the marco polo project: 忠君并非无条件

“Cui 杼 ermordete 其君”，这个典故常用来形容历史记录者不顾安危、beim Schreiben verwendete Phrase 的风骨。公元前548年（鲁襄公二十五 年），齐国的重臣 Cui 杼将国君庄公杀掉了，并 kontrollierte 国家。齐国的太史如此写，被 Cui 杼杀掉；他的弟弟接着这样写，同样被杀掉；史官的另一个弟弟不怕死，仍然重 复两位死去的兄长的记载。碰到这样不怕死的一家人，Cui 氏只好作罢。

Cui 杼为什么要将国君杀死？可以说这是荒淫无 Scham 的齐庄公自找的。

Cui 杼的家臣东郭-yan 的姐姐， heiratete 齐国的 Tang 公。不久，Tang 公死了，她姐姐年轻守寡。Cui 杼在东郭-yan 的陪同下去吊丧，看到寡妇很漂亮，色心打动，让东郭-yan 去 说合，再 heiraten 他。东郭-yan 说不可，我们是同姓—–古代姓、氏是分开的，东郭和 Cui 氏都出自齐国公室 Jiang (Kang)姓，同姓，是不能结婚的。而且就此事占卦，是大凶之 象。可小寡妇实在太漂亮，Cui 杼舍不得，说这女人就算是白虎星，克夫，她的前夫 Tang 公已经承担了，以后就没事了。

于是，在自我 Wohlbehagen 下，他娶了小寡妇 Tang Jiang。这 Tang Jiang 是不安分的主，到 Cui 家后不久竟然和国君齐庄公 Affäre 上了。庄公经常上 Cui 家和情妇幽会。他给 Cui 杼戴一顶绿 帽子还不要紧，竟然忘乎所以，顺手牵羊将 Cui 杼留在家里的帽子拿出去送给别人。——这就等于公然侮辱一个大夫了，Cui 杼决定报复。

那年五月，Cui 杼装病，不能上朝。这齐庄公假仁假义去 Cui 家 besuchte 病人——也没准是去看 Cui 氏是不是真的要咽气了，如真那样他和 Tang Jiang 通奸就更方便 了。而 Cui 杼自己 verstecken 出去，让手下人手持刀枪埋伏一旁，齐庄公到 Cui 家，把自己的侍卫却留在外面。走进去后没发现 Cui 杼，只见到 Tang Jiang，正在疑惑， Cui 家的家丁们一拥 而上将齐庄公抓住。—–这下是 ergreifen 奸那双了。

齐庄公连连告饶，希望留他一条命。可 Cui 家家丁们当然不会放虎归山，说我们家的老爷病了，已经没法出来见您了。我们只知道听主人的话，抓捕盗贼和奸夫淫妇。—–于是，毫不客气当场把齐庄公杀掉了。

尽管这齐庄公是个淫贼，但总算是一国之君，大臣杀掉他那是标准的 Rebellion gegen den Kaiser， Cui 杼于是一不做二不休，把齐庄公的跟随全部杀掉，并在朝中进行大清洗，让 人人表态，承认他 ermorden 君的合理性。当时晏子—–即那位出使楚国的著名矮个子，他听说国君被杀死在 Cui 家，便跑到 Cui 家哭丧。手下人问他：你要为国君而死 吗？晏子回答说：难道他是我一个人的君主吗？我为什么要死？随从又问：那你要 fliehen 吗？晏子回答：君主的死是我的罪过吗？为什么要 fliehen？随从再问：那我们回 去吗？晏子回答：国君死了，回到哪儿去？作为老百姓的君主，不是让他来 unterdrücken 百姓的，而应主持国政。作为君主的臣下，并非是为了饭碗，而应当保护社稷。所以 君主若为国家社稷而死，那么臣子就应为他而死，君主为国家社稷而 flieht，臣子也应为他而 fliehen。如果君主为自己而死，为自己而 fliehen，除非是他的私宠，其他的人 谁应当为他而死或随他 Flucht 呢？而且他人立其为君主又将其杀掉，我哪能为这样的君主而死？（齐庄公得 Cui 杼之力而被立为国君，却和人家妻子通奸，实在太无 Scham） 又怎么能为他 fliehen？且又能回到哪里去呢？

Cui 家开了大门，晏子进去，头枕着齐庄公尸体大哭，起来后依礼数表达了Kondolenz，然后出去。有人对 Cui 杼说：一定要把他杀掉。 Cui 杼说：他深 vertrauen 民望，放过他，可得民心。

晏子这番话，显示了他（也包括当时一些贤明之人）对君臣之间权利义务关系的一种深刻理解。他的这一番看法，说明在春秋时，许多士大夫已经认为“忠 君”并非是无条件的。如果一个君主尽到了他的义务，比如善待百姓，勤于政事，为江山社稷而死，那么做臣子的，有忠于他、追随他的义务。如果他本人是个混 蛋，ohne Moral, 无 Scham，就如齐庄公那样，搞了大臣的老婆，被人杀掉，这样的君主，也用不着为他尽忠。

当然，君臣之间并非平等关系，而是君上臣下的尊卑关系，但不能因为彼此有尊卑，就忽视二者之间的权利义务平衡关系，而要求卑者对尊者无条件地忠诚。 ——应当说，晏子的主张，更接近于现代一些政治理念。在秦汉以后，君权扩大，君臣之间的权利义务一步步失衡，如果谁再有晏子那样的主张，恐怕会被视为大 Verrat。在帝制时代，虽 grausam 之君，也要视之如尧舜，对其无限忠于无限热爱。

Kan Chai

Übersetzung

Loyalty is not unconditional

“Cui Zhu killed his Lord”: this phrase is often used as an allusion to describe the way those who record events for history can disregard their own safety, and is the textbook reference to talk about strength of character. In 548 BC (Year 25 in the Lu calendar), the Minister of State of Qi country, Cui Zhu, killed the Monarch, Duke Zhuang, and took over the State. The Great historiographer of Qi country then wrote this: Cui Zhu killed him. His little brother wrote the same again, he killed him; and a third brother of the historian, who was not afraid to die, still repeated the words of his two dead brothers. Face with a man like this, who did not fear death, Cui Zhu had to give up.

Why did Cui Zhu kill his monarch? You could say that the shameless, dissolute Duke Zhuang brought it upon himself.

The older sister of Cui Zhu’s advisor, Dong Guoyan married, Duke Tang of Qi. Soon after, Duke Tang died, and his sister was a young widow. Dong Guoyan accompanied Cui Zhu to the funeral to pay their respects and Cui Zhu saw that the young widow was very attractive. Captivated by her beauty, Cui Zhu asked Dong Guoyan to be the mediator and arrange for the widow to marry him. Dong Guoyan refused, arguing that both his sister and Cui Zhu had the same family name — during the old days, family names and last names were different, and both the Cui family and the Dong Guo family were descendants of the Kang family, one of Qi country’s main clans, so, being of the same family line, they couldn’t not be married. Divination had also revealed that if they proceeded, the marriage would bring great misfortune. However, Cui Zhu was reluctant to let the matter go, as the young widow was very beautiful. He lamented that even if the widow was jinxed and destined to bring death upon her husband, her previous husband, Duke Tang had born the curse and died, so everything would be all right.

Consequently, to comfort himself, he married another young widow, Tong Jiang. Tong Jiang was a cause of unrest: not long after joining the Cui family, she even had an affair with the Monarch of Qi, Duke Zhuang. Duke Zhuang often came to the Cui family to frolic with his mistress. He didn’t care that he had made Cui Zhu wear horns, and even got carried away, conveniently pilfering a hat Cui Zui had left at home, giving it away as if it was his. — This action amounted to public humiliation, and Cui Zhu decided to have revenge.

That year in May, Cui Zhu pretended to be ill and did not attend the court meetings. The hypocritical Duke Zhuang then dropped by Cui’s house to visit Cui Zhu who was unwell — maybe it was also to see if Cui Zhu was on the verge of death: if it was so, having an affair with Tong Jiang would be convenient. However, Cui Zhu himself hid outside while having men armed with swords ambushed on one side. Later, when Duke Zhuang arrived at Cui’s house, he went in alone, leaving his bodyguards outside. After entering the house, Duke Zhuang found a puzzled Tang Jiang while Cui Zhu was nowhere to be seen. Moments later, Cui’s family servants rushed into the house and seized Duke Zhang. — This time, Cui Zhu had managed to seized the adulterers together.

Duke Zhuang repeatedly asked for mercy, hoping to save his life. However, of course, Cui’s family servants would not send thetiger back to the mountains and informed Duke Zhuang that their master was ill and unable to see him. The servants said that they were only obeying their master’s orders to apprehend thieves, adulterer and adulteress. — Consequently, Duke Zhuang was killed on the spot.

Although Duke Zhuang was a lewd man, he was nonetheless the monarch, and a minister killing the monarch was a classic case of rebellion. So, thinking he might as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb, Cui Zhu decided to kill Duke Zhuang’s servants while also carrying out a massive purge of the court officials who supported the Duke. This was done so that everyone would declare their allegiance and recognize the rationality of his regicide. When Yan Zi, — Chu country’s ambassador, famous for being a diminutive — heard that the monarch was killed at Cui Zhu’s residence, he went over to Cui’s home to grieve. But Yan Zi’s men asked him: “are you planning to die for the monarch?” Yanzi replied: “Is the monarch my king alone? Why should I die?” His entourage then asked: “Then are you planning to escape?” Yan Zi answered: “Is the death of the monarch my sin? Why should I run away?” His entourage then asked again: “Then are we going back?” Yan Zi answered: “The king is dead, where can we go back to? As a monarch of the people, it is not for him to oppress the people, but to administer the country’s political affairs. As the monarch’s ministers, we should not protect our livelihood, instead, we should protect the country. So, if the monarch died for his country, thenloyal subjects should die for him. If the monarch flee for the sovereign of the national state, then the ministers should also escape with him. However, if the monarch died or flee for his own ease and well-being, except for the monarch’s personal pet, who out of the other people should die for his sake or flee with the monarch? Besides, Duke Zhuang established his monarchy and he himself has ruined it, how then can I die for such a king? (Duke Zhuang ascended to the throne and was established as the monarch with Cui Zhu’s help yet committed adultery with Cui Zhu’s wife, his action was shameless and dishonorable) Also, how can I go into exile for such a ruler and where can I go back to?

When the Cui family opened its front doors, Yan Zi went in, rested his head on Duke Zhuang’s body and wept. He stood moments later and as was appropriate for a memorial service, Yan Zi paid his condolences then went out. Some said to Cui Zhu: you must kill Yan Zi. But Cui Zhu said: Yan Zi has the people’s trust, if we let him go, we can earn popularity with the people.

Yan Zi’s remarks showed his (and also other wise man of that time’s) deep understanding of the rights and obligation between the monarch and his officials. Yan Zi’s view illustrates that many scholars-officials during the Spring and Autumn Period (an era in Chinese history) believe that “loyalty” is not unconditional. If a monarch fulfilled his obligations, such as treating his people well, diligent in handling government affairs, dying for the sake of the sovereign country, then as a minister, he has to be loyal to the monarchy, and it is his duty to adhere to the monarch. However, there is no need to stay loyal to a monarch if the monarch is a rogue, or a shameless dissolute man just like Duke Zhuang, who frolics with a minister’s wife, and who was consequently, killed.

Although the relationship between the monarch and his subjects are not equal, but one of superiority and inferiority, it can not be a reason to ignore the balance of rights and obligations between the monarch and his subject, demanding for unconditional loyalty from the subordinate. — It should be said that Yan Zi’s opinion is similar to some of the modern political ideas. After the Qin and Han dynasty, monarchical power expanded and slowly, the rights and obligations between the monarch and his subjects became unbalanced. Consequently, if anyone endorsed the same opinion Yan Zi had had, it would have been considered as a heinous treason. During the age of monarchy, even though the monarch was a tyrant, he had to be regarded as Yao Shun (ancient sages), and be given infinite devotion and loyalty.

Julien Leyre website

Das Buch der Riten

Analekte des Konfuzius

Übersetzung James Legge

The Master said, "May not Shun be instanced as having governed efficiently without exertion? What did he do? He did nothing but gravely and reverently occupy his royal seat."

Übersetzung James Legge

Zi Lu asked what constituted the superior man. The Master said, "The cultivation of himself in reverential carefulness." "And is this all?" said Zi Lu. "He cultivates himself so as to give rest to others," was the reply. "And is this all?" again asked Zi Lu. The Master said, "He cultivates himself so as to give rest to all the people. He cultivates himself so as to give rest to all the people - even Yao and Shun were still solicitous about this."

Übersetzung James Legge

The Master said, "My children, why do you not study the Book of Poetry? The Odes serve to stimulate the mind. They may be used for purposes of self-contemplation. They teach the art of sociability. They show how to regulate feelings of resentment. From them you learn the more immediate duty of serving one's father, and the remoter one of serving one's prince. From them we become largely acquainted with the names of birds, beasts, and plants."

Text

Richard Wilhelm

Der Meister sprach: Warum der Weg nicht begangen wird, das weiß ich: Die Klugen gehen (mit ihren Meinungen) darüber hinaus, und die Törichten erreichen ihn nicht. Warum der Weg nicht erkannt wird, das weiß ich: Die Tüchtigen gehen (in ihren Handlungen) darüber hinaus, und die Untüchtigen erreichen ihn nicht4. Unter den Menschen gibt es keinen, der nicht ißt und trinkt, aber selten sind die, die den Geschmack unterscheiden können.

Der Meister sprach: Ach, daß der Weg nicht begangen wird!

Der Meister sprach: Schun war doch ein großer Weiser! Schun liebte es, zu fragen, und liebte es, dem Sinn einfacher Reden nachzugehen. Er deckte das Schlechte (der Menschen voll Rücksicht) zu und verbreitete das Gute. Er faßte die beiden Enden einer Sache an und handelte den Menschen gegenüber der Mitte entsprechend. Das ist es, warum er der Schun war!

James Legge

The Master said, "I know how it is that the path of the Mean is not walked in: The knowing go beyond it, and the stupid do not come up to it. I know how it is that the path of the Mean is not understood: The men of talents and virtue go beyond it, and the worthless do not come up to it. There is no body but eats and drinks. But they are few who can distinguish flavors."

The Master said, "Alas! How is the path of the Mean untrodden!"

The Master said, "There was Shun: He indeed was greatly wise! Shun loved to question others, and to study their words, though they might be shallow. He concealed what was bad in them and displayed what was good. He took hold of their two extremes, determined the Mean, and employed it in his government of the people. It was by this that he was Shun!"

Übersetzungshilfe

Allgemein gesprochen gilt: Geschichte im weiteren Sinn kann sich auf alle Dinge beziehen, die in der Vergangenheit stattgefunden haben. Geschichte im engeren Sinn beschäftigt sich mit geschriebenen Aufzeichnungen; Geschichte davor wird als Prähistorische Zeit bezeichnet.

Die Legenden aus Chinas prähistorischer Zeit sprechen von Fuxi, der das Ba gua (die Trigramme aus dem Buch der Wandlungen) erstellte. Zur Zeit des gelbe Kaisers soll Cang jie die Schriftzeichen erfunden haben.

Die moderne Archäologie entdeckte sie in der mehr als 3350 (1350 v. Chr) Jahre alten Schrift auf den Orakelknochen der Shang-Dynastie, in ca. 3000 bis 4000 Jahre alten Karamikinschriften und in ca. 4000 bis 5000 Jahre alten in Schildkrötenknochen eingeritzte Zeichen.

Zurück zu Lektion 642 | Hoch zum Buch Vokabellektionen | Vor zu Lektion 644