VOLUME III, SEMESTER 3, CHAPTER 32, SECTION 2

VOLUME III, SEMESTER 3, CHAPTER 32, SECTION 2

A child of three, an old man of eighty, and the labors with no price

The last section said the by labor of the human world cannot copy nature, because man has a kind heart. Just because there is this kind heart, the human world has a great stretch of things the rule of the by labor cannot weigh at all. This section walks near this stretch. First walk near two men: a child of three, an old man of eighty. They put out labor of near nothing, yet have food to eat all the same, have someone to hold them dear. By what reasoning is this.

One, a child of three

First look at a child of three. Take the six rules from before to weigh him, and what do you weigh out.

Weigh by time, he does not go to work. Weigh by the piece, he makes not one thing. Weigh by result, he has no result at all. Weigh by scarcity, children who can cry and fuss are all over the ground, not scarce one bit. Weigh by charge, on his shoulder there is not one bit of load. Weigh by contribution, his bringing in to this house is a zero, or a minus, he only spends and does not earn. Six rules, weighed down, and this child’s one share of labor comes to zero, even to a minus.

Yet does this child have food to eat. He does. He eats more carefully tended than any. Does he have someone to hold him dear. He does. The whole house turns about him. He cries one cry at midnight, and the grown ones climb from bed. What he wants, the house hurries to give. See this strange thing clear: a man who weighs down to zero by labor, yet gets the most care of this house, the best of its things. What does this say. It says that in this house the dividing of things goes not at all by the rule of the by labor. It goes by another rule. This other rule weighs not how much labor he put out, it weighs how much he needs.

Two, an old man of eighty

Now look at the other end of this house, an old man of eighty.

In his young years he spent great force, raised a whole household. But now he is old, his hand shakes, his walk will not carry him. Take those six rules to weigh him again, and again nothing weighs out. He can do no work, brings out no result, and of scarcity and contribution there is nothing to speak. By the pure by labor, he too draws near to zero. Yet will this house, because he puts out no labor now, then give him no food, and cast him aside. It will not. A house worth the name will keep him and nourish him, and let him live out these last years in peace and steadiness.

Put the old and the small together and look. One is not yet able to put out labor, one is no longer able to put out labor. These two ends, that rule of the by labor cannot weigh at all. Yet these two ends are exactly the two men in a house who get the most care, who least ought to be shorted. This says a house is never divided by the pure by labor. Were it the pure by labor, this old one and this small one would be the first to be starved dead. But no house in its right mind would do so. Because in the house, beside the rule of the by labor, there is another rule, a rule that weighs need, weighs tenderness, at work all along.

Three, the labors with no price

Beside this old and this small, the house holds still a great stretch of labor the six rules cannot weigh. This stretch of labor least ought to be let slip, yet is most often let slip.

A mother, the whole day long busy in the house. She minds the child, cooks the food, washes the clothes, sees to the old, keeps a house neat and whole. Is the labor she puts out little. It is a great deal, busy from dawn to dark, not stopping one moment. Yet has this share of labor a price. It has none. No man pays her a wage, the market marks out no price for her. The last chapter said the market rule can weigh only the labor that can be carried out and sold. This share of a mother’s labor has nowhere to be sold, and so was let slip whole by that rule.

This is a thing sorely unfair, and sorely worth thinking deep. This share of a mother’s labor is the root by which a house can turn. Without this share of her labor, the child has none to mind it, the old none to see to them, the food none to cook it, and this house scatters. Yet just because it cannot be carried to the market and cried, it has no price, and it is as though it did not exist, did not count. Hold this stretch of labor with no price in mind. It is not that it does not exist, it is that those few rules cannot reach it. Some of the most needful labors in the world are exactly the labors with the least price. This layer, the back half of the term will speak of again, and heavily.

Four, treat my old as old, and reach it to the old of others

So on what ground can this old and this small, these labors with no price, get their care. By what reasoning. Mencius has a line that speaks this reasoning down to the root. Treat my old as old, and reach it to the old of others. Treat my young as young, and reach it to the young of others. So runs the line in the Mencius, King Hui of Liang.

Put it plain. Treat my old as old, the first old is a verb, to hold in honor and nourish. Nourish the old of my own house, and reach it to the old of others, then push this nourishing out, push it onto the old of another house. Treat my young as young, and reach it to the young of others, love the child of my own house, then push this love out, onto the child of another house. In this one line of Mencius sits a rule wholly unlike the by labor.

The rule of the by labor asks: how much labor did you put out. This rule of Mencius asks: does he need to be nourished, to be held dear. The old one needs nourishing, so nourish him, and ask not whether he can still put out labor. The child needs love, so love him, and ask not whether he can earn. This rule weighs need, not labor. And Mencius pushes one step further: not only nourish your own, but push this heart onto others. This is already not distribution by labor. It is another thing, and it is the lead player of the back half of this term. Mencius, more than two thousand years ago, set this rule that weighs need, out beside that rule that weighs labor, in the human world together. A house, a society worth the name, has always used the two rules at once.

Five, what this section set, crossing to the next

Good. This section walked near the men and the labors the by labor cannot weigh.

A child of three, weighed down by the six rules to zero, yet gets the most care of the whole house. An old man of eighty, able to put out labor no more, yet is well nourished. A mother, busy from dawn to dark, yet her share of labor, for having nowhere to be cried for sale, has no price, and was let slip whole by the market. This old and this small, this stretch of labor with no price, all tell us one same thing: a house, a society worth the name, is never divided by the pure by labor. It has another rule too, a rule that weighs need, weighs tenderness, at work all along. Through Mencius, treat my old as old and my young as young, we saw clear this rule weighs need, not labor.

The position this section set is: the world has a great stretch of the most needful labor and the men who most ought to be cared for, that the rule of the by labor cannot weigh at all, and the human world has always used the two rules, the weighing of labor and the weighing of need, at once.

So, since the by labor cannot weigh these, on what does the human world lean to send its things into the hands of these men it cannot weigh. Is it by pity, by alms. Or is there a more shaped way. The next section calls Laozi, to look at that line take from the too much and make up the not enough, and to look at how the three workings of the human world that go past the by labor, in the end run.

Credit to the ancestors; the mistakes are mine: Tiger Lyon.

Section 3, Take from the too much and make up the not enough, three workings past the by labor