | Fu Xi, Xuanyuan | Honoring worthiness through the Way | The Way |
| Five Emperors | Yao, Shun | Honoring worthiness through Virtue | Virtue |
| Three Kings | Yu of Xia, Tang of Yin, Wu of Zhou | Honoring kinship through Merit | Meritorious Achievement |
| Five Hegemons | Duke Huan of Qi, Duke Wen of Jin | Honoring kinship through Force | Military Strength |
Shao Yong believed that historical degeneration was essentially a process whereby the core principles sustaining social order descended from the "Way" to "Virtue," then to "Merit," and finally to "Force." Confucius's "praising the Changes beginning with Fu Xi and Xuanyuan, sequentially editing the Documents beginning with Yao and Shun, selecting the Songs from Wen and Wu onward, and composing the Spring and Autumn Annals from Huan and Wen onward" constitutes precisely a layered response to this structure of historical decline—with different classics being used to adjudicate different eras.
Another core thesis is the distinction between Heaven and Humanity:
This distinction rigorously separates the external and uncontrollable conditions (wealth and honor) from internal and controllable qualities (merit and virtue). In history, the cycle whereby the Three Dynasties "won the world through merit and lost it through cruelty" are examples proving that "faults one has caused oneself are difficult to escape," rather than merely demonstrating the unpredictability of the Mandate of Heaven.
Viewing Shao Yong's philosophy of history from a modern perspective, several points deserve attention:
The Decline of Institutions and Legitimacy: The progression from governance by the Way to governance by Virtue, then to governance by Merit and ultimately Force, can be understood as a continuously eroding source of legitimacy—from harmony with natural law to the appeal of moral charisma, to demonstrated performance, and finally to the compulsion of violence. The same "decline of legitimacy" can be observed in modern organizational governance: when an organization's cohesion must be sustained by strong-arm methods, its decline has already become inevitable.
The Remaining Value of "Preserving an Empty Name": Confucius's retention of the announcement-sacrifice sheep and Duke Wen of Jin's "honoring the king through empty titles" were, from Shao Yong's perspective, not meaningless. An empty name is not entirely nothing—it preserves the symbols and memory of an institution, leaving open the possibility that it might in the future be revived. This offers insight for modern institutional change: formal procedures, ceremonials, and symbols—even when largely "formalistic"—may still carry within them the seeds of institutional renewal.
Strategic Thinking on "Differing Strategies of Attack and Defense": The argument that Yan, though remote, had the capacity "to nourish virtue and await the opportune moment" demonstrates that Shao Yong did not regard mere strength as the only variable. Geographic position, strategic patience, valuing opportunity, and careful observation are all keys to long endurance. This is a rejection of the cycle of violence in which "those who defeat others by force will also be defeated by force."
Good and Evil as a Choice Between "Cherishing Life" and "Cherishing Killing": Shao Yong defines good and evil from a perspective of survival and continuity—what cherishes life prospers; what cherishes killing perishes. This echoes the observation in contemporary social science that "cooperative societies enjoy greater resilience." Though Qin's legalist governance was efficient, its "excessively harsh laws and excessive killing" created extreme systemic risk, such that once its authority collapsed, there was no possible recovery.
At the level of personal cultivation: Treating "merit and virtue rest with the person" separately from "wealth and honor rest with Heaven" is highly practical psychological construction. Controllable effort (character, ability, accumulation) and uncontrollable results (wealth, position, opportunity)—handle them with division of labor: do one's utmost within the controllable realm and stay composed regarding the uncontrollable. This avoids the exhausting mentality of resentment that comes with "praying but not receiving."
At the level of organizational governance: The pattern of downward-shifting power that Shao Yong identifies—from the Son of Heaven to feudal lords, from feudal lords to retainer ministers, and then to private houses—is a law of continuously descending centers of gravity of power. If the upper level of society or an organization neither acts nor takes responsibility, power will invariably be seized by lower levels, and order will consequently disintegrate. The contradiction faced by Duke Jing of Qi—"unable to honor the Zhou Son of Heaven above, yet wanting his own ministers to honor him below"—remains common among contemporary managers.
At the level of strategic decision-making: "Relying on strength to oppress the weak—how is that different from beasts of prey," along with the chain of mutual destruction among Wu, Yue, Chu, and Qin, offers a warning against cycles of violence: those who conquer by force will ultimately be conquered by force in turn. In modern competitive strategy, over-reliance on dominance based on coercion without cultivation of virtue and righteousness may prove effective in the short term, but over the long run it will provoke counter-forces all the more powerful. Within the framework of "hypothesis—action—review," one should treat "force" as a short-term variable while counting "virtue and righteousness" and "institutional resilience" as long-term variables.
At the level of cultural transmission: "What still preserves its name although its substance is gone is superior to what has lost both name and substance"—when mending cultural ruptures, preserving forms (rites, festivals, ceremonies, canonical texts) even when their content has been temporarily lost still safeguards the fire for future renewal. This is not a defense of "formalism," but a reminder: do not casually destroy that which retains but a remaining form.
In Shao Yong's philosophy of observing things, "taking ten thousand generations as one's territory" is an extremely powerful proposition. Confucius possessed no actual political territory, yet he owned the intellectual domain of "ten thousand generations." This advances a non-spatial conception of territory: the value of human existence is not measured by the scope of physical control, but by the reach of influence across time. This self-awareness of "temporal existence" constitutes a unique response to the problem of "immortality" in the history of Chinese thought.
Another profound issue is the dialectic between the Mandate of Heaven and human effort. Shao Yong says on one hand that "wealth and honor depend on Heaven," and on the other that "accumulating merit and practicing virtue is the constant duty of the superior man, not something undertaken with an ulterior aim." On the surface this appears as a dichotomy, but in fact it points to a deeper unity: only by not seeking those things that cannot be sought can one truly possess those things that can be sought. If the accumulation of merit takes wealth and honor as its end, it becomes corrupted; true accumulation is "doing one's part"—a conscious action irrespective of any desired outcome. This resonates, in some sense, with Kant's "purposiveness without purpose"—the goodness of a motive should not be conditioned on its results.
The admonition of "treading on frost and knowing that solid ice will arrive" also deserves deep reflection. Shao Yong cites the first line of the sixth yin line in the Kun Hexagram, pointing to the gradual nature of historical change: the Tian family's usurpation of Qi and the tripartite division of Jin were not sudden ruptures but accumulations proceeding step by step from "obtaining emolument," "establishing merit," and "humiliating the sovereign." Every great collapse of order presents subtle and discernible signs at its early stage. Recognizing these signs and responding accordingly is the core of the wisdom of "observing things"—perceiving the small to foresee the great.
The Four-Tier Historical View of Emperor, Sage-King, King, and Hegemon: In Huangji Jingshi, Shao Yong systematically distinguishes four historical tiers—"emperor, sage-king, king, hegemon"—corresponding respectively to the governing principles of the Way, virtue, achievement, and force. This chapter is a concrete application of this framework.
Yuan-Hui-Yun-Shi (Epoch, Age, Cycle, Era): The grand historical periodization theory of Huangji Jingshi, which constructs a cosmological-historical model using the four temporal units of "yuan, hui, yun, shi," holding that history follows calculable cyclical laws. The analysis of the rise and fall from the Three Dynasties to the Qin and Han dynasties in this chapter is the unfolding of these cyclical laws within concrete history.
"Treading on frost, the solid ice will arrive": The first line statement of the Kun Hexagram in the I Ching. It means that when one steps on frost, one should know that solid ice is approaching. It is used to illustrate the gradual nature and foreseeability of historical change.
The Weiji (Not Yet Completed) Hexagram: The final hexagram of the I Ching, with Li (Fire) below and Kan (Water) above, symbolizing that things have not yet reached completion. Confucius arranged the I Ching to end with Weiji, and Shao Yong saw in this an open-ended view of history with no final endpoint.
"The announcement-sacrifice sheep" (Gaoshuo Xiyang): A Western Zhou institution in which the Son of Heaven annually proclaimed the coming year's calendar to the feudal lords, who stored it in their ancestral temples and, on the first day of each month, performed a ceremony with a live sheep before implementing it. A classic exemplification of "existing in name but lost in reality."
The Oath of Qin (Qin Shi): The final chapter of the Book of Documents, consisting of Duke Mu of Qin's oath of repentance after his defeat at the Battle of Xiao. Confucius placed it at the end of the Book of Documents, and Shao Yong interpreted it as a final warning to those who delight in killing.
Studies on Shao Yong's Philosophy: Contemporary scholarship on the relationship between Shao Yong's "numerology" (cosmology) and "observation of things" (epistemology), such as the introduction to Shao Yong's philosophy of history in Wing-tsit Chan's A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy.
Historical Cycles and Institutional Resilience: Research in contemporary political science on "dynastic life cycles" and "imperial collapse" can enter into cross-temporal dialogue with Shao Yong's observations on "offense and defense requiring different circumstances" and "those who conquer by force also perish by force." Turchin's Historical Dynamics, with its big-data analysis of the rise and fall of empires, offers methodological comparability with the macro-historical concerns of Huangji Jingshi.
Institutional Studies of the "Name-Reality Distinction": Discussions in institutional economics and political sociology on "symbolic institutional resources"—the idea that formally existing institutions, even when temporarily ineffective, may be reactivated under certain conditions. This view echoes Shao Yong's defense of "the announcement-sacrifice sheep."
Resilience Studies of Regional Potential: Shao Yong's analysis of the state of Yan "holding distant territory while cultivating virtue and awaiting the right time" can be related to contemporary geopolitical discussions of "strategic depth" in rimland regions, as well as to comparisons between long-termism and short-termism in regional competition.