Volume 30 Treatises 20: Punishment and Law

刑法志

Monograph: Criminal Law.

傳曰：「齊之以禮，有恥且格。」刑之不可犯，不若禮之不可逾，則昊歲比於犧年，宜有降矣。若夫穹圓肇判，宵貌攸分，流形播其喜怒，稟氣彰其善惡，則有自然之理焉。念室後刑，衢樽先惠，將以屏除災害，引導休和，取譬琴瑟，不忘銜策，擬陽秋之成化，若堯舜之為心也。效原布肅，軒皇有轡野之師；雷電揚威，高辛有觸山之務。陳乎兵甲而肆諸市朝，具嚴天刑，以懲亂首，論其本意，蓋有不得已而用之者焉。是以丹浦興仁，羽山咸服。而世屬僥倖，事關攸蠹，政失禮微，獄成刑起，則孔子曰：「聽訟吾猶人也，必也使無訟乎！」及周氏龔行，卻收鋒刃，祖述生成，憲章堯禹，政有膏露，威兼禮樂，或觀辭以明其趣，或傾耳以照其微，或彰善以激其情，或除惡以崇其本。至夫取威定霸，一匡九合，寓言成康，不由凝網，此所謂酌其遺美，而愛民治國者焉。若乃化蔑彝倫，道睽明慎，則夏癸之虔劉百姓，商辛之毒{痡}四海，衛鞅之無所自容，韓非之不勝其虐，與夫《甘棠》流詠，未或同歸。秦文初造參夷，始皇加之抽協，囹圄如市，悲哀盈路。漢王以三章之法以吊之，文帝以刑厝之道以臨之，于時百姓欣然，將逢交泰。而犴逐情遷，科隨意往，獻瓊杯于闕下，徙青衣于蜀路，覆醢裁刑，傾宗致獄。況乃數囚於京兆之夜，五日于長安之市，北闕相引、中都繼及者，亦往往而有焉。而將亡之國，典刑咸棄，刊章以急其憲，適意以寬其網，桓靈之季，不其然歟！魏明帝時，宮室盛興，而期會迫急，有稽限者，帝親召問，言猶在口，身首已分。王肅抗疏曰：「陛下之所行刑，皆宜死之人也。然眾庶不知，將為倉卒，願陛下下之于吏而暴其罪。均其死也，不汙宮掖，不為搢紳驚惋，不為遠近所疑。人命至重，難生易殺，氣絕而不續者也，是以聖王重之。孟軻云：'殺一不辜而取天下者，仁者不為也。'」

The tradition reads: "Regulate them with ritual, and they feel shame and mend their ways." Fear of penalties still falls short of reverence that stops people short of breaching ritual; set beside an age of innocence, ours ought to show a lighter touch. When heaven first divided above from below and living shapes took on joy, anger, and moral color through the qi they received, they followed patterns inherent in nature itself. Thoughtful detention precedes sentence; wine offered at the crossroads signals mercy first—the aim is to banish harm and lead society toward peace, like tuning zither and zither-bass together while still holding rein and crop, in the spirit of the Spring and Autumn's moral transformation and the benevolence of Yao and Shun. When the wasteland was swept with solemn dread, the Yellow Emperor led tethered hosts across the open fields. Where thunder displayed Heaven's wrath, Emperor Ku turned lightning against rebellious peaks. They displayed weapons, executed ringleaders in the marketplace and at court, and invoked awe-inspiring punishments because, at bottom, some crises left rulers no alternative. Hence kindness rose from the banks of Dan, and submission reached even banishment at Mount Yu. Yet whenever fortune favors the reckless, institutions rot within, governance slackens, ritual fades, and prisons swell, Confucius complained: "I decide cases no better than anyone—what I want is an end to litigation altogether!" Later the Zhou armies marched under Heaven's mandate, sheathed the sword, honored nurture and growth, and modeled themselves on Yao and Yu—government tasted sweet as dew, majesty paired with ritual and music; rulers listened to petitions, caught whispered grievances, praised virtue to encourage it, and purged wickedness to protect the moral core. Those who forged prestige, stabilized hegemony, unified the regional lords, and invoked the peace of Kings Cheng and Kang without leaning on harsh nets drank from that legacy of mercy—true governance that cherishes the people. When rulers mock moral order and abandon cautious justice, you get Jie slaughtering his subjects, Zhou sinking his cruelty across the realm, Shang Yang with nowhere honorable to stand, Han Fei drowned in his own harsh doctrines—nothing like the ode to the sweet pear tree where the people still sang of kindness. Qin's Duke Wen invented kin-extinction statutes; the First Emperor piled on flaying and rib-tearing torments until jails looked like busy markets and wailing clogged every road. The Han founder soothed the realm with three simple articles; Emperor Wen governed by storing the axe away; ordinary families tasted relief and hoped for an era of perfect harmony. Soon passions swayed verdicts, statutes bent to whim, poison wine waited below the palace stair, convicts in blue were marched toward Shu, summary executions overturned justice, and whole lineages were dragged into court. Night sweeps hauled suspects through the capital; Chang'an's market hosted staggered executions for days on end; indictments chained together from the northern gate through the inner metropolis became grimly routine. Dying dynasties tossed precedent aside, rushed new prohibitions onto the books, and loosened the net whenever it suited them—look no further than the chaos under Emperors Huan and Ling. Under Wei Mingdi palace works multiplied, court deadlines turned lethal, and anyone who missed a roster summons faced the emperor's own interrogation—often mid-sentence the axe had already fallen. Wang Su protested in a memorial: "Everyone you execute deserves death. The crowd cannot see that and will think these deaths abrupt; please remand each case to the judiciary and publish the offenses publicly. They still die, yet the harem stays unstained, officials are spared shock, and no one far or near questions the justice of it. A single life weighs more than anything: restoring it is hard, taking it is easy, and once the breath stops there is no second chance—hence sage rulers handle executions with dread. Mencius warned that no humane man seizes the realm over a single wrongful death."

世祖武皇帝接三統之微，酌千年之範，乃命有司，大明刑憲。于時詔書頒新法於天下，海內同軌，人甚安之。條綱雖設，稱為簡惠，仰昭天眷，下濟民心，道有法而無敗，德俟刑而久立。及晉圖南徙，百有二年，仰止前規，挹其流潤，江左無外，蠻陬來格。孝武時，會稽王道子傾弄朝權，其所樹之黨，貨官私獄，烈祖惛迷，不聞司敗，晉之綱紀大亂焉。

Emperor Wu of Jin caught the fading rhythm of the Three Ages, distilled a millennium of precedent, and charged his ministers to cast clear light on the criminal code. Imperial writ spread the new code from border to border; the kingdom rolled forward on a single standard and the people breathed easier. The statutes looked intricate yet earned a reputation for simplicity and mercy, reflecting Heaven's care above and steadying hearts below—good order needs laws that do not rot, and lasting virtue still relies on measured punishments. After the court crossed the Yangzi it spent a hundred and two years gazing back at old precedents and drinking from their lingering kindness—the lower Yangzi stayed inwardly secure and frontier peoples routinely sued for peace. Under Emperor Xiaowu, Prince Sima Daozi of Kuaiji twisted the government in his favor: his creatures traded posts for cash and ran private jails while Emperor Xiaowu drifted in a stupor, deaf to legal breakdown, and Jin's discipline collapsed.

傳曰「三皇設言而民不違，五帝畫象而民知禁」，則《書》所謂「象以典刑，流宥五刑，鞭作官刑，撲作教刑」者也。然則犯黥者皁其巾，犯劓者丹其服，犯臏者墨其體，犯宮者雜其屢，大辟之罪，殊刑之極，布其衣裾而無領緣，投之於市，與眾棄之。舜命皋陶曰；「五刑有服，五服三就，五流有宅，五宅三居。」方乎前載，事既參倍。夏後氏之王天下也，則五刑之屬三千。殷因于夏，有所損益。周人以三典刑邦國，以五聽察民情，左嘉右肺，事均熔造，而五刑之屬猶有二千五百焉。乃置三刺、三宥、三赦之法：一刺曰訊群臣，再刺曰訊群吏，三刺曰訊萬民；一宥曰不識，再宥曰過失，三宥曰遺忘；一赦曰幼弱，再赦曰老旄，三赦曰蠢愚。《司馬法》：或起甲兵以征不義，廢貢職則討，不朝會則誅，亂嫡庶則縶，變禮刑則放。

The Tradition says, "The Three August Ones established words and the people did not transgress; the Five Emperors painted images and the people knew prohibitions." This is what the Documents means by "images used for regular punishments, exile and pardon for the five punishments, the whip made punishment for offices, and the rod made punishment for teaching." Branding meant a dark kerchief, clipped nose a scarlet tunic, severed knee dark markings, castration mismatched shoes, and execution—the crown of penalties—meant plain sackcloth without borders before the crowds cast you out in the square. Shun told Minister Gao Yao: "The five punishments each carried fixed gradations; those gradations determined three kinds of enforcement; banishment likewise came with paired estates and three grades of exile." Stack that against earlier ages and the caseload had already tripled. Under the Xia kings the five punishments spawned three thousand enumerated offenses. Shang revised the Xia code, trimming here and tightening there. Zhou judges relied on three penal canons and five methods of listening, with peasants pounding the left stone for grief and the right for appeals—justice forged like metal—yet the statute book still listed twenty-five hundred capital-linked clauses. They layered three rounds of consultation—first ministers, then bureaucrats, finally commoners—plus three grounds for mercy and three kinds of pardon. Ignorance of law, honest mistake, or simple forgetfulness each earned a step down in severity. Youth, extreme age, or congenital incapacity opened the door to commutation. The Methods of the Minister of War authorized campaigns against oath-breakers: withhold tribute and face expedition, skip league meetings and face execution, scramble succession and face arrest, meddle with ritual penalties and face exile.

傳曰：「殷周之質，不勝其文。」及昭後徂征，穆王斯耄，爰制刑辟，以詰四方，奸宄弘多，亂離斯永，則所謂「夏有亂政而作《禹刑》，商有亂政而作《湯刑》，周有亂政而作《九刑》」者也。古者大刑用甲兵，中刑用刀鋸，薄刑用鞭撲。自茲厥後，狙詐彌繁。武皇帝並以為往憲猶疑，不可經國，乃命車騎將軍、守尚書令、魯公徵求英俊，刊律定篇云爾。

The chronicles add that Shang and Zhou began austere but drowned in ornament." Later campaigns exhausted the kings until aging King Mu codified new statutes to rein in the provinces—each spike in crime produced its own compendium, the very "Yu," "Tang," and "Nine Punishments" named whenever dynastic order frayed. Antiquity reserved armies for the gravest crimes, blades and saws for middling offenses, whips and rods for the lightest. Afterward schemes multiplied faster than the law could track. Emperor Wu decided Han-Wei precedent was too muddled to govern by and ordered the chariot general, acting Secretariat chief, and Duke of Lu to recruit jurists and engrave a definitive code—that story follows.

漢自王莽篡位之後，舊章不存。光武中興，留心庶獄，常臨朝聽訟，躬決疑事。是時承離亂之後，法網弛縱，罪名既輕，無以懲肅。梁統乃上疏曰：

After Wang Mang seized the Han throne, the classical statutes barely survived. Emperor Guangwu revived the dynasty with relentless attention to criminal justice—he held dawn audiences to hear appeals and settled knotty cases himself. Coming straight from civil war, the statutes hung slack; penalties felt mild and no longer terrified wrongdoers. Minister Liang Tong therefore presented this memorial:

臣竊見元帝初元五年，輕殊刑三十四事，哀帝建平元年盡四年，輕殊死者刑八十一事，其四十二事，手殺人皆減死罪一等，著為常法。自是以後，人輕犯法，吏易殺人，吏民俱失，至於不羈。

I note that in Yuandi's Chuyuan 5 thirty-four provisions softened capital sentences, and from Aidi's Jianping 1 through Jianping 4 eighty-one more did the same—forty-two of them cutting murderers one notch below death and locking that relief into permanent precedent. After that, townsfolk shrugged at statutes, bailiffs reached for the blade too readily, officials and subjects alike abandoned restraint, and order unraveled.

臣愚以為刑罰不苟務輕，務其中也。君人之道，仁義為主，仁者愛人，義者理務。愛人故當為除害，理務亦當為去亂。是以五帝有流殛放殺之誅，三王有大辟刻肌之刑，所以為除殘去亂也。故孔子稱「仁者必有勇」，又曰「理財正辭，禁人為非曰義」。高帝受命，制約令，定法律，傳之後世，可常施行。文帝寬惠溫克，遭世康平，因時施恩，省去肉刑，除相坐之法，他皆率由舊章，天下幾致升平。武帝值中國隆盛，財力有餘，出兵命將，征伐遠方，軍役數興，百姓罷弊，豪傑犯禁，奸吏弄法，故設遁匿之科，著知縱之律。宣帝聰明正直，履道握要，以禦海內，臣下奉憲，不失繩墨。元帝法律，少所改更，天下稱安。孝成、孝哀，承平繼體，即位日淺，聽斷尚寡。丞相王嘉等猥以數年之間，虧除先帝舊約，穿令斷律，凡百餘事，或不便於政，或不厭人心。臣謹表取其尤妨政事、害善良者，傅奏如左。

I submit that penal policy must never chase leniency for its own sake—it must aim at true proportion. Governing rests on humanity and duty: humanity cherishes lives, duty puts affairs in order. To love the people you remove predators; to keep affairs straight you purge turmoil. Hence the Five Legendary rulers wielded exile, drowning, banishment, and execution, while the Three Dynasties kings retained mutilating capital sentences—all to extirpate brutality and chaos. Thus Confucius said, "The humane person must have courage," and also said, "Putting wealth in order, correcting words, and forbidding people to do wrong is called righteousness." Gaozu founded the Han with concise ordinances and enduring codes that later reigns were meant to live by. Emperor Wen ruled gently in prosperous times, commuting corporal punishments and abolishing guilt-by-association while leaving the rest of Gaozu's code intact, bringing the realm within sight of perfect calm. Wudi mobilized endless campaigns while the treasury still looked full; commoners broke under corvée, bold men flouted bans, and clerks twisted verdicts, so the throne added clauses against fugitives and judges who knowingly went lenient. Emperor Xuan combined clarity with integrity, held to fundamentals, and kept officials snapping their rulings to the straight ink-line. Yuandi tinkered little with the code and the realm still pronounced itself secure. Chenodi and Aidi inherited a tranquil throne and had ruled only briefly, so they heard few capital cases themselves. Within a few years Chancellor Wang Jia's faction punched loopholes through edicts and statutes—more than a hundred changes—that often harmed governance or offended public sentiment. I therefore excerpt the worst offenses against policy and decency and attach them herewith.

伏惟陛下苞五常，履九德，推時撥亂，博施濟時，而反因循季世末節，衰微軌跡，誠非所以還初反本，據元更始也。願陛下宣詔有司，悉舉初元、建平之所穿鑿，考其輕重，察其化俗，足以知政教所處，擇其善者而從之，其不善者而改之，定不易之典，施之無窮，天下幸甚。事下三公、廷尉議，以為隆刑峻法，非明王急務，不可開許。統復上言曰：「有司猥以臣所上不可施行。今臣所言，非曰嚴刑。竊謂高帝以後，至於宣帝，其所施行，考合經傳，此方今事，非隆刑峻法。不勝至願，願得召見，若對尚書近臣，口陳其意。」帝令尚書問狀，統又對，極言政刑宜改。議竟不從。及明帝即位，常臨聽訟觀錄洛陽諸獄。帝性既明察，能得下奸，故尚書奏決罰近於苛碎。

Your Majesty embodies the cardinal virtues and rescues the age, yet clinging to dying expedients from the late Han hardly restores founding clarity or lets you reset the mandate. Please order the ministries to audit every Jianping-era loophole, weigh each reform's costs and moral effect, keep what still serves civilization and repeal what corrupts it, then engrave a stable code that future reigns never need rewrite—the empire will owe you a debt of gratitude. The matter was sent down for discussion by the Three Excellencies and the Commandant of Justice. They considered that it elevated punishments and sharpened laws, was not urgent business for an enlightened king, and could not be opened and approved. Wang Tong again submitted words, saying, "The responsible offices have carelessly judged that what I submitted cannot be put into effect. What I am now saying is not a call to make punishments harsh. I privately maintain that from Emperor Gao down to Emperor Xuan, what was put into effect, when checked against the classics and commentaries, is a matter for the present day, not an elevation of punishments or a sharpening of laws. I cannot overcome my utmost wish: I hope to be summoned for an audience, or else to face the Secretaries and close ministers and orally state my meaning." The emperor ordered the Secretaries to question him about the circumstances. Wang Tong again replied, speaking fully on why government and punishments should be changed. In the end, the deliberation did not follow his proposal. When Emperor Ming came to the throne, he often personally heard lawsuits and inspected and reviewed the various prisons of Luoyang. Because the emperor was by nature clear and discerning and could discover wrongdoing below, the decisions and punishments memorialized by the Secretaries came close to being harsh and minute.

至章帝時，尚書陳寵上疏曰：「先王之政，賞不僭，刑不濫，與其不得已，寧僭不濫。故唐堯著典曰'流宥五刑，眚災肆赦'。帝舜命皋陶以'五宅三居，惟明克允'。文王重《易》六爻，而列叢棘之聽；周公作《立政》，戒成王勿誤乎庶獄。陛下即位，率由此義，而有司執事，未悉奉承。斷獄者急於榜格酷烈之痛，執憲者繁於詐欺放濫之文，違本離實，棰楚為奸，或因公行私，以逞威福。夫為政也，猶張琴瑟，大弦急者小弦絕，故子貢非臧孫之猛法，而美鄭僑之仁政。方今聖德充塞，假於上下，宜因此時，隆先聖之務，蕩滌煩苛，輕薄棰楚，以濟群生，廣至德也。」帝納寵言，決罪行刑，務于寬厚。其後遂詔有司，禁絕鑽鑽諸酷痛舊制，解祅惡之禁，除文致之請，讞五十餘事，定著於令。是後獄法和平。

In the time of Emperor Zhang, Secretary Chen Chong submitted a memorial saying, "In the government of the former kings, rewards were not excessive and punishments were not indiscriminate; if there had to be one rather than the other, it was better for rewards to be excessive than for punishments to be indiscriminate. Therefore Tang Yao set down in the canon, 'Exile and pardon for the five punishments; accidental calamities are broadly pardoned.' Emperor Shun commanded Gao Yao with, 'Five residences and three placements; only clarity can be trusted.' King Wen gave weight to the six lines of the Changes, yet arranged hearings amid the clustered thorns; the Duke of Zhou composed Established Government and warned King Cheng not to make mistakes in the many criminal cases. When Your Majesty came to the throne, you followed this meaning, but the responsible offices and those who administer affairs have not fully received and carried it out. Those who decide prison cases are eager for the pain of beating frames and cruel torments, and those who hold the laws are prolix in writings on deceit, fraud, looseness, and excess. They depart from the root and leave reality, make cudgeling into wrongdoing, and sometimes use public business to carry out private aims and display power and favor. Carrying out government is like tuning zithers: when the large strings are tightened, the small strings break. Thus Zigong criticized Zangsun's fierce laws and praised Zichan of Zheng's humane government. At present, sagely virtue fills all and extends above and below. It is fitting to take this time to exalt the business of the former sages, wash away troublesome harshness, lighten the cudgel and the rod, rescue the multitude of living beings, and broaden utmost virtue." Emperor Zhang accepted Chen Chong's plea and tilted every verdict toward mercy. He soon banned iron branding, pierce-screws, and other torments enshrined in old practice, dropped prosecutions for fabricated occult charges, ended malicious readings of the code, and codified more than fifty appellate clarifications. Criminal procedure thereafter turned calm and even-handed.

永元六年，寵又代郭躬為廷尉，復校律令，刑法溢于《甫刑》者，奏除之，曰：「臣聞禮經三百，威儀三千，故《甫刑》大辟二百，五刑之屬三千。禮之所去，刑之所取，失禮即入刑，相為表裏者也。今律令，犯罪應死刑者六百一十，耐罪千六百九十八，贖罪以下二千六百八十一，溢于《甫刑》千九百八十九，其四百一十大辟，千五百耐罪，七十九贖罪。《春秋保乾圖》曰：'王者三百年一蠲法。 '漢興以來，三百二年，憲令稍增，科條無限。又律有三家，說各駁異。刑法繁多，宜令三公、廷尉集平律令，應經合義可施行者，大辟二百，耐罪、贖罪二千八百，合為三千，與禮相應。其餘千九百八十九事，悉可詳除。使百姓改易視聽，以成大化，致刑措之美，傳之無窮。」未及施行，會寵抵罪，遂寢。寵子忠。忠後復為尚書，略依寵意，奏上三十三條，為《決事比》，以省請讞之弊。又上除蠶室刑，解贓吏三世禁錮，狂易殺人得減重論，母子兄弟相代死聽赦所代者，事皆施行。雖時有蠲革，而舊律繁蕪，未經纂集。

In Yongyuan 6 Chen Chong succeeded Guo Gong at the Ministry of Justice, reviewed the entire corpus, and petitioned to strike clauses exceeding even the Mu-era Fu canon: "Ritual preserves three hundred anchors and three thousand gestures of deportment, matching the Fu code's two hundred capital crimes among three thousand punishments. Punishment picks up every obligation ritual lets fall—law and rite are two sides of one coat. Current Han codes list 610 capital offenses, 1,698 mutilating sentences, and 2,681 redeemable offenses—1,989 clauses beyond what the Fu canon contemplated, including 410 capital counts, 1,500 hair-shaving penalties, and 79 redeemable articles. The apocryphal Baogan Diagram teaches that kings should overhaul statutes roughly once every three centuries. Han has now ruled 302 years; orders swell steadily while clauses multiply without ceiling. Three rival schools interpret the code, and their readings contradict one another. Let the Three Excellencies and the Ministry of Justice reconcile Han law with the canon: retain two hundred capital statutes plus twenty-eight hundred lesser offenses—three thousand clauses mirroring ritual's triads—and discard the surplus. The other 1,989 provisions deserve systematic repeal. Refashion what ordinary families hear and see, complete moral transformation, approach the age when punishments lie unused, and hand that achievement down forever." The memorial stalled before promulgation because Chen Chong himself faced indictment. His son Chen Zhong figures next. Chen Zhong later rose again within the Ministry, distilled his father's ideas into thirty-three binding precedents collected as the Decided Cases as Precedents, and closed loopholes that clogged appellate paperwork. His supplements abolished castration workshops, lifted perpetual disqualification on embezzlers' descendants, allowed lighter sentences for insane killers, and permitted relatives who swapped places on the scaffold to receive the intended pardon—all enacted. Piecemeal repeals helped, yet the Eastern Han code stayed overgrown because nobody produced a unified digest.

獻帝建安元年，應劭又刪定律令，以為《漢議》，表奏之曰：「夫國之大事，莫尚載籍。載籍也者，決嫌疑，明是非，賞刑之宜，允執厥中，俾後之人永有鑒焉。故膠東相董仲舒老病致仕，朝廷每有政議，數遣廷尉張湯親至陋巷，問其得失，於是作《春秋折獄》二百三十二事，動以《經》對，言之詳矣。逆臣董卓，蕩覆王室，典憲焚燎，靡有孑遺，開闢以來，莫或茲酷。今大駕東邁，巡省許都，拔出險難，其命惟新。臣竊不自揆，輒撰具《律本章句》、《尚書舊事》、《廷尉板令》、《決事比例》、《司徒都目》、《五曹詔書》及《春秋折獄》，凡二百五十篇，蠲去復重，為之節文。又集《議駁》三十篇，以類相從，凡八十二事。其見《漢書》二十五，《漢記》四，皆刪敘潤色，以全本體。其二十六，博采古今瑰瑋之士，德義可觀。其二十七，臣所創造。《左氏》云：'雖有姬薑，不棄憔悴；雖有絲麻，不棄菅蒯。 '蓋所以代匱也。是用敢露頑才，廁於明哲之末，雖未足綱紀國體，宣洽時雍。庶幾觀察，增闡聖德。惟因萬機之餘暇，遊意省覽。」獻帝善之，於是舊事存焉。是時天下將亂，百姓有土崩之勢，刑罰不足以懲惡，於是名儒大才故遼東太守崔實、大司農鄭玄、大鴻臚陳紀之徒，咸以為宜復行肉刑。漢朝既不議其事，故無所用矣。

In Jian'an 1 Ying Shao pruned the statutes into his Han Deliberations and prefaced the memorial: "No state duty outweighs preserving written law. Archives settle doubts, separate right from wrong, balance reward and punishment, and hand posterity a lasting mirror. Retired counselor Dong Zhongshu still advised Zhang Tang on classical jurisprudence, yielding 232 Spring and Autumn case rulings grounded in canonical debate. The traitor Dong Zhuo torched legal archives along with the capital—perhaps no catastrophe since creation erased institutions so utterly. The imperial train now advances east to Xu, escaping catastrophe and refounding the mandate. I privately did not measure myself, and at once compiled and fully prepared The Root Text and Chapter-and-Verse Commentary on the Statutes, Old Affairs of the Secretaries, Placard Orders of the Commandant of Justice, Ratios and Precedents for Deciding Affairs, General Catalog of the Minister over the Masses, Edicts of the Five Bureaus, and Spring and Autumn Adjudications, totaling two hundred and fifty fascicles. I removed duplications and repetitions and made their articles and text. Thirty more volumes titled Deliberation Refutations sort eighty-two contested issues by topic. Twenty-five entries drawn from the Han Documents and four from the Han Records were trimmed and polished so the compilation stays internally consistent. Section twenty-six collects noteworthy voices past and present whose moral insight still instructs. Section twenty-seven records material I authored myself. The Zuo Tradition remarks that even when fine Qi and Jiang silks lie ready, one still keeps threadbare cloth. Even with silk and hemp at hand, humble rush cord still has its place. Those humble materials fill whatever the treasury lacks. So I risk adding my crude scholarship after your luminaries—far short of codifying the body politic or proclaiming universal peace. Yet perhaps cursory review will still enlarge readers' sense of your virtue. Only use some leisure from the multitude of affairs to let your mind range through and inspect them." Emperor Xian endorsed the collection, and those precedents survived. As order collapsed and punishments lost deterrent force, luminaries such as ex-Liaodong governor Cui Shi, minister Zheng Xuan, and herald Chen Ji urged restoring mutilating penalties. Because the court took no decision, the proposal died quietly.

及魏武帝匡輔漢室，尚書令荀彧博訪百官，復欲申之，而少府孔融議以為：「古者敦厖，善否區別，吏端刑清政簡，一無過失，百姓有罪，皆自取之。末世陵遲，風化壞亂，政撓其俗，法害其教。故曰'上失其道，人散久矣'。而欲繩之以古刑，投之以殘棄，非所謂與時消息也。紂斮朝涉之脛，天下謂為無道。夫九牧之地，千八百君，若各刖一人，是天下常有千八百紂也，求世休和，弗可得已。且被刑之人，慮不念生，志在思死，類多趨惡，莫復歸正。夙沙亂齊，伊戾禍宋，趙高、英布，為世大患。不能止人遂為非也，適足絕人還為善耳。雖忠如鬻拳，信如卞和，智如孫臏，冤如巷伯，才如史遷，達如子政，一罹刀鋸，沒世不齒。是太甲之思庸，穆公之霸秦，陳湯之都賴，魏尚之臨邊，無所復施也。漢開改惡之路，凡為此也。故明德之君，遠度深惟，棄短就長，不苟革其政者也。」朝廷善之，卒不改焉。

When Emperor Wu of Wei supported the Han house, Secretariat Director Xun Yu broadly consulted the hundred officials and again wanted to extend corporal punishments, but Lesser Treasurer Kong Rong argued: "In antiquity people were simple and substantial, good and bad were distinct, officials were upright, punishments clear, and government simple; if the people committed crimes, they brought them on themselves. Later eras decay: morale frays, institutions warp until policy twists customs and statutes sabotage moral instruction. Hence the adage that once rulers abandon the Way, their subjects drift beyond recall. Slapping archaic mutilations onto modern offenders ignores how institutions must breathe with their times. King Zhou's pointless shin-cutting frolic branded him irredeemably cruel. Eighteen hundred feudal lords times one amputation each still yields eighteen hundred tyrants—never harmony. The branded stop investing in survival; hope dies, recidivism rises, rehabilitation falters. History lists Su Sha, Yi Li, Zhao Gao, and Ying Bu among disasters spawned by society's outcasts. Corporal shame does not deter crime; it simply bars redemption. Men as upright as Yu Quan or brilliant as Sima Qian become permanent pariahs after mutilation. Second chances like Taijia's reform or Wei Shang's generalship vanish once the law brands a body ruined. Han deliberately created alternatives to mutilation for exactly these humane reasons. Therefore rulers of brilliant virtue measure distantly and ponder deeply, abandon the shortcoming and follow the strength, and do not reform their government carelessly." The deliberative assembly sided with Kong Rong and dropped the proposal.

及魏國建，陳紀子群時為御史中丞，魏武帝下令又欲復之，使群申其父論。群深陳其便。時鐘繇為相國，亦贊成之，而奉常王脩不同其議。魏武帝亦難以籓國改漢朝之制，遂寢不行。於是乃定甲子科，犯釱左右趾者易以木械，是時乏鐵，故易以木焉。又嫌漢律太重，故令依律論者聽得科半，使從半減也。

Once Wei stood as a kingdom, Chen Qun inherited his father's portfolio and had to defend corporal punishment anew. Chen Qun laid out pragmatic gains in exhaustive detail. Chancellor Zhong Yao concurred, yet Minister Wang Xiu held firm opposition. Cao Cao shrank from rewriting Han law from a subordinate court and shelved the initiative. The Jiazi reform swapped iron fetters for timber stocks because metal ran short. Deeming Han penalties cruel, Wei permitted sentencing at half the nominal statutory grade.

魏文帝受禪，又議肉刑。詳議未定，會有軍事，復寢。時有大女劉硃，撾子婦酷暴，前後三婦自殺，論硃減死輸作尚方，因是下怨毒殺人減死之令。魏明帝改士庶罰金之令，男聽以罰金，婦人加笞還從鞭督之例，以其形體裸露故也。

Cao Pi's accession reopened the corporal-punishment controversy. War interrupted the conference and the reform slept. When Liu Zhu drove three daughters-in-law to suicide, judges spared her life for hard labor—lawmakers then generalized mercy for passionate homicides. Wei Mingdi let gentlemen buy off fines while ordering female offenders flogged instead of stripped for cash penalties.

是時承用秦漢舊律，其文起自魏文侯師李悝。悝撰次諸國法，著《法經》。以為王者之政，莫急於盜賊，故其律始于《盜賊》。盜賊須劾捕，故著《網捕》二篇。其輕狡、越城、博戲、借假不廉、淫侈逾制以為《雜律》一篇，又以《具律》具其加減。是故所著六篇而已，然皆罪名之制也。商君受之以相秦。漢承秦制，蕭何定律，除參夷連坐之罪，增部主見知之條，益事律《興》、《廄》、《戶》三篇，合為九篇。叔孫通益律所不及，傍章十八篇。張湯《越宮律》二十七篇。趙禹《朝律》六篇。合六十篇。又漢時決事，集為《令甲》以下三百餘篇，及司徒鮑公撰嫁娶辭訟決為《法比都目》，凡九百六卷。世有增損，率皆集類為篇，結事為章。一章之中或事過數十，事類雖同，輕重乖異。而通條連句，上下相蒙，雖大體異篇，實相采入。《盜律》有賊傷之例，《賊律》有盜章之文，《興律》有上獄之法，《廄律》有逮捕之事，若此之比，錯糅無常。後人生意，各為章句。叔孫宣、郭令卿、馬融、鄭玄諸儒章句十有餘家，家數十萬言。凡斷罪所當由用者，合二萬六千二百七十二條，七百七十三萬二千二百餘言，言數益繁，覽者益難。天子於是下詔，但用鄭氏章句，不得雜用餘家。

Wei jurists continued Han codes rooted in Li Kui's Warring States canon. Li Kui codified interstate precedents into the Classic of Law. Because predators threaten stability most, his text leads with theft and violence. Suppression chapters followed immediately for pursuit and capture. Petty vice and administrative drift filled a Miscellaneous fascicle while the Completing statute calibrated aggravation and mitigation. Six slim volumes nonetheless enumerated every named crime. Shang Yang imported Li Kui's skeleton into Qin's centralized reform. Han fused Qin severity with Xiao He's softer overlay—nine core codes replacing collective punishment with departmental oversight chapters. Shusun Tong appended eighteen ceremonial side statutes. Zhang Tang added twenty-seven palace-security provisions. Zhao Yu supplied six audience protocols. The Han archive thus stacked sixty statutory bundles. Case law ballooned: three hundred decree codices plus Bao Xun's 960-scroll marriage register. Every reign reshuffled clauses into thematic fascicles and episodic chapters. Single chapters now mixed dozens of fact patterns of wildly different weight. Cross-references tangled: separate books silently imported one another's clauses. Theft law mingled with assault law; stable regulations housed arrest rules—definitions blurred beyond navigation. Commentators multiplied rival readings atop every line. Shusun Xuan, Guo Lingqing, Ma Rong, Zheng Xuan, and other classicists had more than ten schools of chapter-and-verse commentary, and each school numbered several hundred thousand words. Effective sentencing drew on 26,272 article intersections spanning 7.73 million characters—unreadable sprawl. An imperial fiat canonized Zheng Xuan and banned eclectic citation.

衛覬又奏曰：「刑法者，國家之所貴重，而私議之所輕賤；獄吏者，百姓之所懸命，而選用者之所卑下。王政之弊，未必不由此也。請置律博士，轉相教授。」事遂施行。然而律文煩廣，事比眾多，離本依末，決獄之吏如廷尉獄吏范洪受囚絹二丈，附輕法論之，獄吏劉象受屬偏考囚張茂物故，附重法論之。洪、象雖皆棄市，而輕枉者相繼。是時太傅鐘繇又上疏求復肉刑，詔下其奏，司徒王朗議又不同。時議者百餘人，與朗同者多。帝以吳蜀未平，又寢。其後，天子又下詔改定刑制，命司空陳群、散騎常侍劉邵、給事黃門侍郎韓遜、議郎庾嶷、中郎黃休、荀詵等刪約舊科，傍采漢律，定為魏法，制《新律》十八篇，《州郡令》四十五篇，《尚書官令》、《軍中令》，合百八十餘篇。其序略曰：

Wei Ji also memorialized, saying, "Punishments and laws are what the state values highly, yet what private discussion treats lightly; jailors anchor people's survival yet the service ranks rock bottom. Imperial government rots when law becomes a low-status afterthought. I request that Doctors of Law be established so they may teach one another in succession." The throne approved and created the post. Yet prolix codes invited manipulation: Fan Hong pocketed silk and chose lenient readings while Liu Xiang took bribes, tortured Zhang Mao to death, and chose cruelty. Marketplace executions did not stop softer miscarriages from stacking up. Zhong Yao revived the corporal-punishment plea; Wang Lang answered with another firm refusal. A hundred voices debated, most siding with Wang Lang. War with Shu and Wu kept the emperor from reopening the wound. After this, the Son of Heaven again issued an edict to revise and settle the penal system. He ordered Minister of Works Chen Qun, Cavalier Regular Attendant Liu Shao, Palace Attendant at the Yellow Gates Han Xun, Consultant Yu Yi, Gentlemen Huang Xiu and Xun Shen, and others to abridge the old statutes, draw alongside from the Han code, and establish them as Wei law. They made the New Code in eighteen fascicles, the Commanderies and Provinces Ordinance in forty-five fascicles, the Secretariat Offices Ordinance and Army Ordinance, totaling more than one hundred and eighty fascicles. Their preface opens:

舊律所難知者，由於六篇篇少故也。篇少則文荒，文荒則事寡，事寡則罪漏。是以後人稍增，更與本體相離。今制新律，宜都總事類，多其篇條。

Sparse chapter counts left early Han codes skeletal. Thin skeletons leaked crimes faster than editors patched them. Successive glossators drifted ever farther from Li Kui's core. Rewriting Wei law meant clustering topics into denser fascicles.

舊律因秦《法經》，就增三篇，而《具律》不移，因在第六。罪條例既不在始，又不在終，非篇章之義。故集罪例以為《刑名》，冠於律首。

Han pasted three new books onto Qin's six yet stranded sentencing offsets awkwardly in sixth place. General sentencing rules sitting mid-volume violated drafting logic. Wei compilers extracted definitions into a Punishment Names preface atop the code.

《盜律》有劫略、恐猲、和賣買人，科有持質，皆非盜事，故分以為《劫略律》。《賊律》有欺謾、詐偽、逾封、矯制、《囚律》有詐偽生死，《令丙》有詐自復免，事類眾多，故分為《詐律》。《賊律》有賊伐樹木、殺傷人畜產及諸亡印，《金布律》有毀傷亡失縣官財物，故分為《毀亡律》。《囚律》有告劾、傳覆，《廄律》有告反逮受，科有登聞道辭，故分為《告劾律》。《囚律》有系囚、鞫獄、斷獄之法，《興律》有上獄之事，科有考事報讞，宜別為篇，故分為《系訊》、《斷獄律》。《盜律》有受所監受財枉法，《雜律》有假借不廉，《令乙》有呵人受錢，科有使者驗賂，其事相類，故分為《請賕律》。《盜律》有勃辱強賊，《興律》有擅興徭役，《具律》有出賣呈，科有擅作修舍事，故分為《興擅律》。《興律》有乏徭稽留，《賊律》有儲峙不辨，《廄律》有乏軍之興，及舊典有奉詔不謹、不承用詔書，漢氏施行有小愆之反不如令，輒劾以不承用詔書乏軍要斬，又減以《丁酉詔書》，《丁酉詔書》，漢文所下，不宜復以為法，故別為之《留律》。秦世舊有廄置、乘傳、副車、食廚，漢初承秦不改，後以費廣稍省，故後漢但設騎置而無車馬，則律猶著其文，則為虛設，故除《廄律》，取其可用合科者，以為《郵驛令》。其告反逮驗，別入《告劾律》。上言變事，以為《變事令》，以驚事告急，與《興律》烽燧及科令者，以為《驚事律》。《盜律》有還贓畀主，《金布律》有罰贖入責以呈黃金為價，科有平庸坐贓事，以為《償贓律》。律之初制，無免坐之文，張湯、趙禹始作監臨部主、見知故縱之例。其見知而故不舉劾，各與同罪，失不舉劾，各以贖論，其不見不知，不坐也，是以文約而例通。科之為制，每條有違科，不覺不知，從坐之免，不復分別，而免坐繁多，宜總為免例，以省科文，故更制定其由例，以為《免坐律》。諸律令中有其教制，本條無從坐之文者，皆從此取法也。凡所定增十三篇，就故五篇，合十八篇，於正律九篇為增，于旁章科令為省矣。

Robbery chapters bundled ransom raids and kidnappings—now isolated under Pillage. Assorted frauds migrated from Bandit, Prison, and Decree Bing clauses into one Fraud book. Environmental and property damage clauses left Bandit law for a Destruction fascicle. Litigation mechanics scattered across Prison and Stables chapters merged into Accusation. Custody, interrogation, and trial stages finally earned distinct fascicles. Corruption clauses scattered across Robbery, Miscellaneous, and Decree Yi united under Soliciting Bribes. Labor abuses and insult cases jumped into Unauthorized Rise. Corvée delays, supply bungles, and edict disputes had been jammed into mismatched chapters; Wei isolated detention crimes once accidental overlap with capital military guilt was unwound. Obsolete Qin-Han relay statutes became a Post-Relay decree once horse relays alone survived budget cuts. Treason reporting stayed with the new Accusation fascicle. Emergency memorials and beacon alarms gained paired decree chapters. Restitution tracking moved from Robbery and Metal-Cloth codes into one fascicle. Accessory liability crystallized once Zhang Tang and Zhao Yu defined supervisory complicity. Clear knowledge triggered joint guilt, negligent oversight triggered fines, ignorance meant innocence—concise yet flexible. Repeating accessory exemptions cluttered each chapter, so Wei centralized them. Silent statutes now defer to the consolidated exemption chapter. Eighteen streamlined fascicles replace sixty Han scrolls plus piles of side edicts.

改漢舊律不行于魏者皆除之，更依古義制為五刑。其死刑有三，髡刑有四，完刑、作刑各三，贖刑十一，罰金六，雜抵罪七，凡三十七名，以為律首。又改《賊律》，但以言語及犯宗廟園陵，謂之大逆無道，要斬，家屬從坐，不及祖父母、孫。至於謀反大逆，臨時捕之，或汙瀦，或梟菹，夷其三族，不在律令，所以嚴絕惡跡也。賊鬥殺人，以劾而亡，許依古義，聽子弟得追殺之。會赦及過誤相殺，不得報仇，所以止殺害也。正殺繼母，與親母同，防繼假之隙也。除異子之科，使父子無異財也。歐兄姊加至五歲刑，以明教化也。囚徒誣告人反，罪及親屬，異于善人，所以累之使省刑息誣也。改投書棄市之科，所以輕刑也。正篡囚棄市之罪，斷凶強為義之蹤也。二歲刑以上，除以家人乞鞫之制，省所煩獄也。改諸郡不得自擇伏日，所以齊風俗也。

Wei stripped unenforceable Han residue and mapped penalties onto classical five-scale doctrine. Thirty-seven listed punishments—three capital modes, four shaving grades, paired labor scales, eleven redemption steps, six fines, seven offsets—anchor the code. Verbal lese-majeste and tomb desecration trigger waist-cutting while collateral guilt spares grandparents and grandkids. Live rebellion draws extrajudicial clan extinction beyond codified sentences. Family revenge against fugitive killers regained classical sanction. General amnesties and mutual accidents end revenge rights to stop feuds. Murdering a stepmother now equals matricide to prevent fake household splits. Deleting the rule that split heir estates kept parental wealth undivided. Assault on older siblings now drew five years’ penal labor to underscore ethical hierarchy. Malicious jailhouse denunciations dragged kin into guilt—extra deterrence meant to curb torture and perjury. Publishing sedition posters no longer automatically earned immediate marketplace execution. Storming jails to free captives received clearer labeling instead of heroic loopholes. Serious labor sentences dropped redundant family appeals that flooded dockets. Local jurisdictions stopped selecting independent "dog-day" amnesty dates.

斯皆魏世所改，其大略如是。其後正始之間，天下無事，於是征西將軍夏侯玄、河南尹李勝、中領軍曹羲、尚書丁謐又追議肉刑，卒不能決。其文甚多，不載。

Wei jurists adopted roughly these headline reforms. During carefree Zhengshi years Xiahou Xuan, Li Sheng, Cao Xi, and Ding Mi reopened the corporal-punishment quarrel without closure. Debate records ran too long for inclusion.

及景帝輔政，是時魏法，犯大逆者誅及已出之女。毋丘儉之誅，其子甸妻荀氏應坐死，其族兄顗與景帝姻，通表魏帝，以匄其命。詔聽離婚。荀氏所生女芝，為潁川太守劉子元妻，亦坐死，以懷妊系獄。荀氏辭詣司隸校尉何曾乞恩，求沒為官婢，以贖芝命。曾哀之，使主簿程咸上議曰：「夫司寇作典，建三等之制；甫侯修刑，通輕重之法。叔世多變，秦立重辟，漢又修之。大魏承秦漢之弊，未及革制，所以追戮已出之女，誠欲殄丑類之族也。然則法貴得中，刑慎過制。臣以為女人有三從之義，無自專之道，出適他族，還喪父母，降其服紀，所以明外成之節，異在室之恩。而父母有罪，追刑已出之女；夫黨見誅，又有隨姓之戮。一人之身，內外受辟。今女既嫁，則為異姓之妻；如或產育，則為他族之母，此為元惡之所忽。戮無辜之所重，於防則不足懲奸亂之源，於情則傷孝子之心。男不得罪於他族，而女獨嬰戮於二門，非所以哀矜女弱，蠲明法制之本分也。臣以為在室之女，從父母之誅；既醮之婦，從夫家之罰。宜改舊科，以為永制。」於是有詔改定律令。

Under Sima Shi co-rule, daughters married out still died for parental treason. When Guanqiu Jian fell, Dian’s wife Lady Xun faced execution until cousin Xun Yan’s plea reached the throne. Imperial writ sanctioned divorce to spare her. Her pregnant daughter Zhi, wed to Prefect Liu Ziyuan, awaited execution under guard. Lady Xun offered herself as government slave to ransom Zhi. He Zeng grieved over this and had his Registrar Cheng Xian submit a deliberation, saying, "When the Minister of Crime made the canon, he established the system of three grades; Fu marquis tuned statutes linking lighter and graver penalties. Every dynasty reworked Qin-Han severity. Wei still copied harsh collateral rules to stamp out traitorous houses. Still, statute must stay balanced—never overshoot. Women follow father, husband, son—rites distinguish maidens from wives. Parents’ guilt nevertheless dragged married daughters back under the blade. If husbands’ clans fell, wives died twice over. A single woman answered both natal and marital guilt. Marriage transfers loyalty to the husband’s house. Motherhood anchors her with her children’s clan—tyrants ignored this. Executing guiltless women neither stops rebellion nor consoles loyal sons. Men escaped cross-clan guilt while women died twice—hardly mercy or clarity. Unmarried daughters share parental punishment. Wives answer husband-house crimes alone. The old statutes should be changed, and this should be made an enduring system." An imperial order rewrote the law accordingly.

文帝為晉王，患前代律令本注煩雜，陳群、劉邵雖經改革，而科網本密，又叔孫、郭、馬、杜諸儒章句，但取鄭氏，又為偏黨，未可承用。於是令賈充定法律，令與太傅鄭沖、司徒荀顗、中書監荀勖、中軍將軍羊祜、中護軍王業、廷尉杜友、守河南尹杜預、散騎侍郎裴楷、潁川太守周雄、齊相郭頎、騎都尉成公綏、尚書郎柳軌及吏部令史榮邵等十四人典其事，就漢九章增十一篇，仍其族類，正其體號，改舊律為《刑名》、《法例》，辨《囚律》為《告劾》、《系訊》、《斷獄》，分《盜律》為《請賕》、《詐偽》、《水火》、《毀亡》，因事類為《衛宮》、《違制》，撰《周官》為《諸侯律》，合二十篇，六百二十條，二萬七千六百五十七言。蠲其苛穢，存其清約，事從中典，歸於益時。其餘未宜除者，若軍事、田農、酤酒，未得皆從人心，權設其法，太平當除，故不入律，悉以為令。施行制度，以此設教，違令有罪則入律。其常事品式章程，各還其府，為故事。減梟斬族誅從坐之條，除謀反適養母出女嫁皆不復還坐父母棄市，省禁固相告之條，去捕亡、亡沒為官奴婢之制。輕過誤老少女人當罰金杖罰者，皆令半之。重奸伯叔母之令，棄市。淫寡女，三歲刑。崇嫁娶之要，一以下娉為正，不理私約。峻禮教之防，准五服以制罪也。凡律令合二千九百二十六條，十二萬六千三百言，六十卷，故事三十卷。泰始三年，事畢，表上。武帝詔曰：「昔蕭何以定律令受封，叔孫通制儀為奉常，賜金五百斤，弟子百人皆為郎。夫立功立事，古今之所重，宜加祿賞，其詳考差敘。輒如詔簡異弟子百人，隨才品用，賞帛萬餘匹。」武帝親自臨講，使裴楷執讀。四年正月，大赦天下，乃班新律。

When Emperor Wen was King of Jin, he was troubled that the statutes and ordinances, root texts and notes of earlier generations were complicated and miscellaneous. Although Chen Qun and Liu Shao had revised them, the statutory net was basically dense, and the chapter-and-verse commentaries of Shusun, Guo, Ma, Du, and other classicists took only Zheng Xuan's school and were also partial and partisan, so they could not be adopted. He therefore ordered Jia Chong to settle the laws and statutes, and ordered him together with Grand Tutor Zheng Chong, Minister over the Masses Xun Yi, Palace Writer Director Xun Xu, Central Army General Yang Hu, Central Protector of the Army Wang Ye, Commandant of Justice Du You, Acting Governor of Henan Du Yu, Cavalier Attendant Pei Kai, Yingchuan Grand Administrator Zhou Xiong, Qi Chancellor Guo Qi, Cavalier Commandant Chenggong Sui, Secretariat Gentleman Liu Gui, Personnel Bureau Clerk Rong Shao, and the others, fourteen men in all, to manage the affair. Based on the Han Nine Chapters, they added eleven chapters, followed their categories, corrected their structures and titles, changed the old code into Penal Names and Legal Precedents, divided the Prisoners Code into Accusations and Impeachments, Detentions and Interrogations, and Deciding Prison Cases, divided the Robbery Code into Requests and Bribes, Fraud and Forgery, Water and Fire, and Destruction and Loss, made Palace Guards and Violations of Regulations according to the categories of affairs, and compiled the Zhou Offices into the Feudal Lords Code. Together these made twenty chapters, six hundred and twenty articles, and twenty-seven thousand six hundred fifty-seven words. Editors stripped cruft, kept crisp rules, and tuned everything to contemporary needs. Military, agrarian, and liquor rules stayed provisional edicts until a future peaceful reign could prune them. Administrative handbooks taught policy; breaching those edicts triggered codified penalties. Everyday paperwork stayed departmental precedent rather than criminal code. Penal reform softened exposure executions, limited clan guilt for treason and adoption cases, scrapped denunciation prisons, and ended fugitive enslavement rules. Fines and beatings for minors, seniors, women, and petty slips were automatically cut in half. Incest with uncles or aunts now meant immediate public execution. Seducing bereaved women earned three years penal labor. Marriage validity rested solely on documented bride-price, not secret promises. Law enforced mourning hierarchies when calibrating criminal guilt. The codex stacked 2,926 provisions across sixty volumes plus thirty precedent fascicles. the third year of Taishi (267 CE) saw the finished code presented to the throne. Emperor Wu issued an edict, saying, "Formerly Xiao He received an enfeoffment for settling statutes and ordinances, and Shusun Tong made ritual regulations, became Chamberlain for Ceremonials, was granted five hundred jin of gold, and one hundred of his disciples all became gentlemen. Reward the compilers commensurate with their service. At once, according to the edict, one hundred exceptional disciples were selected, employed according to their talents and grades, and rewarded with more than ten thousand bolts of silk." Wudi presided while Pei Kai recited the new code. In the first month of year four he amnestied the realm and published the Jin code.

其後，明法掾張裴又注律，表上之，其要曰：

Zhang Pei’s statutory commentary begins:

律始於《刑名》者，所以定罪制也；終於《諸侯》者，所以畢其政也。王政布于上，諸侯奉于下，禮樂撫於中，故有三才之義焉，其相須而成，若一體焉。

Punishment Names opens the code because it defines offense labels and scales. Feudal Lords closes the book because it finishes jurisdictional rules. Editorial structure mirrors heaven-earth-man coordination across statutes.

《刑名》所以經略罪法之輕重，正加減之等差，明發眾篇之多義，補其章條之不足，較舉上下綱領。其犯盜賊、詐偽、請賕者，則求罪於此，作役、水火、畜養、守備之細事，皆求之作本名。告訊為之心舌，捕系為之手足，斷獄為之定罪，名例齊其制。自始及終，往而不窮，變動無常，周流四極，上下無方，不離於法律之中也。

The opening fascicle harmonizes sentencing ladders across the entire code. Core crimes resolve through Names while petty administrative offenses cite their titled chapters. Litigation flows tongue-to-hand-to-verdict under unified principles. Flexible doctrine stays anchored despite exhaustive hypotheticals.

其知而犯之謂之故，意以為然謂之失，違忠欺上謂之謾，背信藏巧謂之詐，虧禮廢節謂之不敬，兩訟相趣謂之鬥，兩和相害謂之戲，無變斬擊謂之賊，不意誤犯謂之過失，逆節絕理謂之不道，陵上僭貴謂之惡逆，將害未發謂之戕，唱首先言謂之造意，二人對議謂之謀，制眾建計謂之率，不和謂之強，攻惡謂之略，三人謂之群，取非其物謂之盜，貨財之利謂之贓：凡二十者，律義之較名也。

Zhang Pei lists twenty definitional contrasts—intent versus negligence, fraud versus jest—that judges use like diagnostic labels.

夫律者，當慎其變，審其理。若不承用詔書，無故失之刑，當從贖。謀反之同伍，實不知情，當從刑。此故失之變也。卑與尊鬥，皆為賊。鬥之加兵刃水火中，不得為戲，戲之重也。向人室廬道徑射，不得為過，失之禁也。都城人眾中走馬殺人，當為賊，賊之似也。過失似賊，戲似鬥，鬥而殺傷傍人，又似誤，盜傷縛守似強盜，呵人取財似受賕，囚辭所連似告劾，諸勿聽理似故縱，持質似恐猲。如此之比，皆為無常之格也。

Good adjudication tracks shifting facts and moral nuance. Ignorant mishandling of imperial orders qualifies for redeemable fines. Five-house rebel neighbors bear graded punishment even if ignorant—a deliberate severity. Such edge cases refine intent doctrine. Any status mix in brawls triggers bandit-law scrutiny. Introducing lethal tools upgrades jest to assault. Reckless shooting near dwellings breaks absolute bans regardless of intent. Fatal stampedes in royal cities mimic malicious killing. Zhang Pei catalogs mimetic offenses requiring careful discrimination. Judges rely on these sliding scales when labels collide.

五刑不簡，正於五罰，五罰不服，正於五過，意善功惡，以金贖之。故律制，生罪不過十四等，死刑不過三，徒加不過六，囚加不過五，累作不過十一歲，累笞不過千二百，刑等不過一歲，金等不過四兩。月贖不計日，日作不拘月，歲數不疑閏。不以加至死，並死不復加。不可累者，故有並數；不可並數，乃累其加。以加論者，但得其加；與加同者，連得其本。不在次者，不以通論。以人得罪與人同，以法得罪與法同。侵生害死，不可齊其防；親疏公私，不可常其教。禮樂崇於上，故降其刑；刑法閑于下，故全其法。是故尊卑敘，仁義明，九族親，王道平也。

Classical five-fine ladder fills gaps when corporal punishment misfires. The code therefore caps gradations at every step: no more than fourteen living-crime ranks, three capital grades, six labor enhancements, five detention enhancements, eleven cumulative labor years, twelve hundred cumulative strokes, one-year sentence increments, and four-tael cash increments. Sentence accounting ignores fractional moons or leap months. Capital punishment caps aggravation ladders. Some bans run concurrently rather than sequentially. Other offenses aggregate aggravation instead. Aggravation sentencing isolates the marginal penalty. Matching tiers revert to baseline guilt. Off-sequence crimes resist unified analogy. Personal versus procedural guilt follow distinct tracks. Harm to corpses versus persons demands different shields. Public versus familial crimes need tailored instruction. Higher ritual standing earns lighter penalties. Lower strata rely on exhaustive statute to preserve full protection. Balanced gradations yield humane clarity across kin networks.

律有事狀相似而罪名相涉者，若加威勢下手取財為強盜，不自知亡為縛守，將中有惡言為恐猲，不以罪名呵為呵人，以罪名呵為受賕，劫召其財為持質。此六者，以威勢得財而名殊者也。即不求自與為受求，所監求而後取為盜贓，輸入呵受為留難，斂人財物積藏於官為擅賦，加歐擊之為戮辱。諸如此類，皆為以威勢得財而罪相似者也。

Six intimidation economies share coercion yet earn distinct labels—robbery, jailbreak assistance, terror, shakedown, bribery, hostage seizure. Same coercive profit stream splits across six statutory names. Solicitation, supervised theft, bureaucratic obstruction, and illegal surcharges each refine bribery’s shades. Wealth-by-intimidation cases remain cognate despite label shifts.

夫刑者，司理之官；理者，求情之機，情者，心神之使。心感則情動於中，而形於言？暢于四支，發於事業。是故奸人心愧而面赤，內怖而色奪。論罪者務本其心，審其情，精其事，近取諸身，遠取諸物，然後乃可以正刑。仰手似乞，俯手似奪，捧手似謝，擬手似訴，拱臂似自首，攘臂似格鬥，矜莊似威，怡悅似福，喜怒憂歡，貌在聲色。奸真猛弱，候在視息。出口有言當為告，下手有禁當為賊，喜子殺怒子當為戲，怒子殺喜子當為賊。諸如此類，自非至精不能極其理也。

Criminal law administers underlying pattern. Legal reasoning traces outward facts to inward intent. Does not emotion voice itself outward once the heart stirs? It flows through the four limbs and finds expression in every deed. Villains blanch or flush when truth closes in. Judges must triangulate motive, fact, and physical tells before sentencing. Zhang Pei lists gesture and expression lexicons for inferring intent. Breathing tempo and eye flicker betray truth. Voice versus fist distinguishes accusation from assault; mood contrasts redefine jest versus malice. Only meticulous inference clarifies such overlaps.

律之名例，非正文而分明也。若八十，非殺傷人，他皆勿論，即誣告謀反者反坐。十歲，不得告言人；即奴婢捍主，主得謁殺之。賊燔人廬舍積聚，盜贓五匹以上，棄市；即燔官府積聚盜，亦當與同。歐人教令者與同罪，即令人歐其父母，不可與行者同得重也。若得遺物強取強乞之類，無還贓法隨例畀之文。法律中諸不敬，違儀失式，及犯罪為公為私，贓入身不入身，皆隨事輕重取法，以例求其名也。

General Part doctrines illuminate without occupying numbered articles. Octogenarians skip liability except for homicide, while false accusers of treason face reverse judgment. Children under ten cannot file suit. When slaves resist masters, the master may petition to kill them. Arson and major theft above five bolts drew public execution. Official granaries burned or robbed faced identical sanctions. Instigating assault tracks accomplice liability; ordering parental assault differs from acting. Forced recovery of lost goods uses precedent restitution clauses. Statutory taxonomy sorts ritual faults, public/private guilt, and tangible versus intangible spoils by degrees.

夫理者，精玄之妙，不可以一方行也；律者，幽理之奧，不可以一體守也。或計過以配罪，或化略以循常，或隨事以盡情，或趣舍以從時，或推重以立防，或引輕而就下。公私廢避之宜，除削重輕之變，皆所以臨時觀釁，使用法執詮者幽於未制之中，采其根牙之微，致之於機格之上，稱輕重於豪銖，考輩類于參伍，然後乃可以理直刑正。

Legal principle refuses single-track formulas. Written law cannot freeze into one rigid mold. Judges weigh fault-matching, simplified defaults, fact-sensitive mercy, seasonal policy shifts, harsh deterrence, or lenient relief. Elastic doctrines let judges weigh mitigations, scan microscopic facts, and align sentences through layered analogy.

夫奉聖典者若操刀執繩，刀妄加則傷物，繩妄彈則侵直。梟首者惡之長，斬刑者罪之大，棄市者死之下，髡作者刑之威，贖罰者誤之誡。王者立此五刑，所以寶君子而逼小人，故為敕慎之經，皆擬《周易》有變通之體焉。欲令提綱而大道清，舉略而王法齊，其旨遠，其辭文，其言曲而中，其事肆而隱。通天下之志唯忠也，斷天下之疑唯文也，切天下之情唯遠也，彌天下之務唯大也，變無常體唯理也，非天下之賢聖，孰能與於斯！

Judges wield law like blade and plumb-line—careless use mis-harms. Five punishments grade horror from head-display to fines. Royal punishments elevate virtue while intimidating vice, modeled on Change's flexibility. Sparse wording masks vast regulatory intent. Only canonical virtues decode law's cosmic scope.

夫刑而上者謂之道，刑而下者謂之器，化而裁之謂之格。刑殺者是冬震曜之象，髡罪者似秋雕落之變，贖失者是春陽悔吝之疵之。五刑成章，輒相依准，法律之義焉。

Meta-law becomes Dao; applied law becomes instrument; adaptive rules become grids. Capital punishment echoes winter thunder; mutilation echoes autumn decay; fines echo spring faults. Five chapters interlock by design.

是時侍中盧珽、中書侍郎張華又表：「抄《新律》諸死罪條目，懸之亭傳，以示兆庶。」有詔從之。

At this time Attendant Lu Ting and Palace Writer Attendant Gentleman Zhang Hua again memorialized: "Copy out the articles for the capital crimes in the New Code and hang them in stations and relay posts to show them to the common people." The throne agreed.

及劉頌為廷尉，頻表宜復肉刑，不見省，又上言曰：

Liu Song renewed corporal-punishment petitions from the Ministry of Justice.

臣昔上行肉刑，從來積年，遂寢不論。臣竊以為議者拘孝文之小仁，而輕違聖王之典刑，未詳之甚，莫過於此。

Years ago I urged corporal punishment—still tabled. Critics indulge Wen's sentimental mercy and forsake classical mutilation.

今死刑重，故非命者眾；生刑輕，故罪不禁奸。所以然者，肉刑不用之所致也。今為徒者，類性元惡不軌之族也，去家懸遠，作役山谷，饑寒切身，志不聊生，雖有廉士介者，苟慮不首死，則皆為盜賊，豈況本性奸凶無賴之徒乎！又令徒富者輸財，解日歸家，乃無役之人也。貧者起為奸盜，又不制之虜也。不刑，則罪無所禁；不制，則群惡橫肆。為法若此，近不盡善也。是以徒亡日屬，賊盜日煩，亡之數者至有十數，得輒加刑，日益一歲，此為終身之徒也。自顧反善無期，而災困逼身，其志亡思盜，勢不得息，事使之然也。

Heavy capital statutes multiply wrongful deaths; light labor sentences fail to deter wickedness. Root cause: abandoning corporal options. Exiled laborers—mostly habitual offenders—starve in mountains until even decent men become thieves. Rich inmates ransom release while poor ones rot in gangs. Destitute laborers slide into theft without restraint. Without mutilation crime spreads unchecked; without deterrence gangs rage openly. Such policy barely qualifies as sound. Escalating escape penalties trap convicts in perpetual labor. Hopeless lifers hunt loot because circumstance leaves no choice.

古者用刑以止刑，今反於此。諸重犯亡者，發過三寸輒重髡之，此以刑生刑；加作一歲，此以徒生徒也。亡者積多，系囚猥畜。議者曰囚不可不赦，復從而赦之，此為刑不制罪，法不勝奸。下知法之不勝，相聚而謀為不軌，月異而歲不同。故自頃年以來，奸惡陵暴，所在充斥。議者不深思此故，而曰肉刑於名忤聽，忤聽孰與賊盜不禁？

Ancient law ended crime through punishment; modern practice inverts it. Recaptured rebels lose hair repeatedly—sentence spawning sentence; stacked years breed endless labor. Jails overflow with repeat escapees. Endless amnesties admit law cannot defeat crime. Criminals exploit legal weakness with evolving plots. Recent seasons swarm with violent crime. Cosmetic objection to mutilation ignores rampant robbery.

聖王之制肉刑，遠有深理，其事可得而言，非徒懲其畏剝割之痛而不為也，乃去其為惡之具，使夫奸人無用復肆其志，止奸絕本，理之盡也。亡者刖足，無所用復亡。盜者截手，無所用復盜。淫者割其勢，理亦如之。除惡塞源，莫善於此，非徒然也。此等已刑之後，便各歸家，父母妻子，共相養恤，不流離于塗路。有今之困，創愈可役，上准古制，隨宜業作，雖已刑殘，不為虛棄，而所患都塞，又生育繁阜之道自若也。

Mutilation removes criminal capacity, not merely fear. Footless escapees cannot run; handless thieves cannot steal; castration follows rapists likewise. Amputation eradicates evil at source. Maimed offenders stay home supported by kin. Scarred workers still tend fields under supervised labor; society keeps producing.

今宜取死刑之限輕，及三犯逃亡淫盜，悉以肉刑代之。其三歲刑以下，已自杖罰遣，又宜制其罰數，使有常限，不得減此。其有宜重者，又任之官長。應四五歲刑者，皆髡笞，笞至一百，稍行，使各有差，悉不復居作。然後刑不復生刑，徒不復生徒，而殘體為戳，終身作誡。人見其痛，畏而不犯，必數倍於今。且為惡者隨發被刑，去其為惡之具，此為諸已刑者皆良士也，豈與全其為奸之手足，而蹴居必死之窮地同哉！而猶曰肉刑不可用，臣竊以為不識務之甚也。

Demote borderline capitals and chronic sex-thieves to mutilation. Cap sub-three-year caning with mandatory floors. Superiors may add weight case by case. Mid felonies become shave-plus-cane without prison labor. Stopping punishment spirals, mutilation educates forever. Visible agony deters more than remote labor. Timely mutilation redeems; intact limbs drive desperados. Denying mutilation misunderstands statecraft.

臣昔常侍左右，數聞明詔，謂肉刑宜用，事便於政。願陛下信獨見之斷，使夫能者得奉聖慮，行之於今。比填溝壑，冀見太平。《周禮》三赦三宥，施於老幼悼耄，黔黎不屬逮者，此非為惡之所出，故刑法逆舍而宥之。至於自非此族，犯罪則必刑而無赦，此政之理也。暨至後世，以時嶮多難，因赦解結，權以行之，又不以寬罪人也。至今恆以罪積獄繁，赦以散之，是以赦愈數而獄愈塞，如此不已，將至不勝。原其所由，內刑不用之故也。今行肉刑，非徒不積，且為惡無具則奸息。去此二端，獄不得繁，故無取於數赦，於政體勝矣。

Court whispers already endorsed corporal law. Trust the policy and commission experts to codify it. I offer my life to see tranquil rule. Rites spare juveniles and senility because guilt rarely originates there. Adult repeat offenders receive no quarter. Later dynasties amnestied for crisis control, not mercy. Frequent amnesties stuffed prisons worse. No mutilation forces amnesty bloat. Mutilation both empties jails and removes criminal means. With mutilation plus deterrence, amnesties become unnecessary.

疏上，又不見省。

The throne again shelved Liu Song.

至惠帝之世，政出群下，每有疑獄，各立私情，刑法不定，獄訟繁滋。尚書裴頠表陳之曰：

Hui's court factionalized justice and docket chaos exploded. Pei Wei then submitted:

夫天下之事多塗，非一司之所管；中才之情易擾，賴恆制而後定。先王知其所以然也，是以辨方分職，為之准局。准局既立，各掌其務，刑賞相稱，輕重無二，故下聽有常，群吏安業也。舊宮掖陵廟有水火毀傷之變，然後尚書乃躬自奔赴，其非此也，皆止于郎令史而已。刑罰所加，各有常刑。

State business spans ministries needing division of labor. Average officials need fixed rules to stay calm. Ancient kings assigned jurisdictions deliberately. Clear jurisdiction balances incentives and steadies clerks. Catastrophes alone drew ministers personally; minor roof checks stayed with clerks. Each offense had a fixed penalty ladder.

去元康四年，大風之後，廟闕屋瓦有數枚傾落，免太常荀寓。于時以嚴詔所譴，莫敢據正。然內外之意，僉謂事輕責重，有違于常。會五年二月有大風，主者懲懼前事。臣新拜尚書始三日，本曹尚書有疾，權令兼出，按行蘭台。主者乃瞻望阿棟之間，求索瓦之不正者，得棟上瓦小邪十五處。或是始瓦時邪，蓋不足言，風起倉卒，台官更往，太常按行，不及得周，文書未至之頃，便競相禁止。臣以權兼暫出，出還便罷，不復得窮其事。而本曹據執，卻問無已。臣時具加解遣，而主者畏咎，不從臣言，禁止太常，復興刑獄。

Yuankang 4 windstorm tiles toppled; Xun Yu took the fall. Harsh edicts silenced dissent. Everyone felt penalties disproportionate. Month-two winds next year made clerks paranoid. Pei Wei briefly supervised inspections. Teams counted fifteen slightly misaligned ridge tiles. Minor skew blamed on builders yet panic triggered blanket bans mid-inspection. Acting supervisors lost mandate once rotated. Permanent staff kept interrogating Ceremonies. Despite Pei Wei's orders, terrified clerks prosecuted ritual ministers again.

昔漢氏有盜廟玉環者，文帝欲族誅，釋之但處以死刑，曰：「若侵長陵一抔土，何以復加？」文帝從之。大晉垂制，深惟經遠，山陵不封，園邑不飾，墓而不墳，同乎山壤，是以丘阪存其陳草，使齊乎中原矣。雖陵兆尊嚴，唯毀發然後族之，此古典也。若登踐犯損，失盡敬之道，事止刑罪可也。

Formerly, when there was someone under the Han who stole a jade ring from the temple, Emperor Wen wanted to execute his clan, but Zhang Shizhi only sentenced him to death and said, "If he had invaded a handful of soil from Changling, what could be added to this?" Wendi accepted. Jin tombs lie low without mounds—indistinguishable hills. Grand Jin reserves clan slaughter for actual tomb breach. Footprints or careless damage merit regular sentencing only.

去八年，奴聽教加誣周龍燒草，廷尉遂奏族龍，一門八口並命。會龍獄翻，然後得免。考之情理，准之前訓，所處實重。今年八月，陵上荊一枝圍七寸二分者被斫，司徒太常，奔走道路，雖知事小，而案劾難測，搔擾驅馳，各競免負，於今太常禁止未解。近日太祝署失火，燒屋三間半。署在廟北，隔道在重牆之內，又即已滅，頻為詔旨所問。主者以詔旨使問頻繁，便責尚書不即案行，輒禁止，尚書免，皆在法外。

Eight years prior a framed Zhou Long nearly lost eight kin. Retrial freed them. That verdict exceeded proportional justice. Petty branch-cutting triggered another Ceremonies inquisition still open. Last week the Blessing office fire consumed half the annex. Fire stayed inside temple walls yet palace demanded endless reports. Clerics punished ministers extra-legally for delayed surveys.

刑書之文有限，而舛違之故無方，故有臨時議處之制，誠不能皆得循常也。至於此等，皆為過當，每相逼迫，不得以理，上替聖朝畫一之德，下損崇禮大臣之望。臣愚以為犯陵上草木，不應乃用同產異刑之制。按行奏劾，應有定準，相承務重，體例遂虧。或因余事，得容淺深。

Because written law cannot cover every factual twist, judges need emergency procedures that sometimes break the usual rulebook. These overreactions in tomb cases undercut the court’s commitment to one law for all and embarrass senior ministers who stand for proper ceremony. Trampling graveyard growth should not trigger the same draconian kin-punishment statutes used for true desecration. Inspections and indictments need stable yardsticks, not an ever-harsher drift that warps precedent. Collateral issues can still adjust how heavy a sentence feels.

頠雖有此表，曲議猶不止。時劉頌為三公尚書，又上疏曰：

Even after Pei Wei’s paper, carping continued. Liu Song, serving as the Three Excellencies’ overseer, then added this argument:

自近世以來，法漸多門，令甚不一。臣今備掌刑斷，職思其憂，謹具啟聞。

Recent decades multiplied alternate legal “doors” and clashing edicts. As the minister now holding capital jurisdiction, I must report my concern.

臣竊伏惟陛下為政，每盡善，故事求曲當，則例不得直；盡善，故法不得全。何則？夫法者，固以盡理為法，而上求盡善，則諸下牽文就意，以赴主之所許，是以法不得全。刑書徵文，徵文必有乖於情聽之斷，而上安于曲當，故執平者因文可引，則生二端。是法多門，令不一，則吏不知所守，下不知所避。奸偽者因法之多門，以售其情，所欲淺深，苟斷不一，則居上者難以檢下，於是事同議異，獄犴不平，有傷於法。

Bending every case to feel perfectly tailored breaks consistent rules. The quest to perfect each outcome shreds a unified code. Why? When clerks stretch clauses to match imperial whim, the statute fractures. Literal argument forks whenever rulers reward clever readings over predictable ones. A fractured code leaves officials and subjects guessing. Sharp lawyers shop forums until punishments become arbitrary.

古人有言：「人主詳，其政荒；人主期，其事理。」詳匪他，盡善則法傷，故其政荒也。期者輕重之當，雖不厭情，苟入于文，則循而行之，故其事理也。夫善用法者，忍違情不厭聽之斷，輕重雖不允人心，經於凡覽，若不可行，法乃得直。又君臣之分，各有所司。法欲必奉，故令主者守文；理有窮塞，故使大臣釋滯；事有時宜，故人主權斷。主者守文，若釋之執犯蹕之平也；大臣釋滯，若公孫弘斷郭解之獄也；人主權斷，若漢祖戮丁公之為也。天下萬事，自非斯格重為，故不近似此類，不得出以意妄議，其餘皆以律令從事。然後法信於下，人聽不惑，吏不容奸，可以言政。人主軌斯格以責群下，大臣小吏各守其局，則法一矣。

An ancient said, "When the ruler of men is detailed, his government is desolate; when the ruler of men sets terms, his affairs are ordered." Perfectionism corrodes legal uniformity. Codified proportionality beats sentimental tailoring. Sound adjudication accepts unpopular but printed sentences. Sovereign and minister occupy distinct roles. Line judges must cling to written clauses. Senior ministers settle statutory deadlocks. Only the emperor handles timely exceptions. Low judges mirror Zhang Shi’s refusal to bend the carriage-interdiction rule. Senior jurists untangle cases the way Gongsun Hong handled Guo Jie. Royal discretion recalls Gaozu killing Ding Gong despite merit. In the ten thousand affairs under Heaven, unless they fall under this pattern of weighty action, and unless they are close to similar cases of this kind, one may not bring forth arbitrary deliberations from personal opinion; all the rest must be handled according to statutes and ordinances. Predictable law earns trust, foils bribery, and makes governance possible. When ruler and ranks stay inside fixed roles, uniformity returns.

古人有言：「善為政者，看人設教。」看人設教，制法之謂也。又曰：「隨時之宜」，當務之謂也。然則看人隨時，在大量也，而制其法。法軌既定則行之，行之信如四時，執之堅如金石，群吏豈得在成制之內，復稱隨時之宜，傍引看人設教，以亂政典哉！何則？始制之初，固已看人而隨時矣。今若設法未盡當，則宜改之。若謂已善，不得盡以為制，而使奉用之司公得出入以差輕重也。夫人君所與天下共者，法也。已令四海，不可以不信以為教，方求天下之不慢，不可繩以不信之法。且先識有言，人至遇而不可欺也。不謂平時背法意斷，不勝百姓願也。

An ancient said, "Those who are good at government observe the people and establish instruction." That is how positive law is born. “Suit the times” means handling what the moment requires. People- and time-surveying inform the code’s great design. After promulgation, law must run like clockwork; bureau ranks may not re-open “flexible” teaching to dilute the code. Why not? Drafters already embedded people and season into the text. If the code misfits, amend it formally. Do not call the code perfect while letting clerks improvise sentence weight. Sovereign and realm share the same published law. Credibility is the foundation of obedience. Wise rulers admit plain facts humans cannot fake forever. Law cannot chase applause case by case.

上古議事以制，不為刑辟。夏殷及周，書法象魏。三代之君齊聖，然咸棄曲當之妙鑒，而任徵文之直准，非聖有殊，所遇異也。今論時敦樸，不及中古，而執平者欲適情之所安，自托於議事以制。臣竊以為聽言則美，論理則違。然天下至大，事務眾雜，時有不得悉循文如令。故臣謂宜立格為限，使主者守文，死生以之，不敢錯思于成制之外，以差輕重，則法恆全。事無正據，名例不及，大臣論當，以釋不滯，則事無閡。至如非常之斷，出法賞罰，若漢祖戮楚臣之私己，封趙氏之無功，唯人主專之，非奉職之臣所得擬議。然後情求傍請之跡絕，似是而非之奏塞，此蓋齊法之大准也。主者小吏，處事無常。何則？無情則法徒克，有情則撓法。積克似無私，然乃所以得其私，又恆所岨以衛其身。斷當恆克，世謂盡公，時一曲法，乃所不疑。故人君不善倚深似公之斷，而責守文如令之奏，然後得為有檢，此又平法之一端也。

Earliest ages judged case-by-case before codification; Three dynasties posted statutes on watchtower gates. Ancient kings preferred predictable text over improvised mercy. Today's mediocrity cannot uphold feudal informal justice. Romanticizing discretionary justice contradicts stable governance. Mass society produces corner cases beyond codification. Publish sentencing grids so clerks cannot freelance aggravation. Senior councils settle gaps statutes omit. Royal exceptionalism stays outside bureaucratic precedent. Ending petition warfare restores systemic fairness. Low clerks oscillate unpredictably. Why? Cold law alienates; sympathetic law corrupts. Harsh judges cloak selfish safety. Callous benches earn praise; mercy invites scrutiny. Rulers must prize textual petitions over performative cruelty.

夫出法權制，指施一事，厭情合聽，可適耳目，誠有臨時當意之快，勝於徵文不允人心也。然起為經制，經年施用，恆得一而失十。故小有所得者，必大有所失；近有所漏者，必遠有所苞。故諳事識體者，善權輕重，不以小害大，不以近妨遠。忍曲當之近適，以全簡直之大准。不牽於凡聽之所安，必守徵文以正例。每臨其事，恆禦此心以決斷，此又法之大概也。

Ad hoc rulings seduce with empathy yet undermine precedent. Codifying improvisation yields tiny gains and systemic harm. Petty wins precede major losses; local loopholes widen. Seasoned jurists weigh systemic harm. Near-term unfairness sometimes preserves long fairness. Judges anchor doctrine despite applause. Every bench decision should echo this discipline.

又律法斷罪，皆當以法律令正文，若無正文，依附名例斷之，其正文名例所不及，皆勿論。法吏以上，所執不同，得為異議。如律之文，守法之官，唯當奉用律令。至於法律之內，所見不同，乃得為異議也。今限法曹郎令史，意有不同為駁，唯得論釋法律，以正所斷，不得援求諸外，論隨時之宜，以明法官守局之分。

No conviction without positive statute or general-part analogy. Senior jurists may dispute interpretations. Line judges enforce codified law. Dissent stays intra-statutory. Dissents cite law books only, never policy memos.

詔下其事。侍中、太宰、汝南王亮奏以為：「夫禮以訓世，而法以整俗，理化之本，事實由之。若斷不斷，常輕重隨意，則王憲不一，人無所錯矣。故觀人設教，在上之舉；守文直法，臣吏之節也。臣以去太康八年，隨事異議。周懸象魏之書，漢詠畫一之法，誠以法與時共，義不可二。今法素定，而法為議，則有所開長，以為宜如頌所啟，為永久之制。」於是門下屬三公曰：「昔先王議事以制，自中古以來，執法斷事，既以立法，誠不宜復求法外小善也。若常以善奪法，則人逐善而不忌法，其害甚於無法也。案啟事，欲令法令斷一，事無二門，郎令史已下，應復出法駁案，隨事以聞也。」

The throne circulated Liu Song’s memo. Attendant, Grand Steward, and Prince Liang of Runan submitted that: "Ritual is used to instruct the age, and law is used to order customs. The root of principle and transformation in fact comes from these. Inconsistent punishment destroys predictability. Custom policy flows from the throne; judges enforce statutes faithfully. Since Taikang 8 cases wandered off-script. Ancient parallels demand singular codes. Now the law has long been fixed, but if the law is made into a matter for deliberation, something will be opened and allowed to grow. We think it fitting to follow what Liu Song has set forth and make it a permanent system." Thereupon the Chancellery instructed the Three Excellencies: "Formerly, the former kings deliberated on affairs in order to make regulations. Since middle antiquity, those who held the law and decided affairs, since law had already been established, truly should not again seek small goods outside the law. Mercy metastasizes worse than legal vacuum. On examining the submitted matter, we wish to make laws and ordinances decide uniformly, so that affairs have no two gates; from gentlemen clerks and recorders downward, they should again bring out legal refutations of cases and report them according to the affair."

及于江左，元帝為丞相時，朝廷草創，議斷不循法律，人立異議，高下無狀。主簿熊遠奏曰：「禮以崇善，法以閑非，故禮有常典，法有常防，人知惡而無邪心。是以周建象魏之制，漢創畫一之法，故能闡弘大道，以至刑厝。律令之作，由來尚矣。經賢智，曆夷險，隨時斟酌，最為周備。自軍興以來，法度陵替，至於處事不用律令，競作屬命，人立異議，曲適物情，虧傷大例。府立節度，復不奉用，臨事改制，朝作夕改，至於主者不敢任法，每輒關咨，委之大官，非為政之體。若本曹處事不合法令，監司當以法彈違，不得動用開塞，以壞成事。按法蓋粗術，非妙道也，矯割物情，以成法耳。若每隨物情，輒改法制，此為以情壞法。法之不一，是謂多門，開人事之路，廣私請之端，非先王立法之本意也。凡為駁議者，若違律令節度，當合經傳及前比故事，不得任情以破成法。愚謂宜令錄事更立條制，諸立議者皆當引律令經傳，不得直以情言，無所依准，以虧舊典也。若開塞隨宜，權道制物，此是人君之所得行，非臣子所宜專用。主者唯當徵文據法，以事為斷耳。」

Jin survival court judged without statutes. Registrar Xiong Yuan memorialized, saying, "Ritual is used to exalt the good, and law is used to restrain wrongdoing; therefore ritual has constant canons, and law has constant defenses, so people know evil and have no perverse mind. Tower statutes enabled peaceful ages. Written law has ancient pedigree. Successive sages polished codes. Warlord adjudication shredded Jin law. Rotating edicts paralyzed local judges. Censorates must guard statutory review. Law approximates justice mechanically. Sentiment-driven amendment corrupts law. Multiple legal doors invite corruption. Appeals require textual authority. Mandate citation standards for memorial debates. Only sovereigns wield emergency discretion. Those in charge should only cite texts, rely on law, and decide according to the affair."

是時帝以權宜從事，尚未能從。而河東衛展為晉王大理，考擿故事有不合情者，又上書曰：「今施行詔書，有考子正父死刑，或鞭父母問子所在。近主者所稱《庚寅詔書》，舉家逃亡家長斬。若長是逃亡之主，斬之雖重猶可。設子孫犯事，將考祖父逃亡，逃亡是子孫，而父祖嬰其酷。傷順破教，如此者眾。相隱之道離，則君臣之義廢。君臣之義廢，則犯上之奸生矣。秦網密文峻，漢興，掃除煩苛，風移俗易，幾于刑厝。大人革命，不得不蕩其穢匿，通其圮滯。今詔書宜除者多，有便於當今，著為正條，則法差簡易。」元帝令曰：「禮樂不興，則刑罰不中，是以明罰敕法，先王所慎。自元康已來，事故薦臻，法禁滋漫。大理所上，宜朝堂會議，蠲除詔書不可用者，此孤所虛心者也。」

Exigent survival politics delayed reform. When Wei Zhan of Hedong was King of Jin's Grand Judge, he examined and picked out precedents that did not accord with human feeling, and again submitted a letter, saying, "Among edicts now being put into effect, some interrogate sons to correct fathers sentenced to death, or whip fathers and mothers to ask where sons are. The Gengyin order executed fugitive heads of household. Decapitating actual fugitive elders seems harsh yet logical. Pinning flight guilt on grandparents when juniors fled reverses generations. Many rulings violate moral order. Destroying family silence erodes political loyalty. Broken loyalty breeds rebellion. Han softened Qin cruelty toward peace. Founders purge prior abuses. Now there are many edicts that should be removed. If those convenient for the present are written as regular articles, the law will be somewhat simpler and easier." Emperor Yuan issued an order, saying, "When ritual and music do not flourish, punishments and penalties do not hit the mark. Therefore making punishments clear and ordering laws was something the former kings treated with care. Yuankang onward bred proliferating bans. What the Grand Judge has submitted should be deliberated in court; removing edicts that cannot be used is what I await with an open mind."

及帝即位，展為廷尉，又上言：「古者肉刑，事經前聖，漢文除之，增加大辟。今人戶凋荒，百不遺一，而刑法峻重，非句踐養胎之義也。愚謂宜復古施行，以隆太平之化。」詔內外通議。於是驃騎將軍王導、太常賀循、侍中紀瞻、中書郎庾亮、大將軍諮議參軍梅陶、散騎郎張嶷等議，以：「肉刑之典，由來尚矣。肇自古先，以及三代，聖哲明王所未曾改也。豈是漢文常主所能易者乎！時蕭曹已沒，絳灌之徒不能正其義。逮班固深論其事，以為外有輕刑之名，內實殺人。又死刑太重，生刑太輕，生刑縱於上，死刑怨於下，輕重失當，故刑政不中也。且原先王之造刑也，非以過怒也，非以殘人也，所以救奸，所以當罪。今盜者竊人之財，淫者好人之色，亡者避叛之役，皆無殺害也，則加之以刑。刑之則止，而加之斬戮，戮過其罪，死不可生，縱虐於此，歲以巨計。此乃仁人君子所不忍聞，而況行之於政乎！若乃惑其名而不練其實，惡其生而趣其死，此畏水投舟，避坎蹈井，愚夫之不若，何取於政哉！今大晉中興，遵復古典，率由舊章，起千載之滯義，拯百殘之遺黎，使皇典廢而復存，黔首死而更生，至義暢於三代之際，遺風播乎百世之後，生肉枯骨，惠侔造化，豈不休哉！惑者乃曰，死猶不懲，而況于刑？然人者冥也，其至愚矣，雖加斬戮，忽為灰土，死事日往，生欲日存，未以為改。若刑諸市朝，朝夕鑒戒，刑者詠為惡之永痛，惡者睹殘刖之長廢，故足懼也。然後知先王之輕刑以禦物，顯誡以懲愚，其理遠矣。」

When the emperor came to the throne, Wei Zhan became Commandant of Justice and again submitted words: "In antiquity, corporal punishments were matters passed through former sages; Emperor Wen of Han abolished them and increased capital penalties. Depopulation clashes with Goujian-style mercy. I foolishly think it fitting to restore antiquity and put it into effect, in order to exalt the transformation of Great Peace." Court-wide deliberation ensued. Thereupon General of Agile Cavalry Wang Dao, Chamberlain for Ceremonials He Xun, Attendant Ji Zhan, Palace Writer Gentleman Yu Liang, Great General's Advisory Army Consultant Mei Tao, Cavalier Gentleman Zhang Yi, and others deliberated, saying: "The canon of corporal punishments has long been honored in origin. Three-age kings kept mutilation. Han Wendi was no sage legislator. Early Han lacked wise ministers to defend classical law. Ban Gu exposed Wen’s reform as bloodier. Wen’s imbalance caused penal dysfunction. Classical mutilation targeted rehabilitation. Non-capital crimes received death. Death sentences overshot proportion annually. Mass execution horrifies humane ears. Rejecting mutilation for killing is suicidal stupidity. Now in the Great Jin Restoration, the dynasty follows and restores the ancient canons and is guided by the old regulations. It raises up a meaning stalled for a thousand years, rescues the surviving people from a hundred ruins, makes the imperial canon exist again after being abolished, and makes the common people live again after death. Utmost righteousness will flourish in the age of the Three Dynasties, and its remaining influence will spread after a hundred generations. To make flesh grow on dry bones and make kindness equal to creation: is this not excellent! Skeptics ask whether mutilation deters. Death’s abstraction fails deterrence. Public mutilation educates better than hidden execution. Only then do we know that the former kings used light punishments to govern things and visible admonitions to discipline the foolish; their principle was far-reaching."

尚書令刁協、尚書薛兼等議，以為：「聖上悼殘荒之遺黎，傷犯死之繁眾，欲行刖以代死刑，使犯死之徒得存性命，則率土蒙更生之澤，兆庶必懷恩以反化也。今中興祚隆，大命惟新，誠宜設寬法以育人。然懼群小愚蔽，習玩所見而忽異聞，或未能咸服。愚謂行刑之時，先明申法令，樂刑者刖，甘死者殺，則心必服矣。古典刑不上大夫，今士人有犯者，謂宜如舊，不在刑例，則進退為允。」

Secretariat Director Diao Xie, Secretary Xue Jian, and others deliberated, saying: "The Sagely One above grieves for the surviving people left from ruin and desolation and is pained by the great number who commit capital crimes. He wishes to use amputation to replace the death penalty, so that those who have committed capital crimes may preserve their lives. Then all within the land will receive the grace of renewed life, and the multitude will surely cherish kindness and return to transformation. Restoration warrants humane statutes. Mass education precedes reform. Offer convicts death-vs-mutilation choice. In the ancient canon, punishments did not reach grandees. If gentlemen today commit crimes, we think it fitting to follow the old practice and not place them within the penal categories; then either advancing or withdrawing will be appropriate."

尚書顗、郎曹彥、中書郎桓彝等議，以為：「復肉刑以代死，誠是聖王之至德，哀矜之弘私。然竊以為刑罰輕重，隨時而作。時人少罪而易威，則從輕而寬之；時人多罪而難威，則宜化刑而濟之。肉刑平世所應立，非救弊之宜也。方今聖化草創，人有餘奸，習惡之徒，為非未已，截頭絞頸，尚不能禁，而乃更斷足劓鼻，輕其刑罰，使欲為惡者輕犯寬刑，蹈罪更眾，是為輕其刑以誘人於罪，殘其身以加楚酷也。昔之畏死刑以為善人者，今皆犯輕刑而殘其身，畏重之常人，反為犯輕而致囚，此則何異斷刖常人以為恩仁邪！受刑者轉廣，而為非者日多，踴貴屨賤，有鼻者醜也。徒有輕刑之名，而實開長惡之源。不如以殺止殺，重以全輕，權小停之。須聖化漸著，兆庶易威之日，徐施行也。」

Secretary Yi, Gentleman Cao Yan, Palace Writer Gentleman Huan Yi, and others deliberated, saying: "Restoring corporal punishments to replace death truly is the utmost virtue of a sage king and the broad private mercy of pity and compassion. Severity must fit era. When the age produces few crimes and people are easy to overawe, lean toward light and lenient measures. When crime clusters and fear alone cannot awe the populace, toughen and reshape punishments to shore up authority. Mutilation fits stability not crisis. Opponents argue wartime Jin cannot soften capital codes without inviting crime. People who once shunned the death penalty as the mark of decency may now break a lighter corporal law and be mutilated, while timid commoners who feared severe penalties end up jailed for slight offenses—how is that any different from hacking the feet off ordinary folk and calling it kindness? Proverb mocks widespread mutilation. Lenient labels deepen vice. Prefer capital harshness temporarily. We should wait until sagely transformation gradually becomes manifest and the multitude becomes easy to awe, and then put it into effect slowly."

議奏，元帝猶欲從展所上。大將軍王敦以為：「百姓習俗日久，忽復肉刑，必駭遠近。且逆寇未殄，不宜有慘酷之聲，以聞天下。」於是乃止。

Yuandi leaned toward Wei until blocked. Great General Wang Dun thought: "The customs of the common people have been practiced for a long time; if corporal punishments are suddenly restored, it will surely frighten people near and far. Moreover, rebel bandits have not yet been destroyed, and it is not fitting for reports of cruelty and harshness to be heard throughout the realm." Proposal dropped.

咸康之世，庾冰好為糾察，近於繁細，後益矯違，復存寬縱，疏密自由，律令無用矣。

Xiankang justice swung between nitpicking and laxness.

至安帝元興末，桓玄輔政，又議欲復肉刑斬左右趾之法，以輕死刑，命百官議。蔡廓上議曰：「建邦立法，弘教穆化，必隨時置制，德刑兼施。長貞一以閑其邪，教禁以檢其慢，灑湛露以流潤，厲嚴霜以肅威，雖復質文迭用，而斯道莫革。肉刑之設，肇自哲王。蓋由曩世風淳，人多惇謹，圖像既陳，則機心直戢，刑人在塗，則不逞改操，故能勝殘去殺，化隆無為。季末澆偽，設網彌密，利巧之懷日滋，恥畏之情轉寡。終身劇役，不足止其奸，況乎黥劓，豈能反於善。徒有酸慘之聲，而無濟俗之益。至於棄市之條，實非不赦之罪，事非手殺，考律同歸，輕重均科，減降路塞，鐘陳以之抗言，元皇所為留湣。今英輔翼贊，道邈伊周，誠宜明慎用刑，愛人弘育，申哀矜以革濫，移大辟于支體，全性命之至重，恢繁息於將來。」而孔琳之議不同，用王朗、夏侯玄之旨。時論多與琳之同，故遂不行。

Yuanxing era Huan Xuan reopened corporal debate. Cai Kuo submitted a deliberation, saying: "In establishing a state and setting up laws, broadening instruction and harmonizing transformation, one must establish regulations according to the time and apply virtue and punishment together. Moral education pairs with seasonal punishments. Classical kings instituted mutilation. Pure ages needed only symbolic deterrence. Decadent ages breed clever crime. Modern wickedness ignores corporal shame. Mutilation noise lacks social uplift. Equal sentencing blocked mercy Zhong Chen protested. Now outstanding assistants give support and help, and their way is distant as Yi Yin and the Duke of Zhou. Truly they should be clear and cautious in using punishments, love the people and broadly nurture them, extend pity and compassion in order to reform excess, move capital penalties to the limbs, preserve the great weight of life and nature, and restore multiplication and growth for the future." Kong Linzhi echoed Wang Lang opposing revival. Majority sided Kong Linzhi—proposal stalled.

Cite this Chapter