The words of asking the grandson are the focus of the Mohist concept of benevolence and righteousness.

benevolence: benevolence also; Righteousness, profit and love, this also; What you love, what you benefit, you also do. Love is not inside and outside, love and benefit are not inside and outside, it is benevolent and inside, righteousness is outside, love and benefit are also madness, if the left eye out of the right eye in.

Mozi believes that love and righteousness themselves are both internal, not external.

The benevolence of the Mohists is love, that is, the pure love that loves oneself, which is heartfelt.

The righteousness of the Mo family is an idea that wants to benefit the world, and it is also heartfelt.

It is unmeasurable until it is expressed.

Because this person is righteous or unjust, if you only consider the heart, no one can evaluate it. He said that benevolence is benevolence, and he said that righteousness is righteousness.

However, to get love, to get benefit, this is external, this is measurable, this is intuitively observable, this is something can be judged.

Relying on the definition of "benevolence and self-love", Mozi first abolished part of the Confucian concept of "benevolence".

King Shang also has benevolence, because he loves himself, and he will also love several people, but his benevolence is not as much as that of King Wu.

Mozi directly replaced benevolence with love, no one does not love themselves, so benevolence itself is meaningless, and it is meaningful unless it achieves "love".

A single foot, no height or shortness.

Alone, non-loving benevolence is meaningless.

Therefore, benevolence is love, which is universal, and is only the basis for the possible realization of "simultaneous love".

Subsequently, in response to Confucianism, he believed that "benevolence, inner also." Righteousness, outside also. Rites and music, a total of "this kind of inferior benevolence and love gives a refutation.

Mozi believed that Confucian logic was inconsistent.

Righteousness is "you want to benefit the world", this is righteousness, this is the problem of the heart, what does it have to do with the outside? You do righteousness out of your heart, and others accept your righteousness, which is an outward expression, but you cannot say that righteousness is the same as righteousness for others.

At the same time, Mozi vigorously refuted the ceremony.

It is believed that etiquette is not universal to the world, but is divided into classes, and the aristocracy has the morality of the nobles, and the commoners have the morality of the commoners, which cannot use the morality of different classes to evaluate whether the other class is in line with morality, so the etiquette is not universal.

In the end, Mozi gave such a remark, which means that for individuals, benevolence and righteousness are a kind of self-cultivation and inner level.

For the world, what is important is not the benevolence of the individual, but the actual "love" and "benefit" that the people of the world feel.

As a monarch, if you can't make the people of the world feel love and get real benefits, then the benevolence and righteousness in your heart are meaningless.

Righteousness, which is immanent and cannot be expressed directly in the material world, is empty.

You are very righteous in your heart, and that is your own heart.

You have made the people of the world get love and benefit, that is, the actual "benevolence" behavior and behavior, which is material, not internal.

So, in the end, what is material, what is real, and what can be measured by feeling and observing, is meaningful.

That is to say, benevolence and righteousness have no meaning in the world. "Loved" and "benefited" are meaningful. The heart of benefiting the world must let everyone get love and benefit, which can be regarded as a truly meaningful "righteousness", otherwise it is also a heart.

What is the standard of meaningful righteousness?

Mozi said: "In ancient times, one person had one righteousness, two people had two righteousness, and ten people had ten righteousness. There are many people, and so are the so-called righteous people. It is the righteousness of people, and the righteousness of non-people, so they are not mutually beneficial. ”

In other words, although the meaning of the Mohists is the same word, the meaning is sometimes completely different.

Sometimes, this righteousness is just a thought that comes from the heart, a way of explaining the world.

Sometimes, this righteousness refers specifically to the meaning of the "Mohists".

Righteousness itself is an idea that comes from the heart, a way to explain the world.

I think the world should be like this, then this is a kind of broad righteousness.

You think that the world should be like that, and that is also a kind of righteousness in a broad sense.

He believes that the world should be a different kind of righteousness, or a kind of generalized righteousness.

However, the standard of righteousness is external and measurable.

Because in ancient times, one person had one righteousness, ten people had ten righteousness, and there was no unified standard, so finally the righteousness of the people was assembled and the standard "righteousness" was selected to benefit the world.

The ancient era of Mozi's own "rational inference" was an era of chaos, no public will, and absolute freedom.

This produced the effect of ten people and ten righteousness, and finally everyone summed up and came up with a contract that everyone could accept, which was condensed into the morality of the world, which is the reason for the "election of the Son of Heaven".

This is the reason why the "public will" of the Mokakai and the "synonymology" of the Mohists are so compatible, because they are essentially the same thing.

Mozi also said, "The ambition is to take the world as a fen, and it can benefit it, so you don't need to use it." ”

In other words, the Confucian Zhongni is a righteous person, he is righteous, he is a person who aspires to the world and wants to benefit the world, and he is very capable......

However, there is no use for eggs, the world "does not need to use", no one uses his righteousness, and his righteousness cannot benefit the people of the world, so it is not right.

Mozi would not attack Confucius for being "unkind and unjust", but he used a huge span of logical arguments to prove one thing - Zhongni is benevolent and righteous, but it is meaningless.

In the end, Mozi used a huge chapter to demonstrate one thing:

One person has one righteousness, ten people have ten righteousness, and only the righteousness of the Mo family can make the people of the world benefit from each other.

Therefore, only the righteousness of my Mohist family is meaningful and should become the righteousness of the unity of all people, and the benevolence and righteousness of other doctrines should be played with in your own hearts.

The important thing is not to explain the world, but to change the world effectively.

Therefore, after Mozi's long argument, Niu coaxed the world to proclaim: "The righteousness of the Mo family is enough!" To abandon my doctrines and ideas and to think about them is like giving up the harvest and gleaning the ears of grain left by others. To deny my words with someone else's words is like touching an egg to a stone. The eggs of the world have been exhausted, and the stone is still like this, and it cannot be destroyed. ”

To put it more broadly, the criterion for testing whether it is the righteousness that is beneficial to the world is whether it can achieve the ultimate "love and mutual benefit".

To put it mildly, this criterion for verifying whether "righteousness" is meaningful and whether it is necessary to practice is the three tables of the Mohists.

"If the world is poor, what is the rich?"

"If the people are outnumbered, they will be in the crowd?"

"If the crowd is chaotic, then engage in governance?"

Is it meaningful righteousness, depending on the ability to achieve poverty in the world and make the world rich? When the people are scarce, the people increase? If there are too many people, will chaos make the world rule?

This is the "righteousness" that is meaningful and can effectively change the world.

If you can't even live up to this standard, your righteousness is meaningless. Meaningless benevolence and righteousness are useful for one's own cultivation, but useless for the world.

Therefore, Mozi never said that Confucianism was not benevolent and righteous, but directly said that Confucianism could not benefit the world.

This is the dialectic of drawing salary from the bottom of the kettle, so that at this time, the Confucian students in the world fell into the trap of Mo Zhai.

talked about benevolence and righteousness all day long, but forgot the purpose of Zhongni's creation of Confucianism, and the nine-foot-tall strong man finally wanted to "take the world as a fen".

This is also the reason why after the death of Zhong Ni, Mozi single-handedly overwhelmed the six factions of Confucianism, and it was not until after his death, after the death of the Mo family due to Meng Sheng's small righteousness in Yangcheng, and the establishment of the Mo family's three-point Jixia School Palace, that Confucianism could rise to become the world's leading learning.

Even in the process, one of the six factions, pays attention to "no expression of submission and obedience on his face, and no look of cowardice and evasion in his eyes; If you are wrong, you must avoid even your slaves; I did the right thing, even for the princes, I dared to fight", many disciples ran to the Mo family and were divided and absorbed by the Mo family.

The root of the controversy between Shi and Gao Sun Tzu actually comes from the times.

Because of the multiple meanings of one word, the vocabulary at this time was too small, so that the essence of Mozi was too condescending, and many words were not common concepts in the world at this time, but the definitions given by Mozi himself.

Mozi borrowed benevolence, but changed the meaning of benevolence, but many Mozi people had difficulty understanding Mozi's original meaning, and they were accustomed to the mainstream ideas of the world, resulting in all kinds of confusion.

It's like Mozi saying "Your mother is a young lady", but the disciples around him still have a very good definition of young lady, which produces a series of disagreements.

You can't blame the disciple for this.

It's really Mozi's idea that is too advanced.

Things such as the propagation of light along a straight line, the indisposition of shadows, the eight principles of specular reflection, the imaging of small holes, the indivisibility of space-time in the universe, the geometric definition of circles, line segments and points, the principle of levers and the decomposition of inclined forces, the selection of the Son of Heaven, the chaos and freedom of the ancients, and the expansion of the defenders in the Xingqiang Star Fortress...... This is not supposed to be the time to be.

Mozi is too venomous, and when explaining "benevolence", even if the meaning of benevolence is changed to simply "love", he still does not forget to ridicule the princes and nobles in the world, saying that they "love the people", just like people "love horses".

This kind of love is the kind of love that horses can pull carts, plough fields, eat meat, and fight, but it is not the kind of love that loves oneself.

This is also an important reason why Gao Sun Tzu thinks that it is "unkind".

Obviously, the grandson could also see that Shi "loved" the cultivators who were driven away.

But this kind of love, in the eyes of the great grandson, is clearly the kind of love that people love horses.

Fit must go around this circle, and it can't be worse.

It must not be said: I am not benevolent enough, and the rest of us are not benevolent, but I am righteous. And I can achieve the "meaning of the three expressions", so in the end, my method is still better than others.

If you want to say this, victory is victory, but Shi Shi feels that if he says so, he may not want to get involved in the position of a giant in his life.