In the period of Yao and Shun, the leader ceded his position to someone who had the ability to do it, just like before Yao and Shun died, he abdicated to Shun and Shun abdicated to Dayu. The seemingly fair abdication system actually has great loopholes. Yao, Shun and Yu are related by blood, which makes the abdication system no longer simple. Yao is the grandson of Huangdi, Shun is the eighth generation grandson of Huangdi, Yao's son-in-law and Dayu is the fourth generation grandson of Huangdi. So it seems that the abdication system is only the abdication between blood relatives.
So how do the classics outside Confucianism evaluate Yao Shunyu's abdication system? "Everything is done wrong" has a saying: "Shun forced Yao, Yu forced Shun, Jie, and attacked Zhou. These four kings are famous all over the world." "Shun Prison Yao" is also mentioned in Bamboo Records. These works outside the Confucian classics clearly describe the cruelty of the struggle for the emperor during the Yao and Shun period, and let us see the historical features outside the Confucian classics.
In retrospect, the ancient struggle for the throne was always cruel. Hu Hai killed his brother for the throne, and even Li Shimin, known as Ren Jun, embarked on the road of killing his brother and forcing his father. In addition to being forced to give way, several monarchs who hold power are willing to give up their rights to others.
Confucius advocated the way of being a gentleman, but there was no gentleman in the cruel political struggle, which was not in line with the way of being a wise monarch advocated by Confucianism, so Confucianism publicized the beautification of Yao and Shun's seizure of power.