| | 謝短: |
《程材》、《量知》，言儒生、文吏之材不能相過，以儒生脩大道，以文吏曉簿書，道勝於事，故謂儒生頗愈文吏也。此職業外相程相量也，其內各有所以為短，未實謝也。夫儒生能說一經，自謂通大道，以驗文吏；文吏曉簿書，自謂文無害，以戲儒生。各持滿而自藏，非彼而是我，不知所為短，不悟於己未足。《論衡》詶之，將使𢢰然各知所之。 |
| | "Chengcai," "Liangzhi"—these works argue that the talents of Confucian scholars and bureaucratic officials cannot surpass each other. They state that Confucian scholars cultivate the great Dao, while bureaucratic officials understand official records; since the Dao is superior to mundane affairs, it is said that Confucian scholars are somewhat better than bureaucratic officials. This is an external comparison of their respective professions; internally, each has its own shortcomings and cannot be genuinely considered superior to the other. A Confucian scholar who can expound one classic considers himself as having grasped the great Dao, and uses this to challenge bureaucratic officials; a bureaucratic official who understands official records considers himself well-versed in literature without fault, and thus mocks Confucian scholars. Each holds a sense of self-satisfaction while concealing their own deficiencies, regarding the other as wrong and themselves as right. They do not recognize their own shortcomings and fail to realize that they are insufficient in themselves. "The Lunheng" refutes this, aiming to make them clearly aware of where each should go.
|
| | 謝短: |
夫儒生所短，不徒以不曉簿書；文吏所劣，不徒以不通大道也，反以閉闇不覽古今，不能各自知其所業之事未具足也。二家各短，不能自知也；世之論者，而亦不能詶之，如何？ |
| | The shortcoming of Confucian scholars is not merely that they do not understand official records; the weakness of bureaucratic officials is not merely that they fail to grasp the great Dao; rather, it lies in their ignorance and failure to study both past and present, so they cannot recognize for themselves that their professional knowledge remains incomplete. Both groups have their own shortcomings but are unable to realize them; and those in the world who comment on these matters also fail to refute this adequately—how is that possible?
|
| | 謝短: |
夫儒生之業，五經也。南面為師，旦夕講授章句，滑習義理，究備於五經，可也。五經之後，秦、漢之事無不能知者，短也。夫知古不知今，謂之陸沉，然則儒生、所謂陸沉者也。五經之前，至於天地始開、帝王初立者，主名為誰，儒生又不知也。夫知今不知古，謂之盲瞽。五經比於上古，猶為今也。徒能說經，不曉上古，然則儒生、所謂盲瞽者也。 |
| | The profession of Confucian scholars lies in the Five Classics. To serve as a teacher facing south, lecturing on passages day and night, becoming fluent in meanings and principles, thoroughly mastering the Five Classics—this is acceptable. However, after the Five Classics, if one cannot know anything about events of the Qin and Han dynasties, this constitutes a shortcoming. To know antiquity but not the present is called "Lu Shen," and thus Confucian scholars may be said to be those known as Lu Shen. Before the Five Classics, going back even to when heaven and earth first opened and emperors were first established, Confucian scholars do not know who these figures are. To know the present but not antiquity is called "blindness." Compared to the most ancient times, the Five Classics are still relatively recent. To be able only to expound the classics but not understand antiquity—thus Confucian scholars can also be called "blind."
|
| | 謝短: |
儒生猶曰：「上古久遠，其事闇昧，故經不載而師不說也。」 |
| | Confucian scholars still say: "The most ancient times are long past, and their events obscure; therefore, the classics do not record them and teachers do not speak of them."
|
| | 謝短: |
夫三王之事雖近矣，經雖不載，義所連及，五經所當共知，儒生所當審說也。夏自禹嚮國，幾載而至於殷？殷自湯幾祀而至於周？周自文王幾年而至於秦？桀亡夏，而紂棄殷，滅周者何王也？ |
| | The matters of the Three Kings, though recent, are not recorded in the classics; yet they are connected to their meanings and should be commonly known by those who study the Five Classics. They are what Confucian scholars ought to carefully explain. Starting from Yu, when Xia established his state, how many years passed before it reached Yin? Beginning with Tang of Shang, how many reigns passed before reaching Zhou? Starting from King Wen of Zhou, how many years passed until the Qin dynasty? Jie destroyed Xia and Zhòu abandoned Shang. Which king destroyed Zhou?
|
| | 謝短: |
周猶為遠，秦則漢之所伐也。夏始於禹，殷本於湯，周祖后稷，秦初為人者誰？秦燔五經，坑殺儒士，五經之家所共聞也。秦何起而燔五經？何感而坑儒生？ |
| | Zhou is still distant, but Qin was the dynasty that Han overthrew. Xia began with Yu, Shang originated from Tang, and Zhou traced its ancestry to Hou Ji. Who was the first person of Qin? Qin burned the Five Classics and buried Confucian scholars alive, a matter well known among those who study the classics. From whom did Qin originate, and why did it burn the Five Classics? What prompted them to bury Confucian scholars alive?
|
| | 謝短: |
秦則前代也，漢國自儒生之家也。從高祖至今朝幾世？歷年訖今幾載？初受何命？復獲何瑞？得天下難易孰與殷、周？家人子弟學問歷幾歲，人問之曰：「居宅幾年，祖先何為？」不能知者，愚子弟也。然則儒生不能知漢事，世之愚蔽人也。溫故知新，可以為師，古今不知，稱師如何？ |
| | Qin was the previous dynasty, while Han arose from among Confucian families. How many generations have passed since Emperor Gaozu to our present time? How many years in total from past dynasties up to the present? From whom did they originally receive their mandate? What omens or blessings have been received again? Compared to Yin and Zhou, was it more difficult or easier for them to gain the empire? If a family's son or grandson has studied for several years, and someone asks him: "How many years have you lived in your home? What did your ancestors do?" One who cannot answer is a foolish child. Therefore, Confucian scholars who do not know about the Han dynasty are people of this world who are ignorant and narrow-minded. "To review the old to learn the new, one can become a teacher." If one does not know either antiquity or the present, how can such a person be called a teacher?
|
| | 謝短: |
彼人問曰：「二尺四寸，聖人文語，朝夕講習，義類所及，故可務知。漢事未載於經，名為尺藉短書，比於小道，其能知，非儒者之貴也。」 |
| | That person might ask: "The two feet and four inches [of bamboo slips], the sacred words of sage men, studied day and night; their meanings and categories are thus worth striving to understand. "Affairs of the Han dynasty are not recorded in the classics, and they are called short writings on slips of bamboo. Compared to minor arts, knowing them is not considered precious among Confucian scholars."
|
| | 謝短: |
儒不能都曉古今，欲各別說其經；經事義類，乃以不知為貴也？事不曉，不以為短！ |
| | Confucian scholars cannot fully understand both antiquity and the present; they wish instead to separately explain their own classics; Is it then considered noble for them not to know matters related to meanings and categories of the classics? Not understanding certain matters is not regarded as a shortcoming!
|
| | 謝短: |
請復別問儒生，各以其經，旦夕之所講說。 |
| | Let me ask Confucian scholars again, each according to their own classic, about what they lecture on day and night.
|
| | 謝短: |
先問《易》家：「《易》本何所起？造作之者為誰？」彼將應曰：「伏羲作八卦，文王演為六十四，孔子作彖、象、《繫辭》。三聖重業，《易》乃具足。」問之曰：「《易》有三家。一曰《連山》，二曰《歸藏》，三曰《周易》。伏羲所作，文王所造，《連山》乎？《歸藏》、《周易》也？秦燔五經，《易》何以得脫？漢興幾年而復立？宣帝之時，河內女子壞老屋，得《易》一篇，名為何《易》？此時《易》具足未？」 |
| | First I will ask those who study the "Yi Jing": "From where did the 'Yi' originate? Who was its author?" They will reply: "Fu Xi created the Eight Trigrams, King Wen expanded them into Sixty-Four Hexagrams, and Confucius composed the Tuan, Xiang, and 'Xici.'" The combined work of these three sages made the "Yi" complete." Ask them: "There are three schools of interpretation for the 'Yi.'" "One is 'Lianshan,' second is 'Guicang,' and third is 'Zhouyi.'" "Did Fu Xi create them or did King Wen compose them—does this refer to 'Lianshan'?" Or does it refer to "Guicang," and the "Zhouyi"?" When Qin burned the Five Classics, why was the "Yi" spared? After Han rose to power, how many years passed before these schools were revived? During the reign of Emperor Xuan, a woman from Hedong destroyed an old house and found one scroll of "Yi." What was the name of this "Yi"? At that time, had the "Yi" become complete?"
|
| | 謝短: |
問《尚書》家曰：「今旦夕所授二十九篇，奇有百二篇，又有百篇。二十九篇何所起？百二篇何所造？秦焚諸《書》之時，《尚書》諸篇皆何在？漢興，始錄《尚書》者何帝？初受學者何人？」 |
| | Ask those who study the "Shangshu": "The twenty-nine chapters taught day and night today, with an additional one hundred and two chapters, plus another one hundred. From where did these twenty-nine chapters originate? Who composed the one hundred and two additional chapters?" When Qin burned all the "Shu," where were the various chapters of the "Shangshu" at that time? After Han rose to power, which emperor first recorded the "Shangshu"? Who was the initial person who received instruction in it?"
|
| | 謝短: |
問《禮》家曰：「前孔子時，周已制禮，殷禮，夏禮，凡三王因時損益，篇有多少，文有增減。不知今《禮》周乎？殷、夏也？」彼必以漢承周，將曰：「周禮。」夫《周禮》六典，又六轉，六六三十六，三百六十，是以周官三百六十也。案今《禮》不見六典，無三百六十官，又不見天子，天子禮廢何時？豈秦滅之哉？宣帝時，河內女子壞老屋，得佚《禮》一篇，六十篇中，是何篇是者？高祖詔叔孫通制作《儀品》，十六篇何在？而復定儀禮？見在十六篇，秦火之餘也，更秦之時，篇凡有幾？ |
| | Ask those who study the "Li": "Before Confucius, Zhou had already established rites; there were also rites of Yin and Xia. In total, the Three Kings adjusted them according to their times, adding or subtracting from the number of chapters and texts. Do you not know whether today's 'Li' belongs to Zhou? Or is it from Yin or Xia?" They will certainly, considering Han as succeeding Zhou, say: "The rites of Zhou." "The 'Zhouli' has six categories and each category is divided into six sections, making six times six equal thirty-six. Thirty-six multiplied by ten equals three hundred and sixty; thus, the Zhou officials totaled three hundred and sixty." Examining today's "Li," we do not see the six categories, nor do we find three hundred and sixty officials; moreover, there is no mention of the Son of Heaven. When did the rites of the Son of Heaven fall into disuse? Was it Qin that abolished them? During the reign of Emperor Xuan of Han, a woman from Hedong dismantled an old house and discovered one lost chapter of "Li." Among the sixty chapters, which specific chapter was it? Emperor Gaozu ordered Shusun Tong to create the "Yi Pin," a work of sixteen chapters. Where are these sixteen chapters now? And who later re-established the rites and ceremonies? The existing sixteen chapters are what remained after the burning by Qin. During the time of the Qin dynasty, how many chapters were there in total?
|
| | 謝短: |
問《詩》家曰：「《詩》作何帝王時也？」彼將曰：「周衰而《詩》作，蓋康王時也。康王德缺於房，大臣剌晏，故《詩》作。」夫文、武之隆，貴在成、康，康王未衰，《詩》安得作？周非一王，何知其康王也？二王之末皆衰，夏、殷衰時，《詩》何不作？《尚書》曰：「詩言志，歌詠言。」此時已有詩也。斷取周以來，而謂興於周。古者采詩，詩有文也；今《詩》無書，何知非秦燔五經，《詩》獨無餘禮也？ |
| | Ask those who study "Shi": "During which emperor's reign was the 'Shijing' composed?" They will say: "The 'Shijing' was compiled when Zhou declined, probably during King Kangwang's reign. King Kangwang lacked virtue in the region of Fang, and his ministers were corrupt and lazy; thus, the 'Shijing' was composed." The prosperity of King Wen and Wu reached its height during Kings Cheng and Kang. Since King Kangwang had not yet declined, how could the "Shijing" have been composed? Zhou did not have only one king; how do you know it was specifically King Kangwang? The end of the reigns of two kings were both times of decline. When Xia and Yin declined, why was the "Shijing" not composed then? The "Shangshu" says: "Poetry expresses aspirations; songs are sung words." At that time, poetry already existed. To cut off and take only from Zhou onward is to say it arose in the Zhou dynasty. In ancient times, poems were collected; poetry had literary form. Now the "Shijing" has no written records—how do we know it is not because Qin burned the Five Classics that there are no remaining remnants of poetry?
|
| | 謝短: |
問《春秋》家曰：「孔子作《春秋》，周何王時也？自衛反魯，然後樂正，《春秋》作矣。自衛反魯，哀公時也。自衛，何君也。俟孔子以何禮，而孔子反魯作《春秋》乎？孔子錄《史記》以作《春秋》，《史記》本名《春秋》乎？制作以為經，乃歸《春秋》也？」 |
| | Ask those who study "Chunqiu": "Confucius composed 'Chunqiu.' During which king's reign of Zhou was this?" After returning to Lu from Wei, he then corrected the music, and "Chunqiu" was composed. Returning from Wei to Lu occurred during the reign of Duke Ai. From which ruler did he leave when departing for Wei? What courtesy was shown to Confucius by the ruler, and under what circumstances did Confucius return to Lu and compose "Chunqiu"? Confucius compiled the "Shiji" to create "Chunqiu." Was the original name of the "Shiji" itself "Chunqiu"? Did he compile and transform it into a classic, thereby naming it "Chunqiu"?"
|
| | 謝短: |
法律之家，亦為儒生。問曰：「《九章》、誰所作也？」彼聞皋陶作獄，必將曰：「皋陶也。」詰曰：「皋陶、唐、虞時，唐、虞之刑五刑，案今律無五刑之文。」或曰：「蕭何也。」詰曰：「蕭何、高祖時也。孝文之時，齊太倉令淳于德有罪，徵詣長安。其女緹縈為父上書，言肉刑壹施，不得改悔。文帝痛其言，乃改肉刑。案今《九章》象刑，非肉刑也。文帝在蕭何後，知時肉刑也。蕭何所造，反具肉刑也？而云《九章》蕭何所造乎？」古禮三百，威儀三千，刑亦正刑三百，科條三千，出於禮，入於刑，禮之所去，刑之所取，故其多少同一數也。今《禮經》十六，蕭何律有九章，不相應，又何？五經題篇，皆以事義別之，至禮與律獨經也，題之，禮言昏禮，律言盜律何？ |
| | Those who study law are also considered Confucian scholars. Ask: "Who composed the 'Jiu Zhang'?" If they have heard that Gao Tao established judicial procedures, they will certainly say: "Gao Tao." Challenge them by saying: "Gao Tao was in the time of Tang and Yu. The punishments under Tang and Yu were five kinds, yet according to today's laws, there is no mention of these five punishments." Some may say: "Xiao He." Challenge them by saying: "Xiao He was in the time of Emperor Gaozu. During the reign of Emperor Wendi, Qi Taicang Ling Chunyu De was guilty and summoned to Chang'an. His daughter Tiying petitioned on her father's behalf, stating that once corporal punishment was applied, it could not be reversed or regretted. Emperor Wendi felt deep sorrow for her words and thus abolished corporal punishments. According to today's "Jiu Zhang," symbolic punishments are used, not corporal punishments. Emperor Wendi was after Xiao He and knew that at the time, corporal punishment existed. Did Xiao He create laws that instead included corporal punishments? And yet you say the "Jiu Zhang" was created by Xiao He?" Ancient rites numbered three hundred, and ceremonial forms totaled three thousand. Punishments also had three hundred standard penalties and three thousand legal provisions. They originated from rites and entered into punishments; where rites were removed, punishments took their place. Therefore, the number of rites and punishments is the same. Now there are sixteen "Rites Classics," while Xiao He's laws have only nine chapters, which do not correspond—why is that? The titles of the Five Classics' chapters are all distinguished by their subject matter. Only rites and laws are uniquely classified as classics, yet they are titled differently: rites speak of marriage rites, while laws refer to theft laws—why is this?
|
| | 謝短: |
夫揔問儒生以古今之義，儒生不能知，別名以其經事問之，又不能曉，斯則坐守何言師法，不頗博覽之咎也。 |
| | To broadly ask Confucian scholars about the meanings of ancient and modern times, yet they cannot know; to specifically name them according to their classical subjects and inquire further, but still fail to understand—this is entirely due to their rigid adherence to a single teacher's doctrine without broad learning.
|
| | 謝短: |
文吏自謂知官事，曉簿書。問之曰：「曉知其事，當能究達其義，通見其意否？」文吏必將罔然。問之曰：「古者封侯，各專國土，今置太守令長，何義？古人井田，民為公家耕，今量租芻，何意？一業使民居更一月，何據？年二十三儒，十五賦，七歲頭錢二十三，何緣？有臈，何帝王時？門、戶、井、竈，何立？社稷，先農，靈星，何祠？歲終逐疫，何驅？使立桃象人於門戶，何旨？挂蘆索於戶上，畫虎於門闌，何放？除墻壁書畫厭火丈夫，何見？步之六尺，冠之六寸，何應？有尉史、令史，無承長史，何制？兩郡移書，曰：『敢告卒人』，兩縣不言，何解？郡言事二府，曰『敢言之』；司空曰『上』，何狀？賜民爵八級，何法？名曰簪褭、上造，何謂？吏上功曰伐閱，名籍墨將，何指？七十賜王杖，何起？著鳩於杖末，不著爵，何杖？苟以鳩為善，不賜鳩而賜鳩杖，而不爵何說？日分六十，漏之盡自，鼓之致五，何故？吏衣黑衣，宮闕赤單，何慎？服革於腰？佩刀於右，舞劍於左，何人備，著鉤於履，冠在於首，何象？吏居城郭，出乘車馬，坐治文書，起城郭，何王？造車輿，何工？生馬，何地？作書，何人？」王造城郭，及馬所生，難知也，遠也。造車作書，易曉也，必將應曰：「倉頡作書，奚仲作車。」詰曰：「倉頡何感而作書？奚仲何起而作車？」又不知也。文吏所當知，然而不知，亦不博覽之過也。 |
| | Bureaucratic officials consider themselves knowledgeable about official matters and familiar with administrative records. Ask them: "If you claim to understand these affairs, can you then thoroughly grasp their meanings and comprehend the underlying intent?" Bureaucratic officials will certainly be at a loss. Ask them: "In ancient times, marquises were enfeoffed and each controlled their own territory. Now we appoint governors and magistrates—what is the meaning behind this?" In ancient times, there was the well-field system, where people farmed for the public. Now we measure taxes and fodder—what is its intent? One official makes commoners serve in rotation every month—on what basis? Taxes for twenty-three years of age, fifteen levies, and two shi of head money at seven years old—what is the reason? There are annual taxes—during which emperor's reign did this originate? Why were the gate, household register, well, and stove established? What is the reason for worshiping Sheji (land and grain gods), Xiannong (the god of agriculture), and Lingxing?" At year's end, we drive away plagues—what are they driven from? Making people place peachwood figures at the gates and household entrances—what is its purpose?" Hanging reed ropes on doorways, painting tigers on gate lattices—why are these practices done? Removing wall paintings and writings to ward off fire demons—what is the basis for this?" A step of six chi, a hat of six cun—what does this correspond to? There are Weishi and Lingshi, but no Chengchangshi—what is the rationale for this system?" When two commanderies send official documents, they say: "We dare to inform the common people," but two counties do not use such language—what is the explanation?" A commandery reporting a matter to two higher offices says, "We dare to speak of it"; The Sikong (Minister of Works) simply says 'submit'—what is the distinction?" Granting commoners eight ranks of noble titles—what law supports this?" Named Zanniao, Shangzao—what do these terms mean?" Officials reporting their achievements say "fa yue," and the name records are marked with ink—what is this referring to?" Granting the King's staff to those over seventy—where does this practice originate?" Attaching a jiu bird at the end of the staff, but not attaching a noble title—what kind of staff is this?" If jiu birds are considered auspicious, then why grant a jiu staff instead of the bird itself? And if noble titles are not granted, what is the reasoning?" The day is divided into sixty parts; when the clepsydra runs out by itself and the drum sounds five times—why is this so?" Officials wear black robes, while palace gates are red—what caution or symbolism does this represent?" Why do they fasten leather belts around their waists? Wearing a sword on the right, carrying a sword for dance on the left—what person is prepared? Attaching hooks to shoes and wearing hats on one's head—what image or symbolism does this represent?" Officials reside in walled cities, travel by carriage and horse, sit to handle documents, and govern from within the city walls—what king is this?" Who was responsible for making chariots and carriages?" Where do horses originate from?" Who created writing?" The king who built walled cities and the origin of horses are difficult to know, as they belong to a distant past. Creating chariots and writing is easier to understand; one will certainly respond: "Cangjie created writing, and Xi Zhong made the cart." Challenge them by asking: "What inspired Cangjie to create writing?" "And what prompted Xi Zhong to invent the cart?" They do not know either. These are matters that bureaucratic officials should understand, yet they remain ignorant—this is also a fault of their narrow learning and lack of broad reading.
|
| | 謝短: |
夫儒生不覽古今，何知一永不過守信經文，滑習章句，解剝互錯，分明乖異。文吏不曉吏道，所能不過案獄考事，移書下記，對卿便給，之准旡一閱備，皆淺略不及，偏駮不純，俱有闕遺，何以相言？ |
| | Confucian scholars who do not study both ancient and modern times cannot know that one should never rigidly adhere to the literal words of classical texts, mechanically recite passages, or interpret them in a way that leads to contradictions and inconsistencies. Bureaucratic officials who do not understand the principles of governance can only handle cases, examine matters, send documents downward, and respond to ministers with ready answers. Their knowledge is incomplete and superficial; their understanding is narrow and inconsistent, both lacking in depth and fullness—how then could they engage in meaningful discussion?
|
