Han shih wai chuan Han Ying's Illustrations of the didactic application of the Classic of songs |
 |
| I. |
| II. |
| III. |
 | IV. | CHAPTER IV |
| 1. |
| 2. |
| 3. |
| 4. |
| 5. |
| 6. |
| 7. |
| 8. |
| 9. |
| 10. |
| 11. |
| 12. |
| 13. |
| 14. |
| 15. |
| 16. |
| 17. |
| 18. |
| 19. |
| 20. |
| 21. |
| 22. |
| 23. |
| 24. |
| 25. |
| 26. |
| 27. |
| 28. |
| 29. |
| 30. |
| 31. |
| 32. |
| 33. |
| V. |
| VI. |
| VII. |
| VIII. |
| IX. |
| X. |
 | CHAPTER IV Han shih wai chuan |  |
CHAPTER IV
1[1]
[The tyrant] Chou invented the punishment of the fiery [pit]
and the pillar.[2]
The Prince Pi-kan said, "If, when his master is
outrageous, [the minister][3]
does not remonstrate, he is not loyal.
If from fear of death he does not speak, he is not brave. If he sees
a fault, he objects, and if [his objections] go unheeded, he dies:
this is the height of loyalty."
Whereupon he remonstrated for three days without leaving the
court. Chou accordingly[4]
put him to death. The Ode says,[5]
Hsin hsü 7.1b-2a is nearly identical. After the quotation from the Ode it adds,
"Is it not indeed pathetic that the innocent should die?" [OMITTED].
For [OMITTED] read [OMITTED] as in HFT 7.3a and 17.1b (Chao 101.) Cf. Shih chi 3.11a (Mém.
hist. 1.201, note 1) for a description.
Read [OMITTED] with Hsin hsü for [OMITTED] "imprisoned him." As there is elsewhere no such
tradition concerning Pi-kan, [OMITTED] must be right. Possibly [OMITTED] is a contamination from
the next section.
[OMITTED] is generally taken as [OMITTED]; Legge translates, "But indeed I have committed no offence"; likewise Karlgren. Han Ying has put the line in a context requiring the more usual meaning of [OMITTED].
2[1]
Chieh made a wine lake in which a boat could move about, and
the [resulting] mound of dregs was so [high] that from it one could
see for a distance of ten li. There were three thousand men who
drank [from the lake] like cattle.[2]
Kuan Lung-fêng proffered a remonstrance:[3]
"In antiquity
were sparing of property. As a result their states were at peace
and they themselves lived out their span of life. But your Highness
now is using up property as though it could not be exhausted
and is putting people to death as though he were afraid he would
not be able to kill them all.[4] If Your Highness does not reform,
the retribution of Heaven will certainly descend on him and
punishment will inevitably come to him. May Your Highness
reform!"
He stood at his post without leaving the court until Chieh
imprisoned him and put him to death. On hearing of this the
superior man says, "It was the will of Heaven." The Ode says,[5]
Hsin hsü 7.1b is very similar, but lacks the quotation at the end. Legge, Shih,
Proleg. 91, translates this paragraph.
[OMITTED]: cf. *Shên chien 5.2a: [OMITTED] "Should someone ask
whether it was more difficult to offer a remonstrance than to receive one. . ." I take
[OMITTED] to be the equivalent of [OMITTED], and not "came to remonstrate with him" as
Legge does.
3[1]
There is great loyalty, secondary loyalty, inferior loyalty, and
there is treason to the state.[2]
Enveloping a prince with the True
Way so as to reform him constitutes great loyalty. Stirring up a
prince with virtue so as to assist him constitutes secondary loyalty.
Holding up the right to censure the wrong so as to provoke the
prince[3]
constitutes inferior loyalty. To be without consideration
for the public or for duty (i),[4]
to be weakly complaisant and
friends[6] —this constitutes treason to the state.
Such a relation as that of the Duke of Chou to King Ch`êng can
be called one of great loyalty. That of Kuan Chung to Duke
Huan can be called one of secondary loyalty. That of [Wu] Tzŭ-hsü
to Fu-ch`ai can be called one of inferior loyalty. That of
Ts`ao Ch`u-lung to [the tyrant] Chou[7]
can be called traitorous.
These all are ways of acting of ministers. Good or ill fortune comes
accordingly as they are worthy or unworthy. The Ode says,[8]
From Hsün-tzŭ 9.6a-b, with minor verbal changes and the addition of the conclusion
and quotation from the Ode.
B, C, D lack [OMITTED], which Chou and CHy add from Hsün-tzŭ. CHy follows TPYL
418.2a and writes [OMITTED] "dies for it" for [OMITTED]. Ch`u-hsüeh chi, loc. cit., has [OMITTED],
and Hsün-tzŭ has [OMITTED]. (Chao 103.) Yang Liang explains, "Because he gives his
prince the reputation of harming sages, it constitutes inferior loyalty."
Chou adds [OMITTED], which is lacking in the other texts, from Hsün-tzŭ; CHy and Chao
would also add it.
Chou quotes SY 10.16a (after Yang Liang), where a Ch`u-lung is mentioned as
tso-shih [OMITTED] to Chieh, and on the basis of which would emend [OMITTED] to [OMITTED]. Wang
Hsien-ch`ien, however, points out that Hsün-tzŭ 10.10b mentions Ts`ao Ch`u-lung as
belonging to the Shang, and so discredits the SY version. (Chao.)
4[1]
Duke Ai asked about choosing men. Confucius said, "Do not
choose the physically strong,[2]
or the eloquent, or the sharp-tongued.[3]
The physically strong are proud; the eloquent flatter;
the sharp-tongued[4]
are unreliable. Just as you string a bow before
you look to its strength, and break a horse before you look for
its good points, [even so] you see that a gentleman is honest and
without guile before you look to him for knowledge. For a gentleman
compared with a wolf: it is difficult to approach him. The Chou
shu says,[5] `To add wings to a tiger'—is this not indeed dangerous?"
6 Shih 341 No. 198/3.
The Ode says,
with his master.
Hsün-tzŭ 20.18a-b is the source for this paragraph. Chia-yü 1.26a modifies Hsün-tzŭ;
SY 8.11b-12a shows some relation to both Hsün-tzŭ and HSWC, but is considerably
amplified.
[OMITTED]: Yang Liang glosses: [OMITTED] "a covetous person." Hao I-hsing says,
"[OMITTED] has not the meaning `to covet' . . . I do not know what character it is a mistake
for, but Yang's commentary is very wrong." The usual meaning of the word makes
excellent sense. SY has [OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED] "The physically strong
will certainly wish to encroach upon others, and cannot be taken as a model."
With Hao I-hsing I emend [OMITTED] to [OMITTED] to agree with SY [OMITTED] "sharp-tongued."
(Chao 104.)
* I-Chou-shu 3.14a has [OMITTED]. Li Hsien's com. on
Hou-Han shu 48.8b quotes HSWC as the same, with [OMITTED] after [OMITTED] and continues: [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. " `Do not add wings to a tiger, lest he fly into
the city, seize men and eat them.' Now putting an unworthy man in power is adding
wings to a tiger." Sun I-jang (Cha-i 2.1a) thinks this is the proper reading, and Chao
agrees. HFT 17.1b also quotes the line from I-Chou-shu. (CHy.)
5[1]
Duke Huan of Ch`i planned in private with Kuan Chung to
attack Chü, and yet the people knew of it. Duke Huan said to
Kuan Chung, "I spoke to you[2]
alone, and yet the people know.
Why is this?"
Kuan Chung said, "It seems to me[3]
that there is a sage in the
country. Where is Tung-kuo Ya?"[4]
Duke Huan looked around and said, "Here he is."
Kuan Chung said, "Did you tell it?"
Tung-kuo Ya said, "I did."
Kuan Chung said, "How did you know it?"
He said, "I have heard that the superior man has three aspects.
From this I knew it."
Kuan Chung said, "What do you mean by three aspects?"
He said, "Pleased and happy[5]
—this is the musical[6]
aspect.
Anxious and grieved—this is the aspect of mourning. Fierce and
replete—this is the military[7]
aspect. From this I knew."
Kuan Chung said, "How did you know it was to be Chü?"
He replied, "His Highness pointed to the southeast.[8]
His
mouth opened and did not close. His tongue was raised and did
not fall. That is how I knew it was to be Chü."
Duke Huan approved.[9]
Master Tung-kuo said that the eyes
are representative of the mind, and that words are the indicators
of action. Now knowledge of men is not to be had for the asking.
By regarding a man's demeanor, investigating his motives, and
determining his choice, you will get to the bottom of his nature.
The Ode says,[10]
I can measure by reflection.
This varies somewhat from both Kuan-tzŭ 16.10b-11a and LSCC 18.5a-6b (Wilhelm
295-7); SY 13.3b-5a is based on the latter.
[OMITTED] "second father" was the title bestowed on Kuan Chung by Duke Huan;
cf. Pelliot, TP 27 (1930) .71-2, note 2.
[OMITTED]: Kuan-tzŭ has [OMITTED] Yu; SY has [OMITTED] Ch`ui. Yü Yüeh (CYTT 17.5b)
says [OMITTED] is a mistake for ⊙[i]
, the old form of [OMITTED]. As LSCC and Lun hêng 26.17a
both agree with HSWC and write [OMITTED], Chao thinks Yü is wrong. Wang Yin-chin
(Ching-i shu-wên 23.16a) says his name was [OMITTED], and [OMITTED] was his tzŭ. (Chao 105.)
B, C here insert the Ode quoted at the end. CHy says it should either be omitted
here or the paragraph should be divided into two.
6
Now you may have strong armor and sharp weapons,[1]
but if
they are not sufficient to undertake an expedition against the
enemy or to defeat the foe,[2]
[it is just the same as not having
weapons at all].[3]
Your bow may be good and the arrows may
match, but if they are not sufficient to shoot far and to hit a small
mark, [it is just the same as having no bow and arrows]. If the
enemy, it is just the same as not having the people at
all. Just as a thousand li of boulders does not mean you have
any [real] territory, even so a million[4] ignorant citizens does not
mean you have the people. The Ode says,[5]
But it is of no use to sift.
In the north is the Ladle,
But it lades out no liquor.
This phrase has become displaced to a position after the next sentence, the conclusion
to which I have supplied in brackets.
For [OMITTED] TPYL 499.1a has [OMITTED] "a billion," or "a hundred billion," depending
on the definition of [OMITTED].
7[1]
According to tradition, Shun played on the five-string lute,
singing the "Nan-fêng" to it,[2]
and yet the empire was in order.
Duke P`ing of Chou[3]
always had wine within reach, while the
bells and musical stones were not loosened from their support,
and yet the world was likewise in order. But a commoner with
only a hundred mou of land and a single house "has no leisure
to rest,"[4]
nor is there any way for him to change [his condition].
Now the way in which one man keeps in touch with the whole
empire and still has leisure while [the masses] below are under
control, is by getting others to work for him. But when a man
arrogates to himself the authority of ordering others around without
being able to control the masses below, then the person on
the throne is not a man worthy of his position. The Ode says,[5]
But it is of no use to sift.
In the north is the Ladle,
But it lades out no liquor.
This sentence, introduced by [OMITTED], occurs in several places: Li Ki 2.67 (17/2.1)
has [OMITTED] "invented" for [OMITTED]; likewise Shih chi 24.16a (Mém. hist. 3.254 and note 6);
both however omit [OMITTED]. Hsin yü 1.96 (von Gabain 32) has [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. Chia yü 8.7a is the same with [OMITTED] for [OMITTED] and [OMITTED]
for [OMITTED], and follows with four lines which are attributed to the "Nan-fêng" (translated
by Chavannes, op. cit.). Chêng Hsüan's com. on Li chi says he has not seen it, and
the quotation in Chia-yü may be from the hand of Wang Su.
8[1]
When Duke Huan of Ch`i went to attack the Shan-jung, his
route passed through Yen, and the Prince of Yen escorted him
beyond the borders [of his own state].[2]
Duke Huan asked Kuan
Chung, "When one feudal lord escorts another, is it right that he
should go beyond his own borders?"
Kuan Chung said, "Unless it is the Son of Heaven [whom he
is escorting], he does not go beyond his own borders."
Duke Huan said, "Then it was out of fear of me that he
violated ritual usage (li). It is not right that I should be the
cause of [the Prince of] Yen's violating ritual (li)."
Whereupon he cut off his territory as far as the Prince of Yen
had gone and presented it to Yen. When the feudal lords heard
of this, they all payed their respects in the court of Ch`i. The Ode
says,[3]
Shih chi 34.3a (Mém. hist. 4.136): "In the 27th year [of Duke Chuang of Yen]
(B.C. 674) the Shan-jung invaded our territory. Duke Huan of Ch`i came to the aid
of Yen, passing to the north to attack the Shan-jung and then returning [through Yen].
The Prince of Yen accompanied Duke Huan of Ch`i past his own borders, and Duke
Huan accordingly cut off the land as far as the Prince of Yen had gone and gave it
to Yen." Chou suggests that the entry in Ch`un ch`iu (Tso chuan 100, Chuang 20)
refers to this incident: "In winter, (B.C. 673) a body of men from Ch`i smote the
Jung."
9
The music of Shun[1]
in using shield and battle-axe[2]
was not
perfect music[3]
; his marriage with his two wives was not in complete
accord with ritual (li)[4]
; his enfeoffing the nineteen sons of
Huang-ti[5]
was not based on justice (i); his going in the fields
weeping and wailing[6]
was not living up to his fate. From the
human point of view, he [acted] correctly, but judged from the
legal point of view, he did not. The Li says,[7]
["The Way of the
Sages includes] the three hundred ways of acting according to
ritual (li), and the three thousand rules of demeanor." The Ode
says,[8]
Associating with the correct and upright
So shall the Spirits hearken to you,
And give you good.
Cf. Li Ki 2.46 (17/1.1): "The combination of those modulated sounds, so as to
give pleasure, and the [direction in harmony with them of the] shields and axes, and of
the plumes and ox-tails, constitutes what we call music." (Legge 2.92.) The shields
and axes were used in mimes of war; the plumes and ox-tails in those of peace. Cf. ibid.
1.469 (6/1.7): "The Grand director of Music taught how to brandish the shield and
axe." (Legge 1.347.)
Cf. Li Ki 2.62 (17/1.26): "The dances with shields and axes did not belong to
the most excellent music." (Legge 2.102.) But Analects 164 (3/25): "The Master
said of the Shao that it was perfectly beautiful and also perfectly good."
Mencius 345 (5A/2.1): "Wang Chang asked [Mencius], saying, `The Ode says,
He must inform his parents.
Shun. How was it that Shun's marriage took place without his informing [his
parents]?' "
Cf. Lu shih ([OMITTED]) 11.15a: [OMITTED] "[Shun] enfeoffed
nineteen grandsons of Huang Ti as marquises and earls."
Cf. Mencius 342 (5A/1.1): "When Shun went into the fields, he cried out and
wept towards the pitying heavens," whence probably Shu ching 65-6 (2B/3.21): "In
the early time of the emperor, when he was living by mount Li, he went into the
fields, and daily cried out and wept toward the pitying heavens." (This belongs to the
"old text.")
10[1]
Li is the ultimate in establishing distinctions[2]
; it is the foundation
for strengthening a state; it constitutes the channel for the
spread of royal prestige; it represents the basis for merit and fame.
The king and nobles unify the empire by following it, or they
fail to follow it, and as a result the state falls. Hence it is not
enough to have strong arms and sharp weapons to engage in
military operations[3]
; high walls and deep moats do not insure
security; harsh commands and a multiplicity of punishments are
inadequate for the establishment of majesty. Success accompanies
the Way of li, while neglect of the Way of li results in ruin. Of
old the people of Ch`u made shields of scaly dragon skin and
rhinocerous hide that were stout as metal or stone, and lances of
steel like [that from] Yüan.[4]
They were cruel as [the sting of] wasp
or scorpion. Light and edged, hard and sharp, they were quick
as a whirlwind. Yet the army [of Ch`u] was endangered in Ch`iusha,
and T`ang-tzŭ[5]
perished. Chuang Ch`iao rose up,[6]
and Ch`u
was divided into three or four [parts].[7]
In what way was this due
to a lack of stout armor and sharp weapons? It was a result of
employing means in governing that were not [in accord with] the
Way of li.
[Ch`u] had the Ju and Huai [Rivers] as obstacles, and the Han
and Chiang [Rivers] for moats; it was encircled by the Fang-chêng
[mountains], and cut off by the forests of Têng; yet Ch`in's army
came to Yen and Ying and captured them as [easily as] one
shakes off dry [leaves]. In what way was this due to a lack of
in governing that were not [in accord with] the Way of li.
[The tyrant] Chou put Pi-kan to death and imprisoned the
viscount of Chi, he devised the punishment of the fiery [pit] and
the pillar, and executions went on continually. Subordinates were
anxious and resentful, while none of them had any hope for his
own life. Yet when the army of Chou arrived, his orders were not
carried out by his attendants. In what way was this[8]
due to any
lack of harsh commands or of a multiplicity of punishments? It
was the result of employing in government means that were not
[in accord with] the Way of li.
If the Way is made clear, then [the people] are treated equitably
and distinctions are established for them; if they are truly loved
and employed in season, then inferiors will respond to superiors
like shadow or echo. Only when a person fails to obey orders is
he punished. One man is punished and the empire submits. The
[guilty] inferior[9]
does not blame his superior, but realizes that the
fault lies with himself. In this way punishments and crimes[10]
will both be diminished, and royal prestige will spread like water
flowing. This results from nothing else than following this way.
The Ode says,[11]
From the south to the north,
There was not a thought but did him homage.
and those far away come in haste to him, [while those from]
secluded and backward states without exception rush to be in his
employment, making him their refuge and their pleasure, even as
an infant turns to its mother. Why is this? It is because jên is
the pattern, i is established, teaching is sincere, love is deep, and li
and music are everywhere prevalent. The Ode says,[13]
This is taken from Hsün-tzŭ 10.12a-14b. It occurs also in Shih chi 23.6a-8a (Mém.
hist. 3.216-20).
[OMITTED]: Hsün-tzŭ has [OMITTED]. Shih chi: [OMITTED] ⊙ .[j]
Yang Liang
says [OMITTED] Yüan is a place name. Hsü Kuang says steel is called [OMITTED]. [OMITTED] is a variant
of [OMITTED], a lance [OMITTED]; cf. *Fang yen 9.1b.
11[1]
The prince[2]
is one who distributes largesse according to li; he
is just to all [in his gifts] and without prejudice. The subject is
one who serves his prince according to li; being loyal and obedient,
he is never lax.[3]
Since the father is generous and kind, he observes
li. Since the son is respectful and loving, he practices respect.
Since the elder brother is kind and loving, he shows fraternal
affection. Since the younger brother is reverent and submissive,
he is not remiss.[4]
The husband, being an enlightened supervisor,[5]
observes the distinction [between husband and wife].[6]
The wife,
being pliant and submissive, is obedient. If her husband acts [in
a manner] not in accordance with the proper way, though frightened,
she herself urges him [to be good]. Such is the complete
way.[7]
Disorder comes with partiality; with completeness comes
order. It may be asked[8]
how all may be accomplished together.
The answer is, pay attention to li. Of old the Former Kings, by
attending to li, made the empire obedient, and hence their virtue
extended to Heaven and Earth. Nothing they did but was proper.
Now the superior man is reverent but not fearful,[9]
respectful but
riches and honors he is not proud, but by responding to changing
circumstances he is not reduced to extremity. This constitutes
paying attention to li.[11] Thus the superior man, insofar as li is
concerned, being respectful is contented; being straightforward[12]
in affairs he is not remiss; being generous[13] in his relations with
others, he is not self-seeking. In regard to demeanor he is
polished[14] without giving offence.[15] When he responds to changing
circumstances, being alert and adaptable, he does not get into
trouble. In his relations with officials and craftsmen he does not
compete[16] with their ability, but makes use of their services. In
regard to the living creatures of Heaven and Earth, he does not
oppose their state, but carefully plans for their prosperity.[17] In
serving[18] his superiors he is loyal and obedient, but not lax. In
employing his subordinates he is just to all without prejudice.
In social intercourse, having classified people, he accords to them
what is proper (i). In his own village he is tolerant but not [to the
straits, he will be famous; and if successful, he will perform meritorious
deeds. Jên and i together will cover the empire, inexhaustible.
Their brilliance will penetrate Heaven and Earth,
governing without instability the ten thousand transformations.
Blood and ch`i are in harmony; will and thought are projected;
virtuous conduct and i fill Heaven and Earth. [Such a person is]
the acme of jên and knowledge. This is what is meant by the li
to which the Former Kings attended. Under these circumstances,
the old are at peace, the young are cherished, and friends are
sincere—[all naturally] as an infant turns to its mother. I say,
this results when jên is the pattern and i prevails, when teaching
is sincere and love is deep, when li and music are universal.[19] The
Ode says,[20]
Every smile and word are as they should be.
This is based on Hsün-tzŭ 8.2b-4a, where the whole is cast in the form of a supposititious
dialogue.
[OMITTED]: I follow CHy, B, C and read [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. Hsün-tzŭ has [OMITTED]. Chou
would omit [OMITTED].
[OMITTED]: B, C have [OMITTED]; cf. Shih 44 No. 29/1: [OMITTED] "enlighten this lower
earth." Chêng Hsüan's commentary: [OMITTED] "It is a metaphor
for the ruler overseeing the affairs of the empire."
[OMITTED]. B, C, D have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED], and so in my translation. CHy follows
Hsün-tzŭ: [OMITTED], and says, "The text above speaks of prince and minister, father
and son, elder and younger brother, husband and wife, all together; so this should not
be connected with the way of a wife alone." He takes the reading [OMITTED] in the [OMITTED] edition
to be an editor's emendation and restores the Hsün-tzŭ reading.
Wang Yin-chin reads [OMITTED] as [OMITTED] in [OMITTED] (Shih 642 No. 304/5) "Unterrified,
unscared."
[OMITTED]: Wang Yin-chih says it should [OMITTED] in the sense of "frightened." This
sentence is reminiscent of Analects 253 (12/5): [OMITTED].
[OMITTED]: likewise Hsün-tzŭ. I suspect that the [OMITTED] comes from the identical
phrase at the end of this passage.
[OMITTED]: Chu Ch`i-fêng (TT 1781-2) says, "The two characters [OMITTED] are
redundant. [OMITTED] stands for [OMITTED] by a mistake in form, and [OMITTED] is the same as [OMITTED] by
a mistake in sound. One edition would write [OMITTED] and one would have [OMITTED], and
a later editor, unable to choose between them, kept them both." Chao thinks this
is correct, as two characters balance with the other phrases. But Hsün-tzŭ has [OMITTED]
[OMITTED], and it is not easy to confuse phonetically [OMITTED] *iwan and [OMITTED] *giug.
[OMITTED]: Wang Nien-sun says [OMITTED] should be taken as [OMITTED] in the sense of
"oppose" [OMITTED], and paraphrases: [OMITTED] "The superior
man corrects and adorns his person without offending against what is proper."
[OMITTED]: CHy, B, C have [OMITTED], likewise Hsün-tzŭ, and Chou would follow that reading;
however, the two are interchangeable. (Chao 109.)
[OMITTED]. For [OMITTED] B, C have [OMITTED]. CHy and D write [OMITTED]
[OMITTED] probably under the influence of Hsün-tzŭ: [OMITTED]
[OMITTED] "He does not bother about explaining how they got to be as they are,
but makes the best possible use of their properties." [OMITTED] and [OMITTED] are interchangeable;
cf. Yi King 281 (11 hsiang): [OMITTED], where [OMITTED] is a variant.
[OMITTED]: Hao I-hsing above has argued that Hsün-tzŭ [OMITTED] should be [OMITTED] as in HSWC,
and Wang Hsien-ch`ien thinks his argument is also valid here.
12[1]
Yen-tzŭ made a visit of state to Lu.[2]
In ascending the hall he
hastened. In presenting the jade he knelt. Tzŭ-kung was surprised
at this and aked Confucius, "Does Yen-tzŭ know ritual (li)?
He came today on a visit of state to Lu, and when he ascended
the hall, he hastened; when he presented the jade he knelt. Why
did he do this?"
Confucius said, "He had his reasons. Wait until he [comes to]
see me, and I will ask him about it."
Soon afterward Yen-tzŭ came in, and Confucius asked him
about it. Yen-tzŭ replied, "Now the ritual (li) of ascending the
hall is for the minister to take two steps when the prince steps
once. Today the prince went quickly—did I dare not hasten?
Today the prince received my present on a low level. Did I dare
not kneel?"
Confucius approved, saying, "In the [canon of] ritual there
are even more rites. With the little experience you Tz`ŭ, have had
in such matters,[3]
how can you be up to knowing ritual?"
The Ode says,[3]
Every smile and word are as they should be.
Chou remarks, "There is no further mention in the Ch`un-ch`iu of envoys sent on
friendly visits to Lu by Ch`i, after Ch`ing Fêng in the 27th year of [Duke] Hsiang
(B.C. 545). This is just an invention of the philosophers."
13
In antiquity eight families were [associated with] one ching-t`ien
[unit].[1]
A square li comprised one ching.[2]
A breadth of three
hundred pu and a length of three hundred pu made one [square]
li. Each field [contained] nine hundred mou.[3]
A breadth of one
pu and a length of one hundred pu[4]
made one mou. A breadth of
one hundred pu and a length of one hundred pu made one hundred
mou. The eight families made a neighborhood. One family
had a hundred mou, and each extra [adult] male[5]
had twenty-five
mou. Each family [tilled] ten mou of the public field. The remaining
twenty mou [they used] together for their [summer] huts,[6]
each having two and one half mou. The eight families protected
one another; they stood watch in turn over each other's movements;
in sickness they shared the anxiety; in difficulty and distress
they aided one another. Those who had, loaned to those
who had not; they invited each other to food and drink. They
planned marriages together; in fishing and hunting they divided
in such ways as these that the people of that time were on good
terms and fond of one another. The Ode says,[7]
Today, however, it is not like that. The people are made
responsible in groups of five. When there is a crime they spy
upon one another; when there is to be punishment they inform
on one another. As a result of the resentments and enmity called
into being by such practices, the people injure one another to the
detriment of their [natural] feelings of friendship. Violence is done
to jên and kindness, while the reforming [capacity] of superiors
is vitiated.[9]
Those who are on good terms are few, while those who
want to destroy others are legion; by these practices the path to
jên is obliterated. The Ode says,[10]
You [and your advisors] will sink together in ruin.
Cf. Ku-liang chuan 12.16a: "Of old 300 pu made up one li. It was called a chingt`ien
[unit]. One ching-t`ien unit contained 900 mou. The public field occupied one
[section]."
Ho Hsiu's com. on Kung-yang chuan 16.15b: "Those in excess of five persons
[per family] were called [OMITTED]. By rule these people received field of 25 mou"; likewise
Mencius 245 (3A/3.17).
Ho Hsiu, ibid., says "Dwellings in the fields were called [OMITTED]; those in the city were
called [OMITTED]."
14[1]
The Son of Heaven should not speak in terms of quantity; the
feudal lords should not speak of profit and loss; the Great Officers
should not speak of success and failure; the gentleman should not
speak of exchanging goods or follow the way of a merchant.[2]
Just as a family that has a four-horse team does not depend[3]
on
the increase of fowls and pigs [for its livelihood], and a family that
and sheep, so the prince of [a state of] a thousand chariots does
not circulate merchandise.[5] A prime minister will not repair a
decrepit fence[6] ; a Great Officer will not do gardening, nor will
the Minister of Storehouses[7] covet[8] the income of the markets.
In this way the poor and wretched have something to rejoice in,[9]
and orphans and widows have something with which to employ
their hands and feet.[10] The Ode says,[11]
And here ears untouched:—
For the benefit of the widow.
This is derived from Hsün-tzŭ 19.11a-b, where it is introduced by the line, "When
superiors lay emphasis on i, then i triumphs over [motives of] profit. When they lay
emphasis on profit, then profit triumphs over i." [OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]
Chêng Hsüan's com. on Li chi 60.5b says, " `A family that has ice cut'—that is,
one with [the rank of] minister or Great Officer, or above, that used ice in mourning
or sacrifices." [OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED].
Cf. GL 379-80: "He who keeps horses and a carriage does not look after fowls
and pigs. The family which keeps its stores of ice does not rear cattle or sheep. [So],
the house which possesses a hundred chariots should not keep a minister to look out
for imposts that he may lay them on the people."
[OMITTED]: Hsün-tzŭ lacks [OMITTED], and Yü Yüeh (Chu-tzŭ p`ing-i 15.14a-b) thinks
it should be added there. He explains [OMITTED] as a mistake for [OMITTED]; for [OMITTED] he would
read [OMITTED], as a phonetic borrowing. [OMITTED] he says is "bamboo fence." Actually only the
variant [OMITTED] is so defined, but as Yü points out, this emendation makes sense with the
next phrase, [OMITTED], both expressing the idea of not competing with the
people for gain.
For [OMITTED] Li Hsien's quotation in his com. on Hou-Han shu 58B.3a writes [OMITTED] "seize."
(Chao 110.)
15[1]
When a ruler wants to get a good archer who can hit a small
mark from a distance, he offers noble rank and generous awards
to attract him. On the one hand he is not partial to his own
brothers, nor on the other hand does he keep in obscurity those
from afar: he selects the one who can hit the mark. Is not this
on it.[3]
Now if one wishes to govern the state and to control the people,
he should harmonize and unify superiors and inferiors; if he would
make the walls strong within and guard against difficulties [from]
without, his government must consist in controlling men. If he
is unable to control men, disorder is imminent, and sudden extinction
awaits him. However, in seeking ministers and assistants
[actually] there is none of this impartiality, but instead bias and
favoritism are what are indulged in.[4]
Can such conduct be called
anything but wrong?
5 Read [OMITTED] with CHy, B, C for [OMITTED].
Truly, no ruler of a state but wishes for stability, yet unexpectedly
a crisis comes; none but wishes for continuity, yet unexpectedly
he is lost. In ancient times there were states to the
number of over a thousand; today they come to no more than a
few tens.[6]
Why is this? Not one but was lost through this [fault].[7]
It is a fact that the intelligent ruler will [reward] his favorites
with precious metals or rare jewels,[8]
but not with offices and public
charges. And why? Because it would be no real advantage to
them whom he favors. It is a benighted ruler who employs such
persons when they are without ability, and it is a false minister
who insists on filling his office when he lacks ability. When above
the ruler is benighted and below the ministers are false, disaster
is not far off; both are ways to injury. Hence it is only the enlightened
ruler who is able to treat those whom he loves with affection.
The benighted ruler always endangers those whom he loves.
Now King Wên was not free from favoritism and partiality.
him. Why did he favor him? Because he was a relative?—No,
he was of a different clan. Because he was an old friend?—No,
he had never known him before. Because of the beauty of his
appearance?—No, T`ai-kung was a toothless old man of seventy-two.
So in using him King Wên wished to set up the Precious
Way, to make clear the Precious Name, and with him to govern
the empire to the benefit of the Middle Kingdom. All this he was
unable to do alone. Therefore, raising up this man, he employed
him; and in fact the Precious Way was set up, and the Precious
Name was made clear. They governed the empire together, setting
up dependencies to the number of seventy-two,[10] of which fifty-three[11]
were occupied by people of [King Wên's] own Chi clan
alone. Of these descendants of Chou, not one who was not insane
but became a brilliant feudal lord in the empire. Now it is this
that is called being able to treat with affection those one loves.
Truly, only the enlightened ruler is able to treat those he loves
with affection, while the benighted ruler always endangers those
he loves—this is illustrated above. The "Ta-ya" says,[12]
It is not long that you will see one another.
Chou would add [OMITTED] after [OMITTED] as in Hsün-tzŭ. CHy has [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. B, C
have [OMITTED] "Can such be called anything but the Great Way?"
[OMITTED]: lit., "alter it." After this sentence, Hsün-tzŭ has an identical passage about
getting a good driver.
I follow CHy, who adds [OMITTED] after [OMITTED] from Hsün-tzŭ, and with B, C reverses [OMITTED].
[OMITTED]: likewise Huün-tzŭ. Wang Nien-sun would transpose to [OMITTED] "10-odd,"
since in Hsün-tzŭ's time there were no more states than that.
[OMITTED]. I follow CHy, who emends to the Hsün-tzŭ reading: [OMITTED].
The [OMITTED] probably was introduced by attraction of the cliché [OMITTED].
[OMITTED]: Hsün-tzŭ has [OMITTED]. Yü Yüeh (Chu-tzŭ p`ing-i 13.11a) prefers [OMITTED]
as referring to the legend that T`ai-kung was in a boat fishing when King Wên found
him. Later (CYTT 17.5b-6a) he argues for [OMITTED] *tiôg, the name of a state, and for
which [OMITTED] *tiôg would be a phonetic borrowing. That [OMITTED] does occur as a place name
is substantiated by texts (cf. Kuo yü 16.3b, and Kao Yu's com. on LSCC 20.2a), but
the point here is the lowly origin of the man, not his nationality.
16[1]
Do not answer one whose questions are coarse; do not ask one
whose answers are coarse.[2]
Do not enter into discussion with one
of argumentative disposition. It is necessary that a person come
following the True Way, and only then should he be engaged [in
conversation]. Unless his is the True Way, he should be avoided.
Thus only with one who is courteous and respectful can one discuss
the methods of the Way; only with one whose words are complaisant
can one discuss the principles of the Way; only with one
whose demeanor is docile can one discuss the Way in its entirety.
Hence one who speaks with a person that should not be spoken
with should be called blind, and one who does not speak with a
person that might properly be spoken with should be called secretive.[3]
The superior man is not blind, but in speaking is careful
about the kind [of man he addresses]. The Ode says,[4]
Of such should the Son of Heaven approve.
approve of them.
[OMITTED], [OMITTED] "If the enquirer does not tell [what his question is],
let the one who is to answer not ask [for it]" (?) This is forced, and I follow CHy,
who has [OMITTED], [OMITTED], after Hsün-tzŭ. Yang Liang equates [OMITTED] with
[OMITTED], which he explains as "bad" [OMITTED]. Hsün-tzŭ continues [OMITTED] "Do not
listen to one whose speech is coarse."
Cf. Analects 297 (15/7): "When a man may be spoken with, not to speak to
him is to err in reference to the man. When a man may not be spoken with, to speak
to him is to err in reference to our words. The wise err neither in regard to their man
nor to their words."
17
In the case of the son who conceals the misconduct of his
parents,[1]
justice (i) is not being strictly observed. In the case of
the prince who punishes the wicked, jên is not being adhered to.[2]
(i), still the right way of acting lies therein. The Ode says,[3]
Cf. Analects 270 (13/18.2): "The father conceals the misconduct of the son, and
the son conceals the misconduct of the father. Uprightness is to be found in this."
HSWC 8/25 quotes this line with [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. (Chao 114.) The Mao shih reading [OMITTED] "joyous" makes no sense in the present context.
18[1]
Duke Huan of Ch`i asked Kuan Chung, "What is it the True
King should respect?"
[Kuan Chung] said, "He respects Heaven."
Duke Huan looked up at the sky.
Kuan Chung said, "What I called Heaven is not the blue void
of the sky. The True King regards the people as Heaven. When
the people are with him, there is peace. When they support him,
he is strong. When they disapprove of him, he is in peril. When
they rebel against him, he is lost. The Ode says,[2]
never been an instance when he was not lost."
Translated after the Han School commentary preserved in a Hou-Han shu commentary and quoted by Schên Ch`iao-ts`ung (I-shuo k`ao 10.4a): [OMITTED] [OMITTED] "It says those thought to be evil by the king all hate him with one accord."
19[1]
The skillful charioteer does not neglect his horses; the skillful
archer does not neglect his bow; the skillful superior does not
neglect his inferiors. When with true love he works for their
advantage, all within the four seas is in harmony. If in a single
family advantage is made the end without love,[2]
it may happen
deeds to be expected] in the whole empire! The Ode says,[3]
Hate him with one accord.
The punctuation of this passage is debatable. I take [OMITTED] as beginning a new
sentence, since the conclusion emphasizes a contrast between [OMITTED] and [OMITTED]. Huai-nan
tzŭ is clearer: [OMITTED].
20[1]
Outside to grieve the members of one's clan, and inside to
sadden the inhabitants of one's village—as the Ode says,[2]
This is what makes me sad.
21[1]
There are those incapable of serving their ruler who expect
their own servants to act loyally. There are those incapable of
serving their own fathers who expect their sons to be filial. There
are those incapable of respect toward their elder brothers who
expect their younger brothers to obey their commands. The Ode
says,[2]
Until he is involved in ruin.
knowing himself.
22[1]
Now the ignorance of the present[2]
age is due to the dressing
throw the empire into disorder and lead the ignorant masses
astray, causing them in their confusion not to know wherein lie
truth or falsehood, order or anarchy. The ones responsible are
those like Fan Sui, Wei Mou, T`ien Wên, Chuang Chou, Shên
Tao, T`ien P`ien, Mo Ti, Sung Chien, Têng Hsi, and Hui Shih.[3]
All these ten philosophers cleave to the false and spread [their
pernicious teachings]. Their learning is varied and extensive,[4]
but they do not follow the techings of high antiquity, nor do they
model temselves on the Former Kings. They attribute to the
ancient past the doctrines which they make up, and devote themslves
to being clever.[5] Though they have nothing that coincides
with the True Way, still people follow them.[6] So we say that all
the fine talk of these ten philosophers is not enough to harmonize
with the Great Way, or to improve customs, or to administer a
government.[7] But what they advocate is always plausible, and
what they say is always reasonable—sufficiently so to mislead the
ignorant masses, and to throw into confusion the simple and the
rustic: it is this the ten philosophers are guilty of.
If [a ruler] will take charge of plans for action,[8]
unify the general
and the specific,[9]
make words correspond to conduct, and assemble
the heroes of the empire, telling them of the Great Way and
teaching them perfect obedience, then on the mat in the interior[10]
Kings,[11] and there will arise[12] in abundance the usages of a
peaceful world. The fine talkers will be unable to enter, the ten
philosophers will be unable to come near.
If he has not the slightest holding of land,[13]
and yet even the
nobility is unable to contest with him for fame—this is a case of
a saint who does not attain his goal. It was thus with Chung-ni.
[If he unites the empire, completes all things, rears and nourishes
the people, and uniformly profits the empire, then of those with
whom he establishes contact none but will follow him. If the
clever talkers at once cease and the ten philosophers are reformed,
then it is a Saint that has achieved power.][14]
It was thus with
Shun and Yü.
With what should the man endowed with jên occupy himself?
On the one hand he makes the government of Shun and Yü his
pattern; on the other hand he models himself after the i of Chung-ni,
and thereby strives to put an end to the theories of the ten
philosophers. Such a course will bring to completion the task of
the man endowed with jên. In the empire harmful elements will
be eliminated, while the traces of the sages will become clear. The
Ode says,[15]
From Hsün-tzŭ 3.12b-17b (Dubs 77-79 leaves out half of this passage), but much
condensed and with changes in the names mentioned.
Hsün-tzŭ lists twelve: T`o Hsiao [OMITTED] Wei Mou, Ch`ên Chung [OMITTED],
Shih Ch`iu [OMITTED], Mo Ti, Sung Chien, Shên Tao, T`ien P`ien, Hui Shih, Têng Hsi,
Tzŭ-ssŭ [OMITTED], Mêng K`o [OMITTED]. On the omission of these last two names Chou says,
"This is the penetrating understanding of a Great Confucian." [OMITTED].
[OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED] is peculiar, but enough of this occurs in Hsün-tzŭ
to fix the punctuation: [OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED] . . .
[OMITTED]: "On a road without traffic, two persons stick together."
CHy, B, C have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED], and so in my translation. Chou defends [OMITTED] on the
ground that in Hsün-tzŭ the twelve philosophers are discussed in pairs. However the
expression [OMITTED] does not once occur there. It makes no sense here, and HSWC has
not followed Hsün-tzŭ's arrangement.
[OMITTED]: Yang Liang says, "[OMITTED] means rules. [OMITTED] means to compare. Treating
on a large scale is called [OMITTED]; when distinctions are made it is called [OMITTED]."
[OMITTED]: CHy, D have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. B, C have [OMITTED]. Chou has followed Hsün-tzŭ.
Yang Liang says, "The southwest corner is called [OMITTED]; the southeast corner [OMITTED]
It means he does not go outside his dwelling."
[OMITTED]: Hsün-tzŭ has [OMITTED], and I take [OMITTED]
as a verb parallel to [OMITTED] in the next sentence: [OMITTED].
[OMITTED]: lit., "without [so much as] an awl's point of land." This is a
common cliché which occurs also in HSWC 5/5, 5/14, and Hsün-tzŭ 4.16b.
[OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. CHy adds this form Hsün-tzŭ changing
[OMITTED] to [OMITTED] and [OMITTED] to [OMITTED] to agree with the rest of the HSWC passage. Chou also
remarks that the text is defective. Wang Nien-sun says [OMITTED] means [OMITTED]. Of [OMITTED]
Yang Liang quotes, "Wherever ships and carriages reach; wherever the strength of
man penetrates." (DM 429, 31/4).
[OMITTED]. CHy emends to the Shih k`ao reading: [OMITTED]. Ch`ên Ch`iao-ts`ung (I-shuo k`ao 10.7a) thinks present texts of HSWC are here corrupted by Mao shih.
[OMITTED]. For [OMITTED] B, C, D have [OMITTED] as in Mao shih. Ch`ên (ibid.) quotes the gloss from Ching-i shih-wên to show that [OMITTED] should be [OMITTED], the binom being there defined as [OMITTED].
23[1]
When greathearted, the superior man reveres Heaven, and
follows the True Way; when timid, he respects i, and practices
moderation; when intelligent, he is possessed of clear understanding
and thinks logically; when ignorant, he is upright and law-abiding;
when happy, he is friendly and controlled; when sad,
he is quiet and withdraws;[2]
when successful, he is peaceful and
contained; when in straits, he is frugal[3]
and careful.
When greathearted, the mean man is rude and violent; when
timid, he is lecherous and perverted; when intelligent, he is a
thief and a cheat;[4]
when stupid, he is a killer and a rebel; when
happy, he is frivolous and gay; when sad, he is crushed and
subdued;[5]
when successful, he is arrogant and partial; when in
straits, he is despondent and harassed. The joints of his limbs are
disposed like those of animals. In violence of speech he is no
different from the barbarians; outside he grieves the members of
his own clan, and inside he worries the inhabitants of his village.
The Ode says,[6]
This is what makes me sad.
Modified from Hsün-tzŭ 2.4b-5b, which begins, "The superior man is the opposite
of the mean man." [OMITTED].
Cf. Yi King 409 (1 [OMITTED]), "Rejoicing, he carries his principles into action;
sorrowing, he keeps with them in retirement."
[OMITTED]. Chou adds this line from HSWC 4/20; likewise Ch`ên Ch`iao-ts`ung
(I-shuo k`ao 10.8b) Chou would expunge the rest of ¶20.
24
Traditionally, the love that comes from the feelings is called
jên. Love tempered by principles and fitness is called i. The
body is called jung.[1] The excellence of correct bearing is such that
itself it is an adequate pattern [for conduct]. . . .[2] Hence, since the
words of such a man are worthy of serving as a guide for the
people, the people will follow these words, and since such conduct
is worthy of serving as a rule for the people, the people will emulate
this conduct. Record it in the books and transmit it in the records;
tell it to ten thousand generations of sons and grandsons, that
they may follow in this path without neglecting it. From keeping
to it comes order; from abandoning it, anarchy; from following it,
life; from abandoning it, death. Now those whose joints are disposed
like those of animals, who are no different from the barbarians
in the violence of their speech,[3] who are confused and
without principles, are the ones who are held guilty by enlightened
kings and saintly rulers. The Ode says,[4]
This is what makes me sad.
[OMITTED]. The text is corrupt, and there would seem to be words
missing after this sentence. I follow CHy, B, C: [OMITTED], emending
[OMITTED] to [OMITTED] as above.
25[1]
Among his itinerant advisors there was one who persuaded
Prince Ch`un-shên saying, "T`ang with seventy li and King Wên
with a hundred li both brought the empire together and unified
[all] within the seas. Now Hsün-tzŭ[2]
is the world's sage. I venture
to suggest that in giving him control of a hundred li Your Highness
will be inconveniencing yourself. What are you going to do
about it?"
Prince Ch`un-shên approved of his argument and sent to dismiss
Hsün-tzŭ, who[3]
left and went to Chao. Chao made him prime
minister. An itinerant advisor again persuaded Prince Ch`unshên
saying,
"Of old I-yin left Hsia and went to Yin. Yin gained the
imperial sway and Hsia perished. Kuan Chung left Lu and
entered Ch`i. Lu declined and Ch`i waxed strong. Judged in the
light of this, wherever there is a sage, invariably the ruler is well
off, and invariably the country is at peace. Now Hsün tzŭ is the
world's sage. What was the idea of sending him away?"
Prince Ch`un-shên in turn approved of this argument and sent
to invite Hsün-tzŭ [to come back]. Hsün-tzŭ thereupon wrote a
letter declining the offer:[4]
"The proverb says, `The leper pities the king.' This is a disrespectful
statement, but it is necessary to look into it. This is in
reference to rulers who are robbed or assassinated or who suffer
death and ruin.[5]
Now with a ruler who, being young and on his
own, has no method for recognizing treachery, powerful ministers
will make decisions independently of him and plan for their own
interests to prevent punishment from reaching themselves. Hence
they will depose a worthy, adult ruler to set up a youth and
weakling; they will degrade the rightful heir to set up an illegitimate
one.[6]
"Thus the record of a Ch`un-ch`iu tells[7]
how the Prince Wei
of Ch`u paid a visit of state in Chêng. Before he had crossed the
border [on his way home] he heard that the king was ill, and
returning [on the pretext of] asking about his illness, assassinated
the king by strangling him with his cap tassel, and in the course
of events put himself on the throne.
"The wife of Ts`ui Chu of Ch`i was beautiful, and Duke Chuang
had an affair with her.[8]
[Ts`ui Chu led his partisans to attack Duke
Chuang. The duke begged to divide the state with him,][9]
but
Ts`ui Chu would not consent. He wished to commit suicide in
his ancestral temple, [but Ts`ui Chu again would not consent.][10]
Then when Duke Chuang fled, climbing up over the outside wall,
they shot him in the thigh. Having killed him, they put his
younger brother, [known as] Duke Ching, on the throne.
"Recent times have seen Li Tui, when he administered Chao,
starving the Father of the Ruler[11]
in [the palace] Sha-ch`iu, where
he died after a hundred days,[12]
and Nao Ch`ih, who, when he
administered Ch`i, hung King Min up [from the rafters of] the
ancestral temple[13]
after pulling out his tendons, so that he died[14]
over night.[15]
"Now although a leper [suffers from] ulcers, swelling, and
scabs, it is not so bad on the one hand as being strangled or shot
in the thigh, as in far-off times, nor on the other hand as having
the tendons drawn or being starved to death, as in recent times.
Now a ruler who is robbed or assassinated, or who suffers death
and ruin, is grieved and oppressed in mind and pained in body—
certainly his lot is worse than the leper's. Viewed in this light, it
is appropriate that even a leper should pity a king." Whereupon
[Hsün-tzŭ] wrote a fu that reads:
Coarse cloth[17] or brocade—he does not know the difference.
A Mo-mu[19] or a Li-fu[20] are his joy.
The blind he thinks are perspicacious,
The deaf he takes for acute,
And true for false,[21] luck for misfortune—
Alas! Oh Heaven,
Where find his equal?
CKT 5.38b-40a is the same as HSWC, and is translated by J. J. L. Duyvendak,
"The Chronology of Hsün tzŭ," TP 26 (1929) .86-90. HFT 4.12b-13a (Liao 131-3)
contains the part beginning "The proverb says," but omits the fu, which is in Hsün-tzŭ
18.18a-19a. On this passage cf. Wang Chung (Shu-hsüeh pu-i 7b), and Wang Hsiench`ien's
refutation (Hsün-tzŭ k`ao-chêng [OMITTED] 47b.-48b). (Chao 117.)
CHy has [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. Both he and Chou have followed CKT. Other editions
have [OMITTED] "with feigned pleasure."
B, C have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. CHy, following HFT, omits [OMITTED] and writes [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. CKT
is the same, and so in my translation.
[OMITTED]. Cf. Tso chuan 581 (Chao 1), where the story is told in more
detail but with some identity in phrasing. "Ch`un-ch`iu," if it refers to a specific work,
must mean the annals of Chêng or Ch`u, as the Ch`un-ch`iu of Lu has no mention of the
incident.
[OMITTED]: title taken by King Wu-ling of Chao on his abdication (B.C. 299) in
favor of his son Ho [OMITTED], who became King Hui-wên.
[OMITTED] in the meaning of [OMITTED], as in CKT 13.1a (translated in Mém. hist. 5.273-4,
note 2). q.v. for the background of this deed.
[OMITTED]: Hsün-tzŭ has [OMITTED], explained by Hao I-hsing as [OMITTED], by Yang Liang as [OMITTED].
Following Yang Liang. Wang Nien-sun reads [OMITTED] as a verb and paraphrases, "Cloth and brocade spread out in front of him" [OMITTED].
Famous for their beauty; cf. Yang Liang's com. for the former and Shih 137 No. 84/1, Mencius 406 (6A/7.7) for the later.
For [OMITTED] CHy, D have [OMITTED] , which seems to have been the Han shih reading. Ch`ên Ch`iao-ts`ung (I-shuo-k`ao 10.9b-10b) regards them as variants (with [OMITTED]) of the same word. [OMITTED] is generally accepted as here referring to the ruler.
26
The [flesh] of the strange animals of the Nan-miao is like
[that of] dogs or sheep,[1]
but give it to a man and it is like a fatal
drug. It is thus because[2]
custom changes the disposition, and
habit alters the nature. Now a madman gnaws at himself, oblivious
that his is not the flesh of an animal raised for food. He eats
dirt, unaware that it is not millet or rice. None the less, a madman
of Ch`u speaks the Ch`u language, while a madman from Ch`i
speaks the Ch`i language. It is thus from habit. Now the effect
of habit on a man is such that, even if slight, it appears, while if
it be carried on farther, it is fixed in him. It spreads through his
very bones and sinews; it is more adhesive than glue or lacquer.
studies. The Ode says,[3]
[OMITTED] D has [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. CHy, B, C have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. The passage has perhaps been contaminated from Analects 255 (12/8.3): [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. "Hide from which the hair has been removed" makes no sense
here. From the context it seems likely that the flesh of some animal is referred to
that is eaten with impunity by the natives who are used to it, but to an outsider is
fatal. My translation is only a conjecture.
I have taken [OMITTED] as in the text above. Variant translations occur in Legge and Karlgren, Book of Odes 16.255.
27[1]
Mencius said, "Jên is man's mind, and i is man's path. [How
lamentable][2]
it is to neglect the path and not pursue it, to lose
this mind and not to seek it again![3]
When men's fowls and dogs
are lost, they know enough to seek for them again, but they lose
their mind, and do not know enough to seek for it.[4]
Is it that
their minds are not worth so much as fowls and dogs?[5]
This is
indeed ignorance of relative values. Alas, their end inevitably will
be destruction. Truly the great end of learning is nothing else
but to seek for the lost mind." The Ode says,[6]
And never will forget it.
This is modified slightly from Mencius 414 (6A/11). I follow Legge's translation
with a few changes.
28[1]
Though the road be near, there will be no arriving without
walking; though the task be small, unless it be undertaken it will
not be completed. If days spent in idleness be many, there will
bow, laminated with horn, covered with sinew, and joined with
glue and lacquer, may be a thing of value [even in a state of] ten
thousand chariots. In those hands[4] it is not worth a few shu.[5]
When the men are the same and their talents, equal, that one is
worth ten thousand of the other is because one devotes his mind
and directs his will [to the task in hand].[6] The Ode says,[7]
And never will forget it.
Cf. Hsün-tzŭ 1.21b (Dubs 51) for the first three sentences. The whole passage is
corrupt. Though I have been able to make some sort of sense out of it by following
the easier readings, I suspect that the argument originally may have been quite
different.
[OMITTED]. B, C have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. D has [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. CHy
has [OMITTED], and [OMITTED] for [OMITTED], emending on the basis of Hsün-tzŭ: [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. As Hao I-hsing and Wang Nien-sun both prefer [OMITTED] for [OMITTED], I accept
CHy's emendation but retain [OMITTED].
[OMITTED]. I follow CHy, B, C and read [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. Cf. Mencius 410
(6A/9.3): [OMITTED].
29
There is a traditional saying: Sincerely hating evil is essential
to understanding punishments. Sincerely loving the good is essential
to understanding reverence.[1]
Only sincerity can move the
spirits and penetrate into the hearts of the people. When one
understands the basis for punishments and reverence, he inspires
awe without [a show of] anger, and confidence without speech:[2]
he is a ruler who has the virtue of sincerity. The Ode says,[3]
And their sound is heard without.
30
Confucius had received a visitor.[1]
After the guest's departure
Yen Yüan said, "Was your visitor [a man possessed of] jên?"
Confucius said, "His heart was unyielding (?), his mouth . . .
(?);[2]
as for his being [possessed of] jên—that I do not know.[3]
It
was his words that gave you that impression." (?)[4]
Yen Yüan with a start of surprise changed color and said,
"Though a foot length[5]
of good jade be covered with ten fathoms
of earth, its brilliance cannot be concealed, and though a fine
pearl an inch long be under a hundred fathoms of water, its lustre[6]
cannot be hidden. Alas! the inadequacy of the body to conceal
the mind![7]
If there is benignity and goodness in a person, his
[very] eyebrows and lashes will show it.[8]
If there is a blemish in
him, his eyebrows and lashes will be unable to conceal it." The
Ode says,[9]
KTCY A.4a has [OMITTED] ○ [OMITTED] "Confucius went to Wei, and Wei had
him receive guests." (Chao 120.) This paragraph is omitted by D.
[OMITTED]. Chou suggests [OMITTED] for [OMITTED] , but the phrase remains
enigmatical. For [OMITTED] PWYF cites only this example.
Lei-chü 83.6b, Po-t`ieh 7.45a, Ch`u-hsüeh chi 27.6a have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]; TPYL 802.8a
has [OMITTED]. (Chao.)
[OMITTED] "Form is the body and appearance is the mind." I follow
KTCY, loc. cit.: [OMITTED]. Chao (121) assumes that after [OMITTED] was corrupted
into [OMITTED] was changed to [OMITTED].
31
The Ode says,[3]
And their sound is heard without.
32[1]
He whom we call a commoner[2]
is one whose mouth is incapable
of speaking good words, and whose mind is incapable of knowing
the methods of the Former Kings. He moves without knowing
what to attend to; he takes a stand without knowing wherein to
establish himself. Every day he chooses things without knowing
what to value. He does not know enough to select sages and fine
gentlemen to whom he might entrust himself. He lets himself
be carried along by the world, not knowing whither to return. He
is controlled by the five emotions;[3]
his mind is impaired by
following them, but he never turns back. Thus his actions endanger
his body, and his repose brings shame to his reputation.
The Ode says,[4]
Ever varying in his conduct.
This is abridged from Hsün-tzŭ 20.14a-b. TTLC 1.5b is closer to Hsün-tzŭ, while
Chia-yü 1.23a-b diverges considerably from all the others.
Hsün-tzŭ, TTLC, and Chia-yü introduce this with "Duke Ai said, `I venture to
ask what are the characteristics of one who is called a commoner?' " [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. The reply is attributed to Confucius.
[OMITTED] B, C have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED]. Hsün-tzŭ and TTLC have [OMITTED] for [OMITTED], and
Chou prefers that reading. The "five viscera"—heart, liver, spleen, lungs, and kidneys,
require the reading [OMITTED]: "His five viscera are not controlled." [OMITTED] is variously defined
by Yang Liang as the five apertures: ear, eye, nose, mouth, and heart, or the five
emotions: joy, anger, grief, pleasure, and resentment. Hao I-hsing and Wang Nien-sun
prefer the latter, and so in the translation.
33[1]
There was a visitor[2]
who had an interview with the Duke of
Chou. Meeting him at the door, the Duke of Chou said, "How
are you going to instruct me?"
The man said, "Outside I would speak of externals; inside,
of essentials. Shall I come in or not?"
The Duke of Chou said, "Please come in."
The guest said, "Standing, I would speak of i; sitting, of jên.
Shall I sit or not?"
The Duke of Chou said, "Please take a seat."
The guest said, "Speaking distinctly will result in trouble;
speaking softly, in not being heard.[3]
Shall I speak or not?"
The Duke of Chou said, "Yes, yes. I understand." And next
Ts`ai.
Truly the visitor was good at giving counsel without speech,
and the Duke of Chou was good at listening to counsel without
speech. A person like the Duke of Chou may be called capable
of listening to subtle discourse. Truly what the superior man tells
others is subtle, and the aid he offers people in difficulty is indirect.
The Ode says,[4]
It is only that I fear not being able to go on.
Versions of this story occur in LSCC 18.6b and SY 15.15b-16a. As the latter
resolves some of the ambiguities of HSWC, I append a translation:
"Master Wang Man of Ch`i had an interview with the Duke of Chou. The Duke
of Chou came out to see him and said, `You, sir, have had the trouble of coming a
long way. What is it you have to teach me?'
Master Wang Man said, "One speaks of essentials inside, and of external outside.
Now shall I speak of essentials or of externals?'
The Duke of Chou led him inside. Master Wang Man (delete [OMITTED]) respectfully
followed him and spread out his mat, but the Duke of Chou did not lead him to a
seat. Master Wang Man said, `One speaks of important affairs sitting, and of minor
affairs standing. Now shall I speak of important affairs or of minor ones?'
The Duke of Chou led him to a seat. When Master Wang Man had sat down, the
Duke of Chou said, "What is it, sir, you have to teach me?'
Master Wang Man said, `I have heard that the saint knows without being told,
and that one who is not a saint does not know even with telling. Now do you want
me to speak or not?'
The Duke of Chou lowered his head for some time in thought without answering.
Master Wang Man took brush and tablet and wrote, `The state is in danger, take
it to heart.' The Duke of Chou looked up. Seeing what was written he said, `Yes, yes.
I respectfully attend your command.' Next day he punished [the princes of] Kuan and
Ts`ai."
[OMITTED] LSCC has [OMITTED]
[OMITTED]. "The court is small and people are many. If I speak softly you will not hear;
if I speak distinctly people will know what I say." The context fixes the meanings
of [OMITTED] and [OMITTED]. For [OMITTED] cf. Shih 331 No. 195/2: [OMITTED], where Han Ying
understood [OMITTED]. (Legge's note.)
| CHAPTER IV Han shih wai chuan | |