Published on November 30, 2019.
This article draws from “Fixed and Unchanging,” the column by Professor Emeritus Kaji Nobuyuki of Osaka University serialized in the monthly magazine Hanada, and discusses the criticism surrounding the phrase “according to one’s own measure.”
Referring to the historical failures of states that tried to make everyone’s “measure” equal, such as the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea, it argues that aspiration and self-strengthening, not equality of condition, are what open the way in life.
Through Kaji’s own experience of studying Chinese classics while working as a tutor during his poor student days, it criticizes the modern tendency to view university advancement only from an economic standpoint.

November 30, 2019
On the contrary, history has shown, and still shows today, how miserable the conditions became in countries that once advocated policies aimed at making everyone’s “measure” the same.
A friend of mine, one of the foremost readers I know, who, like me, subscribes every month to the four monthly magazines, said, “Senior Kaji and you are responding to each other.”
The following is from an essay by Professor Emeritus Kaji Nobuyuki of Osaka University, serialized under the title “Fixed and Unchanging” at the beginning of the monthly magazine Hanada released on the 26th.
This old man, whose senility is progressing, cannot quite make sense of recent affairs in this floating world.
The other day, there was apparently some uproar over a gaffe by the minister of education.
A gaffe is a serious matter.
I wondered whether he had made some grave statement such as abolishing compulsory education entirely, closing all universities, or installing toilets for old men in every women’s university restroom.
But, astonishingly, what he had said to university entrance-exam students was, “Please do your best according to your own measure.”
That this should be called a great gaffe is something this old man cannot understand at all.
While I was thinking so, I learned that taking private English tests for university entrance exams costs money, and that the testing venues where one can take those tests within the range of affordable costs are concentrated in urban areas, making them disadvantageous for students in the provinces, and so on and so forth.
Apparently, the argument is that this lacks consideration for the economic condition of households; in other words, that “one’s own measure” means adjusting oneself to the economic condition of one’s family, and that this is “discrimination.”
Then let me ask.
Name a country where “one’s own measure,” for example income circumstances, has become almost the same, or the same.
No such thing exists anywhere.
The only places where it exists are heaven in the Christian cultural sphere and paradise in the Indian religious cultural sphere, and even then only after death.
In the Confucian cultural sphere to which we belong, no such thing exists either before or after death.
It is something that has never existed in world history.
On the contrary, history has shown, and still shows today, how miserable the conditions became in countries that once advocated policies aimed at making everyone’s “measure” the same.
That is to say, the collapsed Soviet Union, China which is collapsing, North Korea which cannot even make everyone’s “measure” the same, and so on.
How do those who oppose the phrase “one’s own measure” explain that?
Precisely because one’s “measure” is not the same as another’s, the will to rise up is born.
From a place where everyone’s “measure” is the same, something new will absolutely never be born.
That is because human beings essentially seek an easy life.
For example, this old man’s family was poor.
When I advanced to university, I could not live in a boarding house because that would cost money, so I commuted from my home in Osaka to the university in Kyoto.
I woke up at six every morning.
Since I went to bed at midnight, every day I napped on the train during my commute.
On the way home, three or four nights a week, I worked as a tutor at two homes.
I paid for most of my tuition myself.
And I studied single-mindedly.
I have written this several times, but I will write it once more.
When I was explaining the lesson content at a tutoring job, the junior-high-school girl I was teaching kept staring at the cuff of my right sleeve as I explained.
Because I was poor and had only one stand-collar student uniform, the cuff had become worn through and torn open.
But I was not bothered at all.
The money I earned as a tutor continued to be put toward tuition, and above all toward purchasing specialized books in Chinese classical studies, my field of study.
Human beings vary.
I never resented anyone because I was poor.
Among friends in the same circumstances, there were some who resented society.
And they became so-called activists.
But what about him now?
In this capitalist society, he has lived a well-treated life, and now lives comfortably and richly.
Where did his resentment go?
This old man was poor in the past and is poor now.
However, I am spending my old age with a rich heart.
The poverty of my life when I was young did not determine the direction of my life at all.
This old man simply had the single-minded wish to specialize in Chinese classical studies.
In order to obtain the money necessary for that, I merely continued working as a tutor at several homes.
I never once resented the poverty of my own family.
Now, unlike the old days, there is an atmosphere in which university advancement is viewed only from an economic standpoint.
Only the aspiration to do something, and to study for that purpose, should determine one’s destination for higher education, and it is a mistake to decide by money.
If one has aspiration, money can somehow be managed.
The ancients said: The movement of Heaven is vigorous.
The gentleman, therefore, strengthens himself without ceasing.
They also said: One who has aspiration will finally accomplish the matter, the purpose.