| Chinese Text Project |
| Show statistics Edit searchSearch details: |
|---|
| Scope: Autobiography Request type: Paragraph |
| Condition 1: Contains text "人面色部七十有餘頰股明潔五色分別隱微憂喜皆可得察占射之者十不失一" Matched:1. |
| Total 1 paragraphs. Page 1 of 1. |
《自紀 - Autobiography》 | English translation: Albert Forke [?] | Library Resources |
| 7 | 自紀: | 充書形露易觀。或曰：「口辯者其言深，筆敏者其文沉。案經藝之文、賢聖之言，鴻重優雅，難卒曉睹。世讀之者，訓古乃下。蓋賢聖之材鴻，故其文語與俗不通。玉隱石間，珠匿魚腹，非玉工珠師，莫能采得。寶物以隱閉不見，實語亦宜深沉難測。《譏俗》之書，欲悟俗人，故形露其指，為分別之文；《論衡》之書，何為復然？豈材有淺極，不能為覆？何文之察，與彼經藝殊軌轍也？」荅曰：玉隱石間，珠匿魚腹，故為深覆。及玉色剖於石心，珠光出於魚腹，其隱乎？猶吾文未集於簡札之上，藏於胸臆之中，猶玉隱珠匿也。及出荴露，猶玉剖珠出乎！爛若天文之照，順若地理之曉，嫌疑隱微，盡可名處。且名白，事自定也。《論衡》者、論之平也。口則務在明言，筆則務在露文。高士之文雅，言無不可曉，指無不可睹。觀讀之者，曉然若盲之開目，聆然若聾之通耳。三年盲子，卒見父母，不察察相識，安肯說喜？道畔巨樹，塹邊長溝，所居昭察，人莫不知。使樹不巨而隱，溝不長而匿，以斯示人，堯、舜猶惑。人面色部七十有餘，頰股明潔，五色分別，隱微憂喜，皆可得察，占射之者，十不失一。使面黝而黑醜，垢重襲而覆部，占射之者，十而失九。夫文由語也，或淺露分別，或深迂優雅，孰為辯者？故口言以明志，言恐滅遺，故著之文字。文字與言同趨，何為猶當隱閉指意？獄當嫌辜，卿決疑事，渾沌難曉，與彼分明可知，孰為良吏？夫口論以分明為公，筆辯以荴露為通，吏文以昭察為良。深覆典雅，指意難覩，唯賦頌耳。經傳之文，賢聖之語，古今言殊，四方談異也。當言事時，非務難知，使指閉隱也。後人不曉，世相離遠，此名曰語異，不名曰材鴻。淺文讀之難曉，名曰不巧，不名曰知明。秦始皇讀韓非之書，嘆曰：「猶獨不得此人同時。」其文可曉，故其事可思。如深鴻優雅，須師乃學，投之於地，何嘆之有？夫筆著者，欲其易曉而難為，不貴難知而易造，口論務解分而可聽，不務深迂而難睹。孟子相賢，以眸子明瞭者；察文，以義可曉。 |
| Autobiography: |
Wang Chong's writings are lucid and easy to understand. There are those who pretend that the words of a good debater must be profound, and the compositions of an able writer obscure. The style of the classic literature and the sayings of worthies and sages are grand and majestic, beautiful and refined, and difficult to grasp at first. Those who study their whole life, learn to understand them with the necessary explanations. The genius of the first thinkers being so wonderful, their expressions cannot be the same as those of ordinary people. Gems, they say, are concealed in stones, and pearls in fish-maws. Only jewel-lapidaries and pearl-experts can find them. These precious things cannot be seen, because they are hidden, and thus truisms must be profound and deep, and hard to grasp. The "Censures on Morals" are intended to rouse people, therefore the meaning is perspicuous and the style quite plain. But why must the Lung-heng be like this too? Is the talent of the author so shallow, that it was absolutely impossible to hide anything? Why is the style so perspicuous, and quite a different principle followed than in the classical literature? My reply is as follows. A gem is concealed in a stone and a pearl in a fish-maw, and therefore they are covered and in the dark. But, when the colour of the gem beams from the heart of the stone, and the lustre of the pearl breaks through the fish-maw, are they still hidden? They are like my thoughts, before they have been fixed in books. Enshrined in my bosom, they are like gems or pearls in their concealment, shining forth, brilliant as the splendour of the heavenly bodies, and clear as the distinct lines of the surface of the earth. Lest things should remain doubtful and obscure to us, we can describe them all by names, and, provided that the names are clear, all the things become defined. The Lun-heng discusses these questions impartially. In speaking, it is essential to use clear words, and in writing, to employ plain signs. The style of eminent scholars is refined, but their words can always be understood, and their meaning always be caught. Their readers are suddenly enlightened like blind men who recover their sight, or stirred up like deaf men who suddenly learn to hear. When a child who has been blind for three years, unexpectedly sees his parents, he would not, at once, know them on perceiving them, why then should he give utterance to his joy? Let a huge tree stand by the road-side, and a long ditch run along a bank, then the locality is well defined, and everybody knows it. Now, should the tree not be huge any more and disappear, and the ditch not be long and be hidden, and the place be shown to people, even Yao and Shun would be perplexed. The human features are divided into more than seventy different classes. The flesh of the cheeks being pure and white, the five colours can be clearly discerned, and the slightest sorrow, pleasure, and other emotions, all find expression in the features. A physiognomist will not once be mistaken in ten cases. But if the face be blackened and begrimed, or covered with a layer of dirt so, that the features are hidden, then physiognomists will give wrong answers nine times out of ten. The style is formed of words. It may be shallow, perspicuous, and distinct, or deep, abstruse, elegant, and polished. Who shall distinguish it? We speak to express our thoughts, and from fear, that our words might be lost, we commit them to writing. Writing having the same purpose as speaking, wherefore should it conceal the meaning? A judge must hate wrong. Now, would a magistrate, who while deciding a doubtful case gives a confuse and unintelligent verdict, be a better official than another, who clearly distinguishes every point, and can easily be understood? In oral discussions, one makes clear distinctions out of regards for the audience, and in written disputations one elucidates one's meaning to be understood. In historical works, a clear and intelligible style is most appreciated, and of profound productions, full of beautiful thoughts, but hard to read, there are only pieces of irregular verse and dithyrambs. As for the classical and semiclassical works and the words of the worthies and sages, the ancient and modern languages are different, and speech varies in the different parts of the empire. At the time, when these men spoke, they did not wish that their words should be difficult to understand, or that their meaning should be hidden. If later ages did not understand them, this is owing to the remoteness of time. Therefore one may speak of the difference of language, but not of genius or shallowness of style. If the reading offers great difficulties, the works may be considered as not very cleverly written, but this should not be reputed a great wisdom. Qin Shi Huangdi reading Han Fei Zi's work exclaimed with a sigh! "Alas! that I am alone, and have not got this man!" They were contemporaries, he could understand his words and reflect upon what he said. If the book had been so profound and exquisite, that he wanted a teacher to comprehend it, he would have flung it to the ground, and it was no use sighing. An author wishes his work to be intelligible, but difficult to write, and he does not care, if it be hard to grasp, but easy to write. In lectures one aims at perspicuity, that the hearers can follow, and does not affect obscurity and ambiguity to baffle the readers. Mencius knew an intelligent man by the sparkling of his eyes. One learns to know what a text is worth by its lucidity. |
| Total 1 paragraphs. Page 1 of 1. |
|---|