| Chinese Text Project | |
| Simplified Chinese version |
《正名 - Rectifying Names 》 | English translation: AI and Chinese Text Project users [?] | Library Resources |
| 正名: | 八曰── | |
| The eighth day── | ||
| 1 | 正名: | 名正则治，名丧则乱。使名丧者，淫说也。说淫则可不可而然不然，是不是而非不非。故君子之说也，足以言贤者之实、不肖者之充而已矣，足以喻治之所悖、乱之所由起而已矣，足以知物之情、人之所获以生而已矣。 |
| When names are correctly established, order prevails; when they are lost, chaos arises. Those who cause the loss of names are proponents of licentious doctrines. When doctrines become licentious, what is acceptable and unacceptable becomes confused; what is true or false, right or wrong, is no longer clear. Therefore, the doctrines of a gentleman are sufficient to express the reality of virtuous individuals and the emptiness of the unworthy alone; they are sufficient to clarify what leads to order or disorder alone; and they are sufficient to understand the nature of things and how people sustain their lives. | ||
| 2 | 正名: | 凡乱者，刑名不当也。人主虽不肖，犹若用贤，犹若听善，犹若为可者。其患在乎所谓贤、从不肖也，所为善、而从邪辟，所谓可、从悖逆也，是刑名异充而声实异谓也。夫贤不肖、善邪辟、可悖逆，国不乱、身不危奚待也？齐泯王是以知说士，而不知所谓士也。故尹文问其故，而王无以应。此公玉丹之所以见信而卓齿之所以见任也。任卓齿而信公玉丹，岂非以自雠邪？ |
| All disorders arise from improper application of names and punishments. Even if a ruler is unworthy, he should still employ the virtuous, heed good counsel, and act in accordance with what is right. The problem lies in what is called virtuous yet follows the unworthy, what is considered good yet follows evil and deviant paths, and what is deemed acceptable yet follows rebellion—this arises from a mismatch between names and realities, and between words and actual meanings. If the virtuous and unworthy, good and deviant, acceptable and rebellious are not clearly distinguished, how can a nation avoid disorder or an individual avoid peril? Qi Minwang thus understood the value of scholars, yet did not understand what was truly meant by "scholars." Therefore, Yin Wen asked him about the reason, and the king had no response. This is why Gong Yudan was trusted and Zhuo Chi was given positions of responsibility. To appoint Zhuo Chi and trust Gong Yudan—was this not to invite self-destruction? | ||
| 3 | 正名: |
尹文见齐王。齐王谓尹文曰：“寡人甚好士。” 尹文曰：“愿闻何谓士？”王未有以应。 尹文曰：“今有人于此，事亲则孝，事君则忠，交友则信，居乡则悌，有此四行者，可谓士乎？”齐王曰：“此真所谓士已。” 尹文曰：“王得若人，用以为臣乎？”王曰：“所愿而不能得也。” 尹文曰：“使若人于庙朝中，深见侮而不斗，王将以为臣乎？”王曰：“否。大夫见侮而不斗，则是辱也。辱则寡人弗以为臣矣。” 尹文曰：“虽见侮而不斗，未失其四行也。未失其四行者，是未失其所以为士一矣。未失其所以为士一，而王以为臣，失其所以为士一，而王不以为臣，则向之所谓士者乃士乎？”王无以应。尹文曰：“今有人于此，将治其国，民有非则非之，民无非则非之，民有罪则罚之，民无罪则罚之，而恶民之难治可乎？”王曰：“不可。”尹文曰：“窃观下吏之治齐也，方若此也。”王曰：“使寡人治信若是，则民虽不治，寡人弗怨也。意者未至然乎。” 尹文曰：“言之不敢无说。请言其说。王之令曰：‘杀人者死，伤人者刑。’民有畏王之令，深见侮而不敢斗者，是全王之令也，而王曰‘见侮而不敢斗，是辱也’。夫谓之辱者，非此之谓也，以为臣不以为臣者罪之也，此无罪而王罚之也。” 齐王无以应。论皆若此，故国残身危，走而之谷，如卫。齐泯王，周室之孟侯也。太公之所老也。桓公尝以此霸矣，管仲之辩名实审也。 |
| Yin Wen met with King Qi. King Qi said to Yin Wen, "I greatly value scholars." Yin Wen replied, "I would like to know what you mean by 'scholars.'" The king had no response. Yin Wen said, "Suppose there is a person here who is filial to his parents, loyal to his ruler, trustworthy in friendships, and respectful toward his fellow villagers. If someone possesses these four virtues, can he be called a scholar?" King Qi said, "This is indeed what is meant by a scholar." Yin Wen asked, "If the king were to find such a person, would he employ him as an official?" The king said, "This is what I wish for but cannot obtain." Yin Wen asked, "If such a person were in the ancestral temple or court and was deeply insulted but did not fight back, would the king employ him as an official?" The king said, "No." A court official who is insulted but does not fight back would be considered disgraced. If he is disgraced, then I will not regard him as my official." Yin Wen said, "Although he is insulted and does not fight back, he has not lost his four virtues. One who has not lost these four virtues has not lost the very qualities that make him a scholar. If one has not lost the qualities that make him a scholar, yet you do not appoint him as an official; but if someone loses those very qualities and you still appoint them—then what you have previously called a "scholar" is truly a scholar? The king had no reply. Yin Wen said, "Suppose there is a ruler here who wishes to govern his state. If the people commit wrongdoings, he criticizes them; if they do not commit wrongdoings, he still criticizes them. If the people have committed crimes, he punishes them; if they have not committed crimes, he still punishes them. Can such a ruler resent the difficulty of governing the people?" The king said, "No." Yin Wen said, "I have secretly observed how the officials govern Qi—it is just like this." The king said, "If my governance were truly like that, then even if the people are difficult to govern, I would not resent it." It must be that things have not yet reached such a state. Yin Wen said, "I dare not speak without justification." Please allow me to explain my reasoning. The king's decree states: "Those who kill shall be put to death, and those who injure others shall receive corporal punishment." There are people who fear the king's decree and, when deeply insulted, dare not fight back—this is to uphold the king's command. Yet you say, "To be insulted and yet not fight back is disgrace." Calling this disgrace contradicts your own decree. To refuse to appoint someone as an official for not fighting back, while calling it disgrace, is to punish the innocent—this is you punishing them without cause. King Qi had no reply. Because of arguments like these, the state suffered damage and the ruler faced peril; he fled to Gu and then to Wei. King Minwang of Qi was a vassal lord of the Zhou dynasty. The place where Tai Gong grew old. Duke Huan once achieved hegemony through this, for Guan Zhong was precise in distinguishing names from realities. |
URN: ctp:lv-shi-chun-qiu/zheng-ming