Follow us on Facebook to receive important updates Follow us on Twitter to receive important updates Follow us on sina.com's microblogging site to receive important updates Follow us on Douban to receive important updates
Chinese Text Project
Simplified Chinese version
Search details:
Scope: Request type: Paragraph
Condition 1: References "古者桀之所乱,汤受而治之" Matched:4.
Total 4 paragraphs. Page 1 of 1.

先秦两汉 - Pre-Qin and Han

Related resources

墨家 - Mohism

Related resources
[Also known as: "Moism"]

墨子 - Mozi

[Spring and Autumn - Warring States] 490 BC-221 BC
Books referencing 《墨子》 Library Resources
Introduction
Source
Related resources
[Also known as: "Mo-tze"]

卷九 - Book 9

English translation: W. P. Mei [?] Library Resources

非命上 - Anti-Fatalism I

English translation: W. P. Mei [?] Library Resources
3 非命上:
然而今天下之士君子,或以命为有。盖尝尚观于圣王之事,古者桀之所乱,汤受而治之;纣之所乱,武王受而治之。此世未易民未渝,在于桀纣,则天下乱;在于汤武,则天下治,岂可谓有命哉!
Anti-Fatalism I:
Some of the gentlemen of the world assume there to be fate. Now let us examine the deeds of the sage-kings. In ancient times, the confusion produced by Jie was replaced by an orderly government by Tang, the chaos of Zhou was turned into order by King Wu. The times did not alter and the people did not change, yet under Jie and Zhou the world was chaotic and under Tang and Wu it was orderly. Can it be said that there is fate?

非命中 - Anti-Fatalism II

English translation: W. P. Mei [?] Library Resources
2 非命中:
今天下之士君子或以命为亡,我所以知命之有与亡者,以众人耳目之情,知有与亡。有闻之,有见之,谓之有;莫之闻,莫之见,谓之亡。然胡
1尝考之百姓之情?自古以及今,生民以来者,亦尝见命之物,闻命之声者乎?则未尝有也。若以百姓为愚不肖,耳目之情不足因而为法,然则胡不尝考之诸侯之传言流语乎?自古以及今,生民以来者,亦尝有闻命之声,见命之体者乎?则未尝有也。然胡不尝考之圣王之事?古之圣王,举孝子而劝之事亲,尊贤良而劝之为善,发宪布令以教诲,
2赏罚以劝沮。若此,则乱者可使治,而危者可使安矣。若以为不然,昔者,桀之所乱,汤治之;纣之所乱,武王治之。此世不渝而民不改,上变政而民易教,其在汤武则治,其在桀纣则乱,安危治乱,在上之发政也,则岂可谓有命哉!夫曰有命云者亦不然矣。
Anti-Fatalism II:
Among the gentlemen of to-day some think there is fate, some think there is no fate. That I am able to judge whether there is fate or not is by the sense testimony of the multitude. If some have heard it and some have seen it I shall say there is fate. If none has heard it, if none has seen it, I shall say there is no fate. Why not then let us inquire into the sense testimony of the people? From antiquity to the present, since the beginning of man, has any seen such a thing as fate, or has heard the sound of fate? Of course, there is none. If the common people are considered stupid and their senses of hearing and sight unreliable, then why not inquire into the recorded statements of the feudal lords? But from antiquity to the present, since the beginning of man, has any of them heard the sound of fate or seen such a thing as fate? Of course, none of them has. Again, why not let us inquire into the deeds of the sage-kings? The ancient kings promoted the filial sons and encouraged them to continue to serve their parents, and respected the virtuous and gentle and encouraged them to continue to do good. They published their orders to instruct (the people), and made reward and punishment fair to encourage (the good) and obstruct (the evil). In this way confusion could be reduced to order and danger could be converted to peace. If anyone doubts this, let us recall: In ancient times the confusion of Jie was reduced to order by Tang, and that of Zhou by King Wu. Now, the times did not change and the people did not alter. Yet when the superior changed a regime the subordinates modified their conduct. Under Tang and Wu it was orderly, but under Jie and Zhou it was disorderly. Hence peace and danger, order and disorder, all depend on the government of the superior. How can it be said everything is according to fate? So, assertions about there being fate are quite false.

1. 不 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》
2. 明 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》

非命下 - Anti-Fatalism III

English translation: W. P. Mei [?] Library Resources
2 非命下:
故昔者三代圣王禹汤文武方为政乎天下之时,曰:必务举孝子而劝之事亲,尊贤良之人而教之为善。是故出政施教,赏善罚暴。且以为若此,则天下之乱也,将属可得而治也,社稷之危也,将属可得而定也。若以为不然,昔桀之所乱,汤治之;纣之所乱,武王治之。当此之时,世不渝而民不易,上变政而民改俗。存乎桀纣而天下乱,存乎汤武而天下治。天下之治也,汤武之力也;天下之乱也,桀纣之罪也。若以此观之,夫安危治乱存乎上之为政也,则夫岂可谓有命哉!故昔者禹汤文武方为政乎天下之时,曰‘必使饥者得食,寒者得衣,劳者得息,乱者得治’,遂得光誉令问于天下。夫岂可以为命哉?故以为其力也!今贤良之人,尊贤而好功道术,故上得其王公大人之赏,下得其万民之誉,遂得光誉令问于天下。亦岂以为其命哉?又以为力也!然今夫有命者,不识昔也三代之圣善人与,意亡昔三代之暴不肖人与?若以说观之,则必非昔三代圣善人也,必暴不肖人也。然今以命为有者,昔三代暴王桀纣幽厉,贵为天子,富有天下,于此乎,不而矫其耳目之欲,而从其心意之辟,外之驱骋、田猎、毕弋,内湛于酒乐,而不顾其国家百姓之政,繁为无用,暴逆百姓,遂失其宗庙。其言不曰‘吾罢不肖,吾听治不强’,必曰‘吾命固将失之’。虽昔也三代罢不肖之民,亦犹此也。不能善事亲戚君长,甚恶恭俭而好简易,贪饮食而惰从事,衣食之财不足,是以身有陷乎饥寒冻馁之忧。其言不曰‘吾罢不肖,吾从事不强’,又曰‘吾命固将穷。’昔三代伪民亦犹此也。
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.

汉代之后 - Post-Han

隋唐 - Sui-Tang

群书治要

[Tang] 631 Library Resources

卷三十四

Library Resources

墨子

Library Resources

非命

Library Resources
1 非命:
古之圣王,举孝子而劝之事亲,尊贤良而劝之为善,发宪布令以教诲,赏罚以劝沮,若此,则乱者可使治而危者可使安矣。若以为不然,昔者,桀之所乱,汤治之,纣之所乱,武王治之,此世不渝而民不改,上变正正作政而民易教,其在汤、武则治,其在桀、纣则乱,安危治乱,在上之发政也。则岂可谓有命哉。昔者,三代之暴王,不缪其耳目之淫,不慎其心志之僻,外之殴骋田猎毕弋,内沉于酒乐,不肯曰我为刑政不善,曰曰上有必字我命故且亡,虽昔也三代之僞民,亦犹此也。繁饰有命,以教衆愚,昔者,禹、汤、文、武方为政乎天下之时。曰:必使饥者得食,寒者得衣,劳者得息,乱者得治,遂得光誉令闻于天下,夫岂可以为命哉。故以为其力也。今贤良之人,尊贤而好蓄道术,故上得其王公大人之赏,下得其万民之誉,遂得光誉令闻于天下,岂以为其命哉。

Total 4 paragraphs. Page 1 of 1.