| 中國哲學書電子化計劃 |
《非命中》 | 英文翻譯：W. P. Mei[?] | 電子圖書館 |
| 1 | 非命中: | 子墨子言曰：「凡出言談，由文學之為道也，則不可而不先立義法。若言而無義，譬猶立朝夕於員鈞之上也，則雖有巧工，必不能得正焉。然今天下之情偽，未可得而識也，故使言有三法。三法者何也？有本之者，有原之者，有用之者。於其本之也，考之天鬼之志，聖王之事；於其原之也，徵以先王之書；用之柰何，發而為刑。此言之三法也。 |
| Anti-Fatalism II: | Mozi said: To make any statement or to publish any doctrine, there must first be established some standard of judgment. To discuss without a standard is like determining the directions of sunrise and sunset on a revolving potter's wheel. Even skilful artisans could not get accurate results in that way. Now that the truth and error (of a doctrine) in the world is hard to tell, there must be three tests. What are the three tests? They are the test of its basis, the test of its verifiability, and the test of its applicability. To test the basis of a doctrine we shall examine the will of Heaven and spirits and the deeds of the sage-kings. To test its verifiability we shall go to the books of the early kings. As to its applicability it is to be tested by its use in the administration of justice and government. These then are the three tests of a doctrine. | |
| 2 | 非命中: |
今天下之士君子或以命為亡，我所以知命之有與亡者，以眾人耳目之情，知有與亡。有聞之，有見之，謂之有；莫之聞，莫之見，謂之亡。然胡 不1嘗考之百姓之情？自古以及今，生民以來者，亦嘗見命之物，聞命之聲者乎？則未嘗有也。若以百姓為愚不肖，耳目之情不足因而為法，然則胡不嘗考之諸侯之傳言流語乎？自古以及今，生民以來者，亦嘗有聞命之聲，見命之體者乎？則未嘗有也。然胡不嘗考之聖王之事？古之聖王，舉孝子而勸之事親，尊賢良而勸之為善，發憲布令以教誨， 明2賞罰以勸沮。若此，則亂者可使治，而危者可使安矣。若以為不然，昔者，桀之所亂，湯治之；紂之所亂，武王治之。此世不渝而民不改，上變政而民易教，其在湯武則治，其在桀紂則亂，安危治亂，在上之發政也，則豈可謂有命哉！夫曰有命云者亦不然矣。 |
| Anti-Fatalism II: |
Among the gentlemen of to-day some think there is fate, some think there is no fate. That I am able to judge whether there is fate or not is by the sense testimony of the multitude. If some have heard it and some have seen it I shall say there is fate. If none has heard it, if none has seen it, I shall say there is no fate. Why not then let us inquire into the sense testimony of the people? From antiquity to the present, since the beginning of man, has any seen such a thing as fate, or has heard the sound of fate? Of course, there is none. If the common people are considered stupid and their senses of hearing and sight unreliable, then why not inquire into the recorded statements of the feudal lords? But from antiquity to the present, since the beginning of man, has any of them heard the sound of fate or seen such a thing as fate? Of course, none of them has. Again, why not let us inquire into the deeds of the sage-kings? The ancient kings promoted the filial sons and encouraged them to continue to serve their parents, and respected the virtuous and gentle and encouraged them to continue to do good. They published their orders to instruct (the people), and made reward and punishment fair to encourage (the good) and obstruct (the evil). In this way confusion could be reduced to order and danger could be converted to peace. If anyone doubts this, let us recall: In ancient times the confusion of Jie was reduced to order by Tang, and that of Zhou by King Wu. Now, the times did not change and the people did not alter. Yet when the superior changed a regime the subordinates modified their conduct. Under Tang and Wu it was orderly, but under Jie and Zhou it was disorderly. Hence peace and danger, order and disorder, all depend on the government of the superior. How can it be said everything is according to fate? So, assertions about there being fate are quite false. 1. 不 : 舊脫。 孫詒讓《墨子閒詁》 | |
| 3 | 非命中: |
今夫有命者言曰：『我非作之後世也，自昔三代有若言以傳流矣。今故先生對之？』曰：夫有命者，不志昔也三代之聖善人與？意亡昔三代之暴不肖人也？何以知之？初之列士桀大夫，慎言知行，此上有以規諫其君長，下有以教順其百姓， 故上有以規諫其君長，下有以教順其百姓，1故上得其君長之賞，下得其百姓之譽。列士桀大夫聲聞不廢，流傳至今，而天下皆曰其力也 ，必不能曰我見命焉2。 |
| Anti-Fatalism II: |
The fatalists tell us: "This doctrine has not been invented by us in a late generation. Such a doctrine has appeared and been handed down since the Three Dynasties. Why do you, sir, now oppose it?" (In answer,) Mozi asked: Was it from the sages and good men of the Three Dynasties or from the wicked and the vicious of the Three Dynasties that the fatalistic doctrine came? How can we find this out? In the beginning secretaries and ministers were careful in speech and intelligent in conduct. They could persuade their ruler above and instruct the people below. Thus they obtained reward from their ruler and applause from the people. And the fame of those secretaries and ministers has come down to the present day. The whole world remarks: "This is the result of endeavour." And it will never say: "I see fate there." 1. 故上有以規諫其君長，下有以教順其百姓， : 刪除。 孫詒讓《墨子閒詁》 | |
| 4 | 非命中: |
是故昔者三代之暴王，不繆其耳目之淫，不慎其心志之辟，外之敺騁田獵畢弋，內沈於酒樂，1不顧其國家百姓之政。繁為無用，暴逆百姓，使下不親其上，是故國為虛厲，身在刑僇之中 ，必不能曰我見命焉2。 是故昔者三代之暴王，不繆其耳目之淫，不慎其心志之辟，外之敺騁田獵畢弋，內沈於酒樂，3 不肯曰：4『我5罷不肖，我為刑政不善』，必曰：『我命故且亡。』雖昔也三代之窮民，亦由此也。內之不能善事其親戚，外不能善事其君長，惡恭儉而好簡易，貪飲食而惰從事，衣食之財不足，使身至有饑寒凍餒之憂，必不能曰：『我罷不肖，我從事不疾』，必曰：『我命固且窮。』雖昔也三代之偽民，亦猶此也。繁飾有命，以教眾愚樸人久矣。聖王之患此也，故書之竹帛，琢之金石，於先王之書仲虺之告曰：『我聞有夏，人矯天命，布命于下，帝式是惡，用闕師。』此語夏王桀之執有命也，湯與仲虺共非之。先王之書太誓之言然曰：『紂夷之居，而不用事上帝，棄闕其先神而不祀也，曰：「我民有命，毋僇其務。」天不亦棄縱而不葆。』此言紂之執有命也，武王以太誓非也。有於三代不國有之曰：『女毋崇天之有命也。』命三不國亦言命之無也。於召公之執令於然，且：「『敬哉！無天命，惟予二人，而無造言，不自降天之哉得之。』在於商、夏之詩書曰：『命者暴王作之。』且今天下之士君子，將欲辯是非利害之故，當天有命者，不可不疾非也。」執有命者，此天下之厚害也，是故子墨子非也。 |
| Anti-Fatalism II: |
On the other hand, the wicked kings of the Three Dynasties did not control the lust of their ears and eyes and did not restrain the passions of their heart. When they went out they indulged in racing, hunting, and trapping. When they stayed indoors they revelled in wine and music. They did not attend to the government of the country and of the people, but they did much that was of no use. They oppressed the people, causing the subordinates not to love their superior. Hence the country became empty and without any future, and they themselves were in punishment and disaster. But they would not confess and say: "I am stupid and insolent and poor in administering the government." But they would say: "It is but my fate to perish." Even the miserable people of the Three Dynasties were like this. Within they could not well serve their parents, without they could not well serve their ruler. They disliked politeness and frugality but liked licence and ease. They indulged in drinking and eating and were lazy. The means of food and clothing became insufficient and they placed themselves in danger of hunger and cold. They would not confess: "I am stupid and insolent and was not diligent at work." But they would say: "It is but my fate to be poor." Such, then, also were the miserable people of the Three Dynasties. Fatalism has been glossed over and taught the stupid people. This was of great concern to the sage-kings, and they put it down on the bamboos and silk and cut it in metals and stone. Among the books of the early kings, "The Announcement of Zhong Hui" says: "I have heard the man of Xia issue orders, pretending them to be fate of Heaven. God was displeased and destroyed his forces." This shows how King Jie of Xia believed in fate and how both Tang and Zhong Hui thought it to be wrong. Among the books of early kings "The Great Declaration" says: "Zhou became insolent and would not worship God, and pushed away the ancestors and spirits without offering them sacrifices. And he said: 'Fortune is with my people,' and neglected and betrayed his duty. Heaven thereupon deserted him and withdrew its protection." This shows how Zhou believed in fate, and how King Wu proclaimed it to be wrong with "The Great Declaration." Again, "The Three Dynasties and Hundred States " says: " Do not place too much faith in the fate in Heaven." So "The Three Dynasties and Hundred States" also says there is no fate. Also "Shao Gong" in the same way discredits the belief in fate. It says: "Assuredly there is no fate in Heaven. Let us two not teach false doctrines. (One's destiny) does not come from Heaven, but is shaped by one's self." And it is said in the odes and books of Shang and Xia: "Fate is born of the wicked kings." So, then, if the gentlemen of the world desire to distinguish right and wrong, benefit and harm, fate of Heaven must be strenuously discredited. To hold there is fate is the great disaster of the world. And therefore Mozi refuted it. 1. 是故昔者三代之暴王，不繆其耳目之淫，不慎其心志之辟，外之敺騁田獵畢弋，內沈於酒樂， : 從第4條移到此處。 |
URN: ctp:mozi/anti-fatalism-ii