sjl

15 MO TZU ON UNIVERSAL LOVE

The Chinese philosopher Mo Tzu was born about 470 B.C, a few years after the death of

Confucius. Originally he was a follower of Confucianism, but he became disillusioned because of

the emphasis on filial piety. Mo Tzu believed that people should make no distinction between

family and stranger or citizen and foreigner. Rather, they should love everyone equally. The

expert below is taken from a collection of his teachings, the Mo Tzu. As you read the excerpt, ask

yourself what qualities constitute universal love.

Mo Tzu said: It is the business of the benevolent man to try to promote what is

beneficial to the world and to eliminate what is harmful. Now at the present time, what

brings the greatest harm to the world? Great state attacking small ones, great families

overthrowing small ones, the strong oppressing the weak, the many harrying the few, the

cunning deceiving the stupid, the eminent lording it over the humble – these are harmful

to the world. So too are rulers who are not generous, ministers who are not loyal, fathers

who are without kindness and sons who are unfilial, as well as those mean men who, with

weapons, knives, poison, fire and water, seek to injure and undo each other.

When we inquire into the cause of these various harms, what we do fin as produced

them? Do they come about from loving each others and trying to benefit them? Surely

not! They come rather hating others and trying to injure them. And when we set out to

classify and describe those men who hate and injure others, shall we say that their actions

are motivated by universality or partiality? Surely we must answer, by partiality, and it is

this partiality in their dealings with one another that gives rise to all great harms in the

world. Therefore we know that partiality is wrong.

Mo Tzu said: Whoever criticizes others must have some alternative to offer them. To

criticize and yet offer no alternative is like trying to stop flood with flood or put out fire

with fire. It will surely have no effect. Therefore Mo Tzu said: Partiality must be replaced

by universality. But how can partiality be replaced by universality? If men were to regard

the states of others as they regard their own, then who would raise his state attack the

state of another? It would be like attacking his own. If men were to regard the cities of

others as they regard their own, then who would raise up his city and attack the city of

another? It would be like attacking his own. If men were to regard the families of others

as they regard their own, the who would raise up his family and overthrow that of

another? Now when states and cities do not attack and make war on each other and

families and individuals do not overthrow or injure one another, is this a harm or benefit

to the world? Surely it is a benefit.

When we inquire into the cause of such benefits, what do we find has produced them?

Do they come about from hating others and trying to injure them? Surely not! They come

rather from loving others and trying to benefit them. And when we set out to classify and

described those men who love and benefit others, shall we say that their actions are

motivated by partiality or universality? Surely we must answer, by universality, and it is

this universality in their dealings that with one another that gives rise to all the great

benefits in the world. Therefore Mo Tzu has said universality is right…

Now if we seek to benefit the world by taking universality as our standard, those with

sharp ears and clear eyes will see and ear for others, those with sturdy limbs will work for

others, and those with a knowledge of the Way will endeavor to teach others. Those who

are old and without wives or children will find means of support and be able to live out

1

their days; the young and orphaned who have no parents will find someone to take care of

them and look after their needs.

READING REVIEW

1. According to Mo Tzu, what gives rise to all the great harms of the world?

2. How can universality replace partiality?

3. How did Mo Tzu view the nature of universal love, as spiritual or material?

Provide evidence from the excerpt to support your answer.

2

Prim ar y S our ce Doc um e nt wi t h Qu e st io n s ( D BQ s)

S E L E C T I O N F R O M T H E Z H U A N G Z I : C H A P T E R 3 , “ T H E S E C R E T O F C A R I N G F O R L I F E ”

Int rod uct io n

Zhuangzi (also called Zhuang Zhou) was an historically verifiable man who lived somewhere around 360-280 BCE. The long book that bears his name is a combination of material that represents his own thinking and of other writings incorporated by various compilers and editors. Like Confucius, Mencius, Han Fei and others, Zhuangzi lived during the time when the kings of the Zhou dynasty had little real power and the kingdom had disintegrated into feudal states that were constantly at war with each other in shifting patterns of alliances and enmities. During the Warring States period (480-221 BCE), Zhuangzi and Laozi were not considered to be part of a single school of thought. Zhuangzi is more concerned with escaping from the world; Laozi, with cunning ways of ruling it. During the Han dynasty, both works’ concern with the Dao (the “Way” of Heaven) and their mystical understanding of that term inspired historians to lump them together under the single category of “Daoism.” The name stuck. Zhuangzi and Laozi are now forever linked as the two great progenitors of Daoist philosophy and religion.

Se l ect ed D ocu m en t E xc erpt w it h Q u e sti o ns From Sources of Chinese Tradition, compiled by Wm. Theodore de Bary and Irene Bloom, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 103-104. © 1999 Columbia University Press. Reproduced with the permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.

Selection
from
the
Zhuangzi:
 Chapter
3,
“The
Secret
of
Caring
for
Life”



 Your
life
has
a
limit
but
knowledge
has
none.
If
you
use
what
is
limited
to
pursue
what
has
no
 limit,
you
will
be
in
danger.
If
you
understand
this
and
still
strive
for
knowledge,
you
will
be
in
 danger
 for
 certain!
 If
 you
 do
 good,
 stay
 away
 from
 fame.
 If
 you
 do
 evil,
 stay
 away
 from
 punishments.
Follow
 the
middle;
go
by
what
 is
constant,
and
you
can
 stay
 in
one
piece,
keep
 yourself
alive,
look
after
your
parents,
and
live
out
your
years.
 
 Cook
Ding
was
cutting
up
an
ox
for
Lord
Wenhui.
At
every
touch
of
his
hand,
every
heave
of
 his
shoulder,
every
move
of
his
feet,
every
thrust
of
his
knee
‑‑
zip,
zoop!
He
slithered
the
knife
 along
with
a
zing,
and
all
was
in
perfect
rhythm,
as
though
he
were
performing
the
dance
of
the
 Mulberry
Grove
or
keeping
time
to
the
Jingshou
music.1

 
 “Ah,
this
is
marvelous!”
said
Lord
Wenhui.
“Imagine
skill
reaching
such
heights!”



























































 1
The
Mulberry
Grove
is
identified
as
a
rain
dance
from
the
time
of
King
Tang
of
the
Shang
dynasty,
and
 the
Jingshou
music
as
part
of
a
longer
composition
from
the
time
of
Yao.


3

Prim ar y S our ce Doc um e nt , wit h Qu e st io n s (D B Q) o n S E LE C TI O N F R O M T H E ZHU A N GZI : CH AP TE R 3, “ THE SE CR ET OF C A RIN G F O R LIF E ”

As ia fo r E du cat ors | Colu m bia U niv ers it y | ht t p:/ /af e. ea s ia .co lu m bia. e du 4

Cook
Ding
laid
down
his
knife
and
replied,
“What
I
care
about
is
the
Way,
which
goes
beyond
 skill.
When
I
first
began
cutting
up
oxen,
all
I
could
see
was
the
ox
itself.
After
three
years
I
no
 longer
 saw
 the
whole
ox.
And
now
 ‑‑
now
 I
 go
at
 it
by
 spirit
and
don’t
 look
with
my
 eyes.
 Perception
and
understanding
have
come
to
a
stop
and
spirit
moves
where
it
wants.
I
go
along
 with
 the
natural
makeup,
strike
 in
 the
big
hollows,
guide
 the
knife
 through
 the
big
openings,
 and
 follow
 things
as
 they
are.
So
 I
never
 touch
 the
 smallest
 ligament
or
 tendon,
much
 less
a
 main
joint.

 
 “A
good
cook
 changes
his
knife
once
a
year
 ‑‑
because
he
cuts.
A
mediocre
 cook
changes
his
 knife
one
a
month
‑‑
because
he
hacks.
I’ve
had
this
knife
of
mine
for
nineteen
years
and
have
 cut
up
thousands
of
oxen
with
it,
and
yet
the
blade
is
as
good
as
though
it
had
just
come
from
 the
grindstone.
There
 are
 spaces
 between
 the
 joints,
and
 the
 blade
of
 the
knife
has
 really
no
 thickness.
 If
you
 insert
what
has
no
 thickness
 into
such
spaces,
 then
 there’s
plenty
of
room
 ‑‑
 more
than
enough
for
the
blade
to
play
about
it.
That’s
why
after
nineteen
years
the
blade
of
my
 knife
is
still
as
good
as
when
it
first
came
from
the
grindstone.

 
 “However,
whenever
 I
 come
 to
 a
 complicated
 place,
 I
 size
 up
 the
 difficulties,
 tell
myself
 to
 watch
out
and
be
careful,
keep
my
eyes
on
what
 I’m
doing,
work
very
slowly,
and
move
 the
 knife
with
 the
greatest
 subtlety,
until
 flop!
The
whole
 thing
 comes
apart
 like
a
 clod
of
 earth
 crumbling
 to
 the
ground.
 I
 stand
 there
holding
 the
knife
and
 look
all
around
me,
 completely
 satisfied
and
reluctant
to
move
on,
and
then
I
wipe
off
the
knife
and
put
it
away.”

 
 “Excellent!”
said
Lord
Wenhui.
“I
have
heard
the
words
of
Cook
Ding
and
learned
how
to
care
 for
life!”
…
 


Q ue st io n s:

1. How does Zhuangzi suggest that one live one’s life? How might his recommendation have been influenced by the chaotic and warlike times in which he lived?

2. How is the concept of “the Way” (Dao) relevant to understanding the story of Cook Ding?

3. How does Zhuangzi’s approach to life contrast to that of Confucius and Mencius? To that of Han Fei and Lord Shang?




Primary Source Document with Questions (DBQs)

S E L E C T I O N S F R O M T H E M E N C I U S : O N H U M A N N A T U R E

Introduction

Mencius (Mengzi, or Meng Ke) was a particularly powerful advocate for the thought of Confucius. Living in the fourth century BCE, about one hundred years after Confucius, Mencius, too, was concerned about the contradiction between the ideal of a peaceful, unified, hierarchical feudal kingdom and the reality of nearly constant warfare between de facto independent feudal states in which the large and powerful preyed upon and absorbed the smaller and weaker states. Like Confucius, Mencius offered his services to feudal lords. Also like Confucius, Mencius had a more successful career as a teacher than as an official.

Document Excerpts with Questions (Longer selection follows this section) From Sources of Chinese Tradition, compiled by Wm. Theodore de Bary and Irene Bloom, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 129. © 1999 Columbia University Press. Reproduced with the permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.

Questions:

1. What assumptions does Mencius make about human nature? 2. How does Mencius’ thinking in regard to human nature fit with your

conceptions of human nature? 3. How does Mencius’ thinking on human nature compare to that of Xunzi?

4. What implications does Mencius’ thinking on human nature have for his advice on how to govern a state?

5

Primary Source Document, with Questions (DBQs) on S E L E C T I O N S F R O M T H E MENCIUS: ON HUMAN NATURE

Asia for Educators | Columbia University | http: //afe.easia.columbia.edu 6































 






















 1
At
the
beginning
of
the
passage
Mencius
recalls
that
the
ancient
kings
had
this
“mind
that
cannot
bear
to
 see
the
suffering
of
others.”
Here
he
affirms
that
people
of
the
present
also
have
it.








2A:6
 
 All
human
beings
have
a
mind
that
cannot
bear
 to
see
 the
sufferings
of
others.
 The
ancient
kings
had
a
commiserating
mind
and,
accordingly,
a
commiserating
government.
 Having
 a
 commiserating
mind,
 a
 commiserating
 government,
 governing
 the
 world
 was
 like
 turning
something
around
on
the
palm
of
the
hand.
 
 Here
is
why
I
say
that
all
human
beings
have
a
mind
that
commiserates
with
others.
Now,1
 if
 anyone
were
suddenly
to
see
a
child
about
to
fall
into
a
well,
his
mind
would
always
be
filled
 with
alarm,
distress,
pity,
and
compassion.
That
he
would
react
accordingly
is
not
because
he
 would
use
the
opportunity
to
ingratiate
himself
with
the
child’s
parents,
nor
because
he
would
 seek
 commendation
 from
 neighbors
 and
 friends,
 nor
 because
 he
 would
 hate
 the
 adverse
 reputation.
From
this
it
may
be
seen
that
one
who
lacks
a
mind
that
feels
pity
and
compassion
 would
not
be
human;
one
who
lacks
a
mind
that
feels
shame
and
aversion
would
not
be
human;
 one
who
lacks
a
mind
that
feels
modesty
and
compliance
would
not
be
human;
and
one
who lacks
a
mind
that
knows
right
and
wrong
would
not
be
human.
 
 The
mind’s
 feeling
 of
 pity
 and
 compassion
 is
 the
 beginning
 of
 humaneness
 (ren);
 the
mind’s
 feelings
of
shame
and
aversion
is
the
beginning
of
rightness
(yi);
the
mind’s
feeling
of
modesty
 and
compliance
 is
 the
beginning
of
propriety;
and
the
mind’s
sense
of
right
and
wrong
is
 the
 beginning
of
wisdom.
 
 Human
beings
have
these
four
beginnings
 just
as
they
have
four
limbs.
For
one
to
have
these
 four
beginnings
and
yet
to
say
of
oneself
that
one
is
unable
to
fulfill
them
is
to
injure
one’s
ruler.
 When
we
know
how
to
enlarge
and
bring
to
fulfillment
these
four
beginnings
that
are
within
 us,
 it
will
be
 like
a
fire
beginning
to
burn
or
a
spring
finding
an
outlet.
 If
one
is
able
to
bring
 them
to
fulfillment,
they
will
be
sufficient
to
enable
him
to
protect
‘all
within
the
four
seas’;
if
 one
is
not,
they
will
be
insufficient
even
to
enable
him
to
serve
his
parents.”


Primary Source Document with Questions (DBQs)

S E L E C T I O N F R O M T H E X U N Z I : “ H U M A N N A T U R E I S E V I L ”

Introduction

Xunzi (Xun Qing, or Xun Kuang: c. 310-c. 219 BCE) lived at the very end of the Zhou dynasty. Like Mencius, he was an advocate and interpreter of the teachings of Confucius. Living a generation after Mencius, Xunzi lived through the final, brutal wars which ended with the state of Qin absorbing and unifying all the Chinese feudal states. Xunzi was a widely traveled scholar, teacher, and official.

Document Excerpts with Questions (Longer selection follows this section) From Sources of Chinese Tradition, compiled by Wm. Theodore de Bary and Irene Bloom, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 179-183. © 1999 Columbia University Press. Reproduced with the permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.







Questions:

1. How does Xunzi’s understanding of human nature compare to your own? 2. How does Xunzi’s understanding of human nature compare to that of

Mencius? Which do you prefer, and why? 3. Why might the two men, from the same background, both self-appointed

interpreters of Confucius, and only one generation apart, come up with their respective understandings of human nature?

4. What implications does Xunzi’s understanding of human nature have for family life and government?

7

Primary Source Document, with Questions (DBQs) on S E L E C T I O N F R O M T H E XUNZI : “HUMAN NATURE IS EVIL ”

Asia for Educators | Columbia University | http://afe.easia.columbia.edu 8







Human
nature
 is
evil;
 its
good
derives
from
conscious
activity.
Now
it
 is
human
nature
to
be
 born
with
a
fondness
for
profit.
 Indulging
this
 leads
to
contention
and
strife,
and
the
sense
of
 modesty
and
yielding
with
which
one
was
born
disappears.
One
is
born
with
feelings
of
envy
 and
hate,
and,
by
indulging
these,
one
is
led
into
banditry
and
theft,
so
that
the
sense
of
loyalty
 and
good
faith
with
which
he
was
born
disappears.
One
is
born
with
the
desires
of
the
ears
and eyes
and
with
a
fondness
for
beautiful
sights
and
sounds,
and,
by
indulging
these,
one
is
led
to
 licentiousness
and
chaos,
 so
 that
 the
 sense
of
 ritual,
 rightness,
 refinement,
 and
principle
with
 which
 one
was
 born
 is
 lost.
Hence,
 following
 human
nature
 and
 indulging
 human
 emotions
 will
 inevitably
 lead
 to
 contention
 and
 strife,
 causing
 one
 to
 rebel
 against
 one’s
 proper
 duty,
 reduce
 principle
 to
 chaos,
 and
 revert
 to
 violence.
 Therefore
 one
must
 be
 transformed
 by
 the
 example
 of
 a
 teacher
 and
 guided
 by
 the
 way
 of
 ritual
 and
 rightness
 before
 one
 will
 attain
 modesty
 and
 yielding,
 accord
 with
 refinement
 and
 ritual,
 and
 return
 to
 order.
 From
 this
 perspective
 it
 is
 apparent
 that
 human
 nature
 is
 evil
 and
 that
 its
 goodness
 is
 the
 result
 of
 conscious
activity.
 
 Thus
warped
wood
must
be
 laid
against
a
straightening
board,
 steamed,
and
bent
 into
shape
 before
it
can
become
straight;
blunt
metal
must
be
ground
on
a
whetstone
before
it
can
become
 sharp.
And
in
that
human
nature
is
evil,
it
must
wait
for
the
example
of
a
teacher
before
it
can
 become
upright,
and
for
ritual
and
rightness
before
it
can
become
orderly.
Now,
if
people
lack
 the
example
of
teachers
they
will
be
partial
and
narrow
rather
than
upright;
if
they
lack
ritual
 and
rightness
they
will
be
rebellious
and
chaotic
rather
than
orderly.
In
ancient
times
the
sage
 kings,
recognizing
that
the
nature
of
human
beings
 is
evil
 ‑‑
 that
 they
incline
toward
evil
and
 are
not
upright,
 that
 they
are
disposed
toward
chaos
and
are
not
orderly
‑‑
created
ritual
and


Primary Source Document, with Questions (DBQs) on S E L E C T I O N F R O M T H E XUNZI : “HUMAN NATURE IS EVIL ”

Asia for Educators | Columbia University | http://afe.easia.columbia.edu Page 3 of 3

rightness
 and
 established
 models
 and
 limits
 in
 order
 to
 reform
 and
 improve
 the
 human
 emotional
 nature
 and
make
 it
 upright,
 in
 order
 to
 train
 and
 transform
 the
 human
 emotional
 nature
 and
provide
 it
with
 a
 guide.
They
 caused
 them
 to
 attain
 order
 and
 to
 conform
 to
 the
 Way.
 And
 so
 today
 a
 person
 who
 is
 transformed
 by
 the
 instructions
 of
 a
 teacher,
 devotes
 himself
to
study,
and
abides
by
ritual
and
rightness
may
become
a
noble
person,
while
one
who
 follows
his
nature
and
emotions,
is
content
to
give
free
play
to
his
passions,
and
abandons
ritual
 and
rightness
is
a
lesser
person.
It
is
obvious
from
this,
therefore,
that
human
nature
is
evil,
and
 that
its
goodness
results
from
conscious
activity.
 
 Mencius
said,
The
fact
that
human
beings
learn
shows
that
their
nature
is
good.
I
say
this
is
not
 so;
 this
 comes
 of
 his
 having
 neither
 understood
 human
 nature
 nor
 perceived
 the
distinction
 between
the
nature
and
conscious
activity.
The
nature
is
what
is
given
by
Heaven:
one
cannot
 learn
it;
one
cannot
acquire
it
by
effort.
Ritual
and
rightness
are
created
by
sages:
people
learn
 them
and
are
capable,
through
effort,
of
bringing
them
to
completion.
What
cannot
be
learned
 or
acquired
by
effort
but
 is
within
us
 is
 called
 the
nature.
What
 can
be
 learned
and,
 through
 effort,
 brought
 to
 completion
 is
 called
 conscious
 activity.
 This
 is
 the
 distinction
 between
 the
 nature
and
conscious
activity.
That
the
eyes
can
see
and
the
ears
can
hear
is
human
nature.
But
 the
faculty
of
clear
sight
does
not
exist
apart
from
the
eye,
nor
does
the
faculty
of
keen
hearing
 exist
 apart
 from
 the
 ear.
 It
 is
 apparent
 that
 the
 eye’s
 clear
 vision
 and
 the
 ear’s
acute
hearing
 cannot
be
learned.
 
 Mencius
said,
Now,
human
nature
is
good,
and
[when
it
is
not]
this
is
always
a
result
of
having
 lost
or
destroyed
one’s
nature.
I
say
that
he
was
mistaken
to
take
such
a
view.
Now,
it
is
human
 nature
 that,
as
soon
as
a
person
 is
born,
he
departs
 from
his
original
substance1
and
from
his
 natural
 disposition,
 so
 that
 he
must
 inevitably
 lose
 and
destroy
 them.
 Seen
 in
 this
way,
 it
 is
 apparent
that
human
nature
is
evil.
Those
who
say
that
the
nature
is
good
find
beauty
in
what
 does
 not
 depart
 from
 the
 original
 substance
 and
 value
 in
 what
 does
 not
 diverge
 from
 the
 natural
 disposition.
 They
 consider
 that
 the
 beauty
 of
 the
natural
 disposition
 and
 the
 original
 substance
 and
 the
goodness
of
 the
mind’s
 intentions
 are
 [inseparable
 from
 the
 nature]
 in
 the
 same
way
that
clear
sight
is
inseparable
from
the
eye
and
keen
hearing
is
inseparable
from
the
 ear.
Hence
 they
maintain
 that
 [the
 nature
 possesses
 goodness]
 in
 the
 same
way
 that
 the
 eye
 possesses
clear
vision
or
the
ear
possesses
keenness
of
hearing.
 
 Now,
it
is
human
nature
that
when
one
is
hungry
he
will
desire
satisfaction,
when
he
is
cold
he
 will
desire
warmth,
and
when
he
 is
weary
he
will
desire
 rest.
This
 is
 the
emotional
nature
of
 human
beings.
Yet,
even
if
a
person
is
hungry,
he
will
not
dare
to
be
the
first
to
eat
if
he
is
in
the
 presence
of
his
elders
because
he
knows
that
he
should
yield
to
them.
Although
he
is
weary,
he
 will
not
dare
to
seek
rest
because
he
knows
that
he
should
work
on
behalf
of
others.
For
a
son
to
 yield
to
his
father
and
a
younger
brother
to
yield
to
his
elder
brother,
or
for
a
son
to
work
on
































 






















 1
The
word
Xunzi
uses
here
is
pu,
a
term
that
occurs
frequently
in
the
Daodejing
and
is
often
translated
in
 that
context
as
“the
uncarved
block.”


9

Primary Source Document, with Questions (DBQs) on S E L E C T I O N F R O M T H E XUNZI : “HUMAN NATURE IS EVIL ”

Asia for Educators | Columbia University | http://afe.easia.columbia.edu 10

behalf
of
his
 father
and
a
younger
brother
 to
work
on
behalf
of
his
elder
brother
 ‑‑
 these
 two
 acts
are
contrary
to
the
nature
and
counter
to
the
emotions,
and
yet
they
represent
the
way
of
 filial
devotion
and
 the
 refinement
 and
principle
 that
 are
 associated
with
 ritual
 and
 rightness.
 Hence,
to
follow
the
emotional
nature
would
mean
that
there
would
be
no
courtesy
or
humility;
 courtesy
and
humility
run
counter
to
the
emotional
nature.
From
this
perspective
it
is
apparent
 that
human
nature
 is
 evil,
 and
 that
 goodness
 is
 the
 result
 of
 conscious
 activity.
A
questioner
 asks:
If
human
nature
is
evil,
then
where
do
ritual
and
rightness
come
from?
I
reply:
ritual
and
 rightness
 are
 always
 created
 by
 the
 conscious
 activity
 of
 the
 sages;
 essentially
 they
 are
 not
 created
by
human
nature.
Thus
a
potter
molds
clay
and
makes
a
vessel,
but
the
vessel
is
created
 by
the
conscious
activity
of
the
potter
and
is
not
created
by
his
human
nature.
In
the
same
way
 a
carpenter
carves
a
piece
of
wood
and
makes
a
utensil,
but
the
utensil
 is
created
through
the
 conscious
activity
of
the
carpenter
and
is
not
created
by
his
human
nature.
A
sage
gathers
his
 thoughts
 and
 reflections,
 engages
 in
 conscious
 activity,
 and
 thus
 creates
 ritual
 and
 rightness
 and
produces
models
and
regulations.
Hence
ritual,
rightness,
models,
and
limits
are
created
by
 the
conscious
activity
of
the
sage
and
not
by
his
human
nature.
…
 
 When
a
person
desires
to
do
good
he
always
does
so
because
his
nature
is
evil.
A
person
who
is
 shallow
 aspires
 to
 depth;
 one
 who
 is
 ugly
 aspires
 to
 beauty;
 one
 who
 is
 narrow
 aspires
 to
 breadth;
one
who
is
poor
aspires
to
wealth;
one
who
is
humble
aspires
to
esteem.
Whatever
one
 lacks
in
oneself
he
must
seek
outside.
Therefore
if
a
person
is
rich,
he
will
not
aspire
to
wealth,
 and
if
he
is
esteemed,
he
will
not
long
for
power.
What
a
person
possesses
in
himself
he
need
 not
seek
outside.
One
can
see
from
this
that
the
reason
human
beings
desire
to
do
good
is
that
 their
nature
is
evil.
Now
human
nature
is
definitely
devoid
of
ritual
and
rightness.
Therefore,
 they
 compel
 themselves
 to
 study
 and
 to
 seek
 to
 possess
 them.
 The
 nature
 knows
 nothing
 of
 ritual
and
rightness,
and
therefore
they
reflect
and
ponder
and
seek
to
understand
them.
Thus
 the
nature
is
inborn,
that
is
all,
and
human
beings
neither
possess
ritual
and
rightness,
nor
do
 they
understand
them.
…
 
 If
human
nature
were
good,
we
could
dispense
with
the
sage
kings
and
desist
from
the
practice
 of
ritual
and
rightness.
Since
human
nature
is
evil,
we
must
elevate
the
sages
and
esteem
ritual
 and
rightness.
Therefore
the
straightening
board
was
created
because
of
warped
wood,
and
the
 plumb
line
came
into
being
because
of
 things
that
are
not
straight.
Rulers
are
established
and
 ritual
and
rightness
are
illuminated
because
the
nature
is
evil.
From
this
perspective
it
is
clear
 that
 human
nature
 is
 evil
 and
 that
 goodness
 is
 the
 result
 of
 conscious
 activity.
Wood
 that
 is
 straight
need
not
wait
for
the
straightening
board
to
become
straight;
it
is
straight
by
nature.
But
 a
warped
 piece
 of
wood
must
 be
 laid
 against
 a
 straightening
 board,
 steamed,
 and
 bent
 into
 shape
before
it
can
become
straight
because
its
nature
is
not
straight.
Now
since
human
nature
 is
 evil,
 people
must
 await
 ordering
 by
 the
 sage
 kings
 and
 transformation
 through
 ritual
 and
 rightness,
and
only
then
do
they
attain
order
and
accord
with
goodness.
From
this
perspective,
 it
is
clear
that
human
nature
is
evil
and
that
goodness
is
the
result
of
conscious
activity.
…