MISCELLANEOUS WRITERS
Names of the authors who belong to this period, B.C. 600 to
B.C. 200, and of the works on a variety of subjects attributed
to them, would fill a long list. Many of the latter have disappeared,
and others are gross forgeries, chiefly of the first and second
centuries of our era, an epoch which, curiously enough, is remarkable
for a similar wave of forgery on the other side of the world. As to the
authors, it will be seen later on that the Chinese even went so far as
to create some of these for antiquity and then write up treatises to
match.
There was SUN TZŬ of the 6th century B.C. He is said
to have written the _Ping Fa_, or Art of War, in thirteen sections,
whereby hangs a strange tale. When he was discoursing one day with
Prince Ho-lu of the Wu State, the latter said, “I have read your book
and want to know if you could apply its principles to women.” Sun Tzŭ
replied in the affirmative, whereupon the Prince took 180 girls out of
his harem and bade Sun Tzŭ deal with them as with troops. Accordingly
he divided them into two companies, and at the head of each placed a
favourite concubine of the Prince. But when the drums sounded for drill
to begin, all the girls burst out laughing. Thereupon Sun Tzŭ, without
a moment’s delay, caused the two concubines in command to be beheaded.
This at once restored order, and ultimately the corps was raised to a
state of great efficiency.
The following is an extract from the Art of War:--
“If soldiers are not carefully chosen and well drilled to obey, their
movements will be irregular. They will not act in concert. They will
miss success for want of unanimity. Their retreat will be disorderly,
one half fighting while the other is running away. They will not
respond to the call of the gong and drum. One hundred such as these
will not hold their own against ten well-drilled men.
“If their arms are not good, the soldiers might as well have none. If
the cuirass is not stout and close set, the breast might as well be
bare. Bows that will not carry are no more use at long distances than
swords and spears. Bad marksmen might as well have no arrows. Even good
marksmen, unless able to make their arrows pierce, might as well shoot
with headless shafts. These are the oversights of incompetent generals.
Five such soldiers are no match for one.”
It is notwithstanding very doubtful if we have any genuine remains of
either Sun Tzŭ, or of Kuan Tzŭ, Wu Tzŭ, Wên Tzŭ, and several other
early writers on war, political philosophy, and cognate subjects. The
same remark applies equally to Chinese medical literature, the bulk of
which is enormous, some of it nominally dating back to legendary times,
but always failing to stand the application of the simplest test.
* * * * *
The _Erh Ya_, or Nearing the Standard, is a work which has often been
assigned to the 12th century B.C. It is a guide to the correct
use of many miscellaneous terms, including names of animals, birds,
plants, etc., to which are added numerous illustrations. It was first
edited with commentary by Kuo P‘o, of whom we shall read later on, and
some Chinese critics would have us believe that the illustrations we
now possess were then already in existence. But the whole question is
involved in mystery. The following will give an idea of the text:--
“For metal we say _lou_ (to chase); for wood _k‘o_ (to carve); for bone
_ch‘ieh_ (to cut),” etc., etc.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: T‘AN KUNG]
There are some interesting remains of a writer named T‘AN KUNG, who
flourished in the 4th and 3rd centuries B.C., and whose work has been
included in the Book of Rites. The three following extracts will give
an idea of his scope:--
1. “One day Yu-tzŭ and Tzŭ-yu saw a child weeping for the loss of its
parents. Thereupon the former observed, ‘I never could understand
why mourners should necessarily jump about to show their grief, and
would long ago have got rid of the custom. Now here you have an honest
expression of feeling, and that is all there should ever be.’
“‘My friend,’ replied Tzŭ-yu, ‘the mourning ceremonial, with all its
material accompaniments, is at once a check upon undue emotion and a
guarantee against any lack of proper respect. Simply to give vent to
the feelings is the way of barbarians. That is not our way.
“‘Consider. A man who is pleased will show it in his face. He will
sing. He will get excited. He will dance. So, too, a man who is vexed
will look sad. He will sigh. He will beat his breast. He will jump
about. The due regulation of these emotions is the function of a set
ceremonial.
“‘Further. A man dies and becomes an object of loathing. A dead body is
shunned. Therefore, a shroud is prepared, and other paraphernalia of
burial, in order that the survivors may cease to loathe. At death there
is a sacrifice of wine and meat; when the funeral cortège is about to
start, there is another; and after burial there is yet another. Yet no
one ever saw the spirit of the departed come to taste of the food.
“‘These have been our customs from remote antiquity. They have not been
discarded, because, in consequence, men no more shun the dead. What you
may censure in those who perform the ceremonial is no blemish in the
ceremonial itself.’”
2. “When Tzŭ-chü died, his wife and secretary took counsel together as
to who should be interred with him. All was settled before the arrival
of his brother, Tzŭ-hêng; and then they informed him, saying, ‘The
deceased requires some one to attend upon him in the nether world. We
must ask you to go down with his body into the grave.’ ‘Burial of the
living with the dead,’ replied Tzŭ-hêng, ‘is not in accordance with
established rites. Still, as you say some one is wanted to attend upon
the deceased, who better fitted than his wife and secretary? If this
contingency can be avoided altogether, I am willing; if not, then the
duty will devolve upon you two.’ From that time forth the custom fell
into desuetude.”
3. “When Confucius was crossing the T‘ai mountain, he overheard a
woman weeping and wailing beside a grave. He thereupon sent one of
his disciples to ask what was the matter; and the latter addressed
the woman, saying, ‘Some great sorrow must have come upon you that
you give way to grief like this?’ ‘Indeed it is so,’ replied she. ‘My
father-in-law was killed here by a tiger; after that, my husband;
and now my son has perished by the same death.’ ‘But why, then,’
inquired Confucius, ‘do you not go away?’ ‘The government is not
harsh,’ answered the woman. ‘There!’ cried the Master, turning to his
disciples; ‘remember that. Bad government is worse than a tiger.’”
* * * * *
[Sidenote: HSÜN TZŬ]
The philosopher HSÜN TZŬ of the 3rd century B.C.
is widely known for his heterodox views on the nature of man, being
directly opposed to the Confucian doctrine so warmly advocated by
Mencius. The following passage, which hardly carries conviction,
contains the gist of his argument:--
“By nature, man is evil. If a man is good, that is an artificial
result. For his condition being what it is, he is influenced first of
all by a desire for gain. Hence he strives to get all he can without
consideration for his neighbour. Secondly, he is liable to envy and
hate. Hence he seeks the ruin of others, and loyalty and truth are set
aside. Thirdly, he is a slave to his animal passions. Hence he commits
excesses, and wanders from the path of duty and right.
“Thus, conformity with man’s natural disposition leads to all kinds of
violence, disorder, and ultimate barbarism. Only under the restraint of
law and of lofty moral influences does man eventually become fit to be
a member of regularly organised society.
“From these premisses it seems quite clear that by nature man is evil;
and that if a man is good, that is an artificial result.”
The _Hsiao Ching_, or Classic of Filial Piety, is assigned partly to
Confucius and partly to TSÊNG TS’AN, though it more probably
belongs to a very much later date. Considering that filial piety is
admittedly the keystone of Chinese civilisation, it is disappointing to
find nothing more on the subject than a poor pamphlet of commonplace
and ill-strung sentences, which gives the impression of having been
written to fill a void. One short extract will suffice:--
“The Master said, ‘There are three thousand offences against which the
five punishments are directed, and there is not one of them greater
than being unfilial.
“‘When constraint is put upon a ruler, that is the disowning of his
superiority; when the authority of the sages is disallowed, that is
the disowning of all law; when filial piety is put aside, that is the
disowning of the principle of affection. These three things pave the
way to anarchy.’”
* * * * *
The _Chia Yü_, or Family Sayings of Confucius, is a work with a
fascinating title, which has been ascribed by some to the immediate
disciples of Confucius, but which, as it now exists, is usually thought
by native scholars to have been composed by Wang Su, a learned official
who died A.D. 256. There appears to have been an older work
under this same title, but how far the later work is indebted to it, or
based upon it, seems likely to remain unknown.
Another discredited work is the _Lü Shih Ch‘un Ch‘iu_, or Spring and
Autumn of LÜ PU-WEI, who died B.C. 235 and was the putative sire of the
First Emperor (see ch. vii.). It contains a great deal about the early
history of China, some of which is no doubt based upon fact.
[Sidenote: MU T‘IEN TZŬ CHUAN]
Lastly, among spurious books may be mentioned the MU T‘IEN TZŬ
CHUAN, an account of a mythical journey by a sovereign of the
Chou dynasty, supposed to have been taken about 1000 B.C. The
sovereign is unfortunately spoken of by his posthumous title, and the
work was evidently written up in the 3rd century A.D. to suit
a statement found in Lieh Tzŭ (see chapter vi.) to the effect that the
ruler in question did make some such journey to the West.