1 Jump to dictionaryShow parallel passages人主:
人主之所以身危国亡者，大臣太贵，左右太威也。所谓贵者，无法而擅行，操国柄而便私者也。所谓威者，擅权势而轻重者也。此二者，不可不察也。夫马之所以能任重引车致远道者，以筋力也。万乘之主、千乘之君所以制天下而征诸侯者，以其威势也。威势者，人主之筋力也。今大臣得威，左右擅势，是人主失力，人主失力而能有国者，千无一人。虎豹之所以能胜人执百兽者，以其爪牙也，当使虎豹失其爪牙，则人必制之矣。今势重者，人主之爪牙也，君人而失其爪牙，虎豹之类也。宋君失其爪牙于子罕，简公失其爪牙于田常，而不蚤夺之，故身死国亡。今无术之主，皆明知宋、简之过也，而不悟其失，不察其事类者也。The reason why a sovereign is in danger and his state perishes is that high officials are too powerful, and the attendants on either side hold excessive authority. What is meant by "powerful" is those who act arbitrarily without law and manipulate state power for personal gain. What is meant by "authority" is the arbitrary exercise of power and influence, determining matters at will. These two factors must not be overlooked. Horses are able to bear heavy loads, pull carts, and travel long distances because of their sinews and strength. The sovereigns ruling over ten thousand chariots and the lords governing a thousand chariots are able to control the world and subdue feudal lords because of their authority and power. Authority and power are the sovereign's sinews and strength. Now, when high officials possess authority and attendants seize power, this means the sovereign loses his strength. A sovereign who has lost his strength yet manages to retain his state is nonexistent among a thousand cases. Tigers and leopards are able to overcome humans and subdue a hundred beasts because of their claws and teeth. If tigers and leopards were to lose their claws and teeth, then people would certainly be able to control them. Now, those with great power are the sovereign's claws and teeth; a ruler who loses his "claws and teeth" is no different from a tiger or leopard. The ruler of Song lost his "claws and teeth" to Zi Han, King Jian of Qi lost his "claws and teeth" to Tian Chang, yet failed to seize them back in time; thus they perished and their states were destroyed. Now, sovereigns lacking strategy all clearly know of the mistakes made by the rulers of Song and Jian, yet they fail to realize their own losses and do not examine similar situations.
2 Jump to dictionaryShow parallel passages人主:
且法术之士，与当途之臣，不相容也。何以明之？主有术士，则大臣不得制断，近习不敢卖重，大臣左右权势息，则人主之道明矣。今则不然，其当途之臣得势擅事以环其私，左右近习朋党比周以制疏远，则法术之士奚时得进用，人主奚时得论裁？故有术不必用，而势不两立，法术之士焉得无危？故君人者非能退大臣之议，而背左右之讼，独合乎道言也；则法术之士安能蒙死亡之危而进说乎？此世之所以不治也。明主者，推功而爵禄，称能而官事，所举者必有贤，所用者必有能，贤能之士进，则私门之请止矣。夫有功者受重禄，有能者处大官，则私剑之士安得无离于私勇而疾距敌，游宦之士焉得无挠于私门而务于清洁矣？此所以聚贤能之士，而散私门之属也。今近习者不必智，人主之于人也或有所知而听之，入因与近习论其言，听近习而不计其智，是与愚论智也。其当途者不必贤，人主之于人或有所贤而礼之，入因与当途者论其行，听其言而不用贤，是与不肖论贤也。故智者决策于愚人，贤士程行于不肖，则贤智之士奚时得用，而主之明塞矣。昔关龙逢说桀而伤其四肢，王子比干谏纣而剖其心，子胥忠直夫差而诛于属镂。此三子者，为人臣非不忠，而说非不当也。然不免于死亡之患者，主不察贤智之言，而蔽于愚不肖之患也。今人主非肯用法术之士，听愚不肖之臣，则贤智之士、孰敢当三子之危而进其智能者乎？此世之所以乱也。Moreover, officials who advocate law and strategy are incompatible with those in positions of power. Why is this so? If a sovereign employs strategists and enforces legal methods, then high officials cannot make arbitrary decisions, and favored attendants dare not wield undue influence. When the power of high officials and close attendants is curbed, the ruler's authority becomes clear. Now, however, those in positions of power seize authority and manipulate affairs to serve their private interests; favored attendants form factions and collude to suppress outsiders. In such circumstances, when can officials who advocate law and strategy be appointed? When can the sovereign make judgments or decisions? Therefore, even if a ruler has strategies, they may not necessarily be employed; and authority cannot coexist with those who seize power. How can officials advocating law and strategy avoid danger? Therefore, a sovereign cannot be considered capable unless he is able to reject the arguments of high officials and disregard the complaints of his close attendants, choosing instead to align solely with those who speak in accordance with principle. If this is not done, how can officials advocating law and strategy risk death to offer their advice? This is why the world remains in disorder. An enlightened sovereign bestows ranks and rewards based on merit, assigns official duties according to ability. Those he recommends are necessarily virtuous; those he employs are necessarily capable. When virtuous and capable officials rise to prominence, private petitions for favor will cease. When those with merit receive generous rewards and those with ability hold high offices, how can swordsmen serving private interests fail to abandon personal bravery in order to fiercely resist the enemy? How can wandering officials seeking officialdom fail to cease their involvement in private petitions and instead strive for integrity and purity? This is how virtuous and capable individuals are gathered, while those involved in private intrigues are dispersed. Now, favored attendants are not necessarily wise. When a sovereign listens to someone because he believes he knows something about the person, others may then discuss that person's words with the favored attendants. If the sovereign trusts the attendants without considering their wisdom, this is equivalent to debating intelligence with a fool. Those in positions of power are not necessarily virtuous. When a sovereign treats someone with courtesy because he considers him virtuous, others may then discuss the person's conduct with those in power. If the sovereign listens to their words yet fails to employ the truly virtuous, this is equivalent to discussing virtue with an unworthy person. Therefore, when wise individuals make decisions based on the opinions of fools and virtuous officials measure their conduct against unworthy people, how can virtuous and wise officials ever be employed? In such a case, the sovereign's wisdom is obstructed. In the past, Guan Longfeng advised Jie and suffered amputation of his limbs; Prince Bi Gan remonstrated with Zhou and had his heart ripped out. Wu Zixu was loyal and upright toward Fuchai but was executed at Shulou. These three men, as ministers, were not lacking in loyalty, nor was their advice inappropriate. Yet they could not escape death and suffering because the sovereign failed to heed the words of the virtuous and wise, instead being misled by the influence of fools and unworthy individuals. Now, if a sovereign refuses to employ officials who advocate law and strategy but listens instead to foolish and unworthy ministers, then which virtuous and wise individual would dare risk the fate of those three men in order to offer his wisdom and ability? This is why the world falls into chaos.