The Calamity of Obstruction and the Blessing of Unobstructedness: An In-depth Study of the Core Tenets of Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi" (Dissolving Obstruction)

By: Xuanji Editorial Department

Epigraph

"The Dao is constant in its substance yet endlessly changing in its manifestations; one corner is insufficient to encompass it."

This statement originates from Master Xunzi’s chapter "Jie Bi" (解蔽, Dissolving Obstruction) and can be regarded as a vital admonition regarding pre-Qin epistemology. Why is the Dao "constant in its substance" (体常)$1 Why is it "endlessly changing in its manifestations" (尽变)$2 Why did various schools each cling to one aspect and fail to perceive the whole$3 Why was only Master Confucius "benevolent, wise, and yet unobscured" (仁知且不蔽)$4 These questions are not merely old debates from the Hundred Schools of Thought; they pertain to the fundamental dilemma of human cognition. This paper attempts a deep study and systematic elucidation of this classic passage by Master Xunzi, drawing upon the perspectives of pre-Qin Confucianism, Daoism, and ancient mythology and folklore, in order to reveal why "obstruction" (蔽, bi) arises, why "dissolving obstruction" (解蔽) is necessary, and how the "blessing of unobscuredness" (不蔽之福) is achieved.

Chapter I: Introduction: What is "Bi" (Obstruction)$5—A Fundamental Cognitive Inquiry

Section 1: The Ancient Etymology and Original Meaning of "Bi" (蔽)

To deeply understand Master Xunzi’s discourse on "Bi" (蔽, obstruction/concealment), one must first trace the character's etymological origins. The character "Bi" (蔽) features the grass radical (艹) and takes bi (敝) as its phonetic component. Although the Shuowen Jiezi (说文解字) was compiled later, the character forms it records often derive from pre-Qin ancient scripts. The initial meaning of "Bi" was the covering or obscuring action of vegetation; when grass and trees are dense, vision cannot extend far; when branches interlace, the light of the sun and moon cannot penetrate below—this is the original physical image of "Bi."

But why did Master Xunzi use "Bi" to describe the predicament of human cognition$6 This question must be investigated.

Consider the existential situation of the early ancestors. In the vast wilderness overgrown with brush, a person traveling within it is often obscured by vegetation, unable to see the road ahead. Fierce beasts might lie hidden among the thicket, invisible to man; deep ravines might lie concealed beneath trailing vines, unperceived. Thus, the harm of "Bi" first manifested as the loss of a complete understanding of the surrounding reality. A single leaf blinds one to Mount Tai; a blade of grass conceals a deep chasm—this is not merely sensory obstruction but implies a limitation in the very structure of cognition.

In pre-Qin texts, "Bi" appears repeatedly, with its meaning progressively deepening. The Book of Odes (Shi Jing), Ode of Bei Feng, "Bo Zhou" (柏舟), states: "Sun and moon abide, why do you vanish$7" (日居月诸，胡迭而微？) Sun and moon are inherently bright, yet once obscured by dark clouds, their light cannot illuminate the earth. Here, "wei" (微) means obscured. The Shi Jing, Ode of Xiao Ya, "Zheng Yue" (正月), states: "The people are now in peril; looking at Heaven, the sight is muddled." (民今方殆，视天梦梦。) Heaven is inherently clear, but when people look upon it, their vision is muddled ("meng meng")—this is not Heaven’s fault, but a result of human eyes being obscured by things.

Furthermore, the I Ching (Zhou Yi), in the hexagram Ming Yi (明夷, Darkness within the Bright), declares: "Ming Yi, perseverance in difficulty benefits." (明夷，利艰贞。) Ming Yi signifies light entering the earth; when the light is underground, the earth becomes dim. This image aligns perfectly with Master Xunzi’s concept of "Bi": the light of wisdom exists intrinsically, yet it is concealed by some force, preventing it from illuminating all things. The commentary (Tuan Zhuan) explains: "Light enters the earth, thus Ming Yi. Internally civilized yet externally docile and yielding, enduring great calamity; King Wen was so." (明入地中，明夷。内文明而外柔顺，以蒙大难，文王以之。) This suggests that although King Wen possessed bright virtue, it was obscured by the tyranny of King Zhou, forcing him to conceal his brilliance. The "Bi" discussed by Master Xunzi, however, is self-generated concealment—it is not external force suppressing one's light, but the narrowness of one's own perception obscuring one’s own wisdom.

This leads to a profoundly significant question: Why do people obscure themselves$8 Why, despite possessing the potential to know the entirety of the Dao, do they insistently hold onto one corner and fail to realize it$9

Returning to the physical image of "Bi," perhaps we can gain a preliminary insight. The concealment caused by grass and trees is not intentional on their part; it is because humans walk among them, immersed within them, unable to rise above them. Similarly, the self-concealment of the mind occurs not intentionally, but because the mind is immersed in a certain aspect of cognition, trapped within it and unable to transcend it. Just as a person deep in a dense forest sees only the few trees immediately around him and not the entirety of the forest, Master Mozi, immersed in the cognition of "Utility" (Yong, 用), saw only the tree of "Utility" and not the tree of "Culture" (Wen, 文); Master Zhuangzi, immersed in the cognition of "Heaven" (Tian, 天), saw only the tree of "Heaven" and not the tree of "Man" (Ren, 人). This is what is meant by: "Those who possess partial knowledge observe one corner of the Dao, yet fail to recognize it as such." (曲知之人，观于道之一隅，而未之能识也。)

Another layer of meaning for "Bi" is related to its cognate, "Bi" (敝, dilapidated). "Bi" (敝) means ruin or decay. The Zuo Zhuan, in the 23rd year of Duke Xi, records: "Those whose words are humble yet whose gifts are heavy must have a request." (其辞卑而币重者，必有所求也。) Chong'er, in exile, had tattered clothes but an unwavering will. The meaning of "Bi" involves damage and impairment. In this sense, "Bi" is not just concealment or covering, but also implies damaging or corrupting—once the mind is obscured, its cognitive function is damaged, and its judgment is impaired. This is the "Calamity of Obstruction and Blockage" (蔽塞之祸) spoken of by Master Xunzi—"Bi" ultimately breeds "Calamity" (Huo, 祸), a disaster that corrupts the individual, society, and politics entirely.

Did the early ancestors realize the danger of this "Bi"$10 The answer is yes. In terms of mythology, ancient times featured numerous narratives concerning "ignorance" (Meng, 蒙昧) and "enlightenment" (Ming, 启明). Legend holds that when Huang Di commissioned Cangjie to invent writing, "Heaven rained millet, and ghosts cried in the night" (天雨粟，鬼夜哭)—the invention of script broke the state of chaotic obscurity, giving names to all things and moving human cognition from "Bi" toward "Ming." Furthermore, it is said Fuxi drew the Eight Trigrams, "looking at the models in Heaven above and observing the patterns on Earth below" (Zhou Yi, Xi Ci Xia), thereby "penetrating the glorious virtue of the spirits and classifying the emotions of all things" (通神明之德，以类万物之情). This "penetration" (Tong, 通) and "classification" (Lei, 类) represent the methodology for overcoming "Bi"—"Tong" means to connect without being confined to one end; "Lei" means to infer by analogy to reach all things, without sticking to one corner.

Thus, the problem of "Bi" was not an issue exclusive to Master Xunzi but a persistent core concern throughout the history of Chinese thought since antiquity. It was Master Xunzi, with his exceptional analytical ability and systematic theoretical construction, who elevated this problem to an unprecedented philosophical height.

Section 2: The Intellectual Background of Master Xunzi’s Discussion of "Bi"

To deeply understand the thesis of Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi," one must examine the background against which his thought arose. Master Xunzi lived in the late Warring States period, when the debates of the Hundred Schools of Thought had raged for centuries. Since Master Confucius inaugurated Confucianism in the late Spring and Autumn period, various schools emerged, each asserting its own doctrine in contention. By Master Xunzi’s time, the ideas of the Hundred Schools had flooded forth like surging rivers, unstoppable.

Faced with this intellectual landscape where "the various schools followed different paths and held different intentions" (百家殊方，指意不同), Master Xunzi felt a deep sense of apprehension. Why$11 Because, in his view, the doctrines of the various schools were not entirely wrong—they each grasped a certain aspect of the Dao and revealed one side of the truth. However, precisely because each school grasped only one aspect of the Dao, they believed they had grasped the entirety of the Dao, and they used this singular perspective to attack others, resulting in severe intellectual chaos and cognitive disaster.

This anxiety is fully reflected in other chapters of Master Xunzi's work. In the chapter "Fei Shi Er Zi" (非十二子, Against the Twelve Philosophers), Master Xunzi systematically criticized twelve contemporary thinkers. Although the angle of criticism in "Fei Shi Er Zi" differs from that in "Jie Bi"—the former focusing on socio-political impact, the latter on epistemological roots—their core concern is identical: how to establish a holistic, impartial intellectual stance amidst the contention of the Hundred Schools.

Master Xunzi’s ability to propose the theory of "Bi" is inseparable from his profound insight into the structure of human cognition. In other sections of "Jie Bi," Master Xunzi analyzed the cognitive mechanism of the mind in detail. He stated:

"How does man know the Dao$12 I say: the mind. How does the mind know$13 I say: by being empty, unified, and still." (人何以知道？曰：心。心何以知？曰：虚壹而静。)

This statement is crucial. Master Xunzi believed the mind inherently possesses the capacity to know the entirety of the Dao, and the method for this is "empty, unified, and still" (xu yi er jing). "Empty" (Xu) means not allowing existing knowledge to obscure new cognition; "Unified" (Yi) means being focused and undivided; "Still" (Jing) means being calm and not agitated. Yet, why could the various masters not achieve "empty, unified, and still"$14 Precisely because they had each accumulated deep learning and insights in specific areas, and these accumulations subsequently became obstacles obscuring their further cognition. This is the inverse of being "unobstructed by accumulation" (bu bei yu cheng ji)—they were precisely obscured by their own "accumulations."

This raises a deeper question: How does knowledge itself become an obstruction$15 Is the pursuit of knowledge harmful$16

Master Xunzi’s answer is subtle and dialectical. Knowledge itself is not harmful; what is harmful is "believing it sufficient and adorning it" (以为足而饰之)—believing that the knowledge one has attained has exhausted the entire Dao, and consciously beautifying and decorating this prejudice until it appears complete. "Jie Bi" states this clearly: "Those who possess partial knowledge observe one corner of the Dao, yet fail to recognize it as such. Therefore, they believe it sufficient and adorn it." (曲知之人，观于道之一隅，而未之能识也。故以为足而饰之。) The character "adorn" (shi, 饰) is used perfectly. If a piece of incomplete jade is not adorned, people immediately see its flaw; but once cleverly adorned, its defect may be hidden, perhaps even leading people to mistake it for perfection. The theoretical systems established by the various schools are this kind of "adornment"—they use sophisticated argumentation and elegant rhetoric to decorate a partial view into the entirety of the Dao.

This insight by Master Xunzi is groundbreaking in the history of pre-Qin thought. Earlier thinkers either attacked their opponents' conclusions as wrong (like Master Mencius criticizing Yang Zhu and Mozi) or pointed out flaws in their methods (like Master Mozi criticizing the Confucian preoccupation with ornate rituals), but few systematically analyzed from an epistemological height why these schools committed such errors. Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi" chapter is precisely this kind of epistemological reflection.

It is also worth noting that Master Xunzi did not criticize the various schools from an entirely external standpoint. As a Confucian scholar himself, he maintained a sober reflective awareness of Confucian tradition. By citing the opening passage, "The obstruction of Master Bin Meng was household chaos" (昔宾孟之蔽者，乱家是也), using a specific historical lesson, he indicated that the problem of "Bi" is not exclusive to any single school but is a universal cognitive predicament for humanity. Furthermore, the reason Master Confucius, whom he revered, was great was not because he mastered some unique secret knowledge, but because he was "benevolent, wise, and yet unobscured" (仁知且不蔽)—Master Confucius’s superiority lay precisely in his freedom from being obscured by any single aspect, enabling him to be inclusive and draw inferences from one point to others.

This lends Master Xunzi’s critique a universality that transcends partisan disputes. He is not saying, "We Confucians are right, and you other schools are wrong," but rather, "Each of you has seen one aspect of the Dao, but you all mistake that one aspect for the whole; this is your fundamental error." This manner of criticism inherently embodies Master Xunzi’s scholarly magnanimity of being "unobstructed."

Section 3: Research Approach and Methodology of This Paper

This paper centers on the classic passage from Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi" chapter, developing a multi-layered, multi-perspective deep study. Specifically, the research trajectory of this paper includes the following aspects:

First, close textual reading. A word-by-word, sentence-by-sentence in-depth analysis of Master Xunzi’s original text, striving for an accurate grasp of its intended meaning. This forms the foundation of the study.

Second, cross-referencing with pre-Qin classics. Extensive citation of pre-Qin Confucian texts (especially the Analects, Mencius, Book of Rites, and I Ching) and Daoist texts (especially the Laozi and Zhuangzi) to create correspondences and contrasts with Master Xunzi’s arguments. Such citations are not intended merely to compare similarities and differences but to understand Master Xunzi’s thesis within a broader intellectual context.

Third, the perspective of ancient mythology and folklore. Seeking out archetypal images and symbolic notations related to "Bi" from ancient myths and pre-Qin folk traditions to provide a deeper cultural underpinning for understanding Master Xunzi’s philosophical assertions.

Fourth, asking "Why$17" repeatedly. Throughout the research process, constantly raising questions and pursuing the underlying reasons behind every assertion, aiming for a depth of understanding that knows "not only what is the case, but also why it is the case."

It must be specially noted that the research of this paper is strictly limited to the intellectual horizon of the pre-Qin and ancient periods, excluding any information from the Han dynasty onward. This limitation is intentional: only by returning to the intellectual context of the pre-Qin era can we truly grasp the original meaning of Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi" without being obscured by later interpretive traditions—this itself is a scholarly practice of "dissolving obstruction."

Chapter II: General Theory of "Bi": The Dao is Constant in Substance Yet Endlessly Changing

Section 1: The Philosophical Connotation of "The Dao is Constant in its Substance Yet Endlessly Changing" (道者体常而尽变)

After criticizing the obstructions of Master Mozi, Master Songzi, Master Shenzi, Master Shenzi, Master Hui, and Master Zhuangzi, Master Xunzi offers a summary judgment:

"These several schools are all but one corner of the Dao. The Dao is constant in its substance yet endlessly changing in its manifestations; one corner is insufficient to encompass it." (此数具者，皆道之一隅也。夫道者体常而尽变，一隅不足以举之。)

These two sentences are the pivot of the entire passage and constitute the core proposition of Master Xunzi’s theory of the Dao. Let us analyze them word by word.

"These several schools" (此数具者)—"This" refers to the doctrines of the schools mentioned above; "several" (shu, 数) denotes multiple in number; "all" (ju, 具) is synonymous with "together" (ju, 俱). Taken together, it means "these few schools (and their doctrines)."

"are all but one corner of the Dao" (皆道之一隅也)—"Corner" (yu, 隅) means a corner or angle. The Analects, "Shu Er" (述而), states: "If I hold up one corner and they cannot come back with the other three, I will not go over it again." (举一隅不以三隅反，则不复也。) A square room has four corners; if you see only one, you might assume the entire room is like that. Master Xunzi says each school's doctrine is "one corner of the Dao," meaning each saw only one corner or one side of the Dao.

However, a crucial question arises here: Why is what each school saw merely "one corner" rather than the whole$18 This requires understanding Master Xunzi’s definition of the Dao's essence.

"The Dao is constant in its substance yet endlessly changing in its manifestations" (夫道者体常而尽变)—This statement is extremely concise and requires layered analysis.

First, "Substance is Constant" (Ti Chang, 体常). "Ti" means substance or foundation. "Chang" means constant or unchanging. "Ti Chang" means that the Dao's substance is eternally constant. This highly echoes what Master Laozi said. Master Laozi states: "There was something, indistinctly formed, born before Heaven and Earth. Empty, silent, standing alone, never changing, revolving everywhere, never exhausted, it may be the mother of all under Heaven." (Laozi, Chapter 25) "Standing alone, never changing" is "Ti Chang." He also says: "The Dao that can be told is not the eternal Dao." (Laozi, Chapter 1) The "constant Dao" (Chang Dao) here also resonates with Master Xunzi's "Chang." For the Dao to be the Dao, it must possess an unchanging, constant nature, otherwise it cannot be the Dao.

However, if the Dao were only "constant in its substance"—only unchanging—it would be a static, dead thing, unable to account for the ever-changing reality of the world. Therefore, Master Xunzi immediately follows this by saying "endlessly changing" (Jin Bian, 尽变).

"Endlessly Changing" (Jin Bian, 尽变). "Jin" means exhausted or encompassing everything. "Bian" means change. "Jin Bian" means the Dao’s manifestations encompass all change—the transformation of Heaven and Earth, human affairs, the waxing and waning of Yin and Yang, the cycling of the four seasons—all change is within the scope of the Dao. The Dao is not only unchanging; the Dao is also the source and destination of all change.

This forms a delicately balanced dialectical structure: the Dao is both "Constant" (unchanging) and "Changing" (encompassing all change). The constant and the changing are unified at the level of the Dao.

This unification of "Constant" and "Changing" has deep intellectual roots in pre-Qin texts.

The I Ching, Xi Ci Shang (系辞上), states: "One Yin and one Yang, this is the Dao." The alternation and transformation of Yin and Yang are the Dao’s form of manifestation; yet the principle of this operation, "one Yin and one Yang," is constant. This is constant inherent in change, and change encompassed within the constant.

Again, the I Ching, Xi Ci Shang, states: "The Yi has the Taiji (Supreme Ultimate); this generates the two Liangyi (Two Principles); the Liangyi generate the four Sixiang (Four Images); the Sixiang generate the eight Baguai (Eight Trigrams)." (Yi you Taiji, shi sheng liangyi, liangyi sheng sixiang, sixiang sheng baguai.) The Taiji is the Dao's substance; it is constant. However, from the Taiji arise the Liangyi, Sixiang, and Baguai, giving rise to all things—this is "endless change."

Master Laozi’s Chapter 42 states: "The Dao produces One; One produces Two; Two produces Three; Three produces all things." (Dao sheng yi, yi sheng er, er sheng san, san sheng wanwu.) The Dao is the source of "One," and "all things" are the unfolding of the Dao. From the Dao to all things is a process from the "Constant" to the "Changing"; yet since all things are generated by the Dao, and the Dao resides within all things, the change ultimately returns to the constant—this is "endless change" without departing from the "constant substance."

Having understood "constant in substance yet endlessly changing," we can see why each school only grasped "one corner." The "constant substance" aspect of the Dao manifests as certain unchanging principles—such as the principle of "Utility" (Yong), the principle of "Law" (Fa), the principle of "Heaven" (Tian), etc. Each school grasped one of these constant principles, believing it to be the entirety of the Dao. However, they ignored the Dao's "endlessly changing" aspect—its manifestations encompass all change and thus cannot appear in only one form. Adhering only to the principle of "Utility" prevents one from understanding the changes encompassed by "Culture"; adhering only to the principle of "Heaven" prevents one from understanding the changes encompassed by "Man."

To use a modern analogy, this is like observing water. Water is liquid at room temperature, solid at low temperatures, and gaseous at high temperatures. If a person has only ever seen liquid water, they might assume water is only liquid—they have seen only "one corner of water." The essence of water ("Ti Chang") is constant, but its form of manifestation ("Jin Bian") is diverse. To claim one form is the whole of water is "Bi."

Returning to the pre-Qin intellectual context, we can use another passage from Laozi to echo Master Xunzi’s "Constant in Substance yet Endlessly Changing":

"Great squareness has no corners; great vessels are finished late; great sounds are rare; great images have no form. The Dao is hidden and nameless." (Laozi, Chapter 41)

"Great squareness has no corners" (大方无隅)—This serves as the perfect footnote to the critique of the "one corner" view: the Dao, as "great squareness," has no corners—it is perfectly integrated and indivisible into corners. Yet, the various masters insisted on cutting out a "corner" from the Dao and claiming it was the whole. Master Laozi says "Great squareness has no corners," and Master Xunzi says "one corner is insufficient to encompass it"—both echo each other, revealing the wholeness and indivisibility of the Dao.

If the Dao is the wholeness of "Constant Substance yet Endless Change," is it possible for man to fully cognize it$19 Or is human cognition inherently limited, destined only to see "one corner"$20

Master Xunzi’s answer to this is optimistic and resolute: man can know the entirety of the Dao. The key to this answer lies in the cognitive method he proposes: "empty, unified, and still" (Xu Yi Er Jing). This method prevents the mind from being obscured by preconceived biases, thus allowing it to penetrate the entirety of the Dao. And the reason Master Confucius was "benevolent, wise, and yet unobscured" is precisely because he practiced this cognitive state of "empty, unified, and still."

Section 2: "One Corner is Insufficient to Encompass It" (一隅不足以举之)—The Dialectic of Wholeness and Partiality

The phrase "one corner is insufficient to encompass it" (Yi yu bu zu yi ju zhi) deserves repeated contemplation. "Ju" means to raise up, to present, to grasp. One corner is insufficient to "grasp" the entire Dao—just as one corner cannot support an entire roof, and one pillar cannot sustain an entire hall.

However, a very subtle layer of thought needs clarification here. When Master Xunzi says each school’s doctrine is "one corner of the Dao," it implies that the doctrines are not entirely spurious—they indeed touched upon one aspect of the Dao, and they made discoveries in that aspect. If the doctrines had no relation to the Dao whatsoever, it would not be called "Bi"—for if one hasn't touched the Dao, one cannot be obscured by an aspect of it. Precisely because they touched a real aspect of the Dao and made progress in that area, they had the basis for "believing it sufficient" and the motivation to "adorn it."

This situation is common in daily life. If a person knows nothing about a matter, they usually will not be conceited; rather, it is those who have some knowledge and insight who are most prone to the flaw of complacency. Confucius said: "To know what you know and know what you do not know, that is knowledge." (Analects, Wei Zheng) This passage is often understood as teaching honesty, but from the perspective of "dissolving obstruction," it holds a deeper meaning: true wisdom lies in clearly knowing what one knows and what one does not know, and not mistaking what is known for the whole.

Laozi, Chapter 71, states: "He who knows he does not know is superior; he who does not know that he does not know is sick." (Zhi bu zhi, shang yi; bu zhi zhi, bing ye.) This aligns perfectly with Confucius’s words: "Knowing what you do not know is superior wisdom; not knowing that you do not know is sickness." The "Bi" of the various schools is precisely the "sickness of not knowing that one does not know"—they did not realize their knowledge was incomplete, but rather believed they had fully apprehended the Dao.

So, why is a "one corner" view so deceptive$21 Why do people so easily mistake "one corner" for the whole$22

This relates to the inherent nature of human cognition. In other parts of "Jie Bi," Master Xunzi analyzes the mind's cognitive mechanisms in detail. He points out that the human mind has two tendencies: one is "obstruction by desire" (yu wei bi, 欲为蔽), where desires cloud rationality; the other is "obstruction by partiality" (qu wei bi, 曲为蔽), where one-sided knowledge obscures comprehensive cognition. The former belongs to emotional interference, while the latter belongs to cognitive limitation. The "Bi" of the various schools belongs more to the latter—the cognitive limitation of those with "partial knowledge" (qu zhi zhi ren, 曲知之人).

"Qu" means bent, not straight, metaphorically meaning narrow or incomplete. "Qu Zhi" means partial knowledge or narrow insight. Why does partial knowledge become an obstacle to cognition$23 Because once a person accumulates rich knowledge and experience in one area, they form a self-consistent framework of thought and explanation. This framework is highly effective in handling the areas they excel in, but when they attempt to apply this same framework to explain all phenomena, serious deviations occur.

Take Master Mozi as an example. Master Mozi established a utilitarian system centered on "Utility" (Yong). This system is very effective in explaining economic production, technological development, and social organization—indeed, judging the value of something, "utility" is an important criterion. However, when Master Mozi attempted to use the "useful/useless" dichotomy to judge everything (including rites, music, and funerals), his framework proved inadequate. This is because the value of some things lies not in direct practical function, but in cultural transmission, emotional expression, and social cohesion—areas the framework of "Utility" cannot fully cover. Because Master Mozi’s framework of "Utility" was indeed effective in its domain of application, he developed a "cognitive inertia," believing this framework could explain everything. This is "believing it sufficient and adorning it."

This "cognitive inertia" is well illustrated by a classic analogy from Zhuangzi’s "Autumn Floods" (Qiu Shui), which resonates deeply with Master Xunzi’s critique:

"A frog in a well cannot be told of the ocean, because it is confined by its habitat; a summer insect cannot be told of ice, because it is bound by its season; a narrow scholar cannot be told of the Dao, because he is restricted by his teaching." (井蛙不可以语于海者，拘于虚也；夏虫不可以语于冰者，笃于时也；曲士不可以语于道者，束于教也。)

Among these three analogies, "the narrow scholar is restricted by his teaching" (Qu shi shu yu jiao) most directly addresses Master Xunzi’s concept of "Bi." The scholars of the various schools were each restricted by their own educational training, which formed a specific mode of thinking. This mode of thinking was both their tool for knowing the Dao and the obstacle obscuring the totality of the Dao—the tool and the obstacle were the very same thing—what a profound paradox!

Yet, did Master Zhuangzi himself realize that his statement could be turned back upon himself$24 Master Zhuangzi built his system around "Heaven" (Tian), using the perspective of "Heaven" to examine all worldly affairs, which indeed allowed him to transcend many worldly prejudices. However, by overemphasizing the perspective of "Heaven," he himself became a special kind of "narrow scholar"—he was "restricted by the teaching" of "Heaven" to the extent that he ignored the independent value of the "Man" perspective. This is precisely what Master Xunzi criticized as "Zhuangzi being obstructed by Heaven and unaware of Man" (庄子蔽于天而不知人).

Here we see a fascinating intellectual interplay: Master Zhuangzi offered the insight that "narrow scholars are restricted by their teaching," yet he himself could not entirely escape this "restriction." Master Xunzi, utilizing the analytical framework provided by Zhuangzi himself, criticized Zhuangzi in turn. This use of an opponent’s logic against them is precisely what demonstrates the universal applicability of Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi" theory—it applies impartially to all thinkers, including the most profound ones.

Section 3: The Cognitive Predicament of "Those with Partial Knowledge" and the Way Out

After summarizing the totality of the Dao as "constant in substance yet endlessly changing," Master Xunzi immediately describes the cognitive predicament of those with partial knowledge:

"Those who possess partial knowledge observe one corner of the Dao, yet fail to recognize it as such. Therefore, they believe it sufficient and adorn it; internally this leads to self-disorder, externally it confuses others, superiors obstruct subordinates, and subordinates obstruct superiors. This is the calamity of obstruction and blockage." (曲知之人，观于道之一隅，而未之能识也。故以为足而饰之，内以自乱，外以惑人，上以蔽下，下以蔽上，此蔽塞之祸也。)

This passage progresses layer by layer, revealing the spread of "Bi" from individual cognition to socio-political consequence. Let us analyze layer by layer.

First Layer: "Observe one corner of the Dao, yet fail to recognize it as such" (观于道之一隅，而未之能识也).

"Observe one corner of the Dao" (Guan yu dao zhi yi yu)—They saw one corner of the Dao. "Yet fail to recognize it as such" (er wei zhi neng shi ye)—Yet they failed to recognize that what they saw was only a corner. Note that Master Xunzi says "fail to recognize" (wei zhi neng shi), not "fail to see" (wei zhi neng jian). They already "observed" and "saw" one corner of the Dao; the problem was not in "seeing" but in "recognizing" (shi)—they could not discern that what they saw was merely a corner. They "saw without recognizing," "perceived without clarity"—this is the beginning of obstruction.

Why does this "seeing without recognizing" occur$25 This involves the difference between "observing" (guan) and "recognizing" (shi). "Observing" is a perceptual activity—the eyes see, the ears hear, the mind touches. "Recognizing" is a reflective activity—scrutinizing one's own perception to judge whether it is complete or partial, accurate or distorted. Those with "partial knowledge" have the capacity to "observe," but lack the capacity to "recognize"—they can grasp one aspect of the Dao but cannot reflect upon the limitation of that grasp.

This phenomenon of "observing without recognizing" is deeply reflected in the wisdom of the I Ching. The image of the hexagram Guan (观, Observation) states: "Wind moves over the earth—Guan. The former kings observed the regions and observed the people to establish instruction." (Feng xing yu di, Guan. Xian wang yi sheng fang guan min she jiao.) The core spirit of the Guan hexagram is "observation"—but not passive, partial observation, but comprehensive, systematic observation ("inspecting the regions," 巡视四方). Observing only one region without inspecting all regions results only in the vision of "one corner." The six lines of the Guan hexagram, from bottom to top, display the progressive layers of "observation": the initial line, "Childlike Observation" (童观); the second line, "Peeping Observation" (窥观); the third line, "Observing one's own life's progress and retreat" (观我生进退); the fourth line, "Observing the glory of the state" (观国之光); the fifth line, "Observing one's own life" (观我生); the top line, "Observing the lives of all" (观其生). It can be said that the cognitive level of those with "partial knowledge" is roughly at the stage of "peeping observation" or "childlike observation"—their scope of observation is limited, and they lack the capacity for self-reflection. Only by reaching the stage of "observing one's own life" or even "observing the lives of all" can one transcend the obstruction of "one corner."

Second Layer: "Therefore, they believe it sufficient and adorn it" (故以为足而饰之).

"Believe it sufficient" (yi wei zu)—they think what they see is enough, that it encompasses the entirety of the Dao. "Adorn it" (shi zhi)—they then embellish and beautify their prejudice.

The character "adorn" (shi) here is crucial. As noted before, "adorn" means concealing and beautifying defects. But on a deeper level, "adorn" also implies an active, conscious effort—those with "partial knowledge" not only passively suffer from the prejudice of one corner but actively work to consolidate and strengthen that prejudice. They establish theoretical systems, develop methods of argumentation, gather favorable evidence, and cultivate followers—all these activities are concrete manifestations of "adornment."

This act of "adornment" makes the prejudice more solid and harder to dismantle. A simple mistake is easy to correct, but a mistake meticulously argued and systematically constructed is extremely difficult to overturn—because a whole self-consistent discourse has been formed around it. To overturn this error requires overturning the entire system of discourse simultaneously, which is nearly impossible for those immersed within it.

Master Laozi says: "Faithful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not faithful." (Laozi, Chapter 81) What is produced by "adornment" is precisely "beautiful words"—speeches meticulously polished to sound pleasing and appear reasonable, yet obscuring the truth. Conversely, true "faithful words"—honestly admitting one has seen only one corner of the Dao—are often "not beautiful," less pleasing, and less systematically complete, yet they are closer to reality.

Third Layer: "Internally this leads to self-disorder" (内以自乱).

This is the first consequence of "Bi" at the individual level. "Self-disorder" (zi luan)—the obstruction causes internal chaos. Why does prejudice lead to internal chaos$26

Because the real world is complex, while the explanatory framework offered by prejudice is simple. When a person explains complex reality with a simple framework, they inevitably encounter phenomena that the framework cannot explain. These inexplicable phenomena cause confusion and anxiety internally. However, because they already "believe it sufficient and adorn it," they will not admit their framework is flawed but will adopt various psychological defense mechanisms to maintain their prejudice—either by ignoring unfavorable evidence, distorting its meaning, or attacking the person who presented it. These defense mechanisms cause internal division and chaos.

The I Ching, Meng hexagram (蒙, Obstruction/Ignorance) states: "Obstruction has success, if one proceeds with perseverance, it is because I do not seek the ignorant child, but the ignorant child seeks me. Cast lots once, and it is told; cast lots three times, and it is treated with disrespect; if treated with disrespect, it is not told." (Meng heng, fei wo qiu tong meng, tong meng qiu wo. Chu shi gao, zai san du, du ze bu gao.) This discusses the path of obstruction and enlightenment. An obstructed person who humbly seeks instruction can be enlightened; if their attitude is insincere ("treated with disrespect"), enlightenment cannot be achieved. The problem with those possessing "partial knowledge" is precisely that they are not "ignorant" (Meng)—completely unknowing—but rather "self-professedly knowing." A completely ignorant person knows they need to learn and is thus teachable; one who believes they already know feels no need to learn and is thus hardest to teach. This state of "self-professed knowing" is itself a deep form of "internal disorder."

Fourth Layer: "Externally it confuses others" (外以惑人).

"Bi" not only causes self-disorder but also spreads outward, confusing others. Those with "partial knowledge" package their prejudices as truth and disseminate them outward, causing others to accept these prejudices as well.

The character "confuse" (huo, 惑) here warrants deep thought. "Huo" means to bewilder or mislead. Confucius said: "At forty, I had no doubts." (Analects, Wei Zheng). Being "un-doubting" (bu huo) means not being confused by external things. But how are ordinary people confused by those with "partial knowledge"$27 Because the prejudices of those with "partial knowledge" have been meticulously "adorned," they appear plausible and systematic. Ordinary people lack sufficient judgment to distinguish this adorned prejudice from true comprehensive knowledge, and thus they are confused.

Worse still, those who are confused will, in turn, confuse others, spreading the prejudice like an epidemic. The Analects, "Yang Huo" (阳货), records Confucius saying: "I dislike the purple dye for usurping the place of vermilion; I dislike the music of Zheng for confusing the refined music of the court; I dislike sharp-tongued men for subverting states and families." (恶紫之夺朱也，恶郑声之乱雅乐也，恶利口之覆邦家者。) Purple appears similar to vermilion but is actually a mixed color; Zheng music sounds similar to refined music but is actually licentious; the speeches of glib men sound like sound doctrine but are actually sophistry. The reason the prejudices of those with "partial knowledge" can "confuse others" is precisely because they bear some resemblance to the Dao—they are, after all, "one corner of the Dao"—allowing them to pass counterfeit truth for genuine article, making discernment difficult.

Fifth Layer: "Superiors obstruct subordinates, and subordinates obstruct superiors" (上以蔽下，下以蔽上).

This is the political consequence of "Bi," and the most severe one. Governing a state primarily requires clear communication between superiors and subordinates and accurate transmission of information. If superiors are obscured by some prejudice, they cannot correctly understand the situation below them, nor can they make correct decisions. If subordinates are obscured by some prejudice, they cannot truthfully report upward, nor can they correctly execute superior orders. When the top and bottom obscure each other, political operation breaks down completely, and state governance collapses entirely.

In the Book of Documents (Shang Shu), Gao Yao advises Yu the Great: "Heaven’s intelligence mirrors that of the people. Heaven’s awe is mirrored by the might of the people." (天聪明，自我民聪明。天明畏，自我民明威。) The intelligence of the Son of Heaven derives from the intelligence of the people—that is, from an accurate understanding of the people’s conditions. If "superiors obstruct subordinates," the Son of Heaven cannot receive true information from the people, and his intelligence cannot function.

Furthermore, the Shang Shu, "Da Yu Mo" (大禹谟), states: "The human heart is perilous, the Dao heart is subtle. Be precise and unified, and sincerely hold the Mean." (人心惟危，道心惟微，惟精惟一，允执厥中。) This famous "Sixteen-Character Heart Method" resonates perfectly with Master Xunzi’s theory of "Jie Bi." The human heart is perilous (wei, 危)—prone to partiality. The Dao heart is subtle (wei, 微)—difficult to grasp. Precisely because of this, one must be "precise and unified" (jing yi, 精一)—pure and focused, unclouded by prejudice—and "sincerely hold the Mean" (yun zhi jue zhong, 允执厥中)—sincerely maintain the center. This "Mean" (Zhong) is precisely the remedy for the obstruction of "one corner"—it is impartial, non-partisan, not clinging to one extreme—it is the state of being "unobstructed."

Sixth Layer: "This is the calamity of obstruction and blockage" (此蔽塞之祸也).

"Obstruction and Blockage" (Bi Sai, 蔽塞)—"Bi" and "Sai" are listed together. "Bi" is obscuring; "Sai" is blocking. Obscuring prevents seeing; blocking prevents the flow of information. Together, "Bi Sai" constitutes a complete cognitive closure and information blockade. "Huo" means disaster. Master Xunzi defines "Bi" ultimately as "Calamity" (Huo, 祸)—a severe disaster. In the pre-Qin context, "Calamity" stands in contrast to "Blessing" (Fu, 福) and concerns matters as vital as the survival of the state and the life or death of the individual. Master Xunzi’s use of "Huo" to conclude this section, and "Fu" to describe Master Confucius’s "unobstructedness," shows the high regard he placed on the issue of "Bi."

Thus, the problem of "Bi" is by no means a purely academic issue—it concerns not only the correctness of individual cognition but also the stability of society, the clarity of politics, and the rise and fall of the state. The "Bi" of the various schools was not just academic imbalance but also political disaster—for once a ruler adopted the prejudice of one school as his state strategy, severe political consequences would ensue.

In the late Warring States period in which Master Xunzi lived, there were many shocking historical lessons regarding this "calamity of obstruction and blockage." States reformed themselves through various doctrines—sometimes Legalist doctrines (like Shang Yang in Qin), sometimes the strategies of the Diplomatists (like Su Qin and Zhang Yi in the various states)—each adhering rigidly to one extreme. Master Xunzi observed these historical experiences and felt deeply the danger of a single-corner view, thus proposing the theory of "Jie Bi" to lay an epistemological foundation for a balanced way of governance.

Section 4: The Structure and Logic of the Six Schools' Obstructions

Before delving into the specific analysis of the six schools, we must first examine the overall structure and internal logic of Master Xunzi’s enumeration.

The six obstructions listed by Master Xunzi are in sequence:

1. Master Mozi—Obstructed by Utility (Yong), unaware of Culture (Wen).
2. Master Songzi—Obstructed by Desire (Yu), unaware of Attainment (De).
3. Master Shenzi—Obstructed by Law (Fa), unaware of Worthy Men (Xian).
4. Master Shenzi (Shen Buhai)—Obstructed by Power (Shi), unaware of Wisdom (Zhi).
5. Master Hui—Obstructed by Rhetoric (Ci), unaware of Reality (Shi).
6. Master Zhuangzi—Obstructed by Heaven (Tian), unaware of Man (Ren).

Each school is "obstructed" by one concept (Utility, Desire, Law, Power, Rhetoric, Heaven) and "unaware" of another (Culture, Attainment, Worthy Men, Wisdom, Reality, Man). Each pair of concepts forms a specific tension. More profoundly, these six relational tensions also exhibit a certain internal logical connection.

Let us try to trace this logic.

From the first pair to the sixth, we can observe a progression from "vessel" to "Dao":

• "Utility" (Yong) and "Culture" (Wen)—Involve the functional aspect (Utility) and the meaningful aspect (Culture); this is the most fundamental level.
• "Desire" (Yu) and "Attainment" (De)—Involve the modulation of human psychological needs (Desire) and proper acquisition (Attainment); this touches upon the inner world of man.
• "Law" (Fa) and "Worthy Men" (Xian)—Involve the institutional level of social governance (Law) and the personnel level (Worthiness); this rises to the political domain.
• "Power" (Shi) and "Wisdom" (Zhi)—Involve the application of authority (Position/Power) and judicious judgment (Intelligence); this touches the core of political operation.
• "Rhetoric" (Ci) and "Reality" (Shi)—Involve linguistic expression (Names and distinctions) and objective essence (Actuality); this rises to the epistemological level.
• "Heaven" (Tian) and "Man" (Ren)—Involve the cosmic natural order (Heavenly Dao) and human affairs (Human actions); this touches the highest level of philosophy.

It can be said that Master Xunzi’s ordering is not arbitrary but possesses an internal sequence rising from low to high, from concrete to abstract. This sequence implies that the "obstruction" of each school differs not only in degree but also in nature—the later the "obstruction," the higher the level of the problem involved, and the deeper (though still partial) the grasp of the Dao.

Simultaneously, the relationship between the "obstructed" concept and the "unaware" concept in the six pairs shares another crucial common feature: in each pair, the "obstructed" and the "unaware" are not diametrically opposed poles but are two indispensable aspects of a complete cognition—it is only by severing them and clinging to one while abandoning the other that "Bi" results.

This "severing" has a very precise analogue in the I Ching framework. The fundamental thought of the I Ching is the mutual complementarity of Yin and Yang, the harmony of hardness and softness. Qian and Kun cannot be discarded, and Yin and Yang cannot be excessively adhered to. The "Bi" criticized by Master Xunzi corresponds to the manifestation of "excessive Yin" or "excessive Yang"—taking only one side while abandoning the other, thus destroying the Dao's harmonious Yin-Yang balance.

The I Ching, Xi Ci Shang, states: "One Yin and one Yang, this is the Dao. Following it is good fortune; completing it is human nature." (Yi you Taiji, shi sheng liangyi...) The Dao is the unity of Yin and Yang, not the separate existence of Yin or Yang. "Utility" and "Culture," "Law" and "Worthy Men," "Heaven" and "Man"—these pairs can all be analogized to the relationship between Yin and Yang; neither can be discarded, and both must be unified within the totality of the Dao.

Once this overall structure is understood, we can proceed to the specific analysis of the "Bi" of the six schools.

Chapter III: The Obstruction of Master Mozi: Obstructed by Utility, Unaware of Culture

Section 1: The Rise of the Idea of "Utility" and the Core Concern of Mohism

"Master Mozi was obstructed by Utility, unaware of Culture." (墨子蔽于用而不知文。)

This is Master Xunzi’s fundamental critique of Master Mozi and the Mohist school. To understand this critique, one must first deeply explore the Mohist concept of "Utility" (Yong, 用).

The teachings of Master Mozi arose from the late Spring and Autumn to early Warring States period. Tradition holds that Master Mozi "studied the professions of the Confucians and received the methods of Confucius," but later established his own school. One of the core reasons Master Mozi diverged from Confucianism was his profound emphasis on "Utility."

In Master Mozi’s view, every proposition and every social system must be tested by its "practical utility." That which is useful is good; that which is useless should be discarded. This utilitarian mindset permeates all of Master Mozi’s doctrines.

Master Mozi proposed the famous "Three Standards" (San Biao, 三表) as the criterion for judging whether a statement is correct:

"That which has a root, that which has a source, and that which has utility. What is its root$28 It is rooted in the deeds of the sage-kings of antiquity. What is its source$29 It is traced to the evidence heard and seen by the common people below. What is its utility$30 To abolish it or enact it as criminal law and administration, observing the benefits it brings to the country, the state, and the people. These are the Three Standards for speech." (有本之者，有原之者，有用之者。于何本之？上本之于古者圣王之事。于何原之？下原察百姓耳目之实。于何用之？废以为刑政，观其中国家百姓人民之利。此所谓言有三表也。)

The third standard—"abolish it or enact it as criminal law and administration, observing the benefits it brings..."—is the most critical. Whether a statement is correct is ultimately judged by whether it benefits the state and the people when applied to political practice. This is the standard of "Utility."

Viewed positively, this standard of "Utility" possesses a distinct spirit of realism. It rejects empty metaphysical speculation and demands that thought serve practical life, focusing on concrete social results—this was a commendable pragmatic attitude amidst the debates of the Hundred Schools.

However, when Master Mozi elevated "Utility" to the sole, supreme standard, problems arose. He used "Utility" as the measure for everything, leading to a series of conclusions that Confucians found extremely radical.

The most typical example is "Against Music" (Fei Yue, 非乐). Master Mozi argued that music has no practical utility—it neither fills stomachs, clothes bodies, nor provides secure housing; rather, it wastes human labor and material resources, which could have been used for producing necessities. Therefore, music should be abolished. "Against Music (Upper)," Master Mozi exhaustively argued the harms of music: making musical instruments consumes wood and metal; performing music consumes human effort and time. These resources could have been used for producing necessities. Therefore, "Making music is wrong." (为乐非也。)

Similarly, "Frugality in Funerals" (Jie Zang, 节葬). Master Mozi criticized the Confucian emphasis on elaborate funerals and prolonged mourning periods as wasteful of resources and damaging to human health, yielding no benefit to the deceased. Therefore, funeral rites should be simplified. The core consideration of "Frugality in Funerals" was also based on the standard of "Utility"—What is the use of lavish funerals$31 None for the living, none for the dead, so why bother$32

Furthermore, "Frugality in Expenditure" (Jie Yong, 节用). Master Mozi opposed all unnecessary consumption and ornamentation, advocating for the simplest possible living conditions. Palaces only needed to shelter from wind and rain; clothing only needed to keep warm; food only needed to satisfy hunger—any expenditure beyond practical need was waste.

Section 2: What is "Unaware of Culture" (Bu Zhi Wen)$33—The Multiple Meanings of "Wen" (文)

Master Xunzi criticized Master Mozi for being "unaware of Culture" (bu zhi wen). What does "Wen" mean here$34

The character "Wen" (文) has extremely rich meanings in the pre-Qin context, encompassing at least the following layers:

First, "Wen" as Pattern or Ornamentation. The earliest oracle bone script for "Wen" resembles a person with tattoos on the chest. Early ancestors valued tattoos, and the patterns and colors were "Wen." By extension, anything with texture, pattern, or adornment could be called "Wen." This contrasts with "Substance" (Zhi, 质)—the plain, unadorned essence. The Analects, "Yong Ye" (雍也), quotes Confucius: "If substance prevails over culture, one becomes rustic; if culture prevails over substance, one becomes a scribe. Only when culture and substance are blended harmoniously does one become a gentleman." (Zhi sheng wen ze ye, wen sheng zhi ze shi. Wen zhi bin bin, ran hou junzi.) Here, "Wen" refers to external refinement and cultivation.

Second, "Wen" as Culture or Education/Transformation. The Zhou dynasty highly valued rites and music for moral cultivation (Li Yue Jiao Hua, 礼乐教化), and the concrete manifestations of this system—rituals, music, clothing, vessels, hierarchical order—were all expressions of "Wen." The I Ching, Bi Gua (贲卦, Adornment), Commentary on the Judgment (Tuan Zhuan), distinguishes: "When hard and soft intermingle, that is the pattern of Heaven (Tian Wen); when culture shines forth to restrain, that is the pattern of Man (Ren Wen). By observing the pattern of Heaven, one discerns the changes of the times; by observing the pattern of Man, one transforms the world." (Gang rou jiao chao, tian wen ye; wen ming yi zhi, ren wen ye. Guan yu tian wen, yi cha shi bian; guan yu ren wen, yi hua cheng tianxia.) This clearly distinguishes "Heavenly Patterns" (natural order) from "Human Patterns" (social and cultural order), stating that the function of "Human Patterns" is "to transform the world" (hua cheng tianxia)—to educate the world through culture and achieve social harmony.

Third, "Wen" as Elegance or Grace. The Zuo Zhuan, in the 25th year of Duke Xiang, records Zichan’s words: "If speech lacks elegance, it will not travel far." (言之无文，行而不远。) Here, "Wen" refers to the aesthetic appeal and persuasive force of language.

Fourth, "Wen" as Ritual Protocol or Documents. "Wen" also specifically refers to concrete ritual institutions and written records. The Duke of Zhou established rites and music, creating a complete social order whose specific form was "Wen." Master Confucius exclaimed: "The Zhou inspected the deeds of the two preceding dynasties; how abundantly cultured they were! I follow the Zhou." (Analects, Ba Yi) This "Wen" refers to the beauty of the Zhou system of rites and music.

Synthesizing these meanings, Master Xunzi’s critique that Master Mozi was "unaware of Culture" includes several criticisms:

First, Master Mozi did not understand the value of external adornment. In his view, any adornment not directly serving practical function was waste. However, "Wen" as ornamentation derives its value not from utility but from aesthetics and symbolism—it expresses humanity's pursuit of beauty, identification of status, and construction of order. These values cannot be measured by "useful or useless."

Second, Master Mozi failed to grasp the profound significance of the moral cultivation through rites and music. While the direct function of rites and music may not be as obvious as food, clothing, shelter, and travel, their indirect functions—cohering society, cultivating character, maintaining order, transmitting civilization—are indispensable to any society. Master Mozi only saw the direct cost of rites and music (expenditure of resources) but ignored their indirect benefits (social cohesion).

Third, Master Mozi failed to understand that humans are not merely functional beings but also cultural beings. People live not only to satisfy basic needs but also to pursue beauty (aesthetic needs), goodness (moral needs), truth (cognitive needs), and transcendence (spiritual needs). A society that satisfies material needs but lacks cultural life is desolate and impoverished, regardless of material wealth.

Confucius offered a profound reflection on this point: The Analects, "Yang Huo" (阳货), records: "When the Master went to Wu Cheng, he heard the sound of stringed instruments and singing. The Master smiled and said, 'Why use an ox-slaughtering knife to kill a chicken$35' Ziyou replied, 'Formerly, I heard you, Master, say: When a gentleman studies the Dao, he loves others; when a petty man studies the Dao, he is easy to command.' The Master said, 'You three gentlemen, what Yàn said is correct. What I said before was only in jest.'" (子之武城，闻弦歌之声，夫子莞尔而笑曰：‘割鸡焉用牛刀？’子游对曰：‘昔者偃也闻诸夫子曰：君子学道则爱人，小人学道则易使也。’子曰：‘二三子，偃之言是也。前言戏之耳。’") This dialogue demonstrates that even in governing a small county, musical cultivation is important—a gentleman who studies the Dao loves others, while a petty man who studies the Dao is easily commanded. Music is not useless entertainment but a vital tool for cultivating the mind. Master Ziyou deeply understood Confucius’s teaching and governed Wu Cheng with strings and songs.

Furthermore, in the Analects, "Tai Bo" (泰伯), Confucius stated: "It begins with the Odes, is established by the Rites, and completed by Music." (Xing yu shi, li yu li, cheng yu yue.) These three sentences outline a complete path of character formation: emotional arousal from poetry, behavioral norms established by ritual, and personal completion through music. If music were abolished according to Master Mozi's doctrine of "Against Music," the final stage of character formation would be missing, and human spiritual development would be incomplete.

Section 3: "The Dao Defined by Utility Ends in Profit Alone" (You Yong Wei zhi Dao, Jin Li Yi)—The Limitation of a One-Corner View

"The Dao defined by Utility ends in Profit alone." (由用谓之道，尽利矣。)

This is Master Xunzi’s summary of the Mohist obstruction. "The Dao defined by Utility" (You Yong Wei zhi Dao)—defining the Dao from the perspective of "Utility." "Ends in Profit alone" (Jin Li Yi)—it results only in "profit" (Li, 利).

The character "Li" (利) here has a dual meaning. First, Li refers to utilitarian benefit, concrete advantage, and effectiveness. Second, Li implies "nothing more than this"—if the Dao is understood only as "Utility," it reduces itself to merely a tool for utilitarian calculation, losing higher dimensions such as culture, moral instruction, and aesthetics.

Why is "ending in profit alone" a limitation$36 Why can the Dao not be defined solely by "profit"$37

This must be understood through the Dao's wholeness. The Dao "is constant in its substance yet endlessly changing in its manifestations"; it encompasses every aspect of human life. Utilitarian benefit is only one aspect of human life—an important one, but not the whole. Besides pursuing utility, humans also pursue beauty (aesthetic needs), goodness (moral needs), truth (cognitive needs), and transcendence (spiritual needs). An intellectual system that only knows utility and nothing else is necessarily incapable of responding to the full spectrum of human needs.

On a deeper level, "ending in profit alone" leads to a severe political consequence. If a state's governance is entirely profit-oriented, everything that does not directly produce material benefits—education, culture, ritual, sacrifice—will be deemed wasteful and cut back. In the short term, this might concentrate resources and increase efficiency; but in the long term, it leads to the disintegration of social cohesion, the collapse of moral foundations, the alienation of the populace, and the undermining of the state's roots.

The Book of Rites (Li Ji), "Record of Music" (Yue Ji), reveals the indispensability of "Wen":

"Music is the harmony of Heaven and Earth; Rites are the order of Heaven and Earth. Harmony causes all things to transform; Order causes all things to be differentiated. Music is produced by Heaven; Rites are established by Earth. Excessive order leads to chaos; excessive creation leads to tyranny. Only by understanding Heaven and Earth can one establish Rites and Music." (乐者，天地之和也；礼者，天地之序也。和，故百物皆化；序，故群物皆别。乐由天作，礼以地制。过制则乱，过作则暴。明于天地，然后能兴礼乐也。)

Rites and music are not man-made decorations but the human manifestation of the harmony and order of Heaven and Earth. To abolish rites and music is to sever the connection between human society and the cosmic order, turning human society into a barren land of pure utilitarian calculation without spiritual anchorage.

In the "On Music" (Yue Lun) chapter, Master Xunzi offered a more detailed refutation of Master Mozi’s "Against Music":

"Music is joy; it is something human nature cannot avoid. Therefore, man cannot be without joy, and if one has joy, it must manifest in sound and shape in movement and stillness. The path of man—sound, movement, stillness—all these variations of nature and method are covered. Therefore, man cannot be without joy, and if one has joy, there must be form; if there is form but it is not guided by the Dao, then chaos will ensue. The former kings disliked this chaos, and thus they formulated the music of the Ya and Song to guide it." (乐者，乐也，人情之所必不免也。故人不能无乐，乐则必发于声音，形于动静。而人之道，声音动静，性术之变尽是矣。故人不能不乐，乐则不能无形，形而不为道，则不能无乱。先王恶其乱也，故制《雅》《颂》之声以道之。)

Master Xunzi points out that music is not a dispensable pastime but a necessity of human emotion. Humans have joy, anger, sorrow, and pleasure, and these emotions inevitably express themselves through sound and action. Without proper channels of expression (i.e., rites and music), these emotions will erupt chaotically, causing social upheaval. The formulation of the Ya and Song music by the former kings was precisely to guide human emotions so that they become orderly and not chaotic.

This argument is sharp and precise. It reveals a core function of "Wen": Wen is not an external adornment placed upon human nature, but a necessary form for human nature to express itself. Man needs "Wen" just as water needs a river channel—if water is not guided by channels, it floods; if human emotions are not guided by rites and music, they descend into chaos. Master Mozi only saw that river channels occupy land ("waste resources") but failed to see the indispensable function of guiding water flow—this is being "obstructed by utility and unaware of culture."

Section 4: The Status of "Wen" in Ancient Culture—From Mythology to Ritual System

To further understand why Master Mozi’s "unawareness of Wen" constitutes a serious failing, we must trace the core status of "Wen" in ancient Chinese culture.

In ancient Chinese mythology, "Wen" is always closely related to the origin and development of civilization.

Legend holds that Fuxi drew the Eight Trigrams—the earliest form of "Wen"—using simple Yin-Yang symbols to represent the operating principles of Heaven, Earth, and all things. The "Wen" of the Eight Trigrams was not useless decoration but the fundamental tool for human cognition of the cosmos. Without this symbolic "Wen," humanity could not systematically grasp the laws of nature, and thus civilization could not develop.

Legend says that when Huang Di ordered Cangjie to create characters, "Heaven rained millet, and ghosts cried in the night." Why did the ghosts cry$38 Ancient interpretations suggest that with the invention of writing, human wisdom greatly increased, and the secrets of the spirits could no longer be hidden—writing gave humanity a more powerful cognitive capacity. Yet, the power of writing rests on the foundation of "matching names to reality" (Ming Shi Xiang Fu, 名实相符)—writing has power because it accurately corresponds to the actual state of things. If writing detaches from "Reality" (Shi) and becomes a mere conceptual game, it ceases to enhance human cognition and instead becomes a tool for confusing right and wrong.

In the ancient sacrificial traditions, language (prayers, invocations) held a sacred status. Incantations must be sincere—because the objects of sacrifice were spirits, who could perceive the mind; insincere words could not move the spirits and might even invite punishment. The Analects, "Ba Yi" (八佾), records: "When making sacrifices, act as if they are present; when making offerings to spirits, act as if the spirits are present." (祭如在，祭神如神在。) This requires the speaker's words to come from sincerity, without the slightest pretense or artifice.

This ancient linguistic view—that language must be sincere and correspond to reality—stands in sharp contrast to Master Hui Shi’s linguistic practice. Master Hui Shi turned language into a game divorced from reality, which, from the ancient perspective, was a grave profanation of language's sacred function.

Master Laozi’s Chapter 81 states: "Faithful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not faithful. The good do not dispute; those who dispute are not good. The knowing are not learned; the learned do not know." (Xin yan bu mei, mei yan bu xin. Shan zhe bu bian, bian zhe bu shan. Zhi zhe bu bo, bo zhe bu zhi.) Master Laozi’s words serve as the most profound critique of Master Hui Shi’s "obstruction by rhetoric": "Those who dispute are not good"—those skilled in subtle debate are actually not skilled in recognizing the Dao. Master Hui Shi was the world's foremost debater, yet precisely because he was too immersed in debate, he lost his grasp on "Reality"—this is the epitome of "those who dispute are not good."

Section 5: The Middle Way of Confucianism—The Unity of "Utility" and "Culture"

Confucians were not indifferent to "Utility." Confucius said, "When learning flourishes, one should enter official service." (Analects, Zi Zhang), advocating for applying learning in practice. Master Mencius discussed "regulating the livelihood of the people" (Mengzi, Liang Hui Wang Shang), emphasizing the importance of material foundations. Master Xunzi himself said: "The way to enrich a state is to moderate expenditure and enrich the people, and store the surplus well." (Xunzi, Fu Guo) Thus, Confucianism fully recognizes the value of "Utility."

However, Confucianism opposes taking "Utility" as the sole standard. In the Confucian view, "Utility" and "Culture" must be unified. Only "Utility" without "Culture" results in a life that satisfies material needs but lacks spiritual meaning—this is the Mohist partiality. Only "Culture" without "Utility" results in a life that is ornate and elegant but disconnected from practical foundations—this is another form of partiality.

The phrase "When substance prevails over culture, one becomes rustic; when culture prevails over substance, one becomes a scribe. Only when culture and substance are blended harmoniously does one become a gentleman" (Wen zhi bin bin, ran hou junzi) precisely expresses the optimal unity of "Utility" (represented by rustic substance) and "Culture" (represented by elegance). "Substance" is closer to "Utility"—plain, practical, functional. "Culture" is closer to "Elegance"—aesthetic, ritualistic, symbolic. "Bin Bin" means appropriate proportion and harmonious balance. The gentleman is neither a pure utilitarian ("rustic") nor a pure formalist ("scribe"), but a harmonious unity of the two.

This path of unity precisely embodies Master Xunzi’s idea that the Dao is "constant in substance yet endlessly changing." The "constant" is the principle that "Utility" and "Culture" are both indispensable; the "changing" is that the specific ratio between them can be adjusted in different eras and situations. In times of material scarcity, one might lean toward "Utility"; in times of spiritual poverty, one might lean toward "Culture." But regardless of the adjustment, one cannot entirely abandon either pole.

Thus, Master Mozi’s "obstruction" lies not in his valuing "Utility"—valuing "Utility" itself is not wrong—but in his "unawareness of Culture," meaning his denial of the value of "Wen." This denial meant his intellectual system was inherently incomplete and biased, unable to encompass all dimensions of human life.

Chapter IV: The Obstruction of Master Songzi: Obstructed by Desire, Unaware of Attainment

Section 1: Master Songzi and His Teachings

"Master Songzi was obstructed by Desire, unaware of Attainment." (宋子蔽于欲而不知得。)

Master Songzi, also known as Song Yang or Song Rongzi, though not as famous as Master Mozi or Master Zhuangzi in the history of thought, had a considerable influence on contemporary scholarship. Master Zhuangzi mentioned "Master Song Rongzi smiled at that" (Xiao Yao You) in appreciation, indicating his standing in the intellectual circles of the time.

Direct surviving materials on Master Songzi are few, mostly found in indirect citations in the Xunzi, Zhuangzi, and Han Feizi. Based on these sources, we can sketch the core tenets of his thought:

First, Master Songzi advocated "not feeling insulted when insulted" (见侮不辱). He believed that the reason people feel humiliated is not the insulting act itself, but their own psychological reaction. If a person can disregard the insults of others, they will not feel insulted. This view aims to eliminate the psychological source of interpersonal conflict.

Second, Master Songzi advocated "diminishing desire" (Guang Yu, 寡欲). He believed human desire is the root of all social problems—greed leads to contention, contention leads to conflict, and conflict leads to war. Therefore, the fundamental way to solve social problems is to reduce human desires. If everyone could minimize desire, society would naturally be peaceful.

Third, Master Songzi opposed "fighting" (Fei Dou, 非斗), advocating for peaceful means to resolve disagreements.

From these assertions, it is clear that the core of Master Songzi’s thought was the "moderation of desire." He viewed human desire as the source of all evil, believing that if desire could be controlled, all problems could be solved. This line of reasoning has some merit—desire is indeed a major cause of many social problems—but it is overly simplistic and one-sided.

Section 2: Distinguishing Between "Desire" (Yu) and "Attainment" (De)

Master Xunzi criticized Master Songzi for being "obstructed by desire, unaware of attainment" (bi yu yu er bu zhi de). The relationship between "Desire" (Yu, 欲) concerning the moderation of desire, and "Attainment" (De, 得) concerning reasonable acquisition, needs careful differentiation.

Master Songzi’s core logic was: The problem stems from excessive desire → reduce desire → problem solved. However, Master Xunzi pointed out that this logic overlooked a crucial link—"Attainment." Even if human desires are reduced, if the "Attainment" (the means and conditions for actual acquisition) is not reasonably arranged, social problems cannot be resolved.

What is "Attainment" (De)$1 Here, "De" has two meanings:

First, "Attainment" refers to actual fulfillment. To live, one always has basic needs—food, clothing, shelter, safety, social interaction, etc.—these needs must be met. Simply telling people to "reduce desire" without providing the conditions to meet basic needs is unrealistic. Master Songzi thought that as long as people didn't want too much, the problem would be solved; but in reality, some things are not a matter of wanting or not wanting—they are matters of necessity. One cannot choose not to eat, not to wear clothes, or not to have shelter. These basic needs cannot be eliminated simply by "diminishing desire."

Second, "Attainment" refers to the legitimate channels and institutional arrangements for acquisition. The key to social problems lies not only in how much people want, but in how they acquire what they need. If the social system is just and reasonable, people can obtain what they need through proper means, and even if they have strong desires, this will not lead to severe social conflict. Conversely, if the social system is unjust, conflict may erupt even if people desire little, simply because basic needs are unmet.

Master Xunzi analyzed the relationship between "Desire" and "Attainment" in detail in the chapter "On Names" (Zheng Ming, 正名):

"Desire does not wait for attainability, but seeking follows what is attainable. Desire not waiting for attainability is received from Heaven; seeking that follows what is attainable is received from the mind. The single desire received from Heaven is constrained by the many things received from the mind; thus, it is difficult to resemble what is received from Heaven." (欲不待可得，而求者从所可。欲不待可得，所受乎天也；求者从所可，所受乎心也。所受乎天之一欲，制于所受乎心之多，固难类所受乎天也。)

This passage is brilliant. Master Xunzi states that the existence of desire ("received from Heaven") is human nature and need not or should not be eliminated; the key is that "seeking follows what is attainable" (qiu zhe cong suo ke)—the method of pursuing the satisfaction of desire must follow rational channels ("received from the mind," i.e., rational guidance). In other words, the problem is not the existence of desire, but how to correctly pursue its satisfaction—this is the issue of "Attainment."

This insight is profound. It reveals the fundamental error in Master Songzi’s "obstruction by desire": Master Songzi focused only on desire itself (trying to reduce it) while ignoring the method and conditions for its satisfaction ("Attainment"). This is like a doctor facing a fever patient who tries only to lower the body temperature instead of finding the cause (infection, inflammation, etc.)—the temperature might drop, but the underlying illness remains, and the fever will return.

Section 3: "The Dao Defined by Desire Ends in Scarcity Alone" (You Yu Wei zhi Dao, Jin Qian Yi)—Why "Scarcity"$2

"The Dao defined by Desire ends in Scarcity alone." (由欲谓之道，尽嗛矣。)

"Qian" (嗛) means humble, small, or insufficient. "End in Scarcity Alone" (Jin Qian Yi)—entirely insufficient and lacking.

Why does Master Xunzi say that defining the Dao based on "Desire" results in "Scarcity"$3

Because Master Songzi’s approach was to solve problems by reducing desire. If this approach were carried to its extreme, its logical conclusion would be: man should have fewer desires, fewer pursuits, less acquisition—in short, less is better. However, to the extreme of "less" is "scarcity"—want and decline. A society whose highest principle is "diminishing desire" will ultimately become one of material poverty and spiritual repression, where everything withers—because all pursuit, all development, all creation is suppressed as "excessive desire."

This is the meaning of "ending in scarcity": if Master Songzi’s doctrine were fully implemented, society would descend into comprehensive lack and stagnation.

On a deeper level, Master Songzi’s "obstruction by desire" also involves a crucial divergence in human nature theory. Master Songzi (and some Daoists) tended to view desire as negative and harmful, believing that eliminating or reducing desire was the only path to an ideal society. However, Master Xunzi (and the mainstream Confucian tradition) believed that desire is a natural component of human nature that cannot and should not be eliminated; the key is to guide and restrain desire through reasonable means, allowing it to be satisfied in an orderly manner.

In Xunzi, "On Rites" (Li Lun), Master Xunzi states:

"Rites are nourishment. Cooked and minced meats, grains, five flavors, harmonized seasonings, these are for nourishing the mouth; spices and orchids, fragrance and aroma, these are for nourishing the nose; carvings and etchings, brocade patterns and artful designs, these are for nourishing the eyes; bells, drums, pipes, and reeds, lutes and stringed instruments, these are for nourishing the ears; airy chambers and fine appearances, mats and cushions, these are for nourishing the body. Therefore, Rites are nourishment." (礼者，养也。刍豢稻粱，五味调香，所以养口也；椒兰芬苾，所以养鼻也；雕琢刻镂，黼黻文章，所以养目也；钟鼓管磬，琴瑟竽笙，所以养耳也；疏房檖貌，越席床笫几筵，所以养体也。故礼者，养也。)

This passage clearly shows that Master Xunzi did not oppose human desire—nourishing the mouth with fine food, the nose with fragrance, the eyes with beauty, the ears with music, the body with comfort—these are all reasonable satisfactions of desire and are all content of "Rites." Rites do not suppress desire but satisfy it in a proper manner, ensuring that satisfaction is orderly, moderate, and tasteful.

Conversely, Master Songzi’s doctrine of "diminishing desire" fundamentally negates these reasonable satisfactions. In his view, fine food is excessive, spices are excessive, ornamentation is excessive, and music is excessive—anything beyond the minimum requirement for survival is superfluous. This extreme doctrine of "diminishing desire" ultimately results in the comprehensive withering of humanity—people cease to pursue a better life, higher culture, or deeper spiritual realms, settling merely for subsistence. This is "ending in scarcity"—a universal state of lack and stagnation.

Section 4: "Desire" and "Attainment" in the Ancient Vision—From Yu the Great's Flood Control

From the perspective of ancient mythology and folklore, the relationship between "Desire" and "Attainment" finds a profound metaphor in the legend of Yu the Great controlling the floods.

What was the core idea behind Yu the Great's flood control$4 It was "Dredging" (Shu, 疏) rather than "Blocking" (Du, 堵). Yu’s father, Gun, controlled the floods using the "blocking" method—wherever there was a flood, he built a dike to stop it. The result was that the floods built up and eventually overflowed catastrophically. Yu the Great used the "dredging" method—following the water’s course, he dug channels to guide the floodwaters into the sea. The result was effective control of the floods.

This legend contains a profound philosophical truth: facing a powerful natural force (water), one should not attempt to eliminate or suppress it (blocking) but rather guide and utilize it (dredging).

Applying this principle to the issue of "desire," the logic is the same. Desire is like a flood, a powerful natural force within human nature. Master Songzi’s doctrine of "diminishing desire" is analogous to Gun’s method of "blocking"—attempting to reduce or eliminate desire. However, desire is human nature; the more it is suppressed, the more it rebounds, just as a dammed river swells. Master Xunzi’s approach (and the Confucian tradition of ritual cultivation) is analogous to Yu the Great’s "dredging"—not eliminating desire, but providing legitimate channels for its satisfaction through ritual institutions, allowing desire to be released in an orderly manner.

The I Ching, Xu Gua (需卦, Waiting/Need) states: "Clouds rise above Heaven—Xu. The gentleman uses this to feast and enjoy himself." (Yun shang yu tian, Xu. Junzi yi yinshi yanyue.) "Xu" means waiting, but also implies need. Clouds await rain, which is the "need" of the Dao of Heaven. Correspondingly, man has the need for food and enjoyment—this is the "need" of the Dao of Man. The Xu hexagram tells us that human needs are natural and legitimate and should not be negated or suppressed. The key is to satisfy these needs in the proper manner and at the appropriate time—"Waiting with wine and food brings good fortune." (需于酒食，贞吉。) Satisfying needs under appropriate conditions leads to auspiciousness.

Furthermore, the I Ching presents the hexagrams Sun (损, Diminishing) and Yi (益, Increasing) as counterparts. Sun means to diminish; Yi means to increase. The two are mutually converting hexagrams, suggesting that one must diminish when appropriate and increase when appropriate—one cannot only diminish, nor can one only increase. Master Songzi’s doctrine of "diminishing desire" is one-sided "diminishing"—constantly reducing desire. However, the wisdom of the I Ching tells us that "diminishing" is not the goal; "diminishing" is for the sake of better "increasing"—reducing unnecessary desires allows genuinely important needs to be better satisfied. "Diminish the high to benefit the low" (Sun shang yi xia, 损上益下) from the Yi hexagram: reducing the excessive enjoyment of rulers to increase the basic welfare of the people—this is the appropriate way to handle "diminishing and increasing." One-sided "diminishing" without "increasing" ultimately results in "scarcity"—universal lack.

In ancient folk traditions, harvest sacrifices were a vital theme. After the autumn harvest each year, the ancestors held grand sacrificial ceremonies to thank Heaven and Earth for their bounty. These ceremonies included abundant food, fervent singing and dancing, and beautiful attire—all legitimate satisfactions and proper expressions of desire. If Master Songzi’s doctrine of "diminishing desire" were followed, most elements of these rites would need to be simplified or abolished—as they represent "excessive desire." Yet, the wisdom of the early ancestors showed that these activities not only satisfied material and spiritual needs but, more importantly, sustained the connection between man and Heaven/Earth, between man and community, and between man and tradition. Eliminating these activities would not bring a better life but would lead to the disintegration of social cohesion.

Section 5: Master Xunzi on Human Desire—Correcting Names and Nourishing Desire

Master Xunzi’s complete discussion of desire is concentrated in the chapters "On Names" and "On Rites." His fundamental position can be summarized as: Desire is human nature; it cannot be eliminated, nor should it be. The key is to guide and restrain desire through ritual and moral institutions, allowing it to be satisfied reasonably.

In Xunzi, "On Names," there is a critical passage:

"Nature (Xing) is what Heaven bestows; Feeling (Qing) is the substance of Nature; Desire (Yu) is the response of Feeling. To take what one desires as attainable and seek it is what Feeling inevitably cannot avoid." (性者，天之就也；情者，性之质也；欲者，情之应也。以所欲为可得而求之，情之所必不免也。)

This logical chain is clear: Heaven bestows "Nature" upon man → the substance of Nature manifests as "Feeling" → the natural reaction of Feeling is "Desire" → because one has desire, one seeks its satisfaction, which is inevitable on the emotional level. In other words, desire is not a bad habit acquired later but arises naturally from the chain: nature → feeling → desire. It is a fundamental component of being human.

Master Xunzi immediately continues:

"To treat what is attainable as the Way and articulate it, this is known to be inevitable. Thus, even if one guards the gate, desire cannot be removed. Even if one is the Son of Heaven, desire cannot be exhausted. Although desire cannot be exhausted, seeking it can be moderated; although desire cannot be removed, pursuit can be restrained." (以为可而道之，知所必出也。故虽为守门，欲不可去也。虽为天子，欲不可尽也。欲虽不可尽，可以近尽也；欲虽不可去，求可节也。)

This means that even the humblest gatekeeper has desires that cannot be eliminated, and even the most noble Son of Heaven cannot exhaust all his desires. However: though desires cannot be fully satisfied, approaching satisfaction is possible; though desires cannot be removed, the pursuit of them can be restrained.

This is the fundamental divergence between Master Xunzi and Master Songzi. Master Songzi attempted to "remove desire" (qu yu), which Master Xunzi saw as impossible and unnecessary. Master Xunzi advocates "restraining pursuit" (jie qiu)—not eliminating desire, but restraining the manner in which its satisfaction is sought, ensuring it conforms to rites and righteousness.

This concept of "restraining pursuit" is directly related to the concept of "Attainment" (De). "De" is the satisfaction of desire through reasonable means. With the institutional arrangement of "Attainment," people can find balance between desire and fulfillment; without the institutional arrangement of "Attainment," even if people desire less, conflict may arise because basic needs are unmet.

Master Songzi’s "obstruction by desire" stems from focusing only on the negative aspect of desire (it is the source of conflict) while ignoring the positive possibility of satisfying desire through reasonable institutional arrangements for "Attainment." This partial view led him to propose "diminishing desire," a doctrine that seems lofty in theory but is unworkable in practice.

Chapter V: The Obstruction of Master Shenzi: Obstructed by Law, Unaware of Worthy Men

Section 1: The Core of Master Shenzi's Legalism

"Master Shenzi was obstructed by Law, unaware of Worthy Men." (慎子蔽于法而不知贤。)

Master Shenzi, or Shen Dao, was an early representative of the Legalist school in the Warring States period. His core proposition was "esteeming Law over esteeming Worthiness" (尚法不尚贤)—governing a state should rely on legal institutions rather than on virtuous and capable individuals.

Master Shenzi’s logic was this: Worthy men are hard to find, and it is difficult to judge whether they are truly "worthy." Laws, however, are objective, clear, and operable. Rather than staking the fate of the state on a few worthy men (which itself is full of uncertainty), it is better to establish a complete system of law so that the state's operation does not depend on any specific individual.

This perspective has its rationale. Truly worthy men are extremely rare in practical politics, and identifying them is even harder. If a state’s governance relies entirely on coincidentally encountering a wise ruler or worthy minister, its future is too uncertain. Establishing legal institutions so that governance is methodical and based on fixed rules does indeed provide a degree of stability and predictability.

However, Master Shenzi’s problem was that he pushed this reasoning to an extreme—completely denying the role of the "Worthy Man" (Xian, 贤) and entrusting everything to "Law" (Fa, 法).

Section 2: The Tension Between Law and Worthiness—A Fundamental Governance Problem

The relationship between "Law" and "Worthy Men" is one of the most central issues in pre-Qin political thought. The Legalists advocated ruling by law, while the Confucians advocated ruling by virtue (or more accurately, by worthy men). Both positions have merit, but both also have drawbacks.

The advantage of Legalism lies in the objectivity and stability of institutions. Once laws are established, everyone—regardless of status or ability—must abide by them. Law does not change based on the person or the time (at least for a period), thus providing a stable framework for social operation.

The disadvantage of Legalism lies in the rigidity and limitation of institutions. Any law is formulated under specific conditions; it cannot foresee every possible situation. When new situations arise, if there are no worthy men with the judgment and creativity to respond flexibly, rigid laws become obstacles to governance.

Conversely, the advantage of the Confucian emphasis on "Worthiness" lies in human flexibility and creativity. Worthy men can adapt to the times and circumstances, making the most appropriate judgments and decisions for specific situations.

The disadvantage of the Confucian emphasis on "Worthy Men" lies in human uncertainty. Worthy men are rare and hard to find; even when encountered, they might misjudge, and many people pretend to be worthy ("those who resemble the right but are not").

Master Xunzi’s brilliance lies in seeing the value of both "Law" and "Worthy Men," advocating for their unification. In "On the Way of the Ruler" (Jun Dao, 君道), he clearly stated:

"There is governance by men, but not governance by law alone... Law cannot stand on its own, nor can models operate by themselves; they persist if they have the right men, and perish if they lose them. Law is the starting point of governance; the gentleman is the source of law. Thus, if there are gentlemen, even sparse laws are sufficient to cover all; if there are no gentlemen, even complete laws, if their application lacks proper sequencing and fails to adapt to changing events, will lead to chaos." (有治人，无治法。……法不能独立，类不能自行；得其人则存，失其人则亡。法者，治之端也；君子者，法之原也。故有君子，则法虽省，足以遍矣；无君子，则法虽具，失先后之施，不能应事之变，足以乱矣。)

This passage hits the nail on the head. Master Xunzi points out that law cannot operate by itself; it must be executed by men. Whether the executors of the law are worthy directly determines whether the law can function as intended. No matter how perfect the legal code, if the executors are not worthy, it cannot cope with the myriad complexities of reality.

Here lies a profound insight: Law is dead, man is alive; reality changes, laws are fixed. A dead, fixed law must rely on living, wise men to bridge the gap between the law and reality. This "wise man" is the "Worthy Man" (Xian).

Section 3: "The Dao Defined by Law Ends in Calculation Alone" (You Fa Wei zhi Dao, Jin Shu Yi)—The Danger of Mechanistic Governance

"The Dao defined by Law ends in Calculation alone." (由法谓之道，尽数矣。)

"Shu" (数) means number, calculation, or rule. "Ends in Calculation Alone" (Jin Shu Yi)—entirely mechanical calculation and rules.

Why does Master Xunzi summarize the Legalist flaw as "Calculation"$5

Because the essence of law is a system of rules—it specifies what can be done, what cannot be done, and what the penalties are for violation. This system of rules can be described by "number"—clear articles, distinct rewards and punishments, precise calculation. However, governing a state is far more than simple rule calculation can cover.

The human heart is complex and subtle. Interpersonal relationships are layered and varied. Social problems are intricate and tangled. Faced with this complexity, a mere system of rules is far from sufficient. For example, a law states, "He who kills shall die," which seems clear. But in reality, killing has many forms: self-defense, accidental death, killing under duress, killing to enact justice—each situation requires a different response. Legal texts cannot exhaust all possible circumstances, so they require men of wisdom and judgment (i.e., "Worthy Men") to make reasonable adjudications based on specific circumstances.

This point has deep resonance in the ancient governance tradition. Legend tells that Emperor Shun appointed Gao Yao as the Shi (chief judge) to manage penal law. The Shang Shu, "Gao Yao Mo" (皋陶谟), recounts Gao Yao explaining his governance philosophy to Shun:

"Heaven has established standards, let us observe the Five Disciplines! Heaven has established rites, let us observe the Five Rites! Let us harmonize our hearts with sincerity! Heaven has bestowed virtue, let us observe the Five Orders! Heaven administers punishment, let us observe the Five Punishments! May state affairs flourish, flourish!" (天叙有典，敕我五典五惇哉！天秩有礼，自我五礼有庸哉！同寅协恭和衷哉！天命有德，五服五章哉！天讨有罪，五刑五用哉！政事懋哉懋哉！)

This statement is highly significant. Gao Yao first speaks of "Standards" (Dian, 典), "Rites" (Li, 礼), and "Virtue" (De, 德), and only finally mentions "Punishment" (Xing, 刑). This indicates that in ancient governance, "Law" (punishment) was only one part of governance, and the last resort. Before employing "Law," one should first use "Virtue" to instruct, "Rites" to regulate, and "Standards" to guide. Only when these measures fail should "Law" be used for punishment.

And to correctly apply "Virtue," "Rites," and "Standards"—which are not as mechanically rigid as "Law"—requires the wisdom and judgment of "Worthy Men" to flexibly adapt them to people, events, and times.

Master Shenzi’s error was seeing only the effectiveness and certainty of "Law," leading him to believe that "Law" could replace all other governance methods—including the judgment of "Worthy Men." He reduced state governance to the mechanical operation of a set of rules ("ending in calculation"), ignoring the subtle aspects of governance that rules cannot cover and require human wisdom to address.

Section 4: Why "Worthiness" Cannot Be Discarded—The Sage Kings’ Rule and Worthy Governance

Why is "Worthiness" indispensable$6 Let us return to the records of the former sage kings in ancient texts to further understand this point.

The Analects, "Tai Bo" (泰伯), records Confucius saying: "Shun had ten ministers and the empire was governed. King Wu said, 'I have ten ministers who can throw the state into chaos.' Confucius said, 'Talent is rare; is that not so$7 During the time of Tang and Yu, they were abundant.'" (舜有臣五人而天下治。武王曰：‘予有乱臣十人。’孔子曰：‘才难，不其然乎？唐虞之际，于斯为盛。’") Confucius lamented that "talent is rare." Shun governed the world with five worthy ministers, and King Wu achieved his great undertaking with ten worthy ministers—the importance of the worthy man is evident here. If worthy men were not important, and if "Law" could solve everything, why did Shun and Wu attach such importance to wise personnel$8 Why not just create a set of legal statutes$9

Again, the Analects, "Yan Hui" (颜渊), records: "Ji Kangzi asked Confucius about governing. Confucius replied, 'To govern is to rectify. If you, sir, lead with correctness, who would dare not to be correct$10'" (季康子问政于孔子。孔子对曰：‘政者正也。子帅以正，孰敢不正？’) "Governing is rectifying" (Zheng zhe zheng ye)—the core of governance is "rectification" (Zheng, 正), which is a moral quality, not a set of legal statutes. "If you lead with correctness" (Zi shuai yi zheng)—if you (the ruler) are upright first, the people will naturally follow. The key here is the moral quality of the ruler himself ("Worthiness"), rather than external legal systems.

Furthermore, in the Analects, "Zi Lu" (子路):

"The Master said: 'If the ruler is upright in his person, he governs without issuing orders. If he is not upright in his person, though he issues orders, they will not be followed.'" (子曰：‘其身正，不令而行；其身不正，虽令不从。’)

The same principle applies. If the ruler is upright (worthy), he governs without needing to command; if the ruler is not upright, even with repeated commands (Law), the people will not obey. This passage profoundly reveals the priority of "Worthiness" over "Law"—if the ruler is unworthy, even the most perfect law becomes meaningless.

Of course, Master Xunzi did not mean that if there are "Worthy Men," "Law" is unnecessary. His assertion is that "Law" and "Worthy Men" must both be esteemed. In Xunzi, "On the Way of the Ruler" (Jun Dao), he stated:

"To exalt Rites and honor the Worthy leads to Kingship; to emphasize Law and love the people leads to Hegemony." (隆礼尊贤而王，重法爱民而霸。)

"Exalting Rites and honoring the Worthy" is the Royal Way (Wang Dao, 王道)—the highest form of governance; "Emphasizing Law and loving the people" is the Hegemonic Way (Ba Dao, 霸道)—a secondary form of governance. The Royal Way incorporates both "Rites" (institutions) and "Worthy Men" (talent), making it the most complete; the Hegemonic Way emphasizes "Law" but lacks full respect for "Worthy Men," thus achieving only second-best results.

Thus, in Master Xunzi’s system, "Law" and "Worthy Men" are two indispensable pillars of governance. Master Shenzi’s error was seeing only "Law" and not "Worthy Men"—it is like seeing the beams but not the columns; how can the structure stand$11

Section 5: The Example of Yao and Shun—The Revelation of Worthiness in Ancient Legends

The best case study in ancient legends concerning the relationship between power and wisdom is the story of Yao and Shun's abdication.

Legend holds that when Emperor Yao was old, he did not pass the throne to his son Danzhu, but to the worthy and capable Shun. Emperor Yao tested Shun for many years, confirming his virtue and talent before formally abdicating the throne to him—this is the archetype of the "abdication system."

The Shang Shu, "Yao Dian" (尧典), records the process of Yao selecting Shun:

"The Emperor said: 'Hark, you Four Overseers! I have reigned seventy years. Can you take up this mandate and respectfully transfer my throne to another$12' The Overseers said: 'We are lacking in virtue and unfit to hold the imperial seat.' Yao said: 'Make clear the obscure and the humble.' The officials advised the Emperor, saying: 'There is a widower below, named Yu Shun.'" Yao said: 'Yes, I have heard of him. What is he like$13' The Overseers said: 'He is a blind man, his father is stubborn, his mother is perverse, and his brother is arrogant. Yet he is able to live in harmony with them through filial piety, constantly devoted to them, and avoids wickedness.'" Yao said: 'I shall test him.'" (帝曰：‘咨，四岳！朕在位七十载，汝能庸命，巽朕位？’岳曰：‘否德忝帝位。’曰：‘明明扬侧陋。’师锡帝曰：‘有鳏在下，曰虞舜。’帝曰：‘俞，我闻，如何？’岳曰：‘瞽子，父顽，母嚚，象傲，克谐以孝，烝烝乂，不格奸。’帝曰：‘我其试哉。’)

This passage is vivid. Emperor Yao asked the Four Overseers who should inherit the throne, and they recommended Shun. Yao not only accepted the recommendation but also personally "tested him"—examining Shun's abilities and character. After observing Shun's handling of various state affairs over many years and confirming his true worthiness, Yao formally abdicated.

This story contains a profound lesson: the most crucial element in governing the world is selecting worthy men. Emperor Yao’s greatest political wisdom was not the formulation of certain laws (the Yao Dian contains little mention of law) but the selection of a worthy successor. If Emperor Yao had been "obstructed by Law and unaware of Worthy Men"—focusing only on legal systems while neglecting talent selection—then even the most perfect laws would have been discarded or distorted by an unworthy successor.

After ascending the throne, Emperor Shun selected a large group of capable men for various posts: Yu managed the floods, Qi managed agriculture, Xie managed education, Gao Yao managed punishment, Yi managed mountains and marshes... These worthy men performed their duties, coordinated with each other, and jointly created an era of "great governance." The core of this governance model was not "Law" (though laws existed), but "Worthy Men"—a group of virtuous and talented individuals functioning correctly in their respective roles.

Master Shenzi’s "obstruction by Law and unawareness of Worthy Men," when viewed from the perspective of the ancient rule of Yao and Shun, essentially negates the most essential element of governance. Law is certainly important, but law is made by men and executed by men. Without worthy men to devise the laws, the laws will not be reasonable; without worthy men to execute the laws, the laws will not be effective. Master Shenzi saw only the "trees" of Law and missed the "forest" of Worthy Men—this is a classic example of "one corner being insufficient to encompass it."

Chapter VI: The Obstruction of Master Shenzi (Shen Buhai): Obstructed by Power, Unaware of Wisdom

Section 1: The Political Theory of Master Shenzi’s "Technique" and "Power"

"Master Shenzi was obstructed by Power, unaware of Wisdom." (申子蔽于埶而不知知。)

Master Shenzi, or Shen Buhai, was a prime minister in the State of Han during the Warring States period and an important Legalist representative. Master Shenzi’s core assertion was "Technique" (Shu, 术)—the arts and methods by which the ruler controls his ministers. In Master Shenzi’s thought, "Power" (Shi, 埶, often written 势) was the foundation upon which the ruler implemented his "Technique."

The character "Shi" (Shi, 埶) has multiple meanings in the pre-Qin context:

First, Position/Status. Referring to the exalted position occupied by the ruler. It is because the ruler occupies the highest seat of power that he can exercise authority and issue commands.

Second, Authority/Influence. Referring to the power and influence derived from that position. Authority is the functional manifestation of status—having a position naturally confers a degree of influence.

Third, Situation/Momentum. Referring to favorable objective conditions and circumstances. The "Shi" in "guiding according to the situation" (Yin Shi Li Dao, 因势利导) carries this meaning.

Master Shenzi mainly focused on the first two meanings—status and authority. He argued that the reason a ruler can govern is fundamentally not because the ruler is personally wise, but because he occupies the highest position of power. As long as he skillfully utilizes the authority granted by this position, even a ruler of average talent can manage his ministers and govern the state.

This perspective has a degree of political realism. Under a centralized autocratic system, a ruler's power indeed largely derives from his institutional position (status) rather than his personal ability. A mediocre ruler in a high position might wield far more influence than a worthy man who lacks such a position. Thus, from the perspective of power dynamics, "Power" is indeed an indispensable factor.

Section 2: The Mismatch Between "Power" and "Wisdom"—The Misplacement of Authority and Intelligence

Master Xunzi criticized Master Shenzi for being "obstructed by Power, unaware of Wisdom" (bi yu shi er bu zhi zhi). "Zhi" here is a variant of "Zhi" (智), meaning wisdom or intelligence.

Master Shenzi's problem was that he overemphasized the role of power while neglecting the importance of wisdom.

Why cannot power replace wisdom$14

Because power is merely the condition for exercising authority, not the guarantee of exercising it correctly. A ruler with immense power but lacking wisdom is like a person who possesses a sharp sword but does not know how to wield it—the sword cannot protect him; it may even harm him.

Confucius said: "The wise are free from perplexity; the benevolent, from care; the courageous, from fear." (Analects, Zi Han) Wisdom (Zhi, 智) heads the three virtues. Why is wisdom so important$15 Because wisdom is the basis for correct judgment. Without wisdom, benevolence can be exploited, and courage can turn into recklessness. Similarly, without wisdom, power can be abused, ultimately harming both the ruler and the state.

Master Shenzi’s "Technique"—the ruler’s methods for controlling ministers—is inherently a technique of power, not wisdom. Power techniques can help a ruler control the situation in the short term, but in the long run, if the ruler lacks the wisdom to judge right from wrong and distinguish loyal from treacherous officials, even the most brilliant techniques cannot ensure long-term stability.

Why is this so$16 Because power techniques are tools for a zero-sum game—you use techniques to control your ministers, and your ministers use techniques to counter you. If the ruler has only techniques but no wisdom, the relationship between him and his ministers becomes an endless power struggle—you guard against me, and I guard against you, leading to mutual suspicion and calculation. In such an environment, truly worthy men will not wish to serve (because they refuse to participate in this toxic game), and only those skilled in power techniques—the treacherous—will remain. In the end, the ruler will be surrounded only by sycophants, while the worthy are all cast aside—this is the inevitable outcome of a power struggle.

Master Xunzi analyzed this profoundly in "On the Way of Ministers" (Chen Dao, 臣道):

"Serving a superior without loyalty is not being a minister; serving a superior without capability is not being a minister. ... Thus, when ministers of righteousness are in place, the court is not skewed; when ministers who can admonish, correct, and assist are trusted, the ruler’s errors are not far-reaching." (事人而不忠，不可为臣；事人而不能，不可为臣。……故正义之臣设，则朝廷不颇；谏争辅拂之人信，则君过不远。)

Master Xunzi points out that state governance requires ministers who possess both "loyalty" and "capability"—men who are both loyal and highly capable. To attract and employ such men, the ruler must possess the "wisdom" (Zhi) to recognize them, not merely the "technique" (Shu) to control them.

Section 3: "The Dao Defined by Power Ends in Expediency Alone" (You Shi Wei zhi Dao, Jin Bian Yi)—The Trap of Ad Hoc Measures

"The Dao defined by Power ends in Expediency alone." (由埶谓之道，尽便矣。)

The character "Bian" (便) means convenience or expediency, an ad hoc measure. "Ends in Expediency Alone" (Jin Bian Yi)—entirely expedient measures.

The use of "Bian" here is very sharp. The characteristic of "expediency" is short-term effectiveness without long-term consideration. The application of power often yields quick results—if you have authority, people must listen; this is very "convenient." However, this "convenience" is transient and fragile. Once the power structure shifts (e.g., a change of ruler, the rise of an influential minister), everything based on that power structure collapses instantly.

Conversely, decisions guided by "Wisdom" (Zhi) possess long-term stability. Wise guidance considers long-term interests, root causes, and systemic impacts, making its results more enduring.

The I Ching, Kun hexagram (坤, Earth), Second Line, states: "Straightforward, square, and great; without constant practice, nothing is unfavorable." (Zhi fang da, bu xi wu bu li.) The core of this statement is: If one acts from the wisdom of being straightforward (zhi), square (fang), and great (da), one does not need to deliberately learn techniques, and everything will naturally be favorable. "Bu Xi" (without constant practice) can be understood as not relying on power techniques—because the starting point is already correct (straight, square, great), the method will naturally not deviate. This stands in stark contrast to Master Shenzi’s relentless pursuit of power techniques.

Furthermore, the I Ching, Xi Ci Xia (系辞下), states: "When virtue is thin yet status is high, knowledge is small yet plans are grand, strength is little yet burdens are heavy—few escape disaster." (De bo er wei zun, zhi xiao er mou da, li xiao er ren zhong, xian bu ji yi.) This statement serves as the best commentary on Master Shenzi’s "obstruction by Power." "High status" (wei zun) is "Power" (Shi); "small knowledge" (zhi xiao) is "unaware of Wisdom." If a person has only "high status" but no "wisdom," the result is bound to be calamity.

Section 4: The Relationship Between Power and Wisdom in Ancient Legends—Taking Emperor Shun as an Example

In ancient legends, the best illustration of the relationship between power and wisdom is the story of Emperor Shun.

Before being selected by Emperor Yao, Emperor Shun was merely a commoner. He possessed no "Power" (Shi) but had exceptional "Wisdom" (Zhi) and virtue. What Emperor Yao valued was Shun’s "Wisdom" (intelligence and virtue), not his "Power" (authority and position). In fact, Shun initially had no "Power"—his authority and status were granted only after Yao confirmed his "Wisdom."

This illustrates a fundamental principle: "Wisdom" is the prerequisite for "Power"; "Power" is the tool of "Wisdom." Only with "Wisdom" can one correctly use "Power"; without "Wisdom," "Power" is a sharp blade without a master, ready to harm its owner at any moment.

In the Shang Shu, "Da Yu Mo," Shun tells Yu the Great:

"Only virtue moves Heaven, reaching everywhere without limit. Over-fullness invites loss, modesty earns benefit; this is the way of Heaven." (惟德动天，无远弗届。满招损，谦受益，时乃天道。)

"Only virtue moves Heaven" means that true strength comes from "Virtue" (which includes "Wisdom"), not from "Power." A virtuous and wise person, even temporarily lacking power, can still have influence that "reaches everywhere without limit." A powerful person lacking virtue and wisdom has a false, transient influence. Furthermore, "Over-fullness invites loss, modesty earns benefit." Master Shenzi's "obstruction by Power" is a form of "fullness"—complacency with the strength of authority, believing that having power guarantees success. But "fullness invites loss"—over-reliance on power invites disaster. Only by centering on "Wisdom" and practicing humility and continuous learning can one "benefit"—achieving true, lasting governance.

Chapter VII: The Obstruction of Master Hui: Obstructed by Rhetoric, Unaware of Reality

Section 1: The Tradition of Sophistry and Master Hui Shi’s Debates

"Master Hui was obstructed by Rhetoric, unaware of Reality." (惠子蔽于辞而不知实。)

Master Hui, or Hui Shi, was a famous sophist (Ming Jia, 名家) from the State of Song during the Warring States period. Master Hui was renowned for his exquisite debates and peculiar propositions.

According to the Zhuangzi, "Tian Xia" (天下), Master Hui proposed more than ten famous theses, the most famous including:

"The ultimate great has no outside, called the Great One; the ultimate small has no inside, called the Small One."

"Nothing of thickness can be accumulated, yet it can span a thousand li."

"Heaven and Earth are of equal lowness; mountains and marshes are of equal flatness."

"The sun at noon is already slanting; things in the act of being born are already dying."

"The Great Sameness differs from the Small Sameness; this is called the difference of Small Sameness. All things are completely the same and completely different; this is called the difference of Great Sameness."

"The South is infinite yet has an end."

"Today I travel to Yue, yet I arrive yesterday."

"Interlocking rings can be undone."

"I know the center of the world; it is between Yan in the north and Yue in the south."

"Universal love for all things; Heaven and Earth are one body."

These propositions seem absurd, yet they contain profound contemplation on fundamental concepts like space, time, sameness/difference, and the finite/infinite. Master Hui Shi attempted to use these extreme propositions to expose the limitations of conventional cognition, challenging the framework of concepts people habitually use.

For instance, "Heaven and Earth are of equal lowness; mountains and marshes are of equal flatness"—common sense dictates Heaven is high and Earth is low, mountains are high and marshes are low, which seems indisputable. But Master Hui Shi proposed that from an absolute perspective, all distinctions of high and low are relative; there is no absolute high or low. This method of thinking indeed breaks the rigid framework of common sense and inspires people to contemplate matters from a higher vantage point.

Again, "The sun at noon is already slanting; things in the act of being born are already dying"—the sun begins to slant the moment it reaches its zenith; things begin to die the moment they are born. This reflects a deep insight into change—everything is in flux; any state is transitional; there is no absolutely static state. This insight highly resonates with the doctrine of constant change (Bian Yi) in the I Ching.

The problem, however, is that Master Hui Shi immersed himself so deeply in these linguistic and conceptual debates that he detached himself from the actual state of affairs. In the realm of "Rhetoric" (Ci, 辞), he traveled further and further away, forgetting that "Rhetoric" should serve "Reality" (Shi, 实)—the actual state of things.

Section 2: "Rhetoric" and "Reality"—The Fundamental Problem of the Name-Reality Relationship

The relationship between "Rhetoric" (Ci) and "Reality" (Shi) is essentially the relationship between "Name" (Ming, 名) and "Reality" (Shi, 实)—a core issue in pre-Qin philosophy.

"Rhetoric" here refers to speech, concepts, and debate—the linguistic realm. "Reality" refers to the actual state of affairs—the actual world. The normal cognitive process should be: first observe "Reality," then use "Rhetoric" to describe and analyze "Reality." "Rhetoric" is the tool, "Reality" is the goal. The tool serves the goal; the goal does not submit to the tool.

Master Hui Shi’s error was in reversing the relationship between "Rhetoric" and "Reality"—he did not use "Rhetoric" to describe "Reality," but used "Rhetoric" to construct a purely conceptual world detached from "Reality." In this purely conceptual world, he could derive all sorts of astonishing conclusions ("Heaven and Earth are of equal lowness," "Today I travel to Yue, yet I arrive yesterday"), but these conclusions were often disconnected from the actual state of the real world.

Confucius placed great emphasis on the consistency between "Names" and "Reality" (Ming Shi Yi Zhi, 名实一致). The Analects, "Zi Lu" (子路), records:

"Zi Lu asked, 'If the lord of Wei awaited you to undertake the governance, what would you set right first$17' The Master said, 'It must be rectifying the names!' Zi Lu said, 'Is that so$18 You are indeed eccentric! What needs rectifying$19' The Master said, 'How crude, You! When a gentleman does not know something, he should refrain from speaking about it. If names are not correct, language will not be in accordance with the truth of things. If language is not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried to success. If affairs cannot be carried to success, rites and music will not flourish. If rites and music do not flourish, punishments and fines will not be appropriate. If punishments and fines are not appropriate, the people will not know where to place their hands and feet. Therefore, the gentleman ensures that his names can be spoken, and his words can be put into practice. The gentleman is never careless in what he says.'" (子路曰：‘卫君待子而为政，子将奚先？’子曰：‘必也正名乎！’子路曰：‘有是哉，子之迂也！奚其正？’子曰：‘野哉，由也！君子于其所不知，盖阙如也。名不正则言不顺，言不顺则事不成，事不成则礼乐不兴，礼乐不兴则刑罚不中，刑罚不中则民无所错手足。故君子名之必可言也，言之必可行也。君子于其言，无所苟而已矣。’)

This passage is highly important. Master Confucius pointed out that "rectifying names" (Zheng Ming, 正名) is the starting point for all political action. If names (concepts) are not correct, speech will not be smooth; if speech is not smooth, affairs will not succeed. This is the correct path from "Rhetoric" to "Reality": first correct the names (make concepts accurate), then correct speech (make discourse coherent), and finally correct affairs (make actions effective).

Master Hui Shi’s debates violated this path. He did not start from "Reality" to test "Rhetoric"; instead, he worked purely on the level of "Rhetoric," deducing various astonishing conclusions (like "Heaven and Earth are of equal lowness") and then congratulating himself on discovering some great truth.

In Xunzi, "On Names" (Zheng Ming), Master Xunzi provided a more systematic critique of the Sophists' debating style:

"Confusing names with names" (以名乱名)—such as arguing "killing a thief is not killing a man"—manipulating the polysemy of concepts to obscure the issue. "Confusing names with reality" (以实乱名)—such as asserting "mountains and abysses are flat"—using extreme examples to deny general concepts. "Confusing reality with names" (以名乱实)—such as asserting "a hill is not an ox"—using logical deduction of concepts to negate the actual attributes of things.

Master Xunzi pointed out that the common error in these three debating styles is severing the correspondence between "name" (rhetoric) and "reality." The correct approach is: "Use names to point to reality, use speech to convey meaning, and use argumentation to reveal cause." (以名举实，以辞抒意，以说出故。) "Rhetoric" always serves "Reality," never supersedes it.

Section 3: "The Dao Defined by Rhetoric Ends in Debate Alone" (You Ci Wei zhi Dao, Jin Lun Yi)—The Price of Empty Talk

"The Dao defined by Rhetoric ends in Debate alone." (由辞谓之道，尽论矣。)

The character "Lun" (论) here carries a derogatory connotation. Normal "discussion" aims at discovering truth; but Master Hui Shi’s "debate" had become a pure intellectual game—he debated not to clarify facts but to demonstrate his rhetorical skill. The more subtle and clever the debate, the further it drifted from reality.

This tendency toward "debate alone" has severe consequences for politics and society.

First, it wastes intellectual resources. A rhetorician as talented as Master Hui Shi, had he applied his wisdom to analyzing real-world problems and resolving social difficulties, could have made immense contributions. Instead, he invested all his talent in conceptual debate, "arguing and adorning with rhetoric," ultimately producing only esoteric theories unrelated to reality.

Second, it corrupted the academic atmosphere. When debate itself becomes the goal, scholars compete to achieve the most exquisite rhetorical skill while ignoring the truthfulness of the content. This leads the entire academic community into a superficial and vain atmosphere—the competition is not about who sees more truth, but who has the sharper tongue.

Third, it confuses the standards of right and wrong. The debating skills of the Sophists were formidable; they could argue black into white and white into black. If these skills were applied to politics, people would lose the ability to judge right from wrong, as any position could be cleverly argued as correct. Once the standard of right and wrong is confused, social order will collapse accordingly.

Confucius said: "Fluent speech and an ingratiating appearance are seldom accompanied by benevolence." (Analects, Xue Er) "Fluent speech" (Qiao Yan, 巧言) is skill in rhetoric; "ingratiating appearance" (Ling Se, 令色) is skill in managing expressions. Confucius noted that those overly skilled in rhetoric often lack true benevolence. This is because the truly benevolent focus on "Reality" (actual good deeds), not on "Rhetoric" (flowery language). Although Master Hui Shi cannot be equated with those of "fluent speech and ingratiating appearance," his tendency to be "obstructed by rhetoric and unaware of reality" shares a spirit with the "fluent speech" Confucius criticized.

Furthermore, in the Analects, "Wei Ling Gong" (卫灵公), Confucius said: "The function of language is merely to convey the meaning." (Ci da er yi yi.) What is the purpose of speech$20 It is "Da"—to accurately convey meaning. As long as meaning can be conveyed accurately, it suffices; there is no need to pursue excessive ornamentation or cleverness. Master Hui Shi’s debates went in the opposite direction—his "Rhetoric" was not for "Conveyance" (Da), but for "Wonder" (Qi, 奇)—to create astonishing effects. Pursuing "Wonder" while forgetting "Conveyance" is the nature of "obstruction by rhetoric."

Section 4: The Original Function of Language in the Ancient View of Speech

From the perspective of ancient culture, what was the original function of language$21

The most primitive function of language is "naming things" (Ming Wu, 名物)—assigning names to things. The I Ching, Xi Ci Xia, records that one of the goals Fuxi set for creating the Eight Trigrams was "to classify the emotions of all things" (Yi Lei Wan Wu Zhi Qing, 以类万物之情)—to categorize and represent the characteristics of all things using a symbolic system. This is the most basic function of language (in the broad sense, including symbolic systems): enabling humans to cognize and communicate information about things.

Legend says that when Cangjie created characters, "Heaven rained millet, and ghosts cried in the night." The power of characters, according to this view, stemmed from their accurate correspondence to reality. If language detaches from "Reality" and becomes a mere game of concepts, it not only fails to advance human cognition but also becomes a tool for confusing right and wrong.

In ancient sacrificial traditions, language (prayers, invocations) held a sacred status. The words of an invocation must be sincere—because the object of sacrifice is a spirit that can perceive the mind; false words will not only fail to move the spirits but may also invite punishment. The Analects, "Ba Yi" (八佾), states: "When making sacrifices, act as if they are present; when making offerings to spirits, act as if the spirits are present." This demands that the speaker's words come from sincerity, without the slightest pretense or artifice.

This ancient linguistic view—that language must be sincere and correspond to reality—forms a sharp contrast with Master Hui Shi’s practice of language. Master Hui Shi turned language into a game divorced from reality, which, from the ancient perspective, was a grave profanation of language’s sacred function.

Master Laozi’s Chapter 81 states: "Faithful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not faithful. The good do not dispute; those who dispute are not good. The knowing are not learned; the learned do not know." Master Laozi’s words serve as the most profound critique of Master Hui Shi’s "obstruction by rhetoric": "The good do not dispute"—those truly skilled in recognizing the Dao do not need clever debate; "those who dispute are not good"—those skilled in clever debate are actually not skilled in recognizing the Dao. Master Hui Shi was the world's foremost debater, yet precisely because he was too immersed in debate, he lost his grasp on "Reality"—this is the epitome of "those who dispute are not good."

Section 5: The Enlightenment from the Zhuangzi-Hui Shi Dialogue—The Debate on the Hao River Bridge

The relationship between Master Zhuangzi and Master Hui Shi was unique. They were both friends and philosophical rivals, often engaging in brilliant debates. The "Debate on the Hao River Bridge" (Hao Liang Zhi Bian) recorded in the Zhuangzi, "Autumn Floods" (Qiu Shui), is arguably the most famous philosophical dialogue in pre-Qin thought:

Zhuangzi and Hui Shi were strolling along the dike of the Hao River. Zhuangzi said: "The minnows swimming freely—this is the joy of fish!" Hui Shi said: "You are not a fish, how do you know the joy of fish$22" Zhuangzi said: "You are not me, how do you know that I do not know the joy of fish$23" Hui Shi said: "I am not you, so naturally I do not know you; you are certainly not a fish, so your not knowing the joy of fish is complete!" Zhuangzi said: "Let us return to the source. When you asked, 'How do you know the joy of fish$24' you were already assuming that I knew, and then questioning me. I know it here, on the Hao River bridge." (庄子与惠子游于濠梁之上。庄子曰：‘鯈鱼出游从容，是鱼之乐也。’惠子曰：‘子非鱼，安知鱼之乐？’庄子曰：‘子非我，安知我不知鱼之乐？’惠子曰：‘我非子，固不知子矣；子固非鱼也，子之不知鱼之乐全矣。’庄子曰：‘请循其本。子曰‘汝安知鱼乐’云者，既已知吾知之而问我，我知之濠上也。’")

This dialogue fully exhibits the characteristic of Master Hui Shi’s "obstruction by rhetoric." Faced with Zhuangzi’s sensitive intuition about the joy of fish, Master Hui immediately challenged him from the perspective of conceptual logic—"You are not a fish, how do you know the joy of fish$25" This challenge is logically valid, but it completely ignores the Reality to which Zhuangzi was pointing when he spoke of the fish's joy—that aesthetic experience of connection between man and nature, that transcendence of the subject-object dichotomy. Master Hui Shi focused only on the strictness of the logic of "Rhetoric" and neglected whether the "Rhetoric" pointed to a corresponding "Reality" (the joy of fish, and man's feeling of resonance with nature).

Zhuangzi’s final response—"I know it here, on the Hao River bridge"—cleverly pulled the discussion back from the logical level of "Rhetoric" to the experiential level of "Reality": I knew the fish’s joy because I was standing on the Hao River bridge—this is a concrete, real experience, not an abstract logical deduction.

However, we must note an interesting paradox here: while Master Zhuangzi criticized Master Hui Shi for being "obstructed by rhetoric," he himself relied heavily on "rhetoric"—his Zhuangzi is filled with exquisite parables, clever arguments, and magnificent diction. Does this suggest Master Zhuangzi was also "obstructed by rhetoric"$26

Master Xunzi might reply: Master Zhuangzi’s "Rhetoric," though exquisite, always pointed toward a "Reality"—the actuality of the Heavenly Dao. Master Zhuangzi’s parables and debates were means to an end, with "Heaven" being the goal. Master Hui Shi’s "Rhetoric," however, lost its clear objective—his debates were for the sake of debate itself, pointing toward no definite "Reality." This is the fundamental difference between them.

Of course, from Master Xunzi’s perspective, although Master Zhuangzi was closer to the Dao than Master Hui (since he at least pointed to "Heaven" as "Reality"), he himself was also obstructed—"obstructed by Heaven and unaware of Man." This is precisely the topic Master Xunzi addresses next.

Chapter VIII: The Obstruction of Master Zhuangzi: Obstructed by Heaven, Unaware of Man

Section 1: Master Zhuangzi’s View of the Heavenly Dao (Tian Dao)

"Master Zhuangzi was obstructed by Heaven, unaware of Man." (庄子蔽于天而不知人。)

This is Master Xunzi’s fundamental critique of Master Zhuangzi, and the highest-level critique among the six obstructions.

The thought of Master Zhuangzi centered on "Heaven" (Tian, 天). In Master Zhuangzi’s philosophy, "Heaven" has rich meanings:

First, Heaven as Nature. The "Heaven" Master Zhuangzi speaks of primarily refers to Nature—the spontaneous, self-so state, independent of human artifice. In Zhuangzi, "Autumn Floods" (Qiu Shui), through the dialogue between the River Earl and the Lord of the Northern Sea, Master Zhuangzi elaborates this thought: "Oxen and horses have four feet; this is called Heaven; leading a horse by the head, putting a ring through an ox's nose—this is called Man. Therefore, it is said: Do not use Man to destroy Heaven, do not use cause to destroy destiny, do not use attainment to sacrifice fame. Guard it diligently and do not lose it; this is called returning to one’s true nature." (牛马四足，是谓天；落马首，穿牛鼻，是谓人。故曰：无以人灭天，无以故灭命，无以得殉名。谨守而勿失，是谓反其真。) Oxen and horses naturally have four legs; this is "Heaven" (Nature). Putting a halter on a horse or a ring through an ox’s nose is "Man" (Human artifice). Master Zhuangzi advocates "not using Man to destroy Heaven"—do not use human constructs to destroy natural states—"guard it diligently and do not lose it; this is called returning to one’s true nature."

Second, Heaven as the Heavenly Dao. The "Heaven" Master Zhuangzi speaks of also refers to the fundamental law governing the cosmos—the Heavenly Dao. In Zhuangzi, "The Great Teacher" (Da Zong Shi), the characteristics of the "Dao" are described: "The Dao has feeling and has faith; it is non-acting and formless; it can be transmitted but not received, obtainable but not seen; it is its own root and base, existing since before Heaven and Earth. Spirits and gods, Heaven and Earth are born from it." (夫道，有情有信，无为无形；可传而不可受，可得而不可见；自本自根，未有天地，自古以固存；神鬼神帝，生天生地。) This "Dao" transcends all things and is the ultimate source of all existence. The highest goal for man, according to Master Zhuangzi, is to know and follow this "Heavenly Dao."

Third, Heaven as Naturalness. The "Heaven" Master Zhuangzi speaks of also refers to the original state of human nature—a state untainted by social norms, moral education, or artificial structures. In Zhuangzi, "Horse's Hooves" (Ma Ti), Master Zhuangzi describes an ideal "Heavenly" state: "Those people possess constant nature; they weave to clothe themselves and plow to eat; this is called sharing the same virtue. Uniting without faction, this is called 'Heavenly Release' (Tian Fang)." (彼民有常性，织而衣，耕而食，是谓同德；一而不党，命曰天放。) People possess their natural character, weaving for clothes and plowing for food; this is called "shared virtue." Uniting without faction is called "Heavenly Release," the unconstrained expression of nature.

Master Zhuangzi’s view of the "Heavenly Dao" indeed reveals a crucial dimension—the existence of the natural order and its priority over artificial order. In a society that is overly artificial, institutionalized, and norm-bound, human nature is suppressed, and vitality is restricted; the society becomes rigid and lifeless. Master Zhuangzi reminds people to return to "Heaven," to nature, to their original nature—this is undoubtedly a valuable intellectual resource.

However, the problem is that Master Zhuangzi pushed "Heaven" to an extreme, to the point of negating all value of "Man." He advocated for following Heaven to such an extent that he dismissed all human endeavors—rites, music, institutions, morality, education—as distortions and harms to natural disposition.

Section 2: The Debate Between "Heaven" and "Man"—The Major Conflict in Pre-Qin Thought

The relationship between "Heaven" and "Man" is arguably the most central and significant issue in pre-Qin philosophy. On this issue, the various schools held differing positions.

Master Laozi advocates: "Man takes Earth as his model; Earth takes Heaven as its model; Heaven takes the Dao as its model; the Dao takes what is natural as its model." (Laozi, Chapter 25) Man should emulate the operations of Heaven and Earth. However, Laozi’s "following what is natural" does not mean completely negating human affairs—he also discusses state governance, military strategy, and loving the people, but advocates handling these issues through the method of "non-action" (Wu Wei, 无为).

Master Zhuangzi went further than Master Laozi. He not only advocated following the natural order but, to a significant degree, negated all human artifice—rites, music, institutions, morality, and education were all seen as distortions that harmed natural disposition.

Confucius’s stance was diametrically opposed to Zhuangzi’s. Master Confucius placed high value on "Man"—his moral cultivation, interpersonal relationships, social order, and political governance—were the core concerns of his thought. Of course, Master Confucius also respected "Heaven"—"What does Heaven say$1 The four seasons proceed, and the hundred things are born." (Analects, Yang Huo)—but his focus remained firmly on "Man."

Master Xunzi holds a famous proposition on this matter: "The Distinction between Heaven and Man" (Tian Ren Zhi Fen, 天人之分). In the chapter "On Heaven" (Tian Lun, 天论), he stated:

"Heaven’s movements are constant; it does not cease for Yao, nor does it vanish for Jie. Respond to it with governance, and it brings good fortune; respond to it with chaos, and it brings misfortune." (天行有常，不为尧存，不为桀亡。应之以治则吉，应之以乱则凶。)

Heaven has its own constant laws of operation—it does not change because a sage like Yao exists, nor does it stop because a tyrant like Jie exists. The key lies in how man responds to Heaven’s laws: responding correctly brings auspiciousness; responding incorrectly brings disaster.

This is the core meaning of "The Distinction between Heaven and Man": Heaven is Heaven, and Man is Man; they each have their own domains and functions. Heaven’s domain is natural operation (seasonal changes, growth of things); Man’s domain is social governance (establishing rites and music, governing and pacifying the people, educating the populace). One cannot deny Man by venerating Heaven, nor can one ignore Heaven by valuing Man.

Master Xunzi further states:

"To accomplish without effort, to gain without seeking—this is the function of Heaven. ... Therefore, one who understands the distinction between Heaven and Man may be called the Utmost Man." (不为而成，不求而得，夫是之谓天职。……故明于天人之分，则可谓至人矣。)

The function of Heaven (Tian Zhi, 天职) is "accomplishment without effort, attainment without seeking"—natural operation requiring no human intervention. However, the function of Man (Ren Zhi, 人职) requires action—establishing rites and music, pacifying the realm, educating the populace—all require active human effort. Master Zhuangzi’s error was using the standard of "Heavenly Function" to negate "Human Function"—he thought that by following the Heavenly Dao, all human effort was superfluous.

However, Master Xunzi pointed out that this view is incorrect. Man has a unique function that Heaven cannot replace. If one applies the attitude of "following Heaven" to all aspects of human society, chaos ensues.

This point is not an abstract theoretical issue but a political one with serious practical consequences. Master Xunzi sharply criticized this in "On Heaven":

"To overly admire Heaven and contemplate it—is that comparable to husbanding its resources and controlling them$2 To follow Heaven and praise it—is that comparable to mastering the mandate of Heaven and utilizing it$3 To look to the timing and wait for it—is that comparable to responding to the timing and commanding it$4 To rely on things and desire their abundance—is that comparable to utilizing human ability to transform them$5" (大天而思之，孰与物畜而制之！从天而颂之，孰与制天命而用之！望时而待之，孰与应时而使之！因物而多之，孰与骋能而化之！)

This passage is stunning. Master Xunzi says: Rather than merely worshipping Heaven and contemplating it, it is better to husband the resources Heaven produces and control them! Rather than following Heaven and praising it, it is better to master Heaven’s mandate and utilize it! Rather than gazing at the seasons and waiting passively, it is better to respond to the timing and command it! Rather than relying on natural things and wishing for abundance, it is better to exert human capacity to transform things!

This passage fully demonstrates Master Xunzi’s active, engaged spirit. He did not deny the existence or value of "Heaven," but emphasized that humanity should not be passive, obedient, or non-acting in the face of Heaven, but rather active, engaged, and efficacious.

Section 3: "The Dao Defined by Heaven Ends in Conformity Alone" (You Tian Wei zhi Dao, Jin Yin Yi)—The Predicament of Passive Compliance

"The Dao defined by Heaven ends in Conformity alone." (由天谓之道，尽因矣。)

"Yin" (因) means to follow, to comply, to conform. "Ends in Conformity Alone" (Jin Yin Yi)—entirely passive conformity.

Why does Master Xunzi summarize Master Zhuangzi’s flaw as "Conformity"$6

Because Master Zhuangzi’s core assertion was "following the Heavenly Dao"—not interfering with the natural state of things through human artifice, but allowing things to follow their nature and guiding them according to circumstances. This attitude of "Conformity" is reasonable when facing the natural world—indeed, man cannot act against the laws of nature. However, when this attitude of "Conformity" is extended to all aspects of human society, serious problems arise.

Human society differs from the natural world. Nature operates spontaneously and self-sufficiently—the sun and moon do not require human arrangement, and the seasons do not require human manipulation. However, the operation of human society requires active human participation—laws must be formulated by men, order must be maintained by men, education must be implemented by men, and conflicts must be mediated by men. If a passive attitude of "Conformity"—letting nature take its course without intervention—is adopted toward human society, society will descend into chaos.

This is not an abstract theoretical issue but a political one with serious practical consequences. Master Xunzi sharply pointed out in "On Heaven":

"To set aside man and contemplate Heaven is to lose the reality of all things." (故错人而思天，则失万物之情。)

"Set aside" (cuo, 错) means to neglect. "To set aside man and contemplate Heaven" means neglecting humanity’s functions while focusing on Heaven. If this is done, one will "lose the reality of all things"—the actual conditions of human society.

This is the core problem of Master Zhuangzi’s "obstruction by Heaven and unawareness of Man": Master Zhuangzi was immersed in the contemplation and realization of "Heaven," neglecting the "Man" dimension—the actual needs of people and the concrete problems of society. His philosophy might bring individuals spiritual transcendence and tranquility, but it cannot guide the effective governance of a state.

Let us take a concrete example. In Zhuangzi, "Horse's Hooves," Master Zhuangzi criticizes the practice of Bo Le, the master horse-trainer:

"The horse has four hooves that can tread on frost and snow, and a coat that can ward off wind and cold; it grazes on grass and drinks water, lifting its hooves to run on land—this is the true nature of the horse. Even if there were elegant terraces and resting halls, they would be useless to it. When Bo Le arrived, he said: 'I am skilled at managing horses.' He burned them, skinned them, branded them, branded their noses, tied them with reins, and penned them in stables; twelve or thirteen out of every thirty horses died." (马，蹄可以践霜雪，毛可以御风寒，龁草饮水，翘足而陆，此马之真性也。虽有义台路寝，无所用之。及至伯乐，曰：‘我善治马。’烧之，剔之，刻之，雒之，连之以羁馽，编之以皁栈，马之死者十二三矣。)

Master Zhuangzi believed the horse's nature was to run freely in the wilderness, and Bo Le’s "skillful management" was actually a violent assault on the horse’s nature. By extension, all human artifice—including rites, music, laws, and institutions—are assaults on natural disposition.

This metaphor is indeed powerful, but it has a fundamental logical flaw: it equates man with the horse. Horses can run freely in the wilderness without social order, but men cannot. If human society lacked rites, music, and legal institutions, it would descend into a state of "survival of the fittest"—this is not the ideal state of "Heavenly Release," but the reality of "Human Disaster" (Ren Huo, 人祸).

Master Xunzi clearly articulated this in "On Human Nature is Evil" (Xing E, 性恶):

"Now, man’s nature is that by birth he is fond of gain. If he follows this nature, contention and avarice will arise, and requests and compliance will cease. By birth, he has feelings of envy and hatred. If he follows this, rebellion and violence will arise, and loyalty and good faith will vanish. By birth, he has the desires of the ears and eyes, a fondness for beautiful sights and sounds. If he follows this, licentiousness and disorder will arise, and rites, righteousness, culture, and order will perish. Thus, if one follows man’s nature and complies with his feelings, he will inevitably end up in contention and avarice, deviating from what is right and orderly, and culminating in brutality." (今人之性，生而有好利焉，顺是，故争夺生而辞让亡焉；生而有疾恶焉，顺是，故残贼生而忠信亡焉；生而有耳目之欲，有好声色焉，顺是，故淫乱生而礼义文理亡焉。然则从人之性，顺人之情，必出于争夺，合于犯分乱理而归于暴。)

If one follows Master Zhuangzi’s advice to completely conform to human nature ("Conformity"), without any human guidance or regulation—the result will be "contention arises and compliance ceases," "malice arises and trustworthiness vanishes," and "licentiousness arises and rites and order perish"—the society will completely collapse.

This is the danger of "Conformity Alone": it appears to respect nature but neglects the specific characteristics of human society. Human society requires "Culture" (Wen), "Attainment" (De), "Worthy Men" (Xian), and "Wisdom" (Zhi)—these are all dimensions of "Man," which "Heaven" cannot automatically provide. Master Zhuangzi’s "obstruction by Heaven and unawareness of Man" precisely overlooks this fundamental fact.

Section 4: The Deeper Root of Master Zhuangzi’s "Obstruction by Heaven"

Why was Master Zhuangzi "obstructed by Heaven"$7 This requires understanding a deeper root of his thought.

Master Zhuangzi lived in the mid-to-late Warring States period—an era of frequent warfare, social upheaval, and moral decay. Against this backdrop of "harm caused by human artifice," people increasingly suspected that the root of the problem lay not in "insufficient human effort" but in "human artifice itself being wrong." If people did not interfere with the natural state, perhaps everything would be better. This is the deep psychological root of Master Zhuangzi’s "obstruction by Heaven"—a complete regression to "Heaven" (the state of non-action in nature) due to utter disillusionment with human intervention.

In I Ching terms, this psychological state resembles the situation of the Pi hexagram (否, Blockage)—Heaven is above, Earth is below; Heaven and Earth do not interact, and all things are blocked. In the state of Pi, all human efforts seem futile—the harder one tries, the worse things get. Faced with this despair, Master Zhuangzi chose to "withdraw"—no longer participating in worldly struggles, but seeking communion with the Heavenly Dao.

However, the wisdom of the I Ching tells us that Pi is not eternal—"when Pi reaches its extreme, it turns to Tai" (否极泰来)—when blockage reaches its apex, it turns into peace. In a state of Pi, the correct action is not total abandonment but "practicing frugality in virtue to avoid danger; one should not be glorified by wealth or position." (Pi Gua, Xiang Zhuan). This suggests temporarily retreating to preserve one's essence, but not withdrawing entirely. In other words, it is permissible to retreat temporarily when times are difficult, but one cannot retreat forever. When human effort temporarily fails, one can return to the Heavenly Dao to conserve energy, but one cannot remain perpetually within the Heavenly Dao while ceasing to return to human affairs.

Master Zhuangzi’s error lay in transforming a temporary strategy for difficult times (retreating to Heaven) into a universally applicable fundamental principle—he advocated returning to the Heavenly Dao not just in times of crisis but at all times. This is "obstruction by Heaven"—mistaking the strategy for coping with crisis for the universal principle of action.

Section 5: The Harmony of Heaven and Man—The Confucian Middle Way

What is the Confucian response to Master Zhuangzi’s "obstruction by Heaven"$8

Confucianism advocates "Unity of Heaven and Man" (Tian Ren He Yi, 天人合一), but this "unity" is not one where "Heaven" consumes "Man" (Master Zhuangzi’s approach), but one where "Heaven" and "Man" each fulfill their respective functions in harmonious coexistence.

The I Ching, Qian hexagram (乾, Heaven), "Wen Yan" commentary states: "The Great Man accords his virtue with that of Heaven and Earth; he accords his brightness with that of the sun and moon; he accords his sequence with that of the four seasons; he accords his fortune and misfortune with that of the spirits. Acting before Heaven, Heaven does not cross him; acting after Heaven, he complies with the time of Heaven." (夫大人者，与天地合其德，与日月合其明，与四时合其序，与鬼神合其吉凶。先天而天弗违，后天而奉天时。)

This describes the relationship between the "Great Man" (the person of the highest attainment) and Heaven and Earth. The Great Man "accords his virtue with that of Heaven and Earth" (his morality aligns with the cosmos). "Acting before Heaven, Heaven does not cross him" means he anticipates cosmic changes and acts accordingly—this is the value of "Man." "Acting after Heaven, he complies with the time of Heaven" means his actions align with the general trend of the Heavenly Dao—this is respect for "Heaven." The two are unified—it is neither pure "Conformity" (passive compliance) nor pure "Action" (forcing intervention), but a dialectic of "Conformity" and "Action."

Master Xunzi’s "Distinction between Heaven and Man" is proposed in this sense. He does not sever Heaven and Man but clarifies their respective functions: Heaven handles the operation of nature, and Man handles the governance of society—allowing both to fulfill their potential and cooperate harmoniously.

This thought of "Heaven-Man Harmony" has deep roots in pre-Qin texts.

The Shang Shu, "Hong Fan" (洪范), records Ji Zi explaining the "Nine Categories of the Great Plan" to King Wu—nine fundamental principles of governance. The fourth category, "Harmonize the Five Chronologies" (coordinate usage of five methods of timekeeping), and the eighth category, "Attend to the Various Omen-signs" (observe various natural signs), both involve attention to "Heaven." But the other seven categories—"Five Elements," "Five Functions," "Eight Duties," "Grand Ultimate," "Three Virtues," "Divination for Doubt," "Ultimate Blessings"—mainly concern human affairs. Thus, in the ancient tradition of governance, "Heaven" and "Man" were equally esteemed and neither could be abandoned.

Master Zhuangzi’s "obstruction by Heaven and unawareness of Man" is precisely the neglect of the "Man" dimension. He attained profound insight into the "Heavenly Dao" (concepts of Heavenly Dao, nature, non-action), but he overlooked the equally important contents in the domain of "Man" (rites, music, institutions, governance).

Section 6: The Philosophical Significance of the Heaven-Man Distinction—Why Zhuangzi's Obstruction is Ranked Last

We note that among the six obstructions listed by Master Xunzi, Master Zhuangzi is ranked last. This is not accidental.

As noted earlier, the ordering of the six obstructions rises from concrete to abstract. Master Zhuangzi’s "obstruction by Heaven" is the highest level of obstruction—because "Heaven" is the highest concept, concerning the ultimate substance and truth of the cosmos.

Master Zhuangzi’s obstruction being ranked last also carries another deep implication. Among the six schools, Master Zhuangzi’s grasp of the Dao is arguably the most profound—the "corner" he saw was the largest, the closest to the "entirety of the Dao." However, precisely because the "corner" he saw was the largest and closest to the whole, his "obstruction" is the most difficult to detect and overcome.

To use an analogy: If a person sees only a tiny piece of a jigsaw puzzle, they easily realize they are not seeing the whole picture. But if a person sees a large section—say, most of the puzzle—they are easily led to believe they have seen the whole and thus neglect the small missing piece. The large piece of the puzzle Master Zhuangzi saw was "Heaven," which encompassed most aspects of the Dao—nature, change, transcendence, non-action—but he was missing one small piece—the piece of "Man." And this missing small piece is precisely the most crucial one.

Laozi, Chapter 48, states: "In the pursuit of learning, one increases daily. In the pursuit of the Dao, one decreases daily. Decrease and decrease again, until one reaches non-action. Having reached non-action, there is nothing that is not done." (Wei xue ri yi, wei dao ri sun. Sun zhi you sun, yi zhi yu wu wei. Wu wei er wu bu wei.) Master Zhuangzi deeply understood this spirit of "decrease"—he "decreased" everything artificial to achieve the state of "non-action." However, Master Xunzi asks: "Having reached non-action, is there really nothing that is not done$9" Did Master Zhuangzi truly achieve "nothing that is not done" by eliminating the dimension of "Man"—or did he, precisely by discarding "Man," end up with "something that is not done"—being unable to govern, pacify the people, educate, or promote rites and music$10

This questioning is sharp and essential. It reveals the dialectical relationship between "Heaven" and "Man" that cannot be abandoned: true "nothing that is not done" is not achieved by abolishing all artifice and purely following nature, but by achieving harmony and unity between the Dao of Heaven and the Dao of Man.

Chapter IX: Master Confucius’s Unobstructedness: Benevolent, Wise, and Yet Unobscured

Section 1: The Profound Meaning of "Benevolent, Wise, and Yet Unobscured" (仁知且不蔽)

After criticizing the obstructions of the six schools, Master Xunzi shifts his focus to the paradigm of "unobstructedness"—Master Confucius:

"Master Confucius was benevolent, wise, and yet unobscured, thus his learning of disparate methods was sufficient to equal that of the former kings. As one school grasping the comprehensive Dao of Zhou, he brought it forth and applied it, never obstructed by accumulation. Thus his virtue matched that of the Duke of Zhou, and his fame matched that of the Three Kings—this is the blessing of unobscuredness." (孔子仁知且不蔽，故学乱术足以为先王者也。一家得周道，举而用之，不蔽于成积也。故德与周公齐，名与三王并，此不蔽之福也。)

This passage is the conclusion and climax of the entire discourse. Let us analyze it sentence by sentence.

"Master Confucius was benevolent, wise, and yet unobscured" (孔子仁知且不蔽)—Master Confucius possessed both benevolence (Ren, 仁) and wisdom (Zhi, 知), and was not obstructed by any single aspect.

The term "Benevolent and Wise" (Ren Zhi) is crucial here. "Ren" is a moral quality; "Zhi" is a cognitive quality. Master Xunzi believes that the reason Master Confucius was "unobscured" lies precisely in his possession of both "Ren" and "Zhi."

Why does combining "Ren" and "Zhi" lead to being "unobscured"$11

First, the function of "Zhi" (Wisdom). "Zhi" enables a person to cognize things comprehensively and deeply. With "Zhi," a person is not satisfied with a partial view but seeks a more complete and profound understanding. "Zhi" is the cognitive tool for "dissolving obstruction"—without sufficient "Zhi," one cannot discern whether one is being obstructed.

However, "Zhi" alone is insufficient. Master Hui Shi also possessed great "Zhi" (his debating talent is acknowledged), yet he was still obstructed. Why$12 Because he lacked "Ren."

The function of "Ren" here is to provide a correct moral direction. "Zhi" enables one to know things, but "Zhi" itself cannot tell one what to pursue or what to care about. A person with only "Zhi" but no "Ren" might apply his wisdom to pursuing power techniques (like Master Shenzi), seeking debate victories (like Master Hui), or constructing concepts (like the Sophists)—these pursuits are inherently narrow and thus inevitably lead to "obstruction."

"Ren," on the other hand, provides "Zhi" with a correct and comprehensive direction. The core of "Ren" is caring for all people ("The benevolent man loves others," Ren zhe ai ren). This universal care prevents a person from focusing on a single domain and motivates them to attend to all aspects of human life. A truly benevolent person cares about material needs (not being "obstructed by Heaven and unaware of Man"), spiritual needs (not being "obstructed by Utility and unaware of Culture"); values social institutions (not neglecting "Law"), and values talent selection (not neglecting "Worthy Men"); respects the laws of "Heaven" (not ignoring "Heaven"), but also focuses on human culture and education (not ignoring "Man"). The universal concern of "Ren" naturally demands a comprehensive, impartial cognition, thus preventing the arising of "Bi."

Thus, the combination of "Ren" and "Zhi" is a necessary condition for being "unobscured." "Zhi" provides the cognitive capacity; "Ren" provides the moral direction. "Zhi" allows one to see various aspects of the Dao; "Ren" motivates one to look at all aspects of the Dao. One cannot be dispensed with.

In the Analects, "Yong Ye" (雍也), Confucius said: "The wise enjoy water; the benevolent enjoy mountains. The wise are active; the benevolent are tranquil. The wise are happy; the benevolent are long-lived." (Zhi zhe le shui, ren zhe le shan. Zhi zhe dong, ren zhe jing. Zhi zhe le, ren zhe shou.) Knowing and benevolence each have characteristics—wisdom is fluid like water, flexible and adaptive; benevolence is steady like mountains, deep and constant. The wise are skilled in responding to change; the benevolent are skilled in maintaining principles. The combination allows one to flexibly respond to all changes ("Zhi") while steadfastly adhering to fundamental principles ("Ren")—this is the state of being "unobscured."

Section 2: "Learning Disparate Methods Was Sufficient to Equal the Former Kings"—Holism Seen Through Diversity

"Thus his learning of disparate methods was sufficient to equal that of the former kings" (故学乱术足以为先王者也).

This sentence is initially confusing. How can the "learning of disparate methods" (xue luan shu) serve as the basis for equaling the "former kings"$13

The character "Luan" (乱) needs careful interpretation. Besides meaning "chaos," "Luan" in the pre-Qin context also carries the meaning of "governing" (Luan and Zhi are sometimes interchangeable). For example, the Shang Shu, "Gu Ming" (顾命), has the phrase "establish Zhou's governance" (作周乱), where "Luan" means "governance." Furthermore, "Luan" also means "diverse" or "multifarious"—not the derogatory "chaotic," but the neutral "many and varied."

Therefore, the correct understanding of "learning disparate methods" should be: Master Confucius studied various and diverse methods (disparate), but he was not obscured by these varied studies; rather, he extracted the essence from them, integrated them, and ultimately reached a level sufficient to equal the former kings.

This forms a perfect contrast with the analysis of the six schools' obstructions. Each school specialized in one method—Mohists in "Utility," Master Songzi in "Desire," Master Shenzi in "Law," Master Shenzi (Shen Buhai) in "Power," Master Hui in "Rhetoric," and Master Zhuangzi in "Heaven"—and each made genuine contributions in their respective domains, but they could not transcend their own domain, resulting in obstruction by their specialization.

Master Confucius was different. He studied a multitude of methods (xue luan shu), but he did not simply pile up knowledge. He used "Benevolence and Wisdom" (Ren Zhi) as the core to integrate all knowledge into a coherent whole. He understood the value of "Utility" while also understanding the significance of "Culture"; he valued the function of "Law" while also valuing the selection of "Worthy Men"; he respected the laws of "Heaven" while also attending to the needs of "Man"—he did not cling rigidly to any one pole but unified them at a higher level.

This is the cognitive mode of being "unobscured": not not studying, but studying widely (bo xue, 博学); not being ignorant, but knowing comprehensively (relative to partial knowledge); not being unspecialized, but specializing in the "entirety of the Dao."

In the Analects, "Zi Han" (子罕), Master Confucius describes his learning journey: "At fifteen, I set my heart on learning. At thirty, I established myself. At forty, I had no doubts. At fifty, I knew the Mandate of Heaven. At sixty, my ear was attuned to it. At seventy, I could follow my heart’s desire without overstepping the boundaries." (Wo shi you wu er zhi yu xue, san shi er li, si shi er bu huo, wu shi er zhi tian ming, liu shi er er shun, qi shi er cong xin suo yu bu yu ju.) This progression from "setting heart on learning" to "following heart’s desire without overstepping boundaries" is precisely a process of continuous "dissolving obstruction" and continuously expanding cognition. "At forty, I had no doubts" (bu huo)—not being confused by external things—this is transcendence of external "obstruction." "At fifty, I knew the Mandate of Heaven"—deepening cognition to grasp the fundamental law of Heaven—this is the deepening of knowledge. "At sixty, my ear was attuned to it"—being able to listen humbly to any speech without rejection or rigidity. "At seventy, I could follow my heart’s desire without overstepping the boundaries"—freedom and order perfectly unified—this is the highest state of being "unobscured."

Section 3: "One School Grasping the Dao of Zhou"—The Manifestation of Holistic Wisdom

**"As one school grasping the comprehensive Dao of Zhou, he brought it forth and applied it, never obstructed by accumulation." (一家得周道，举而用之，不蔽于成积也。) **

"One school" (Yi Jia)—referring to the Confucian school represented by Master Confucius. "Grasping the comprehensive Dao of Zhou" (De Zhou Dao)—having grasped the complete Dao of the Zhou dynasty. "Brought it forth and applied it" (Ju er yong zhi)—bringing it out and putting it into practice. "Never obstructed by accumulation" (Bu bei yu cheng ji ye)—never obscured by one’s existing accumulation.

The term "Dao of Zhou" (Zhou Dao) deserves special attention. "Zhou Dao" does not refer to one specific aspect of Zhou thought or institution but to the comprehensive Dao of Zhou civilization—including its political institutions (feudalism, clan system), social norms (rites, music, education), spiritual culture (poetry, history), and moral concepts (benevolence, righteousness, loyalty, trustworthiness)—an organic whole of all aspects.

The reason Master Confucius so revered the Zhou dynasty was that, in his view, the Zhou represented a "culmination"—"The Zhou inspected the deeds of the two preceding dynasties; how abundantly cultured they were!" (Analects, Ba Yi). The Zhou borrowed the achievements of the Xia and Yin dynasties and developed a more perfect civilization upon that foundation. This is the profound meaning of "Zhou" in "Dao of Zhou"—"Zhou" means completeness, perfection. The "Dao of Zhou" is the "complete Dao."

Master Confucius "grasping the Dao of Zhou" means he grasped this complete and perfect Way. He did not just take one part but inherited and developed the essence of Zhou civilization in its entirety. This is the specific manifestation of his being "unobscured"—he did not cling rigidly to any single aspect of the Dao but encompassed all aspects.

More importantly, he was "never obstructed by accumulation." Accumulation (Cheng Ji, 成积)—existing accumulations. Although Master Confucius was widely learned and deeply accumulated knowledge, he was never obscured by this existing accumulation. This contrasts perfectly with the six schools—the reason they were obstructed is precisely that they accumulated rich knowledge in their own fields ("accumulation"), became trapped by this accumulation, and could not transcend it.

How did Master Confucius manage to be "unobscured by accumulation"$14 The answer lies in his attitude toward learning.

In the Analects, "Zi Han" (子罕), Master Confucius said: "Do I have knowledge$15 I do not. When a simple fellow asks me a question, I am empty and barren, and I probe both ends of the question until I exhaust it." (Wu you zhi hu zai$16 Wu zhi ye. You bi fu wen yu wo, kong kong ru ye, wo kou qi liang duan er jie zhi.) Master Confucius says he "does not have knowledge" (wu zhi ye)—not that he is truly ignorant, but that he does not consider himself as possessing knowledge. When faced with any question, he approaches it with an attitude of "empty and barren" (kong kong ru ye), leaving space for new cognition. This is "emptiness" (Xu).

Laozi, Chapter 11, says: "Thirty spokes share the hub of a wheel; it is on the emptiness (of the center) that the use of the wheel depends. Clay is molded to form a vessel; it is on the emptiness (of the interior) that the use of the vessel depends. Doors and windows are cut to make a room; it is on the emptiness (of the interior) that the use of the room depends. Thus, what is useful is the being; what is used is the non-being." (Sanshi fu gong yi gu, dang qi wu, you che zhi yong...) Master Laozi’s statement profoundly reveals the function of "emptiness" (Wu, 无): The wheel has spokes and a hub, but what allows it to be used is the "emptiness" in the center. The pottery vessel has walls, but what allows it to hold things is the "emptiness" inside. The room has walls, but what allows habitation is the "emptiness" within. Similarly, the mind has various knowledge and experiences ("Being"), but what allows the mind to cognize new things is the "emptiness" (Xu) within—the void. Without "emptiness," the mind is like a vessel with no interior—it looks solid but can hold nothing.

Section 3: "Unity" (Yi)—Focus without Dispersion

"Unity" (Yi)—Focus without dispersion.

"Yi" means singular focus. "The mind is never not full, yet there is such a thing as unity." (Xin wei chang bu man ye, ran er you suo wei yi.) The mind is always active with various thoughts (full), yet one must maintain focus (Yi).

"Yi" does not mean focusing on only one aspect (which would lead to obstruction)—it means being fully invested when cognizing a specific thing, without being distracted by other thoughts. "Yi" is an attitude toward cognition, not the scope of cognition. The scope of cognition should be comprehensive (guaranteed by "Xu"), while the attitude toward cognition should be focused ("Yi"). True "Yi" means being fully invested in understanding each domain sequentially, and after grasping it, being able to let it go and move to the next domain—repeating this process ultimately leads to a comprehensive and deep understanding of all domains.

Master Confucius is the best model here. When studying the Odes, he was fully engaged (Xing yu shi); when studying rites, he was fully engaged (Li yu li); when appreciating music, he was fully engaged (Cheng yu yue). But he was not invested in only one domain; rather, he achieved deep knowledge in each area in turn—this is the unity of "Yi" and "Xu": "Yi" ensures depth and focus in each act of cognition, while "Xu" ensures breadth and comprehensiveness across the scope of cognition.

Section 3: "Stillness" (Jing)—Unperturbed by Emotion

"Stillness" (Jing)—Unperturbed by emotion.

"Jing" means tranquility or composure. "The mind is never not moving, yet there is such a thing as stillness." (Xin wei chang bu dong ye, ran er you suo wei jing.) The mind always has emotions fluctuating (moving), yet one must maintain stillness (Jing).

The function of "Jing" is to eliminate emotional interference in cognition. When a person is agitated, angry, fearful, or greedy, they often make biased judgments. The arising of "Bi" is often related to emotion—a person clings to a certain viewpoint perhaps because that viewpoint satisfies some emotional need (such as security, superiority, or belonging). To "dissolve obstruction," one must transcend this emotional interference and examine one's cognition with a calm and objective attitude.

Master Confucius’s "no doubts at forty" and "following his heart’s desire without overstepping the boundaries at seventy" are the highest manifestations of "Jing." He could maintain inner composure and clear judgment in all complex situations—not shaken by external temptations, nor swept away by internal desires.

The Great Learning (Da Xue) states: "Only when one knows where to stop does one become steadfast. When steadfast, one can be tranquil. When tranquil, one can be at ease. When at ease, one can deliberate. When deliberating, one can attain." (知止而后有定，定而后能静，静而后能安，安而后能虑，虑而后能得。) This sequence from "stopping" to "attaining" perfectly describes the psychological process of "dissolving obstruction": First, "stopping" (Zhi, 止)—ceasing restless activity; then "steadfastness" (Ding, 定)—establishing the correct direction; then "tranquility" (Jing, 静)—eliminating emotional interference; then "ease" (An, 安); then "deliberation" (Lü, 虑); and finally "attainment" (De, 得)—gaining true cognition of the Dao’s entirety.

Section 4: Correspondence Between "Xu Yi Er Jing" and the Six Schools' Obstructions

Let us compare the methodology of "empty, unified, and still" with the six schools' obstructions to further understand the concrete path of "dissolving obstruction."

Master Mozi: Obstructed by Utility, unaware of Culture. Master Mozi’s "Bi" stemmed from his mind being completely filled with the knowledge of "Utility," leaving no space to be "Empty" (Xu) for the cognition of "Culture." If Master Mozi had been "Empty"—while maintaining the importance of "Utility," leaving space for the cognition of "Culture"—he would not have been obstructed.

Master Songzi: Obstructed by Desire, unaware of Attainment. Master Songzi’s "Bi" resulted from his excessive focus on the negative aspect of "Desire" (Yu), lacking "Unity" (Yi)—he failed to focus on the positive aspect of "Attainment" (De).

Master Shenzi: Obstructed by Law, unaware of Worthy Men. Master Shenzi’s "Bi" is related to a lack of "Emptiness"—his mind was filled with the knowledge of "Law," leaving no space to accept the cognition of "Worthy Men."

Master Shenzi (Shen Buhai): Obstructed by Power, unaware of Wisdom. Master Shenzi’s "Bi" is related to a lack of "Stillness" (Jing)—his pursuit of power was accompanied by intense utilitarian emotion, and this emotion interfered with his calm cognition of "Wisdom" (Zhi).

Master Hui Shi: Obstructed by Rhetoric, unaware of Reality. Master Hui Shi’s "Bi" stemmed from being too "Unified" (Yi) in the realm of "Rhetoric"—his focus was entirely dedicated to conceptual debate, to the point where he forgot that debate’s purpose is to serve "Reality."

Master Zhuangzi: Obstructed by Heaven, unaware of Man. Master Zhuangzi’s "Bi" is related to a lack of "Emptiness"—his mind was completely filled with the realization of "Heaven," leaving no space for the care of "Man." Simultaneously, his "Stillness" went to an extreme—the tranquility he sought, which transcended all human affairs, was actually an avoidance and evasion of "Man."

Thus, "empty, unified, and still" is not a simple slogan but a cultivation method that requires precise handling. "Xu" should not be excessive (otherwise it becomes complete ignorance); "Yi" should not be excessive (otherwise it becomes one-sided rigidity); "Jing" should not be excessive (otherwise it becomes passive evasion). The three must cooperate in the right measure to achieve the state of "unobscuredness."

This precise coordination is what Master Xunzi called the "Mean" (Zhong)—the middle way, moderation—neither too much nor too little—this is the psychological state of being "unobscured."

Chapter XIII: Philosophical Reflection on "Bi" and "Ming": How is Knowledge Possible$17

Section 1: How Can Man Know$18

Master Xunzi’s theory of "Bi" raises a deeper philosophical question: How can finite man cognize the infinite Dao$19

Master Xunzi’s answer is: through the "Mind" (Xin, 心). "How does man know the Dao$20 I say: the mind." However, the mind itself is finite—it is limited by the senses, by experience, by language. How can a finite mind cognize the infinite Dao$21

Master Xunzi’s answer is: by being "empty, unified, and still" (Xu Yi Er Jing). Although the mind is finite, as long as it maintains this state, it can transcend its limitations and penetrate the entirety of the Dao.

Why can being "empty, unified, and still" allow a finite mind to comprehend the infinite Dao$22

Let us seek clues in pre-Qin texts.

The I Ching, Xi Ci Shang (系辞上), states: "The sage washes his mind with this, retreats into obscurity, and shares fortune and misfortune with the people." (圣人以此洗心，退藏于密，吉凶与民同患。) The sage "washes his mind"—cleansing it of prejudice and distracting thoughts—this is "Xu" (Empty). "Retreats into obscurity" (Tui zang yu mi)—retreating into the depth of the mind—this is "Jing" (Still). Through "washing the mind" and "retreating into obscurity," the sage’s mind reaches a special state, capable of "sharing fortune and misfortune with the people"—sympathizing with the fate of all under Heaven.

Again, the I Ching, Xi Ci Shang, states: "The Yi does not think, it does not act; it is silently still, and by responding, it pervades all things under Heaven." (Yi wu si ye, wu wei ye, ji ran bu dong, gan er sui tong tianxia zhi gu.) The principle of the Yi is "non-thinking" (not clinging to a specific mode of thought), "non-action" (not forcing a specific outcome), and "silently still" (inner composure). Yet, once it responds, it can "pervade all things under Heaven"—understand the causes and effects of everything.

"Silently still" corresponds to "Jing"; "non-thinking" corresponds to "Xu" (not being bound by existing cognitive frameworks); "responding and thereby pervading" (Gan er sui tong)—once an affinity is felt, penetration occurs—this is the cognitive state achieved after being "empty, unified, and still."

Thus, the reason being "empty, unified, and still" allows the finite mind to grasp the infinite Dao lies in "resonance and penetration" (Gan Tong, 感通). When the mind is in this state, it is no longer bound by any specific framework but is open to all possibilities. In this state of openness, the mind can establish a "resonance" with the Dao—a direct and comprehensive sensing of the Dao’s operation. This "resonance" is not a logical deduction but an integral intuition—it grasps the whole not by analyzing the parts, but by grasping the whole all at once.

This mode of cognition stands in sharp contrast to the cognitive style of the scholars of the six schools. Their method was analytical—each started from one perspective and grasped the Dao through analysis and deduction. However, since the Dao "is constant in its substance yet endlessly changing," the analytical method can only grasp one aspect, not the totality. Only the method of "resonance and penetration"—an integral intuition—can grasp the entirety of the Dao.

Section 2: The Levels of "Knowledge"—Knowledge of Sight and Hearing vs. Knowledge of Virtue

In pre-Qin thought, "Knowledge" (Zhi, 知) has different levels. We can roughly distinguish two realms:

Knowledge of Sight and Hearing (Wen Jian Zhi Zhi, 聞見之知)—Knowledge acquired through the senses (eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body). This knowledge is empirical, concrete, and partial.

Knowledge of Virtue (De Xing Zhi Zhi, 德性之知)—Knowledge acquired through the mind being "empty, unified, and still." This cognition is holistic, profound, and pervasive.

The scholars of the six schools primarily possessed "Knowledge of Sight and Hearing"—they accumulated rich knowledge in their respective domains. However, they lacked "Knowledge of Virtue"—the holistic cognition of the entirety of the Dao.

Master Confucius possessed both. He had extensive "Knowledge of Sight and Hearing" ("learning disparate methods"), but also profound "Knowledge of Virtue" ("benevolent, wise, and yet unobscured"—unifying all knowledge through benevolence and wisdom).

What is the relationship between these two types of knowledge$23 "Knowledge of Sight and Hearing" is the foundation of "Knowledge of Virtue"—without rich experience accumulation, holistic cognition cannot begin. However, "Knowledge of Sight and Hearing" cannot automatically elevate to "Knowledge of Virtue"—it requires the cultivation of "empty, unified, and still" to be elevated and integrated. If one only has "Knowledge of Sight and Hearing" without the discipline of "Xu Yi Er Jing," rich accumulation will become an obstruction—it solidifies into a fixed framework, hindering further cognition. This is exactly the case with the six schools—their rich experience in their respective fields ("accumulation") became the very obstacle obscuring their recognition.

Master Confucius’s "unobstructedness by accumulation" lies precisely in his ability, through the discipline of "Xu Yi Er Jing," to elevate rich "Knowledge of Sight and Hearing" into unified "Knowledge of Virtue," thereby accepting every aspect of experience without being limited by any single aspect.

Section 3: Why Perfect "Unobstructedness" is So Rare

If "Xu Yi Er Jing" is the method for dissolving obstruction, and this method is not mysterious (Master Xunzi explicitly taught it to everyone), why are those who truly achieve "unobscuredness" so rare$24 Why does Master Xunzi cite only Master Confucius as the paradigm of being "unobscured" in the entire history of pre-Qin thought$25

This question is crucial and touches upon the fundamental predicament of human cognition.

The answer can be sought in several aspects:

First, "Xu Yi Er Jing" is easy to state but extremely difficult to practice. To maintain the mind's "Emptiness" (Xu), one must overcome humanity’s natural tendency toward "complacency"—humans are naturally inclined to overestimate what they know and underestimate what they do not know. To maintain the mind's "Unity" (Yi), one must find a precise balance between focus and openness—not too focused (leading to rigidity), and not too scattered (leading to superficiality). To maintain the mind's "Stillness" (Jing), one must find the appropriate balance between engaging with the world and withdrawing—not being swept away by emotions, yet not avoiding normal emotional experiences. These balances and measures are extremely hard to grasp, hence the rarity of those who truly achieve "Xu Yi Er Jing."

Second, the influence of the social environment. In the era of the Hundred Schools, every school vigorously promoted its doctrine and attacked others. In such an environment, a person is easily drawn into one camp, seeing only the strengths of their own side and the weaknesses of others—this is the "obstruction" caused by the social environment. To remain "unobscured" in this environment requires extraordinary independent thinking and resilience—something beyond the capacity of the average person.

Third, human finitude. Human life is finite, and the domains one can study in depth are also limited. To achieve cognition of the entirety of the Dao within a finite life requires extraordinary talent and immense effort. Master Confucius "never tired of learning" (Analects, Shu Er), studying tirelessly his entire life—even so, he only reached the highest state of "following his heart’s desire without overstepping boundaries" at the age of seventy. This shows that "unobscuredness" is a lifelong cultivation process, not achievable overnight.

These factors combined explain why "unobscuredness" is rare. However, Master Xunzi is not pessimistic because of this. His proposal of the methodology "Xu Yi Er Jing" is precisely intended to help more people embark on the path of "dissolving obstruction"—even if they cannot reach the perfect "unobscuredness" of Master Confucius, they can at least reduce their own biases to a certain extent and make their cognition more comprehensive.

Section 3: Can "Bi" Be Completely Eliminated$26

Another core question: Can "Bi" be completely eliminated$27 Or, as finite beings, are we destined only to see "one corner of the Dao"$28

Master Xunzi seems to hold a relatively optimistic position—he believes that man can "know the Dao" (cognize the entirety of the Dao) through the cultivation of "Xu Yi Er Jing." Master Confucius is the successful example.

However, from Master Zhuangzi’s perspective, such optimism might be questionable. Master Zhuangzi raises a profoundly significant question in "Discussion on Making Things Equal" (Qi Wu Lun):

"My life has a boundary, but knowledge is boundless. To pursue the boundless with the bounded is perilous!" (吾生也有涯，而知也无涯。以有涯随无涯，殆已！)

Life is finite, knowledge is infinite. To pursue the infinite with the finite is perilous. This statement implies that complete "unobscuredness"—the full cognition of the Dao’s entirety—might be impossible for finite beings.

How might Master Xunzi respond to this doubt$29 Perhaps he would say: My concept of "unobscuredness" does not mean omniscient knowledge (that is a divine state, not a human one), but rather, within the limits of human capacity, striving to minimize bias and expand cognition. Master Confucius's "unobscuredness" does not mean he knew everything, but that he was never obscured by any single extreme—he always maintained cognitive openness and comprehensiveness.

This interpretation appropriately downgrades "unobscuredness" from "omniscience" to "non-partial knowledge"—not knowing everything, but not leaning toward any one extreme. This adjustment is reasonable and necessary—because "omniscience" indeed exceeds human capability, but "non-partial knowledge" is something humans can strive for through cultivation.

Section 4: Can Different Obstructions Correct Each Other$30

An interesting question arises: Can the "Bi" of different schools correct each other$31 For instance, Master Mozi was "obstructed by Utility, unaware of Culture." If he could converse with someone "obstructed by Culture, unaware of Utility" (assuming such a person existed), could their biases compensate for each other$32

Theoretically, the answer is yes. If people with different biases could humbly learn from each other, each drawing upon the strengths of the other to compensate for their own weaknesses, they could all, to some extent, "dissolve obstruction."

However, in practice, this process is fraught with difficulty. Because a core feature of "Bi" is "believing it sufficient and adorning it"—the obstructed person does not believe they are obstructed, but rather believes they are correct and others are wrong. Under this mindset, they will not humbly learn from their opponents but will try to persuade or defeat them.

This is why "Xu Yi Er Jing" is so crucial. Only by first achieving "Emptiness" (Xu) in one’s own mind—admitting that one’s cognition might be incomplete—can one begin to learn from others. If the mind is not "Empty," even when faced with the most valuable dissenting opinions, one will dismiss them as errors and reject them.

Master Confucius’s greatness lies precisely in the extreme "Emptiness" of his mind. He said: "When three people walk together, one of them must be my teacher. I choose the good qualities in them and follow them, and the bad qualities and correct them in myself." (Analects, Shu Er) Anyone—regardless of their intellectual stance—could become his teacher. He did not reject others because their stance differed from his, but "chose the good qualities and followed them"—absorbing the strengths of others. This magnanimity that embraces all is the foundation of being "unobscured."

Section 5: "Bi" Theory's Revelation for Today—Though Limited to Pre-Qin

Although this paper is strictly limited to the intellectual horizon of the pre-Qin and ancient periods, the vitality of Master Xunzi’s theory of "Bi" transcends the era. In the pre-Qin context, the problem of "Bi" manifested as the rigid adherence to one side during the debates of the Hundred Schools. But the underlying epistemological principle—how a finite cognitive subject avoids partiality—is an eternal dilemma of human cognition.

The methodology for dissolving obstruction proposed by Master Xunzi, "Xu Yi Er Jing," possesses universal applicability within the pre-Qin context. It applies not only to academic research but also to political decision-making, interpersonal communication, and self-cultivation—any area requiring correct cognition.

Within the pre-Qin context, the ultimate goal of "dissolving obstruction" was not personal cognitive satisfaction but the peace and order of the realm. The reason Master Xunzi attached such importance to the issue of "Bi" was not mere academic curiosity but a deep concern for society and politics. He deeply understood that erroneous cognition inevitably leads to erroneous decisions, and erroneous decisions inevitably lead to social chaos and suffering for the people. Therefore, "dissolving obstruction" is not just an academic task but also a political mission.

The Great Learning states: "The Way of the Great Learning lies in manifesting the illustrious virtue, in renovating the people, and in resting in the supreme good." (Ge wu zhi zhi, cheng yi zheng xin, xiu shen qi jia zhi guo ping tianxia.) "Investigating things to extend knowledge" (Ge Wu Zhi Zhi)—comprehensively and deeply cognizing affairs—this is the cognitive dimension of "dissolving obstruction." "Making the will sincere, rectifying the mind" (Cheng Yi Zheng Xin)—making the will and mind sincere and upright—this is the cultivation aspect of "Xu Yi Er Jing." "Cultivating the person, ordering the family, governing the state, and bringing peace to the world"—the step-by-step extension from the individual to society to the state—this is the ultimate goal of "dissolving obstruction."

Chapter XIV: "Bi" and "Ming": From the I Ching's "Ming Yi" to "Jie Bi"

Section 1: The Image of Ming Yi—Light Entering the Earth

The I Ching hexagram Ming Yi (明夷, Darkness within the Bright) has Kun (Earth) above and Li (Fire/Light) below. Li is fire, representing light; Kun is earth. Fire is beneath the earth—this is the image of Ming Yi. "Yi" means injury. Light injured, light concealed—this is Ming Yi.

The image of Ming Yi has a profound correspondence with Master Xunzi’s theory of "Bi." "Bi" is a form of "Ming Yi"—the light of wisdom is concealed by some force (prejudice) and cannot function to illuminate all things.

The Ming Yi, Commentary on the Judgment (Tuan Zhuan), states: "Light enters the earth, thus Ming Yi. Internally civilized yet externally docile and yielding, enduring great calamity; King Wen was so." (明入地中，明夷。内文明而外柔顺，以蒙大难，文王以之。) This speaks of King Wen living under the tyranny of King Zhou; though possessing internal virtue and civilization, he had to appear docile externally to avoid death. This is a forced "Ming Yi"—the light does not wish to hide, but is suppressed by external darkness.

However, the "Bi" of the six schools is a voluntary "Ming Yi"—their wisdom is not suppressed by external forces but concealed by their own biases. They possess "light" (genuine insight in their own domain), but this "light" enters the "earth" (is buried by prejudice) and cannot illuminate other domains.

Section 2: From "Bi" to "Ming"—The Process of Dissolving Obstruction

The opposite of "Bi" is "Ming" (Brightness). Among the sixty-four hexagrams of the I Ching, the counterpart to Ming Yi is Jin (晋, Progress/Advance). Jin has Li (Fire/Light) above Kun (Earth) below—Fire rises above the Earth; light shines forth—this is Jin, the state of "Ming."

The process from "Ming Yi" to Jin is the process from "Bi" to "Ming"—from light being concealed to light shining forth again.

The Jin, Commentary on the Image (Xiang Zhuan), states: "Light rises above the earth, thus Jin. The gentleman uses this to manifest his bright virtue." (明出地上，晋。君子以自昭明德。) "Light rises above the earth" (Ming chu yu di shang)—this is "dissolving obstruction." "The gentleman uses this to manifest his bright virtue" (Junzi yi zi zhao ming de)—this is the "blessing of unobscuredness."

Note the character "Self" (Zi, 自) in "manifesting his bright virtue by himself"—"dissolving obstruction" is ultimately a process of self-awakening—it is not an external force forcibly removing the obstruction, but one recognizing the existence of the obstruction and transcending it oneself. Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi" chapter is precisely the theoretical tool to facilitate this self-awakening—it does not "dissolve the obstruction" for you, but helps you realize the existence of obstruction and then "dissolve it" yourself.

The Great Learning begins by stating: "The Way of the Great Learning lies in manifesting the illustrious virtue, in renovating the people, and in resting in the supreme good." (Ming Ming De). "Manifesting illustrious virtue" aligns with the Jin hexagram’s "manifesting bright virtue by himself." And the prerequisite for "manifesting illustrious virtue" is precisely "dissolving obstruction"—only by removing the biases and selfish desires obscuring the mind can the inner "bright virtue" shine forth again.

Section 3: "Bi" and "Tong" in the Sixty-Four Hexagrams—From Meng to Ge

In the sixty-four hexagrams of the I Ching, besides the correspondence between Ming Yi and Jin, many other images resonate with Master Xunzi’s theory of "Bi."

Meng Hexagram (蒙, Obstruction/Ignorance)—Gen (Mountain) above Kan (Water) below. Water is beneath the mountain, obscured by the mountain—this is "Meng," meaning obscured or ignorant. "Meng" is close to "Bi," both referring to a state where cognition is obscured. The Meng, Commentary on the Judgment (Tuan Zhuan), states: "Obstruction has success, if one proceeds with perseverance, it is because one acts in accordance with the time and the mean." (Meng heng, yi heng xing, shi zhong ye.) Obscurity can be overcome—but only on the premise of following the Middle Way ("acting in accordance with the time and the mean"). This aligns with Master Xunzi’s theory of "dissolving obstruction"—partiality can be overcome, but it requires the correct method ("Xu Yi Er Jing" is a form of "acting in accordance with the time and the mean").

Tai and Pi Hexagrams—As mentioned, Tai symbolizes the free flow between Heaven and Earth; Pi symbolizes their blockage. "Flowing through" (Tong, 通) is "unobstructedness"; "blockage" (Sai, 塞) is "obstruction."

Ge Hexagram (革, Revolution/Change)—Dui (Lake) above Li (Fire) below. Fire and water interact, symbolizing transformation. "Ge" means "to remove the old and establish the new"—removing old prejudices and welcoming new cognition. "Dissolving obstruction" is, in a sense, a form of "Ge"—reforming old biases and renewing the cognitive framework.

The Guan Hexagram (观, Observation)—As mentioned before, its core spirit is comprehensive observation. The six stages, from "childlike observation" to "observing the lives of all," depict the gradual ascent of cognition from partiality to comprehensiveness.

These hexagrams show that the opposition between "Bi" and "Tong" (or "Bi" and "Ming") is one of the core themes in the wisdom of the I Ching. Master Xunzi’s theory of "Bi" can be seen as a philosophical elevation of this core theme found in the I Ching.

Chapter XVI: Conclusion: The Totality of the Dao and the Effort of Learning

Section 1: Review: The Arising of "Bi"

Reviewing the entire text, we can offer a systematic summary of the core tenets of Master Xunzi’s "Jie Bi."

The arising of "Bi" has three levels of cause:

First, The Totality of the Dao. "The Dao is constant in its substance yet endlessly changing in its manifestations"—the Dao is a complete entity encompassing all change. Precisely because the Dao is so vast and complete, finite man finds it difficult to grasp its entirety, making it easy to focus on only one aspect.

Second, The Finitude of Man. Human life is limited, cognitive capacity is limited, and the scope of experience is limited. To cognize the infinite Dao under finite conditions inevitably requires choices—one cannot study all fields in depth simultaneously; one must focus deeply in some areas while only superficially touching others. This necessary choice plants the seed of "Bi."

Third, The Self-Complacency of Man. Man is naturally inclined to overestimate his knowledge and underestimate his ignorance. This tendency is the source of "Bi."

Please provide a complete, high-quality English translation.