| | 骈拇: |
骈拇枝指，出乎性哉！而侈于德。附赘县疣，出乎形哉！而侈于性。多方乎仁义而用之者，列于五藏哉！而非道德之正也。是故骈于足者，连无用之肉也；枝于手者，树无用之指也；多方骈枝于五藏之情者，淫僻于仁义之行，而多方于聪明之用也。是故骈于明者，乱五色，淫文章，青黄黼黻之煌煌非乎？而离朱是已。多于聪者，乱五声，淫六律，金石、丝竹，黄钟、大吕之声非乎？而师旷是已。枝于仁者，擢德塞性以收名声，使天下簧鼓以奉不及之法非乎？而曾、史是已。骈于辩者，累瓦结绳窜句，游心于坚白同异之间，而敝跬誉无用之言非乎？而杨、墨是已。故此皆多骈旁枝之道，非天下之至正也。彼正正者，不失其性命之情。故合者不为骈，而枝者不为跂；长者不为有馀，短者不为不足。是故凫胫虽短，续之则忧；鹤胫虽长，断之则悲。故性长非所断，性短非所续，无所去忧也。意仁义其非人情乎！彼仁人何其多忧也？且夫骈于拇者，决之则泣；枝于手者，齕之则啼。二者或有馀于数，或不足于数，其于忧一也。今世之仁人，蒿目而忧世之患；不仁之人，决性命之情而饕富贵。故意仁义其非人情乎！自三代以下者，天下何其嚣嚣也？ |
| Webbed Toes: |
A ligament uniting the big toe with the other toes and an extra finger may be natural growths, but they are more than is good for use. Excrescences on the person and hanging tumours are growths from the body, but they are unnatural additions to it. There are many arts of benevolence and righteousness, and the exercise of them is distributed among the five viscera; but this is not the correct method according to the characteristics of the Dao. Thus it is that the addition to the foot is but the attachment to it of so much useless flesh, and the addition to the hand is but the planting on it of a useless finger. (So it is that) the connecting (the virtues) with the five viscera renders, by excess or restraint, the action of benevolence and righteousness bad, and leads to many arts as in the employment of (great) powers of hearing or of vision. Therefore an extraordinary power of vision leads to the confusion of the five colours and an excessive use of ornament. (Its possessor), in the resplendence of his green and yellow, white and black, black and green, will not stop till he has become a Li Zhu. An extraordinary power of hearing leads to a confusion of the five notes, and an excessive use of the six musical accords. (Its possessor), in bringing out the tones from the instruments of metal, stone, silk, and bamboo, aided by the Huang-zhong and Da-lu (tubes), will not stop till he has become a Shi Kuang. (So), excessive benevolence eagerly brings out virtues and restrains its (proper) nature, that (its possessor) may acquire a famous reputation, and cause all the organs and drums in the world to celebrate an unattainable condition; and he will not stop till he has become a Zeng (Shen) or a Shi (Qiu). An extraordinary faculty in debating leads to the piling up of arguments like a builder with his bricks, or a netmaker with his string. (Its possessor) cunningly contrives his sentences and enjoys himself in discussing what hardness is and what whiteness is, where views agree and where they differ, and pressing on, though weary, with short steps, with (a multitude of) useless words to make good his opinion; nor will he stop till he has become a Yang (Zhu) or Mo (Di). But in all these cases the parties, with their redundant and divergent methods, do not proceed by that which is the correct path for all under the sky. That which is the perfectly correct path is not to lose the real character of the nature with which we are endowed. Hence the union (of parts) should not be considered redundance, nor their divergence superfluity; what is long should not be considered too long, nor what is short too short. A duck's legs, for instance, are short, but if we try to lengthen them, it occasions pain; and a crane's legs are long, but if we try to cut off a portion of them, it produces grief. Where a part is by nature long, we are not to amputate, or where it is by nature short, we are not to lengthen it. There is no occasion to try to remove any trouble that it may cause. The presumption is that benevolence and righteousness are not constituents of humanity; for to how much anxiety does the exercise of them give rise! Moreover when another toe is united to the great toe, to divide the membrane makes you weep; and when there is an extra finger, to gnaw it off makes you cry out. In the one case there is a member too many, and in the other a member too few; but the anxiety and pain which they cause is the same. The benevolent men of the present age look at the evils of the world, as with eyes full of dust, and are filled with sorrow by them, while those who are not benevolent, having violently altered the character of their proper nature, greedily pursue after riches and honours. The presumption therefore is that benevolence and righteousness are contrary to the nature of man - how full of trouble and contention has the world been ever since the three dynasties began! |
| | 骈拇: |
且夫待钩绳规矩而正者，是削其性；待绳约胶漆而固者，是侵其德也；屈折礼乐，呴俞仁义，以慰天下之心者，此失其常然也。天下有常然。常然者，曲者不以钩，直者不以绳，圆者不以规，方者不以矩，附离不以胶漆，约束不以纆索。故天下诱然皆生，而不知其所以生；同焉皆得，而不知其所以得。故古今不二，不可亏也。则仁义又奚连连如胶漆纆索，而游乎道德之间为哉？使天下惑也！夫小惑易方，大惑易性。何以知其然邪？自虞氏招仁义以挠天下也，天下莫不奔命于仁义，是非以仁义易其性与？ |
| Webbed Toes: |
And moreover, in employing the hook and line, the compass and square, to give things their correct form you must cut away portions of what naturally belongs to them; in employing strings and fastenings, glue and varnish to make things firm, you must violently interfere with their qualities. The bendings and stoppings in ceremonies and music, and the factitious expression in the countenance of benevolence and righteousness, in order to comfort the minds of men - these all show a failure in observing the regular principles (of the human constitution). All men are furnished with such regular principles; and according to them what is bent is not made so by the hook, nor what is straight by the line, nor what is round by the compass, nor what is square by the carpenter's square. Nor is adhesion effected by the use of glue and varnish, nor are things bound together by means of strings and bands. Thus it is that all in the world are produced what they are by a certain guidance, while they do not know how they are produced so; and they equally attain their several ends while they do not know how it is that they do so. Anciently it was so, and it is so now; and this constitution of things should not be made of none effect. Why then should benevolence and righteousness be employed as connecting (links), or as glue and varnish, strings and bands, and the enjoyment arising from the Dao and its characteristics be attributed to them? It is a deception practised upon the world. Where the deception is small, there will be a change in the direction (of the objects pursued); where it is great, there will be a change of the nature itself. How do I know that it is so? Since he of the line of Yu called in his benevolence and righteousness to distort and vex the world, the world has not ceased to hurry about to execute their commands - has not this been by means of benevolence and righteousness to change (men's views) of their nature? |
| | 骈拇: |
故尝试论之，自三代以下者，天下莫不以物易其性矣。小人则以身殉利，士则以身殉名，大夫则以身殉家，圣人则以身殉天下。故此数子者，事业不同，名声异号，其于伤性以身为殉，一也。臧与谷，二人相与牧羊，而俱亡其羊。问臧奚事，则挟厕读书；问谷奚事，则博塞以游。二人者，事业不同，其于亡羊均也。伯夷死名于首阳之下，盗跖死利于东陵之上。二人者，所死不同，其于残生伤性均也，奚必伯夷之是而盗跖之非乎？天下尽殉也。彼其所殉仁义也，则俗谓之君子；其所殉货财也，则俗谓之小人。其殉一也，则有君子焉，有小人焉；若其残生损性，则盗跖亦伯夷已，又恶取君子小人于其间哉？且夫属其性乎仁义者，虽通如曾、史，非吾所谓臧也；属其性于五味，虽通如俞儿，非吾所谓臧也；属其性乎五声，虽通如师旷，非吾所谓聪也；属其性乎五色，虽通如离朱，非吾所谓明也。吾所谓臧者，非仁义之谓也，臧于其德而已矣；吾所谓臧者，非所谓仁义之谓也，任其性命之情而已矣；吾所谓聪者，非谓其闻彼也，自闻而已矣；吾所谓明者，非谓其见彼也，自见而已矣。夫不自见而见彼，不自得而得彼者，是得人之得而不自得其得者也，适人之适而不自适其适者也。夫适人之适而不自适其适，虽盗跖与伯夷，是同为淫僻也。余愧乎道德，是以上不敢为仁义之操，而下不敢为淫僻之行也。 |
| Webbed Toes: |
I will therefore try and discuss this matter. From the commencement of the three dynasties downwards, nowhere has there been a man who has not under (the influence of external) things altered (the course of) his nature. Small men for the sake of gain have sacrificed their persons; scholars for the sake of fame have done so; great officers, for the sake of their families; and sagely men, for the sake of the kingdom. These several classes, with different occupations, and different reputations, have agreed in doing injury to their nature and sacrificing their persons. Take the case of a male and female slave; they have to feed the sheep together, but they both lose their sheep. Ask the one what he was doing, and you will find that he was holding his bamboo tablets and reading. Ask the other, and you will find that she was amusing herself with some game. They were differently occupied, but they equally lose their sheep. (So), Bo-yi died at the foot of Shou-yang to maintain his fame, and the robber Zhi died on the top of Dong-ling in his eagerness for gain. Their deaths were occasioned by different causes, but they equally shortened their lives and did violence to their nature; why must we approve of Bo-yi, and condemn the robber Zhi? In cases of such sacrifice all over the world, when one makes it for the sake of benevolence and righteousness, the common people style him 'a superior man,' but when another does it for the sake of goods and riches, they style him 'a small man.' The action of sacrificing is the same, and yet we have 'the superior man' and 'the small man!' In the matter of destroying his life, and doing injury to his nature, the robber Zhi simply did the same as Bo-yi - why must we make the distinction of 'superior man' and 'small man' between them? Moreover, those who devote their nature to (the pursuit) of benevolence and righteousness, though they should attain to be like Zeng (Shen) and Shi (Qiu), I do not pronounce to be good; those who devote it to (the study of) the five flavours, though they attain to be like Shu-er, I do not pronounce to be good; those who devote it to the (discrimination of the) five notes, though they attain to be like Shi Kuang, I do not pronounce to be quick of hearing; those who devote it to the (appreciation of the) five colours, though they attain to be like Li Zhu, I do not pronounce to be clear of vision. When I pronounce men to be good, I am not speaking of their benevolence and righteousness; the goodness is simply (their possession of) the qualities (of the Dao). When I pronounce them to be good, I am not speaking of what are called benevolence and righteousness; but simply of their allowing the nature with which they are endowed to have its free course. When I pronounce men to be quick of hearing, I do not mean that they hearken to anything else, but that they hearken to themselves; when I pronounce them to be clear of vision, I do not mean that they look to anything else, but that they look to themselves. Now those who do not see themselves but see other things, who do not get possession of themselves but get possession of other things, get possession of what belongs to others, and not of what is their own; and they reach forth to what attracts others, and not to that in themselves which should attract them. But thus reaching forth to what attracts others and not to what should attract them in themselves, be they like the robber Zhi or like Bo-yi, they equally err in the way of excess or of perversity. What I am ashamed of is erring in the characteristics of the Dao, and therefore, in the higher sphere, I do not dare to insist on the practice of benevolence and righteousness, and, in the lower, I do not dare to allow myself either in the exercise of excess or perversity. |
