| | 福虛: |
世論行善者福至，為惡者禍來。福禍之應，皆天也，人為之，天應之。陽恩，人君賞其行；陰惠，天地報其德。 |
| | The world's opinion is that those who do good deeds will have blessings come to them, and those who commit evil acts will bring calamity upon themselves. The response of blessings or calamities is all determined by Heaven; humans act, and Heaven responds accordingly. Yang En, a ruler rewards his conduct; Yin Hui, Heaven and Earth reward his virtue.
|
| | 福虛: |
無貴賤賢愚，莫謂不然。徒見行事有其文傳，又見善人時遇福，故遂信之，謂之實然。斯言或時賢聖欲勸人為善，著必然之語，以明德報；或福時適，遇者以為然。如實論之，安得福祐乎？ |
| | No matter one's status, whether noble or humble, wise or foolish, none should say otherwise. They merely see that actions are recorded in writings and witness virtuous people encountering blessings at times, so they come to believe it, calling it an actual truth. These words may have been spoken by sages or virtuous people of the time who wished to encourage others to do good, stating them as certainties in order to clarify that virtue will be rewarded; or it may simply be a coincidence when blessings occur, and those who encounter it take it to be true. If we speak of the matter truthfully, how can one obtain blessings and protection?
|
| | 福虛: |
楚惠王食寒葅而得蛭，因遂吞之，腹有疾而不能食。令尹問：「王安得此疾也？」王曰：「我食寒葅而得蛭，念譴之而不行其罪乎？是廢法而威不立也，非所以使國人聞之也。譴而行誅乎？則庖廚監食者，法皆當死，心又不忍也。吾恐左右見之也，因遂吞之。」令尹避席再拜而賀曰：「臣聞天道無親，唯德是輔。王有仁德，天之所奉也，病不為傷。」是夕也，惠王之後而蛭出，及久患心腹之積皆愈。故天之親德也，可謂不察乎？ |
| | King Huai of Chu ate a cold pickle dish and found a leech in it, so he swallowed it. As a result, his abdomen became ill and he could not eat. The Lingyi asked, "How did the king acquire this illness?" The king said, "I ate a cold pickle dish and got a leech. Should I think of punishing it but not carry out its punishment?" This would be to abandon the law and fail to establish authority, which is not how one should make the people of the state hear about it. Should I condemn it and carry out punishment? Then the cooks and those in charge of food preparation would all be subject to death according to law, but my heart cannot bear it. I am afraid that those around me might see this, so I swallowed it." The Lingyi rose from his seat and bowed twice in celebration, saying, "I have heard that the way of Heaven is impartial; it supports only virtue. The king possesses benevolence and virtue, which Heaven upholds; therefore, this illness will not cause harm." On that night, after King Huai passed urine, the leech emerged, and his longstanding ailments in the chest and abdomen were completely healed. Therefore, can it be said that Heaven does not recognize virtue?
|
| | 福虛: |
曰：此虛言也。 |
| | It is said: This is a false statement.
|
| | 福虛: |
案惠王之吞蛭，不肖之主也。有不肖之行，天不祐也。何則？惠王不忍譴蛭，恐庖廚監食，法皆誅也。一國之君，專擅賞罰；而赦，人君所為也。惠王通譴葅中何故有蛭，庖廚監食皆當伏法，然能終不以飲食行誅於人，赦而不罪，惠莫大焉。庖廚罪覺而不誅，自新而改後；惠王赦細而活微，身安不病。今則不然，強食害己之物，使監食之臣不聞其過，失御下之威，無禦非之心，不肖一也。使庖廚監食失甘苦之和，若塵土落於葅中，大如蟣虱，非意所能覽，非目所能見，原心定罪，不明其過，可謂惠矣。今蛭廣有分數，長有寸度，在寒葅中，眇目之人，猶將見之。臣不畏敬，擇濯不謹，罪過至重，惠王不譴，不肖二也。葅中不當有蛭，不食投地；如恐左右之見，懷屏隱匿之處，足以使蛭不見，何必食之？如不可食之物，誤在葅中，可復隱匿而強食之？不肖三也。有不肖之行，而天祐之，是天報祐不肖人也。 |
| | Investigating King Huai's act of swallowing the leech, he was an unworthy ruler. He had unworthy conduct; Heaven did not protect him. Why is that? King Huai could not bear to punish the leech, fearing that if he punished the cooks and food supervisors according to law, they would all be executed. The ruler of a whole country holds sole authority over rewards and punishments; to pardon is something the sovereign does. King Huai understood that the reason there was a leech in the pickle dish was due to the cooks and food supervisors who should all be punished according to law. Yet he ultimately did not carry out punishment for such an incident involving food, choosing instead to pardon them without holding them accountable; this is the greatest form of kindness. The cooks and supervisors were aware of their crime but were not punished; they would reform themselves in the future. King Huai pardoned minor offenses and spared small creatures, thus ensuring his own safety and freedom from illness. Nowadays, it is not the same; one forces oneself to consume harmful food and allows those in charge of meals to remain unaware of their faults. This results in a loss of authority over subordinates and an absence of vigilance against wrongdoing—this is the first sign of unworthiness. Allowing the cooks and supervisors to lose their sense of balance in flavors, so that dust falls into the pickle dish, as large as lice or mites—things beyond one's intention to notice and beyond what the eyes can see—if guilt is determined solely by intent without clearly identifying the fault, this may be called kindness. Now, a leech has clear dimensions in width and length; when it is in the cold pickle dish, even someone with poor eyesight would still see it. The officials did not show reverence and were careless in their washing and preparation, committing a grave offense. King Huai did not punish them—this is the second sign of unworthiness. A pickle dish should not contain leeches; if there were one, it would be discarded to the ground without being eaten; If he was afraid that those around him might see it, there were plenty of places to hide and conceal the leech so that it would not be seen; why then must he swallow it? If an inedible object were mistakenly placed in the pickle dish, could one possibly conceal and force oneself to eat it? This is the third sign of unworthiness. Having acted in an unworthy manner yet being protected by Heaven means that Heaven has blessed and favored the unworthy person.
|
| | 福虛: |
不忍譴蛭，世謂之賢，賢者操行，多若吞蛭之類，吞蛭、天除其病，是則賢者常無病也。賢者德薄，未足以言。聖人純道，操行少非，為推不忍之行，以容人之過，必眾多矣。然而武王不豫，孔子疾病，天之祐人，何不實也？ |
| | Being unable to punish the leech is considered by the world as virtue, and virtuous people are said to have conduct like that of swallowing a leech. If swallowing a leech removes one's illness from Heaven, then it would follow that virtuous people never suffer from illness. Virtuous people have shallow virtue; this is not sufficient to speak of. Sages possess pure morality, and their conduct has few faults. If they were to adopt the act of showing mercy in order to tolerate others' mistakes, such cases would certainly be numerous. However, King Wu fell ill, and Confucius suffered from sickness; if Heaven protects people, why is this not true?
|
| | 福虛: |
或時惠王吞蛭，蛭偶自出。食生物者，無有不死，腹中熱也。初吞，蛭時未死，而腹中熱，蛭動作，故腹中痛。須臾，蛭死腹中，痛亦止。蛭之性食血，惠王心腹之積，殆積血也。故食血之蟲死，而積血之病愈。猶狸之性食鼠，人有鼠病，吞狸自愈，物類相勝，方藥相使也。食蛭蟲而病愈，安得怪乎？食生物無不死，死無不出，之後蛭出，安得祐乎？令尹見惠王有不忍之德，知蛭入腹中必當死出，臣因再拜，賀病不為傷，著己知來之德，以喜惠王之心，是與子韋之言星徙，太卜之言地動，無以異也。宋人有好善行者，三世不解，家無故黑牛生白犢，以問孔子。孔子曰：「此吉祥也，以享鬼神。」即以犢祭。一年，其父無故而盲。牛又生白犢，其父又使其子問孔子。孔子曰：「吉祥也，以享鬼神。」復以犢祭。一年，其子無故而盲。其後楚攻宋，圍其城。當此之時，易子而食之，㭊骸而炊之，此獨以父子俱盲之故，得毋乘城。軍罷圍解，父子俱視。此脩善積行神報之效也。 |
| | Perhaps at that time, when King Huai swallowed the leech, it happened to come out by chance. Those who eat living creatures will inevitably die; this is due to internal heat in the abdomen. Initially, when he swallowed it, the leech had not yet died, and the heat in his abdomen caused it to move, resulting in abdominal pain. After a short while, the leech died inside his abdomen, and the pain ceased as well. Leeches naturally feed on blood; King Huai's accumulated ailments in his chest and abdomen were likely accumulations of blood. Therefore, when the blood-feeding worm died, the illness caused by blood accumulation was cured. It is like how cats naturally eat rats; if a person suffers from a rat-related illness, swallowing a cat would supposedly cure it—this is an example of the principle that certain creatures or substances overcome others in nature, akin to how herbal remedies work through their interactions. Curing an illness by consuming a leech—how could this be considered strange? Eating living creatures inevitably leads to death, and when one dies, the creature will eventually come out. Afterward, the leech exited—how can this be attributed to Heaven's protection? The Lingyi, seeing King Huai's display of compassion, knew that the leech entering his abdomen would inevitably die and come out. The minister thus bowed twice, congratulating him on how the illness did not cause harm, highlighting his virtue in foreknowledge to please King Huai. This is no different from Zi Wei's statement about stars moving or the Grand Diviner's declaration of an earthquake. A man from Song who was fond of doing good deeds had continued for three generations without ceasing; suddenly, a black cow in his family gave birth to a white calf. He took this matter and asked Confucius about it. Confucius said, "This is an auspicious omen; offer it as a sacrifice to the spirits." He immediately used the calf for a sacrifice. One year later, his father suddenly became blind without any apparent cause. The cow gave birth to another white calf, and the father once again sent his son to ask Confucius. Confucius said, "This is an auspicious sign; offer it as a sacrifice to spirits." They again used the calf for a sacrificial offering. One year later, his son suddenly became blind without cause. Later, the State of Chu attacked Song and surrounded its city. At this time, people exchanged children to eat, and burned bones for fuel. Because of the father and son's blindness alone, they were exempt from having to man the city walls. When the army lifted its siege, both father and son regained their sight. This was the effect of cultivating virtue and accumulating good deeds being rewarded by divine forces.
|
| | 福虛: |
曰：此虛言也。 |
| | It is said: This is a false statement.
|
| | 福虛: |
夫宋人父子脩善如此，神報之，何必使之先盲後視哉？不盲常視，不能護乎？此神不能護不盲之人，則亦不能以盲護人矣。使宋、楚之君合戰頓兵，流血僵尸，戰夫禽獲，死亡不還，以盲之故，得脫不行，可謂神報之矣。今宋、楚相攻，兩軍未合，華元、子反結言而退，二軍之眾，並全而歸，兵矢之刃無頓用者。雖有乘城之役，無死亡之患。為善人報者，為乘城之間乎？使時不盲，亦猶不死。盲與不盲，俱得脫免，神使之盲，何益於善？ |
| | If the father and son of this man from Song had cultivated such virtue, why would divine retribution require them to first become blind and then regain their sight? Would they not have been able to protect themselves if they had remained sighted all along? If the divine forces cannot protect those who are not blind, then they would also be unable to protect people through their blindness. If the rulers of Song and Chu engaged in battle, their armies were stationed, blood flowed, corpses littered the field, soldiers were captured or killed without return. Because they happened to be blind, they escaped from service—this can indeed be called a divine reward. Now, when Song and Chu attacked each other, before the two armies had even engaged in battle, Hua Yuan and Zi Fan made an agreement and withdrew. The forces of both armies returned intact, with no weapons or arrows used at all. Even if there had been a duty to man the city walls, there would have been no danger of death. Is this divine reward for doing good meant specifically for those who manned the city walls? If they had not been blind at that time, they would still have remained unharmed. Whether blind or sighted, they both escaped harm; if the divine forces made them blind, what benefit does that bring to their virtue?
|
| | 福虛: |
當宋國乏糧之時也，盲人之家，豈獨富哉？俱與乘城之家易子㭊骸，反以窮厄獨盲無見，則神報祐人，失善惡之實也。 |
| | At the time when the state of Song was short on food supplies, would a blind person's household alone be wealthy? They were all required to man the city walls and exchange children for food, burning bones for fuel; yet this blind family alone was left in poverty and hardship without sight. If divine forces reward people like this, they have lost touch with the reality of virtue and vice.
|
| | 福虛: |
宋人父子，前偶自以風寒發盲，圍解之後，盲偶自愈。世見父子修善，又用二白犢祭，宋、楚相攻，獨不乘城，圍解之後，父子皆視，則謂修善之報，獲鬼神之祐矣。 |
| | The father and son from Song had previously coincidentally become blind due to a cold or wind-related illness, and after the siege was lifted, their blindness coincidentally recovered on its own. The world sees that the father and son cultivated virtue, used two white calves for sacrifice, when Song and Chu fought each other they alone did not have to man the city walls; after the siege was lifted their sight returned. Thus it is said to be a reward for cultivating virtue, receiving protection from spirits and deities.
|
| | 福虛: |
楚相孫叔敖為兒之時，見兩頭虵，殺而埋之，歸，對其母泣。母問其故，對曰：「我聞見兩頭虵死。向者，出見兩頭虵，恐去母死，是以泣也。」其母曰：「今虵何在？」對曰：「我恐後人見之，即殺而埋之。」其母曰：「吾聞有陰德者，天必報之。汝必不死，天必報汝。」叔敖竟不死，遂為楚相。埋一虵，獲二祐，天報善，明矣。 |
| | When Sun Shuao of the State of Chu was a child, he saw a two-headed snake and killed it, burying it. When he returned home, he wept before his mother. His mother asked why this was so, and he replied, "I have heard that whoever sees a two-headed snake will die. Earlier, I went out and saw the two-headed snake; fearing that I would leave you and die, I wept." His mother asked, "Where is the snake now?" He replied, "I was afraid that someone else might see it later, so I killed and buried it." His mother said, "I have heard that those who perform hidden acts of virtue will surely be rewarded by Heaven. You must not die; Heaven will certainly reward you." Sun Shuao eventually did not die, and later became the prime minister of Chu. By burying one snake, he received two blessings; Heaven's reward for virtue is clearly evident.
|
| | 福虛: |
曰：此虛言矣。 |
| | It is said: This is a false statement.
|
| | 福虛: |
夫見兩頭虵輒死者，俗言也；有陰德天報之福者，俗議也。叔敖信俗言而埋虵，其母信俗議而必報，是謂死生無命，在一虵之死。 |
| | The idea that seeing a two-headed snake leads to immediate death is merely popular superstition; The notion that hidden virtue will be rewarded by Heaven with blessings is also just common opinion. Sun Shuao believed in the popular saying and buried the snake, while his mother trusted the common opinion that there would certainly be a reward. This suggests that life and death are not determined by fate but depend on whether one kills the snake.
|
| | 福虛: |
齊孟嘗君田文以五月五日生，其父田嬰讓其母曰：「何故舉之？」曰：「君所以不舉五月子，何也？」嬰曰：「五月子，長與戶同，殺其父母。」曰：「人命在天乎？在戶乎？如在天，君何憂也？如在戶，則宜高其戶耳，誰而及之者？」後文長與一戶同，而嬰不死。是則五月舉子之忌，無效驗也。夫惡見兩頭虵，猶五月舉子也。五月舉子，其父不死，則知見兩頭虵者，無殃禍也。由此言之，見兩頭虵自不死，非埋之故也。埋一虵，獲二福，如埋十虵，得幾祐乎？ |
| | Prince Tian Wen of Qi was born on the fifth day of the fifth lunar month. His father, Tian Ying, scolded his mother and said, "Why did you raise him?" She asked, "What is the reason you refuse to raise a child born in the fifth month?" Tian Ying said, "A child born in the fifth lunar month grows up to be as tall as the door lintel and will kill his parents." She asked, "Is a person's fate determined by Heaven? Or is it determined by the door?" If it is determined by Heaven, why are you worried? If it depends on the door, then you should just raise the lintel higher; who could possibly reach that height?" Later, when Tian Wen grew to be as tall as a door lintel, Tian Ying did not die. This shows that the superstition against raising children born in the fifth lunar month has no basis or validity. Hating to see a two-headed snake is like disliking to raise a child born in May; both are mere superstitions. Since the father of a child born in the fifth moon did not die, it is known that seeing a two-headed snake brings no misfortune. From this we can say that one who sees a two-headed snake will not die, and it is not because of burying the snake. Burying one snake brings double blessings; if ten snakes are buried, how many blessings would be received?
|
| | 福虛: |
埋虵惡人復見，叔敖賢也。賢者之行，豈徒埋虵一事哉？前埋虵之時，多所行矣。稟天善性，動有賢行，賢行之人，宜見吉物，無為乃見殺人之虵。豈叔敖未見虵之時有惡，天欲殺之，見其埋虵，除其過，天活之哉？石生而堅，蘭生而香，如謂叔敖之賢在埋虵之時，非生而稟之也。 |
| | If the act of burying a snake is considered evil and others still see it, then Sun Shuao was indeed virtuous. The conduct of a virtuous person could not possibly be limited to just the act of burying snakes! Before he buried the snake, Sun Shuao had already performed many good deeds. Endowed with an inherently kind nature from Heaven, his every action reflected virtuous conduct. A person of virtue should encounter auspicious things; there is no reason for him to see a snake that brings death. Could it be that before Sun Shuao saw the snake he had committed some evil deed, and Heaven intended to kill him? After seeing him bury the snake and thus remove his wrongdoing, did Heaven spare his life? Stone is hard by nature; orchids are fragrant from birth. If one says that Sun Shuao's virtue was only developed at the time he buried the snake, then it would not be something he was born with.
|
| | 福虛: |
儒家之徒董無心，墨家之役纏子，相見講道。纏子稱墨家佑鬼神，是引秦穆公有明德，上帝賜之九十年。纏子難以堯、舜不賜年，桀、紂不夭死。 |
| | Dong Wuxin of the Confucian school and Chuan Zi of the Mohist school met to discuss their doctrines. Chuan Zi claimed that the Mohists believed in divine protection from ghosts and gods, citing Qin Mu Gong's virtuous conduct as an example of how Heaven rewarded him with ninety years. Chuan Zi was challenged on the fact that Yao and Shun were not granted extra years, while Jie and Zhou did not die prematurely.
|
| | 福虛: |
堯、舜、桀、紂猶為尚遠，且近難以秦穆公、晉文公。夫謚者、行之迹也，迹生時行，以為死謚。穆者、誤亂之名，文者、德惠之表。有誤亂之行，天賜之年；有德惠之操，天奪其命乎？案穆公之霸，不過晉文；晉文之謚，美於穆公。天不加晉文以命，獨賜穆公以年，是天報誤亂，與穆公同也。 |
| | Yao, Shun, Jie, and Zhou are still too distant in time; let us instead consider the more recent examples of Qin Mu Gong and Jin Wen Gong. A posthumous title is a record of one's conduct; it is given after death based on the deeds performed during life. "Mu" means "confused and disorderly," while "Wen" signifies virtue and benevolence. If one has confused and disorderly conduct, Heaven grants them longevity; If someone possesses virtue and benevolence, would Heaven deprive them of their life?" Judging from the achievements of Qin Mu Gong as a hegemon, they did not surpass those of Jin Wen Gong; Jin Wen Gong's posthumous title was more honorable than that of Qin Mu Gong. If Heaven did not grant Jin Wen Gong a longer life, yet gave Qin Mu Gong extra years, this would mean that Heaven rewards disorder and confusion in the same way as it does for Qin Mu Gong.
|
| | 福虛: |
天下善人寡，惡人眾。善人順道，惡人違天。然夫惡人之命不短，善人之年不長。天不命善人常享一百載之壽，惡人為殤子惡死，何哉？ |
| | Virtuous people are few in number throughout the world, while wicked individuals abound. Virtuous people follow the Way; evil people defy Heaven. Yet, the lives of wicked individuals are not short, and the years of virtuous people are not long. Why does Heaven not decree that virtuous individuals always enjoy a hundred-year lifespan, while wicked people die young or suffer violent deaths?"
|
