Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics) by Han Feizi (PDF)

Description

Trenchant, sophisticated, and cynical, Han Feizi has been read in every age and is still of interest today when people are more than ever concerned with the nature and use of power. Han Feizi (280?-233 B.C.), a prince of Han, was a representative of the Fa-chia, or Legalist, school of philosophy and produced the final and most readable exposition of its theories. His handbook for the ruler deals with the problems of strengthening and preserving the state, the way of the ruler, the use of power, and punishment and favor. Ironically, the ruler most influenced by Han Feizi, the king of Qin, eventually sent Han Feizi to prison, where he later committed suicide.

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: About the Author Burton Watson is one of the world’s best-known translators from the Chinese and Japanese. He received the PEN translation prize in 1981. His translations include The Lotus Sutra, The Vimalakirti Sutra, Ryokan: Zen Monk-Poet of Japan, Saigyo: Poems of a Mountain Home, and The Columbia Book of Chinese Poetry: From Early Times to the Thirteenth Century, all published by Columbia. This book presents Watson’s renowned translation of a Chinese philosophy classic in pinyin romanization for the first time.

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐I’ve always had a special enthusiasm for books in the Realpolitik tradition. The History of the Peloponnesian War, The Prince, and Leviathan are among my favorite entries in world literature. I’ve been acquainted with the concept of Legalism and its influence on Qin and subsequent Chinese dynasties for a long time through my carousal of history and other books in the Eastern Classics canon. However, I’ve never pursued this interest to the extent of engaging with the primary sources that developed this Chinese variation on the realpolitik.So why set aside a weekend to the study of a primary Legalist text now? The People’s Republic of China’s 2015 decision to phase in a society spanning point-based process (Social Credit System) cataloging each citizen’s behaviors positively or negatively echoes Legalist Lord Shang’s assertion that an individual’s rank (Commoner –> Gentleman –> Ministers) in society ought to correlate with their a quantifiable measurement of their accomplishments. Ergo Commoner soldiers could obtain entry into the gentry by collecting enemy heads in battle, and Commoner farmers could do the same by producing greater quantities of food. This early Legalist maxim deviated from the Confucian norm that individuals ought to be content with their status in society and only seek advancement if the circumstances dictated. The resemblance between the ancient policy and the overtures of China’s present government was fascinating enough to turn what had hitherto been a passing interest into a serious one.A brief analysis of commentaries indicated Han Feizi was the most philosophically engaging Legalist. Unfortunately, locating a complete version of his works proved difficult, so I had to rely on the Basic Writings. Because the translation is incomplete the text will make occasional jumps like from Section 10 to Section 12. I can’t comment much on what is missing, but what is provided are The Way of the Ruler, On Having Standards, The Two Handles, Wielding Power, The Eight Villanies, The Ten Faults, The Difficulties of Persuasion, Mr. He, Precautions Within the Palace, Facing South, the Five Vermin, and Eminence in Learning.The Way of the Ruler evokes Daoism of all philosophies to describe the attributes of a fit ruler. Like the Daoist sage he must be mysterious and apart from the broader society. This is includes refraining from making public appearances among commoners (hunting, concerts, religious rituals, etc) or fraternizing with subordinates as though they were trusted friends. The minarchist school of Chinese political thought seems like a strange bedfellow for what essentially amounts to fascism, but this evocation of mystery prevents subordinates from comprehending the ruler astutely enough to sense his weaknesses or exploit his ignorance, disarming potential rebellions before they start.”On Having Standards” criticizes the notion that charisma and personal will of the ruler or his ministers ought to factor into the government of the state. In the ancient world, alongside whatever courts administered justice, most rulers could order their attendant strong men to bestow rewards and punishments in a casual way, regardless of court procedures. “Execute this guy because I don’t like the way he looked at me” and that flavor of tyranny. Instead, Han Feizi argues that rulers should only enforce rewards or punishments for things that have been written into, and publicly held up as, law. Indulging in personal will when confronted with procedural or administrative problems will pattern an example that laws don’t reach far, and aren’t worth respecting, thereby undermining the authoritarian system the Legalist ruler depends on to preserve his reign.”Two Handles” refers to rewards and punishment. The idea is that a ruler should issue rewards to people that succeed and punishments to those who fail. The rewards should be small to prevent subordinates from developing independent power bases that can challenge the ruler, but punishments severe so that those on the receiving end of them can’t seek vengeance, potential replacements for subordinates being abundant among the state’s social climbers anyway. Importantly, ministers must be rewarded or punished to the letter of what they set out to accomplish, not on the quantity. Thus an agricultural minister who promised a small net gain in grain production but produced a huge surplus would be punished equally as much as a minister who promised a huge surplus, but ran a deficit. Again, this is because the exact laws authorized by the ruler must be respected above personal achievement, or society will spiral into chaos as individuals pursue desperate and risky policies to gain greater and greater rewards.”Wielding Power” elaborates on the concepts that were detailed in the Way of the Ruler, returning to Daoist language. Unlike other philosophies which empathize the importance of rulers being active presences in the lives of their subjects, Legalist rulers need to resist the impulse to micro manage. Whereas rulers following other philosophers might blend the role of king, general, warrior, and even farmer, the Legalist ruler should only be the first. He doesn’t need to understand military strategy except to make it work in cohesion with his other policies (agricultural production, trade, diplomatic relationships, etc) and issue directives to his generals, nor should he ever expose himself to the dangers of combat or the drudgery of running a farm. His only concern is to coerce honest reports from his ministers so that can understand what is happening in his kingdom and issue rewards and punishments accordingly.”The Eight Villainies” outline the most common threats rulers will face, the overarching idea being that subordinates will attempt to expand their influence over society at the expense of their ruler by diverting him with hobbies extraneous to government. #1 would be encouraging him to spend time with lovers, #2 would be encouraging entertainers to produce longer and more elaborate performances, #3 is co-opting family members and trusted advisers to manipulate him into authorizing policies that empower ministers, #4 is encouraging him to focus on interior decorating (of his palace), #5 is bribing the masses to threaten his rule, #6 is hiring sophists to confuse him with flashy but logically unsound arguments, #7 is ministers recruiting mercenaries to develop spheres of authority co-equal with the ruler within his own kingdom, #8 is soliciting foreign intervention from other rulers.”The Ten Faults” are the attributes a ruler can embody that leave him exposed to the Eight Villainies. #1 is prioritizing minor details, like the fact a subordinate enjoys your favorite poem or song, over substantial accomplishments. Essentially, promoting a subordinate to a higher position because you like him rather than because he is a good Legalist minister invites ruination. #2 is more of the same, except it means that a ruler prioritizes getting his favorite musician to come live in his kingdom over securing his borders against an upcoming invasion. #3 is being rude to everyone you interact with for no reason other than you are the ruler. #4 is loving art and entertainment so much you can’t maintain interest in civil administration. #5 is being too greedy to make smart investments for the future. #6 is loving women entertainers. #7 is spending time away from the palace where your administration exists, leaving you unable to issue commands and write laws and encouraging others to assume those roles in your place. #8 is ignoring good advice for the sake of having your own way. #9 is relying on foreign allies for protection instead of developing the military resources of your own kingdom. #10 behaving arrogantly toward rulers from neighboring kingdoms.”The Difficulties of Persuasion” is a bit anomalous in this selection because it was addressed to subordinates, rather than rulers — Legalist rulers embody absolute power, and therefore don’t need to persuade anyone. Whereas rulers function as remote Daoist sages, ministers have to engage directly with subjects (farmers, soldiers, etc) in order to get results. Thus when a farmer wants to plant a luxury crop that sells for a lot but doesn’t meet the food consumption needs of the state or a soldier wants to engage in combat that doesn’t contribute to the security of the country, the minister has to convince them to live in strict compliance with law by pointing out how pursuing these deviant interests will bring ruin. It also (unsurprisingly) encourages ministers to live in compliance with the law themselves, so the ruler will respect the advice they give him.”Mr. He” doesn’t seem to be addressed to anyone, but rather consists of Han Feizi’s personal evaluation of the Warring States Period and the difficulties that exist in being a good ruler, minister, or subject according to Legalist maxims, as well as the dangers of being a Legalist in a Confucian world, and life’s general unfairness. He muses on the trouble a Legalist minister must face living in a society where rulers don’t appreciate Legalism, a situation he probably felt himself teaching Legalism to disinterested higher ranking relatives.”Precautions within the Palace” raised a lot of ire in Ancient China because it suggested that rulers couldn’t entrust their safety to anyone, not even loved ones. Concubines the ruler cherished early in life will wish the ruler is dead so that the children of late life concubines won’t have a share in the inheritance. Therefore the ruler can’t trust in anyone’s good will, and should investigate every suggestion thoroughly, as pertains to his security.”Facing South” suggests that ruler needs scale down middle management. Appointing an minister to be a liaison between himself another minister who has been assigned an important task places too much distance between the ruler and his ability to administrate. It also encourages ministers to band together to deceive the ruler and develop their own power bases. It also suggests”The Five Vermin” is one of the longest entries. Han Feizi was arguing from within a tradition that unquestionably maintained previous eras were golden ages where China was safe and well fed, and that living up to the (ostensibly ancient) ideals recommended by rival philosophers Conscious and Mozi would reproduce the prosperity that existed back then. Feizi agrees that times were golden, compared to the warlike and disorderly era of the Warring States Period, but suggests the ancients’ apparent virtue of the past arose from abundant resources and small populations, not from living according to Confucian/Mohistic ideals. Consequently rulers should coax good behavior from subjects by working fields, securing borders, and filling stomachs, rather than fermenting discontent with obscure philosophies or religions.”Eminence in Learning” continues to criticize rival philosophers Confucius and Mohi. Although each of them claimed to have grounded their tenets in the teachings of ancient Sages whose wisdom is beyond contestation (not even by Han Feizi), he points out they contradict each other and that their ideologies have split into rival schools, making it impossible to verify which tenets from which schools are the correct ones. It also recommends the criteria by which rulers should appraise intellectuals. As in all things Legalistic, consistency is key: a ruler shouldn’t support the work of a sage whose ideologies he privately enjoys, but doesn’t want disseminated to broader society.Being more of a Minarchist of the Daoist variety myself, I find Legalist ideas as terrifying as they are compelling. There’s a kind of dread to knowing that human beings can be reduced to automatons of the state before realizing they have the individual will to challenge this power dynamic. Nonetheless I see a lot of value in Han Feizi’s teachings. Partly he is excused because of the chaotic times he lived in, but also because his book shows how authoritarianism can plant roots in the human consciousness, and what sorts of things can drive people to accept authoritarianism. It gives you a much more developed sense of how bad humanity can be than Confucius or Mozi, and how political relationships can become toxic and pervert enterprise. Regardless if you agree with its prescribed cures for an unruly society, it is a valuable book for turning the light on aspects of humanity optimists won’t (or can’t) address. You will come way better informed about the difficulty of having ideals in a fallen world, and the dangers of trying to live by them. That is a value that is constant among realpolitik books.

⭐Bought this for my early Chinese Art and Archaeology course to study different philosophies of the time and this was beautiful, easy to follow and super interesting!

⭐Product came quickly and as described.

⭐Han Feizi, Mo Tzu and Confucius -Mencius were four of the “hundred philosophers” in the period from 551 to 233 BC that made recommendations about how a country should be governed. This book is a direct translation Ham Feizi’s basic writings from Chinese by Burton Watson. one of the world’s best translators from Chinese. These doctrines were developed during “Warring States” period, 404 to 221 BC. During that period China consisted of several independent Kingdoms that were continuously at war. If you are interested in the practice of government you should study all three philosophers and determine what they think is useful and is useless in their teachings. It is at least at the same level as the teachings of Aristotle. It is based on far more experience of a large state. The teaching sof Han Feizi are referred to as the “realistic” and also as the “legalistic school.” Han Feizi, different from the other philosophers was a prince and a member of the ruling class of the state of Han. He wrote this book on how a ruler should govern wishing to survive and conquer other states. He tried to convince the King of Han to apply his doctrine. The king refused. He therefore accepted an invitation to join the court by the king of Qin, Shi Huang in 221 BC. Qin Shi Huang was already well aware of Feizi’s theory. Shi Huang was told that Han Feizi could not be trusted because he belonged to the royal Han family. Feizi was told to take poison, which he did. Qin Shi Huang conquered all independent Chinese kingdoms including Han. He carried out gigantic projects including building most of the Great Wall of China, a national road system, digging the Lingqu canal, deploying 100 000s of workers of which tens of thousands died. He has become well known because of the life size 7,000 Terracotta soldiers arranged in battle formation discovered in 1974. What was the Feizi doctrine? There has to be order in a state. Order requiresDiscipline. Discipline requires laws and standards of suitable behavior. People are not disciplined by nature, and therefore rewards for proper behavior should be high and punishment for breaking laws severe. Laws should be easy to understand by common people and no exceptions should be made for anybody regardless of status. The ruler should appoint the best performers as ministers. Performance can only be judged by results achieved. Competent people will propose plans leading to specified results. Those that did not deliver the result or produced more than promised should be punished. Nobody should be promoted without a proven track record. Clever talkers or scholars should never be admitted to government. The ruler should not trust anybody, including his wife, children or concubines. He should never allow any minister to provide a favor to anybody; only the ruler can bestow favors and rewards. The ruler should never let anybody know what he would like to happen, as that would lead to flattery and intrigues. The private and public interest are not always the same. Han Feizi describes why the teachings of Confucius and Mo Tzu were dangerous including the following. Confucius had confused the issue of private and public interest in one of his books (13. 18 about the stolen sheep) indicating that loyalty to a father (private interest) was more important than loyalty to the state (public interest). He also pointed out that some fathers have bad sons and some sons have bad fathers and the that bad character and incompetence could not be remediated (the “Bad Emperor” problem). Confucius idea of looking to the past for solution was dangerous as the present and future were different. Adhering to traditions that were wasteful or harmful was wrong. Every act should be judged on performance to day and in the future. Qin Shi Huang agreed, ordered all of their books burned and ordered 460 of their scholars to be burned alive. Qin Shi Huang established a united China be it at a high price in human lives in wars and in his huge projects. He was king of Qin from 247- 221 BC, founded the Qin Dynasty in 221, and died in 2007BC after ruling for 40 years. His successor, his 18th son, Hu Hai, was an extremely incompetent emperor, revolutions soon started and the state collapsed and was succeeded by the Han dynasty. Mao Zedong was an admirer of Qin Shi Huang and also influenced by the doctrines of Han Feizi. The idea of order at almost any price is still alive to day. That is why Deng Xiaoping considered he had no other choice but to remove all of the students from Tiananmen Square with force in 1989. He was convinced China would disintegrate without this action and return to the “Warring States” position.

⭐This is an excellent insight on how today’s rulers of China perceive the role of law and how to govern their country. It is not rule of law – it is ruled by law. And there is little or no scope for diverging views. Han Feizi live more than two thousand years ago, but his views are still highly relevant.

⭐It’s hard to find good English translations of all but the most famous texts. This one helped a lot in understanding Legalism. Thanks!

Keywords

Free Download Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics) in PDF format
Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics) PDF Free Download
Download Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics) 2003 PDF Free
Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics) 2003 PDF Free Download
Download Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics) PDF
Free Download Ebook Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics)