| | 感類: |
陰陽不和，災變發起，或時先世遺咎，或時氣自然。賢聖感類，慊懼自思，災變惡徵，何為至乎？引過自責，恐有罪，畏慎恐懼之意，未必有其實事也。何以明之？以湯遭旱自責以五過也。聖人純完，行無缺失矣，何自責有五過？然如《書》曰：「湯自責，天應以雨。」湯本無過，以五過自責，天何故雨？以無過致旱，亦知自責不能得雨也。由此言之，旱不為湯至，雨不應自責。然而前旱後雨者，自然之氣也。此言，《書》之語也。難之曰：《春秋》大雩，董仲舒設土龍，皆為一時間也。一時不雨，恐懼雩祭，求陰請福，憂念百姓也。湯遭旱七年，以五過自責，謂何時也？夫遭旱一時，輒自責乎？旱至七年，乃自責也？謂一時輒自責，七年乃雨，天應之誠，何其留也？始謂七年乃自責，憂念百姓，何其遲也？不合雩祭之法，不厭憂民之義，《書》之言，未可信也。由此論之，周成王之雷風發，亦此類也。 |
| | When yin and yang are out of harmony, calamities arise; sometimes these are due to the accumulated sins of previous generations, or at other times they occur naturally as a result of atmospheric conditions. Sages and virtuous people are moved by such events; they feel anxious and reflect upon themselves, wondering why calamities and ominous signs have come to pass. They take it upon themselves to blame their own faults, fearing that they may be guilty; this is an expression of caution and fear, but there may not necessarily be any actual wrongdoing involved. Why should we say so? Because King Tang of Shang blamed himself for five faults when he encountered a drought. A sage is perfectly virtuous, and his conduct has no flaws; why then did he blame himself for five faults? Yet as the Book of Documents says: "King Tang blamed himself, and Heaven responded with rain." If King Tang originally had no faults but blamed himself for five, why did Heaven respond by sending rain? A drought occurred without any fault on his part; this shows that self-reproach alone cannot bring about rain. From this we may say, the drought did not come because of King Tang, and the rain did not result from his self-reproach. Nevertheless, the fact that there was a drought followed by rain is simply due to natural atmospheric conditions. This statement is from the Book of Documents. An objection may be raised: In the Spring and Autumn Annals, a great rain sacrifice was held; Dong Zhongshu set up an earth dragon — all of these were done within one time period. When it did not rain during a season, they feared and performed the sacrificial rites for rain, seeking yin forces and requesting blessings — this was out of concern for the people. King Tang encountered a seven-year drought; when he blamed himself for five faults, what time period is being referred to? When encountering a drought in one season, would one immediately blame oneself? Only after a seven-year-long drought did he then blame himself? lineno If one blamed oneself immediately upon encountering a single season of drought, yet it took seven years before rain came — how slow was Heaven's response to sincerity? Initially, if he blamed himself only after seven years of drought, and yet still worried about the people — how delayed was his concern? This does not conform to the rites of rain sacrifice, nor does it satisfy the meaning of caring for the people; therefore, what is said in the Book of Documents cannot be trusted. From this reasoning, the thunder and wind that occurred during King Cheng of Zhou's reign were also of this nature.
|
| | 感類: |
《金滕》曰：「秋大熟未穫，天大雷電以風，禾盡偃，大木斯拔，邦人大恐。」當此之時，周公死。儒者說之，以為成王狐疑於周公。欲以天子禮葬公，公、人臣也；欲以人臣禮葬公，公有王功。狐疑於葬周公之間，天大雷雨，動怒示變，以彰聖功。古文家以武王崩，周公居攝，管、蔡流言，王意狐疑周公，周公奔楚，故天雷雨，以悟成王。夫一雷一雨之變，或以為葬疑，或以為信讒，二家未可審。且訂葬疑之說。 |
| | The Jin Teng says: "In autumn, the grain was ripe but not yet harvested; Heaven sent great thunder and lightning with strong winds. All the crops were flattened, large trees uprooted, and the people of the state greatly frightened." At that time, Duke of Zhou had died. Confucian scholars explain this by saying that King Cheng doubted Duke of Zhou. They wished to bury the duke with the rites for an emperor, but he was merely a minister. To bury him with the rites of a common minister would be inappropriate, since he had achieved the accomplishments of a king. Because King Cheng wavered in deciding how to bury Duke of Zhou, Heaven sent great thunder and rain, stirred with anger and displaying a portent, to demonstrate the saint's achievements. The scholars of the ancient texts say that after King Wu died, Duke of Zhou assumed regency. When Guan and Cai spread false accusations, the king doubted Duke of Zhou; thus, Duke of Zhou fled to Chu. Hence Heaven sent thunder and rain in order to enlighten King Cheng. 龙头 The change of one thunderclap and one rainfall, some say it was due to uncertainty about the burial rites, others claim it was because of believing slander — these two interpretations cannot be determined. Let us examine the theory regarding doubts over the burial rites.
|
| | 感類: |
秋夏之際，陽氣尚盛，未嘗無雷雨也，顧其拔木椻禾，頗為狀耳。當雷雨時，成王感懼，開《金滕》之書，見周公之功，執書泣過，自責之深。自責適已，天偶反風，《書》家則謂天為周公怒也。千秋萬夏，不絕雷雨。苟謂雷雨為天怒乎？是則皇天歲歲怒也。正月陽氣發泄，雷聲始動，秋夏陽至極而雷折。苟謂秋夏之雷為天大怒，正月之雷天小怒乎？雷為天怒，雨為恩施。使天為周公怒，徒當雷，不當雨。今雨俱至，天怒且喜乎？「子於是日也，哭則不歌。」《周禮》：「子、卯稷食菜羹。」哀樂不並行。哀樂不並行，喜怒反并至乎？ |
| | At the junction of autumn and summer, yang energy is still strong; thunderstorms are not uncommon. It was merely that uprooting trees and flattening crops made it particularly noticeable. When the thunderstorm occurred, King Cheng was moved and fearful. He opened the scroll of Jin Teng, saw Duke of Zhou's achievements, held the book in his hands and wept bitterly, deeply self-reproaching himself. As soon as he had blamed himself, Heaven coincidentally reversed the wind; scholars of the Book then say that Heaven was angry on behalf of Duke of Zhou. Throughout countless autumns and summers, thunderstorms have never ceased. If one were to say that every thunderstorm is Heaven's anger? Then it would mean that the Supreme Heaven is angry year after year. In the first month, yang energy begins to release and thunder starts; in autumn and summer when yang reaches its peak, thunder becomes violent. If one says that the thunder of autumn and summer is Heaven's great anger, then would the thunder in the first month be Heaven's small anger? Thunder represents Heaven's anger; rain signifies Heaven's grace. If Heaven was angry on Duke of Zhou's behalf, it should have been thunder alone and not also rain. Now both thunder and rain occurred — does this mean Heaven was both angry and pleased? "On this day, if a son mourns, he should not sing." The Rites of Zhou say: "On Zi and Mao days, the food for Ji [a deity] is vegetable soup." Sorrow and joy should not be expressed at the same time. If sorrow and joy cannot coexist, then can joy and anger come together?
|
| | 感類: |
秦始皇帝東封岱嶽，雷雨暴至。劉媼息大澤，雷雨晦冥。始皇無道，自同前聖，治亂自謂太平，天怒可也。劉媼息大澤，夢與神遇，是生高祖，何怒於生聖人而為雷雨乎？堯時大風為害，堯激大風於青丘之野。舜入大麓，烈風雷雨。堯、舜世之隆主，何過於天，天為風雨也？大旱，《春秋》雩祭；又董仲舒設土龍，以類招氣。如天應雩、龍，必為雷雨。何則？秋夏之雨，與雷俱也。必從《春秋》、仲舒之術，則大雩、龍，求怒天乎？師曠奏《白雪》之曲，雷電下擊；鼓《清角》之音，風雨暴至。苟為雷雨為天怒，天何憎於《白雪》、《清角》，而怒師曠為之乎？此雷雨之難也。 |
| | When Emperor Qin Shi Huang performed a sacrificial ceremony on Mount Tai in the east, thunderstorms suddenly arrived. Liu Ao rested by Daze, when thunder and rain caused darkness and gloom. Emperor Qin Shi Huang was tyrannical; he compared himself to former sages, claiming peace in times of disorder — Heaven's anger is understandable. Liu Ao rested at Daze, dreamed of meeting a deity, and thus gave birth to Gaozu. Why would Heaven be angry enough to send thunderstorms over the birth of a sage? During Yao's time, strong winds caused harm; Emperor Yao drove away the great wind in the plains of Qingqiu. When Shun entered Dalu, fierce winds and thunderstorms occurred. Yao and Shun were the most virtuous rulers of their time; what faults did they have to provoke Heaven, causing wind and rain? During a great drought, the Spring and Autumn Annals records the performance of rain-sacrifices; 龙头 Dong Zhongshu also set up an earthen dragon to attract atmospheric forces through analogy. If Heaven were to respond to the rain sacrifice or the earthen dragon, it would certainly bring thunder and rain. Why is that so? Rain in autumn or summer always comes with thunder. If one must follow the methods of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Dong Zhongshu, then performing a great rain sacrifice or setting up an earthen dragon — is this seeking to provoke Heaven's anger? Shikuang performed the "Bai Xue" melody, and thunder and lightning struck downward. When he played the "Qingjiao" tune, winds and rain suddenly arrived in force. If thunder and rain are indeed Heaven's anger, why would Heaven hate the "Bai Xue" and "Qingjiao" tunes so much as to be angry at Shikuang for playing them? This is a difficulty in interpreting thunderstorms.
|
| | 感類: |
又問之曰：「成王不以天子禮葬周公，天為雷風，偃禾拔木。成王覺悟，執書泣過，天乃反風，偃禾復起。何不為疾反風以立大木，必須國人起築之乎？」應曰：「天不能。」曰：「然則天有所不能乎？」應曰：「然。」難曰：「孟賁推人，人仆；接人而起，接人立。天能拔木，不能復起，是則天力不如孟賁也。秦時三山亡，猶謂天所徙也。夫木之輕重，孰與三山？能徙三山，不能起大木，非天用力宜也。如謂三山非天所亡，然則雷雨獨天所為乎？」 |
| | Another question may be raised: "King Cheng did not bury Duke of Zhou with the rites for an emperor; Heaven responded with thunder and wind, flattening crops and uprooting trees. King Cheng became enlightened, held the book and wept over his mistake; Heaven then reversed the wind, and the flattened crops rose again. "Why did Heaven not quickly reverse the wind to upright the uprooted trees? Was it necessary for the people of the country to get up and rebuild them?" The response is: "Heaven cannot do that." One might ask, "If so, then are there things Heaven cannot do?" The response is: "Yes." An objection may be raised: "Meng Ben pushed a man, and the man fell; he pulled another up, and that person stood." Heaven can uproot trees but cannot restore them — this means Heaven's power is less than Meng Ben's. During the Qin dynasty, three mountains disappeared; it was still said to be moved by Heaven. Which is heavier — a tree or three mountains? If Heaven can move three mountains but cannot upright a large tree, this does not make sense in terms of the use of power. "If one says that it was not Heaven who caused the three mountains to disappear, then is thunder and rain alone the work of Heaven?"
|
| | 感類: |
問曰：「天子欲令成王以天子之禮葬周公，以公有聖德，以公有王功。經曰：『王乃得周公死自以為功代武王之說。』今天動威，以彰周公之德也。」 |
| | A question may be raised: "The emperor wished King Cheng to bury Duke of Zhou with imperial rites, because the duke possessed saintly virtue and had achieved royal accomplishments. The Classic says: 'King Cheng then learned of Duke of Zhou's death, believing that the duke had taken it upon himself to accomplish what King Wu could not.' Now Heaven displayed its power in order to demonstrate Duke of Zhou's virtue."
|
| | 感類: |
難之曰：「伊尹相湯伐夏，為民興利除害，致天下太平。湯死，復相大甲。大甲佚豫，放之桐宮，攝政三年，乃退復位。周公曰：『伊尹格于皇天。』天所宜彰也。伊尹死時，天何以不為雷雨？」應曰：「以《百雨篇》曰：『伊尹死，大霧三日。』」大霧三日，亂氣矣，非天怒之變也。東海張霸造《百雨篇》，其言雖未可信，且假以問：「天為雷雨以悟成王，成王未開金匱雷止乎？已開金匱雷雨乃止也？」應曰：「未開金匱雷止也。開匱得書，見公之功，覺悟泣過，決以天子禮葬公。出郊觀變，天止雨反風，禾盡起。由此言之，成王未覺悟，雷雨止矣。」難曰：「伊尹，霧三日。天何不三日雷雨，須成王覺悟乃止乎？太戊之時，桑穀生朝，七日大拱。太戊思政，桑穀消亡。宋景公時，熒守心，出三善言，熒惑徙舍。使太戊不思政，景公無三善言，桑穀不消，熒惑不徙。何則？災變所以譴告也，所譴告未覺，災變不除，天之至意也。今天怒為雷雨，以責成王，成王未覺，雨雷之息，何其早也？」 |
| | An objection may be raised: "Yi Yin assisted King Tang in attacking Xia, bringing benefits to the people and removing their harms, thus achieving peace throughout the land. After King Tang died, he again served as prime minister under Taijia. When Taijia became indulgent and dissolute, Yi Yin exiled him to the Tong Gong palace, assumed regency for three years, then stepped back as he resumed his throne. Duke of Zhou said: "Yi Yin was recognized by the Supreme Heaven." This is something Heaven should have commended. If so, why did Heaven not send thunder and rain when Yi Yin died?" The response is: "According to the chapter 'Ba Yu,' it says, 'When Yi Yin died, a great fog lasted for three days.'" A three-day thick fog is merely a disturbance of the atmosphere; it was not an omen of Heaven's anger. Zhang Ba of Donghai fabricated the "Ba Yu" chapter; although his words are not reliable, let us temporarily accept them for the sake of argument: "If Heaven sent thunder and rain to enlighten King Cheng, did the thunder stop only after he opened the Jin Kui?" "Did the thunder and rain cease only after he had opened the Jin Kui?" The response is: "No, the thunder stopped before King Cheng opened the Jin Kui. He opened the box and found the scroll, saw Duke of Zhou's achievements, became enlightened and wept over his error, then decided to bury him with imperial rites. He went outside the capital to observe the changes; Heaven stopped the rain and reversed the wind, causing all the flattened crops to rise again. From this we may say that King Cheng had not yet become enlightened when the thunder and rain ceased." An objection is raised: "For Yi Yin, there was a three-day fog. Why did Heaven not send three days of thunder and rain, waiting for King Cheng to become enlightened before stopping?" During the reign of Taiwu, mulberry and millet sprouted in the court; within seven days they grew large. When Taiwu reflected on his governance, the mulberry and millet disappeared. During the reign of Song Jinggong, the planet Mars remained in the constellation Shen; after he made three virtuous statements, Mars moved from its position. If Taiwu had not reflected on his governance and Song Jinggong had not made three virtuous statements, the mulberry and millet would not have disappeared, nor would Mars have moved. Why is that so? Calamities and omens are sent by Heaven to warn and admonish. If the warning has not yet been understood, the calamity will not be removed — this is Heaven's ultimate intention. "Now Heaven was angry and sent thunder and rain to admonish King Cheng; yet before King Cheng had become aware of it, the rain and thunder ceased — how early is that?"
|
| | 感類: |
又問曰：「禮、諸侯之子稱公子，諸侯之孫稱公孫，皆食采地，殊之眾庶。何則？公子公孫，親而又尊，得體公稱，又食采地，名實相副，猶文質相稱也。天彰周公之功，令成王以天子禮葬，何不令成王號周公以周王，副天子之禮乎？」應曰：「王者、名之尊號也，人臣不得名也。」難曰：「人臣猶得名王，禮乎？武王伐紂，下車追王大王、王季、文王。三人者、諸侯，亦人臣也，以王號加之。何為獨可於三王，不可於周公？天意欲彰周公，豈能明乎？豈以王迹起於三人哉？然而王功亦成於周公。江起岷山，流為濤瀨。相濤瀨之流，孰與初起之源。秬鬯之所為到，白雉之所為來，三王乎？周公也？周公功德盛於三王，不加王號，豈天惡人妄稱之哉？周衰，六國稱王，齊、秦更為帝，當時天無禁怒之變。周公不以天子禮葬，天為雷雨以責成王，何天之好惡不純一乎？」 |
| | Another question was raised: "According to the rites, the sons of feudal lords are called Gongzi (princes), and their grandsons are called Gongsun; all of them receive fiefdoms, distinguishing them from commoners. Why is that so? Gongzi and Gongsun are both close relatives of the feudal lord and hold a position of respect; they receive titles befitting their status, as well as fiefdoms. Their names correspond to their actual positions, just as form corresponds to substance. "Heaven honored the merit of Zhou Gong, and had King Cheng bury him with the rites reserved for an emperor. Why then did Heaven not have King Cheng bestow on Zhou Gong the title of Zhou Wang (King of Zhou), so that his status would be in accordance with imperial rites?" The response was: "An emperor's title is the most exalted name; it cannot be bestowed upon a subject." An objection was raised: "Is it in accordance with rites for a subject to receive the title of an emperor?" King Wu, when he attacked King Zhou, upon entering the capital paid homage by posthumously honoring Taiwang (the Great Grandfather), Wang Ji, and King Wen. These three were feudal lords as well — they too were subjects — yet the title of king was bestowed upon them. Why is it acceptable to bestow such a title on these three kings, but not on Zhou Gong? If Heaven's will was to honor and distinguish Zhou Gong, how could that be unclear? Is it because the dynasty originated from these three men? Nevertheless, the king's achievements were also realized through Zhou Gong. The Yangtze River originates from Minshan and flows as surging waves and rapids. Comparing the flowing torrents of waves and rapids, which is greater — the mighty flow or the source at its beginning? Was it these three kings who caused the arrival of the ji chang (a sacred wine) and the coming of the white pheasants? Or was it Zhou Gong? Zhou Gong's virtue and achievements surpassed those of the three kings. If he did not receive a royal title, was it because Heaven abhors people from falsely bestowing such honors? When the Zhou dynasty declined, the six states declared themselves kings; Qi and Qin even proclaimed themselves emperors. At that time, Heaven did not show any signs of anger or punishment. "When Zhou Gong was not buried with imperial rites, Heaven sent thunder and rain to reprimand King Cheng. But when the six states declared themselves kings and Qi and Qin proclaimed themselves emperors, Heaven showed no anger or punishment — how can Heaven's likes and dislikes be so inconsistent?"
|
| | 感類: |
又問曰：「魯季孫賜曾子簀，曾子病而寢之。童子曰：『華而睆者，大夫之簀。』而曾子感慚，命元易簀。蓋禮，大夫之簀，士不得寢也。今周公、人臣也，以天子禮葬，魂而有靈，將安之不也？」應曰：「成王所為，天之所予，何為不安？」難曰：「季孫所賜大夫之簀，豈曾子之所自制乎？何獨不安乎？子疾病，子路遣門人為臣。病間，曰：『久矣哉由之行詐也！無臣而為有臣。吾誰欺？欺天乎？』孔子罪子路者也。己非人君，子路使門人為臣，非天之心，而妄為之，是欺天也。周公亦非天子也，以孔子之心況周公，周公必不安也。季氏旅於太山，孔子曰：『曾謂泰山不如林放乎？』以曾子之細，猶卻非禮，周公至聖，豈安天子之葬？曾謂周公不如曾子乎？由此原之，周公不安也。大人與天地合德，周公不安，天亦不安，何故為雷雨以責成王乎？」 |
| | Another question was raised: "Lord Jisun of Lu gave a bamboo mat to Zengzi, and when Zengzi fell ill he used it. A child said: 'This is an ornate and smooth bamboo mat — one suitable for a high-ranking official.' Zengzi felt ashamed, and ordered Yuan to replace the mat. According to rites, a bamboo mat suitable for an official is not something a scholar of lower rank may use. "Now Zhou Gong was merely a subject, yet he was buried with the rites for an emperor — if his spirit is aware and has consciousness, would it not feel uneasy about this?" The response was: "What King Cheng did was what Heaven granted; why should there be any unease?" An objection is raised: "Was the official's bamboo mat given by Lord Jisun something that Zengzi himself had made?" Why should he alone feel uneasy? When Confucius was seriously ill, Zigong sent the disciples to serve as his attendants. After he recovered somewhat, Confucius said: "For a long time now, You has been practicing deception!" "He had no attendants but pretended to have them." "Whom am I deceiving?" "Am I deceiving Heaven?"' This was Confucius reprimanding Zigong. Confucius himself was not a ruler; for Zigong to have the disciples serve as attendants was contrary to Heaven's will and an act of false pretense — this is deceiving Heaven. Zhou Gong, too, was not an emperor; applying Confucius's perspective to Zhou Gong, Zhou Gong would certainly feel uneasy. When the Ji family made a sacrifice at Mount Tai, Confucius said: "Could it be that Mount Tai is less discerning than Lin Fang?" Even Zengzi, who was so meticulous, still rejected what was against the rites; Zhou Gong, being the most sage of all, how could he feel at ease with a burial according to imperial rites? Is it not saying that Zhou Gong is less virtuous than Zengzi? From this reasoning, we may conclude that Zhou Gong would feel uneasy. "A great man harmonizes in virtue with Heaven and Earth; if Zhou Gong felt uneasy, then Heaven itself would also feel uneasy. Why, then, did Heaven send thunder and rain to blame King Cheng?"'
|
| | 感類: |
又問曰：「『死生有命，富貴在天。』武王之命，何可代乎？」應曰：「九齡之夢，天奪文王年以益武王。克殷二年之時，九齡之年未盡，武王不豫，則請之矣。人命不可請，獨武王可。非世常法，故藏於《金縢》；不可復為，故掩而不見。」難曰：「九齡之夢，武王已得文王之年未？」應曰：「已得之矣。」難曰：「已得文王之年，命當自延。克殷二年，雖病猶將不死，周公何為請而代之？」應曰：「人君爵人以官，議定，未之即與，曹下案目，然後可諾。天雖奪文王年以益武王，猶須周公請，乃能得之。命數精微，非一臥之夢所能得也。」應曰：「九齡之夢能得也。」難曰：「九齡之夢，文王夢與武王九齡，武王夢帝予其九齡，其天已予之矣，武王已得之矣，何須復請？人且得官，先夢得爵，其後莫舉，猶自得官。何則？兆象先見，其驗必至也。古者謂年為齡，已得九齡，猶人夢得爵也。周公因必效之夢，請之於天，功安能大乎？」 |
| | Another question was raised: "It is said, 'Life and death are determined by fate; wealth and honor depend on Heaven.'" "Why could King Wu's destiny not be changed?"' The response was: "In the dream of Jiling, Heaven took away the years from King Wen and gave them to King Wu. At the time when King Wu conquered Yin, two years had passed; yet Jiling's term of office was not yet complete. When King Wu fell ill, he made a request for it. Human lives cannot be requested or transferred — only in the case of King Wu could this happen. This was not an ordinary rule for the world, so it is recorded in the Jin Teng (The Golden Casket). "It cannot be repeated, hence it has been concealed and hidden." An objection is raised: "In the dream of Jiling — did King Wu already receive the years from King Wen?" The response was: "He had already received them." An objection is raised: "If he had already received the years of King Wen, his life should have naturally been extended. "In the second year after conquering Yin, even though he was ill, he still would not die — why did Zhou Gong make a request to transfer it for him?" The response was: "When a ruler bestows an official position, the matter is discussed and decided — yet it is not immediately granted. The case must be reviewed by the relevant officials before approval can be given. "Although Heaven took King Wen's years to give them to King Wu, it still required Zhou Gong to make a request before the transfer could be completed." "The matter of fate is subtle and profound — it cannot simply be obtained through one dream alone." The response was: "The dream of Jiling could indeed obtain it." An objection is raised: "In the dream of Jiling, King Wen dreamed that he would give nine years to King Wu; and King Wu dreamed that Heaven granted him those nine years. If Heaven had already given them, and King Wu had already received them, why was a further request necessary?" "When a person is about to receive an official post, he may first dream of receiving the title; if no one later recommends him, he will still obtain the position on his own. Why is that so? Because omens and signs appear first, the verification must inevitably follow. In ancient times, years were called "ling." To have already received nine ling was like a person dreaming of receiving an official title. "If Zhou Gong merely followed the dream and made a request to Heaven, how could his achievement be considered great?"'
|
| | 感類: |
又問曰：「功無大小，德無多少，人須仰恃賴之者，則為美矣。使周公不代武王，武王病死，周公與成王而致天下太平乎？」應曰：「成事，周公輔成王而天下不亂。使武王不見代，遂病至死，周公致太平何疑乎？」難曰：「若是，武王之生無益，其死無損，須周公功乃成也。周衰，諸侯背畔，管仲九合諸侯，一匡天下。孔子曰：『微管仲，吾其被髮左衽矣。』使無管仲，不合諸侯，夷狄交侵，中國絕滅，此無管仲有所傷也。程量有益，管仲之功，偶於周公。管仲死，桓公不以諸侯禮葬，以周公況之，天亦宜怒，微雷薄雨不至，何哉？豈以周公聖而管仲不賢乎？夫管仲為反坫，有三歸，孔子譏之，以為不賢。反坫、三歸，諸侯之禮；天子禮葬，王者之制，皆以人臣，俱不得為。大人與天地合德，孔子、大人也，譏管仲之僭禮；皇天欲周公之侵制，非合德之驗，《書》家之說，未可然也。」 |
| | Another question was raised: "Whether an achievement is large or small, and whether virtue is abundant or scarce, if people must look up to and rely on a person, then that is admirable. "If Zhou Gong had not taken over for King Wu, and if King Wu had died from illness, could Zhou Gong and King Cheng have brought about peace throughout the world?"' The response was: "In reality, it was through Zhou Gong's assistance to King Cheng that the world remained at peace. "If King Wu had not been succeeded and died of illness, how could there be any doubt that Zhou Gong would have brought about peace?"' An objection is raised: "If so, then King Wu's life was of no benefit and his death caused no loss — it required Zhou Gong's achievements to complete the matter. "When the Zhou dynasty declined, feudal lords rebelled; Guan Zhong united the feudal lords nine times and restored order to the world. Confucius said: "Without Guan Zhong, we would all be wearing our hair loose and dressing in left-sided robes." "If there had been no Guan Zhong to unite the feudal lords, the Hu and Di peoples would have invaded each other, and the Chinese civilization might have perished — this is what would be lost without Guan Zhong. The value of such achievements cannot be measured; Guan Zhong's accomplishments are comparable to those of Zhou Gong. "When Guan Zhong died, Duke Huan did not bury him with the rites for a feudal lord. Comparing this to Zhou Gong's case, Heaven should also have been angry — yet there was no slight thunder or drizzle. Why is that?" Is it because Zhou Gong was a sage and Guan Zhong not virtuous? Guan Zhong built altars for returning captured envoys, possessed three estates, and Confucius criticized him, considering him not virtuous. The return altar and the three estates were rites befitting a feudal lord; To bury with imperial rites was the system of an emperor — both Zhou Gong and Guan Zhong were subjects, neither of whom could be granted such honors. "A great man harmonizes with the virtue of Heaven and Earth; Confucius was a great man, who criticized Guan Zhong for overstepping ritual propriety. "If Heaven wished Zhou Gong to overstep the established rites, that would not be an example of harmony with virtue. The claims made by scholars of the Book of Documents are therefore questionable."
|
| | 感類: |
以見鳥跡而知為書，見蜚蓬而知為車，天非以鳥跡命倉頡，以蜚蓬使奚仲也。奚仲感蜚蓬，而倉頡起鳥跡也。晉文反國，命徹麋墨，舅犯心感，辭位歸家。夫文公之徹麋墨，非欲去舅犯；舅犯感慚，自同於麋墨也。宋華臣弱其宗，使家賊六人，以鈹殺華吳於宋命合左師之後。左師懼曰：「老夫無罪。」其後左師怨咎華臣，華臣備之。國人逐瘈狗，瘈狗入華臣之門。華臣以為左師來攻己也，踰墻而走。夫華臣自殺華吳而左師懼，國人自逐瘈狗而華臣自走，成王之畏懼，猶此類也。心疑於不以天子禮葬公，卒遭雷雨之至，則懼而畏過矣。夫雷雨之至，天未必責成王也。雷雨至，成王懼以自責也。夫感則蒼頡、奚仲之心，懼則左師、華臣之意也。懷嫌疑之計，遭暴至之氣，以類之驗見，到天怒之效成矣。見類驗於寂漠，猶感動而畏懼，況雷雨揚軒䡷之聲，成王庶幾能不怵惕乎？迅雷風烈，孔子必變。禮、君子聞雷，雖夜，衣冠而坐，所以敬雷懼激氣也。聖人君子於道無嫌，然猶順天變動，況成王有周公之疑，聞雷雨之變，安能不振懼乎？然則雷雨之至也，殆且自天氣；成王畏懼，殆且感物類也。 |
| | Just as one sees the tracks of a bird and recognizes them as writing, or observes the drifting tumbleweed and understands it as an inspiration for carts — Heaven did not send the bird's tracks to command Cangjie, nor did it use the tumbleweed to instruct Xi Zhong. It was Xi Zhong who was inspired by the drifting tumbleweed, and Cangjie who derived writing from bird tracks. When Duke Wen of Jin returned to his state, he ordered the removal of Mi Mo; Uncle Fan was deeply moved and resigned from office, returning home. Duke Wen's order to remove Mi Mo was not an attempt to drive away Uncle Fan; it was Uncle Fan who, feeling ashamed, voluntarily equated himself with Mi Mo. In the state of Song, Hua Chen weakened his own clan by sending six household bandits to kill Hua Wu with a halberd at the site of the Cui family's ancestral hall after the left minister. The Left Minister was frightened and said, "I am an old man without any crime." Afterward, the Left Minister resented Hua Chen and blamed him; in response, Hua Chen prepared for it. The people of the state drove away a rabid dog, which ran into Hua Chen's gate. Hua Chen thought it was the Left Minister coming to attack him and fled over the wall. Hua Chen killed Hua Wu and the Left Minister was afraid; the people of the state chased a rabid dog and Hua Chen fled on his own — King Cheng's fear was similar to this. If one suspects that the king is not being buried with the rites befitting an emperor, and eventually suffers a sudden thunderstorm, then it would indeed be reasonable to feel fear and apprehension. The arrival of thunderstorms does not necessarily mean that Heaven is holding King Cheng accountable. When the thunderstorm arrived, King Cheng was frightened and blamed himself. Inspiration is akin to Cangjie's or Xi Zhong's minds, while fear reflects the intentions of the Left Minister and Hua Chen. Holding suspicions in one's mind, encountering a sudden surge of atmospheric disturbance, when verified by analogy, it appears as if the anger of Heaven has been realized. If one can feel moved and fearful merely by observing analogous signs in silence, how much more so would King Cheng have been startled when confronted with the roaring sound of thunderstorms? Could he possibly remain unshaken? When a sudden thunderclap and fierce wind arose, Confucius would certainly change his expression. According to the rites, when a gentleman hears thunder, even at night he should sit dressed in formal attire and with his cap on; this is done out of reverence for thunder and fear of its stirring energy. Sages and gentlemen, though free from suspicion in the Way, still follow Heaven's changes; how much more so for King Cheng, who had doubts about Duke Zhou, to feel startled upon hearing a thunderstorm? How could he possibly remain calm? Nevertheless, the arrival of thunder and rain is likely due to natural atmospheric conditions; King Cheng's fear and apprehension were probably caused by his sensitivity to analogous signs.
|
| | 感類: |
夫天道無為。如天以雷雨責怒人，則亦能以雷雨殺無道。古無道者多，可以雷雨誅殺其身，必命聖人興師動軍，頓兵傷士。難以一雷行誅，輕以三軍剋敵，何天之不憚煩也？或曰：「紂父帝乙，射天毆地，游涇、渭之間，雷電擊而殺之。斯天以雷電誅無道也。」帝乙之惡，孰與桀、紂？鄒伯奇論桀、紂惡不如亡秦，亡秦不如王莽，然而桀、紂、秦、莽之地，不以雷電。孔子作《春秋》，采毫毛之善，貶纖介之惡，采善不踰其美，貶惡不溢其過。責小以大，夫人無之。成王小疑，天大雷雨。如定以臣葬公，其變何以過此？《洪範》稽疑，不悟災變者，人之才不能盡曉，天不以疑責備於人也。成王心疑未決，天以大雷雨責之，殆非皇天之意。《書》家之說，恐失其實也。 |
| | The Way of Heaven is non-action. If Heaven uses thunder and rain to express anger at people, then it could also use thunder and rain to kill the unjust. In ancient times there were many unjust rulers; if Heaven could use thunder and rain to punish them, it would certainly not have had to command sages to raise armies, mobilize troops, and cause the deaths of soldiers. It would be difficult for a single thunderclap to carry out punishment, yet easy for three armies to defeat the enemy — why then should Heaven not be weary of such trouble? Some say, "Di Yi, the father of King Zhou, shot at Heaven and struck the Earth; while traveling between the Jing and Wei rivers, he was struck by lightning and killed. This is an example of Heaven using thunder and lightning to punish the unjust." How does Di Yi's wickedness compare with that of Jie or Zhou? Zou Boqi argued that the wickedness of Jie and Zhou was less than that of the fallen Qin dynasty, which in turn was less than that of Wang Mang; yet none of these lands where Jie, Zhou, Qin, or Wang Mang ruled were struck by thunder and lightning. Confucius, in compiling the Spring and Autumn Annals, collected even the slightest good deeds and censured even the smallest evils; he praised goodness without exceeding its merits and condemned evil without exaggerating its faults. To hold someone accountable for a great fault over a minor matter is something no ordinary person would do. King Cheng had only slight doubts, yet Heaven sent a violent thunderstorm. If it was indeed decided to bury the king with the rites for a minister, what change could possibly surpass this? The Hongfan discusses resolving doubts; it acknowledges that people cannot fully understand all disasters and changes, so Heaven does not hold people accountable for uncertainties. King Cheng was uncertain in his heart but had not yet made a decision; if Heaven punished him with a violent thunderstorm, it is likely not the will of the Supreme Heaven. The interpretations by scholars of the Book of Documents may have lost their true meaning.
|
