《墨子》Vol. 12

Mozi (founder of the Mohist school) expounds his core philosophy in the chapter "Esteeming Righteousness": nothing in this world is more precious than "righteousness" (yi). He offers an analogy: if someone offered to trade your hat and shoes for your hands and feet, you would certainly refuse, because limbs are more valuable than clothing; if someone offered the entire world in exchange for your life, you would likewise decline, because life is more precious than worldly possessions. Yet people will risk their lives over a dispute concerning moral principles, proving that righteousness surpasses even life itself in importance.

When someone advised Mozi: "Nowadays no one in the world practices righteousness, why must you persist alone in this difficult path?" Mozi responded with a farming metaphor: if only one out of ten people tills the land, that farmer must work even harder, because there are many mouths to feed but few working the fields. Precisely because no one in the world currently upholds righteousness, someone must take the lead in practicing it—how can this be discouraged?

When Mozi visited King Hui of Chu, the aging monarch had his minister Mu He receive the philosopher. Though Mu He praised Mozi's doctrines, he hinted: "The ruler is sovereign of all under heaven—might he not consider a commoner's proposals beneath him?" Mozi countered: when the Son of Heaven falls ill, he still takes medicinal herbs though they grow wild; the grain offered by farmers is still used in noble sacrifices. He cited how Tang the Completer (founder of the Shang dynasty) personally visited the commoner Yi Yin (renowned Shang minister). When attendants objected that "Yi Yin is a lowly man," King Tang replied: "You don't understand. If this medicine can cure illness, would we reject it for being mere weeds?" This shows truly valuable things should be adopted regardless of their humble origins.

Through these vivid analogies, Mozi emphasizes: practicing righteousness is like healing medicine or life-saving grain—it must not be dismissed because its advocate comes from humble circumstances. True wisdom lies in recognizing what is genuinely precious: that which we call "righteousness."

Mozi said: If I could make my ears hear more clearly and my eyes see more sharply, I would gladly strive to achieve it. Now, Yi Yin (the virtuous minister of the Shang dynasty) is to our state what a skilled physician and good medicine are to a patient. If you prevent me from meeting Yi Yin, it is tantamount to denying me the chance to improve myself. Thereupon, Mozi had Peng's son disembark from his carriage and no longer allowed him to drive. Only by acting this way was it deemed appropriate.

Mozi proposed principles for human conduct: Any speech or action that benefits Heaven, the spirits, and the people should be pursued; any speech or action that harms Heaven, the spirits, and the people should be abandoned. Words and deeds that align with the standards of sage-kings like Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang of Shang, King Wen of Zhou, and King Wu of Zhou should be followed; those that align with the ways of tyrants like Jie of Xia, Zhou of Shang, King You of Zhou, and King Li of Zhou should be rejected.

Mozi emphasized the importance of matching words with deeds: Only words that can be put into practice are worth advocating; words that cannot be practiced should not be frequently spoken. To speak without acting is mere empty talk. Mozi advised against six kinds of emotional biases: In silence, one should contemplate; in speech, one should teach; in action, one should accomplish. If one can exercise self-restraint like the sage-kings of the Three Dynasties (Xia, Shang, Zhou), one may become a sage. Excessive joy, anger, pleasure, sorrow, and love must be eliminated, and the movements of hands, feet, mouth, nose, and ears should be guided by benevolence and righteousness—only then can one become a sage.

Mozi told his disciples: The practice of righteousness cannot be entirely free of obstacles, just as a carpenter cutting wood cannot avoid occasionally deviating from the guideline. Mozi criticized the gentlemen of his time: When offered minor official posts, they decline because they feel incompetent, yet they dare to take on the heavy responsibility of being a prime minister—is this not absurd?

Using the analogy of a blind person distinguishing colors, Mozi explained: If a blind person says, "Ju is white, Qian is black," even those with sight cannot refute them. But if white and black objects are mixed together and the blind person is asked to distinguish them, they cannot do so. Therefore, I say the blind do not understand black and white—not because they don't know the names, but because they cannot practically discern them. When gentlemen of the world today discuss "benevolence," even great sages like Yu and Tang could not refute them. But when benevolent and non-benevolent matters are mixed together for them to judge, they cannot tell the difference. Thus, I say these gentlemen do not understand benevolence—not because they don't know the concept, but because they cannot apply it in practice.

Finally, Mozi criticized the behavior of scholars of his time: People today treat their own bodies with less care than merchants treat a bolt of cloth. When merchants trade a piece of cloth, they dare not decide lightly—they must choose the best. Yet scholars today act recklessly with their own conduct, doing whatever they please, with some even committing serious crimes punishable by law.

Mozi observed that those with shallow virtue (De) become indignant when criticized, showing that scholars treat their self-cultivation with less care than merchants treat bolts of cloth. While merchants meticulously examine the quality of goods during transactions, scholars resent having their shortcomings pointed out.

Mozi pointed out that contemporary gentlemen claim to uphold righteousness (Dao), yet grow angry when others help them cultivate virtue—as absurd as wanting to build a sturdy wall while resenting those who assist in its construction. The ancient sage-kings inscribed admonitions on bamboo slips, bronze vessels, and stone steles precisely to ensure their Dao legacy would endure. When later generations hear these ancestral teachings yet fail to practice them, they sever the transmission of the ancient kings' wisdom.

When traveling south to Wei state with numerous books, Mozi was questioned by disciple Xian Tangzi: "Master, you taught Gongshang Guo that 'grasping fundamental principles suffices'—why then carry so many texts?" Mozi explained: "The Duke of Zhou read hundreds of documents each morning and received seventy worthies each evening, thus assisting the Son of Heaven in establishing achievements that endure. I bear no royal duties nor till fields for sustenance—how could I neglect study? Though truth is ultimately singular, people comprehend it diversely, hence we need extensive texts for clarification. Those like Gongshang Guo who grasp subtle essentials require few books, but ordinary minds need broad learning to understand."

Admonishing Wei minister Gongliang Huanzi, Mozi said: "Wei, sandwiched between powerful Qi and Jin, resembles a poor household dwelling among millionaires. Should the poor imitate lavish spending, they'll soon perish. You maintain hundreds of ornate carriages, grain-fed steeds, and silk-robed maids—resources sufficient to sustain a thousand scholars. In crisis, would you rather have maids forming human screens or a thousand warriors guarding you?"

Later, when a disciple Mozi recommended for Wei office resigned, complaining: "They promised a thousand measures of grain but gave only five hundred," Mozi rebuked him: "If your compensation exceeded your worth, the ruler lacked wisdom; if demanding more than your due, you lacked righteousness (Yi). Never abandon principle for material gain."

Mozi once posed an example to his disciples: If someone passed by you a thousand times carrying a basin, would you drive them away for that? The disciples replied they would not. Mozi pointed out that people don't reject things simply because they're repeated—what matters is the inherent value of the matter, not its frequency.

Mozi criticized the social attitudes of his time: people respected laborers carrying grain but didn't value those who practiced righteousness (Yi). He gave the example that when seeing someone exhausted by the roadside from carrying grain, everyone—whether noble or common—would help, recognizing this as an act of righteousness. Yet when someone expounded the Way of the Ancient Kings (the governing principles of sage rulers), people would not only reject it but slander it. This showed society valued righteousness less than physical labor.

Using merchants as contrast, Mozi observed: merchants brave checkpoints, treacherous roads, and bandits in pursuit of profit, while scholars (intellectuals) merely talk about righteousness without action. This proved scholars understood "benefit" (Li) less thoroughly than merchants.

When traveling north to Qi, Mozi encountered a diviner (Ri Zhe) who warned: "The Celestial Lord (Tian Di) is slaying the black dragon in the north today, and your dark complexion makes northward travel inauspicious." Mozi retorted: "By this logic, southerners couldn't go north, northerners couldn't go south, and people of different complexions would all be restricted—wouldn't this paralyze the world?" He likened such superstitions to throwing eggs at stone—even all the eggs in the world couldn't damage the stone.

In another dialogue, Gong Mengzi (a Confucian scholar) told Mozi: "The noble man should be like a bell—sounding only when struck, remaining silent when untouched." Mozi responded that this analogy captured just one of three situations (implying Confucian limitations), as there were other circumstances like proactive teaching.

This passage from Mozi discusses the art of remonstration and methods of spreading virtuous teachings. In the dialogue, Mozi presents two key arguments:

Regarding remonstration, Mozi employs the metaphor of "a bell ringing without being struck": Just as a bell may sound without being struck, when rulers (daren) impose tyrannical governance or prepare to wage unjust wars, exemplary persons (junzi) should offer counsel even without being asked. Such tyranny resembles a crossbow ready to fire—it will inevitably bring national calamity. Attacking innocent states creates lose-lose outcomes for both aggressors and victims.

On propagating virtuous teachings, Gong Mengzi (a Confucian scholar) argues that good deeds should attract followers naturally like precious jade or beautiful women, needing no active promotion. Mozi counters this by observing: In our chaotic era, while many pursue beautiful women (who remain sought-after even in seclusion), few seek virtuous teachings. Without active persuasion, people won't understand them. Consider two equally skilled diviners—the one who actively practices benefits others more than the recluse. The same applies to the Dao of humaneness and righteousness (renyi zhi dao)—active advocacy generates greater merit.

In debating attire versus conduct, Gong Mengzi claims gentlemen must first wear status-appropriate clothing to cultivate corresponding behavior. Mozi directly refutes this, asserting conduct is independent of garments. Citing Duke Huan of Qi as proof—who governed effectively while wearing tall caps, broad sashes, golden swords, and wooden shields—he demonstrates that statecraft depends on virtue (de), not costumes.

This dialogue records a debate between Mozi (founder of Mohism) and Gong Mengzi (a Confucian scholar) concerning governance and external formalities. Through historical examples, Mozi demonstrates that effective governance does not depend on a ruler's attire.

Duke Wen of Jin governed his state peacefully while wearing coarse cloth garments and sheepskin coats, with a straw rope belt and sword at his waist. King Zhuang of Chu ruled his kingdom stably while wearing bright ceremonial caps and magnificent crimson robes. King Goujian of Yue maintained order while sporting cropped hair and body tattoos. Though these four rulers dressed differently, their governing principles were identical—proving that effective administration has nothing to do with clothing.

Gong Mengzi advocated adhering to ancient conventions, insisting that wearing antique costumes and speaking archaic language constituted virtue (De). Mozi refuted this by citing counterexamples: King Zhou of Shang and his minister Fei Zhong used identical speech, yet the former was tyrannical while the latter virtuous; the Duke of Zhou and Guan Shu wore identical attire, yet the former was sagely while the latter oppressive. This demonstrated that virtue bears no relation to wearing ancient clothes or speaking old-fashioned words.

When Gong Mengzi proposed that Confucius—being versed in poetry, history, rites and music—would have become Son of Heaven had he lived in sage-kings' times, Mozi derided this notion as absurd as counting another's teeth to claim personal wealth. True wisdom, Mozi argued, lay in "revering Heaven, serving spirits, loving people, and practicing frugality."

Their final debate concerned fate: Gong Mengzi maintained that wealth, poverty, longevity and premature death were heaven-decreed, yet insisted gentlemen must study. Mozi mocked this contradiction as akin to tying up someone's hair only to remove their hat. Regarding retribution, Mozi noted all ancient sage-kings believed spirits could bestow blessings or calamities, stressing that "righteousness" and "unrighteousness" inevitably brought corresponding "auspicious" and "inauspicious" consequences.

This exchange embodies core Mohist concepts of "universal impartiality" and "rejecting fatalism," opposing Confucian overemphasis on ritual formalities while emphasizing practical governance and the religious perspective of "Heaven's will" and "honoring spirits."

In this dialogue, Mozi (founder of the Mohist school) critiques Confucian ritual and music systems. He argues that since the tyrannical reigns of rulers like Jie of Xia and Zhou of Shang, leaders mistakenly believed spirits lacked efficacy—incapable of bestowing blessings or curses, indifferent to omens—leading to political chaos and state collapse. The ancient sage-kings' classic Zi records: "Arrogance invites calamity," demonstrating that evil deeds bring punishment while good deeds receive rewards.

When debating funeral rites with Gong Mengzi (a Confucian scholar), Mozi points out: According to Confucian rules, mourning lasts three years for deceased rulers, parents, wives, or eldest sons; one year for uncles and brothers; months for other relatives. Yet Confucians also advocate reciting, playing, singing, and dancing the Book of Songs during non-mourning periods. Mozi challenges: If so, when would gentlemen govern? When would commoners farm?

Gong Mengzi responds: "Govern when the state is chaotic; practice rituals and music when at peace. Farm when stable; practice rituals and music when prosperous." Mozi counters: State governance requires sustained effort, just as wealth demands continuous labor—how can one focus solely on rituals after achieving order? This resembles digging a well only when thirsty or seeking medicine only when ill. He cites tyrants like Jie of Xia, Zhou of Shang, King You, and King Li of Zhou, who indulged in music while neglecting welfare, leading to their demise.

Their debate extends to spirits: Gong Mengzi claims "spirits don’t exist" yet insists "gentlemen must study sacrifices." Mozi satirizes this as learning hospitality without guests or weaving nets without fish. Regarding mourning duration, Mozi compares Gong Mengzi’s critique of three-year mourning while defending three-day rites to "a naked man mocking someone with tattered clothes." Finally, discussing whether specialized knowledge constitutes true wisdom, Mozi notes fools may surpass average people in certain areas yet remain foolish overall. When Gong Mengzi defends three-year mourning as "honoring parents," Mozi retorts: Does an infant’s instinctive attachment to parents count as wisdom?

This exchange crystallizes Mohist tenets like "frugality," "modest funerals," "condemning music," and "affirming spirits," opposing Confucian ceremonial excess while advocating pragmatic governance.

This dialogue records a debate between Mozi (founder of Mohism) and Master Cheng (a Confucian scholar) regarding Confucian doctrines. Mozi criticized four Confucian tenets that he believed would lead to societal decline:

First was their attitude toward spirits. The Confucians claimed spiritual matters were unclear and denied the existence of ghosts and deities, which Mozi argued displeased the celestial and earthly spirits. He believed this attitude would corrupt social morality.

Second concerned funeral customs. Confucians advocated elaborate burials with multiple coffins, abundant burial garments and quilts, three years of mourning involving constant weeping, walking with canes, and becoming deaf and blind from grief. Mozi considered such excessive mourning rituals would exhaust the people's livelihood.

Third involved musical activities. Confucians enthusiastically promoted string instruments, singing, drumming, and dancing—practices Mozi believed would make people indulge in pleasure while neglecting proper duties.

Fourth was their concept of fate. Confucians taught that wealth/poverty, longevity/early death, and social order/chaos were predetermined and unchangeable. Mozi argued that if rulers believed this, they wouldn't govern diligently; if commoners believed it, they wouldn't work hard—inevitably causing great disorder.

When Master Cheng accused Mozi of slandering Confucianism, Mozi responded: "If Confucians truly don't hold these four doctrines, then my words would be slander. But if they do hold them, I'm merely stating facts."

In subsequent debate, Mozi illustrated his position with metaphors—like "using a carriage shaft to swat mosquitoes" (making a mountain out of a molehill)—while acknowledging that Confucius did express undeniable truths. Master Cheng retorted: "Since you oppose Confucianism, why quote Confucius?" Mozi replied: "Correct principles should be recognized as such, just as birds naturally seek shade when encountering heat waves."

This passage records several dialogues between Mozi and his disciples, showcasing the core tenets of Mohist philosophy.

The text begins with an analogy using fish and birds responding to drought: when facing drought, fish instinctively swim to deeper waters while birds fly to higher ground—a natural response even sage-kings like Yu and Tang couldn't alter. Mozi employs this metaphor to modestly claim his wisdom still falls short of Confucius'.

Two instructional stories follow. In the first, a disciple wishes to study under Mozi to secure an official position. Mozi admonishes him with a parable about five brothers from Lu state: just as brothers urging burial rites for their father act from moral duty rather than personal gain, encouraging learning serves to propagate righteousness. The second story features a disciple refusing study because "none in my clan learns." Mozi counters this by arguing one wouldn't abandon pursuits of beauty or wealth simply because others don't partake—the same applies to virtuous conduct.

Finally, they debate the connection between virtue and blessings. When a disciple questions why years of following Mozi yielded no visible rewards, Mozi responds with the logic of fugitives evading punishment: just as one can't deny the law's existence merely by escaping capture, one shouldn't dismiss the spirits' omniscience for lacking immediate blessings. He emphasizes that virtuous acts must stem from sincere intent rather than utilitarian calculations.

These dialogues embody Mohist emphasis on practical action, pursuit of collective justice, and discernment of spiritual principles—firmly opposing excuses and profit-driven motives.

Mozi said, "Even concealing a single person is considered a crime. Now you've hidden so many people—this will invite severe punishment. How can you still seek blessings?" When Mozi fell ill, his disciple Diebi came and asked, "Master, you often say that ghosts and spirits perceive the finest details, bestowing misfortune or blessings, rewarding good deeds and punishing evil ones. Yet now you, a sage, have fallen ill. Does this mean your teachings are flawed, or that the ghosts and spirits lack discernment?"

Mozi replied, "Just because I am ill, how does that prove the ghosts and spirits lack perception? There are many causes for human illness—some arise from exposure to cold or heat, others from exhaustion. It’s like having a hundred doors and closing only one—thieves can still enter. 'Righteousness' is a fundamental principle for governing the world, but how can we demand that everyone forcibly uphold it?"

Some disciples informed Mozi that someone wished to learn archery from him. He said, "No. A wise person first assesses their own capacity before acting. Even a 'national scholar' (guoshi, an exceptional talent) would struggle to both fight in battle and tend to the wounded—how much more so for you, who are not national scholars? How can you simultaneously master scholarship and excel in archery?"

The disciples later reported, "Gaozi (a philosopher) speaks of benevolence and righteousness but behaves vilely. We should sever ties with him." Mozi responded, "No. Though his words and deeds don’t align, it’s still better that he promotes my teachings rather than not mentioning them at all. It’s like someone utterly lacking in benevolence who still reveres Heaven and spirits while caring for others—that’s still preferable to being wholly worthless. Gaozi is eloquent; though he fails to practice benevolence and righteousness, at least he doesn’t slander our doctrines."

The disciples pressed further: "Gaozi claims to excel in practicing benevolence and righteousness." Mozi retorted, "Hardly. His so-called benevolence and righteousness are like a lame man boasting of long legs or a hunchback claiming broad shoulders—it cannot last." When Gaozi told Mozi, "I wish to govern the state with benevolent policies," Mozi pointed out, "Governing requires matching words with deeds. You talk without acting and can’t even manage yourself—how could you govern a state? First resolve your own disorder."

(Note: Here, "righteousness" refers to the Mohist core tenet of "universal love"; "national scholar" denotes a virtuous and talented statesman; "Gaozi" was a philosopher famous for his debates with Mencius.)