Han Fei Zi

From New World Encyclopedia

Han Fei (韓非) (c. 280–233 B.C.E.) was a philosopher who combined various practical systems of statecraft into a unified doctrine, which was later named the School of Law or Legalism. His stress on harsh punishments and on tight control of the machinery of bureaucracy was used to great effect by the King of Qin, who used Han Fei's Legalist insights to unify China as its first emperor. The many hardships visited upon the people in the name of Legalism caused the entire school of philosophy to be demonized from the fall of the Qin Kingdom into the present day.

The case of Han Fei Zi offers an extra-Biblical example of the legalistic reinterpretation of religious texts and shows how this issue was addressed in Chinese culture. The misuse of his teachings by the Qin emperor (and in later Chinese politics) demonstrates that basing social laws upon narrow readings of religious and philosophical texts can lead to rigidity and can spawn fundamentalism and intolerance.

Contents 1 Han Fei's Life 2 Han Fei's Philosophy 2.1 Controlling the state 2.1.1 Techniques of leadership 2.1.2 Laws and Coercive Punishments 2.1.3 The position of power 2.2 Metaphysics and cosmology 3 Han Fei's Impact 4 References 5 External links 6 Credits

Han Fei's Life

Unlike the other famed philosophers of the time, Han Fei (280-233 B.C.E.) was a member of the ruling aristocracy, having been born into the ruling family of the state of Han during the end phase of the Warring States Period. He spent his younger years as a student of famed Confucian teacher, Xunzi. Though he desired to take up political office, as befitted a member of the royal family, he was prevented by his stutter and associated fear of public speaking. Instead, he concentrated his efforts upon writing proposals aimed at bettering the state of affairs in Han, as he saw his home state descending into turmoil and lawlessness.

Later, when their kingdom was under attack from the state of Qin (whose ruler had read and applied the teachings of Han Fei), the King of Han sent him to Qin as an emissary. While there, Li Si (another former student of Xunzi, who was employed in the royal court) spoke to the King of Qin and convinced him that his former classmate was, in fact, a spy. The King had Han Fei jailed. While he was imprisoned, Li Si visited him and, without the King's knowledge, convinced him that he was going to be executed. Han Fei, dejected and alone, took poison to avoid the shame of a public execution.

Han Fei's entire recorded work, including many of the creeds sent to the Kings of Han and Qin, is collected in the Han Feizi, a book of some 55 chapters. It is also important as the only surviving source for numerous anecdotes from the Warring States Period. (Liao, xxvii-xxix).

Han Fei's Philosophy

Han Fei's Legalist philosophy differs from the majority of positions propounded in the Hundred Schools of Philosophy period (770 to 222 B.C.E.) in a number of fundamental ways. First, his thought was imminently practical, with a near one-pointed focus upon a single goal - the effective and efficient administration of a state. Though the book attributed to him does contain speculations upon more abstract philosophical issues (including metaphysics and cosmology), these apparent digressions are primarily used to provide an underpinning for his practical system of leadership. Second, his philosophical musings are almost unilaterally directed at (and intended for the use of) the ruler. Third, he attempts to base his conclusions upon observations of the world as it actually is, rather than an idealization of it. For this reason, Benjamin Shwartz notes the he seems close "in spirit to certain 19th- and twentieth-century social scientific 'model builders'" (quoted in Graham, 269). Indeed, he argued that, given the changing political and social climate in China at the time, it was inappropriate to gauge one's practices upon past observances: "the Sage does not aim at practicing antiquity, and does not model himself upon what is considered to be permanently correct. He discusses the affairs of his own age, and prepares for them accordingly" (Han Fei Zi (ch. 49), quoted in Fung 317). In all of these ways, his philosophy was inimical to that of the early Confucians (Confucius, Mencius and Xunzi), who stressed the importance of the past rites (li) and believed that the general public could be moralized through the efforts of exemplary individuals (junzi). Likewise, it was incompatible with the spirit of the early Daoists (Laozi and Zhuangzi), who idealized the simplicity of life in the past and abhorred coercive political leadership. Regardless, the Legalist stress on practical (and practicable) techniques created a significant challenge for the more theoretical schools of philosophy then common in China.

Han Fei's thought unites three Legalist themes that had, until that point, been separate: the use of laws (法, Fa) and of coercive punishments (borrowed from Shang Yang); the emphasis on particular techniques of leadership (developed by Shen Buhai) (術, Shu); and, finally, the requirement of holding the position of power (勢, Shi) (as per Shen Dao). In his estimation, each of these elements is jointly essential for the effective administration of a state.

Controlling the state

Techniques of leadership

The first element in Han Fei's system of effective political leadership is the employment of particular techniques, the most important of which are wu-wei and xing-ming. Though the former term (wu-wei) is likely familiar to Western readers in its Daoist context, the Legalist sense is less well established.

At first glance, the two understandings seem relatively similar. Han Fei suggests that "virtue begins with non-assertion, develops with non-wanting, rests secure with non-thinking, and solidifies with non-using…. The reason why men value non-assertion and non-thinking is that by remaining empty one's will is ruled by nothing" (HF ch. 20, Liao 170). Likewise, in making the case against willful action, he argues that "all sorts of submission to desire either violate and weaken the ruler or harm the people" (HF ch. 20, Liao 189). However, unlike the descriptions of wu-wei in the Dao De Jing, this technique is understood to have definite, worldly benefits: "Tao exists in invisibility; its function, in unintelligibility. Be empty and reposed and have nothing to do. Then from the dark see defects in the light" (HF ch. 5, Liao 32 [emphasis added]). This second line exemplifies the Legalist reinterpretation of this concept - by resting in quiet repose, the sagely ruler is able to truly discern the desires and intentions of his ministers, while his own are concealed by his practical application of wu-wei. Expanding on this principle, Han Fei insists that "the ruler must not reveal his wants. For, if he reveals his wants, the ministers will polish their manners accordingly. The ruler must not reveal his views, For, if he reveals his views, the ministers will display their hues differently" (HF ch. 5, Liao 31).

This practical application of wu-wei also allows for the use of Han Fei's second major technique: xing-ming (literally "names and forms"). (Creel "The Meaning of Hsing-ming," in What is Taoism?) This practice involves paying careful attention to the details of your underling's claims, such that you are able to accurately assess their fulfillment of them. The text advises "if you hear any word uttered, do not change it nor move it but compare it with the deed and see if word and deed coincide with each other" (HF ch. 5, Liao 32). More explicitly, it states:

Whenever a minister utters a word, the ruler should in accordance with his word assign him a task to accomplish, and in accordance with the task call the work to account. If the work corresponds with the task, and the task corresponds with the word, he should be rewarded. On the contrary, if the work is not equivalent to the task and the task not equivalent to the word, he should be punished. Accordingly, any minister whose word is big but whose work is small should be punished. Not that the work is small, but that the work is not equivalent to the name. Again, any minister whose word is small but whose work is big should also be punished. Not that big work is not desirable, but that the discrepancy between the work and the name is worse than the accomplishment of the big work. Hence the minister should be punished.

Not only does this passage clearly explicate a major technique of Legalist administrative practice, it also aligns this idea of xing-ming with the second major principle of Han Fei's practical guide to rulership: rewards and punishments.

Laws and Coercive Punishments

As seen above, the ruler is supposed to constrain the actions of his ministers through the use of judicious rewards (for accurate performance of duties) and harsh punishments (for disparities between claims and actualities). This administrative technique is also seen to be a key to running an orderly state. Specifically, Han Fei suggests that it is imperative for a ruler to uphold and publically promulgate a system of objective standards (fa, often defined more strictly as "laws), such that everyone will know their responsibilities and will not be able to plead ignorance. As the text states: "if everybody pays for whatever he does, and if good and evil visit him without fail, who would dare to distrust the law? Once compasses and squares [a common metaphor for fa] are established and one angle is made right, the other three angles will come out one after another" (HF ch. 8, Liao 57). An intriguing additional development in this system is a stress on the impartiality of laws as being key to enforcing public acceptance of them.

The law does not fawn on the noble; the string does not yield to the crooked. Whatever the law applies to, the wise cannot reject nor the brave defy. Punishment for fault never skips ministers, reward for good never misses commoners (HF ch. 6, Liao 45).

This idea of universally applicable law is a unique occurence in the history of jurisprudence, especially considering the era in which Han Fei was writing.

The necessity of these principles is based upon Han Fei's conviction that human beings are, by nature, selfish and inclined to do evil (a perspective that he inherited from his teacher, Xunzi). Thus, he argues that it is far better for a ruler to clearly outline the appropriate rewards and punishments, as a means of deterring people from the temptation to act inappropriately. In making this point, he states that "if you lay out cheap goods in a dark corner, even Tseng and Shih [early moral ideals] would be under suspicion; if you hang up a hundred gold in the marketplace, even the greatest thief would not take it. The difference is in whether it will be known; therefore when a clear-sighted ruler governs a state he has many to police it, comes down heavily on crime, and ensures that people are forbidden by law rather than restrained by honesty" (HF ch. 56, Graham 277). This last point can be seen as a direct criticism of the moral idealism of Confucianism and the indifference of early Daoism.

The position of power

The final leg of Han Fei's tripartite system of leadership is his stress on the necessity of establishing a correct power-base (shih) from which to conduct his affairs. Roger Ames, in his excellent The Art of Rulership summarizes this point as follows:

Whereas the ruler as individual is limited in his capacity to regulate the conduct of others, from the stategically advantageous position of the throne he can use his political status as ruler to amplify his influence over others. It is this political status and its application as a fulcrum for increasing the ruler's capacity to influence others that constitute his shih (72).

Likewise, Han Fei, in his typically practical manner, argues that the establishment of a power-base is of utmost importance, especially for those rulers who do not live up to the lofty examples of the idealized Chinese sage kings (Yao and Shun):

My concern when I speak of the power-base is with rulers in between. Those in between do not reach as high as Yao or Shun or sink as low as Chieh and Chou. When by embracing the law they occupy the power-base, there is order, when by rejecting the law they lose the power-base, there is disorder. If now one abandons the power-base and rejects law expecting order only when a Yao or Shun arrives there will be one generation of order for a thousand of disorder; if one embraces law and occupies the power-base expecting disorder only when a Chieh or Chou arrives, there will be one generation of disorder for a thousand of order.”

In this way, he argues for the necessity of a powerbase (shih) from which one can administer the government using appropriate techniques (shu) and can impartially enforce the laws and standards (fa). In so doing, Han completes his threefold synthesis of past Legalist teachings and creates a notable (and practical) system of political leadership.

Metaphysics and cosmology

Han Fei's metaphysical system concentrates on two related concepts: Dao and li (principle). Cosmologically, he follows the teachings of the Dao De Jing and the Zhuangzi, describing the Dao as the source and ground of the world. In this way, the Dao is seen as both a creative and an immanent presence, one that creates the "ten thousand things" and provides them with the ability to act. "Indeed, Tao is so magnificent as to have no form …. When it functions proportionately, the myriad things are formed, though it does not add to their security. This, Tao is omnipresent in all events. So, follow and preserve its decrees and live and die at the right time" (HF ch. 8, Liao 55: See also HF ch. 20, Liao 192). However, even here we can see a prescriptive ethic at work. Indeed, the Dao must be seen as in some way normative, for why else would he state that people need to "follow and preserve its decrees"?

Han Fei's major contribution to Chinese cosmology is his innovative conception of li (principle) as an intermediate stage between Dao and reality. More specifically, he suggests these principles, which emerge from the Dao, are patterns upon which worldly entities are based:

Tao is the way of everything, the form of every principle. Principles are the lines that complete things. Tao is the cause of the completion of everything …. Inasmuch as things have their respective principles and therefore cannot trespass against each other, principles are determinants of things and everything has a unique principle. Inasmuch as everything has its unique principle and Tao disciplines the principles of all things, everything has to go through a process of transformation (HF ch. 20, Liao 191-192).

In this way, Han Fei postulates a system where Dao provides the impetus to action and li define the forms that this action will take. However, the system becomes far less esoteric with an additional innovation these li are perceptible to the enlightened, and, as such, can become foci for action. When an individual does so, it allows them to attain the Dao. “In general, principles are what distinguish the square from the round, the short from the long, the coarse from the fine, and the hard from the brittle. Accordingly, it is only after principles become definite that things can attain Tao” (HF ch. 20, Liao 195). In this way, the relationship between Dao and principle ceases to be the subject of mere philosophical inquiry, as it becomes tied to his practical understanding of laws and standards (fa).

Han Fei's Impact

His philosophy was very influential on the first King of Qin, who later became the first emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang. His theories, especially his emphases on publicly promulgated law and harsh punishments, became the guiding principles of the new emperor's policies. Likewise, Han Fei's criticism of other schools of philosophy as impractical provided part of the impetus for Emperor Qin's large-scale destruction of non-Legalist books (including various early Daoist and Confucian treatises which are now lost).

After the early demise of the Qin Dynasty, Han Fei's philosophy was officially vilified by the following Han Dynasty. However, despite its outcast status throughout the history of imperial China, Han Fei's political theory continued to heavily influence every dynasty afterwards, and the Confucian ideal of a rule without laws was never again realized. In fact, the bureaucracy of later imperial China, though ostensibly based on Confucian precepts, was as much a product of Han Fei's theories.

Han Fei's philosophy experienced a renewed interest under the rule of the Chinese Communist Party during the leadership of Mao Zedong, who personally admired some of the principles laid out in it.

References

• Ames, Roger T. The Art of Rulership: A Study in Ancient Chinese Political Thought. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1983.
• Cheng, Anne. Histoire de la pensée chinoise. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1997.
• Creel, Herrlee G. Shen Pu-hai: A Chinese Political Philosopher of the Fourth Century B.C.E. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.
• Creel, Herlee G. What is Taoism? Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.
• Fung Yu-lan. A History of Chinese Philosophy: Volume II, Translated by Derk Bodde. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952.
• Graham, A. C. Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1989.
• Han Fei Tzu: Basic Writings, Translated by Burton Watson. New York: Columbia University Press, 1964.
• Complete Works of Han Fei Tzu: A Classic of Chinese Political Science, Translated and

with notes by W. K. Liao. London: Arthur Probsthain, 1959.

External links

• Chinese Text Project Full text of Han Feizi (in Chinese)