Xunzi's 'Jie Bi' (Unveiling Concealment): On the Wholeness of the Dao, Cognitive Limitation, and the Fortune of Being Unobstructed
This paper offers an in-depth interpretation of the 'Jie Bi' chapter in Xunzi, investigating the epistemological origins of the 'calamity of obstruction' described by the Pre-Qin philosophers. By analyzing the concept that 'the Dao is constant in its entirety yet utterly transformative,' the essay reveals the dilemma of human cognition being fixated on 'a single corner' and elucidates the transcendental value of Confucius's 'benevolence and wisdom unhindered,' aiming to understand how to escape cognitive bias.
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