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
Back Forward
Confucianism -> Lunheng -> Autobiography -> 8

充书违诡于俗。或难曰：“文贵夫顺合众心，不违人意，百人读之莫谴，千人闻之莫怪。故管子曰：‘言室满室，言堂满堂。’今殆说不与世同，故文剌于俗，不合于众。”荅曰：论贵是而不务华，事尚然而不高合。论说辩然否，安得不谲常心、逆俗耳？众心非而不从，故丧黜其伪，而存定其真。如当从众、顺人心者，循旧守雅，讽习而已，何辩之有？孔子侍坐于鲁哀公，公赐桃与黍，孔子先食黍而啖桃，可谓得食序矣，然左右皆掩口而笑，贯俗之日久也。今吾实犹孔子之序食也，俗人违之，犹左右之掩口也。善雅歌，于郑为人悲；礼舞，于赵为不好。尧、舜之典，伍伯不肯观；孔、墨之籍，季、孟不肯读。宁危之计，黜于闾巷；拨世之言，訾于品俗。有美味于斯，俗人不嗜，狄牙甘食。有宝玉于是，俗人投之，卞和佩服。孰是孰非？可信者谁？礼俗相背，何世不然？鲁文逆祀，畔者五人。盖犹是之语，高士不舍，俗夫不好；惑众之书，贤者欣颂，愚者逃顿。The book of Wang Chong is of another type than the usual writings. The following objection might be raised against it:--- In literature it is of importance to conform to the public feeling, and not to be in opposition to received ideas. Then not one out of a hundred readers will find anything to blame, and not one out of a thousand hearers will take exception. Therefore Kuan Tse said that, where somebody is speaking in a house, the audience must fill the whole house, and, when he speaks in a hall, the entire hall should be full. Now Wang Chong's arguments are not in accordance with public opinion. Consequently his words controvert all common ideas, and do not tally with the general views. I reply that in arguing, the essential thing is truth, not elegance, that the facts should at all events be correct, and that consensus is not the highest aim. Investigating a question, one discusses the pros and cons, how would it be possible not to deviate from old ideas and perhaps offend the ears of the common hearer? When the general feeling is wrong, it cannot be followed. One denounces and discards that which is false, and keeps and establishes that which is true. If we were to go by majority, and conform to the public feeling, we could only follow the good old rules and precedents, and recite them over and over again, but how could there be any discussion? When Confucius was attending the court and sitting next to Duke Ai of Lu, the duke favoured him with a peach and millet. Confucius first ate the millet and then the peach. This, we must admit, was the right order of eating the two courses. The courtiers, however, all covered their mouth and laughed. They had, for a long time, been used to another custom. Now I, in fact, resemble Confucius eating the two dishes in the order described above. Ordinary people take exception like the courtiers laughing in their sleeves. Beautiful festive songs were considered as too melancholic, in Cheng and pantomimes, at great celebrations, found no favour in Zhao. The five Leading Princes declined to cast a look upon the Canons of Yao and Shun, and Ji and Meng would not read the works of Confucius and Mo Di. Plans for securing the peace in times of danger are scoffed at in side-alleys, and schemes of reform ridiculed by common people. If there were an exquisite dish, vulgar people would not taste it, though Yi Ti and Yi Ya might eat it with the greatest relish, and if there were a precious jade-stone, ordinary people would throw it away, whereas Pien Ho would hoard it up as a treasure. Who would be right, who wrong, and who could be trusted? Propriety and common usage are always in opposition, when has it not been so? When Duke Wen of Lu infringed the rule of sacrifices, five men resisted him. Great scholars will never give up researches of the above mentioned kind, and common people will always dislike them. And so will the savants enjoy and appreciate books, which bewilder the masses, and which the narrow-minded will flee.

Enjoy this site? Please help.Site design and content copyright 2006-2024. When quoting or citing information from this site, please link to the corresponding page or to https://ctext.org/ens. Please note that the use of automatic download software on this site is strictly prohibited, and that users of such software are automatically banned without warning to save bandwidth. 沪ICP备09015720号-3Comments? Suggestions? Please raise them here.