| Chinese Text Project |
| Search details: |
|---|
| Scope: Request type: Paragraph |
| Condition 1: References "饑者則食之，寒者則衣之" Matched:26. |
| Total 25 paragraphs. Page 1 of 3. Jump to page 1 2 3 |
《先秦兩漢 - Pre-Qin and Han》 | Related resources |
《儒家 - Confucianism》 | Related resources |
《說苑 - Shuo Yuan》 | [Western Han (206 BC - 9)] Liu Xiang | Books referencing 《說苑》 Library Resources |
《貴德》 | Books referencing 《貴德》 Library Resources |
| 1 | 貴德: | 聖人之於天下百姓也，其猶赤子乎！饑者則食之，寒者則衣之；將之養之，育之長之；惟恐其不至於大也。《詩》曰：「蔽芾甘棠，勿剪勿伐，召伯所茇。」傳曰：自陝以東者周公主之，自陜以西者召公主之。召公述職當桑蠶之時，不欲變民事，故不入邑中，舍于甘棠之下而聽斷焉，陜間之人皆得其所。是故後世思而歌誄之，善之，故言之；言之不足，故嗟嘆之；嗟嘆之不足，故歌詠之。夫詩思然後積，積然後滿，滿然後發，發由其道而致其位焉；百姓嘆其美而致其敬，甘棠之不伐也，政教惡乎不行！孔子曰：「吾於甘棠，見宗廟之敬也。」甚尊其人，必敬其位，順安萬物，古聖之道幾哉！仁人之德教也，誠惻隱於中，悃愊於內，不能已於其心；故其治天下也，如救溺人，見天下強陵弱，眾暴寡；幼孤羸露，死傷係虜，不忍其然，是以孔子歷七十二君，冀道之一行而得施其德，使民生於全育，烝庶安土，萬物熙熙，各樂其終，卒不遇，故睹麟而泣，哀道不行，德澤不洽，於是退作春秋，明素王之道，以示後人，恩施其惠，未嘗輟忘，是以百王尊之，志士法焉，誦其文章，傳今不絕，德及之也。《詩》曰：「載馳載驅，周爰咨謀。」此之謂也。聖王布德施惠，非求報於百姓也；郊望禘嘗，非求報於鬼神也。山致其高，雲雨起焉；水致其深，蛟龍生焉；君子致其道德而福祿歸焉。夫有陰德者必有陽報，有隱行者必有昭名，古者溝防不修，水為人害，禹鑿龍門，闢伊闕，平治水土，使民得陸處；百姓不親，五品不遜，契教以君臣之義，父子之親，夫婦之辨，長幼之序；田野不修，民食不足，后稷教之，闢地墾草，糞土樹穀，令百姓家給人足；故三后之後，無不王者，有陰德也。周室衰，禮義廢，孔子以三代之道，教導於後世，繼嗣至今不絕者，有隱行也。《周頌》曰：「豐年多黍多稌，亦有高廩，萬億及秭，為酒為醴，烝畀祖妣，以洽百禮，降福孔偕。」《禮記》曰：「上牲損則用下牲，下牲損則祭不備物。」以其舛之為不樂也。故聖人之於天下也，譬猶一堂之上也，今有滿堂飲酒者，有一人獨索然向隅而泣，則一堂之人皆不樂矣；聖人之於天下也，譬猶一堂之上也，有一人不得其所，則孝子不敢以其物薦進。 |
《風俗通義 - Fengsu Tongyi》 | [Eastern Han] 190-200 | Books referencing 《風俗通義》 Library Resources |
《愆禮》 | Library Resources |
《太原郝子廉》 | Library Resources |
| 1 | 太原郝子... : | 太原郝子廉，飢不得食，寒不得衣，一介不取諸人。曾過娣飯，留十五錢，默置席下去。每行飲水，常投一錢井中。 |
《墨家 - Mohism》 | Related resources |
《墨子 - Mozi》 | [Spring and Autumn - Warring States] 490 BC-221 BC English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Books referencing 《墨子》 Library Resources Introduction Source Related resources |
《卷二 - Book 2》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
《尚賢中 - Exaltation of the Virtuous II》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 6 | 尚賢中: | 今王公大人中實將欲治其國家，欲脩保而勿失，胡不察尚賢為政之本也？且以尚賢為政之本者，亦豈獨子墨子之言哉！此聖王之道，先王之書距年之言也。傳曰：『求聖君哲人，以裨輔而身』，《湯誓》云：『聿求元聖，與之戮力同心，以治天下。』則此言聖之不失以尚賢使能為政也。故古者聖王唯能審以尚賢使能為政，無異物雜焉，天下皆得其利。古者舜耕歷山，陶河瀕，漁雷澤，堯得之服澤之陽，舉以為天子，與接天下之政，治天下之民。伊摯，有莘氏女之私臣，親為庖人，湯得之，舉以為己相，與接天下之政，治天下之民。傅說被褐帶索。庸築乎傅巖，武丁得之，舉以為三公，與接天下之政，治天下之民。此何故始賤卒而貴，始貧卒而富？則王公大人明乎以尚賢使能為政。是以民無飢而不得食，寒而不得衣，勞而不得息，亂而不得治者。 |
| Exaltation of the Virtuous...: | If the rulers now want to govern their states so that they will be permanent and unshakeable, why do they not learn that exaltation of the virtuous is the foundation of government? Besides, is this principle merely a conception of Mozi? It is the way of the sage-kings and the tenet of "Ju Nian," a book of an ancient king. And, thus it is recorded: "(He) sought out the wise men to protect and aid you." And thus states the "Oath of Tang": "I then sought for the Great Sage, with whom I might unite my strength and mind to govern the empire." All these show how the sage-kings never failed to exalt the virtuous and employ the capable in government. The sage-kings of old comprehended onlv this -- to exalt the virtuous and employ the capable in government and nobody else; so the whole world was benefited. In times of old, Shun cultivated land at Mt. Li made pottery by the River, and was engaged in fishing in Lake Lei. Yao discovered him at Fuze. Exalting him, Yao made him Emperor and handed to him the government of the empire and the rule over the people. Yi Zhi once served in the bridal party of the daughter of the Prince of Xin, and later voluntarily served Tang as his cook. Tang discovered him. Exalting him, Tang made him his Prime Minister and handed to him the government of the empire and the rule over the people. Fu Yue once wore garments of coarse cloth tied with ropes, working as an artisan at Fu Yan. Wu Ding discovered him. Exalting him, Wu Ding made him High Duke and handed to him the government of the empire and the rule over the people. Why is it that these people starting in humility arrived at honour, starting in poverty arrived at wealth? It is because these rulers understood the importance of exalting the virtuous and employing the capable in government. Therefore, none of the people were hungry yet without food, cold yet without clothing, tired yet without rest, disturbed yet without peace. |
《尚賢下 - Exaltation of the Virtuous III》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 4 | 尚賢下: | 古者聖王既審尚賢欲以為政，故書之竹帛，琢之槃盂，傳以遺後世子孫。於先王之書呂刑之書然，王曰：『於！來！有國有土，告女訟刑，在今而安百姓，女何擇言人，何敬不刑，何度不及。』能擇人而敬為刑，堯、舜、禹、湯、文、武之道可及也。是何也？則以尚賢及之，於先王之書豎年之言然，曰：『晞夫聖、武、知人，以屏輔而身。』此言先王之治天下也，必選擇賢者以為其群屬輔佐。曰今也天下之士君子，皆欲富貴而惡貧賤。曰然。女何為而得富貴而辟貧賤？莫若為賢。為賢之道將柰何？曰有力者疾以助人，有財者勉以分人，有道者勸以教人。若此則飢者得食，寒者得衣，亂者得治。若飢則得食，寒則得衣，亂則得治，此安生生。 |
| Exaltation of the Virtuous...: | Having understood the principle of exalting the virtuous in government, the ancient sage-kings inscribed it on bamboos and silk and engraved it on the dishes and vases, to hand it down to their descendants. Thus we find in the "Penal Code of Lu", a book of an ancient king, the following: "The king said: 'Ho! come, ye rulers of states and territories, I will tell you how to make punishments a blessing. Now it is yours to give repose to the people: - what should you be most concerned about the choosing of? Should it not be proper men? What should you deal with the most reverently? Should it not be punishments? What should you calculate the most? Should it not be to whom they should reach?'" (This is to say) with insight in choosing men and considerateness in meting punishments, you can catch up with the ways of Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu. How? By exaltation of the virtuous. Again in the book "Shu Nian", another book of an ancient king, we find: "He looked for wise men to protect and aid you." This is to say, when the ancient kings reigned over the empire they invariably selected the virtuous and made them officials and aids. The gentlemen in the world like riches and honour, and dislike poverty and humility. Now how can you obtain the former and avoid the latter? There is no better way than to practise virtue. What then is the way to practise virtue ? Let him who has strength be alert to help others, let him who has wealth endeavour to share it with others, let him who possesses the Dao (the way of nature and life) teach others persuasively. With this, the hungry will be fed, the cold will be clothed, the disturbed will have order. When the hungry are fed, the cold are clothed, and the disturbed have order - this is procuring abundant life. |
《卷四 - Book 4》 | Library Resources |
《兼愛下 - Universal Love III》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 4 | 兼愛下: |
然而天下之士非兼者之言，猶未止也。曰：「即善矣。雖然，豈可用哉？」子墨子曰：「用而不可，雖我亦將非之。且焉有善而不可用者？姑嘗兩而進之。誰以為二士，使其一士者執別，使其一士者執兼。是故別士之言曰：『吾豈能為吾友之身，若為吾身，為吾友之親，若為吾親。』是故退睹其友，飢即不食，寒即不衣，疾病不侍養，死喪不葬埋。別士之言若此，行若此。兼士之言不然，行亦不然，曰：『吾聞為高士於天下者，必為其友之身，若為其身，為其友之親，若為其親，然後可以為高士 於1天下。』是故退睹其友，飢則食之，寒則衣之，疾病侍養之，死喪葬埋之。兼士之言若此，行若此。若之二 士2者，言相非而行相反與？當使若二士者，言必信，行必果，使言行之合猶合符節也，無言而不行也。然即敢問，今有平原廣野於此，被甲嬰冑將往戰3，死生之權未可識也；又有君大夫之遠使於巴、越、齊、荊，往來及否未 及否未4可識也，然即敢問，不識將惡也家室，奉承親戚，提挈妻子，而寄託之？不識於兼之有是乎？於別之有是乎？我以為當其於此也，天下無愚夫愚婦，雖非兼之人，必寄託之於兼之有是也。此言而非兼，擇即取兼，即此言行費也。不識天下之士，所以皆聞兼而非之者，其故何也？」 |
| Universal Love III: |
Yet the objection is not all exhausted. It is asked, "It may be a good thing, but can it be of any use?" Mozi replied: If it were not useful then even I would disapprove of it. But how can there be anything that is good but not useful? Let us consider the matter from both sides. Suppose there are two men. Let one of them hold to partiality and the other to universality. Then the advocate of partiality would say to himself, how can I take care of my friend as I do of myself, how can I take care of his parents as my own? Therefore when he finds his friend hungry he would not feed him, and when he finds him cold he would not clothe him. In his illness he would not minister to him, and when he is dead he would not bury him. Such is the word and such is the deed of the advocate of partiality. The advocate of universality is quite unlike this both in word and in deed. He would say to himself, I have heard that to be a superior man one should take care of his friend as he does of himself, and take care of his friend's parents as his own. Therefore when he finds his friend hungry he would feed him, and when he finds him cold he would clothe him. In his sickness he would serve him, and when he is dead he would bury him. Such is the word and such is the deed of the advocate of universality. These two persons then are opposed to each other in word and also in deed. Suppose they are sincere in word and decisive in deed so that their word and deed are made to agree like the two parts of a tally, and that there is no word but what is realized in deed, then let us consider further: Suppose a war is on, and one is in armour and helmet ready to join the force, life and death are not predictable. Or suppose one is commissioned a deputy by the ruler to such far countries like Ba, Yue, Qi, and Jing, and the arrival and return are quite uncertain. Now (under such circumstances) let us inquire upon whom would one lay the trust of one's family and parents. Would it be upon the universal friend or upon the partial friend? It seems to me, on occasions like these, there are no fools in the world. Even if he is a person who objects to universal love, he will lay the trust upon the universal friend all the same. This is verbal objection to the principle but actual selection by it - this is self-contradiction between one's word and deed. It is incomprehensible, then, why people should object to universal love when they hear it. 1. 於 : Inserted. 孫詒讓《墨子閒詁》 | |
| 5 | 兼愛下: |
然而天下之士非兼者之言，猶未止也。曰：「意可以擇士，而不可以擇君乎？」「姑嘗兩而進之。誰以為二君，使其一君者執兼，使其一君者執別，是故別君之言曰『吾惡能為吾萬民之身，若為吾身，此泰非天下之情也。人之生乎地上之無幾何也，譬之猶駟馳而過隙也』。是故退睹其萬民，飢即不食，寒即不衣，疾病不侍養，死喪不葬埋。別君之言若此，行若此。兼君之言不然，行亦不然。曰：「吾聞為明君於天下者，必先萬民之身，後為其身，然後可以為明君於天下。」是故退睹 其1萬民，飢即食之，寒即衣之，疾病侍養之，死喪葬埋之。兼君之言若此，行若此。然即交若之二君者，言相非而行相反與？常使若二君者，言必信，行必果，使言行之合猶合符節也，無言而不行也。然即敢問，今歲有癘疫，萬民多有勤苦凍餒，轉死溝壑中者，既已眾矣。不識將擇之二君者，將何從也？我以為當其於此也，天下無愚夫愚婦，雖非兼者，必從兼君是也。言而非兼，擇即 取兼2，此言行拂也。不識天下所以皆聞兼而非之者，其故何也？」 |
| Universal Love III: |
Yet the objection is not all exhausted. It is objected: Maybe it is a good criterion to choose among ordinary men, but it may not apply to the rulers. Let us again consider the matter from both sides. Suppose there are two rulers. Let one of them hold partiality and the other universality. Then the partial ruler would say to himself, how can I take care of the people as I do of myself? This would be quite contrary to common sense. A man's life on earth is of short duration, it is like a galloping horse passing by. Therefore when he finds his people hungry he would not feed them, and when he finds them cold he would not clothe them. When they are sick he would not minister to them, and upon their death he would not bury them. Such is the word and such is the deed of the partial ruler. The universal ruler is quite unlike this both in word and in deed. He would say to himself, I have heard that to be an upright ruler of the world one should first attend to his people and then to himself. Therefore when he finds his people hungry he would feed them, and when he finds them cold he would clothe them. In their sickness he would minister to them, and upon their death he would bury them. Such is the word and such is the deed of the universal ruler. These two rulers, then, are opposed to each other in word and also in deed. Suppose they are sincere in word and decisive in deed so that their word and deed are made to agree like the two parts of a tally, and that there is no word but what is realized in deed, then let us consider further: Suppose, now, that there is a disastrous pestilence, that most people are in misery and privation, and that many lie dead in ditches (Under such circumstances) let us inquire, if a person could choose one of the two rulers, which would he prefer? It seems to me on such occasions there are no fools in the world. Even if he is a person who objects to universal love, he will choose the universal ruler. This is verbal objection to the principle but actual selection by it - this is self-contradiction between one's word and deed. It is incomprehensible, then, why people should object to universal love when they hear it. 1. 其 : Inserted. |
《卷八 - Book 8》 | Library Resources |
《非樂上 - Condemnation of Music I》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 2 | 非樂上: | 今王公大人，雖無造為樂器，以為事乎國家，非直掊潦水折壤坦而為之也，將必厚措斂乎萬民，以為大鍾、鳴鼓、琴瑟、竽笙之聲。古者聖王亦嘗厚措斂乎萬民，以為舟車，既以成矣，曰：『吾將惡許用之？曰：舟用之水，車用之陸，君子息其足焉，小人休其肩背焉。』故萬民出財齎而予之，不敢以為慼恨者，何也？以其反中民之利也。然則樂器反中民之利亦若此，即我弗敢非也。然則當用樂器譬之若聖王之為舟車也，即我弗敢非也。民有三患：飢者不得食，寒者不得衣，勞者不得息，三者民之巨患也。然即當為之撞巨鍾、擊鳴鼓、彈琴瑟、吹竽笙而揚干戚，民衣食之財將安可得乎？即我以為未必然也。意舍此。今有大國即攻小國，有大家即伐小家，強劫弱，眾暴寡，詐欺愚，貴傲賤，寇亂盜賊並興，不可禁止也。然即當為之撞巨鍾、擊鳴鼓、彈琴瑟、吹竽笙而揚干戚，天下之亂也，將安可得而治與？即我未必然也。」是故子墨子曰：「姑嘗厚措斂乎萬民，以為大鍾、鳴鼓、琴瑟、竽笙之聲，以求興天下之利，除天下之害而無補也。」是故子墨子曰：「為樂，非也。」 |
| Condemnation of Music I:...: | Now the rulers construct musical instruments as an undertaking of the state. They cannot be produced as easily as by evaporating water or digging into the earth. Inevitably heavy taxes have to be collected from the people to obtain sounds of the big bell, the sounding drum, the qin and the se, and the yu and the sheng. The ancient sage-kings had, indeed, collected heavy taxes from the people to build boats and vehicles. But when they were completed, and when the people asked: "What use have we for these?" the answer was: "The boats are to be employed on water and the vehicles on land, so that the gentlemen can rest their feet and the labourers can rest their shoulders and backs." Thus the people contributed their money and dared not grumble about it. This was because the boats and vehicles contributed to the benefit of the people. If the musical instruments also contribute to the benefit of the people, even I shall not dare condemn them. Thus if the musical instruments are as useful as the boats and carts with the sage-kings, even I shall not dare condemn them. There are three things that the people worry about, namely, that the hungry cannot be fed, that the cold cannot be clothed, and that the tired cannot get rest. These three are the great worries of the people. Now suppose we strike the big bell, beat the sounding drum, play the qin and the se, and blow the yu and the sheng, can the material for food and clothing then be procured for the people? Even I do not think this is possible. Again, every large state now attacks small states and every large house molests small houses. The strong plunder the weak, the many oppress the few, the clever deceive the stupid and the honoured disdain the humble. And bandits and thieves rise all together and cannot be suppressed. But can the chaos in the world be put in order by striking the big bell, beating the sounding drum, playing the qin and the se, and blowing the yu and the sheng? Even I do not think it is possible. Therefore Mozi said : The levy of heavy taxes on the people to construct the big bell, the sounding drum, the qin and the se, and the yu and the sheng, is not at all helpful in the endeavour to procure the benefits of the world and destroy its calamities. Therefore Mozi said: To have music is wrong. |
《卷九 - Book 9》 | Library Resources |
《非命下 - Anti-Fatalism III》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 2 | 非命下: | 故昔者三代聖王禹湯文武方為政乎天下之時，曰：必務舉孝子而勸之事親，尊賢良之人而教之為善。是故出政施教，賞善罰暴。且以為若此，則天下之亂也，將屬可得而治也，社稷之危也，將屬可得而定也。若以為不然，昔桀之所亂，湯治之；紂之所亂，武王治之。當此之時，世不渝而民不易，上變政而民改俗。存乎桀紂而天下亂，存乎湯武而天下治。天下之治也，湯武之力也；天下之亂也，桀紂之罪也。若以此觀之，夫安危治亂存乎上之為政也，則夫豈可謂有命哉！故昔者禹湯文武方為政乎天下之時，曰『必使飢者得食，寒者得衣，勞者得息，亂者得治』，遂得光譽令問於天下。夫豈可以為命哉？故以為其力也！今賢良之人，尊賢而好功道術，故上得其王公大人之賞，下得其萬民之譽，遂得光譽令問於天下。亦豈以為其命哉？又以為力也！然今夫有命者，不識昔也三代之聖善人與，意亡昔三代之暴不肖人與？若以說觀之，則必非昔三代聖善人也，必暴不肖人也。然今以命為有者，昔三代暴王桀紂幽厲，貴為天子，富有天下，於此乎，不而矯其耳目之欲，而從其心意之辟，外之敺騁、田獵、畢弋，內湛於酒樂，而不顧其國家百姓之政，繁為無用，暴逆百姓，遂失其宗廟。其言不曰『吾罷不肖，吾聽治不強』，必曰『吾命固將失之』。雖昔也三代罷不肖之民，亦猶此也。不能善事親戚君長，甚惡恭儉而好簡易，貪飲食而惰從事，衣食之財不足，是以身有陷乎飢寒凍餒之憂。其言不曰『吾罷不肖，吾從事不強』，又曰『吾命固將窮。』昔三代偽民亦猶此也。 |
| Anti-Fatalism III: | When the ancient sage-kings of the Three Dynasties, Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu, ruled, they said: "We must promote the filial sons and encourage them in serving their parents, and we must honour the virtuous and good men and instruct them in doing good." In this way they administered the government and published instructions, rewarded the good and punished the evil. It seems in this way the confusion in the world could be reduced to order, and the danger of the state could be transformed into safety. If this is doubted, (let us recall): In ancient times, the disorder of Jie was reduced to order by Tang, that of Zhou was reduced to order by King Wu. Then the times did not change nor did the people alter. Yet when the superior changed regime the subordinates modified their conduct. With Jie and Zhou the world was chaotic, under Tang and Wu it became orderly. That the world became orderly was due to the endeavour of Tang and Wu. That the world was chaotic was due to the sin of Jie and Zhou. Judging from this, safety and danger, order and chaos all depend on the way the superior conducts the government. How can it be said, there is fate? In ancient times when Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu ruled the empire, they said: "We must feed the hungry, clothe the cold, give the weary rest, and the disturbed peace." Thus their good name was heard all over the world. Can this be ascribed to fate? It is really due to endeavour. The virtuous and gentle of today respect virtue and pursue the ways and means (to benefit the world). Hence they are rewarded by the rulers above and praised by the people below. And their good name is heard all over the world. Can this be ascribed to fate? This is also due to their endeavour. Now, were those who believed in fate the sages of the Three Dynasties or the wicked of the Three Dynasties? Judging from the nature of this doctrine, it could not be the sages of the Three Dynasties, but must be the wicked that believed in fate. The ancient wicked kings of the Three Dynasties, Jie, Zhou, You, and Li, were honoured as emperors and possessed the whole world in wealth. Yet they could not control the sensuality of their ears and eyes, but gave rein to their passions. Going out they would race, hunt, and trap. Staying indoors they revelled in wine and music. They did not attend to the government of the country and the people, but did much that was of no use. And they oppressed and violated the people. Thus they lost their ancestral temple. They would not confess: "I am insolent and stupid. I did not attend to government diligently." But they would say: "It is but my fate that I lose it." Even the insolent people of the Three Dynasties were like this. They could not well serve their parents and their lord. They greatly hated politeness and frugality but liked licence and ease. They indulged in eating and drinking and were lazy at work. Their means of clothing and food became insufficient, and they incurred the danger of hunger and cold. They would not confess: "I am stupid and insolent, I am not diligent in my work." But they also said: "It is but my fate that I am poor." Thus the insolent people of the Three Dynasties also believed in fate. |
《法家 - Legalism》 | Related resources |
《管子 - Guanzi》 | [Warring States - Han (475 BC - 220)] | Books referencing 《管子》 Library Resources Related resources |
《輕重甲 - Qing Zhong I》 | Books referencing 《輕重甲》 Library Resources |
| 1 | 輕重甲: | 桓公曰：「輕重有數乎？」管子對曰：「輕重無數，物發而應之，聞聲而乘之，故為國不能來天下之財，致天下之民，則國不可成。」桓公曰：「何謂來天下之財？」管子對曰：「昔者桀之時，女樂三萬人，端譟晨樂，聞於三衢，是無不服文繡衣裳者，伊尹以薄之游女，工文繡纂組，一純得粟百鍾於桀之國。夫桀之國者，天子之國也，桀無天下憂，飾婦女鍾鼓之樂，故伊尹得其粟而奪之流，此之謂來天下之財。」桓公曰：「何謂致天下之民？」管子對曰：「請使州有一掌，里有積五窌，民無以與正籍者，予之長假，死而不葬者，予之長度，飢者得食，寒者得衣，死者得葬，不資者得振，則天下之歸我者若流水，此之謂致天下之民。故聖人善用非其有，使非其人，動言搖辭，萬民可得而親。」桓公曰：「善。」 |
| 2 | 輕重甲: | 桓公問管子曰：「夫湯以七十里之薄，兼桀之天下，其故何也」？管子對曰：「桀者，冬不為杠，夏不束柎，以觀凍溺，弛牝虎充市，以觀其驚駭。至湯而不然，夷競而積粟，飢者食之，寒者衣之，不資者振之，天下歸湯若流水，此桀之所以失其天下也。」桓公曰：「桀使湯得為是，其故何也？」管子曰：「女華者，桀之所愛也，湯事之以千金；曲逆者，桀之所善也，湯事之以千金。內則有女華之陰，外則有曲逆之陽。陰陽之議合，而得成其天子，此湯之陰謀也。」 |
| Total 25 paragraphs. Page 1 of 3. Jump to page 1 2 3 |
|---|