| Chinese Text Project | |
| Simplified Chinese version |
《卷九 - Book 9》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 33 | 卷九: | 非乐中 |
| Book 9: | Condemnation of Music II | |
| 34 | 卷九: | 非乐下 |
| Book 9: | Condemnation of Music III |
《非命上 - Anti-Fatalism I》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 1 | 非命上: | 子墨子言曰：“古者王公大人，为政国家者，皆欲国家之富，人民之众，刑政之治。然而不得富而得贫，不得众而得寡，不得治而得乱，则是本失其所欲，得其所恶，是故何也？”子墨子言曰：“执有命者以集于民闲者众。执有命者之言曰：‘命富则富，命贫则贫；命众则众，命寡则寡；命治则治，命乱则乱；命寿则寿，命夭则夭；命虽强劲，何益哉？’以上说王公大人，下以驵百姓之从事，故执有命者不仁。故当执有命者之言，不可不明辨。” |
| Anti-Fatalism I: | Mozi said: At present, in governing the states the rulers all desire to have their countries wealthy, their population large, and their administration orderly. But instead of wealth they obtain poverty, instead of an increase they obtain a decrease in population, instead of order they obtain chaos; i.e. they lose what they like but obtain what they dislike. What is the reason for this? Mozi said: It is due to the large number of fatalists among the people. The fatalists say: "When fate decrees that a man shall be wealthy he will be wealthy; when it decrees poverty, he will be poor; when it decrees a large population, this will be large; and when it decrees a small population this will be small; if order is decreed, there will be order; if chaos, there will be chaos. If fate decrees old age, there will be old age; if untimely death, there will be untimely death. Even if a man sets himself against his fate, what is the use?" With this doctrine the rulers are urged above and the people are kept away from their work below. Hence the fatalists are unmagnanimous. And their doctrines must be clearly examined. | |
| 2 | 非命上: | 然则明辨此之说将柰何哉？子墨子言曰：“必立仪，言而毋仪，譬犹运钧之上而立朝夕者也，是非利害之辨，不可得而明知也。故言必有三表。”何谓三表？子墨子言曰：“有本之者，有原之者，有用之者。于何本之？上本之于古者圣王之事。于何原之？下原察百姓耳目之实。于何用之？废以为刑政，观其中国家百姓人民之利。此所谓言有三表也。 |
| Anti-Fatalism I: | Now, how is this doctrine to be examined? Mozi said: Some standard of judgment must be established. To expound a doctrine without regard to the standard is similar to determining the directions of sunrise and sunset on a revolving potter's wheel. By this means the distinction of right and wrong, benefit and harm, cannot be known. Therefore there must be three tests. What are the three tests? Mozi said: Its basis, its verifiability, and its applicability. How is it to be based? It should be based on the deeds of the ancient sage-kings. How is it to be verified? It is to be verified by the senses of hearing and sight of the common people. How is it to be applied? It is to be applied by adopting it in government and observing its benefits to the country and the people. This is what is meant by the three tests of every doctrine. | |
| 3 | 非命上: | 然而今天下之士君子，或以命为有。盖尝尚观于圣王之事，古者桀之所乱，汤受而治之；纣之所乱，武王受而治之。此世未易民未渝，在于桀纣，则天下乱；在于汤武，则天下治，岂可谓有命哉！ |
| Anti-Fatalism I: | Some of the gentlemen of the world assume there to be fate. Now let us examine the deeds of the sage-kings. In ancient times, the confusion produced by Jie was replaced by an orderly government by Tang, the chaos of Zhou was turned into order by King Wu. The times did not alter and the people did not change, yet under Jie and Zhou the world was chaotic and under Tang and Wu it was orderly. Can it be said that there is fate? | |
| 4 | 非命上: |
然而今天下之士君子，或以命为有。盖尝尚观于先王之书，先王之书，所 以1出国家，布施百姓 者2，宪也。先王之宪，亦尝有曰‘福不可请，而祸不可讳，敬无益，暴无伤’者乎？所以听狱制罪者，刑也。先王之刑亦尝有曰‘福不可请，祸不可讳，敬无益，暴无伤’者乎？所以整设师旅，进退师徒者，誓也。先王之誓亦尝有曰：‘福不可请，祸不可讳，敬无益，暴无伤’者乎？”是故子墨子言曰：“吾当未盐数，天下之良书不可尽计数，大方论数，而五者是也。今虽毋求执有命者之言，不必得，不亦可错乎？今用执有命者之言，是覆天下之义，覆天下之义者，是立命者也，百姓之谇也。说百姓之谇者，是灭天下之人也”。然则所为欲义在上者，何也？曰：“义人在上，天下必治，上帝山川鬼神，必有干主，万民被其大利。”何以知之？子墨子曰：“古者汤封于亳，绝长继短，方地百里，与其百姓兼相爱，交相利，移则分。率其百姓，以上尊天事鬼，是以天鬼富之，诸侯与之，百姓亲之，贤士归之，未殁其世，而王天下，政诸侯。昔者文王封于岐周，“绝长继短，方地百里，与其百姓兼相爱、交相利，则，是以近者安其政，远者归其德。闻文王者，皆起而趋之。罢不肖股肱不利者，处而愿之曰：‘柰何乎使文王之地及我，吾则吾利，岂不亦犹文王之民也哉。’是以天鬼富之，诸侯与之，百姓亲之，贤士归之，未殁其世，而王天下，政诸侯。乡者言曰：义人在上，天下必治，上帝山川鬼神，必有干主，万民被其大利。吾用此知之。 |
| Anti-Fatalism I: |
But the gentlemen of the world still assume that there is fate. Now let us look at some of the writings of the early kings. The writings of the early kings that were issued to the whole country and distributed among the people were the laws. Did any of the laws of the early kings ever say: "Blessing cannot be invoked and disaster cannot be avoided; reverence will not do any good and cruelty will not do any harm"? The standards according to which lawsuits were tried and punishments were meted out were the codes of punishment. Did any of the codes of punishment of the early kings say: "Blessing cannot be invoked and disaster cannot be avoided; reverence will not do any good and cruelty will not do any harm"? The inspiration by which the armies were organized and the soldiers were commanded to advance or to retreat came from the declarations. Did any of the declarations of the early kings say: "Blessing cannot be invoked and disaster cannot be avoided; reverence will do no good and cruelty will do no harm"? Mozi said: I have not enumerated the good books of the empire completely. As they cannot be exhaustively enumerated, I limit myself to the most prominent ones, namely, the three above mentioned. And try as we may, we cannot find any belief in the doctrine of fatalism. Should it not then be abandoned? To adopt the fatalists' doctrine is to overthrow righteousness in the world. To overthrow righteousness in the world will establish fate, which is a temptation to the people. And to offer people temptation is to destroy the people. Now, why is it that we desire righteousness to be with the superiors? Because when the righteous are in authority, the world will have order, God, hills and rivers, and the spirits will have their chief sacrificer, and the people will be visited by the great blessings therefrom. How do we know? Mozi said: In ancient times, Tang was given a fief at Bo. Taking allowance for the irregular boundary lines, his land amounted to about a hundred li square. He worked with the people for mutual love and reciprocal benefit, and shared with them what was in abundance. And he led his people to reverence Heaven and worship the spirits. Thereupon, Heaven and the spirits enriched him, the feudal lords befriended him, the people loved him, and the virtuous came to him. Within a single generation he ruled over the empire and headed the feudal lords. Again in ancient times, King Wen was assigned to the state of Qi Zhou. Making allowance for the irregular boundary lines, his land amounted to about a hundred li square. He worked with his people for mutual love and reciprocal benefit. So those near him enjoyed his government and those distant submitted themselves to his virtues. All who heard of King Wen rose up and rushed over to him. The stupid and insolent and those weak in limbs remained where they were and complained: "Why not let the land of King Wen extend to this place. Wouldn't I then also be a subject of King Wen?" Thereupon Heaven and the spirits enriched him, the feudal lords befriended him, the people loved him and the virtuous came to him. Within a single generation he ruled over the whole empire and headed the feudal lords. As we have said: When the righteous are in authority the world will have order, God, hills and rivers, and the spirits will have their chief sacrificer, and the people will be visited by the great benefits therefrom. And this is how we know it to be so. 1. 以 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 5 | 非命上: | 是故古之圣王发宪出令，设以为赏罚以劝贤，是以入则孝慈于亲戚，出则弟长于乡里，坐处有度，出入有节，男女有辨。是故使治官府，则不盗窃，守城则不崩叛，君有难则死，出亡则送。此上之所赏，而百姓之所誉也。执有命者之言曰：‘上之所赏，命固且赏，非贤故赏也。上之所罚，命固且罚，不暴故罚也。’是故入则不慈孝于亲戚，出则不弟长于乡里，坐处不度，出入无节，男女无辨。是故治官府则盗窃，守城则崩叛，君有难则不死，出亡则不送。此上之所罚，百姓之所非毁也。执有命者言曰：‘上之所罚，命固且罚，不暴故罚也。上之所赏，命固且赏，非贤故赏也。’以此为君则不义，为臣则不忠，为父则不慈，为子则不孝，为兄则不良，为弟则不弟，而强执此者，此特凶言之所自生，而暴人之道也1。 |
| Anti-Fatalism I: |
The ancient sage-kings published laws and issued orders to be standards of reward and punishment, and to encourage the virtuous and to obstruct the evil. And so the people were filial to their parents at home and respectful to the elders in the village or the district. They observed propriety in conduct, moderation in going out and coming in, and decency between men and women. And when they were made to look after the court they would not steal, when they were made to defend a city they would not raise an insurrection. When the lord met with death they would commit suicide, and when the lord was banished they would follow him. This is what the superior will reward and what the people will applaud. Now, the fatalists say: "Whoever is rewarded by the superior is destined to be rewarded. It is not because of his virtue that he is rewarded. Whoever is punished by the superior is destined to be punished. It is not because of his vice that he is punished." Under these conditions the people would not be filial to their parents at home, and respectful to the elders in the village or the district. They would not observe propriety in conduct, moderation in going out and coming in, or decency between men and women. And, if they were made to look after the court they would steal, if they were made to defend a city they would raise an insurrection. If the lord met with death they would not commit suicide, and if the lord were banished they would not accompany him. This is what the superior will punish, and what the people will condemn. The fatalists say: "Whoever is punished by the superior is destined to be punished. It is not because of his vice that he is punished." Believing in this, the ruler would not be righteous, the minister would not be loyal, the father would not be affectionate, the son would not be filial, the elder brother would not be brotherly, and the younger brother would not be respectful. The unnatural adherence to this doctrine is responsible for pernicious ideas and is the way of the wicked. 1. 也 : Originally read: "昔". Corrected by 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 6 | 非命上: |
然则何以知命之为暴人之道？昔上世之穷民，贪于饮食，惰于从事，是以衣 食1之财不足，而饥寒冻馁之忧至，不知曰‘我罢不肖，从事不疾’，必曰‘我命固且贫’。昔上世暴王不忍其耳目之淫，心涂之辟，不顺其亲戚，遂以亡失国家，倾覆社稷，不知曰‘我罢不肖，为政不善’，必曰‘吾命固失之。’于仲虺之告曰：‘我闻于夏人，矫天命布命于下，帝伐之恶，龚丧厥师。’此言汤之所以非桀之执有命也。于太誓曰：‘纣夷处，不用事上帝鬼神，祸厥先神禔不祀，乃曰吾民有命，无廖排漏，天亦纵弃之而弗葆。’此言武王所以非纣执有命也。今用执有命者之言，则上不听治，下不从事。上不听治，则刑政乱；下不从事，则财用不足，上无以供粢盛酒醴，祭祀上帝鬼神， 下无以2降绥天下贤可之士，外无以应待诸侯之宾客，内无以食饥衣寒，将养老弱。故命上不利于天，中不利于鬼，下不利于人，而强执此者，此特凶言之所自生，而暴人之道也。” |
| Anti-Fatalism I: |
Now how do we know fatalism is the way of the wicked? In ancient times, the miserable people indulged in drinking and eating and were lazy in their work. Thereupon their food and clothing became insufficient, and the danger of hunger and cold was approaching. They did not acknowledge: "I was stupid and insolent and was not diligent at work." But they would say: "It is but my lot to be poor." The ancient wicked kings did not control the sensuality of their ears and eyes and the passions of their mind. They did not follow their ancestors and so they lost their country and ruined their state. They did not know that they should confess: "I am stupid and insolent and was not diligent in attending to government." But they would say: "It is but my fate to lose it." The "Announcement of Zhong Hui" says: "I have heard that the man of Xia issued orders, pretending them to be fate of Heaven. God was displeased and destroyed his forces." This tells how Tang showed Jie's belief in fate to be wrong. "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 tells how King Wu showed Zhou's belief in fate to be wrong. If the doctrine of the fatalist were put to practice, the superiors would not attend to government and the subordinates would not attend to work. If the superior does not attend to government, jurisdiction and administration will be in chaos. If the subordinates do not attend to work, wealth will not be sufficient. Then, there will not be wherewith to provide for the cakes and wine to worship and do sacrifice to God, ghosts and spirits above, and there will not be wherewith to tranquillize the virtuous of the world below; there will not be wherewith to entertain the noble guests from without, and there will not be wherewith to feed the hungry, clothe the cold, and care for the aged and weak within. Therefore fatalism is not helpful to Heaven above, nor to the spirits in the middle sphere, nor to man below. The eccentric belief in this doctrine is responsible for pernicious ideas and is the way of the wicked. 1. 食 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 7 | 非命上: | 是故子墨子言曰：“今天下之士君子，忠实欲天下之富而恶其贫，欲天下之治而恶其乱，执有命者之言，不可不非，此天下之大害也。” |
| Anti-Fatalism I: | Therefore Mozi said: If the gentlemen in the world really desire to have the world rich and do not want to have it poor, desire to have it orderly and dislike to have it in confusion, the doctrine of fatalism must be rejected. It is a great calamity to the world. |
《非命中 - Anti-Fatalism II》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 1 | 非命中: | 子墨子言曰：“凡出言谈，由文学之为道也，则不可而不先立义法。若言而无义，譬犹立朝夕于员钧之上也，则虽有巧工，必不能得正焉。然今天下之情伪，未可得而识也，故使言有三法。三法者何也？有本之者，有原之者，有用之者。于其本之也，考之天鬼之志，圣王之事；于其原之也，徵以先王之书；用之柰何，发而为刑。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为亡，我所以知命之有与亡者，以众人耳目之情，知有与亡。有闻之，有见之，谓之有；莫之闻，莫之见，谓之亡。然胡 不1尝考之百姓之情？自古以及今，生民以来者，亦尝见命之物，闻命之声者乎？则未尝有也。若以百姓为愚不肖，耳目之情不足因而为法，然则胡不尝考之诸侯之传言流语乎？自古以及今，生民以来者，亦尝有闻命之声，见命之体者乎？则未尝有也。然胡不尝考之圣王之事？古之圣王，举孝子而劝之事亲，尊贤良而劝之为善，发宪布令以教诲， 明2赏罚以劝沮。若此，则乱者可使治，而危者可使安矣。若以为不然，昔者，桀之所乱，汤治之；纣之所乱，武王治之。此世不渝而民不改，上变政而民易教，其在汤武则治，其在桀纣则乱，安危治乱，在上之发政也，则岂可谓有命哉！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 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 3 | 非命中: |
今夫有命者言曰：‘我非作之后世也，自昔三代有若言以传流矣。今故先生对之？’曰：夫有命者，不志昔也三代之圣善人与？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，此上有以规谏其君长，下有以教顺其百姓， 故上有以规谏其君长，下有以教顺其百姓，1故上得其君长之赏，下得其百姓之誉。列士桀大夫声闻不废，流传至今，而天下皆曰其力也 ，必不能曰我见命焉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. 故上有以规谏其君长，下有以教顺其百姓， : Deleted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 4 | 非命中: |
是故昔者三代之暴王，不缪其耳目之淫，不慎其心志之辟，外之驱骋田猎毕弋，内沈于酒乐，1不顾其国家百姓之政。繁为无用，暴逆百姓，使下不亲其上，是故国为虚厉，身在刑僇之中 ，必不能曰我见命焉2。 是故昔者三代之暴王，不缪其耳目之淫，不慎其心志之辟，外之驱骋田猎毕弋，内沈于酒乐，3 不肯曰：4‘我5罢不肖，我为刑政不善’，必曰：‘我命故且亡。’虽昔也三代之穷民，亦由此也。内之不能善事其亲戚，外不能善事其君长，恶恭俭而好简易，贪饮食而惰从事，衣食之财不足，使身至有饥寒冻馁之忧，必不能曰：‘我罢不肖，我从事不疾’，必曰：‘我命固且穷。’虽昔也三代之伪民，亦犹此也。繁饰有命，以教众愚朴人久矣。圣王之患此也，故书之竹帛，琢之金石，于先王之书仲虺之告曰：‘我闻有夏，人矫天命，布命于下，帝式是恶，用阙师。’此语夏王桀之执有命也，汤与仲虺共非之。先王之书太誓之言然曰：‘纣夷之居，而不用事上帝，弃阙其先神而不祀也，曰：“我民有命，毋僇其务。”天不亦弃纵而不葆。’此言纣之执有命也，武王以太誓非也。有于三代不国有之曰：‘女毋崇天之有命也。’命三不国亦言命之无也。于召公之执令于然，且：“‘敬哉！无天命，惟予二人，而无造言，不自降天之哉得之。’在于商、夏之诗书曰：‘命者暴王作之。’且今天下之士君子，将欲辩是非利害之故，当天有命者，不可不疾非也。”执有命者，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，不缪其耳目之淫，不慎其心志之辟，外之驱骋田猎毕弋，内沈于酒乐， : Moved here from entry 4. |
《非命下 - Anti-Fatalism III》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 1 | 非命下: |
子墨子言曰：“凡出言谈，则必可而不先立仪而言。若不先立仪而言，譬之犹运钧之上而立朝夕焉也。我以为虽有朝夕之辩，必将终未可得而从定也。是故言有三法。何谓三法？曰：有考之者， 有1原之者，有用之者。恶乎考之？考先圣大王之事。恶乎原之？察众之耳目之请？恶乎用之？发而为政乎国，察万民而观之。此谓三法也。 |
| Anti-Fatalism III: |
Mozi said: In order to expound a doctrine there must be established some standard of judgment. To expound without a standard is similar to determining the directions of sunrise and sunset on a potter's wheel that is turning. I should think even such obvious distinctions as that between the directions of sunrise and sunset cannot be thus determined. Therefore every doctrine must stand 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. How is it to be based? It is to be based on the deeds of the early sage-kings. How is it to be verified? It is to be verified by the testimony of the ears and eyes of the multitude. How is it to be applied? It is to be applied by being adopted in government and its effects on the people being shown. These are called the three tests. 1. 有 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 2 | 非命下: | 故昔者三代圣王禹汤文武方为政乎天下之时，曰：必务举孝子而劝之事亲，尊贤良之人而教之为善。是故出政施教，赏善罚暴。且以为若此，则天下之乱也，将属可得而治也，社稷之危也，将属可得而定也。若以为不然，昔桀之所乱，汤治之；纣之所乱，武王治之。当此之时，世不渝而民不易，上变政而民改俗。存乎桀纣而天下乱，存乎汤武而天下治。天下之治也，汤武之力也；天下之乱也，桀纣之罪也。若以此观之，夫安危治乱存乎上之为政也，则夫岂可谓有命哉！故昔者禹汤文武方为政乎天下之时，曰‘必使饥者得食，寒者得衣，劳者得息，乱者得治’，遂得光誉令问于天下。夫岂可以为命哉？故以为其力也！今贤良之人，尊贤而好功道术，故上得其王公大人之赏，下得其万民之誉，遂得光誉令问于天下。亦岂以为其命哉？又以为力也！然今夫有命者，不识昔也三代之圣善人与，意亡昔三代之暴不肖人与？若以说观之，则必非昔三代圣善人也，必暴不肖人也。然今以命为有者，昔三代暴王桀纣幽厉，贵为天子，富有天下，于此乎，不而矫其耳目之欲，而从其心意之辟，外之驱骋、田猎、毕弋，内湛于酒乐，而不顾其国家百姓之政，繁为无用，暴逆百姓，遂失其宗庙。其言不曰‘吾罢不肖，吾听治不强’，必曰‘吾命固将失之’。虽昔也三代罢不肖之民，亦犹此也。不能善事亲戚君长，甚恶恭俭而好简易，贪饮食而惰从事，衣食之财不足，是以身有陷乎饥寒冻馁之忧。其言不曰‘吾罢不肖，吾从事不强’，又曰‘吾命固将穷。’昔三代伪民亦犹此也。 |
| Anti-Fatalism III: | When the ancient sage-kings of the Three Dynasties, Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu, ruled, they said: "We must promote the filial sons and encourage them in serving their parents, and we must honour the virtuous and good men and instruct them in doing good." In this way they administered the government and published instructions, rewarded the good and punished the evil. It seems in this way the confusion in the world could be reduced to order, and the danger of the state could be transformed into safety. If this is doubted, (let us recall): In ancient times, the disorder of Jie was reduced to order by Tang, that of Zhou was reduced to order by King Wu. Then the times did not change nor did the people alter. Yet when the superior changed regime the subordinates modified their conduct. With Jie and Zhou the world was chaotic, under Tang and Wu it became orderly. That the world became orderly was due to the endeavour of Tang and Wu. That the world was chaotic was due to the sin of Jie and Zhou. Judging from this, safety and danger, order and chaos all depend on the way the superior conducts the government. How can it be said, there is fate? In ancient times when Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu ruled the empire, they said: "We must feed the hungry, clothe the cold, give the weary rest, and the disturbed peace." Thus their good name was heard all over the world. Can this be ascribed to fate? It is really due to endeavour. The virtuous and gentle of today respect virtue and pursue the ways and means (to benefit the world). Hence they are rewarded by the rulers above and praised by the people below. And their good name is heard all over the world. Can this be ascribed to fate? This is also due to their endeavour. Now, were those who believed in fate the sages of the Three Dynasties or the wicked of the Three Dynasties? Judging from the nature of this doctrine, it could not be the sages of the Three Dynasties, but must be the wicked that believed in fate. The ancient wicked kings of the Three Dynasties, Jie, Zhou, You, and Li, were honoured as emperors and possessed the whole world in wealth. Yet they could not control the sensuality of their ears and eyes, but gave rein to their passions. Going out they would race, hunt, and trap. Staying indoors they revelled in wine and music. They did not attend to the government of the country and the people, but did much that was of no use. And they oppressed and violated the people. Thus they lost their ancestral temple. They would not confess: "I am insolent and stupid. I did not attend to government diligently." But they would say: "It is but my fate that I lose it." Even the insolent people of the Three Dynasties were like this. They could not well serve their parents and their lord. They greatly hated politeness and frugality but liked licence and ease. They indulged in eating and drinking and were lazy at work. Their means of clothing and food became insufficient, and they incurred the danger of hunger and cold. They would not confess: "I am stupid and insolent, I am not diligent in my work." But they also said: "It is but my fate that I am poor." Thus the insolent people of the Three Dynasties also believed in fate. | |
| 3 | 非命下: |
昔者暴王作之，穷 人1术之，此皆疑众迟朴，先圣王之患之也，固在前矣。是以书之竹帛，镂之金石，琢之盘盂，传遗后世子孙。曰何书焉存？禹之总德有之曰：‘允不著，惟天民不而葆，既防凶心，天加之咎，不慎厥德，天命焉葆’？仲虺之告曰：‘我闻有夏，人矫天命，于下，帝式是增，用爽厥师。’彼用无为有，故谓矫，若有而谓有，夫岂为矫哉！昔者，桀执有命而行，汤为仲虺之告以非之。太誓之言也，于去发曰：‘恶乎君子！天有显德，其行甚章，为鉴不远，在彼殷王。谓人有命，谓敬不可行，谓祭无益，谓暴无伤，上帝不常，九有以亡，上帝不顺，祝降其丧，惟我有周，受之大帝。’昔者纣执有命而行，武王为太誓、去发以非之。曰：子胡不尚考之乎商周虞夏之记，从十简之篇以尚，皆无之，将何若者也？” |
| Anti-Fatalism III: |
The ancient wicked kings originated it and the miserable people practised it. It was shaking the convictions of the multitudes and converting the stupid. And this was already of great concern to the ancient sage-kings. They put it down on the bamboos and silk and cut it in metal and stone and engraved it on dishes and cups to be handed down to their descendants. In what books are they embodied? "Zong De" of Yu says: "When promises are not fulfilled even a subject of Heaven will not be protected. When one has touched the evil star, Heaven will visit him with its curse. When one is not careful about one's conduct, how can fate of Heaven protect him?" "The Announcement of Zhong Hui" says: "I have heard that the man of Xia issued orders, pretending them to be fate of Heaven. God was displeased and destroyed his armies." He made use of what did not exist as if it had existed, and therefore it was called pretension. If he declared to be existent what really existed, how would this be pretension? In ancient times, Jie believed in fate and acted accordingly. Tang here showed it to be wrong through "The Announcement of Zhong Hui." "The Great Declaration " says: "Therefore the Prince Regent Fa said: 'Ah, my lords, Heaven blesses the virtuous. Its way is clear. Example need not be sought far. It is in the King of Yin. He claimed each man had his own fate, worship should not be practised, sacrifices were of no avail, and wickedness could do no harm. God withdrew his blessing and the nine districts are lost to him. God is not pleased and is visiting him with ruin. Hence it is that our Zhou (the dynasty, the empire) is given by the Great God.'" That is, Zhou believed in fate and acted accordingly. King Wu refuted him in "The Great Declaration." So, why not examine the records of Yu, Xia, Shang, and Zhou, and see that all of them held there is no fate? How would you account for this? 1. 人 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 4 | 非命下: |
是故子墨子曰：“今天下之君子之为文学出言谈也，非将勤劳其惟舌，而利其唇呡也，中实将欲为其国家邑里万民刑政者也。今也王公大人之所以蚤朝晏退，听狱治政，终朝均分，而不敢 息1怠倦者，何也？曰：彼以为强必治，不强必乱；强必宁，不强必危，故不敢怠倦。今也卿大夫之所以竭股肱之力，殚其思虑之知，内治官府，外敛关市、山林、泽梁之利，以实官府，而不敢怠倦者，何也？曰：彼以为强必贵，不强必贱；强必荣，不强必辱，故不敢怠倦。今也农夫之所以蚤出暮入，强乎耕稼树艺，多聚叔粟，而不敢怠倦者，何也？曰：彼以为强必富，不强必贫；强必饱，不强必饥，故不敢怠倦。今也妇人之所 以2夙兴夜寐，强乎纺绩织紝，多治麻丝葛绪捆布縿，而不敢怠倦者，何也？曰：彼以为强必富，不强必贫，强必暖，不强必寒，故不敢怠倦。今虽毋在乎王公大人，蒉若信有命而致行之，则必怠乎听狱治政矣，卿大夫必怠乎治官府矣，农夫必怠乎耕稼树艺矣，妇人必怠乎纺绩织紝矣。王公大人怠乎听狱治政，卿大夫怠乎治官府，则我以为天下必乱矣。农夫怠乎耕稼树艺，妇人怠乎纺织绩紝，则我以为天下衣食之财将必不足矣。若以为政乎天下，上以事天鬼，天鬼不使；下以持养百姓，百姓不利，必离散不可得用也。是以入守则不固，出诛则不胜，故虽昔者三代暴王桀纣幽厉之所以共抎其国家，倾覆其社稷者，此也。”是故子墨子言曰：“今天下之士君子，中实将欲求兴天下之利，除天下之害，当若有命者 之3言 ，不可不强非4也。曰：命者，暴王所作，穷人所术，非仁者之言也。今之为仁义者，将不可不察而强非者，此也。” |
| Anti-Fatalism III: |
And Mozi said: In expounding a doctrine or elaborating a system the gentlemen of the world should not do it just to exercise their voice and tongue and practise their lips. It must aim at being applied in the government of the country, the district, and the people. Now the rulers go to court early and retire late, hearing lawsuits and attending to government and meting out justice for the whole day, and dare not be negligent. Why do they do this? They think diligence will bring about order, and negligence chaos; diligence will produce safety, and negligence danger. Therefore they dare not be negligent. The ministers and secretaries exhaust the energy in their limbs and stretch the wisdom of their minds within to look after the court and without to collect taxes from passes, markets, and products from mountains, woods, ponds, and fields to fill the treasury, and dare not be negligent. Why do they do this? They think diligence will procure honour and negligence dishonour; diligence will procure glory and negligence disgrace. Therefore they dare not be negligent. The farmers set out at daybreak and come back at dusk, diligently sowing seeds and planting trees to produce much soy beans and millet, and dare not be negligent. Why do they do this? They think diligence will result in wealth, and negligence in poverty; diligence will produce plenty, and negligence famine. Therefore they dare not be negligent. The women get up at dawn and retire in the night, diligently weaving and spinning to produce much silk, flax linen, and cloth, and dare not be negligent. Why do they do this? They think diligence will produce wealth and negligence poverty; diligence will produce warmth and negligence cold. Therefore they dare not be negligent. Now, if they should believe in fate and behave accordingly, the rulers would be negligent in hearing lawsuits and attending to government; the ministers and secretaries would be negligent in attending to court; the farmers would be negligent in sowing seeds and planting trees; the women would be negligent in weaving and spinning. When the rulers are negligent in hearing lawsuits and attending to government and the ministers and secretaries in attending to court, then I should think the world would be in chaos. When the farmers are negligent in sowing seeds and planting trees and the women in weaving and spinning, then according to my opinion clothing and food for the world will be insufficient. As to the result of the application of the doctrine of fatalism to the government of the empire, to worship Heaven and the spirits above with it Heaven and the spirits will not be pleased, and to nurture the people below with it they will not be benefited but will be demoralized and cannot be employed. And, within, defence will not be strong, and, without, attack will not be victorious. And that for which the wicked kings of the Three Dynasties, Jie, Zhou, You, and Li, lost their country and ruined their state was just this (doctrine). Therefore Mozi said: If the gentlemen of the world really desire to procure benefits for the world and destroy its calamities they cannot but vigorously refute the doctrine of fatalism. For fatalism was an invention of the wicked kings and the practice of miserable men. It was not a doctrine of the magnanimous. Therefore those who practise magnanimity and righteousness must examine it and vigorously refute it. 1. 息 : Deleted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 |
| 38 | 卷九: | 非儒上 |
| Book 9: | Anti-Confucianism I |
《非儒下 - Anti-Confucianism II》 | English translation: W. P. Mei [?] | Library Resources |
| 1 | 非儒下: |
儒者曰：“亲亲有术，尊贤有等。”言亲疏尊卑之异也。其礼曰：“丧父母三年，妻，后子三年，伯父叔父弟兄庶子其，戚族人五月。”若以亲疏为岁月之数，则亲者多而疏者少矣，是妻后子与父同也。若以尊卑为岁月数，则是尊其妻子与父母同，而亲伯父宗兄而卑子也，逆孰大焉。其亲死，列尸弗 敛1，登屋窥井，挑鼠穴，探涤器，而求其人矣。以为实在则赣愚甚矣；如其亡也必求焉，伪亦大矣！取妻，身迎，袨端为仆，秉辔授绥，如仰严亲，昏礼威仪，如承祭祀。颠覆上下，悖逆父母，下则妻子，妻子上侵事亲，若此可谓孝乎？儒者：“迎妻，妻之奉祭祀，子将守宗庙，故重之。”应之曰：“此诬言也，其宗兄守其先宗庙数十年，死丧之其，兄弟之妻奉其先之祭祀弗散，则丧妻子三年，必非以守奉祭祀也。夫忧妻子以大负絫，有曰‘所以重亲也’，为欲厚所至私，轻所至重，岂非大奸也哉！” |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: |
The Confucianist says: Love among relations should depend upon the degree of relationship, and honour to the virtuous should be graded. This is to advocate a discrimination among the near and the distant relations and among the respectable and the humble. But, according to his code of propriety: Mourning for the death of the parent should be three years; for the wife or the eldest son three years; for an uncle, a brother, or one of the other sons, a year; and for a near relative, five months. If the periods are based on the degree of relationship, evidently mourning for the closer relative should be longer and for the more distant shorter. Thus the wife and the eldest son are the same as the parents (in nearness). If the periods are based on degrees of respect which are severally due then it means that the wife and the eldest son are respected as much as the parents, and the uncles and brothers are placed on the same level with the other sons. What perversity can be greater than this? When his parent dies he first lets him lie there without dressing him for burial. He climbs on the roof, looks into the well, reaches into the rat holes, and searches in the washing basins to look for the dead man. Assuming that the man still exists this procedure is certainly stupid. If he does not exist this insistent search is the height of hypocrisy. When a Confucianist takes a wife, he has to escort her in person, dressed in ceremonial garments as a servant. He drives the cart himself, as if waiting on a revered parent. The dignity and solemnity of the marriage ceremony compare with that of sacrifice and worship. High and low are turned upside down. Father and mother are disobeyed. Parents are brought down to the level of the wife and the wife is exalted to interfere with service to parents. Can such conduct be called filial? The Confucianist tells us: "A wife is taken to share in continuing the worship and sacrifice (to ancestors) and the son will attend to the ancestral temple, therefore they are highly regarded." We answer him: This is all false representation. For, his brothers attend to the ancestral temple for tens of years. Yet when they die he will mourn for them only one year. The brothers' wives continue the worship and sacrifice of his ancestors. Yet, there is no mourning (upon their death) whatsoever. Then the three years' mourning for the death of his wife and eldest son is evidently not for the reason of their attending to the ancestral temple and continuing the worship and sacrifice. Now, to be partial to one's wife and son is already quite wayward. Yet the Confucianist pretends it to be for the sake of the parents. This is partiality to the most favourite but neglect of the most important. Isn't this great perversity? 1. 敛 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 2 | 非儒下: |
有强执有命以说议曰：“寿夭贫富，安危治乱，固有天命，不可损益。穷达赏罚幸否有极，人之知力，不能为焉。”群吏信之，则怠于分职；庶人信之，则怠于从事。 吏1不治则乱，农事缓则贫，贫且乱政之本，而儒者以为道教，是贼天下之人者也。 |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: |
Further, he holds tenaciously to the dogma of fate and argues: "Old age or early death, poverty or wealth, safety or danger, order or chaos are destined by the fate of Heaven and cannot be modified. Failure or success, reward or punishment, luck or adversity, are all settled; the wisdom and power of man can do nothing." When the different officers believe this they will neglect their several duties. When the common people believe this they will neglect their work. Lax government will lead to disorder; inefficient agriculture will lead to poverty. And poverty is the root of disorder and insurrections. Yet the Confucianists take this teaching about fate to be the Dao and the principle of life. This is to destroy the people of the empire. 1. 吏 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 3 | 非儒下: | 且夫繁饰礼乐以淫人，久丧伪哀以谩亲，立命缓贫而高浩居，倍本弃事而安怠傲，贪于饮食，惰于作务，陷于饥寒，危于冻馁，无以违之。是若人气，鼸鼠藏，而羝羊视，贲彘起。君子笑之。怒曰：“散人！焉知良儒。”夫夏乞麦禾，五谷既收，大丧是随，子姓皆从，得厌饮食，毕治数丧，足以至矣。因人之家翠，以为，恃人之野以为尊，富人有丧，乃大说，喜曰：“此衣食之端也。” |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: | Moreover, the Confucianist glosses over the elaborate ceremonials and music to make man extravagant; he extends mourning and pretends grief to cheat his parents. He introduces fate and causes poverty, and lives in idleness. He overthrows the fundamentals and avoids work, and is indolent and proud. Self-indulgent in drinking and eating and too lazy to work, he often suffers from hunger and cold and is in danger of freezing and starvation, without ability to avert them. He behaves like a beggar; grasps food like a hamster, gazes at things like a he-goat, and rises up like a wild boar. The gentlemen all laugh at him. He becomes angry and exclaims: "What does the undisciplined man know about the good Confucianist?" In spring and summer he begs for grains. When the five grains are all gathered in he resorts to the funerals. All the sons and grandsons are taken along and are filled with drink and food. It is sufficient for him to manage but a few funerals. He depends on others' houses for his wealth and uses others' fields to uphold his dignity. When a death takes place in a rich family he will rejoice greatly, for it is his opportunity for clothing and food. | |
| 4 | 非儒下: |
儒者曰：“君子必服古言然后仁。”应之曰：“所谓古之 言服1者，皆尝新矣，而古人 言之，2服之，则 非3君子也。然则必服非君子之服，言非君子之言，而后仁乎？” |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: |
The Confucianist says: "The superior man must be ancient in mode of speech and in dress before be can be magnanimous." We answer him: The so-called ancient speech and dress were all modern once. When the ancients first used that speech and wore that dress they would not be superior men (according to the Confucianists' criteria). Do you therefore mean to say that one has to wear the dress of the non-superior man and speak the speech of the non-superior man before he can be magnanimous? 1. 言服 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 5 | 非儒下: | 又曰：“君子循而不作。”应之曰：“古者羿作弓，伃作甲，奚仲作车，巧垂作舟，然则今之鲍函车匠皆君子也，而羿、伃、奚仲、巧垂皆小人邪？且其所循人必或作之，然则其所循皆小人道也？” |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: | Again, the Confucianist says: "The superior man conforms to the old but does not make innovations." We answer him: In antiquity Yi invented the bow, Yu invented armour, Xi Zhong invented vehicles, and Qiao Cui invented boats. Would he say, the tanners, armourers, and carpenters of to-day are all superior men, whereas Yi, Yu, Xi Zhong, and Qiao Cui were all ordinary men? Moreover, some of those whom he follows must have been inventors. Then his instructions are after all the ways of the ordinary men. | |
| 6 | 非儒下: | 又曰：“君子胜不逐奔，揜函弗射，施则助之胥车。”应之曰：“若皆仁人也，则无说而相与。仁人以其取舍是非之理相告，无故从有故也，弗知从有知也，无辞必服，见善必迁，何故相？若两暴交争，其胜者欲不逐奔，掩函弗射，施则助之胥车，虽尽能犹且不得为君子也。意暴残之国也，圣将为世除害，兴师诛罚，胜将因用儒术令士卒曰毋逐奔，揜函勿射，施则助之胥车。”暴乱之人也得活，天下害不除，是为群残父母，而深贱世也，不义莫大焉！” |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: | Again he says: "When the superior man is victorious he does not pursue the fleeing enemy. When the enemy is kept at bay he does not shoot. When the enemy retreat he will help them pushing their carts." We answer him: If the magnanimous are here referred to, they have no occasion for strife. The magnanimous remind each other of the principle of right and wrong and of what is to be accepted and what is to be rejected. He who has no cause follows him who has it. He who has no knowledge follows him who has knowledge. Running short of argument he would acknowledge defeat, seeing good he would be converted. How can there be any strife? If the contestants are both wicked, though the victor does not pursue the fleeing enemy, though he does not shoot the enemy at bay, though he helps pushing the enemy's carts in retreat - though he does all these, still he cannot be a superior man. On the other hand, suppose a sage starts out to destroy a curse on behalf of the empire. He raises an army to punish the wicked and cruel state. When he is victorious, let us suppose him to follow the Confucian way and command his army: "Don't pursue the fleeing enemy. Don't shoot when the enemy is at bay. Help them pushing the carts when they retreat." The wicked men will thus be set free and the curse of the world will not yet be removed. This is to harm the parents of the multitudes and greatly to ruin the world. Nothing can be more unrighteous! | |
| 7 | 非儒下: | 又曰：“君子若锺，击之则鸣，弗击不鸣。应之曰：“夫仁人事上竭忠，事亲得孝，务善则美，有过则谏，此为人臣之道也。今击之则鸣，弗击不鸣，隐知豫力，恬漠待问而后对，虽有君亲之大利，弗问不言，若将有大寇乱，盗贼将作，若机辟将发也，他人不知，己独知之，虽其君亲皆在，不问不言。是夫大乱之贼也！以是为人臣不忠，为子不孝，事兄不弟，交，遇人不贞良。夫执后不言之朝物，见利使己虽恐后言，君若言而未有利焉，则高拱下视，会噎为深，曰：‘唯其未之学也。’用谁急，遗行远矣。夫一道术学业仁义者，皆大以治人，小以任官，远施周偏，近以修身，不义不处，非理不行，务兴天下之利，曲直周旋，利则止，此君子之道也。以所闻孔丘之行，则本与此相反谬也。” |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: | Again the Confucianist says: "The superior man is like a bell. It will sound when it is struck. It will remain silent when it is not struck." We answer him: The magnanimous, in serving his superior, should be loyal, and in serving his parents, should be filial. When there is excellence (in the superior) he should adore, when there is fault he should give counsel. This is the way of a minister. Now, if one sounds only when struck, and remains silent when not struck, then he will hide his knowledge and spare his efforts, waiting to be questioned before he answers. Even if there is some great advantage at stake to the lord or parents, he will not speak up without being asked. And, if a great invasion or insurrection is approaching or a conspiracy is afoot, and none know it but he; yet even in the presence of his lord and parents he will not speak up without being questioned. What a criminal, producing confusion! Such a man will not be loyal as a minister, filial as a son, respectful in serving an elder brother or gentle in treating the people. When benefit is in sight, the only fear should be that counsel may be late. When the ruler starts something not beneficial, one should fold his hands high on the breast and look down and utter with difficulty: "This I have not learned." Upon emergency one should withdraw and set out on a long journey. For, every principle, doctrine, and standard of magnanimity and righteousness are to be used on the large scale to rule men and on the small scale to hoId office; widely, to exercise a universal influence and, narrowly, to cultivate one's person. What is not righteous should not be tolerated; what is not according to principle should not be practised. One should endeavour to procure benefits for the empire directly and indirectly, avoiding that which brings no profit: such is the way of the superior man. But what we hear of the conduct of Kong Qiu is diametrically opposed to this. | |
| 8 | 非儒下: | 齐景公问晏子曰：“孔子为人何如？”晏子不对，公又复问，不对。景公曰：“以孔丘语寡人者众矣，俱以贤人也。今寡人问之，而子不对，何也？”晏子对曰：“婴不肖，不足以知贤人。虽然，婴闻所谓贤人者，入人之国必务合其君臣之亲，而弭其上下之怨。孔丘之荆，知白公之谋，而奉之以石乞，君身几灭，而白公僇。婴闻贤人得上不虚，得下不危，言听于君必利人，教行下必于上，是以言明而易知也，行明而易1从也，行义可明乎民，谋虑可通乎君臣。今孔丘深虑同谋以奉贼，劳思尽知以行邪，劝下乱上，教臣杀君，非贤人之行也；入人之国而与人之贼，非义之类也；知人不忠，趣之为乱，非仁义之也。逃人而后谋，避人而后言，行义不可明于民，谋虑不可通于君臣，婴不知孔丘之有异于白公也，是以不对。”景公曰：“呜乎！贶寡人者众矣，非夫子，则吾终身不知孔丘之与白公同也。” |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: |
Lord Jing of Qi asked Yanzi: "What kind of a man is Confucius?" Yanzi answered not. The Lord reiterated the question and there was still no answer. Lord Jing said: "Many have told me about Kong Qiu and all said he was a virtuous man. Now that I am asking you about him, why should you not answer?" Yanzi replied: "Ying is not wise and cannot know virtuous men. Yet Ying has heard that a virtuous man must be one who, upon entering a state, will endeavour to bring about friendly relations between the ruler and the ministers and dissolve the grudges between superior and subordinates. This man Confucius once visited the state of Jing. He heard of the plans of Duke Bo and told them to Shi Qi. As a result, the lord almost perished and Duke Bo was executed. Ying has also heard that the virtuous man does not obtain confidence of the superior by flattery or that of the subordinates by threat. If his counsels are listened to by the lord they will benefit the people, if his instructions are followed by the subordinates they will benefit the superior. His speech is plain and easy to understand and his conduct is plain and easy to follow. His righteous conduct enlightens the people and his thoughtful counsel convinces the lord and his ministers. Now, this man Confucius with elaborate plans conspired with the rebels and with devious plots committed depravity. To persuade the subordinates to plot against their superior and tell the ministers to assassinate their lord is not the conduct of a virtuous man. To enter a country and join with its traitors is not akin to the righteous. To urge those who are known to be disloyal to revolt does not fit the way of the magnanimous. Plotting against one at a distance and condemning one behind his back, his conduct enlightening not the people and his counsel convincing not the lord - how Confucius is different from Duke Bo, your servant Ying does not see. This is why I did not answer you." Lord Jing said: "Oh! I have been benefited. If it were not for you, I would never in my life understand Kong Qiu to be of the same kind as Duke Bo." 1. 明而易 : Originally read: "易而". Corrected by 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 9 | 非儒下: |
孔丘之齐见景公，景公说，欲封之以尼溪，以告晏子。晏子曰：“不可夫儒浩居而自顺者也，不可以教下；好乐而淫人，不可使亲治；立命而怠事，不可使守职；宗丧循哀，不可使慈民；机服勉容，不可使导众。孔丘盛容修饰以蛊世，弦歌鼓舞以聚徒，繁登降之礼以示仪，务趋翔之节以观众，博学不可使议世，劳思不可 以补民1，絫寿不能尽其学，当年不能行其礼，积财不能赡其乐，繁饰邪术以营世君，盛为声乐以淫遇民，其道不可以期世，其学不可以导众。今君封之，以利齐俗，非所以导国先众。” 公曰：2“善！”于是 厚其3礼，留其封，敬见而不问其道。孔丘乃恚，怒于景公与晏子，乃树鸱夷子皮于田常之门，告南郭惠子以所欲为，归于鲁。有顷，闲齐将伐鲁，告子贡曰：“赐乎！举大事于今之时矣！”乃遣子贡之齐，因南郭惠子以见田常，劝之伐吴，以教高、国、鲍、晏，使毋得害田常之乱，劝越伐吴。三年之内，齐、吴破国之难，伏尸以言术数。孔丘之诛也。 |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: |
Kong Qiu visited the state of Qi and saw Lord Jing. Lord Jing was pleased and was going to assign Ni Xi to him. He told Yanzi about it. Yanzi said: "Please do not. A scholar of his school would sit crouching and take things easy, therefore he cannot be made to teach the subordinates. He likes music and will corrupt the people, and therefore cannot be trusted to govern. He believes in fate and will neglect his duty, therefore be cannot be given an office. He lays emphasis on mourning, and makes much of grief, therefore he cannot be made to take care of the people. He will be formal in dress and affected in manners, therefore he cannot lead the multitudes. Kong Qiu dresses elaborately and puts on adornments to mislead the people, promotes music and dancing to attract the multitudes, performs elaborate ceremonies of going up and coming down the steps, and practises the etiquette of rushing and soaring to dazzle the multitudes. With all his extensive learning he cannot plan for the world; with all his laborious thought he cannot help the people. A whole lifetime cannot exhaust his learning; the grown man cannot observe his ceremonies; and even the wealthy cannot enjoy his music. He elaborates and adorns his improper ways to keep the lords busy; he profusely furnishes sounds and music to corrupt the people. His principles cannot instruct the world; his learning cannot lead the multitudes. Now you, my lord, commission him to change the customs of Qi. It really is not the way to lead a country and bring forward the multitudes." The Lord said: "This is well." Thereupon the Lord gave him valuable gifts but retained the commission, received him with respect but did not inquire into his teaching. Kong Qiu became angry, angry with Lord Jing and Yanzi. So, he placed Chi Yi Ze Pi in the following of Tian Chang, and communicated his plans to Hui-tzu of the South City. Then he returned to Lu. Before long, Qi desired to attack Lu. He remarked to Zi Gong: "Oh, Ci, now is the time to do the great deed." Thereupon he sent Zi Gong to Qi and, through the introduction of Huizi of the South City, saw Tian Chang. Zi Gong persuaded him to attack Wu (instead of Lu). He also told Gao Guo Bao Yan not to interfere with Tian Chang's insurrection. Then he went on and persuaded Yue to attack Wu. For three years, both Qi and Wu were threatened with ruin. The bodies of those killed amounted to hundreds of thousands. And this was the revenge of Kong Qiu. 1. 以补民 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 10 | 非儒下: | 孔丘为鲁司寇，舍公家而奉季孙。季孙相鲁君而走，季孙与邑人争门关，决植。 |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: | Kong Qiu was once the Chief Justice of Lu. But he abandoned the cause of the lord and entered the service of Jisun. Jisun was the Chancellor of Lu but deserted his trust and ran away. As he was trying to force the gate against the guards, Kong Qiu lifted the beam (for him). | |
| 11 | 非儒下: |
孔丘穷于蔡陈之闲，藜羹不糁，十日，子路为享豚，孔丘不问肉之所由来而食；号人衣以酤酒，孔丘不问酒之所由来而饮。哀公迎孔子，席不端弗坐，割不正弗食，子路进，请曰：“何其与陈、蔡反也？”孔丘曰：“来！吾语女，曩与女为苟 生，今与女为苟1义。”夫饥约则不辞妄取，以活身，赢饱 则2伪行以自饰，污邪诈伪，孰大于此！ |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: |
Once, Kong Qiu was in straits between Cai and Chen having only vegetable soup without even rice to eat. After ten days of this, Zi Lu cooked a pig for him. Kong Qiu did not inquire whence the meat came, and ate. Zi Lu robbed some one of his garment and exchanged it for wine. Kong Qiu did not inquire whence the wine came, and drank. But when Lord Ai received Confucius, Confucius would not sit on a mat that was not placed straight and would not eat meat that was not cut properly. Zi Lu went to him and asked: "Why the reverse to what you did on the borders of Chen and Cai? Kong Qiu answered: "Come, let me tell you. Then, our goal was to keep alive. Now our goal is to behave righteously." Now when hunger-stricken he was not scrupulous about the means of keeping alive, and when satiated he acted hypocritically to appear refined. What foolery, perversion, villainy, and pretension can be greater than this! 1. 生，今与女为苟 : Inserted. 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 | |
| 12 | 非儒下: |
孔丘与其门弟子闲坐，曰：“夫舜见瞽叟孰然1，此时天下圾乎！周公旦非其人也邪？何为舍其家室而托寓也？”孔丘所行，心术所至也。其徒属弟子皆效孔丘。子贡、季路辅孔悝 乱2乎卫，阳货乱乎齐，佛肸以中牟叛，桼雕刑残，莫大焉。夫为弟子后生，其师，必修其言，法其行，力不足，知弗及而后已。今孔丘之行如此，儒士则可以疑矣。 |
| Anti-Confucianism II:...: |
Kong Qiu was lounging with his disciples. He remarked: "When Shun saw Gu Sou, he felt uneasy. The empire at the time must be in danger. Was not Dan, the Duke of Zhou, unmagnanimous? Why did he resign from his public office and retire to his private home? This shows Kong Qiu's conduct and the attitude of his mind. His followers and disciples all imitated him: Zi Gong and Ji Lu assisted Kong Li and committed high treason against the state of Wei. Yang Huo rebelled against Qi. Bi Xi was entrusted with Zhong Mou and became independent. Qi Diao had a ferocious appearance. Nothing can be more... than this! Of course the disciples and pupils, following a teacher, will advocate his doctrines and imitate his conduct. Only, they are not as powerful and not as clever. Now, since such was the conduct of Kong Qiu, the Confucian scholars are naturally to be objects of suspicion. 1. 孰然 : Originally read: "然就". Corrected by 孙诒让《墨子闲诂》 |
URN: ctp:mozi/book-9