Facing South南面
人主之過，在已任臣矣，又必反與其所不任者備之，此其說必與其所任者爲讎，而主反制於其所不任者。今所與備人者，且曩之所備也。人主不能明法而以制大臣之威，無道得小人之信矣。人主釋法而以臣備臣，則相愛者比周而相譽，相憎者朋黨而相非。非譽交爭，則主惑亂矣。人臣者，非名譽請謁無以進取，非背法專制無以爲威，非假於忠信無以不禁；三者，惽主壞法之資也。人主使人臣雖有智能，不得背法而專制；雖有賢行，不得踰功而先勞；雖有忠信，不得釋法而不禁：此之謂明法。
The ruler's fault lies in having already entrusted a minister and then being sure to guard against him with the very men he has not entrusted. In this way the one he guards with is bound to become the enemy of the one he entrusted, and the ruler is instead controlled by the one he did not entrust. The men he now guards others with are the very men he guarded against before. If a ruler cannot make the law bright and by it curb the awe of his great ministers, he has no way to win the trust of lesser men. If a ruler lets go of the law and guards minister with minister, then those who love one another band together and praise one another, and those who hate one another form cliques and call one another wrong. When blame and praise contend, the ruler is beguiled and thrown into confusion. A minister has no way to advance and get his end but by reputation, praise, and petitioning; no way to make himself awesome but by turning his back on the law and ruling alone; no way to escape prohibition but by borrowing the name of loyalty and good faith. These three are what darken the ruler and break down the law. The ruler makes his ministers such that though they have wisdom and ability, they cannot turn their backs on the law and rule alone; though they have worthy conduct, they cannot overstep their merit and claim to have toiled first; though they have loyalty and good faith, they cannot let go of the law and escape prohibition. This is called making the law bright.
人主有誘於事者，有壅於言者，二者不可不察也。人臣易言事者，少索資，以事誣主。主誘而不察，因而多之，則是臣反以事制主也。如是者謂之誘，誘於事者困於患。其進言少，其退費多，雖有功，其進言不信。不信者有罪，事有功者不賞，則羣臣莫敢飾言以惽主。主道者，使人臣前言不復於後，後言不復於前，事雖有功，必伏其罪，謂之任下。
There are rulers who are lured by affairs and rulers who are blocked by words, and these two must be examined. A minister who speaks lightly of an affair asks few resources and deceives his ruler with the affair. If the ruler is lured and does not examine it, and goes on to make much of him, then the minister is instead controlling the ruler by means of the affair. Such a thing is called luring, and one who is lured by affairs is worn down by troubles. When what he reported was little and what he spent afterward was much, then though there be merit, his reported word is not to be trusted. When the untrustworthy are held guilty, and no reward is given even for an affair that has merit, then the host of ministers does not dare dress up words to darken the ruler. The way of the ruler is to make his ministers such that an earlier word is not overturned by a later one and a later word is not overturned by an earlier one, and that though an affair has merit, they must still bear their guilt. This is called holding those below to their charge.
人臣爲主設事而恐其非也，則先出說設言曰：「議是事者，妬事者也。」人主藏是言，不更聽羣臣；羣臣畏是言，不敢議事。二勢者用，則忠臣不聽而譽臣獨任。如是者謂之壅於言，壅於言者制於臣矣。主道者，使人臣必有言之責，又有不言之責。言無端末辯無所驗者，此言之責也；以不言避責持重位者，此不言之責也。人主使人臣言者必知其端以責其實，不言者必問其取舍以爲之責，則人臣莫敢妄言矣，又不敢默然矣，言、默則皆有責也。
When a minister sets an affair going for his ruler and fears that it will be called wrong, he first puts out a word and lays it down in advance, saying, "Whoever debates this affair is a man who envies this affair." The ruler stores this word in his heart and no longer listens to the host of ministers, and the host of ministers, fearing this word, do not dare to debate the affair. When these two forces are at work, the loyal minister is not heard and the flattering minister alone is entrusted. Such a thing is called being blocked by words, and one who is blocked by words is controlled by his ministers. The way of the ruler is to make his ministers answerable for speaking and answerable also for not speaking. Words with no beginning or end, and eloquence with nothing that can be tested, are the charge for speaking; keeping silent to avoid being charged while holding on to a heavy post is the charge for not speaking. If the ruler makes it so that of those who speak he must know the thread and hold them to the substance, and of those who do not speak he must ask what they take and what they leave and lay the charge on them, then his ministers do not dare to speak recklessly, nor do they dare to stay silent. In speaking and in silence alike there is a charge to answer.
人主欲爲事，不通其端末，而以明其欲，有爲之者，其爲不得利，必以害反。知此者，任理去欲。舉事有道，計其入多，其出少者，可爲也。惑主不然，計其入，不計其出，出雖倍其入，不知其害，則是名得而實亡。如是者功小而害大矣。凡功者，其入多，其出少，乃可謂功。今大費無罪而少得爲功，則人臣出大費而成小功，小功成而主亦有害。
If a ruler wishes to undertake an affair without penetrating its beginning and end, and only makes plain what he desires, then the one who carries it out will not profit by his doing, and it must come back as harm. One who knows this trusts to the principle and puts his desires away. There is a way in taking up affairs: what brings in much and puts out little may be done. A beguiled ruler is not like this. He reckons what comes in and does not reckon what goes out, so that though the outgo be double the income he does not know the harm of it, and thus he gains the name and loses the substance. In this way the merit is small and the harm is great. In all merit, only what brings in much and puts out little may be called merit. Now if great expense is held blameless and a small gain is counted merit, then the minister lays out great expense and completes a small merit, and though the small merit is completed there is harm to the ruler.
不知治者，必曰：「無變古，毋易常。」變與不變，聖人不聽，正治而已。然則古之無變，常之毋易，在常古之可與不可。伊尹毋變殷，太公毋變周，則湯、武不王矣。管仲毋易齊，郭偃毋更晉，則桓、文不霸矣。凡人難變古者，憚易民之安也。夫不變古者，襲亂之迹；適民心者，恣姦之行也。民愚而不知亂，上懦而不能更，是治之失也。人主者，明能知治，嚴必行之，故雖拂於民，必立其治。說在商君之内外而鐵殳，重盾而豫戒也。故郭偃之始治也，文公有官卒；管仲始治也，桓公有武車：戒民之備也。是以遇贛窳墯之民，苦小費而忘大利也，故夤虎受阿謗。而𨌑小變而失長便，故鄒賈非載旅。狎習於亂而容於治，故鄭人不能歸。
One who does not know government is sure to say, "Do not change the old, do not alter the constant." Changing and not changing the sage does not listen to; he simply sets government straight. Then the not changing of the old and the not altering of the constant rest on whether that constant and that old thing will serve or will not. Had Yi Yin not changed Yin and Taigong not changed Zhou, then Tang and Wu would not have reigned as kings. Had Guan Zhong not altered Qi and Guo Yan not altered Jin, then Duke Huan and Duke Wen would not have been overlords. In general, men find it hard to change the old because they shrink from shaking the people's ease. Now not changing the old is to take over the tracks of disorder, and fitting oneself to the people's heart is to leave treacherous conduct alone. The people are foolish and do not know disorder, and those above are soft and cannot alter it. This is the failure of government. A ruler knows government brightly and carries it out strictly and surely, and so even when it goes against the people he sets his government up all the same. The explanation lies in Lord Shang, who went in and out with an iron staff and a heavy shield, warned in advance. So when Guo Yan first governed, Duke Wen had troops of the office, and when Guan Zhong first governed, Duke Huan had armored carts. These were the readiness that warned the people. For this reason, meeting a people dull and slack, who grieve over a small expense and forget a great profit, Yin Hu took the slander of his village. And they start at a small change and lose a long convenience, and so Zou Jia called the carrying of travelers wrong. They are used to disorder and cannot take in government, and so the men of Zheng could not return.