| | 感虛: |
儒者《傳書》言：「堯之時，十日並出，萬物燋枯。堯上射十日，九日去，一日常出。」 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "During Yao's time, ten suns appeared together, and all things were scorched and withered." Yao shot down the ten suns from above; nine of them departed, and one sun remained shining regularly."
|
| | 感虛: |
此言虛也。 |
| | This statement is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫人之射也，不過百步，矢力盡矣。日之行也，行天星度，天之去人，以萬里數，堯上射之，安能得日？使堯之時，天地相近，不過百步，則堯射日，矢能及之；過百步，不能得也。 |
| | When a person shoots an arrow, it cannot go beyond one hundred bu; the force of the arrow would then be exhausted. The sun's movement follows its course among the stars in the heavens, and the sky is separated from people by tens of thousands of li. If Yao shot upward to hit it, how could he possibly reach the sun? If during Yao's time the heavens and earth were close together, no more than one hundred bu apart, then Yao shooting at the sun could have hit it with an arrow; But if they were more than a hundred bu apart, he would not have been able to reach it.
|
| | 感虛: |
假使堯時天地相近，堯射得之，猶不能傷日，傷日何肯去？何則？日、火也，使在地之火，附一把炬，人從旁射之，雖中，安能滅之？地火不為見射而滅，天火何為見射而去？ |
| | Even if we suppose that during Yao's time the heavens and the earth were close, and Yao was able to shoot it, he still could not have harmed the sun. If the sun had been harmed, how would it have left? Why is that so? The sun is fire. Suppose there were a fire on the ground, with just one torch attached to it; if someone shot at it from the side, even if they hit it, how could they possibly extinguish it? If a fire on earth is not extinguished by being shot at, why would the fire in the sky be driven away simply because it was shot at?
|
| | 感虛: |
此欲言堯以精誠射之，精誠所加，金石為虧，蓋誠無堅則亦無遠矣。夫水與火，各一性也，能射火而滅之，則當射水而除之。洪水之時，流濫中國，為民大害，堯何不推精誠射而除之？堯能射日，使火不為害，不能射河，使水不為害。夫射水不能郤水，則知射日之語虛，非實也。 |
| | This is an attempt to say that Yao shot the sun with his sincerity and earnestness, and that where sincerity and earnestness are directed, even metal and stone would be damaged. However, if sincerity can break through what is solid, then it should also have no limits in distance. Water and fire each possess their own nature; if one could shoot at fire to extinguish it, then one should also be able to shoot at water to remove it. During the time of the great floods, waters overflowed and caused great harm to the people; why did Yao not then exert his sincerity to shoot at them and eliminate them? If Yao could shoot down the sun so that fire would cause no harm, yet he was unable to shoot at the rivers so that water would not cause harm. Since shooting at water cannot repel it, we know that the statement about shooting down the sun is false and not true.
|
| | 感虛: |
或曰：「日、氣也，射雖不及，精誠滅之。」夫天亦遠，使其為氣，則與日月同；使其為體，則與金石等，以堯之精誠，滅日虧金石，上射日則能穿天乎？世稱桀、紂之惡，射天而毆地；譽高宗之德，政消桑穀。今堯不能以德滅十日，而必射之，是德不若高宗，惡與桀、紂同也，安能以精誠獲天之應也？ |
| | Some may say: "The sun is a kind of qi; even if an arrow could not reach it, sincerity and earnestness would extinguish it." If the heavens are distant, then assuming that they consist of qi, this would be no different from the sun and moon; if they are considered as physical entities, then they would be equal to metal and stone. If Yao's sincerity could extinguish the sun and damage metal and stone, then shooting upward at the sun would he also be able to pierce through the heavens? The world speaks of Jie and Zhou's wickedness, saying they shot at heaven and struck the earth; they praise Gaozong's virtue, saying his governance caused mulberry and millet to wither. Now, if Yao could not use his virtue to eliminate the ten suns but had to shoot them down, this implies that his virtue was less than Gaozong's and his wickedness comparable to Jie and Zhou. How then could he have received a response from heaven through sincerity?
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「武王伐紂，渡孟津，陽侯之波，逆流而擊，疾風晦冥，人馬不見。於是武王左操黃鉞，右執白旄，瞋目而麾之曰：『余在，天下誰敢害吾意者！』於是風霽波罷。」 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "King Wu attacked Zhou, crossed the Mengjin ford, and encountered Yanghou's waves that surged against the current to strike. A fierce wind caused darkness, and people and horses could not see each other." At this time, King Wu held a yellow yue in his left hand and a white flag in his right. With eyes wide with anger, he waved it and said: "I am here; who dares to harm my will under heaven!" At this the wind ceased and the waves subsided."
|
| | 感虛: |
此言虛也。 |
| | This statement is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
武王渡孟津時，士眾喜樂，前歌後舞，天人同應。人喜天怒，非實宜也。前歌後舞，未必其實；麾風而止之，迹近為虛。 |
| | When King Wu crossed the Mengjin ford, his soldiers were joyful; some sang ahead while others danced behind, and heaven and people responded in harmony. For humans to be happy yet for heaven to be angry is not a reasonable or factual situation. That people sang ahead and danced behind may not have been the actual case; the claim that he waved a flag to stop the wind is also close to being false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫風者、氣也，論者以為天地之號令也。武王誅紂是乎？天當安靜以祐之。如誅紂非乎？而天風者、怒也。武王不奉天令，求索己過，瞋目言曰：「余在，天下誰敢害吾者！」重天怒，增己之惡也，風何肯止？父母怒，子不改過，瞋目大言，父母肯貰之乎？如風、天所為，禍氣自然，是亦無知，不為瞋目麾之故止。夫風猶雨也，使武王瞋目以旄麾雨而止之乎？武王不能止雨，則亦不能止風。 |
| | Wind is qi, and some argue it represents the commands of heaven and earth. Was King Wu's punishment of Zhou justified? Heaven should have remained calm to support him. If punishing Zhou was wrong? then the wind from heaven would be a sign of anger. King Wu did not follow the commands of Heaven, but instead sought blame for his own faults. With glaring eyes he declared: "I am here; who in all under heaven dares to harm me!" This would have deepened Heaven's anger and increased his own wickedness. How could the wind possibly stop? If a parent is angry, and a child does not correct their faults but instead glares and speaks loudly, would the parents forgive them? If wind is a natural phenomenon caused by Heaven's qi and thus without awareness, then it would not stop simply because someone glared or waved at it. Wind is like rain; could King Wu have stopped the rain by glaring and waving a flag? If King Wu could not stop the rain, then he could also not stop the wind.
|
| | 感虛: |
或時武王適麾之，風偶自止，世褒武王之德，則謂武王能止風矣。 |
| | Perhaps at that time King Wu happened to wave his flag, and by coincidence the wind stopped on its own. The world praised King Wu's virtue and thus claimed he was able to stop the wind.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「魯襄公與韓戰，戰酣，日暮，公援戈而麾之，日為之反三舍。」 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "Duke Xiang of Lu fought against the state of Han. In the heat of battle as dusk approached, the duke took up a halberd and waved it; the sun moved back three shě for him."
|
| | 感虛: |
此言虛也。 |
| | This statement is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
凡人能以精誠感動天，專心一意，委務積神，精通于天，天為變動，然尚未可謂然。襄公志在戰，為日暮一麾，安能令日反？使聖人麾日，日終不反，襄公何人？而使日反乎？ |
| | Ordinary people may be able to move heaven with sincerity and earnestness—by focusing their minds, devoting themselves wholeheartedly, concentrating their efforts, and accumulating spiritual power until it reaches Heaven. Heaven might then respond by changing its course; yet even this is still questionable. Duke Xiang's mind was focused on battle, and with a single wave at dusk, how could he possibly have commanded the sun to reverse its course? If even a sage were to wave at the sun, it would still not turn back. What kind of person was Duke Xiang? And yet he could make the sun reverse its course?
|
| | 感虛: |
《鴻範》曰：「星有好風，星有好雨。日月之行，則有冬有夏。月之從星，則有風雨。」夫星與日月同精，日月不從星，星輒復變。明日月行有常度，不得從星之好惡也，安得從襄公之所欲？ |
| | The "Hong Fan" says: "Some stars favor wind, some stars favor rain." "The movement of the sun and moon follows a pattern with winter and summer." "When the moon follows the stars, there are wind and rain." Stars share the same essence as the sun and moon. When the sun and moon do not follow the stars, the stars change accordingly. Clearly, the movement of the sun and moon has a fixed course; they cannot follow the preferences or dislikes of stars. How then could they obey Duke Xiang's desires?
|
| | 感虛: |
星之在天也，為日月舍，猶地有郵亭，為長吏廨也。二十八舍有分度，一舍十度，或增或減。言日反三舍，乃三十度也。日、日行一度，一麾之間，反三十日時所在度也？如謂舍為度，三度亦三日行也，一麾之間，令日卻三日也？ |
| | Stars in the sky serve as lodgings for the sun and moon, just as on earth there are post stations that serve as offices for magistrates. The twenty-eight lodgings have defined degrees; one lodging is ten degrees, sometimes increased or decreased slightly. To say the sun reversed three lodgings means it moved back thirty degrees. The sun moves one degree per day; in the time between a single wave, could it have reversed to where it was thirty days earlier? If one considers each lodging as a degree, then three degrees would be the distance it travels in three days. In the time between one wave, could he have commanded the sun to move back by three days?
|
| | 感虛: |
宋景公推誠出三善言，熒惑徙三舍，實論者猶謂之虛。襄公爭鬭，惡日之暮，以此一戈麾，無誠心善言，日為之反，殆非其意哉！且日、火也，聖人麾火，終不能郤，襄公麾日，安能使反？ |
| | When Duke Jing of Song spoke three virtuous words with sincerity, the planet Mars moved three lodgings. Even this is regarded by rational scholars as false. Duke Xiang was engaged in a battle, resenting the coming of dusk. With just one wave of his halberd, without sincerity or virtuous words, he caused the sun to reverse course—this is surely not credible! Moreover, the sun is fire; even a sage waving at fire could never extinguish it. How then could Duke Xiang, by merely waving his halberd at the sun, possibly make it reverse?
|
| | 感虛: |
或時戰時日正卯，戰迷，謂日之暮。麾之，轉左曲道，日若郤。世好神怪，因謂之反，不道所謂也。 |
| | Perhaps during the battle, the time was actually around mao hour (5-7 AM), but in the confusion of combat, they mistakenly thought it to be dusk. When he waved his halberd and turned left onto a winding path, the sun seemed as if it had retreated. The world favors supernatural phenomena; thus they claimed the sun reversed, without understanding what actually happened.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「荊軻為燕太子謀刺秦王，白虹貫日。衛先生為秦畫長平之事，太白蝕昴。」此言精感天，天為變動也。 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "Jing Ke plotted for Prince Dan of Yan to assassinate the King of Qin, and a white rainbow pierced through the sun." Wei Shengshi proposed strategies for the Battle of Changping on behalf of Qin, and Tai Bai eclipsed Mao." This statement suggests that their sincerity moved Heaven, causing it to change.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫言白虹貫日、太白蝕昴，實也。言荊軻之謀、衛先生之畫，感動皇天，故白虹貫日、太白蝕昴者，虛也。 |
| | The claim of a white rainbow piercing the sun and Tai Bai eclipsing Mao is factual. To say that Jing Ke's plot and Wei Shengshi's strategy moved the heavens, thus causing a white rainbow to pierce the sun and Tai Bai to eclipse Mao, is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫以筯撞鍾，以筭擊鼓，不能鳴者，所用撞擊之者小也。今人之形不過七尺，以七尺形中精神，欲有所為，雖積銳意，猶筯撞鍾、筭擊鼓也，安能動天？精非不誠，所用動者小也。且所欲害者，人也，人不動，天反動乎？ |
| | If one strikes a bell with chopsticks or hits a drum with an abacus, it cannot produce sound; this is because the object used to strike is too small. Now, a person's body is no more than seven chi tall. With the spirit and energy within such a small form, even if one concentrates all their determination, it is like striking a bell with chopsticks or hitting a drum with an abacus—how could they possibly move Heaven? Their sincerity is not lacking; the problem lies in their being too small to have any effect. Moreover, those who wished harm were human beings; if humans did not act, would Heaven instead respond?
|
| | 感虛: |
問曰：「人之害氣，能相動乎？」曰：「不能。」「預讓欲害趙襄子，襄子心動；貫高欲篡高祖，高祖亦心動。二子懷精，故兩主振感。」曰：禍變且至，身自有怪，非適人所能動也。何以驗之？時或遭狂人於途，以刃加己，狂人未必念害己身也，然而己身先時已有妖怪矣。由此言之，妖怪之至，禍變自凶之象，非欲害己者之所為也。且凶之人，卜得惡兆，筮得凶卦，出門見不吉，占危睹禍氣。禍氣見於面，猶白虹、太白見於天也。變見於天，妖出於人，上下適然，自相應也。 |
| | One might ask: "Can the harmful qi of people influence each other?" The answer is: "No." "Yu Ran wanted to harm Zhao Xiangzi, and Xiangzi's heart sensed it; Guan Gao wished to usurp Emperor Gaozu, and Gaozu also felt a disturbance in his mind." The two men harbored intense intentions, so the two rulers were moved by their presence." It is said: When calamity and change are about to occur, strange phenomena appear naturally in the body; they are not something that others can directly cause. How can this be verified? Sometimes, while traveling on the road, one may encounter a madman who draws a blade against them. The madman might not have necessarily intended to harm them beforehand; yet strange omens would already have appeared in their body before this happened. From this, we can say that the arrival of strange omens is a natural sign of impending calamity or misfortune; it is not caused by those who intend to harm oneself. Moreover, a person destined for misfortune may receive an ill omen when divining with yarrow sticks or consulting the I Ching; upon leaving home they see ominous signs and foresee danger and calamity. The aura of misfortune appears on one's face, just as a white rainbow or the planet Tai Bai appear in the sky. Changes manifest in the heavens; strange phenomena arise from people. The upper and lower realms happen to align, corresponding with each other naturally.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「燕太子丹朝於秦，不得去，從秦王求歸。秦王執留之，與之誓曰：『使日再中，天雨粟，令烏白頭，馬生角，廚門木象生肉足，乃得歸。』當此之時，天地祐之，日為再中，天雨粟，烏白頭，馬生角，廚門木象生肉足。秦王以為聖，乃歸之。」 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "Prince Dan of Yan paid a morning visit to Qin, but was not allowed to leave. He then requested permission to return from the King of Qin." The King of Qin detained him and made a vow with him, saying: "Only when the sun rises in the west again, rain falls as millet, crows turn white-headed, horses grow horns, wooden elephants at the kitchen gate sprout meaty feet, may you return." At that time, heaven and earth favored him; the sun rose in the west again, millet rained from the sky, crows turned white-headed, horses grew horns, and wooden elephants at the kitchen door sprouted meaty feet. The King of Qin believed this to be a sign of divine power and thus allowed him to return."
|
| | 感虛: |
此言虛也。 |
| | This statement is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
燕太子丹何人？而能動天？聖人之拘，不能動天；太子丹、賢者也，何能致此？ |
| | What kind of person was Prince Dan of Yan? How could he move Heaven? Even when sages are detained, they cannot move Heaven; Prince Dan was a virtuous man—how could he possibly cause such things to happen?
|
| | 感虛: |
夫天能祐太子，生諸瑞以免其身，則能和秦王之意，以解其難。見拘一事而易，生瑞五事而難。舍一事之易，為五事之難，何天之不憚勞也？ |
| | If Heaven were able to favor the prince and produce these auspicious signs to save him, it should also have been capable of influencing King Qin's will to resolve his difficulties. Changing one matter—his detention—is easy; producing five auspicious phenomena is difficult. Abandoning the simple solution of changing his detention and instead creating these five difficult signs—why would Heaven not be weary of such labor?
|
| | 感虛: |
湯困夏臺，文王拘羑里，孔子厄陳、蔡。三聖之困，天不能祐，使拘之者睹祐知聖，出而尊厚之。或曰：「拘三聖者，不與三誓，三聖心不願，故祐聖之瑞，無因而至。天之祐人，猶借人以物器矣，人不求索，則弗與也。」曰：太子願天下瑞之時，豈有語言乎？心願而已。然湯閉於夏臺、文王拘於羑里時，心亦願出；孔子厄陳、蔡，心願食。天何不令夏臺、羑里關鑰毀敗，湯、文涉出；雨粟陳、蔡，孔子食飽乎？ |
| | Tang was imprisoned at Xiatai, King Wen was detained in Youli, and Confucius suffered hardships in Chen and Cai. The three sages' sufferings were not aided by Heaven, yet those who detained them recognized their virtue and released them, treating them with respect. Some may say: "Those who detained the three sages did not make them swear oaths. The sages themselves were unwilling, so auspicious signs that would have aided them had no opportunity to appear." "Heaven's aid to people is like lending someone tools or objects; if a person does not request them, they will not be given." It was said: When the prince wished for auspicious signs from Heaven, did he actually speak out such words? It was merely a wish of his heart. Yet when Tang was confined at Xiatai and King Wen detained in Youli, their hearts also wished to be released; when Confucius suffered hardship in Chen and Cai, his heart desired food. Why did Heaven not cause the locks of Xiatai or Youli to break so that Tang and King Wen could escape? Or send rain of millet upon Chen and Cai so that Confucius might eat his fill?
|
| | 感虛: |
太史公曰：「世稱太子丹之令天雨粟，馬生角，大抵皆虛言也。」太史公、書漢世實事之人，而云「虛言」，近非實也。 |
| | The Grand Historian said: "The world's claim that Prince Dan caused Heaven to rain millet and make horses grow horns is largely empty talk." The Grand Historian was a man who recorded factual events of the Han dynasty, and yet he called it "empty talk"—this is close to being untrue.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「杞梁氏之妻嚮城而哭，城為之崩。」此言杞梁從軍不還，其妻痛之，嚮城而哭，至誠悲痛，精氣動城，故城為之崩也。 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "The wife of Qi Liang wept toward the city wall, and it collapsed because of her sorrow." This passage says that Qi Liang went to war and did not return, and his wife mourned for him deeply. Weeping toward the city wall with sincere sorrow, her spirit moved it so greatly that the wall collapsed.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫言嚮城而哭者，實也；城為之崩者，虛也。 |
| | To say that she wept toward the city is a fact; that the wall collapsed because of it is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫人哭悲，莫過雍門子。雍門子哭對孟嘗君，孟嘗君為之於邑。蓋哭之精誠，故對嚮之者悽愴感慟也。夫雍門子能動孟嘗之心，不能感孟嘗衣者，衣不知惻怛，不以人心相關通也。今城、土也，土猶衣也，無心腹之藏，安能為悲哭感慟而崩？ |
| | Among those who weep with sorrow, none surpasses Yongmenzi. Yongmenzi wept before Lord Mengchang, and Lord Mengchang was moved to tears. It is the sincerity of his sorrow that causes those who witness it to feel deep grief and emotional distress. Yongmenzi could move Lord Mengchang's heart, but he could not affect the clothes of Lord Mengchang; for clothing does not know sorrow or compassion and is not connected to human feelings. Now, a city wall is made of earth; earth is like clothing—it has no heart or inner feelings. How could it possibly be moved to collapse by sorrowful weeping?
|
| | 感虛: |
使至誠之聲能動城土，則其對林木哭，能折草破木乎？嚮水火而泣，能涌水滅火乎？夫草木水火，與土無異，然杞梁之妻不能崩城，明矣。 |
| | If a voice of utmost sincerity were able to move earth and walls, then would not the same person be able to break trees and uproot grass by weeping before them? If one wept toward water or fire, could it cause water to surge forth and extinguish the flames? Grasses, trees, water, and fire are no different from earth. If this were true, then clearly the wife of Qi Liang could not have caused the city wall to collapse.
|
| | 感虛: |
或時城適自崩，杞梁妻適哭，下世好虛，不原其實，故崩城之名，至今不滅。 |
| | Perhaps at that time, the city wall happened to collapse on its own while Qi Liang's wife was weeping. Later generations, fond of exaggeration and without seeking the truth, failed to investigate the facts; thus, the story of the collapsing city wall has remained well known until today.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「鄒衍無罪，見拘於燕，當夏五月，仰天而歎，天為隕霜。」此與杞梁之妻哭而崩城，無以異也。 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "Zou Yan, who was innocent, was detained in Yan. In the fifth month of summer, he looked up to Heaven and sighed, and Heaven responded by causing frost to fall." This is no different from the story of Qi Liang's wife weeping until a city wall collapsed.
|
| | 感虛: |
言其無罪見拘，當夏仰天而歎，實也；言天為之雨霜，虛也。 |
| | To say that he was wrongfully detained and sighed toward Heaven in the middle of summer is factual; to claim that Heaven responded by raining frost is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫萬人舉口，並解吁嗟，猶未能感天；鄒衍一人，冤而壹歎，安能下霜？ |
| | Even if ten thousand people cried out together and sighed in unison, they still could not move Heaven; how then could Zou Yan alone, with a single sigh of injustice, cause frost to fall?
|
| | 感虛: |
鄒衍之冤，不過曾子、伯奇。曾子見疑而吟，伯奇被逐而歌。疑、與拘同，吟、歌與歎等，曾子、伯奇不能致寒，鄒衍何人，獨能雨霜？ |
| | Zou Yan's injustice was no greater than that suffered by Zengzi or Bo Qi. Zengzi, suspected wrongly, sang in sorrow; Bo Qi, driven away, composed songs of grief. Suspicion is the same as detention; singing and weeping are no different from sighing. If Zengzi and Bo Qi could not bring about cold weather, then who was Zou Yan that he alone could cause frost to fall?
|
| | 感虛: |
被逐之冤，尚未足言。申生伏劍，子胥刎頸，實孝而賜死，誠忠而被誅，且臨死時，皆有聲辭。聲辭出口，與仰天歎無異，天不為二子感動，獨為鄒衍動，豈天痛見拘，不悲流血哉？伯奇冤痛相似，而感動不同也？ |
| | The injustice of being driven away is still not worth mentioning. Sheng Sheng fell on his sword, and Wu Zixu cut off his neck. Both were truly filial yet executed, sincerely loyal yet killed. At the moment of their deaths, they both spoke words of sorrow. Their spoken words were no different from looking up to Heaven and sighing, yet Heaven was not moved by these two men. Why then would Heaven be stirred only for Zou Yan? Does Heaven feel sorrow at being detained but not grieve over bloodshed? Is it that the injustice and pain of Bo Qi were similar, yet their effects in moving people varied?
|
| | 感虛: |
夫熯一炬火，爨一鑊水，終日不能熱也；倚一尺冰，置庖廚中，終夜不能寒也。何則？微小之感，不能動大巨也。今鄒衍之歎，不過如一炬、尺冰，而皇天巨大，不徒鑊水庖廚之醜類也。一仰天歎，天為隕霜，何天之易感、霜之易降也？ |
| | Lighting a single torch to boil a pot of water, even all day long, cannot make it hot; placing one foot of ice in the kitchen overnight still cannot cool it. Why is this so? Because a small influence cannot move something great and massive. Now, Zou Yan's sigh was no more powerful than a single torch or one foot of ice. Heaven is vast and mighty—not merely like boiling water in a pot or cooling food in the kitchen. With just one sigh toward Heaven, Heaven rained frost—how easily is Heaven moved? How easily does frost fall?
|
| | 感虛: |
夫哀與樂同，喜與怒均。衍興怨痛，使天下霜，使衍蒙非望之賞，仰天而笑，能以冬時使天熱乎？變復之家曰：「人君秋賞則溫，夏罰則寒。」寒不累時，則霜不降；溫不兼日，則冰不釋。一夫冤而一歎，天輒下霜，何氣之易變、時之易轉也？ |
| | Sorrow and joy are the same; happiness and anger are equal in their nature. If Zou Yan's sorrow could cause frost to fall across the land, then if he were to receive unexpected rewards and laugh toward Heaven, would it not be able to make Heaven warm in winter? The followers of the theory of change and restoration say: "If a ruler rewards people in autumn, it will be warm; if he punishes them in summer, it will grow cold." Cold does not accumulate over time, yet frost still falls; warmth does not last for multiple days, and yet ice still melts. If the sorrow of one man could cause Heaven to rain frost, then how easily would climate change and seasons shift?
|
| | 感虛: |
寒溫自有時，不合變復之家。且從變復之說，或時燕王好用刑，寒氣應至；而衍囚拘而歎，歎時，霜適自下。世見適歎而霜下，則謂鄒衍歎之致也。 |
| | Cold and warmth have their own natural times; they do not conform to the theories of those who claim change and restoration. Moreover, following the theory of change and restoration, perhaps at that time King Yan favored harsh punishment, so cold air naturally arrived; and when Zou Yan was detained and sighed, the frost happened to fall at that moment. The world saw that he sighed just as the frost fell, so they believed it was his sighing that caused it.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「師曠奏《白雪》之曲，而神物下降，風雨暴至，平公因之癃病，晉國赤地。」 |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "Shikuang played the piece 'Bai Xue,' and as a result, divine beings descended from above while storms suddenly arrived. Duke Ping became ill with difficulty urinating, and the land of Jin turned red."
|
| | 感虛: |
或言：「師曠《清角》之曲，一奏之，有雲從西北起；再奏之，大風至，大雨隨之，裂帷幕，破俎豆，墮廊瓦。坐者散走，平公恐懼，伏乎廊室。晉國大旱，赤地三年，平公癃病。」夫《白雪》與《清角》，或同曲而異名，其禍敗同一實也。 |
| | Some say: "When Shikuang played his piece 'Qingjiao,' as soon as he began, clouds arose from the northwest; when played a second time, strong winds arrived and heavy rain followed, tearing curtains, breaking ritual vessels, and toppling tiles from the eaves." Those seated scattered in panic; Duke Ping was terrified and cowered within the corridor. Jin suffered a great drought, with red earth for three years, and Duke Ping fell ill." The pieces "Bai Xue" and "Qingjiao" may be the same melody with different names, and their disastrous effects are essentially one.
|
| | 感虛: |
傳書之家，載以為是；世俗觀見，信以為然。原省其實，殆虛言也。 |
| | Those who record in the Confucian classics take this as true; the common people, observing and hearing of it, believe it to be so. Examining the truth behind these accounts, they are likely empty words.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫《清角》何音之聲，而致此？：「《清角》、木音也，故致風而。如木為風，雨與風俱。」三尺之木，數絃之聲，感動天地，何其神也？此復一哭崩城、一歎下霜之類也。 |
| | What kind of sound is "Qingjiao," that it could cause such effects? "The 'Qingjiao' is a wooden tone, hence it brings wind." "If wood causes wind, then rain and wind should come together." A three-foot piece of wood, a few strings' sound—how could it move Heaven and Earth? How miraculous! This is yet another case like the weeping that collapses a city wall or the sighing that causes frost to fall.
|
| | 感虛: |
師曠能鼓《清角》，必有所受，非能質性生出之也。其初受學之時，宿昔習弄，非直一再奏也。審如《傳書》之言，師曠學《清角》時，風雨當至也。 |
| | If Shikuang could play "Qingjiao," it must have been something he learned, not a natural ability born of his own nature. When he first studied the piece, he practiced and played it for many days—this was not merely one or two performances. If we accept the words of "Chuan Shu" as true, then when Shikuang first learned to play "Qingjiao," storms should have arrived at that time.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「瓠芭鼓瑟，淵魚出聽；師曠鼓琴，六馬仰秣。」或言：「師曠鼓《清角》，一奏之，有玄鶴二八，自南方來，集於廊門之危；再奏之而列；三奏之，延頸而鳴，舒翼而舞，音中宮商之聲，聲吁于天。平公大悅，坐者皆喜。」《尚書》曰：「擊石拊石，百獸率舞。」此雖奇怪，然尚可信。何則？鳥獸好悲聲，耳與人耳同也。禽獸見人欲食，亦欲食之，聞人之樂，何為不樂？ |
| | The Confucian classic "Chuan Shu" states: "Huba played the se, and fish from deep waters came to listen; Shikuang played the qin, and six horses raised their heads to eat." Some say: "When Shikuang played 'Qingjiao,' the first time he performed, sixteen black cranes came from the south and gathered on the eaves of the corridor; when played a second time they formed rows; on the third performance, they stretched their necks and cried out, spread their wings and danced, their calls harmonizing with the tones of Gong and Shang, echoing toward Heaven." Duke Ping was greatly pleased, and those seated were all delighted." The "Shang Shu" says: "Striking stones in rhythm causes the hundred beasts to dance together." Though strange, this is still somewhat credible. Why? Birds and beasts enjoy sorrowful sounds, for their ears are no different from human ears. When animals see people eating, they also wish to eat; when they hear the joy of humans, why should they not be joyful?
|
| | 感虛: |
然而「魚聽」、「仰秣」，「玄鶴延頸」，「百獸率舞」，蓋且其實；風雨之至，晉國大旱，赤地三年，平公癃病，殆虛言也。 |
| | However, "fish listening," "horses raising their heads to eat," "black cranes stretching their necks," and "the hundred beasts dancing"—these are likely exaggerations; the arrival of storms, the great drought in Jin, red earth for three years, Duke Ping's illness—these are likely empty talk.
|
| | 感虛: |
或時奏《清角》時，天偶風雨，風雨之後，晉國適旱；平公好樂，喜笑過度，偶發癃病。傳書之家，信以為然，世人觀見，遂以為實。實者樂聲不能致此。何以驗之？風雨暴至，是陰陽亂也。樂能亂陰陽，則亦能調陰陽也，王者何須脩身正行，擴施善政？使鼓調陰陽之曲，和氣自至，太平自立矣。 |
| | Perhaps at the time Shikuang played "Qingjiao," rain and wind happened to occur, and after these storms, Jin just so happened to suffer a drought; Duke Ping loved music and laughed excessively, which coincidentally caused his illness. Those who record in the "Chuan Shu" take this as true, and common people observing it believe it to be real. In truth, music cannot cause such effects. How can this be verified? Storms suddenly arriving are signs of disorder in the yin and yang forces. If music could disrupt yin and yang, then it should also be able to regulate them. Why would a ruler need to cultivate virtue, act uprightly, or implement benevolent policies? If one could simply play music that regulates yin and yang, harmony would naturally arrive, and peace and prosperity would be established on their own.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「湯遭七年旱，以身禱於桑林，自責以六過，天乃雨。」或言：「五年。禱辭曰：『余一人有罪，無及萬夫；萬夫有罪，在余一人。天以一人之不敏，使上帝鬼神傷民之命。』於是剪其髮，麗其手，自以為牲，用祈福於上帝。上帝甚說，時雨乃至。」 |
| | The "Chuan Shu" states: "Tang encountered a seven-year drought, and he prayed before the mulberry forest, blaming himself for six faults; only then did Heaven send rain." Some say: "Five years." The prayer said: 'If I, the ruler alone, have committed a crime, it should not affect the people; if the people have committed crimes, the blame lies with me alone.' "Heaven has made the one person unwise, causing the Supreme Deity and spirits to harm the people's lives." Thus he cut his hair, pierced his hands, and offered himself as a sacrifice, using this to pray for blessings from the Supreme Deity. The Supreme Deity was very pleased, and timely rain then arrived."
|
| | 感虛: |
言湯以身禱於桑林自責，若言剪髮、麗手、自以為牲，用祈福於帝者，實也。言雨至為湯自責以身禱之故，殆虛言也。 |
| | To say that Tang prayed before the mulberry forest and blamed himself, as if mentioning cutting his hair, piercing his hands, offering himself as a sacrifice to pray for blessings from Heaven—this is factual. To say that the rain arrived because Tang blamed himself and prayed with his own body is likely an exaggeration.
|
| | 感虛: |
孔子疾病，子路請禱。孔子曰：「有諸？」子路曰：「有之；《誄》曰：『禱爾于上下神祗。』」孔子曰：「丘之禱久矣。」聖人脩身正行，素禱之日久，天地鬼神知其無罪，故曰「禱久矣」。《易》曰：「大人與天地合其德，與日月合其明，與四時合其敘，與鬼神合其吉凶。」此言聖人與天地鬼神同德行也。即須禱以得福，是不同也。湯與孔子俱聖人也，皆素禱之日久。孔子不使子路禱以治病，湯何能以禱得雨？孔子素禱，身猶疾病；湯亦素禱，歲猶大旱，然則天地之有水旱，猶人之有疾病也。疾病不可以自責除，水旱不可以禱謝去，明矣。 |
| | When Confucius was ill, Zigong requested to pray on his behalf. Confucius asked: "Is there such a thing?" Zigong said: "Yes, there is; "The Lishu says: 'I pray to the gods and spirits above and below for you.'" Confucius said: "For a long time, I have prayed on my own." A sage cultivates virtue and acts uprightly; having long prayed in sincerity, Heaven, Earth, gods, and spirits know he is innocent. Hence it was said, "I have been praying for a long time." The Yijing says: "A great person unites with Heaven and Earth in virtue, with the sun and moon in brightness, with the four seasons in order, and with gods and spirits in auspiciousness and misfortune." This means that a sage shares the same virtue and conduct as Heaven, Earth, and the gods. If blessings must be obtained through prayer, then they are not the same. Tang and Confucius were both sages who had long prayed in sincerity. Confucius did not allow Zigong to pray for his illness; how could Tang have obtained rain through prayer? Even though Confucius had long prayed sincerely, he still fell ill. Tang also prayed sincerely for a long time, yet the year was still severely drought-stricken. Thus, just as humans suffer from illness, Heaven and Earth experience floods or droughts. It is clear that diseases cannot be cured by self-reproach alone, nor can floods or droughts be dispelled through prayer and offerings.
|
| | 感虛: |
湯之致旱以過乎？是不與天地同德也。今不以過致旱乎？自責禱謝，亦無益也。人形長七尺，形中有五常，有癉熱之病，深自剋責，猶不能愈，況以廣大之天，自有水旱之變，湯用七尺之形，形中之誠，自責禱謝，安能得雨邪？人在層臺之上，人從層臺下叩頭，求請臺上之物。臺上之人聞其言，則憐而與之；如不聞其言，雖至誠區區，終無得也。夫天去人，非徒層臺之高也，湯雖自責，天安能聞知而與之雨乎？ |
| | Did Tang's drought result from his own faults? If so, then he did not share the same virtue as Heaven and Earth. Now, is it because of faults that droughts occur? Self-reproach and prayer would then be of no benefit. A human body is seven chi tall, and within the form are the Five Constants; yet when illness or fever strikes, even deep self-reproach cannot cure it. How much less can Heaven, vast as it is, with its own changes of floods and droughts, be affected by Tang's seven-chi body and his sincerity within to blame himself and pray for offerings? How could such actions bring rain? A person is on a high platform, while others below the platform kneel and bow, requesting objects from those above. Those on the platform hear their words and may feel pity and give them what they ask for; if they do not hear, even with utmost sincerity and earnestness, nothing will be obtained in the end. Heaven is far from humanity; it is not merely as high as a platform. Though Tang blamed himself, how could Heaven possibly hear and know of this to give him rain?
|
| | 感虛: |
夫旱、火變也，湛、水異也。堯遭洪水，可謂湛矣，堯不自責，以身禱祈，必舜、禹治之，知水變必須治也。除湛不以禱祈，除旱亦宜如之。由此言之，湯之禱祈，不能得雨。 |
| | Droughts are changes caused by fire; floods are anomalies caused by water. Yao encountered a great flood, which could be called a deluge. Yet Yao did not blame himself or pray with his own body; he necessarily relied on Shun and Yu to manage it, showing that water-related disasters must be addressed through action. If deluges cannot be removed by prayer alone, then droughts should also be treated in the same way. From this reasoning, Tang's prayers could not have brought rain.
|
| | 感虛: |
或時旱久，時當自雨，湯以旱久，亦適自責，世人見雨之下，隨湯自責而至，則謂湯以禱祈得雨矣。 |
| | Perhaps the drought had lasted long, and it was time for rain to come naturally. Tang's self-reproach coincided with this period; people saw that the rain came just after Tang blamed himself, so they believed that Tang obtained rain through his prayers.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「倉頡作書，天雨粟，鬼夜哭。」此言文章興而亂漸見，故其妖變致天雨粟、鬼夜哭也。 |
| | The "Chuan Shu" states: "Cangjie invented writing, and Heaven rained millet; ghosts wept at night." This means that as literature flourished, disorder gradually emerged, and thus these ominous changes caused Heaven to rain millet and ghosts to weep at night.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫言天雨粟、鬼夜哭，實也。言其應倉頡作書，虛也。 |
| | To say that Heaven rained millet and ghosts cried at night is factual. To claim this was a response to Cangjie's invention of writing is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫河出《圖》，洛出《書》，聖帝明王之瑞應也。圖書文章，與倉頡所作字畫何以異？天地為圖書，倉頡作文字，業與天地同，指與鬼神合，何非何惡，而致雨粟、神哭之怪？使天地鬼神惡人有書，則其出圖書非也；天不惡人有書，作書何非，而致此怪？ |
| | When the Yellow River produced "Tu" and the Luo River produced "Shu," these were auspicious signs for sage emperors and enlightened kings. How are the diagrams and writings from the rivers different from the characters Cangjie created? If Heaven and Earth produced the diagrams, and Cangjie created written characters, then his achievement was on par with Heaven and Earth; his conduct aligned with gods and spirits. What wrong or evil did he commit to cause such strange phenomena as raining millet and divine weeping? If Heaven, Earth, and gods and spirits disliked humans having writing, then their production of diagrams and writings would be wrong; if Heaven does not dislike people having writing, what was wrong with creating it, yet still caused these strange phenomena?
|
| | 感虛: |
或時倉頡適作書，天適雨粟，鬼偶夜哭，而雨粟、鬼神哭，自有所為，世見應書而至，則謂作書生亂敗之象，應事而動也。 |
| | Perhaps at that time, Cangjie just happened to create writing while Heaven coincidentally rained millet and spirits just so wept at night. The raining of millet and the crying of ghosts had their own causes; people saw these events follow the creation of writing and thus believed it was an omen of disorder caused by writing, a response to affairs in motion.
|
| | 感虛: |
「天雨穀」、論者謂之從天而下，變而生。 |
| | "The raining of grains from Heaven"—commentators say it fell directly from the sky and was an abnormal phenomenon.
|
| | 感虛: |
如以雲雨論之，雨穀之變，不足怪也。何以驗之？ |
| | If we consider this in terms of clouds and rain, then the phenomenon of grain raining is not extraordinary at all. How can this be verified?
|
| | 感虛: |
夫雲雨出於丘山，降散則為雨矣。人見其從上而墜，則謂之天雨水也。夏日則雨水，冬日天寒，則雨凝而為雪，皆由雲氣發於丘山，不從天上降集於地，明矣。夫穀之雨，猶復雲布之亦從地起，因與疾風俱飄，參於天，集於地。人見其從天落也，則謂之「天雨穀」。 |
| | Clouds and rain arise from hills and mountains, and when they descend and disperse, they become rain. People see it falling from above and call it "rain from Heaven." In summer, rain falls; in winter, when the sky is cold, the rain freezes and becomes snow. All of this originates from clouds rising from hills and mountains—not descending directly from Heaven to Earth—this is clear. The raining of grain, like clouds, also arises from the Earth; it is carried by strong winds upward into the sky and then falls to the ground. People see it falling from Heaven, so they call it "rain of grain from Heaven."
|
| | 感虛: |
建武三十一年中，陳留雨穀，穀下蔽地。案視穀形，若茨而黑，有似於稗實也。此或時夷狄之地，生出此穀，夷狄不粒食，此穀生於草野之中，成熟垂委於地，遭疾風暴起，吹揚與之俱飛，風衰穀集，墜於中國。中國見之，謂之「雨穀。」何以效之？野火燔山澤，山澤之中，草木皆燒，其葉為灰，疾風暴起，吹揚之，參天而飛，風衰葉下，集於道路。夫「天雨穀」者、草木葉燒飛而集之類也，而世以為雨穀，作《傳書》者以變怪。 |
| | In the middle of the thirtieth year of Jianwu, millet rained in Chenliu, and it covered the ground. Upon examination, these grains were black and spiky, resembling the seeds of paddy grass. This may have been grain growing in the lands of the Yi and Di peoples. Since these people do not rely on grains for food, this grain grew wild among grasses; when it matured and began to fall to the ground, a sudden strong wind arose, carrying both the grain and the grass into the air. When the wind subsided, the grain fell together with the grass onto Central China. People in Central China saw it and called it "rain of grain." How can this be proven? When wild fires burn through mountains and marshes, all the grass and trees in these areas are set ablaze; their leaves turn to ash. A sudden strong wind arises, carrying this ash upward into the sky. When the wind weakens, the ash falls down and accumulates on roads. The so-called "rain of grain from Heaven" is merely the kind of phenomenon where burned leaves and ash are carried by wind and settle elsewhere; yet people call it a rain of grain, and those who write the "Chuan Shu" record it as an omen or strange event.
|
| | 感虛: |
天主施氣，地主產物，有葉實可啄食者，皆地所生，非天所為也。今穀非氣所生，須土以成，雖云怪變，怪變因類。生地之物，更從天集，生天之物，可從地出乎？地之有萬物，猶天之有列星也，星不更生於地，穀何獨生於天乎？ |
| | Heaven provides the breath of life, while Earth produces things; all leaves and fruits that can be eaten are born from Earth, not Heaven. Now, grain is not produced by breath alone; it requires soil to grow. Even if called an abnormal phenomenon, such anomalies follow natural categories. Things born from Earth cannot descend from Heaven; can things born from Heaven emerge from the ground? Just as Earth has myriad things, Heaven has constellations. Stars do not beget themselves anew on Earth; why should grain alone originate from Heaven?
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》又言：「伯益作井，龍登玄雲，神棲崑崙。」言龍井有害，故龍、神為變也。 |
| | The "Chuan Shu" also states: "Boyi dug wells, and dragons ascended to dark clouds; spirits dwelled on Kunlun." This suggests that the well was harmful to dragons, hence dragons and spirits manifested as omens.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫言龍登玄雲，實也。言神棲崑崙，又言為作井之故，龍登神去，虛也。 |
| | To say that dragons ascended into dark clouds is factual. To claim that spirits dwelled on Kunlun and then left because of the well-digging is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫作井而飲，耕田而食，同一實也。伯益作井，致有變動，始為耕耘者，何故無變？神農之橈木為耒，教民耕耨，民始食穀，穀始播種。耕土以為田，鑿地以為井，井出水以救渴，田出穀以拯饑，天地鬼神所欲為也，龍何故登玄雲？神何故棲崑崙？ |
| | Dug wells for drinking and tilled fields for eating—these are essentially the same in nature. If Boyi digging a well caused disturbances, then why did the first people who began to till and farm not cause any changes? Shennong bent wood into a plow, taught the people to till and weed, and thus the people began eating grain; grain cultivation began with sowing. Tilling the soil to make fields and digging into the ground to create wells—wells produce water to quench thirst, while fields yield grain to relieve hunger. These are things Heaven, Earth, gods, or spirits would wish for; why then did dragons ascend into dark clouds? Why should spirits dwell on Kunlun?
|
| | 感虛: |
夫龍之登玄雲，古今有之，非始益作井而乃登也。方今盛夏，雷雨時至，龍多登雲。雲龍相應，龍乘雲雨而行，物類相致，非有為也。 |
| | Dragons ascending into dark clouds have occurred throughout history and did not begin only when Boyi dug a well. At present, during the height of summer, thunderstorms frequently arrive, and dragons often ascend into clouds. Clouds and dragons correspond naturally; dragons ride the clouds and rains to move about. This is a natural occurrence among things, not an intentional act.
|
| | 感虛: |
堯時，五十之民，擊壤於塗。觀者曰：「大哉，堯之德也！」擊壤者曰：「吾日出而作，日入而息，鑿井而飲，耕田而食，堯何等力？」堯時已有井矣。唐、虞之時，豢龍、御龍，龍常在朝，夏末政衰，龍乃隱伏，非益鑿井，龍登雲也。 |
| | During Yao's time, fifty-year-old commoners played with soil on the road. Onlookers said: "How great is Yao's virtue!" The one playing with soil said: "I work when the sun rises and rest when it sets, dig wells for water, till fields for food. What power does Yao have to do this?" Wells already existed during Yao's time. During the Tang and Yu periods, dragons were tamed and ridden; they often appeared at court. Toward the end of the Xia dynasty, when government declined, dragons withdrew into hiding—not because Boyi had dug a well did dragons ascend to clouds.
|
| | 感虛: |
所謂神者，何神也？百神皆是，百神何故惡人為井？使神與人同，則亦宜有飲之欲。有飲之欲，憎井而去，非其實也。 |
| | What is meant by "spirits"—what kind of spirits are they? They refer to all kinds of gods. Why would these hundred deities dislike people digging wells? If spirits are like humans, they should also have the desire for water to drink. To dislike wells and leave because of a desire for drinking is not reasonable.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫益殆不鑿井，龍不為鑿井登雲，神不棲於崑崙，傳書意妄，造生之也。 |
| | Boyi likely did not dig a well; dragons did not ascend to the clouds because of it, nor did spirits dwell on Kunlun. These accounts in the "Chuan Shu" are baseless fabrications.
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「梁山崩，壅河，三日不流，晉君憂之。晉伯宗以輦者之言，令景公素縞而哭之，河水為之流通。」 |
| | The "Chuan Shu" states: "Mount Liang collapsed, blocking the river; for three days, the water did not flow. The ruler of Jin was worried." Jin Bozong followed the advice of a charioteer and ordered King Jing to wear plain white robes and weep for it; as a result, the river resumed its flow.
|
| | 感虛: |
此虛言也。 |
| | This is an empty fabrication.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫山崩壅河，猶人之有癰腫，血脈不通也。治癰腫者，可復以素服哭泣之聲治乎？ |
| | When a mountain collapses and blocks the river, it is like a human having an abscess—blood vessels are blocked. To treat an abscess, can one cure it simply by wearing plain clothes and crying?
|
| | 感虛: |
堯之時，洪水滔天，懷山襄陵，帝堯吁嗟，博求賢者。水變甚於河壅，堯憂深於景公，不聞以素縞哭泣之聲能厭勝之。堯無賢人若輦者之術乎？將洪水變大，不可以聲服除也？ |
| | During Yao's time, floods surged to the heavens, surrounding mountains and overflowing hills. Emperor Yao sighed in sorrow and widely sought virtuous individuals. The water disaster was more severe than a river blockage, and Yao's sorrow deeper than that of King Jing. Yet there is no record of him using plain robes or weeping to overcome the calamity. Did Yao lack a charioteer with such wisdom? Could the great flood not be dispelled by weeping and plain robes either?
|
| | 感虛: |
如「素縞而哭」，悔過自責也，堯、禹之治水，以力役，不自責。梁山、堯時山也；所壅之河、堯時河也。山崩河壅，天雨水踊，二者之變，無以殊也。堯、禹治洪水以力役，輦者治壅河用自責，變同而治異，人鈞而應殊，殆非賢聖變復之實也。 |
| | "Wearing white robes and crying" is an expression of remorse and self-reproach. However, Yao and Yu's efforts to control the floods relied on labor and effort—not on self-blame. Mount Liang was a mountain during Yao's time; the river that was blocked is the same one from Yao's era. A mountain collapsing and a river being blocked, along with heavy rains causing surges—these two disasters are not essentially different. Yao and Yu controlled the great floods through labor, while the charioteer cleared the blocked river by self-reproach. The disasters were similar but their responses differed; people are equal yet their actions varied—this is likely not a true account of how sages and virtuous men should respond to calamities.
|
| | 感虛: |
凡變復之道，所以能相感動者，以物類也。有寒則復之以溫，溫復解之以寒。故以龍致雨，以刑逐暑，皆緣五行之氣，用相感勝之。山崩壅河，素縞哭之，於道何意乎？ |
| | Generally, the principle by which changes can influence one another lies in their classification as similar things. When there is cold, it is countered with warmth; when there is heat, it is resolved by cold. Therefore, using dragons to bring rain and employing punishments to dispel summer heat are all based on the Five Elements' qi (vital energy), utilizing their mutual influences for resolution. A mountain collapsing and blocking a river, then wearing plain robes and weeping—what meaning does this have in terms of the principle?
|
| | 感虛: |
此或時河壅之時，山初崩，土積聚，水未盛。三日之後，水盛土散，稍壞沮矣。壞沮水流，竟注東去。遭伯宗得輦者之言，因素縞而哭，哭之因流，流時謂之河變起此而復。其實非也。何以驗之？使山恆自崩乎？素縞哭無益也。使其天變應之，宜改政治。素縞而哭，何政所改，而天變復乎？ |
| | This may be because at the time the river was blocked, the mountain had just collapsed and soil had accumulated, but the water had not yet surged. After three days, the waters swelled and dispersed the earth, gradually breaking down the blockage. As the blockage broke apart, the water flowed eastward once more. When Jin Bozong heard the charioteer's advice, he ordered plain robes and weeping. The water happened to flow at that time, so they claimed the river had changed because of this action and thus returned to normal. In reality, it was not like that. How can we verify this? Would the mountain collapse on its own continuously? Wearing plain robes and weeping would be of no help. If it were a heavenly omen requiring response, the appropriate action would have been to reform governance. Wearing plain robes and crying—what political reforms did this achieve that could restore balance after a heavenly omen?
|
| | 感虛: |
《傳書》言：「曾子之孝，與母同氣。曾子出薪於野，有客至而欲去。曾母曰：『願留，參方到。』即以右手搤其左臂。曾子左臂立痛，即馳至，問母：『臂何故痛？』母曰：『今者客來欲去，吾搤臂以呼汝耳。』蓋以至孝與父母同氣，體有疾病，精神輒感。」 |
| | The "Chuan Shu" states: "Zengzi's filial piety was so profound that he shared the same vital energy with his mother." When Zengzi went out to gather firewood in the fields, a guest arrived and wished to leave. Zeng's mother said: "Please stay; Cen is on his way." She then grasped her left arm with her right hand. Zengzi immediately felt pain in his left arm and hurried home, asking his mother: "Why is my arm hurting?" His mother said: "Just now a guest came and wanted to leave, so I grasped my arm to call you." It is said that through utmost filial piety one shares the same vital energy with parents; if their body suffers illness, the spirit immediately feels it.
|
| | 感虛: |
曰：此虛也。 |
| | This is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫「孝悌之至，通於神明」，乃謂德化至天地。俗人緣此而說，言孝悌之至，精氣相動。 |
| | The phrase "the utmost filial piety and fraternal duty, reaching the divine" means that virtue has reached such a level as to harmonize with heaven and earth. Common people take this saying and claim that through the utmost filial piety, spiritual energies can influence each other.
|
| | 感虛: |
如曾母臂痛，曾子臂亦輒痛，曾母病乎，曾子亦病？曾母死，曾子輒死乎？攷事，曾母先死，曾子不死矣。此精氣能小相動，不能大相感也。 |
| | If Zeng's mother felt pain in her arm and Zengzi also immediately felt it, then if his mother were ill, would Zengzi become ill as well? When Zeng's mother died, did Zengzi die at the same time? Investigating historical facts, Zeng's mother passed away first, yet Zengzi did not die. This suggests that spiritual energies may cause minor mutual influences but cannot produce major effects.
|
| | 感虛: |
世稱申喜夜聞其母歌，心動，開關問歌者為誰，果其母。蓋聞母聲，聲音相感，心悲意動，開關而問，蓋其實也。今曾母在家，曾子在野，不聞號呼之聲，母小搤臂，安能動子？ |
| | The world speaks of Shen Xi hearing his mother singing at night, feeling a stirring in his heart, opening the gate to ask who was singing, and finding out it was indeed his mother. It is reasonable that hearing a familiar voice would stir the heart; feeling sorrow and moving emotionally, then opening the gate to inquire—this is plausible. Now, if Zeng's mother was at home and Zengzi was in the fields, he did not hear her calling. If his mother merely grasped her arm slightly, how could it possibly affect him?
|
| | 感虛: |
疑世人頌成，聞曾子之孝，天下少雙，則為空生母搤臂之說也。 |
| | It is likely that people in later generations, hearing of Zengzi's filial virtue and knowing it was rare in the world, invented this tale about his mother grasping her arm.
|
| | 感虛: |
世稱：南陽卓公為緱氏令，蝗不入界。蓋以賢明至誠，災蟲不入其縣也。 |
| | The world says: Zhuo Gong of Nanyang served as magistracy of Gou Shi, and locusts did not enter his territory. It is said that because he was virtuous and sincere to the utmost, calamitous insects did not enter his county.
|
| | 感虛: |
此又虛也。 |
| | This too is false.
|
| | 感虛: |
夫賢明至誠之化，通於同類，能相知心，然後慕服。蝗蟲、閩虻之類也，何知何見？而能知卓公之化？使賢者處深野之中，閩虻能不入其舍乎？閩虻不能避賢者之舍，蝗蟲何能不入卓公之縣？ |
| | The influence of virtue and sincerity can reach those of the same kind, enabling mutual understanding of hearts, thus inspiring admiration and submission. Locusts are insects like flies; what do they know or see? How could they possibly understand Zhuo Gong's virtue? If a virtuous person were living in the depths of the wilderness, would flies still avoid entering his home? Flies cannot avoid the house of a virtuous man; how then could locusts refrain from entering Zhuo Gong's county?
|
| | 感虛: |
如謂蝗蟲變，與閩虻異，夫寒溫，亦災變也，使一郡皆寒，賢者長一縣，一縣之界能獨溫乎？夫寒溫不能避賢者之縣，蝗蟲何能不入卓公之界？ |
| | If one claims locusts are different from flies, then cold and heat are also forms of calamity. Suppose an entire region were to become cold; if a virtuous official governed a county, could the boundary of that single county remain uniquely warm? If cold and heat cannot avoid affecting a virtuous official's territory, how could locusts possibly refrain from entering Zhuo Gong's jurisdiction?
|
| | 感虛: |
夫如是，蝗蟲適不入界，卓公賢名稱於世，世則謂之能郤蝗蟲矣。何以驗之？夫蝗之集於野，非能普博盡蔽地也，往往積聚多少有處。非所積之地，則盜跖所居；所少之野，則伯夷所處也。集過有多少，不能盡蔽覆也。夫集地有多少，則其過縣有留去矣。多少不可以驗善惡，有無安可以明賢不肖也？蓋時蝗自過，不謂賢人界不入，明矣。 |
| | If this were the case, and locusts just happened not to enter his territory, Zhuo Gong's reputation for virtue spread in the world; thus, people claimed he had the power to repel locusts. How can this be verified? When locusts gather in the fields, they do not blanket the entire land; rather, their swarms accumulate more or less in certain areas. In places where there are no locusts, it might be where a bandit like Zhi resides; in fields with fewer locusts is where Bo Yi dwells. The number of locust swarms varies; they cannot possibly cover every area completely. Since the gathering areas vary in size, it follows that when locusts pass through a county, some may remain and others depart. If the number of locusts cannot prove virtue or wickedness, how can their presence or absence determine whether a person is virtuous or corrupt? It is clear that the locusts simply passed by at the time; it cannot be said that they avoided entering a virtuous man's territory.
|
