Mozi

今有五锥，此其铦，铦者必先挫；有五刀，此其错，错者必先靡。是以甘井近竭，招木近伐，灵龟近灼，神蛇近暴。是故比干之殪，其抗也；孟贲之杀，其勇也；西施之沉，其美也；吴起之裂，其事也。故彼人者，寡不死其所长，故曰：太盛难守也。 故虽有贤君，不爱无功之臣，虽有慈父，不爱无益之子。是故不胜其任而处其位，非此位之人也；不胜其爵而处其禄，非此禄之主也。良弓难张，然可以及高入深；良马难乘，然可以任重致远；良才难令，然可以致君见尊。是故江河不恶小谷之满己也，故能大。圣人者，事无辞也，物无违也，故能为天下器。是故江河之水，非一源之水也；千镒之裘，非一狐之白也。夫恶有同方取不取同而已者乎？盖非兼王之道也。是故天地不昭昭，大水不潦潦，大火不燎燎，王德不尧尧者，乃千人之长也。其直如矢，其平如砥，不足以覆万物。是故溪陕者速涸，逝浅者速竭，硗埆者其地不育，王者淳泽，不出宫中，则不能流国矣。 修身第二

This text from "Xunzi" observes that excess in any talent—sharpness, strength, beauty, or ability—often leads to premature ruin, comparing great rivers to humble streams and fine furs to single fox skins to illustrate that inclusivity fosters greatness while overreliance on one quality invites failure; it warns rulers that virtue unadorned by genuine power cannot sustain a kingdom.

For a reader today This passage offers you the insight that extreme advantages without balance can become liabilities, and it invites you to consider how integrating diverse strengths creates lasting success rather than relying on a single outstanding trait.

English translation by Eastern Lens, from the revised daizhige Chinese classics corpus. The original Chinese is published alongside it for verification.

然计得下之情将柰何可？故子墨子曰：“唯能以尚同一义为政，然后可矣。何以知尚同一义之可而为政于天下也？然胡不审稽古之治为政之说乎。古者，天之始生民，未有正长也，百姓为人。若苟百姓为人，是一人一义，十人十义，百人百义，千人千义，逮至人之众不可胜计也，则其所谓义者，亦不可胜计。此皆是其义，而非人之义，是以厚者有斗，而薄者有争。是故天下之欲同一天下之义也，是故选择贤者，立为天子。天子以其知力为未足独治天下，是以选择其次立为三公。三公又以其知力为未足独左右天子也，是以分国建诸侯。诸侯又以其知力为未足独治其四境之内也，是以选择其次立为卿之宰。卿之宰又以其知力为未足独左右其君也，是以选择其次立而为乡长家君。是故古者天子之立三公、诸侯、卿之宰、乡长家君，非特富贵游佚而择之也，将使助治乱刑政也。故古者建国设都，乃立后王君公，奉以卿士师长，此非欲用说也，唯辩而使助治天明也。

Thus Mozi argued that only governance by 'universal agreement on a single standard' is viable, proposing that because early humans lacked leadership and held conflicting meanings leading to chaos, wise rulers were appointed step-by-step—from the Son of Heaven down to local heads—not for privilege but to unify administration under a shared moral order.

For a reader today This text offers a historical snapshot of Mozi's political philosophy on centralized authority; it provides context for understanding ancient Chinese debates about order versus individual opinion.

English translation by Eastern Lens, from the revised daizhige Chinese classics corpus. The original Chinese is published alongside it for verification.

今执厚葬久丧者言曰：“厚葬久丧，果非圣王之道，夫胡说中国之君子，为而不已，操而不择哉？”子墨子曰：“此所谓便其习而义其俗者也。昔者越之东有輆沐之国者，其长子生，则解而食之。谓之‘宜弟’；其大父死，负其大母而弃之，曰鬼妻不可与居处。此上以为政，不以为俗，为而不已，操而不择，则此岂实仁义之道哉？此所谓便其习而义其俗者也。楚之南有炎人国者，其亲戚死朽其肉而弃之，然后埋其骨，乃成为孝子。秦之西有仪渠之国者，其亲戚死，聚柴薪而焚之，熏上，谓之登遐，然后成为孝子。此上以为政，下以为俗，为而不已，操而不择，则此岂实仁义之道哉？此所谓便其习而义其俗者也。若以此若三国者观之，则亦犹薄矣。若以中国之君子观之，则亦犹厚矣。如彼则大厚，如此则大薄，然则葬埋之有节矣。故衣食者，人之生利也，然且犹尚有节；葬埋者，人之死利也，夫何独无节于此乎。

Those who advocate for extravagant burial and prolonged mourning ask if this truly violates the Way of the Sages, suggesting that only in China do virtuous people act without pause or choose their ways without thought; Mozi responds that this is merely indulging local habits and justifying customs, citing examples where eastern tribes eat newborns to honor brothers, abandon widowed grandmothers as ghosts demand separation, Borneo's Yanren bury bones after rotting flesh to become filial, and western Qin cremates the dead until smoke rises to heaven to achieve filial piety, noting these are governed by state law or custom but clearly differ from China's practices; thus whether burial is deemed thick or thin depends on the standard applied, yet even for the living, clothes and food have limits, so surely burials must also observe moderation.

For a reader today This text challenges readers to question cultural norms that lack universal ethical grounding and invites reflection on how rituals should balance respect for the dead with practical wisdom for society.

English translation by Eastern Lens, from the revised daizhige Chinese classics corpus. The original Chinese is published alongside it for verification.

是故昔者三代之暴王，不缪其耳目之淫，不慎其心志之辟，外之驱骋田猎毕弋，内沉于酒乐，而不顾其国家百姓之政。繁为无用，暴逆百姓，使下不亲其上，是故国为虚厉，身在刑僇之中，不用曰：我罢不肖，‘我为刑政不善’，必曰：‘我命故且亡。’虽昔也三代之穷民，亦由此也。内之不能善事其亲戚，外不能善事其君长，恶恭俭而好简易，贪饮食而惰从事，衣食之财不足，使身至有饥寒冻馁之忧，必不能曰：‘我罢不肖，我从事不疾’，必曰：‘我命固且穷。’虽昔也三代之伪民，亦犹此也。繁饰有命，以教众愚朴人久矣。圣王之患此也，故书之竹帛，琢之金石，于先王之书仲虺之告曰：‘我闻有夏，人矫天命，布命于下，帝式是恶，用阙师。’此语夏王桀之执有命也，汤与仲虺共非之。先王之书太誓之言然曰：‘纣夷之居，而不用事上帝，弃阙其先神而不祀也，曰：“我民有命，毋僇其务。”天不亦弃纵而不葆。’此言纣之执有命也，武王以太誓非也。

Therefore, the tyrannous rulers of the Three Dynasties failed to regulate their senses and corrupt minds; instead, they indulged in wild hunts and revelry while neglecting state affairs, wasting resources, oppressing the people, alienating subjects from their rulers, which led to desolate nations and personal destruction. They did not blame their own ineptitude or poor governance but falsely attributed everything to fate, claiming "I am doomed to perish." The same fatalistic logic applied to commoners who neglected family and leaders, loved luxury over frugality, indulged in gluttony while avoiding labor, and suffered hunger and cold because they blamed fate rather than their own laziness. For generations, the doctrine of "fate" was used as a tool to deceive the ignorant masses by attributing poverty and misery to unavoidable destiny; wise rulers recorded on bamboo and stone that King Xie of Xia arrogantly claimed divine mandate, which the Lord God rejected; similarly, King Zhou of Shang abandoned his ancestors and declared his people's suffering was ordained, yet Heaven did not protect him, actions rightly criticized by the Duke of Wu in The Oath at Muye.

For a reader today This passage invites readers to reflect on how blaming fate rather than taking responsibility can perpetuate social decay and personal suffering across all levels of society.

English translation by Eastern Lens, from the revised daizhige Chinese classics corpus. The original Chinese is published alongside it for verification.

子墨子谓鲁阳文君曰：“攻其邻国，杀其民人，取其牛马、粟米、货财，则书之于竹帛，镂之于金石，以为铭于钟鼎，传遗后世子孙曰：‘莫若我多。’今贱人也，亦攻其邻家，杀其人民，取其狗豕食粮衣裘，亦书之竹帛，以为铭于席豆，以遗后世子孙曰：‘莫若我多。’亓可乎？”鲁阳文君曰：“然吾以子之言观之，则天下之所谓可者，未必然也。” 子墨子为鲁阳文君曰：“世俗之君子，皆知小物而不知大物。今有人于此，窃一犬一彘则谓之不仁，窃一国一都则以为义。譬犹小视白谓之白，大视白则谓之黑。是故世俗之君子，知小物而不知大物者，此若言之谓也。” 鲁阳文君语子墨子曰：“楚之南有啖人之国者桥，其国之长子生，则鲜而食之，谓之宜弟。美，则以遗其君，君喜则赏其父。岂不恶俗哉？”子墨子曰：“虽中国之俗，亦犹是也。杀其父而赏其子，何以异食其子而赏其父者哉？苟不用仁义，何以非夷人食其子也？” 鲁君之嬖人死，鲁君为之诔，鲁人因说而用之。

Mozi said to Lord Lu Yangwen, "When one country attacks another, killing its people and taking their cattle, horses, grain, and goods, they record the deed on bamboo or silk, engrave it on metal or stone to inscribe upon bells and tripods, and pass it down to descendants declaring, 'No one does as much as we.' Yet commoners also attack neighboring households, killing its people and taking their dogs, pigs, food, grain, clothes, and fur; they too record these acts and proclaim the same boast. Is this acceptable?" Lord Lu Yangwen replied, "Upon hearing your words, I see that what the world calls right may not always be so." Mozi further explained, "Gentlemen of ordinary times know small things but not great ones: stealing one dog or pig is called unrighteous, while stealing a whole city or capital is called righteous—like calling white white when seen up close but black when seen from afar; thus those who claim to understand virtue only in small matters do not grasp its true scale." When the Duke of Lu's beloved concubine died, he composed an elegy for her that the people adopted as a custom.

For a reader today This passage invites reflection on how society often judges moral value based on scale rather than principle, and reminds us that practices once normalized can be questioned through consistent ethical reasoning.

English translation by Eastern Lens, from the revised daizhige Chinese classics corpus. The original Chinese is published alongside it for verification.