Yetgeul › Mozi (The Book of Master Mo) › Against Offensive War, Part One

Against Aggressive War, Part One非攻上

Mozi (The Book of Master Mo) 墨子 · Mo Di and his disciples · About the 4th century BC · 3 passages · 479 Chinese characters · reading time 1.9 min

Mozi (The Book of Master Mo) Against Offensive War, Part One The writings of the school that in the Warring States period stood beside the Confucians as one of the "two great companies." It is not the work of one man but what Mo Di and his disciples added generation after generation, and so many chapters set down the same argument in three versions — upper, middle and lower. These are taken as the traces of the branches of the school, each copying it out in its own way. Ten doctrines are the backbone — exalting the worthy, conforming upward with what is right, loving all alike, condemning aggression, thrift in use, thrift in burial, following the will of Heaven, making ghosts clear, condemning music, and condemning fate. "If a man looked on the house of another as on his own house, who would steal?" is in the chapters on loving all alike. The ladder of "Condemning Aggression" — that a man who steals peaches and plums from another's orchard is punished, while a man who attacks another's state is praised — and the three gauges of "Condemning Fate," that to speak without a measure is "like setting the marks of sunrise and sunset upon a turning potter's wheel," stand there too. The last chapter, "Gongshu," is a story. When Chu made cloud ladders to attack Song, Mozi walked ten days and ten nights, met Gongshu Ban, and beat him nine times over with a belt and pieces of wood; and on the way home he met rain and was not let in to shelter inside the gate of that very Song village.

子墨子言曰：古者王公大人情欲得而惡失，欲安而惡危，故當攻戰而不可不非。今有一人，入人園圃，竊其桃李，衆聞則非之，上爲政者得則罰之。此何也？以虧人自利也。至攘人犬豕雞豚者，其不義又甚入人園圃竊桃李。是何故也？以虧人愈多，其不仁茲甚，罪益厚。至入人欄廏，取人馬牛者，其不仁義又甚攘人犬豕雞豚。此何故也？以其虧人愈多，苟虧人愈多，其不仁茲甚，罪益厚。至殺不辜人也，扡其衣裘，取戈劒者，其不義又甚入人欄廄、取人馬牛。此何故也？以其虧人愈多。苟虧人愈多，其不仁茲甚矣，罪益厚。當此，天下之君子皆知而非之，謂之不義。今至大爲攻國，則弗知非，從而譽之，謂之義。此可謂知義與不義之別乎？

Mozi said, "In old times the kings and dukes and great men truly wished to gain and hated to lose, wished to be at peace and hated danger. So they could not but hold attacking and warring wrong.

Now suppose one man goes into another man's orchard and garden and steals his peaches and plums. The multitude hear of it and hold it wrong, and those above who carry on the government catch him and punish him. Why is this? Because he injures another to profit himself.

When it comes to taking another man's dogs and swine and fowl, the wrong in it is greater than going into another man's orchard and garden and stealing peaches and plums. What is the reason for this? Because the injury done to another is more. When the injury done to another is more, the lack of benevolence is deeper and the guilt is heavier.

When it comes to going into another man's pen and stable and taking his horses and oxen, the lack of benevolence and right in it is greater than taking another man's dogs and swine and fowl. What is the reason for this? Because the injury done to another is more. If truly the injury done to another is more, the lack of benevolence is deeper and the guilt is heavier.

When it comes to killing a man who has done no wrong, stripping off his clothes and his fur robe, and taking his spear and his sword, the wrong in it is greater than going into another man's pen and stable and taking his horses and oxen. What is the reason for this? Because the injury done to another is more. If truly the injury done to another is more, the lack of benevolence is deeper and the guilt is heavier.

In these things the gentlemen of all under heaven all know to hold them wrong and call them not right. But now, when it comes to the great matter of attacking another man's state, they do not know to hold it wrong. They follow it and praise it and call it right. Can this be called knowing the difference between right and not right?"

殺一人謂之不義，必有一死罪矣。若以此說往，殺十人十重不義，必有十死罪矣；殺百人百重不義，必有百死罪矣。當此，天下之君子皆知而非之，謂之不義。今至大爲不義攻國，則弗知而非，從而譽之，謂之義。情不知其不義也，故書其言以遺後世。若知其不義也，夫奚說書其不義以遺後世哉？

To kill one man is called not right, and there is surely one crime deserving death in it. If we carry this saying onward, to kill ten men is ten times not right, and there are surely ten crimes deserving death. To kill a hundred men is a hundred times not right, and there are surely a hundred crimes deserving death.

In these things the gentlemen of all under heaven all know to hold them wrong and call them not right. But now, when it comes to the great wrong of attacking another man's state, they do not know to hold it wrong. They follow it and praise it and call it right. Truly they do not know that it is not right, and so they write down their words and leave them to later ages. If they did know that it is not right, for what reason would they write down what is not right and leave it to later ages?

今有人於此，少見黑曰黑，多見黑曰白，則以此人不知白黑之辯矣；少嘗苦曰苦，多嘗苦曰甘，則必以此人爲不知甘苦之辯矣。今小爲非，則知而非之。大爲非攻國，則不知非，從而譽之，謂之義。此可謂知義與不義之辯乎？是以知天下之君子也，辯義與不義之亂也。

Suppose there were a man here who, seeing a little black, called it black, and seeing much black, called it white. We would say that this man does not know the difference between white and black. And if, tasting a little bitterness, he called it bitter, and tasting much bitterness, he called it sweet, we would surely say that this man does not know the difference between sweet and bitter.

Now when a small wrong is done, they know it and hold it wrong. When a great wrong is done and another man's state is attacked, they do not know to hold it wrong. They follow it and praise it and call it right. Can this be called knowing the difference between right and not right? By this we know that the gentlemen of all under heaven are in confusion in telling right from not right.

‹ Against Aggressive War, Part Two Contents Impartial Love, Part Three ›Listen to this piece