Comprehensive Reflections to Aid in Governance(Part 115): Throw Not Stones in A Glass House

Comprehensive Reflections to Aid in Governance

By Sima Guang

Translated By Yiming Yang  

Annals of Han Book 6 Scroll 14 (continued)

The 6th year of the Emperor Wen’s Early Era (174 B.C. continued)

Jia Yi’s memorial continued:

“The ruler is like a hall, his officials like the steps leading up to it, and the people like the ground below. If the steps are nine levels high and far from the ground, then the hall is elevated. If the steps are level with the ground, then the hall is low. Thus, in ancient times, wise kings created a hierarchical system, with chancellors, ministers, officers, and scholars within the court, and noble ranks—duke, marquis, earl, viscount, and baron—outside the court. Among the plebeians were officers and local bureaucrats, as well as common people. This system was carefully structured, with the Son of Heaven at its apex, ensuring that his position was beyond coveting.”

“The proverb says, ‘Beware of the vessel when pelting a rat.’ This is an apt analogy. When the rat is near a vessel, one hesitates to strike it, fearing damage to the vessel. How much more should this apply to a noble minister near their ruler? By observing proper etiquette and ethical conduct, a ruler can discipline ministers without degrading their dignity. Thus, there have been cases where a minister was allowed to commit suicide rather than suffer brutality. Punishments such as branding the face or cutting off the nose do not apply to grandees because of their proximity to the ruler. According to etiquette, a subordinate must not check the age of an emperor’s horse by examining its teeth, and there is punishment for kicking the fodder of imperial carriage horses to prevent ministers from showing disrespect towards the ruler. Today, even the nobility—kings, marquesses, and the Three Excellencies—are treated with respect by the Son of Heaven, just as ancient emperors referred to their elders as ‘uncles.’

“And yet, if we implement laws such as branding, cutting off the nose, shaving hair, amputation, flogging, or beheading in the market, is this not like a hall without a staircase? Are those who suffer such humiliation too close to the Sovereign? Without due respect, will ministers wielding significant power and holding important positions be reduced to criminals and slaves with no sense of shame? That the Second Emperor of Qin was slew in Wangyi Palace, punished to the full extent of the law, was another example of pelting rats without protecting the vessel.

“I have heard the saying, ‘Even if shoes are new, they are not used as pillows; even if a hat is worn out, it is not to be placed underfoot.’ Once a person has held a position of honor and favor, the Son of Heaven’s demeanor and etiquette towards them change, and the officials and people have once bowed in reverence and fear. Now, if there is a transgression, it is within the emperor’s prerogative to decree their removal, dismissal, or even grant them death or complete destruction. However, to bind and shackle them, subject them to lowly officials, hand them over to constables, and let them be insulted and flogged by subordinate officials of the constabulary, is hardly a way to make the common people witness justice.

“If those of lowly status become accustomed to seeing their superiors treated so harshly, they may believe they can subject them to the same treatment if a grandee makes a mistake and loses their status. This is not how we cultivate a culture of revering the revered and respecting the respected. In ancient times, high officials who lacked integrity were removed from office, but were not accused of corruption directly; instead, it was said, ‘The Fu and Gui(sacrificial vessels) are not rightly laid out.’ Those who engaged in lewd and immoral behavior, trespassing the boundaries between men and women, were not directly labeled adulterers; rather, its euphemism, ‘The curtains are not properly arranged.’ Those who were lazy and incompetent were not called disqualified; instead, it was termed as, ‘The subordinate is not up to his duty.’ Thus, for high-ranking officials, their faults were recognized, but they were not publicly denounced. They were given the leeway to conceal their misconduct.

“Even in cases of severe punishment, when it entered the realm of severe condemnation, upon hearing the judgment, the condemned wore a white hat with long tassels, knelt before a basin of water with a sword ready for self-mutilation, requested an audience, and confessed their wrongdoing. They were not physically bound or dragged away. For those who committed lesser offenses, upon hearing the orders, they slit their throats; they were not forced to stretch their necks. For those who committed grave offenses, upon hearing the orders, they faced north, bow twice, knelt, and took their own lives; they were not dragged by their hair and decapitated. The Sovereign conveyed to them: ‘You know you did something wrong, yet I still treat you with respect.’ When a ruler treats his subjects with respect, the courtiers maintain their self-esteem; when he demonstrates integrity and a sense of shame, individuals uphold dignity in their actions. When a ruler establishes integrity, propriety, and righteousness in his treatment of subordinates, and the subordinates do not respond with appropriate conduct, they are no longer considered human.

“Therefore, when civilization is established and customs are set, all who serve as subjects should prioritize propriety over personal gain, uphold principles, and adhere to righteousness. In doing so, they can be entrusted with the power of governance and the responsibility of protecting a young and vulnerable ruler before he comes of age. This is the result of strict integrity, observance of shame, and the practice of courtesy and righteousness. What could a ruler lose by doing so? When such practices could have been implemented but instead the wrong method of treating ministers was prolonged, it becomes a matter worthy of long sighs.”

At this time, the Marquis of Jiang was imprisoned but eventually released without charge. Jia Yi used this opportunity to criticize the emperor. After the emperor took Jia Yi’s words to heart and treated his ministers with dignity, his officials, when found guilty of an offense, chose to commit suicide rather than take punishment.

The 7th year of the Emperor Wen’s Early Era (173 B.C.)

In October, during the winter, an edict was issued prohibiting the mothers of marquesses, the consorts of marquesses, and the sons of kings and officials with an emolument of over 2,000 piculs of grain from conducting unauthorized arrests and searches.

In April, during the summer, a general amnesty was declared throughout the country.

On June 2, a fire broke out on the trellis outside the east gate of Weiyang Palace.

The people sang a song about the Prince of Huainan that went: “With a foot of cloth, it can still be sewn; with a peck of grain, it can still be pounded. But two brothers cannot live together in harmony!” When the emperor heard this, he was troubled by it.

The 8th year of the Emperor Wen’s Early Era (172 B.C.)

In the summer, the Emperor granted marquisates to the sons of the late Prince of Huainan, Liu An and three others. Knowing the emperor intended to restore the former prince’s line, Jia Yi submitted a memorial urging him to reconsider. Jia Yi wrote: 

“The late Prince of Huainan(Liu Chang) was infamous for his rebellion and wickedness; his crimes are known to all. Although Your Majesty pardoned and banished him, he died of illness, and the world considers his death fitting. Now, by honoring the son of a criminal, you risk tarnishing your reputation. How could this young man forget his father’s fate? The Duke of Bai, Sheng, who sought to avenge his father, succeeded because his father’s killers were his grandfather and uncle. Although the Duke of Bai rebelled, he never sought to usurp the country’s rightful ruler. His rebellion was a rash act of anger, an attempt to thrust a sharp dagger into the chests of his enemies, and perished together with them.

“Though the state of Huainan is small, its former leader, Qing Bu, was able to raise an army and revolt. The Han dynasty endures only by good fortune. Allowing someone to avenge their enemy could endanger the state’s resources and stability, which is unwise. Personal grudges are a source of danger for the state. Therefore, it is inadvisable to grant power or accumulate wealth for such individuals. If this situation is not exactly the same as that of Wu Zixu or the Duke of Bai, who sought revenge in the large capital city, then it is more like the suspicion that there may arise another Zhuan Zhu or Jing Ke (assassins) from within the ranks. Rewarding him with power and wealth is no different from arming bandits or giving wings to tigers. This will inevitably lead to future trouble. I beg Your Majesty to think carefully before making this decision!”

However, the emperor did not heed Jia Yi’s advice.

A long comet appeared in the east.

The 9th year of the Emperor Wen’s Early Era (171 B.C.)

In the spring, there was a severe drought.

The 10th year of the Emperor Wen’s Early Era (170 B.C.)

In winter, the Emperor traveled to Ganquan Palace. 

General Bo Zhao killed a court envoy. The Emperor could not bear to impose punishment on his maternal uncle, so he ordered the court officials to drink with him, hoping that Bo Zhao would repent and take responsibility for his actions. However, Bo Zhao refused. The Emperor then sent court officials to express their condolences to Bo Zhao‘s family, which forced Bo Zhao, feeling ashamed and remorseful, to commit suicide.

Sima Guang’s commentary: Li Deyu believed the Emperor Wen‘s decision to execute Bo Zhao was just but not compassionate. When Duke Kang of Qin bid farewell to Duke Wen of Jin, he said it felt as if his mother were still alive. The Emperor’s mother was still alive, and Bo Zhao was her only younger brother. Executing Bo Zhao would hurt his mother’s feelings. In my humble opinion, the law is the common recourse of the world; only those who enforce it equally for the high and low can prevent violations. Though Bo Zhao was known for his virtues, the Emperor Wen did not appoint a teacher of virtue to guide him but instead appointed him as a military commander. This led to his snobbery and emboldened him to kill an imperial envoy. If the emperor had pardoned him, how would this be any different from the reigns of Emperor Cheng and Emperor Ai?

Emperor Wen of Wei once praised Emperor Wen of Han but criticized him for not addressing Bo Zhao’s actions earlier, stating, ‘The family of the emperor’s mother should be treated with kindness for their benefaction in nurturing the ruler, but not be given power to meddle state affairs. Once they have violated the law, they have to face the consequences.’ His criticism implied that Emperor Wen of Han did not restrain Bo Zhao earlier. This remark was right on target. If the emperor wished to comfort his mother, he should have acted prudently from the beginning.