Name and Mind: A Study of Xunzi's "Rectification of Names"
A complete study of the *Zhengming* (Rectification of Names) chapter of the *Xunzi*. It takes up the Master's chain—"if names are not rectified, speech does not flow"—and opens onto the distinction between names having no fixed appropriateness and names having a fixed goodness; it traces in detail the boundary of convention-becoming-custom, the Heavenly Faculties' sorting of categories and the mind's verifying cognition, the three delusions and the inevitability of disputation, the three grades of speech, how order and disorder lie in what the mind approves, the Way as the true balance across past and present, and ends with "the self enslaved to things" and "valuing the self and putting things to service." It takes Confucian and Daoist principle as its foundation, drawing on the *Analects*, *Mencius*, *Doctrine of the Mean*, *Laozi*, *Zhuangzi*, *Zuo Tradition*, and the *Book of Songs*.
8 Order and Disorder Lie in What the Mind Approves
8.1 The Mistake of Eliminating Desire and Minimizing Desire
8.1.1 Having Desire or Lacking Desire Is a Difference of Kind, of Life and Death
The fourteenth section is the center of gravity for the whole essay's philosophical argument. It opens by refuting two claims about governance: "Whoever discusses governance while waiting for people to eliminate desire is one who has no means of guiding desire, and is troubled by the very fact of having desire. Whoever discusses governance while waiting for people to have few desires is one who has no means of moderating desire, and is troubled by the very fact of having many desires."
Whoever discusses governance while waiting for people to eliminate their desires is someone with no way to guide desire, trapped by the fact that people have desires at all. Whoever discusses governance while waiting for people to reduce their desires is someone with no way to moderate desire, trapped by the fact that people's desires are many.
Master Xun's judgment is: "Having desire or lacking desire is a difference of kind, a matter of life and death, not of order or disorder. Whether desires are many or few is a difference of kind, a quantity belonging to the emotions, not a matter of order or disorder." Having desire or lacking it belongs to two different categories entirely—it is the difference between being alive and being dead, not the difference between order and disorder. Whether desires are many or few likewise belongs to two different categories—it is a quantity of the emotions, not the difference between order and disorder.
These lines strip "desire" entirely out of the question of "order and disorder." Having desire or not is a matter of life and death: every living person has desires; only the dead have none. Having many or few desires is a matter of quantity: some people have many desires, some have few—this is merely how much emotion there is. Neither has anything to do with order or disorder. To pin order and disorder on the elimination or reduction of desire is to look in the wrong place.
8.1.2 Looking in the Wrong Place
Why is this the wrong place to look$26 Because order and disorder are things that can actually be achieved, while eliminating desire and minimizing desire are things that cannot be achieved. A person cannot eliminate desire, because desire is "a fixture of nature," part of one's innate endowment. A person can hardly reduce desire either, because how much desire one has is "a quantity belonging to the emotions," an inherent quantity of feeling. To pin order and disorder on something unachievable means order and disorder can never be achieved.
Master Xun's line of thought here is extremely practical. He does not ask "how should an ideal person be," but asks "what can an actual person be." An actual person has desires, and quite a lot of them—this is a given condition. Order and disorder must be resolved within this condition. If order and disorder can only be achieved once people have no desires or few desires, then order and disorder have no hope of ever being achieved.
This is the meaning of being "troubled by having desire" and "troubled by having many desires." Those who advocate eliminating desire are trapped by the fact that "people have desire," believing that as long as desire exists, order is impossible. Those who advocate minimizing desire are trapped by the fact that "people's desires are many," believing that as long as desires are many, order is impossible. Both kinds of people are trapped by desire, unable to see where order and disorder truly lie.
8.1.3 Not Seeking It Where It Lies, but Seeking It Where It Is Absent
The end of the fourteenth section says: "Hence order and disorder lie in what the mind approves, not in what the emotions desire. Not seeking it where it lies, but seeking it instead where it is absent—though one says 'I have found it,' one has in fact lost it."
Order and disorder lie in what the mind approves, not in what the emotions desire. Rather than searching where order and disorder actually lie, one searches instead where they are not to be found; though one claims to have found it, one has in fact lost it.
"Where it lies" and "where it is absent"—this pair of phrases draws the whole passage together. Order and disorder have a place where they lie, and that place is what the mind approves. The theories of eliminating and minimizing desire go looking in the place "where it is absent," and no matter how they search, they will never find it there. Master Xun's criticism is not that eliminating or minimizing desire is bad—it is that these theories answer the wrong question. The question is order and disorder; the answer given is desire; but desire is not where order and disorder lie.
8.2 Desire Is Received from Heaven, Seeking Is Received from the Mind
8.2.1 Desire Need Not Wait Upon the Possibility of Attainment, but the Seeking Follows What Is Approved
In the middle of the fourteenth section are several lines that constitute the most precise analysis in the whole essay: "That desire need not wait upon the possibility of attainment, while the seeking follows what is approved: that desire need not wait upon the possibility of attainment is what is received from Heaven; that the seeking follows what is approved is what is received from the mind."
Desire does not arise only once attainment becomes possible; but seeking follows whatever the mind approves. That desire arises without waiting for possibility of attainment is something received from Heaven; that seeking follows what the mind approves is something received from the mind.
Here two things are distinguished: desire and seeking. Desire is wanting; seeking is pursuing. Wanting is innate, not something a person controls—one wants whatever one wants, regardless of whether it can be attained. But pursuing is determined by the mind: if the mind approves, one pursues; if the mind does not approve, one does not pursue.
This distinction is the key to the entire passage. Desire is not governed by the mind; seeking is governed by the mind. Order and disorder do not lie in desire, but in seeking; seeking is governed by the mind, and so order and disorder lie in the mind. "The single desire received from Heaven, when regulated by the many considerations received from the mind, can hardly be classed together with what is received from Heaven alone." The single desire given by Heaven, once moderated by the many considerations given by the mind, can hardly be regarded as the same kind of thing as what Heaven alone provides.
8.2.2 Some People Go from Life to Death
Master Xun then offers an extremely powerful example: "That men desire life is extreme indeed, that men hate death is extreme indeed; and yet there are people who go from life to death of their own accord—not because they do not desire life and desire death, but because they judge that they may not live, and may die."
People's desire to live is extremely strong; people's aversion to death is extremely strong. And yet there are those who give up life and choose death—not because they do not want to live and want to die, but because they judge that they cannot go on living, and that they may rightly die.
This example demonstrates the separation between desire and mind. Wanting to live is desire, given by Heaven, and extremely strong. And yet the mind judges "one may not live, and one may die," and so the person gives up life. The mind's "may" overrides desire's "want." If order and disorder lay in desire, then given how strong the desire to live is, no one should ever give up life. But some people do give up life, which shows that what determines action is not desire, but what the mind approves.
This is the same phenomenon expressed in two different ways as Master Meng's discussion of fish and bear's paw in "Gaozi I." Master Meng says: "Life is what I desire; righteousness is also what I desire. When the two cannot both be had, I would give up life and choose righteousness." "There are things I desire more than life, and things I hate more than death." Master Meng speaks of righteousness itself as a kind of desire, a desire even stronger than the desire for life. Master Xun does not put it this way—he says that giving up life for death is not because one desires death, but because the mind judges that "one may die." Master Meng places righteousness on the level of desire; Master Xun places it on the level of what the mind approves. The two men are describing the same phenomenon: that a person can give up life for righteousness. But Master Xun's formulation more clearly separates mind from desire.
8.2.3 The Mind Restraining It, and the Mind Impelling It
"Hence when desire exceeds what is needed but action falls short of it, this is the mind restraining it. If what the mind approves accords with reason, then however many the desires, what harm do they do to order$27 When desire falls short of what is needed but action exceeds it, this is the mind impelling it. If what the mind approves departs from reason, then however few the desires, how could this halt disorder$28"
Desire exceeds what is needed, yet action does not follow so far—this is the mind restraining it. If what the mind approves accords with reason, then however many the desires may be, what harm do they do to order$29 Desire falls short of what is needed, yet action exceeds it—this is the mind impelling it. If what the mind approves departs from reason, then however few the desires may be, how could this stop disorder$30
These four lines are the hinge of the whole essay. Desire being great while action does not overreach is the mind restraining it; desire being small while action overreaches is the mind impelling it. Whether action overreaches or falls short is determined by the mind, not by desire. Hence order and disorder lie in the mind.
Here Master Xun poses two rhetorical questions: "however many the desires, what harm do they do to order$31" and "however few the desires, how could this stop disorder$32" Many desires do no harm to order; few desires cannot halt disorder. This is the final blow against the theories of eliminating and minimizing desire. They both assume that desire is the root of order and disorder; Master Xun says: it is not. A person of many desires, if his mind accords with reason, achieves order; a person of few desires, if his mind departs from reason, falls into disorder. Order and disorder have nothing whatsoever to do with the quantity of desire.
8.3 A Comparison with Master Meng's "Minimizing Desire"
8.3.1 Nothing Nourishes the Mind Better Than Minimizing Desire
At this point, a question cannot be avoided: Master Meng once said, "For nourishing the mind, nothing is better than minimizing one's desires" ("Jin Xin II"). The Most High also said, "Display plainness and embrace simplicity, lessen self-interest and minimize desire" (Daodejing, chapter 19). Master Xun says that "whoever discusses governance while waiting for people to have few desires" is "troubled by having many desires"—is this a criticism of Master Meng and the Most High$33
A close reading of the text shows that it is not. Master Meng speaks of "nourishing the mind"; Master Xun speaks of "discussing governance." Nourishing the mind is a matter of personal cultivation; discussing governance is a matter of order and disorder in the realm. Master Meng says that the best way to nourish one's own mind well is to minimize one's desires—this is addressed to an individual. Master Xun says that in discussing the order and disorder of the realm, one cannot wait for everyone to minimize their desires—this is addressed to a true king. The two men are not speaking on the same level.
What follows Master Meng's "nothing nourishes the mind better than minimizing desire" is this: "One whose character has few desires will, even if he loses something of his good mind, lose only a little; one whose character has many desires will, even if he retains something of his good mind, retain only a little." A person of few desires, even if his good mind is somewhat lost, loses only a little of it; a person of many desires, even if his good mind is somewhat preserved, preserves only a little of it. Master Meng is speaking of the relationship between desire and the preservation of the good mind—a question of the mind's cultivation. Master Xun does not deny this level at all. In the fifteenth section he says, "though desire cannot be eliminated, the seeking of it can be moderated"—desire cannot be eliminated, but the pursuit of it can be moderated. To moderate one's pursuit is precisely to nourish the mind.
8.3.2 A Difference of Level, Not of Opposition
So the difference between Master Xun and Master Meng is not an opposition over "whether desire should be minimized," but a distinction of level over "where order and disorder reside."
Master Meng's "minimizing desire" is a requirement of personal cultivation addressed to the individual noble person. A noble person who has fewer desires will have a somewhat clearer mind. There is nothing wrong with this. Master Xun's "order and disorder" is a judgment about the order of the entire realm. It is not possible for everyone in the entire realm to minimize their desires, and order and disorder cannot be made to depend on this. There is nothing wrong with this either.
The fundamental point on which the two men agree is that both place the mind above desire. Master Meng says, "first establish what is greater, and what is lesser cannot take it away"—the greater is the mind, the lesser is the desires of ear and eye. Master Xun says, "order and disorder lie in what the mind approves, not in what the emotions desire." Both take the mind as master and desire as subordinate. The only difference is this: Master Meng speaks from the standpoint of cultivating the mind, urging the reduction of desire's interference with the mind; Master Xun speaks from the standpoint of the mind's judgment, holding that as long as the mind accords with reason, an abundance of desire does no harm.
As for the Most High's "lessening self-interest and minimizing desire," this is spoken from the standpoint of the Way. The nature of the Way is plainness, and for a person to accord with the Way is to be plain, and plainness means lessened self-interest and minimized desire. This too is a statement on the level of cultivation, not on the level of order and disorder. What the Most High himself says about governance is: "I do nothing, and the people transform themselves; I love stillness, and the people rectify themselves; I engage in no affairs, and the people prosper themselves; I have no desires, and the people become simple of themselves" (chapter 57). The Most High's governance relies on the ruler's own lack of desire to transform the people, not on the people's own elimination of desire. In this respect—that governance does not need to wait for the people to eliminate desire—this is actually rather close to Master Xun's own approach of "overseeing them with authority, guiding them with the Way."
8.3.3 The Way: Advancing, One Comes Close to Fulfillment; Retreating, One Moderates Seeking
At the end of the fifteenth section, Master Xun gives his own attitude toward desire: "Though desire cannot be fully satisfied, one can come close to fully satisfying it. Though desire cannot be eliminated, the seeking of it can be moderated. Though what is desired cannot all be attained, the one who seeks can still come close to attaining all of it; though desire cannot be eliminated, when what is sought cannot be had, the one who deliberates will moderate his seeking. As for the Way: advancing, one comes close to fulfillment; retreating, one moderates one's seeking—nothing under Heaven surpasses it."
Desire can never be fully satisfied, but one can come close to full satisfaction. Desire can never be eliminated, but the pursuit of it can be moderated. Though what is desired cannot all be attained, the one who seeks can still come close to attaining all of it; though desire cannot be eliminated, when what is sought cannot be had, the one who reflects will moderate his pursuit. The Way—advancing, it can come close to full satisfaction; retreating, it can moderate the pursuit—nothing under Heaven is better than it.
These lines state Master Xun's position with great completeness. He does not advocate eliminating desire, nor does he advocate minimizing desire—he advocates the Way. What is the Way$1 It is the mind's approval according with reason. When the mind accords with reason, advancing it can come close to fully satisfying its desires, and retreating it can moderate its pursuit. Being fitting whether advancing or retreating—this is where order truly lies.
This echoes the earlier statement that "even a gatekeeper cannot be rid of desire—it is a fixture of his nature; even the Son of Heaven cannot exhaust his desires." The gatekeeper cannot be rid of desire; the Son of Heaven cannot exhaust his desires. From the lowest to the highest, desire is always present. Since desire is bound to be present, order must be resolved on the premise that desire is present. The solution is not to annihilate desire, but to let the mind use the Way to judge one's seeking. When the mind judges by the Way, it makes no difference whether desires are many or few. This is the whole of Master Xun's position. It acknowledges human nature without being trapped by it; it neither overestimates people nor underestimates them. This is, precisely, a middle way.