| | Between heaven and earth, among all beings that live by breathing qi, none is more ignorant than man. The deepest sorrow in human feelings is nothing more than the loss of one's parents. A great wound takes a long time to heal, and intense pain delays recovery. Therefore, the sage kings established the three-year mourning period; this was done to express feelings in accordance with ritual and to mark the utmost sorrow. From the Son of Heaven down to commoners, none failed to follow it. Emperors passed down the tradition, and none knew where it originated. When Emperor Xiaowen, with his naturally modest disposition, sought to promote simplicity, he was about to abandon this practice for all under heaven; thus, he turned to his ministers and subjects, ordering them not to observe prolonged mourning rites, instructing that they should be lifted after the burial had taken place. This was intended to reduce burdensome procedures and ease the hardships of his people. Observing the content of his edict, it was only intended to apply to himself alone, not to establish new mourning rites for the Han dynasty and pass them down to future generations. Later people then followed and implemented it without question, failing to analyze or distinguish its rationale. By the time of Emperor Xianzong, whose virtuous and wise rule was deeply respected, he clearly recognized that Emperor Xiaowen's regulation had been a temporary measure. He also understood that the rites of former kings could not be long disregarded. Therefore, when Emperor Shizu passed away, mourning in the form of zhan cui lasted for three years. After Emperor Huoming died, however, high-ranking officials in court merely speculated based on their own private assumptions that the successor must wish to end mourning quickly. Referring only to Taizong's last will, they failed not only to consider the filial son's heartfelt sorrow and lingering grief but also allowed the practices of sage kings to gradually fall into disuse and be neglected. The regulation for shortened mourning rites thus continued in practice without being abolished. This is indeed a matter of great regret. Teng Wengong was merely the ruler of a small state, and to make matters worse, he lived in the waning years of the Zhou dynasty when rites and moral instruction were not practiced. Yet even so, he still had the integrity to correct past mistakes by consulting Meng Ke and observing a three-year mourning period. How much more regrettable then is it that the great Han ruler, who was destined to be matched with heaven itself, abandoned the three-year mourning rite—how could this not be lamentable! Moreover, establishing laws based on benevolence results in only minor defects; When one elevates the Way for oneself, it may still be abandoned after generations; how much more difficult then is it to establish laws based on cruelty, proclaim them throughout the realm, and yet hope that families will possess filial piety and kindness, and that moral virtue among the people will become thick and abundant? The Shi Jing says: "If you set an example in teaching, the people will all follow it." The sage ruler, if in moments of leisure and banquets he could transcend worldly concerns and reflect deeply, reviewing the ancient regulations of Duke of Zhou, consulting the precedents of Emperor Xianzong, moved by the sincere conduct described in Liaoe, abhorring what is criticized in Suguan, would issue a moral decree to restore antiquity and revise the provisional edict of Taizong. Once such actions are carried out, they would forever serve as a model, passed down through countless generations—an unalterable principle indeed.
|
| | In former times, sage kings established rites and laws to ensure that respect had a constant standard, and lowliness had its proper gradations. Thus, gentlemen and commoners each fulfilled their respective duties, so that beneath there were no transgressions of overstepping rank above, and human labor and material resources could adequately support one another. In the past, wealthy families and merchants within the realm possessed vast fortunes, employing male and female servants in numbers ranging from dozens to hundreds. Was this ever the intention of former kings when they established rites? The state has four classes of people, who do not interfere with one another; Scholars labor with their minds, while artisans, farmers, and merchants toil with their strength. "To labor with the mind is called being a gentleman; to labor with one's strength is called being a commoner." Gentlemen govern others, while commoners are governed by others. Those who are governed by others feed upon others, and those who govern others are fed by others. This is the universally accepted principle of all past kings." Now, those people without virtue who possess wealth should be governed by others and feed upon them. Yet they employ male and female servants, exerting no labor of body or strength, merely giving orders with a glance or the movement of their chin, sitting idly in ease. Even if there are loyal and trustworthy scholars who read the works of sages and philosophers, wearing formal robes and holding official tablets, standing among officials in court—how can such people compare? Moreover, even the gentlemen of today are often poor and destitute, with no male or female servants in their homes. When they do have such servants, there are not enough to attend to their needs; thus, wives and children must labor diligently, personally cooking and preparing meals. Why is this so? It is all due to unscrupulous individuals who compete for profit, as well as the collusion of high-ranking officials and powerful families who engage in monopolistic practices that cause this situation. When things become excessive in one area, they must necessarily contract elsewhere. The sage knew this to be the case; therefore, he took from those who had more and gave to those who had less, distributing resources fairly according to need. He established measures to prevent excess and ensured balance, which is why order and governance could be achieved. To govern a state in such a way that upright and modest gentlemen lack even this, while greedy individuals have more than enough as described—this is not the way to distinguish ranks of honor and humility, establish gradations between noble and base, devalue wealth and profit, or elevate virtue and morality. Now, magistrates and county officials who are addressed as "Jun" (Lord) do so because rewards, punishments, and authority all emanate from themselves. Common people who own male and female servants, sometimes numbering in the hundreds, also wield rewards, punishments, and power over them from their own authority. In this way, how are they different from magistrates and county officials? Although male and female servants are considered lowly, they all possess the Five Constant Virtues and were originally good subjects of the Son of Heaven. Yet now commoners force these registered households to serve them, causing their suffering and leaving them without recourse or means to appeal—how unjust is this! Now, from minor clerks who receive a daily ration of grain up to the kings of feudal states, all are officials who govern the people and thus should be allowed to own male and female servants. Artisans, farmers, merchants, and those who serve by running errands or carrying out commands are all individuals who labor with their own strength and are governed by others; therefore, they should not be allowed to possess male and female servants. When Emperor Xiaochong took the throne, Shi Dan assisted in governance and proposed that there should be limits on the ownership of farmland, houses, and male and female servants. At that time, Ding Fu held power, and Dong Xian was favored and powerful; both opposed this proposal and were unwilling to accept it, so the matter was eventually abandoned and overturned. Shi Dan and others were all well-known ministers of the former dynasty, who were concerned about the problems caused by monopolistic families. They proposed loyal and trustworthy policies to establish restrictions for the good of the state. Yet their proposals were suppressed by wicked officials and ultimately not implemented. How much less likely then is it that an ordinary commoner would be able to propose and enact such regulations—does this not seem extremely distant!
|
