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
Show statistics Edit searchSearch details:
Scope: Request type: Paragraph
Condition 1: References 齊前莊公 : 姓名:姜購,在位前794-前731。 Duke Zhuang of Qi (the first) (ruled 794 BC-731 BC) or coextensive terms Matched:4.
Total 4 paragraphs. Page 1 of 1.

先秦兩漢 - 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"]

卷八 - Book 8

Library Resources

明鬼下 - On Ghosts III

English translation: W. P. Mei [?] Library Resources
8 明鬼下:
非惟若書之說為然也。昔者,齊莊君
1有所謂王里國、中里徼者,此二子者,訟三年而獄不斷。齊君由謙殺之恐不辜,猶謙釋之。恐失有罪,乃使之人共一羊,盟齊之神社,二子許諾。於是泏洫𢵣羊而漉其血,讀王里國之辭既已終矣,讀中里徼之辭未半也,羊起而觸之,折其腳,祧神之而槁之,殪之盟所。當是時,齊人從者莫不見,遠者莫不聞,著在齊之春秋。諸侯傳而語之曰:『請品先不以其請者,鬼神之誅,至若此其憯遫也。』以若書之說觀之,鬼神之有,豈可疑哉?」
On Ghosts III:
Not only does the record in this book prove it to be so. Formerly the Lord Zhuang of Qi (794-731 B.C.) had two ministers, Wang Liguo and Zhong Lijiao, who were engaged in a lawsuit. For three years no judgment could be reached. The Lord of Qi thought of putting both of them to death, but was afraid to slay the innocent; he thought of acquitting both of them but was afraid to let loose the guilty. So he let them provide a lamb and take oath on the altar of Qi. The two men agreed to take the oath of blood. The throat of the lamb was cut and its blood sprinkled on the altar. The case of Wang Liguo was read all through. But before half of the case of Zhong Lijiao was read, the lamb arose and butted at him, broke his leg and prostrated him on it. At the time those people who were present all saw it and those far away heard of it. It was recorded in the Spring and Autumn of Qi. The feudal lords circulated the news around and remarked: "So speedy and severe is the punishment from spirits and ghosts to him that takes an oath in insincerity!" Judging from the record in this book, how can we doubt that spirits and ghosts exist?

1. 臣 : Inserted. 孫詒讓《墨子閒詁》

史書 - Histories

Related resources

史記 - Shiji

[Western Han] 109 BC-91 BC Sima Qian
Books referencing 《史記》 Library Resources
Source
Related resources
[Also known as: "Records of the Grand Historian"]

世家

Books referencing 《世家》 Library Resources

齊太公世家

Books referencing 《齊太公世家》 Library Resources
15 齊太公世... :
莊公二十四年,犬戎殺幽王,周東徙雒。秦始列為諸侯。五十六年,晉弒其君昭侯。

16 齊太公世... :
六十四年,莊公卒,子釐公祿甫立。

漢代之後 - Post-Han

清代 - Qing

墨子閒詁 - Mozi Jiangu

[Qing] 1893 Sun Yi-Rang Library Resources
Source

卷八

Library Resources

明鬼下

Books referencing 《明鬼下》 Library Resources
8 明鬼下:
非惟若書之說為然也。「惟」吳鈔本作「唯」。昔者,齊莊君之臣畢云:「『君』,事類賦引作『公』,舊脫『臣』字,據太平御覽、事類賦增」。有所謂王里國、畢云:「太平御覽、事類賦引作『王國卑』,下同,疑此非」。中里徼者,畢云:「太平御覽、事類賦,引作『檄』,下同」。此二子者,訟三年而獄不斷。公羊宣元年,何注云:「古者疑獄三年而後斷」。齊君由謙殺之恐不辜,猶謙釋之。畢云:「由與猶同,故兩作」。王云:「由、猶皆欲也,謙與兼同,言欲兼殺之,兼釋之也。《大雅·文王有聲》篇『匪棘其欲』。《禮器》作『匪革其猶』。周官小行人『其悖逆暴亂作慝猶犯令者』,《大戴記·朝事》篇,『猶』作『欲』。是『猶』即『欲』也。猶、由古字亦通」。蘇說同。恐失有罪,乃使之人共一羊,畢云:「太平御覽、事類賦引『之』作『二』」。盟齊之神社,畢云:「事類賦無『神』字」。詒讓案:周禮司盟云「有獄訟者,則使之盟詛,凡盟詛各以其地域之眾庶,共其牲而致焉」,鄭注云「使其邑閭出牲而來盟」。此所云,與禮合。二子許諾。畢云:「太平御覽、事類賦,引作『二子相從』」。於是泏洫畢云:「《說文》云『泏,水貌,讀若窟』。洫,未詳,疑皿字,言以水渫皿」。洪云:「『泏洫』,當是『涖盟』之訛」。案:「泏皿」殊不辭,洪謂「泏盟」之訛,於字形亦遠。竊謂此當作「●血」。「●」「歃」聲同,唐人書「臿」字或作「●」,與「出」形近,故訛。「血」,又涉「泏」字而誤加水也。𢵣羊而漉其血,畢云:「太平御覽、事類賦,引已上八字作『以羊血灑社』,則『漉』當為『灑』字之誤。『𢵣』,字書無此字」。盧云:「玉篇有『掗』字,云磊搖也,烏可、烏寡、力可三切」。王引之云:「『𢵣』,即『𠜲』字也。《廣雅》曰『𠜲,刑刻剄也」。吳語『自𠜲於客前』,賈逵曰『𠜲,剄也』。作『𢵣』者,或字耳。此文本作『𢵣羊出血而灑其血』,謂剄羊出血而灑其血於社也。太平御覽獸部十三引,作『以羊血灑社』者,省文耳。今本『出血』作『泏血』,涉下文『灑』字而誤加氵,又誤在『𢵣羊』之上,則義不可通」。案:王以「泏洫」為「出血」,未塙,而讀「𢵣」為「𠜲」,則是也。洪說同。讀王里國之辭既已終矣,畢云:「四字,事類賦作『已盡』二字」。讀中里徼之辭未半也,畢云:「太平御覽、事類賦引,『也』作『祭』」。羊起而觸之,畢云「事類賦引,作『觸中里檄』。」折其腳,祧神之此有脫誤,畢云:「疑當云『跳神之社』」。案:羊跳安能敲人使殪,畢說不合事情。而槁之,殪之盟所。當是時,齊人從者莫不見,遠者莫不聞,畢云:「太平御覽引云『齊人以為有神驗』。事類賦引云『齊人以為有神』。疑以意改」。著在齊之春秋。諸侯傳而語之曰:『請品先不以其請者,畢云:「『品』,當為『盟』,下『請』當為『情』。」王引之云:「畢謂『品』當作『盟』是也。上『請』字當為『諸』,『先』當為『共』,隸書『先』字或作『●』,與『共』相似而誤。『共』字當在『盟』字上。共盟,見上文。諸,猶今人言諸凡也。言凡共盟而不以其情者,必受鬼神之誅也。上文曰『諸不敬慎祭祀者,鬼神之誅,至若此其憯遫也』,是其證。今本『諸』,訛作『請』,『共』訛作『先』,『盟』訛作『品』,又升『品』字於『先』字上,則義不可通。下『請』字即『情』字也,墨子書通以『請』為『情』,不煩改字。」俞云:「『先』字之義尚不可曉。王氏改為『共』字,而移在『盟』字之上,似亦未安。『先』,疑『矢』字之誤。矢、誓古通用。盟矢,即盟誓也。『矢』字隸書或作『●』,見孔宙碑,『先』字隸書或作『●』,見北海相景君碑,兩形相似而誤。」案:俞說是也。鬼神之誅,至若此其憯遫也。』以若書之說觀之,鬼神之有,豈可疑哉?」

Total 4 paragraphs. Page 1 of 1.