Translated by J. J.-L. DUYVENDAK (1889-1954)

                  T A B L E    O F    C O N T E N T S

Notes
Preface

INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I: SHANG YANG IN HISTORY
1. Shang Yang and the rise of Ch’in.
2. The Life of Shang Yang [in the Shih-chi — in the Ch’in-ts’ê].
3. Historical criticism of the Life.

CHAPTER II: SHANG YANG AS SOCIAL REFORMER
1. Shang Yang’s economics.
2. Shang Yang’s system of rewards and punishments.

CHAPTER II: THE BOOK OF LORD SHANG and THE SCHOOL OF LAW
1. The Makers of the School of Law.
2. The original ideas of Shang-tzu.
3. Further ideas of the Book of Lord Shang.
4. Influence of the School of Law.

CHAPTER IV: THE TEXT OF THE BOOK OF LORD SHANG
1. History of the text.
2. Authenticity of the text.

Appendix I. A lost paragraph.
Appendix II. List of references.

TRANSLATION OF THE BOOK OF LORD SHANG
CHAPTER I
1. The Reform of the Law
2. An Order to Cultivate Waste Lands
3. Agriculture and War
4. The Elimination of Strength

CHAPTER II
5. Discussion about the People
6. The Calculation of Land
7. Opening and Debarring

CHAPTER III
8. The Unification of Words
9. Establishing Laws
10. The Method of Warfare
11. The Establishment of Fundamentals
12. Military Defence
13. Making Orders Strict
14. The Cultivation of the Right Standard

CHAPTER IV
15. The Encouragement of Immigration
16. Compendium of Penalties [lost]
17. Rewards and Punishments
18. Policies

CHAPTER V
19. Within the Borders
20. Weakening the People
21. [Lost]
22. External and Internal Affairs
23. Prince and Minister
24. Interdicts and Encouragements
25. Attention to Law
26. The Fixing of Rights and Duties
27. [Lost]
28. [Lost]
29. [Lost]

                             P R E F A C E

p.VIII This book gives a complete translation of the work known in Chinese as Shang-chün-shu, and the title, which I have chosen, is a literal rendering of the Chinese designation of the book (101).

The Lord of Shang held high office in the state of Ch’in between 359 and 338 B.C., and the book which bears his name is regarded as belonging to the School of Law. In order to ascertain how far the connection of his name with the book is justified, it has been necessary to study his life, and for a right understanding of the ideas of the book, its relation to the principles of the School of Law have had to be examined. This has been done in the Introduction. I should, however, point out that this aims neither at giving a complete historical study of the Life of Shang Yang, nor at making a complete systematic study of the principles of the School of Law; both would have far exceeded the scope of an introduction, where naturally the attention should be centred around the man and the book named after him.

Shang Yang and the Book have long been execrated in China. The opinion of a scholar like Su Tung-p’o (1036 -1101) p.IX may be regarded as representing the general point of view. This distinguished author and poet says (102) that the name of Shang Yang is in the world like fly-specks; speaking about him befouls the mouth and tongue, writing about him sullies the paper; when his methods are applied in the world, ruin of the state, misery of the people, destruction of the family and loss of one’s own life follow one after the other. This would seem enough to keep anyone from attempting a translation!

In modern times, however, opinion has altered considerably. Chang Ping-lin devotes an article (103) to him and his judgment is, on the whole, favourable. It is true, he says, that Shang Yang used very severe methods, but these were necessary in his days and he was just to all. He was « like a bamboo-frame which keeps a bow straight, and one could not get him out of his straightness. He continues, that criticism on his measures in the rough times in which Shang Yang lived, is like wanting to wait for a hungry man till you can give him fine food, and forbidding him to eat coarse food which might keep him alive !

In Liang Ch’i -ch’ao’s Collected Works (104) an essay on p.X Shang Yang by Mai Mêng-hua is inserted, which praises him as being a Chinese Lycurgus or Solon. The author tries to exculpate him from the charge that he rejected all morality, and points out that as a statesman and law-giver he did very important work.

Miura, in his Chung-kuo-lun-li-hsüeh-shih, also discusses Shang Yang; though he praises him as a capable politician, he criticizes him for his too great stress on war and agriculture, his rejection of morality and his severe punishments.

Finally, Dr. Kuo-cheng Wu, while assigning to Shang Yang “a most dazzling place in the galaxy of Chinese political philosophers” because of “the originality in his thought and the practicability of his schemes”, yet renders “a decisive verdict against Shang Yang’s system” (105).

All these discussions of Shang Yang and his book have, so far, been very uncritical. I have therefore found it necessary to devote a good deal of attention both to historical and to literary criticism; it is hoped that the result of these studies, while divesting Shang Yang perhaps of some of his romantic glamour, will be a contribution towards understanding the origin and development of the School of Law.

Apart from the interest which they have for Sinologues, the ideas of the Chinese Legalists certainly deserve the attention also of Western Jurists. They are concerned with similar problems as have occupied the minds of Western philosophers of law, though these are approached with a different background and are seen from a different angle. History of law p.XI will no doubt profit from a study of a development of ideas of law, which have not been affected by Greek philosophy, Roman conceptions, or Christian ideals. I have, in this book, generally refrained from making comparisons, as isolated comparisons have little value and are often misleading, and besides, not being a Jurist, it would have led too far afield. I have, however, tried to discuss the material in such a way that a Jurist will easily see the salient points.

This is the first translation in any language of the Book of Lord Shang. Some summary of its contents has been given in earlier works, notably by Ivanov in the introduction to his Russian translation of Han Fei-tzû (106), and by Forke in his monumental history of ancient Chinese philosophy (107), which is an invaluable vademecum for the student of Chinese thought. While the present book was in the press, there appeared in English, Dr. Kuo-cheng Wu’s work (108), which I have just mentioned, and which also contains a summary of the Book of Lord Shang.

While my translation keeps as closely as possible to the original, and tries to preserve the original character of the style, I have endeavoured not to give a dead translation, which would leave to the reader the task of finding a clue to many a sententious and enigmatic phrase. Translation is re-interpretation of thought, and should never be a mechanical rendering of words, least of all in the case of Chinese. A translation into a Western language acquires therefore more clearness, and preciseness of expression than the original p.XII possesses, as Chinese characters have a far wider connotation than the English words by which they are rendered, and verbs and nouns are not differentiated. The word [], lit. “oneness”, for example, in order to be clear, has had variously to be translated by “to unify, to make uniform, to con centrate, unity, uniformity, concentration, singleness of purpose”, etc.

The text of the Book of Lord Shang is very corrupt, and presents in many places almost insurmountable difficulties. The very best of contemporary scholars, like Wang Hsien-ch’ien, Wang K’ai -yün, Chang Ping-lin, Yen Fu, K’ang Yu -wei, Liang Ch’i -ch’ao. all are said to complain of the difficulty of the Book of Lord Shang (109). I have therefore been obliged to devote more attention to matters of textual criticism than is usual in other translations from the Chinese, where the text is better established. I have been fortunate enough, through the great kindness of the well-known historian, Mr. Ku Chieh-kang, to obtain the best Chinese edition of the Book, published in 1915 by Wang Shih-jun (110). When, during a visit to Peking in 1926, I mentioned to Mr. Ku my intention of publishing a translation of this book, that scholar drew my attention to this edition, which I had seen nowhere, and even presented me with his own copy of it. I have much pleasure in expressing my sincere gratitude to him.