Chuan Xi Lu (傳習錄)

先生於大學格物諸說，悉以舊本為正，蓋先儒所謂誤本者也。愛始聞而駭，既而疑，已而殫精竭思。參互錯綜，以質於先生，然後知先生之說，若水之寒，若火之熱，斷斷乎百世以俟聖人而不惑者也。先生明睿天授，然和樂坦易，不事邊幅。人見其少時豪邁不羈，又嘗氾濫於詞章，出入二氏之學。驟聞是說，皆目以為立異好奇，漫不省究。不知先生居夷三載，處困萶桌取精一之功，固已超入聖域，粹然大中至正之歸矣。愛朝夕炙門下，但見先生之道，即之若易，而仰之愈高。見之若粗，而探之愈精。就之若近，而造之愈益無窮。十餘年來，竟未能窺其藩籬。世之君子，或與先生僅交一面，或猶未聞其韾欬，或先懷忽易憤潡之心，而遠欲於立談之間，傳聞之說，臆斷懸度。如之何其可得也？從遊之士，聞先生之教，往往得一而遺二。見其牝牡驪黃，而棄其所謂千里者。故愛備錄平日之所聞，私以示夫同志，相與考正之。庶無負先生之教雲。門人徐愛書。以下門人徐愛錄。

On every point of the "investigation of things" (ge wu, probing the matters one faces and rectifying the mind regarding them) in the Great Learning, the Master (Wang Shouren) takes the old text as correct, which is the very text earlier Confucians called mistaken. When I, Xu Ai, first heard this, I was startled; then I doubted; afterward I gave it my full effort, comparing and cross-checking, and brought it to the Master for instruction. Only then did I understand that the Master's teaching is like the coldness of water and the heat of fire: it can certainly wait a hundred generations for a sage to appear and still not be refuted. The Master's clear insight is a gift of Heaven, yet he is genial and easygoing and does not care about outward appearances. When people saw that in his youth he was bold and unrestrained, and that he had once been immersed in literary composition and had moved in and out of Buddhist and Daoist studies, on suddenly hearing this teaching they all took it as a love of being different and of novelty, and brushed it off casually. They did not know that the Master, during three years of demotion among the barbarians, had cultivated the work of refinement and unity amid hardship (the base text has a doubtful reading here), and had already gone beyond and entered the realm of sages, returning wholly to the great mean and perfect uprightness. Morning and evening I received his teaching at his gate, and I saw only that the Master's Way, approached, seems easy but looked up to is ever higher; seen, seems coarse but probed is ever finer; drawn near, seems not far but truly reached is ever more boundless. In more than ten years, I have not yet been able even to glimpse its outer fence. Gentlemen of the world, some have only met the Master once, some have not yet heard even his cough, and some, harboring contempt or indignation at the outset, want to conjecture and guess from afar on the basis of a brief conversation or hearsay; how could they possibly attain it? The scholars who follow and associate with him, in listening to the Master's teaching, often get one and miss two; they see the outer look of the mare or stallion, the black or the yellow, and lose the true meaning of what is called the thousand-li horse. So I have recorded what I heard from day to day, one item after another, and privately shown it to like-minded friends, so that we may correct each other, hoping not to fail the Master's teaching. Written by his disciple Xu Ai. What follows was recorded by his disciple Xu Ai.

○愛問，「『在親民』，朱子謂當作新民。後章『作新民』之文似亦有據。先生以為宜從舊本『作親民』，亦有所據否」？先生曰，「『作新民』之『新』，是自新之民，與『在新民』之『新』不同。此豈足為據？『作』字卻與『親』字相對。然非『親』字義。下面治國平天下處，皆於『新』字無發明。如雲『君子賢其賢而親其親。小人樂其樂而利其利』。『如保赤子』。『民之所好好之。民之所惡惡之。此之謂民之父母之類』。皆是『親』字意。『親民』猶孟子『親親仁民』之謂。親之即仁之也。百姓不親，舜使契為司徒，敬敷五教，所以親之也。堯典『克明峻德』便是『明明德』。『以親九族』，至『平章協和』，便是『親民』，便是『明明德於天下』。又如孔子言『修己以安百姓』。『修己』便是『明明德』。『安百姓』便是『親民』。說親民便是兼教養意。說新民便覺偏了」。

Xu Ai asked: "As for 'being in loving the people', Master Zhu said it should read 'renewing the people'. The text 'to arouse the people to renew themselves' in a later chapter also seems to give support. You, Master, think we should follow the old text and write 'loving the people'; is there support for that too?" The Master said: "The 'renew' in 'to renew the people' means a people renewing themselves, which is different from the 'renew' in 'in renewing the people'. How is this enough to serve as evidence? The word 'arouse' does correspond to the word 'love', but it does not mean 'love'. In the passages below on governing the state and bringing peace to the world, nowhere is the word 'renew' elaborated. For example, such statements as 'the gentleman honors what is worthy and loves those he is close to, the petty man enjoys what is enjoyable and profits from what is profitable', 'as if protecting an infant', and 'what the people like, he likes; what the people hate, he hates; this is called being the father and mother of the people' all carry the meaning of 'love'. 'Loving the people' is like Mencius's 'loving one's kin and being benevolent to the people'. To love them is to be benevolent to them. When the hundred families were not close and harmonious, Shun sent Xie to be Minister of Instruction and respectfully spread the five teachings, which was the way of making them close. The phrase in the Canon of Yao, 'able to make bright his lofty virtue', is 'making bright the bright virtue' (bringing out the inborn luminous virtue). From 'to make close the nine branches of kin' to 'bringing clarity and harmony', this is 'loving the people', and this is 'making bright the bright virtue throughout the world'. It is also like Confucius saying 'cultivate oneself so as to bring peace to the people'. 'Cultivate oneself' is 'making bright the bright virtue'. 'Bring peace to the people' is 'loving the people'. To say 'loving the people' includes both teaching and nurturing; to say 'renewing the people' feels one-sided."

○愛問，「『知止而後有定』，朱子以為『事事物物皆有定理』，似與先生之說相戾」。先生曰，「於事事物物上求至善，卻是義外也。至善是心之本體。只是明明德到至精至一處便是。然亦未嘗離卻事物。本注所謂『盡夫天理之極，而無一毫人慾之私』者，得之」。

Xu Ai asked: "As for 'knowing where to rest, and then there is steadiness', Master Zhu took it to mean 'every affair and every thing has its fixed principle', which seems the opposite of what you say, Master." The Master said: "To seek the highest good in each affair and each thing is to treat righteousness as something outside. The highest good is the original substance of the mind. It is simply where making bright the bright virtue reaches the utmost refinement and unity. Yet it has never been apart from affairs and things. The old commentary, 'exhausting the ultimate of Heavenly principle without a trace of private human desire,' is correct."

○愛問，「至善只求諸心。恐於天下事理，有不能盡」。先生曰，「心即埋也。天下又有心外之事，心外之理乎」？愛曰，「如事父之孝，事君之忠，交友之信，治民之仁，其間有許多理在。恐亦不可不察」。先生嘆曰，「此說之蔽久矣。豈一語所能悟？今姑就所問者言之。且如事父，不成去父上求個孝的理。事君，不成去君上求個忠的理交友治民，不成去友上民上求個信與仁的理。都只在此心。心即理也。此心無私慾之蔽，即是天理。不頂外面添一分。以此純乎天理之心，發之事父便是孝。發之事君便是忠。發之交友治民便是信與仁。只在此心去人慾存天理上用功便是」。愛曰，「聞先生如此說，愛已覺有省悟處。但舊說纏於胸中，尚有未脫然者。如事父一事，其間溫凊定省之類，有許叫多節目。不知亦須講求否」？先生曰，「如何不講求？只是有個頭腦。只是就此心去人慾存天理上講求。就如講求冬溫，也只是要盡此心之孝，恐怕有一毫人慾間雜。講求夏清，也只是要盡此心之孝，恐怕有一毫人慾間雜。只是講求得此心。此心若無人慾，純是天理，是個誠於孝親的心，冬時自然思量父母的寒，便自要求個溫的道理。夏時自然思量父母的熱，便自要求個清的道理。這都是那誠孝的心發出來的條件。卻是須有這誠孝的心，然後有這條件發出來。譬之樹木，這誠孝的心便便是根。許多條件便枝葉。須先有根，然後有枝葉。不是先尋了枝葉，然後去種根。禮記言『孝子之有深愛者，必有和氣。有和氣者，必有欲愉色。有愉色者，必有婉容』。須是有個深愛做根，便自然如此」。

Xu Ai asked: "If one seeks the highest good only in the mind, I fear that there will be principles of the world's affairs that cannot be exhausted." The Master said: "The mind is principle (the original substance of the mind is Heavenly principle, and one need not seek it outside the mind). Are there still affairs outside the mind, or principles outside the mind?" Xu Ai said: "For example, the filial piety in serving one's father, the loyalty in serving one's ruler, the good faith in friendship and the benevolence in governing the people: there are many principles in them, and I fear they cannot go unexamined." The Master sighed and said: "This way of speaking has obstructed people for a long time; how could one saying awaken it? Let me take up what you asked. For example, in serving one's father, does one go to the father to look for a principle of filial piety? In serving one's ruler, does one go to the ruler to look for a principle of loyalty? In friendship and governing the people, does one go to friends and the people to look for principles of good faith and benevolence? It is all just in this mind. The mind is principle. When this mind has no obscuring by selfish desire, it is Heavenly principle, and not a bit needs adding from outside. Take this mind that is purely Heavenly principle and put it to use in serving one's father, and it is filial piety; put it to use in serving one's ruler, and it is loyalty; put it to use in friendship and governing the people, and it is good faith and benevolence. One simply works on this mind, removing human desire and preserving Heavenly principle." Xu Ai said: "Hearing you say this, Master, I already feel some awakening. But old views are still tangled in my chest and I have not fully broken free. Take serving one's father: in it there are many particulars such as keeping him warm in winter, cool in summer, and attending to his bed morning and evening. Must one study these as well?" The Master said: "How could one not study them? There is only a main point. One studies them only in terms of removing human desire and preserving Heavenly principle in this mind. For example, to study warmth in winter is only to want to fully express the filial piety of this mind, fearing that a trace of human desire may be mixed in. To study coolness in summer is likewise only to want to fully express the filial piety of this mind, fearing that a trace of human desire may be mixed in. It is only a matter of studying this mind. If this mind has no human desire and is purely Heavenly principle, being a mind sincere in filial love, then in winter it naturally thinks of the cold of one's parents and naturally seeks the way of warmth; in summer it naturally thinks of their heat and naturally seeks the way of coolness. These are all particulars that issue from that sincere filial mind. But there must first be this sincere filial mind, and then these particulars issue from it. It is like a tree: this sincere filial mind is the root, and the many particulars are the branches and leaves. There must first be the root, and then branches and leaves. It is not that one first looks for branches and leaves and then goes to plant the root. The Book of Rites says: 'A filial son with deep love must have a harmonious air; one with a harmonious air must have a pleasant look; one with a pleasant look must have a gentle bearing.' There must be deep love as the root, and then it is naturally so."

○鄭朝朔問，「至善亦須有從事物上求者」，先生曰，「至善只是此心純乎天理之極便是。更於事物上怎生求？且試說幾件看」。朝朔曰，「且如事親，如何而為溫清之節，如何而為奉養之宜，須求個是當，方是至善。所以有學問思辨之功」。先生曰，「若只是溫清之節，奉養之宜，可一日二日講之而盡。用得甚學問思辨？惟於溫清時，也只要此心純乎天理之極。奉養時，也只要此心純乎天理之極。此則非有學問思辨之功，將不免於毫釐千里之繆。所以雖在聖人，猶加精一之訓。若只是那些儀節求得是當，便謂至善，即如今扮戲子扮得許多溫清奉養得儀節是當，亦可謂之至善矣」。愛於是日又有省。

Zheng Chaoshuo asked: "Surely the highest good must also be sought in affairs and things?" The Master said: "The highest good is simply the utmost of this mind being purely Heavenly principle. How would one seek it again in affairs and things? Let us try citing a few and see." Chaoshuo said: "For example, in serving one's parents, what is the proper measure of keeping them warm and cool, and what is the fitting way to nourish them; one must seek what is right, and only then is it the highest good. That is why there is the work of study, inquiry, reflection and discernment." The Master said: "If it were only the measure of warmth and coolness and the fitting way of nourishing, it could be finished in a day or two. What would one need study, inquiry, reflection and discernment for? It is precisely that, when keeping them warm and cool, one needs only that the mind be purely Heavenly principle to the utmost; when nourishing them, one needs only that the mind be purely Heavenly principle to the utmost. If this were not the work of study, inquiry, reflection and discernment, one would inevitably be off by a thousand li for a hair's breadth. That is why even with sages, the admonition of refinement and unity was added. If one simply gets those ceremonies right and calls that the highest good, then when today's actors perform many ceremonies of warming, cooling and nourishing correctly, that too could be called the highest good." On this day Xu Ai had another awakening.

○愛因未會先生知行合一之訓，與宗賢惟賢往復辯論，未能決。以問於先生。先生曰，「試舉看」。愛曰，「如今人盡有知得父當孝，兄當弟者，卻不能孝，不能弟。便是知與行分明是兩件」。先生曰，「此已被私慾隔斷，不是知行的本體了。未有而不行耆。知而不行，只是未和聖蕢教人知行，正是要復那本體。不是著你只恁的便罷。故大學指個真知行與人看，說『如好好色』，『如惡惡臭』。見好色屬知，好好色屬行。只見那好色時，已自好了。不是見了後，又立個心去好。聞惡臭屬知，惡惡臭屬行。只聞那惡臭時，已自惡了。不是聞了後，別立個心去惡。如鼻塞人雖貝惡臭在前，鼻中不曾聞得，便亦不甚惡。亦只是不曾知臭。就如稱某人知孝，某人知弟。必是其人已曾行孝行弟，方可稱他知孝知弟。不成只是曉得說些孝弟的話，便可稱為知孝弟。又如知痛，必已自痛了，方知痛。知寒，必已自寒了。知飢，必已自磯了。知行如何分得開？此便是知行的本體，不曾有私意隔斷的。聖人教人，必要是如此，方可謂之知。，不然，只是不曾知。此卻是何等緊切著實的工夫。如今苫苫定要說知行做兩個，是甚麼意？。某要說做一個，是什麼意？若不知立言宗旨。只管說一個兩個，亦有甚用」？愛曰，「古人說知行做兩個，亦是要人見個分曉一行做知的功夫，一行做行的功夫，即功夫始有下落」。先生曰，「此卻失了古人宗旨也。某嘗說知是行的主意。行是知的功夫。知是行之始。行是知之成。若會得時，只說一個知，已自有行在。只說一個行，已自有知在。古人所以既說一個知，又說一個行者，只為七間有一種人，懵懵懂懂的任意去做，全不解思惟省察。也只是個冥行妄作。所以必說個知，方才行得是。又有一種人，茫茫蕩蕩，懸空去思一索。全不肯著實躬行。也只是個揣摸影響。

Because Xu Ai had not yet grasped the Master's teaching of the unity of knowing and acting (knowing and acting are originally one thing; it is not that one first knows and then goes and acts), he debated back and forth with Zongxian and Weixian without reaching a decision, and brought the question to the Master. The Master said: "Try giving an example." Xu Ai said: "Today there are many people who know that a father should be served with filial piety and an elder brother with respect, but cannot be filial or respectful. That makes it clear that knowing and acting are two things." The Master said: "That is already cut off by selfish desire and is not the original substance of knowing and acting. There has never been anyone who knows and does not act. Knowing without acting is simply not yet knowing. When the sages and worthies taught people about knowing and acting, it was precisely to restore that original substance, not to tell you to leave it at this. So the Great Learning points to a true knowing and acting for people to see, saying 'as one loves a beautiful color' and 'as one hates a foul odor'. Seeing a beautiful color belongs to knowing, and loving the beautiful color belongs to acting. At the very moment of seeing that beautiful color, one has already loved it; it is not that after seeing it one sets up another mind to love it. Smelling a foul odor belongs to knowing, and hating the foul odor belongs to acting. At the very moment of smelling the foul odor, one has already hated it; it is not that after smelling it one sets up another mind to hate it. Take someone with a blocked nose: even if he sees the foul thing right in front of him, if his nose does not smell it, he does not much hate it, and that too is simply not having known the odor. It is like saying that someone knows filial piety or knows brotherly respect: the person must already have practiced filial piety and brotherly respect before he can be said to know them. Could one be said to know filial piety and brotherly respect merely by knowing how to say some words about them? Or take knowing pain: one must already be in pain oneself in order to know pain. To know cold, one must already be cold oneself. To know hunger, one must already be hungry oneself. How can knowing and acting be separated? This is the original substance of knowing and acting, which has never been cut off by selfish intentions. When the sages taught people, it had to be so before it could be called knowing. Otherwise it is simply not yet knowing. What urgent, solid work this is! Why do people today insist so doggedly on saying that knowing and acting are two? And what is my aim in saying they are one? If one does not know the purpose of the statement, and merely goes on saying one or two, what use is it?" Xu Ai said: "When the ancients spoke of knowing and acting as two, they also wanted people to see clearly: on one side doing the work of knowing and on the other the work of acting, so that the work has a place to land." The Master said: "That loses the purpose of the ancients. I have said before: knowing is the guiding intent of acting, and acting is the work of knowing; knowing is the beginning of acting, and acting is the completion of knowing. If one understands this, then saying just one word, knowing, already includes acting; saying just one word, acting, already includes knowing. The reason the ancients said both knowing and acting is that there is a type of person who, dim and muddled, acts as he pleases with no understanding of reflection or self-examination, and is merely acting blindly and rashly, so one must speak of knowing for his acting to be right. And there is another type who, vague and drifting, thinks in thin air and is not willing to practice in earnest, and merely gropes at shadows and echoes.

所以必說一個行，方才知得真。此是古人不得已，補偏救弊的說話。若見得這個意時，即一言而足。今人卻就將知行分作兩件去做。以為必先知了，然後能行。我如今且去講習討論做知的工夫。待知得真了，方去做行的工夫。故遂終身不行，亦遂終身不知。此不是小病痛，其來已非一日矣。某今說個知行合一，正是對病的藥。又不是某鑿空杜撰。知行本體，原是如此。今若知得宗旨時，即說兩個亦不妨。亦只是一個。若不會宗旨，便說一個，亦濟得甚事？只是閒說話」。

(The Master continued:) So one must speak of acting for knowing to be real. This was a word of the ancients out of necessity, to supplement one side and rescue a defect. If one sees this meaning, then one word is enough. People today, however, split knowing and acting into two separate things, thinking that one must first know and then be able to act. 'For now I will go and study, discuss and work at knowing, and when I truly know, then I will go and work at acting.' So for a whole life they do not act, and for a whole life they do not know. This is no minor sickness, and its origin is not of one day. My teaching now of the unity of knowing and acting is precisely the medicine for this sickness. Nor is it something I made up out of thin air. The original substance of knowing and acting has always been so. Now if one grasps the purpose, then even saying two does no harm, for it is still only one. If one does not understand the purpose, then even saying one, what does it accomplish? It is merely idle talk."

○愛問，「昨聞先生止至善之教，已覺功夫有用力處。但礜宋子格物之訓思之終不能合」。先生曰，「格物是止至善之功。既知至善，即知格物矣」。愛曰，「昨以先生之教，推之格物之說，似亦見得大略。但朱子之訓，其於書之『精一』，論語之『博約』，孟子之『盡心知性』，皆有所證據。以是未能釋然」。先生曰，「子夏篤信聖人。曾子反求諸己。篤信固亦是，然不如反求之切。今既不得於心，安可狃於舊聞，不求是當？就如朱子亦尊信程子。至其不得於心處，亦何嘗茍從？精一博約盡心，本自與吾說﹝吻﹞合，但未之思耳。朱子格物之訓，未免牽合附會。非其本旨。精是一之功，博是約之功。曰仁既明知行合一之說，此可一言而喻。盡心知性知天，是生知安行事。存心養性事天，是學知利行事。『夭壽不貳，修身以俟』，是困知勉行事。朱子錯訓格物。只為倒看了此意，以盡心知性為物格知至，要初學便去做生知安行事。如何做得」？愛問，「盡心知性，何以為生知安行」？先生曰，「性是心之體。天是性之原。盡心即是儘性。『惟天下至誠為能盡其性，知天地之化育』，存心者，心有未盡也。知天如知州知縣之知，是自己分上事。己與天為二事天如子之事父，臣之事君。須是恭敬奉承，然後能無失。尚與天為二。此便是聖贀之別。至於夭壽不貳其心，乃是敢學者一心為善。不可以窮通夭壽之故，便把為善的心變動了。只去修身以俟命，見得窮通壽夭，有個命在。我亦不必以此動心。事天雖與天為二，已自見得個天在面前。俟命，便是未曾見面，在此等候相似。此便是初學立心之始，有個困勉的意在。今卻倒做了，所以使學者無下手處」。愛曰，「昨聞先生之教。亦影影見得功夫須是如此。今聞此說，益無可疑。愛昨曉思，格物的『物』字，即是『事』字。皆從心上說」。先生曰，「然。

Xu Ai asked: "Yesterday, hearing your teaching on resting in the highest good, I already felt there was a place to apply effort. But when I think about Master Zhu's explanation of the investigation of things, I still cannot make them fit." The Master said: "The investigation of things is the work of resting in the highest good. Once one knows the highest good, one knows the investigation of things." Xu Ai said: "Yesterday, using your teaching to extend to the theory of the investigation of things, I seemed to see it in outline. But Master Zhu's explanation has support in the 'refinement and unity' of the Book of Documents, the 'broad study and restraint' of the Analects, and Mencius's 'exhausting the mind to know the nature', so I am still not at ease." The Master said: "Zixia placed firm trust in the sage, while Master Zeng looked back into himself. Firm trust is certainly right, but it is not as close to the mark as looking back into oneself. Now that one does not find it satisfactory in one's own mind, how can one cling to old hearsay and not seek what is right? Even Master Zhu honored and trusted the Cheng brothers, but where he did not find it satisfactory in his own mind, did he ever follow them carelessly? Refinement and unity, broad study and restraint, and exhausting the mind were originally in accord with my teaching; it is only that one has not thought about it. Master Zhu's explanation of the investigation of things is somewhat forced and far-fetched, and not the original intent. Refinement is the work of unity, and broad study is the work of restraint. Since you already understand the teaching of the unity of knowing and acting, this can be understood in a single sentence. Exhausting the mind, knowing the nature and knowing Heaven are matters of those who know by birth and act with ease. Preserving the mind, nourishing the nature and serving Heaven are matters of those who know by study and act for benefit. 'Not wavering over short life or long, but cultivating oneself and awaiting what comes' are matters of those who know through hardship and act with effort. Master Zhu misread the investigation of things precisely because he looked at this meaning upside down, treating exhausting the mind and knowing the nature as things investigated and knowledge attained, and demanding that beginners do the work of those who know by birth and act with ease; how can this be done?" Xu Ai asked: "Why is exhausting the mind and knowing the nature the work of those who know by birth and act with ease?" The Master said: "The nature is the substance of the mind, and Heaven is the source of the nature. To exhaust the mind is to exhaust the nature. 'Only the one in the world who is perfectly sincere can fully express his nature and know the transforming and nourishing of Heaven and Earth.' Preserving the mind means the mind has not yet been fully exhausted. Knowing Heaven is like the 'know' in 'prefect who knows the prefecture' and 'magistrate who knows the county': it is a matter within one's own portion, yet one and Heaven are still two. Serving Heaven is like a son serving his father or a minister serving his ruler: one must be respectful and deferential and only then can one be without fault, and still one is two with Heaven. This is the difference between a sage and a worthy. As for not wavering in one's mind over short life or long, this teaches learners to be single-minded in doing good and not to let the mind of doing good be changed by hardship or success, short life or long, but simply to cultivate oneself and await what is decreed, seeing that there is a decree behind hardship and success, short life and long, and one need not be moved by it. Though serving Heaven is still being two with Heaven, one has already seen Heaven before one's face. Awaiting what is decreed is as if one has not yet met it face to face and is waiting here for it. This is the starting point of the beginner's resolve, with a sense of knowing through hardship and acting with effort. Now it has been turned upside down, so learners have no place to begin." Xu Ai said: "Yesterday, hearing your teaching, I dimly saw that the work must be like this. Now, hearing these words, I have even less doubt. Yesterday morning I thought that the 'thing' in the investigation of things is the same as 'affair', and that both are spoken of in terms of the mind." The Master said: "Right.

身之主宰便是心。心之所發便是意。意之本體便是知。意之所在便是物。如意在於事親，即事親便是一物。意在於事君，即事君便是一物。意在於仁民愛物，即仁民愛物便是一物。意在於視聽言動，即視聽言動便是一物。所以某說無心外之理，無心外之物。中庸言『不誠無物』，大學『明明德』之功，只是個誠意。誠意之功，只是個格物。

(The Master continued:) What governs the body is the mind. What the mind puts to use is intention. The original substance of intention is knowing. Where the intention rests is a thing. If the intention is on serving one's parents, then serving one's parents is one thing. If the intention is on serving one's ruler, then serving one's ruler is one thing. If the intention is on being benevolent to the people and caring for creatures, then being benevolent to the people and caring for creatures is one thing. If the intention is on seeing, hearing, speaking and moving, then seeing, hearing, speaking and moving is one thing. So I say that there is no principle outside the mind and no thing outside the mind. The Doctrine of the Mean says, 'Without sincerity there is nothing,' and the work of 'making bright the bright virtue' in the Great Learning is only making the intention sincere. The work of making the intention sincere is only the investigation of things."

○先生又曰，「『格物』如孟子『大人格君心』之『格』。是去其心之不正，以全其本體之正。但意念所在，即要去其不正，以全其正。即無時無處不是存天理。即是窮理。天理即是明德。窮埋即是明明德」。

The Master also said: "The 'investigation' in 'investigation of things' is like the 'rectify' in Mencius's 'the great man rectifies the ruler's mind': it is to remove what is not right in the mind in order to preserve the rightness of its original substance. Wherever a thought rests, one removes what is not right in order to preserve what is right. Then at no time and in no place is one not preserving Heavenly principle. This is exhausting principle. Heavenly principle is bright virtue. Exhausting principle is making bright the bright virtue."

○又曰，「知是心之本體。心自然會知。見父自然知孝，見兄自然知弟，見孺子入井，自然知惻隱。此便是良知。不假外求。若良知之發，更無私意障礙。即所謂『充其惻隱之心。而仁不可勝用矣』。然在常人不能無私意障礙。所以須用致知格物之功，勝私復理。即心之良知更無障礙，得以充塞流行。便是致其知。知致則意誠」。

The Master also said: "Knowing is the original substance of the mind. The mind naturally knows. Seeing one's father, one naturally knows filial piety; seeing one's elder brother, one naturally knows respect; seeing a small child about to fall into a well, one naturally knows compassion. This is liangzhi (innate knowing, the luminous awareness by which the original substance of the mind naturally knows, not needing to be sought from outside). It is not sought from outside. If liangzhi is put to use with no further obstruction from selfish intentions, this is what is meant by 'extending the heart of compassion until benevolence cannot be exhausted in use'. Yet ordinary people cannot be without obstruction from selfish intentions, so they need the work of extending knowledge and investigating things to overcome selfishness and restore principle. When the mind's liangzhi has no more obstruction, and fills and flows freely, that is extending its knowledge. When knowledge is extended, the intention is sincere."

○愛問，「先生以博文為約禮功夫。深思之未能得略。請開示」先生曰，『禮』字即是『理』字。理之發見可見者謂之文。文之隱微不可貝者謂之理。只是一物。約禮只是要此心純是一個天理。要此心純是天理，須就理之發見處用功。如發見於事親時，就在事親上學存此天理。發貝於事君時，就在事看上學存此天理。發見於處富貴貧賤時，就在處富貴貧賤上學存此天理。發貝於處患難夷狄時，就在處患難夷狄上學存此天理。至於作止語默，無處不然。隨他發見處，即就那上面學個存天理。這便是博學之於文，便是約禮的功夫。博文即是惟精。約禮即是惟一。

Xu Ai asked: "You, Master, take broad learning of culture as the work of restraint by ritual. I have thought deeply and still cannot get the outline. Please instruct me." The Master said: "The word 'ritual' is the same as the word 'principle'. Principle, when it appears so that it can be seen, is called culture; culture, when hidden and subtle so that it cannot be seen, is called principle; it is only one thing. Restraint by ritual is only to make this mind purely one Heavenly principle. To make this mind purely Heavenly principle, one must apply effort at the places where principle appears. For example, when it appears in serving one's parents, one learns to preserve this Heavenly principle in serving one's parents. When it appears in serving one's ruler, one learns to preserve this Heavenly principle in serving one's ruler. When it appears in dealing with wealth, rank, poverty and lowliness, one learns to preserve this Heavenly principle in dealing with them. When it appears in dealing with hardship and the barbarians, one learns to preserve this Heavenly principle in dealing with them. As for acting and resting, speaking and keeping silent, it is the same everywhere. Following where it appears, one learns right there to preserve Heavenly principle. This is broad learning of culture, and it is the work of restraint by ritual. Broad learning of culture is 'only refinement', and restraint by ritual is 'only unity'."

○愛問，「『道心常為一身之主，而人心每聽命』。以先生精一之訓推之，此語似有弊」先生曰，「然。心一也。未雜於人謂之道心。雜以人偽謂之人心人心之得其正者即道心。道心之矢其正者即人心。初非有三心也。程子謂人心即人慾，道心即天理。語若分析，而意實得之。今曰『道心為生，而人心聽命』，是三心也。天理人慾不併立。安有天理為主，人慾又從而聽命者」？

Xu Ai asked: "'The mind of the Way is always the master of the body, and the human mind always takes orders from it.' Using your teaching of refinement and unity to think this through, this saying seems to have a flaw." The Master said: "Right. The mind is one. What has not been mixed with human artifice is called the mind of the Way; what is mixed with human falsity is called the human mind. When the human mind gets what is right, it is the mind of the Way; when the mind of the Way loses what is right, it is the human mind. At the beginning there were not two minds. Master Cheng said that the human mind is human desire and the mind of the Way is Heavenly principle. The words seem to split it in two, but the meaning is in fact right. Now to say 'the mind of the Way is the master, and the human mind takes orders' makes two minds. Heavenly principle and human desire do not stand together. How can Heavenly principle be the master while human desire follows and takes orders?"

○愛問文中子韓退之。先生曰，「退之文人之雄耳。文中子儒也。後人徒以文詞之故，推尊退之。其實退之去文中子遠甚」。愛問何以有擬經之矢。先生曰，「擬經恐未可盡非。且說後世儒者著述之意與擬經如何」？愛曰，「世儒著述，近名之意不無。然期以明道。擬經純若為名」。先生曰，「著述以明道，亦何所劾法」？曰，「孔子刪迦六經，以明道也」。先生曰，「然則擬經獨非效法孔子乎」？愛曰，「著述即於道有所發明。擬經似徒擬其跡。恐於道無補」。先生曰，「子以明道者使其反僕還淳，而貝諸行事之實乎？抑將美其言辭，而徒以譊譊於世也？天下之大亂，由虛文勝而實行衰也。使道明於天下，則六經不必述。刪述六經，孔子不得已也。自伏義晝卦，至於文王周公。其間言易，如連山歸藏之屬。紛紛籍籍，不知其幾。易道大亂。孔子以天下好文之風日盛，知其說之將無紀極，於是取文王周公之說而贊之。以為惟此為得其宗。於是紛紛之說盡廢。而天下之言易者始一。書詩禮樂春秋皆然。書自典謨以後，詩自二南以降，如九丘八索，一切淫哇逸蕩之詞，蓋不知其幾千百篇。禮樂之名物度數，至是亦不可勝窮。孔子皆刪削而述正之，然後其說始廢。如書詩禮樂中，孔子何嘗加一語？今之禮記諸說，皆後儒附會而成。已非孔子之舊。至於春秋，雖稱孔子作之，其實皆魯史舊文。所謂筆者，筆其舊。所謂削者，削其繁。是有減無增。孔子述六經，懼繁文之亂天下。惟簡之而不得。使天下務去其文，以求其實。非以文教之也。春秋以後，繁文益盛，天下益亂。始皇焚書得罪，是出於私意。又不合焚六經。若當時志在明道，其諸反經叛理之說，悉取而焚之，亦正暗合刪述之意。自秦漢以降，文又日盛。若欲盡去之，斷不能去。只宜取法孔子。錄其近是者而表章之。則其諸怞悖之說，亦宜漸漸自廢。

Xu Ai asked about Wenzhongzi (Wang Tong) and Han Tuizhi (Han Yu). The Master said: "Tuizhi was merely a hero among literary men. Wenzhongzi was a Confucian. Later people honor Tuizhi only because of his literary style, but in fact Tuizhi is very far from Wenzhongzi." Xu Ai asked why there was the fault of imitating the classics. The Master said: "Imitating the classics may not be rejected across the board. Tell me, how does the intention of later Confucians' writings compare with imitating the classics?" Xu Ai said: "In the writings of worldly Confucians, one cannot say there is no intention of seeking fame, yet they hope thereby to make the Way clear. Imitating the classics seems purely for fame." The Master said: "If writing is to make the Way clear, what is one modeling on?" Xu Ai said: "Confucius edited and transmitted the Six Classics to make the Way clear." The Master said: "Then is imitating the classics not also modeling on Confucius?" Xu Ai said: "Writing is what elucidates the Way. Imitating the classics seems only to copy the outward form and probably does the Way no good." The Master said: "Do you think that making the Way clear means leading people back to simplicity and honesty and showing it in the reality of conduct, or that it means embellishing words and making a clamor in the world? The great disorder of the world comes from empty writing flourishing and real practice declining. Had the Way already been clear throughout the world, the Six Classics would not need to be transmitted again. Editing and transmitting the Six Classics was something Confucius could not avoid. From Fu Xi drawing the trigrams to King Wen and the Duke of Zhou, among those who expounded the Changes in between, such as the Lianshan and the Guicang, there were countless numbers in confusion and the Way of the Changes was in great disorder. Confucius, because the world's fondness for refinement grew greater day by day, knew that such talk would have no limit, so he took the explanations of King Wen and the Duke of Zhou and praised and supported them, considering that only these held the root. Then all the conflicting explanations were abandoned, and only then were those who spoke of the Changes in the world unified. It was the same with the Documents, Songs, Rites, Music and Spring and Autumn Annals. In the Documents, after the Canons and Counsels; in the Songs, after the Two Southern Odes; as with the Nine Mounds and Eight Cords, all the licentious and dissolute words, probably numbered several thousand or hundred. The names, things and measures of ritual and music were by then also impossible to exhaust. Confucius edited out and corrected them all, and only then were those explanations abandoned. As for the Documents, Songs, Rites and Music, did Confucius ever add a single word? Now the various explanations of the Book of Rites were all pieced together by later Confucians and are no longer Confucius's original. As for the Spring and Autumn Annals, though it is said that Confucius made it, in fact it is all the old text of the chronicles of Lu. What is called 'writing' is recording the old; what is called 'cutting' is cutting out the excessive. There was subtraction and no addition. When Confucius transmitted the Six Classics, he feared that excessive writing would throw the world into disorder, and simply could not make it brief enough. He wanted to make the world strive to rid itself of the writing in order to seek the reality, and not to teach them by means of writing. After the Spring and Autumn Annals, excessive writing became even more abundant and the world more disordered. The First Emperor was guilty of burning books, which came from selfish intent, and he should not have burned the Six Classics. If at that time his aim had been to make the Way clear, and he had taken all those explanations that went against the classics and rebelled against principle and burned them, that too would have secretly accorded with the idea of editing and transmitting.

不知文中子當時擬經之意如何。某切深有取於其事。以為聖人復起，不能易也。天下所以不治，只因文盛實衰。入出己見。新奇相高，以眩俗取譽。徒以亂天下之聰明，塗天下之耳目。使天下靡然爭務修飾文詞，以求知於世。而不復知有敦本尚實，反僕還淳之行。是皆著述者有以啟之」。愛曰，「著述亦有不可缺者。如春秋一經，若無左傳，恐亦難曉」。先生曰，「春秋必待傳而後明，是歇後謎語矣。聖人何苦為此艱深隱晦之詞？左傳多是魯史舊文。若春秋須此而後明，孔子何必削之」？愛曰，「伊川亦云，『傳是案，經是斷』。如書弒某君，伐某國。若不明其事，恐亦難斷」。先生曰，「伄川此言，恐亦是相沿世儒之說。未得聖人作經之意。如書弒君，即弒君便是罪。何必更問其弒君之詳。征伐當自天子出。書伐國，即伐國便是罪。何必更問其伐國之詳？聖人述六經，只是要正人心。只是要存天理，去人慾。於存天理去人慾之事，則嘗言之。或因人請問，各隨分量而說。亦不肯多道。恐人專求之言語。故曰『予欲無言』。若是一切縱人慾滅天理的事，又安肯詳以示人？是長亂導奸也。故孟子云，『仲尼之門，無道桓文之事者。是以後世無傳焉』。此便是孔門家法。世儒只講得一個伯者的學問。所以要知得許多陰謀詭計。純是一片功利的心。與聖人作經的意思正相反。如何思量得通」？因嘆曰，「此非達天德。者未易與言此也」又曰，「孔子云，『吾猶及史之闕文也』。孟子云，『盡信書，不如無書。吾於武成取二三策而已』。孔子刪書，於唐虞夏四五百年間，不過數篇。豈更無一事，而所述止此？聖人之意可知矣。聖人只是要刪去繁文，後儒郄只要添上」。愛曰，「聖人作經，只是要去人慾，存天理。如五伯以下事，聖人不欲詳以示人。則誠然矣。至如堯舜以前事，如何略不少見」？

(The Master continued:) I do not know what Wenzhongzi's intention was in imitating the classics at that time. I deeply approve of it and think that if a sage arose again, he could not change it. The reason the world is not well governed is only that writing flourishes and reality declines. Everyone puts forth his own views and competes in novelty to dazzle the common run and seek fame, and merely disturbs the world's hearing and sight, blocks the world's ears and eyes, and makes the world rush to adorn its words so as to be known by the age, no longer knowing the conduct of valuing the root, esteeming reality and returning to simplicity. All this was opened up by those who write." Xu Ai said: "Some writing cannot be done without. Take the Spring and Autumn Annals: without the Zuo Commentary, I fear it would be hard to understand." The Master said: "If the Spring and Autumn Annals can only be understood after the commentary, then it is a riddle whose answer is hidden. Why would the sage bother to write such obscure language? The Zuo Commentary is mostly the old text of the chronicles of Lu. If the Spring and Autumn Annals needed it to be understood, why would Confucius have cut it?" Xu Ai said: "Yichuan also said: 'The commentary is the case; the classic is the verdict.' When it is written that so-and-so assassinated his ruler or such a state attacked another, if one does not understand those affairs, it would also be hard to judge." The Master said: "This saying of Yichuan probably also follows the received view of worldly Confucians and has not reached the sage's intention in making the classic. When it is written that a ruler was assassinated, the assassination itself is the crime; why ask again about the details of the assassination? Military campaigns should come from the Son of Heaven. When it is written that a state was attacked, the attack itself is the crime; why ask again about the details of the attack? When the sage transmitted the Six Classics, he only wanted to rectify people's minds, only wanted to preserve Heavenly principle and remove human desire. On the matter of preserving Heavenly principle and removing human desire, he did speak of it. Sometimes when people asked, he spoke according to their capacity, and was unwilling to say much, fearing that people would seek it exclusively in words, and so he said, 'I wish to say nothing.' As for everything that indulges human desire and destroys Heavenly principle, how could he be willing to show it to people in detail? That would be abetting disorder and leading people to wickedness. So Mencius said: 'Among the disciples of Zhongni, none spoke of the affairs of Dukes Huan and Wen, and so nothing was handed down about them in later generations.' This is the family rule of the Confucian school. Worldly Confucians merely discuss the learning of hegemons, so they want to know many stratagems and schemes, with a mind purely of profit, which is exactly the opposite of the sage's intention in making the classics. How can this be thought through?" Then he sighed and said: "If one is not a person who has reached Heavenly virtue, it is not easy to speak of this with him." He also said: "Confucius said: 'I still caught the blank spaces left in the chronicles.' Mencius said: 'To believe the Documents entirely is worse than having no Documents. In the "Wucheng" I take only two or three slips.' When Confucius edited the Documents, over the four or five hundred years of Tang, Yu and Xia he kept only a few chapters. Could there have been no other events, so that only these were recorded? The sage's intention can be known. The sage only wanted to cut out excessive writing, while later Confucians only want to add." Xu Ai said: "When the sage made the classics, he only wanted to remove human desire and preserve Heavenly principle. As for things from the Five Hegemons onward, that the sage did not want to show them to people in detail is indeed right. But as for events before Yao and Shun, why are they passed over briefly and not seen?"

先生曰，「義黃之世，其事闊疏，傳之者觲矣。此亦可以想見。其時全是淳龐僕素，略無文采的氣象。此便是太古之治。非後世可及」。愛曰，「如三墳之類，亦有傳者。孔子何以刪之」？先生曰，「縱有傳者，亦於世變漸非所宜。風氣益開，文采日勝。至於週末，雖欲變以夏商之俗，已不可挽。況唐虞乎又況義黃之世乎然其治不同，其道則二孔子於堯舜，則祖述之。於文武，則憲章之。文武之法，即是堯舜之道。但因時致治。其設施政令，已自不同。即夏商事業，施之於周，已有不合。故周公思兼三王。其有不合，仰而思之，夜以繼日。況太古之治，豈復能行？斯固聖人之所可峈也」。又曰，「專事無為，不能如三王之因時致治，而必欲行以太古之俗，即是佛老的學術。因時致治，不能如三王之一本於道，而以功利之心行之，即是伯者以下事業。後世儒者許多講來講去，只是講得個伯術」。

The Master said: "In the ages of Fu Xi and the Yellow Emperor, those events were remote and sparse, and little was transmitted. This can be imagined. At that time it was entirely an air of simplicity and honesty, with almost no refinement. This was the government of highest antiquity, which later ages cannot reach." Xu Ai said: "Things like the Three Mounds also were transmitted. Why did Confucius cut them?" The Master said: "Even if they were transmitted, they gradually suited the changing times less. As customs became more open, refinement grew day by day. By the end of the Zhou, even if one wanted to return to the customs of Xia and Shang, it could no longer be retrieved, let alone Tang and Yu. How much less the ages of Fu Xi and the Yellow Emperor! Yet though governance differs, the Way is one. Confucius took Yao and Shun as his ancestral models, and King Wen and King Wu as his standards. The laws of Wen and Wu are the Way of Yao and Shun, only that governing according to the time means the policies and orders established are naturally different. Even the undertakings of Xia and Shang, when applied in Zhou, were already not fitting. That is why the Duke of Zhou, wishing to combine the three kings, when something did not fit, looked up and thought about it day and night without rest. How much more the governance of highest antiquity, which could hardly be practiced still? These are things the sage could pass over lightly." He also said: "To devote oneself solely to non-action, unable to govern according to the time as the three kings did, and insist on following the customs of highest antiquity, is the learning of Buddhists and Daoists. To govern according to the time but be unable to base oneself on the Way as the three kings did, and instead act with a mind of profit, is the work of hegemons and below. What later Confucians go on and on about is only the art of the hegemons."

○又曰，「唐虞以上之治，後世不可復也。略之可也。三代以下之治，後世不可法也。削之可也。惟三代之治可行。然而世之論三代者，不明其本，而徒事其末。則亦不可復矣」。

The Master also said: "The governance before Tang and Yu cannot be restored by later ages, so it is fine to leave it out. The governance after the Three Dynasties cannot be taken as a model by later ages, so it is fine to cut it. Only the governance of the Three Dynasties can be put into practice. But those in the world who discuss the Three Dynasties do not understand their root and only work on the branches, so that too cannot be restored."

○愛曰，「先儒論六經，以春秋為史。史專記事。恐與五經事體終或稍異」。先生曰，「以事言謂之史。以道言謂之經。事即道。道即事。春秋亦經。五經亦史。易是包犧氏之史。書是堯舜下史。禮樂是三代史。其事同。其道同。安有所謂異」？

Xu Ai said: "Earlier Confucians, in discussing the Six Classics, took the Spring and Autumn Annals as history. History is exclusively a record of events, and I fear it is ultimately somewhat different in character from the Five Classics." The Master said: "Speaking in terms of events it is called history, and speaking in terms of the Way it is called a classic. Events are the Way and the Way is events. The Spring and Autumn Annals is also a classic, and the Five Classics are also history. The Changes is the history of Baoxi, the Documents is the history from Yao and Shun onward, and ritual and music are the history of the Three Dynasties. Their events are the same and their Way is the same; where is the so-called difference?"

○又曰，「五經亦只是史。史以叨善惡，示訓戒。善可為訓者，時存其逃，以示法。惡可為戒者，存其戒而削其事，以杜奸」。愛曰，「存其《跡》以示法，亦是存天理之本然。削其事以杜奸，亦是遏人慾於將萌否」？先生曰，「聖人作經，固無非是此意。然又不必泥著文句」。愛又問，「惡可為戒者，存其戒而削其事，以杜奸。何獨於詩而不刪鄭衛？先儒謂『惡者可以懲創人之逸志』。然否」？先生曰，「詩非孔門之舊本矣。孔子云，『放鄭聲，鄭聲淫』。又曰，『惡鄭聲之亂雅樂也』。『鄭衛之音，亡國之音也』。此是孔門家法。孔子所定三百篇，皆所謂雅樂。皆可奏之郊廟，奏之鄉黨。皆所以資暢和平，涵拯偲性。移風易俗，安得有此？是長淫導奸矣。此必秦火之後，世儒附會，以足三百萹之數。蓋淫泆之詞，世俗多所喜傳。如今閭巷皆然。惡者可以懲創人之逸志。是求其說而不得，從而為之辭」。

The Master also said: "The Five Classics are also just history. History is used to make clear good and evil and to display admonition. What is good and can serve as instruction is sometimes preserved in its traces, as a model; what is evil and can serve as warning is preserved only in its warning and its events cut away, to shut out wickedness." Xu Ai said: "Preserving traces as a model is also preserving the original state of Heavenly principle; cutting away the events to shut out wickedness is also checking human desire just as it is about to sprout?" The Master said: "When the sage made the classics, it was certainly nothing other than this intention. But one need not cling to the literal wording." Xu Ai asked further: "What is evil and can serve as warning is preserved only in its warning and its events cut away, to shut out wickedness. Why, only in the Songs, were the odes of Zheng and Wei not cut out? Earlier Confucians said that 'the evil ones can chastise people's dissolute inclinations'; is that right?" The Master said: "The Songs is already not the old text of the Confucian school. Confucius said: 'Banish the music of Zheng, for the music of Zheng is licentious.' He also said: 'I hate the music of Zheng for confusing the refined music.' 'The sounds of Zheng and Wei are the sounds of a ruined state.' This is the family rule of the Confucian school. The three hundred pieces fixed by Confucius were all what is called refined music, all of which could be performed at the suburban and ancestral temples and in the villages, all used to foster harmony and peace, nourish virtue and nature, and change customs and habits; how could there be these? That would be abetting licentiousness and leading people to wickedness. This must be that after the burning of the books by Qin, worldly Confucians pieced them together to fill out the number of three hundred pieces. Dissolute words are generally loved and passed on by the common world, as in every village lane today. 'The evil ones can chastise people's dissolute inclinations' is seeking an explanation and not finding it, and then covering for it."

愛因舊說汩沒，始聞先生之教，實是駭愕不定，無人頭處。其後聞之既久，漸知反身實踐。然後始信先生之學，為孔門嫡傳。舍是皆傍蹊小徑，斷港絽河矣。如說格物是誠意的工夫。明善是誠身的工夫。窮理是儘性的工夫。道問學是尊德性的工夫。博文是約禮的工夫。惟精是惟一的工夫。諸如此類，始皆落落難合。其後思之既久，不覺手舞足蹈。

I, Xu Ai, was sunk in old views, and when I first heard the Master's teaching I was truly astonished and unsettled, with no place to enter. Later, after listening a long time, I gradually learned to turn back to myself and practice, and only then did I believe that the Master's learning is the direct transmission of the Confucian school. Everything else is a side path or a blocked stream. For instance, saying that the investigation of things is the work of making the intention sincere, that making goodness clear is the work of making the person sincere, that exhausting principle is the work of fully realizing the nature, that following the path of inquiry and study is the work of honoring the virtuous nature, that broad learning of culture is the work of restraint by ritual, and that only refinement is the work of only unity, and the like: at first they were scattered and hard to fit together. Later, after thinking about them for a long time, I could not help dancing with joy.

○陸澄問，「主一之功，如讀書，則一心在讀書上。接客，則一心在接客上。可以為主。乎」？先生曰，「好色則一心在好色上。好貨則一心在好貨上。可以為主一乎？是所謂遂物。非主一也。主一是專主一個天理」。

Lu Cheng asked: "As for the work of 'holding to one', if when reading one is wholly in reading, and when receiving guests one is wholly in receiving guests, can this be called holding to one?" The Master said: "If, loving beauty, one is wholly in loving beauty, or, loving goods, one is wholly in loving goods, can that be called holding to one? That is what is called chasing after things, not holding to one. Holding to one is devoting oneself solely to one Heavenly principle."

○問立志。先生曰，「只念念要存天理，即是立志。能不忘乎此，久則自然心中凝聚。猶道冢所謂結聖胎也。此天理之念常存。馴至於美大聖神，亦只從此一念存養擴充去耳」。

Asked about establishing one's resolve, the Master said: "Simply to be mindful at every moment of preserving Heavenly principle is establishing resolve. If one can keep from forgetting this, in time it naturally condenses in the mind, like what the Daoists call forming the sacred embryo. This thought of Heavenly principle, constantly preserved, gradually reaches the fine, great, sacred and divine, which also proceeds merely by nourishing and expanding this one thought."

○日間工夫覺紛擾，則靜坐。覺懶看書，則且看書。是亦因病而藥。

If in the daytime your work feels scattered and disturbed, sit in quiet. If you feel too lazy to read, then read for the time being. This too is using medicine according to the illness.

○處朋友，務相下，則得益。相上則損。

In dealing with friends, one must each take the lower place with the other, and then there is benefit. If each takes the higher place, there is loss.

○孟源有自是好名之病。先生屢責之。曰，警責方已。友自陳日來工夫詩正。源從傍曰，「此方是尋著源舊時家當」。先生曰，「爾病又發」。源色變。議擬欲有所辨。先生曰，「爾病又發」。因喻之曰，「此是汝一生大病根。譬如方丈地內，種此一大樹。雨露之滋，土胍之力，只滋養得這個大根。四傍縱要種些嘉榖，上面被此樹葉遮覆，下面被此樹根盤結，如何生長得成？須用伐去此樹，纖根勿留，力可種植嘉種。不然，任汝耕耘培壅，只是滋養得此根」。

Meng Yuan had the faults of thinking himself right and loving fame. The Master reproved him several times. When the reproof had just stopped, a friend described how his work had recently become somewhat more correct. Meng Yuan said from the side: "This is finding the old family property I used to have." The Master said: "Your illness has flared up again." Meng Yuan's face changed, and he thought of defending himself. The Master said: "Your illness has flared up again." Then he instructed him, saying: "This is the great root of illness in your whole life. It is like a tree planted in a plot ten feet square: the moistening of rain and dew and the strength of the soil only nourish this one big root. Even if one wanted to plant good grain around it, it would be covered above by the leaves and tangled below by the roots; how could it grow? One must cut down this tree and leave not a single fine root, and only then can good seed be planted. Otherwise, however much you plow and tend and heap up soil, it only nourishes this root."

○問，「後世著述之多，恐亦有亂正學」。先生曰，「人心天理渾然。聖賢筆之書，如寫真傳神。不過示人以形狀大略，使之因此而討求其真耳。其精神意氣，言笑動止，固有所不能傳也。後世著述，是又將聖人所晝，摹仿謄寫，而妄自分析加增，以逞其技。其失真愈遠矣」。

Someone asked: "There is so much writing in later ages; I fear it also disturbs the correct learning." The Master said: "The human mind and Heavenly principle are whole and undivided. When the sages and worthies wrote them in books, it was like painting a portrait to capture the spirit, merely giving people a rough sense of the form so that they might go on to seek the real thing. As for the spirit and air, the words and smiles, the movements and rest, there is inevitably what cannot be transmitted. Later writings copy and transcribe again what the sages painted, and arbitrarily analyze and add to it in order to show off their own skill, and lose the truth even more."

○問，「聖人應變不窮，莫亦是預先講求否」？先生曰，「如何講求得許多？聖人之心如明鏡。只是一個明，則隨感而應，無物不照。未有已往之形尚在，未照之形先具者。若後世所講，邞是如此。是以與聖人之學大背。周公制禮作樂，以文天下。皆聖人所能為。堯舜何不盡為之，而待於周公？孔子刪述六經，以詔萬世，亦聖人所能為。周公何不先為之，而有待於孔子？是知聖人遇此時，方有此事。只怕鏡不明。不怕物來不能照。講求事變，亦是照時事。然學者邞須先有個明的工夫。學者惟患此心之未能明，不患事變之不能盡」。日，「然則所謂『仲漠無朕，而萬象森然已具』者，其言何如」？日，「是說本自好。只不善看，亦便有病痛」。

Someone asked: "The sage responds to change without limit; surely this too is by studying in advance?" The Master said: "How could one study so much? The sage's mind is like a bright mirror. It is simply one brightness, and so it responds to whatever it encounters, and nothing is not reflected. There is no past form still lingering, and no unreflected form prepared in advance. What later ages discuss is exactly of this kind, and therefore it is greatly opposed to the sage's learning. The Duke of Zhou made ritual and music to adorn the world, which a sage could do. Why did Yao and Shun not do it all, and wait for the Duke of Zhou? Confucius edited and transmitted the Six Classics to instruct ten thousand generations, which a sage could also do. Why did the Duke of Zhou not do it first, leaving it to Confucius? From this one knows that a sage meets his time and only then has this task. One fears only that the mirror is not bright, not that things will come and cannot be reflected. Studying the changes of affairs is also something that happens at the moment of reflecting. But the learner must first have the work of making it bright. The learner worries only that this mind has not yet become bright, not that he cannot exhaust the changes of affairs." He asked: "Then what about the saying, 'empty and still, without a trace, yet the myriad phenomena are already fully present'?" The Master said: "This saying is originally good. It is only that, if one does not read it well, it also has its defects."

○「義理無定在，無窮盡。吾與子言，不可以少有所得，而遂謂止此也。再言之十年，二十年，五十年，未有止也」。他日又曰，「聖如堯舜。然堯舜之上，善無盡。惡如桀紂。然桀籿之下，惡無盡。使桀紂未死，惡寧止此乎？使善有盡時，文王何以望道而未之見」？

The Master said: "Meaning and principle have no fixed place and no end. When I discuss with you, do not take a little gain and think it stops there. Discuss ten more years, twenty, fifty, and there is no limit." Another day he said: "As sage as Yao and Shun, yet above Yao and Shun, goodness has no end. As evil as Jie and Zhou, yet below Jie and Zhou, evil has no end. If Jie and Zhou had not died, would their evil have stopped there? If goodness had an end, why did King Wen look toward the Way as though he had never seen it?"

○問，「靜時亦覺意思好。才遇事，便不同。如何」？先生曰，「是徒知養靜，而不用克已工夫也。如此臨事便要傾倒。人須在事上磨，方立得住，方能諍亦定，動亦定」。

Someone asked: "When quiet, I also feel the sense is good. But as soon as I meet an affair, it is different. Why?" The Master said: "This is because you only know how to nourish quiet and do not apply the work of overcoming the self. Facing affairs in this way, you will be toppled. A person must be tempered in affairs (tempering this mind in concrete matters) in order to stand firm, and only then can he be settled in stillness and settled in movement."

○問上達工夫。先生曰，「後儒教人才涉精微，便謂上達，未當學，且說下學。是分下學上達為二也。夫目可得見，耳可得聞，口可得言，心可得思者，皆下學也。目不可得見，耳不可得聞，口不可得言，心不可得思者，上達也。如木之栽培灌溉，是下學也。至於日夜之所息，條達暢茂，乃是上達。人安能預其力哉？故凡可用功，可告語者，皆下學。上達只在下學裡。凡聖人所說，雖極精微，俱是下學。學者只從下學裡用功，自然上達去。不必別尋個上達的工夫」。

Someone asked about the work of reaching upward. The Master said: "Later Confucians, in teaching people, as soon as something touches on the subtle and fine, call it reaching upward, and say it should not yet be studied and that one should speak of lower learning. This splits lower learning and reaching upward into two. Whatever the eye can see, the ear can hear, the mouth can say and the mind can think is all lower learning. What the eye cannot see, the ear cannot hear, the mouth cannot say and the mind cannot think is reaching upward. Take the planting, tending and watering of a tree: that is lower learning. As for what grows and rests day and night and spreads out lush and flourishing, that is reaching upward. How could a person apply effort to it in advance? So whatever one can apply effort to or speak of is all lower learning. Reaching upward lies within lower learning. Whatever the sages said, though extremely subtle, is all lower learning. If the learner simply works within lower learning, he will naturally reach upward. There is no need to look for a separate work of reaching upward."

○問，「惟精惟一，是如何用功」？先生曰，「惟一是惟精主意，惟精是惟一功夫。非惟精之外復有惟一也。『精』字從『米』。姑以米譬之。要得此米純然潔白，便是惟一意。然非加舂簸篩揀惟精之工，則不能純然潔白也。舂簸篩揀，是惟精之功。然亦不過要此米到純然潔白而已。博學，審問，慎思，明辨，篤行者，皆所以為惟精而求惟一也。他如博文者即約禮之功。格物致知者即誠意之功。道問學即尊德性之功。明善即誠身之功，無二說也」。

Someone asked: "How does one work at 'only refinement, only unity'?" The Master said: "Only unity is the guiding intent of only refinement, and only refinement is the work of only unity. It is not that there is another only unity outside only refinement. The word 'refinement' includes the radical 'rice'. Let us take rice as an analogy. To make this rice purely clean and white is the meaning of only unity. But without applying the work of only refinement, pounding, winnowing, sifting and picking, it cannot become purely clean and white. Pounding, winnowing, sifting and picking is the work of only refinement, yet it too only wants the rice to become purely clean and white. Broad study, careful inquiry, cautious reflection, clear discernment and earnest practice are all done to seek only unity for the sake of only refinement. Others, such as broad learning of culture being the work of restraint by ritual, investigating things and extending knowledge being the work of making the intention sincere, following the path of inquiry and study being the work of honoring the virtuous nature, and making goodness clear being the work of making the person sincere, are not two different statements."

○知者行之始。行者知之成。聖學只一個功夫。知行不可分作兩事。

Knowing is the beginning of acting, and acting is the completion of knowing. The learning of the sages is only one work. Knowing and acting cannot be split into two things.

○漆雕開曰，「吾斯之未能信」。夫子說之。子路使子羔為費宰。子曰，「賊夫人之子」。曾點言志，夫子許之。聖人之意可見矣。

Qidiao Kai said: "I am not yet able to be sure of this." Confucius was pleased. Zilu made Zigao the steward of Bi. Confucius said: "This is harming someone else's son." When Zeng Dian spoke of his aspiration, Confucius approved of him. The sage's intention can be seen.

○問，「寧靜存心時，可為未發之中否」？先生曰，「今人存心，只定得氣。當其寧靜時，亦只是氣寧靜。不可以為未發之中」。日，「未便是中。莫亦是求中功夫」？曰，「只要去人慾，存天理，方是功夫。靜時念念去人慾，存天理。動時念念去人慾，存天理。不管寧靜不寧靜。若靠那寧靜，不惟漸有富靜厭動之弊。中間許多病痛，只是潛伏在。終不能絕去，遇事依舊滋長。以循理為生，何嘗不寧靜？以寧靜為主，未必能循理」。

Someone asked: "When one preserves the mind in quiet and calm, can this count as the equilibrium before feelings are aroused?" The Master said: "When people today preserve the mind, they only settle their qi. When it is quiet and calm, it is only the qi that is quiet and calm. It cannot be taken as the equilibrium before arousal." He asked: "Even if it is not the equilibrium, is it not also the work of seeking the equilibrium?" The Master said: "Only removing human desire and preserving Heavenly principle is the work. When quiet, one removes human desire and preserves Heavenly principle in every thought; when active, one removes human desire and preserves Heavenly principle in every thought, regardless of whether it is quiet and calm. If one relies on that quiet and calm, not only does one gradually acquire the flaw of liking quiet and disliking activity, but many ailments in between merely lie hidden and are never cut off, and when one meets affairs they grow as before. If one takes following principle as the main thing, how could one not be quiet and calm? If one takes quiet and calm as the main thing, one is not necessarily following principle."

○問，「孔門言志，由求任政事。公西赤任禮樂。多少實用？及曾竹說來，卻似耍的事。聖人卻許他，是意何如」？曰，「三子是有意必。有意必，便偏著一邊。能此未必能彼。曾點這意思卻無意必。便是『素其位而行，不願乎其外。素夷狄，行乎夷狄。素患難，行乎患難。無人而不自得矣』。三子所謂『汝器也』。曾點便有不器意。然三子之才，各卓然成章。非若世之空言無實者。故夫子亦皆許之」。

Someone asked: "In the Confucian school's talk of aspirations, Zilu and Ran Qiu took on government affairs and Gongxi Chi took on ritual and music, how practical they are. When it came to Zeng Dian, it was like a pastime, yet the sage approved of him; what does that mean?" The Master said: "The three had intention and certainty. Having intention and certainty, they lean toward one side, and being able in this does not mean being able in that. Zeng Dian's meaning was without intention and certainty. That is 'acting according to one's present position and not wishing to go beyond it. If in a barbarian land, acting as one in a barbarian land. If in hardship, acting as one in hardship. Nowhere does one fail to be at ease.' The three are what is called 'you are a vessel'. Zeng Dian has the meaning of 'not a vessel'. Yet the talents of the three each stood out and formed a pattern, unlike the empty talkers of the world with nothing real. So the Master approved of them all as well."

○問，「知識不長進如何」？先生曰，「為學須有本原。須從本原上用力。漸漸盈科而進。仙家說嬰兒亦善。譬嬰兒在母腹時，只是純氣。有何知識？出胎後，方始能啼。既而後能笑。又既而後能認識其父母兄弟。又既而後能立，能行，能持，能負。卒乃天下之事，無不可能。皆是精氣日足，則筋力日強，聰明日開。不是出胎日便講求推尋得來。故須有個本原。聖人到位天地，育萬物，也只從喜怒哀樂未發之中上養來。後儒不明格物之說。見聖人無不知，無不能。便欲於初下手時講求得盡。豈有此理」。又曰，「立志用功，如種樹然。方其根芽，猶未有幹。及其有幹，尚未有枝。枝而後葉。葉而後花實。初種根時，只管栽培灌溉。勿作枝想。勿作葉想。勿作花想。勿作實想。懸想何益？但不忘栽培之功，怕。沒有枝葉花寅」？

Someone asked: "What should I do when my knowledge does not grow?" The Master said: "In learning one must have a root source. One must put effort into the root source and advance gradually, filling each hollow as water does. The Taoists say that the infant is good as an image. When an infant is in its mother's womb, it is only pure qi; what knowledge does it have? Only after leaving the womb does it begin to cry, then to smile, then to recognize parents and brothers, then to stand, walk, hold and carry, and finally nothing in the world is beyond it. All this is because as its vital essence grows fuller day by day, its sinews and strength grow stronger day by day and its intelligence opens day by day. It is not something obtained by study and reasoning on the day of leaving the womb. So there must be a root source. Even when the sage fixes the positions of heaven and earth and nourishes the myriad things, it is only by cultivation from the center before joy, anger, sorrow and delight have arisen. Later Confucians, not understanding the doctrine of the investigation of things, see that the sage knows everything and can do everything, and so want to study everything exhaustively at the very start. What principle is there in that?" He also said: "Setting one's aim and applying effort is like planting a tree. When it is just a root and sprout, there is not yet a trunk. When there is a trunk, there is not yet a branch. With branches there are leaves, and with leaves there are flowers and fruit. When first planting the root, just tend and water it. Do not think of branches, do not think of leaves, do not think of flowers, do not think of fruit. What use is there in imagining them? If one does not forget the work of tending, why fear that there will be no branches, leaves, flowers or fruit?"

○問，「看書不能明如何」？先生曰，「此只是在文義上穿求，故不明。如此，又不如為舊時學問。他到看得多，解得去。只是他為學雖極解得明曉，亦終身無得。須於心體上用功。凡明不得，行不去，須反在自心上體當。即可通。蓋四書五經，不過說這心體。這心體即所謂道心。體明即是道明。更無二。此是為學頭腦處」。

Someone asked: "What should I do when I cannot understand what I read?" The Master said: "This is only digging around in the literal meaning of the text, so you do not understand. In that case you might as well do the old kind of learning. They read more and could explain it. But though their learning explained things very clearly, they gained nothing all their lives. One must apply effort to the substance of the mind. Whatever one cannot understand or carry out, one must turn back and embody in one's own mind, and then it can be understood. In general the Four Books and Five Classics only speak of this mind-substance. This mind-substance is what is called the mind of the Way. When the substance is clear, the Way is clear; there are not two. This is the headwaters of learning."

○「虛靈不眛，眾理而萬事出」。心外無理。心外無事。

"Empty, spiritual and unclouded, with all principles complete and the myriad affairs coming out from it." Outside the mind there is no principle. Outside the mind there is no affair.

○或問，「晦庵先生曰，『人之所以為學者，心與理而已』。此語如何」？曰，「心即性，性即理。下一『與』字，恐未免為二。此在學者善觀之」。

Someone asked: "Master Huian (Zhu Xi) said: 'What people learn is only mind and principle.' What do you say to that?" The Master said: "Mind is nature, and nature is principle. Putting in the word 'and' perhaps cannot avoid dividing them into two. Learners should observe this well."

○或曰，「人皆有是心。心即理。何以有為善有為不善」？先生曰，「惡人之心矢其本體」。

Someone said: "Everyone has this mind. Mind is principle. Why then do some do good and some do evil?" The Master said: "The mind of the evil person has lost its original substance."

○問，「『析之有以極其精而不亂，然後合之有以盡其大而無餘』。此言如何」？先生曰，「恐亦未盡。此理豈容分析？又何須湊合得？聖人說精一，自是盡」。

Someone asked: "'Analyze it so as to reach its utmost refinement without confusion, and then combine it so as to exhaust its greatness without remainder.' What do you say to this?" The Master said: "Perhaps this too is not complete. How can this principle be analyzed? And what need is there to piece it together? When the sage speaks of refinement and unity, it is naturally exhausted."

○省察是有事時存養，存養是無事時省察。

Self-examination is nourishing the mind when there is something to do, and nourishing the mind is self-examination when there is nothing to do.

○澄嘗問象山在人情事變上做工夫之說。先生曰，「除了人情事變，則無事矣。喜怒哀樂非人情乎？自視聽言動以至富貴貧賤患難死生，皆事變也。事變亦只在人情裡。其要只在致中和。致中和只在謹獨」。

Lu Cheng once asked about Xiangshan's (Lu Jiuyuan's) teaching on working in human feelings and the changes of affairs. The Master said: "Apart from human feelings and the changes of affairs, there is nothing to do. Are joy, anger, sorrow and delight not human feelings? From seeing, hearing, speaking and moving to wealth, honor, poverty, lowliness, hardship, death and life, all are changes of affairs. And the changes of affairs are also only within human feelings. The essential is only to reach centrality and harmony. Reaching centrality and harmony lies only in being watchful over oneself when alone."

○澄問，「仁義禮智之名，因已發而有」。曰，「然」。他日澄曰，「惻隱羞惡辭讓是非，是性之表德邪」？曰，「仁義禮智也是表德。性一而已。自其形體也，謂之天。主宰也，市之帝。流行也，謂之命。賦於人也，謂之性。主於身也，謂之心。心之發也，遇父便謂之孝，遇君便謂之忠。自此以往，名至於無窮，只一性而已。猶人一而已。對父謂之子，對子謂之父。自此以往，至於無窮，只一人而已。人只要在性上用功。看得一性字分明，即萬理燦然」。

Lu Cheng asked: "The names of benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom exist because of what has been manifested." The Master said: "Right." Another day Lu Cheng said: "Are compassion, shame, deference and the sense of right and wrong the manifested virtues of nature?" The Master said: "Benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom are also manifested virtues. Nature is only one. In terms of its form it is called Heaven; as ruler it is called the Lord; as flowing it is called the mandate; as bestowed on humans it is called nature; as master of the body it is called mind. When the mind functions, toward a father it is called filial piety, toward a ruler it is called loyalty. From here onward the names are endless, but it is only one nature. Just as a person is only one: toward a father he is called son, toward a son he is called father. From here onward, to endless extent, it is only one person. A person need only apply effort to nature. When one sees the one word 'nature' clearly, the myriad principles shine out."

○一日論為學工夫。先生曰，「教人為學不可執一偏。初學時心猿意馬，拴縛不定。其所思慮多是人慾一邊。故且教之靜坐息思慮。久之，俟其心意稍定。只懸空靜守，如槁木死灰，亦無用。須教他省察克治。省察克治之功，則無時而可間。如去盜賊，須有個掃除廓清之意。無事時，將好色好貨好名等私，逐一追究搜尋出來。定要拔去病根，永不復起，方始為快。常如貓之捕鼠。一眼看著，一耳聽著。才有一念萌動，即與克去。斬釘截鐵，不可姑容與他方便。不可窩藏。不可放他出路。方是真實用功。方能掃除廓清。到得無私可克，自有端拱時在。雖曰『何思何慮』，非初學時事。初學必須思省察克治。即是思誠。只思一個天理。到得天理純全，便是何思何慮矣」。

One day the discussion was on the work of learning. The Master said: "In teaching people to learn one must not cling to one side. When one first begins to learn, the mind is a monkey and the thoughts are a horse, tethered but unsettled, and what one thinks about is mostly on the side of human desire, so for now one is taught to sit quietly and rest thought. After a long time, when the mind has become somewhat steady, merely holding still in empty quiet, like dry wood and dead ashes, is of no use. One must be taught self-examination and self-conquest. The work of self-examination and self-conquest must never be interrupted. It is like getting rid of thieves: one must have the idea of sweeping out and clearing. When there is nothing going on, one should hunt out and search for private desires such as love of beauty, love of goods and love of fame one by one, and one must pull out the root of the illness so that it never rises again, and only then is it satisfying. Be always like a cat catching a mouse, with one eye watching and one ear listening, so that as soon as a thought stirs one conquers it at once. Cut through like a nail and a bar of iron: do not tolerate it or give it convenience, do not harbor it, do not let it find a way out. Only then is it real effort, only then can one sweep clean. When there is no private desire left to conquer, naturally there is a time of upright, folded-hands calm. Though it is said 'What is there to think, what is there to ponder,' that is not the matter of a beginner. A beginner must think, examine and conquer himself, which is thinking sincerity. He thinks only of one thing, heavenly principle. When heavenly principle is pure and whole, that is 'what is there to think, what is there to ponder.'"

○澄問，「有人夜怕鬼者奈何」？先生曰，「只是平日不能集義而心有所慊，故怕。若素行合於神明，何怕之有」？子莘曰，「正直之鬼不須怕。恐邪鬼不管人善惡，故未免怕」。先生曰，「豈有邪鬼能迷正人乎？只此一怕即是心邪。故有迷之者。非鬼迷也，心自迷耳。如人好色，即是色鬼迷。好貨，即是貨鬼迷。怒所不當怒，是怒鬼迷。懼所不當懼，是懼鬼迷也」。

Lu Cheng asked: "What should one do about fearing ghosts at night?" The Master said: "It is only that in ordinary times one has not accumulated righteousness and feels something lacking in the mind, and so one fears. If one's usual conduct accords with the spirits, what is there to fear?" Zishen said: "One need not fear upright ghosts. I fear that evil ghosts do not care whether a person is good or bad, so fear is hard to avoid." The Master said: "How can an evil ghost confuse an upright person? This very fear is the mind's evil, which is why there is something to confuse him. It is not a ghost that confuses him; it is the mind confusing itself. For instance, if a man loves beauty, a ghost of beauty confuses him; if he loves goods, a ghost of goods confuses him; if he is angry where he should not be, a ghost of anger confuses him; if he fears where he should not, a ghost of fear confuses him."

○定者心之本體。天理也。動靜所遇之時也。

Stillness is the original substance of the mind, which is heavenly principle. Movement and quiet are the times one encounters.

○澄問學庸同異。先生曰，「子思括大學一書之義為中庸首章」。

Lu Cheng asked about the similarities and differences between the Great Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean. The Master said: "Zisi summarized the meaning of the Great Learning and made it the first chapter of the Doctrine of the Mean."

○問，「孔子正名。先儒說上告天子，下告方伯。廢輒立郢。此意如何」？先生曰，「恐難如此。豈有一人致敬盡禮，待我而為政，我就先去廢他，豈人情天理？孔子既肯與輒為政，必已是他能傾心委國而聽。聖人盛德至誠，必已感化衛輒。使知無父之不可以為人。必將痛哭奔走，往迎其父。父子之愛本於天性。輒能悔痛真切如此，蒯聵豈不感動底豫？蒯聵既還，輒乃致國詩戮。聵已見化於子，又有夫子至誠調和其間，當亦決不肯受。仍以命輒。群臣百姓又必欲得輒為君。輒乃自暴其罪惡。請於天子，告於方伯諸侯。而必欲致國於父。聵與群臣臣姓，亦皆表輒悔悟仁孝之美，請於天子，告於力伯諸戾。必欲得輒而為之君。於是集命於輒。使之復君衛國。輒不得已，乃如後世上皇故事。率群臣百姓尊聵為太公。備物致養。而始退復其位焉。則君君臣臣父父子子，名正言順。一舉而可為政於天下矣。孔子正名或是如此」。

Someone asked: "Confucius rectified names. Earlier Confucians said he reported above to the Son of Heaven and below to the regional lords, to depose Zhe and set up Ying. What do you think this means?" The Master said: "I fear it cannot be so. How could there be a man who shows complete respect and courtesy, who waits for me to take up his government, and I first go and depose him? What kind of human feeling or heavenly principle is that? Since Confucius was willing to govern for Zhe, Zhe must already have been able to entrust the affairs of state to him with his whole heart and listen to him. With his abundant virtue and utmost sincerity, the sage must already have moved and transformed Zhe of Wei, making him know that one without a father cannot be a person, and Zhe would surely weep bitterly and hurry to welcome his father. The love between father and son is rooted in nature. Zhe, repenting so sincerely, would Kuaikui not be moved and pleased? Once Kuaikui returned, Zhe would hand over the state and ask to be put to death. Kuaikui, already transformed by his son and with the Master's utmost sincerity mediating between them, would surely never accept, and would give the state's mandate back to Zhe. The ministers and common people would also surely wish Zhe to be their ruler. Zhe would then expose his own crimes, ask the Son of Heaven, report to the regional lords, and insist on giving the state to his father. Kuaikui and the ministers and people would likewise praise the beauty of Zhe's repentance, benevolence and filial piety, ask the Son of Heaven, report to the regional lords, and insist that Zhe be their ruler. So the mandate would be gathered on Zhe, making him rule Wei again. Zhe, having no choice, would, like the later story of the Retired Emperor, lead the ministers and people to honor Kuaikui as Grand Duke, provide him with all things and nourish him, and only then withdraw and resume his own place. Then ruler would be ruler, minister minister, father father and son son, names would be correct and speech in accord, and in one stroke he could govern the world. This is perhaps how Confucius would have rectified names."

○澄在鴻臚寺倉居。忽家信至，言兒病危。澄心甚憂悶不能堪。先生曰，「此時正宜用助。若此時放過，閒時講學何用？人正要在此時磨鍊？父之愛子，自是至情。然天理亦自有個中和處。過即是私意。人於此處多認做天理當憂，則一向憂苦，不知己，是『有所憂患，不得其正』。大抵七情所感，多隻是過，少不及者。才過便非心之本體。必須調停適中始得。就如父母之喪。人子豈不欲一哭便死，方快於心？然卻曰『毀不滅性』。非聖人強制之也。天理本體，自有分限。不可過也。人但要識得心體，自然增減分毫不得」。

Lu Cheng was staying at the granary of the Court of State Ceremonial when suddenly a letter from home arrived saying his son was gravely ill. Lu Cheng was deeply distressed and could not bear it. The Master said: "This is just the time to apply effort. If you let this time pass, what use is lecturing on learning at leisure? A person needs to be tempered precisely at such a time. A father's love for his son is of course the deepest feeling. Yet heavenly principle also has its place of centrality and harmony, and beyond it is private will. In such a moment people mostly take it as heavenly principle that one ought to grieve, and so they go on grieving, not knowing that they have already fallen into 'having something to be anxious about and failing to be correct.' In general, when the seven feelings are stirred, it is mostly excess, seldom falling short. As soon as there is excess it is no longer the original substance of the mind, and one must adjust it to be moderate. Take mourning for one's parents. How could a son not wish to weep until he died, which would satisfy his heart? Yet it is said 'let grief not destroy the nature.' It is not that the sage forces him. The original substance of heavenly principle has its own limits and cannot be exceeded. One only needs to recognize the substance of the mind, and naturally one cannot add or subtract a hair's breadth."

○不可謂未發之中常人俱有。蓋體用一源。有是體，即有是用。有未發之中，即有發而皆中節之和。今人未能有發而皆中節之和。須知是他未發之中亦未能全得。

One cannot say that ordinary people all have the centrality of the unmanifested. Because substance and function have one source. If there is this substance, there is this function. If there is the centrality of the unmanifested, there is the harmony in which all manifestations hit the measure. People today cannot yet have the harmony in which all manifestations hit the measure; one should know that they cannot yet fully have the centrality of the unmanifested either.

○易之辭是「初九潛龍勿用」六字。易之象是初晝。易之變是值其晝。易之占是用其辭。

The text of the Changes is the six characters of "The hidden dragon: do not act." The image of the Changes is the first line. The change of the Changes is just when the line comes up. The divination of the Changes is using its text.

○夜氣是就常人說。學者能用功，則日間有事無事，皆是此氣翕聚發生處。聖人則不消說夜氣。

The night qi is spoken of with ordinary people in mind. If a learner can apply effort, then in the daytime, whether there is business or not, this is where this qi gathers and arises. As for the sage, there is no need to speak of night qi.

○澄問操存舍亡章。曰，「『出入無時，莫知其鄉』。此雖就常人心說。學者亦須是知得心之本體，亦元是如此。則操存功夫，始沒病痛。不可便謂出為亡人為存。若論本體，元是無出無入的。若論出入，則其思慮運用是出。然主宰常昭昭在此，何出之有？既無所出，何人之有？程子所謂腔子，亦只是天理而已。雖終日應酬，而不出天理，即是在腔子裡。若出天理，斯謂之放，斯謂之亡」。又曰，「出入亦只是動靜。動靜無端。豈有鄉邪」？

Lu Cheng asked about the chapter on holding fast and losing. The Master said: "'It goes out and comes in at no fixed time; no one knows its abode.' Though this is said with the ordinary person's mind in view, learners too must know that the original substance of the mind is also like this, and then the work of holding fast will have no fault. One must not take going out to be losing and coming in to be preserving. If one speaks of the original substance, originally it neither goes out nor comes in. If one speaks of going out and coming in, then the activity of thought and use is going out. Yet the master is always clearly here; what is going out? Since there is nothing going out, what is coming in? What Master Cheng called the 'inside of the chest' is only heavenly principle. Even if one deals with affairs all day without leaving heavenly principle, that is being inside the chest. If one leaves heavenly principle, this is called letting go, this is called losing." He also said: "Going out and coming in are only movement and stillness. Movement and stillness have no beginning or thread; where is there an abode?"

○王嘉秀問，「佛以出離生死誘人入道。仙以長生久視誘人入道。其心亦不是要人做不好。究其極至，亦是貝得聖人上一截。然非人道正路。如今仕者，有由科，有由貢，有由傳奉一般做到大官。畢竟非人仕正路，君子不由也。仙佛到極處，與儒者略同。但有了上一截，遺了下一截。終不似聖人之全。然其上一截同者，不可誣也。後世儒者又只得聖人下一截。分裂失真。流而為記誦，詞章，功利，訓詀。亦卒不免為異端。是四冢者，終身勞苦於身心。無分毫益。祝彼仙佛之徒，清心寡慾，超然於世累之外者，反若有所不及矣。今學者不必先排仙佛。且當篤志為聖人之學。聖人之學明，則仙佛自泯。不然，則此之所學，恐彼或有不屑。而反欲其俯就，不亦難乎？鄙見如此。先生以為何如」？先生曰，「所論大略亦是。但謂上一截，下一截，亦是人見偏了如此。若論聖人大中至正之道，徹上徹下。只是一貫。更有甚上一截，下一截？『「陰一陽之謂道但仁者見之便謂之仁。知者見之便謂之智。百姓又曰用而不知。故君子之道鮮矣』。仁智豈可不謂之道？但見得偏了，便有弊病」。

Wang Jiaxiu asked: "The Buddhists lure people into the Way with escape from birth and death, and the Taoists lure people into the Way with long life and long vision. Their intentions are also not to make people do wrong. At the utmost, they too have seen the upper section of the sage. But it is not the correct road of the human Way. Take officials today: some come through the examinations, some through tribute recommendation, some through court appointment, and all alike may become high officials, but after all this is not the correct road into service, and the gentleman does not take it. At their furthest reach, the Taoists and Buddhists are roughly the same as the Confucians. But having the upper section and losing the lower, they in the end do not resemble the sage's wholeness. Yet where their upper section agrees, it cannot be denied. Later Confucians again obtained only the lower section of the sage, split and lost the truth, and flowed into memorization, rhetoric, utility and philology, and could not in the end avoid being heterodox. These four schools toil in body and mind all their lives and gain not a bit. Looking at the Taoist and Buddhist followers, who clear their minds, reduce desire and rise above worldly entanglements, they seem on the contrary to be lacking in nothing. Learners now need not first reject Buddhism and Taoism, but should earnestly set their aim on the learning of the sage. When the learning of the sage is clear, Buddhism and Taoism will naturally vanish. Otherwise, what we learn here may be disdained over there, and wishing them to stoop to us is also hard, is it not? That is my humble view. What does the Master think?" The Master said: "What you say is roughly right. But to speak of an upper section and a lower section is itself a one-sided view. If we speak of the sage's Way of great centrality and perfect uprightness, it penetrates above and below and is only one thread; what upper and lower sections are there? 'One yin and one yang is called the Way. The benevolent see it and call it benevolence, the wise see it and call it wisdom, and the common people use it daily without knowing it, so the way of the gentleman is rarely seen.' Can benevolence and wisdom not be called the Way? But when seen one-sidedly there is a defect."

○蓍固是易。龜亦是易。

Yarrow stalks are of course the Changes, and tortoise shells are also the Changes.

○問，「孔子謂武王未盡善，恐亦有不滿意」。先生曰，「在武王自合如此」。曰，「使文王未沒，畢竟如何」？曰，「文王在時，天下三分已有其二。若到武王伐商之時，文王若在，或者不致興兵。必然這一分亦來歸了文王。只善處籿，使不得縱惡而已」。

Someone asked: "Confucius said that King Wu was not wholly good; probably there was also some dissatisfaction." The Master said: "In King Wu's own case this was just as it should be." Asked: "Supposing King Wen had not died, what would have happened in the end?" The Master said: "When King Wen was alive, he already held two thirds of the world. When it came to the time King Wu attacked Shang, if King Wen had been alive, he might not have raised troops, and surely the remaining third would also have come to King Wen. He would only have dealt with Zhou well, so that he could not indulge in evil."

○問，「孟於言『執中無權猶執一』」。先生曰，「中只有天理，只是易。隨時變易，如何執得？須是因時制宜。難預先定一個規矩在。如後世儒者要將道理一一說得無罅漏。立定個格式。此正是執一」。

Asked: "Mencius said, 'To hold the center without weighing circumstances is like holding to one thing.'" The Master said: "The center is only heavenly principle, only change. It changes with the times; how can one hold to it? One must adapt to the time, and it is hard to fix a rule in advance. Later Confucians want to explain principles one by one with no gaps and set up a pattern. This is exactly holding to one thing."

○唐詡問，「立志是常存個善念要為善去惡否」？曰，「善念存時，即是天理。此念即更思何善？此念非惡，更去何惡？此念如樹之根芽。立志者長立此善念而已。『從心所欲。不踰矩』，只是志到熟處」。

Tang Xu asked: "Is setting one's aim constantly keeping a good thought, and wishing to do good and remove evil?" The Master said: "When a good thought is kept, that is heavenly principle. If this thought is already present, what more good is there to think? If this thought is not evil, what evil is there to remove? This thought is like the root and sprout of a tree. One who sets his aim only constantly establishes this good thought. 'Following what the heart desires without overstepping the rule' is only the aim brought to ripeness."

○精神，道德，言動，大率收斂為主。發散是不得已。天地人物皆然。

In spirit, morality, speech and action, the main thing is generally to draw in and gather. Spreading out is only when unavoidable. Heaven, earth, humans and things are all like this.

○問，「文中子是如何人」？先生曰，「文中子庶幾『具體而微』。惜其蚤死」。問，「如何卻有續經之非」？曰，「續經亦未可盡非」。請問。良久，曰，「更覺『良工心獨苦』」。

Asked: "What kind of man was Wenzhongzi?" The Master said: "Wenzhongzi was almost 'complete in all respects though in miniature,' a pity that he died early." Asked: "Why then is his continuation of the Classics wrong?" The Master said: "The continuation of the Classics too cannot be wholly rejected." He was asked to explain. After a long while he said: "I feel even more that 'the skilled craftsman's heart toils alone.'"

○許魯齋謂儒者以。治生為先之說亦誤人。

Xu Luzhai (Xu Heng) said that Confucians should put managing a livelihood first, and this saying also misleads people.

○問仙家元氣，元神，元精。先生曰，「只是一件。流行為氣。凝聚為精。妙用為神」。

Asked about the Taoist original qi, original spirit and original essence. The Master said: "They are only one thing. Flowing it is qi, condensed it is essence, and wonderfully functioning it is spirit."

○喜怒哀樂，本體自是中和的。才自家看些意思，便過不及，便是私。

Joy, anger, sorrow and delight, in their original substance, are naturally central and harmonious. As soon as one adds some personal intent, there is excess or shortfall, and that is selfishness.

○問，「哭則不歌」。先生曰，「聖人心體自然如此」。

Asked: "When one weeps one does not sing." The Master said: "The mind-substance of the sage is naturally so."

○克己須要掃除廓清，一毫不存方是。有一毫在，則眾惡相引而來。

Overcoming the self must be a sweeping out and clearing away, and only when not a hair remains is it right. If a hair remains, then a host of evils are drawn in.

○問律呂新書，先生曰，「學者當務為急。算得此數熟，亦恐未有用。必須心中先具禮樂之本方可。且如其書說，冬用管以候氣。然至冬至那一刻時，管灰之飛，或有先後須臾之間。焉知那管正值冬至之刻？須自心中先曉得冬至之刻始得。此便有不通處。學者須先從禮樂本原上用功」。

Asked about the New Book of Pitch-pipes. The Master said: "Learners should do what is urgent and needs doing. To master these numbers and calculations is probably also of no use. One must first have the root of rites and music in the mind. As that book says, in winter one uses pipes to detect the qi. But at the moment of the winter solstice, the flying of the pipe ashes may come a little earlier or later. How can one know the pipe is at the moment of the winter solstice? One must first know the moment of the winter solstice in one's own mind. This is where it breaks down. Learners must first apply effort to the root source of rites and music."

○曰仁云，「心猶鏡也。聖人心如明鏡。常人心如昏鏡。近世格物之說，如以鏡照物，照上用功。不知鏡尚昏在，何能照？先生之格物，如磨鏡而使之明。磨上用功。明瞭後亦未嘗廢照」。

Xu Ai (Renri) said: "The mind is like a mirror. The sage's mind is like a bright mirror, the ordinary person's mind is like a clouded mirror. The recent doctrine of the investigation of things is like using a mirror to illuminate things, applying effort to the illuminating. It does not know that the mirror is still clouded; how can it illuminate? The Master's investigation of things is like polishing the mirror to make it bright, applying effort to the polishing. After it is bright, illumination has never been abandoned."

○問道之精粗。先生曰，「道無精粗。人之所貝有精粗。如這一間房。人初進來，只貝一個大規模如此。處久便柱壁之類，一一看得明白。再久，如柱上有些文藻，細細都看出來。然只是一間房」。

Asked about the fineness and coarseness of the Way. The Master said: "The Way has no fineness or coarseness. Only what people see has fineness and coarseness. Take this room: when a person first comes in, he sees only a large layout like this. After staying a while, he sees the pillars and walls and so on clearly one by one. After longer still, if there is some pattern on a pillar, he sees it in detail. Yet it is only one room."

○先生曰，「諸公近見時，少疑問。何也？人不用力，莫不自以為己知。為學只循而行之是矣。殊不知私慾日生。如地上塵一日不掃，便又有一層。看實用功，便見道無終窮。愈探愈深。必使精白無一毫不徹方可」。

The Master said: "Gentlemen, when you meet me lately, you have few questions. Why? When people do not put in effort, there is none who does not think he already knows. They think learning is just following and doing. They do not realize that private desires grow day by day, like dust on the ground, which if not swept for one day has another layer. When one truly applies effort, one sees that the Way has no end, and the more one probes the deeper it is. One must make it pure and white until there is not a hair that is not penetrated, and only then is it enough."

○問，「知至然後可以言誠意。今天理人慾知之未盡，如何用得克己工夫」？先生曰，「人若真宣切己用功不已，則於此心天理之精微，日見一日。私慾之細微，亦日見一日。若不用克己工夫，終日只是說話而已。天理格不自見，私慾亦胳不自貝。如人走路一般。走得一段，方認得一段。走到歧路處，有疑便問。問了又走。方漸能到得欲到之處。今人於己知之天理不肯存。己知之人慾不肯去。且只管愁不能盡知。只管閒講。何益之有？巨待克得自己無私可克，方愁不能盡知，亦未遲在」。

Asked: "Only when knowledge has been reached can one speak of making the will sincere. Now if we do not fully know heavenly principle and human desire, how can we use the work of overcoming the self?" The Master said: "If a person truly and earnestly applies effort ceaselessly on himself, then of the subtlety of heavenly principle in this mind he sees more each day, and of the fineness of private desire he also sees more each day. If one does not use the work of overcoming the self, one only talks all day. Heavenly principle can never show itself, and private desire can never show itself either. It is like walking a road: only after walking a stretch does one recognize that stretch. When one reaches a fork, if in doubt one asks, and after asking one walks on, and gradually one can reach the place one wants to reach. Today people are unwilling to keep the heavenly principle they already know or remove the human desire they already know, and just worry that they cannot know everything and just talk idly; what benefit is there? Wait until one has overcome oneself so that there is no private desire left to conquer, and then worry that one cannot fully know; it is not too late."

○問，「道一而已。古人論道往往不同。求之亦有要乎」？先生曰，「道無方體。不可執著。卻拘滯於文義上求道遠矣。如今人只說天。其實何嘗見天？謂日月風雷即天，不可。謂人物草木不是天，亦不可。道鄎是天。若識得時，何莫而非道？人但各以其一隅之見，認定以為道止如此，所以不同。若解向裡尋求，見得自己心體，即無時無處不是此道。旦古一旦今。無終無始。更有甚同異？心即道。道即天。知心則知道知天」。又曰，「諸君要實見此道，須從自己心上體認，不假外求始得」。

Asked: "The Way is only one, yet the ancients often spoke of the Way differently. Is there also an essential key in seeking it?" The Master said: "The Way has no direction, place or form, and cannot be clung to. If one is bound to the literal meaning of the text in seeking the Way, it is far off. Today people only speak of Heaven, but when have they really seen Heaven? To say that sun, moon, wind and thunder are Heaven is wrong; to say that people, things, grass and trees are not Heaven is also wrong. The Way is Heaven. If one recognizes it, where is it not the Way? People each take their own corner of understanding and decide that the Way ends there, and so they differ. If one knows to look inward and sees one's own mind-substance, then at no time and place is it not this Way. From ancient times to now, with no end and no beginning, what sameness or difference is there? Mind is the Way, and the Way is Heaven. To know the mind is to know the Way and know Heaven." He also said: "If you gentlemen wish to truly see this Way, you must recognize it in your own mind and not seek it from outside."

○問，「名物度數。亦須先講求否」？先生曰，「人只要成就自家心體，則用在其中。如養得心體果有未發之中，自然有發而中節之和。自然無施不可。茍無是心，雖預先講得世上許多名物度數，與己原不相干。只是裝綴臨時，自行不去。亦不是將名物度數全然不理。只要『知所先後，則近道』」。又曰，「人要隨才成就，才是其所能為。如夔之樂，稷之種。是他資性合下便如此。成就之者，亦只是要他心體純乎天理。其運用處，皆從天理上發來，然後謂之才。到得純乎天理處，亦能不器。使薆稷易藝而為，當亦能之」。又曰，「如『素富貴，行乎富貴。素患難，行乎患難』，皆是不器。此惟養得心體正者能之」。

Asked: "Must one also study names, things, institutions and numbers first?" The Master said: "A person need only fulfill his own mind-substance, and the function is within it. If one nourishes the mind-substance so that it truly has the centrality of the unmanifested, naturally there is the harmony that hits the measure when manifested, and naturally nothing one does is wrong. If there is no such mind, even if one has studied beforehand all the names, things, institutions and numbers of the world, they have no connection with oneself and are merely decoration for the moment, and will not work by themselves. It is not that names, things, institutions and numbers are wholly ignored; only 'knowing what comes first and last brings one close to the Way.'" He also said: "A person should be fulfilled according to his talent, what he can do. Take Kui's music or Ji's planting: these are naturally his innate disposition. What fulfills him is only that his mind-substance be purely heavenly principle and all his activities arise from heavenly principle, and then it is called talent. When one reaches the point of purity in heavenly principle, one can also be no mere utensil. If Kui and Ji had exchanged tasks, they should have been able to do them." He also said: "As in 'Being by nature in wealth, one acts as in wealth; being by nature in hardship, one acts as in hardship,' all are not being a mere utensil. Only one who has nourished a rectified mind-substance can do this."

○「與其為數頃無源之塘水，不若為數尺有源之井水，生意不窮」。時先生在塘邊坐。傍有井，故以之喻學雲。

"Rather than be a pond of several acres with no source, be a well of several feet with a source, whose life is inexhaustible." At that time the Master was sitting by a pond, and beside it was a well, so he used this as a metaphor for learning.

○問，「世道日降。太古時氣象，如何復見得」？先生曰，「一日便是一元。人平日一時起坐，未與物接。此心清明景象，便如在伏羲時遊一般」。

Asked: "The world's Way declines day by day. How can one again see the atmosphere of high antiquity?" The Master said: "One day is one cycle. When a person first rises and sits in ordinary times, before meeting things, the clear and bright scene of this mind is just like wandering in the age of Fu Xi."

○問，「心要逐物。如何則可」？先生曰，「人君端拱清穆，六卿分職，天下乃治。心統五官，亦要如此。今眼要視時，心便逐在色上。耳要聽時，心便逐在聲上。如人君要選官時，便自去坐在吏部。要調軍時，便自去坐在兵部。如此，豈惟失卻君體？六卿亦皆不得其職」。

Asked: "The mind wants to chase after external things; how can this be put right?" The Master said: "When the ruler sits upright with folded hands, pure and solemn, and the six ministers divide their duties, the world is ordered. The mind governs the five senses and should be the same. Now when the eyes want to see, the mind chases after color; when the ears want to hear, the mind chases after sound. It is as if a ruler, when he wishes to select officials, goes to sit in the Ministry of Personnel himself, and when he wishes to move troops, goes to sit in the Ministry of War himself. In that case, not only is the ruler's own role lost, but the six ministers also cannot fulfill their duties."

○善念發而知之，而充之。惡念發而知之，而遏之。知眾充與遏者，志也。天聰明也。聖人只有此。學者當存此。

When a good thought arises, know it and expand it; when an evil thought arises, know it and check it. What knows what should be expanded and what should be checked is the aim, which is Heaven-given intelligence. The sage has only this. Learners should preserve this.

○澄曰，「好色，好利，好名等心，固是私慾。如閒思雉慮，如何亦謂之私慾」？先生曰，「畢竟從好色，好利，好名等根上起。自尋其根便見。如汝心中決知是無有做劫盜的思慮。何也？以汝元無是心也。汝若於貨色名利等心，一切皆如不做劫盜之心一般，都消滅了。光光只是心之本體。看有甚閒思慮？此便是『寂然不動』。便是『未發之中』。便是『廓然大公』。自然『感而遂通』。自然『發而中節』。自然『物來順應』」。

Lu Cheng said: "Minds that love beauty, profit and fame are of course private desire. But why are idle thoughts and stray musings also called private desire?" The Master said: "After all they arise from the roots of loving beauty, profit and fame. Look for their roots in yourself and you will see it. For instance, in your mind you know for certain that there are no thoughts of robbery. Why? Because originally you have no such mind. If with respect to the minds of goods, beauty, name and profit you had eliminated everything, as with the mind that does not rob, leaving only the bare original substance of the mind, would you still have idle thoughts? This is 'still and unmoving,' this is 'the centrality of the unmanifested,' this is 'vast and perfectly impartial,' and naturally 'on being stirred it penetrates,' naturally 'when manifested it hits the measure,' and naturally 'when things come it responds accordingly.'"

○問志至氣次。先生日，「『志之所至，氣亦至焉』之謂。非『極至次貳』之謂。『持其志』，則養氣在其中。『無暴其氣』，則亦持其志矣。孟子救告子之偏，故如此夾持說」。

Asked about "the will is supreme and the qi comes next." The Master said: "It means 'wherever the will goes, the qi goes too,' not the meaning of 'utmost and secondary.' If one 'holds firm to the will,' nourishing the qi is within it; if one 'does not do violence to the qi,' that too is holding to the will. Mencius was rescuing Gaozi's one-sidedness, so he spoke clamping from both sides in this way."

○問，「先儒曰，『聖人之道，必降而自卑。賢人之言，則引而自高』。如何」？先生日，「不然。如此卻乃偽也。聖人如天。無往而非天。三光之上，天也。九地之下，亦天也。天何嘗有降而自卑？此所謂大而化之也。賢人如山嶽。守其高而已。然百仞者不能引而為千仞。千仞者不能引而為萬仞。是賢人未嘗引而自高也。引而自高，則偽矣」。

Asked: "An earlier Confucian said: 'The Way of the sage must descend and humble itself; the words of the worthy draw themselves upward.' What do you say?" The Master said: "It is not so. That would be false. The sage is like Heaven, and there is nowhere that is not Heaven. Above the three luminaries is Heaven, and beneath the nine earths is also Heaven. When has Heaven ever descended to humble itself? This is what is called great and transforming. The worthy is like a mountain peak, keeping to his height only. But a hundred-fathom peak cannot be drawn up into a thousand fathoms, nor a thousand into ten thousand. So the worthy has never drawn himself upward. To draw oneself upward would be false."

○問，「伊川謂『不當於喜怒哀樂未發之前求中』。延平卻教學者看未發之前氣象。何如」？先生日，「皆是也。伊川恐人於未發前討個中，把中做一物看。如吾向所謂認氣定時做中。故令只於涵養省察上用功。延平恐人未便有下手處，故令入時時刻刻求末發而氣象。使人正目而視惟此，傾耳而聽惟此。即是『戒慎不睹。恐懼不聞』的工夫。皆古人不得已誘人之言也」。

Asked: "Yichuan (Cheng Yi) said: 'One should not seek the center before joy, anger, sorrow and delight arise.' Yanping (Li Tong) instead taught learners to observe the atmosphere before they arise. What do you make of this?" The Master said: "Both are right. Yichuan feared that people would seek a center before arising and treat the center as a thing, as I have been saying about taking the moment when the qi is settled as the center, so he only had people apply effort to nourishing and examining. Yanping feared that people would have nowhere to begin, so he had people at every moment seek the atmosphere before arising, so that when one looks directly it is only on this and when one listens intently it is only on this. This is the practice of 'being cautious about what is not seen and fearful about what is not heard.' Both are words the ancients spoke out of necessity to guide people."

○澄問，「喜怒哀樂之中和。其全體常人固不能有。如一件小事當喜怒者，平時無喜怒之心。至其臨時，亦能中節。亦可謂之中和乎」？先生曰，「在一時之事，固亦可謂之中和。然未可謂之大本達道。人性皆善。中和是人人原有的。豈可謂無？但常人之心既有所昏蔽，則其本體蜼亦時時發見，終是暫明暫滅，非其全體大用矣。無所不中，然後謂之大本。無所不和，然後謂之達道。惟天下之至誠，然後能立天下之大本」。曰，「澄於中字之義尚未明」。曰，「此須自心體認出來。非言語所能喻。中只是天理」。曰，「何者為天理」？曰，「去得人慾，便識天理」。曰，「天理何以謂之中」？曰，「無所偏倚」。曰，「無所偏倚，是何等氣象」？曰，「如明鏡然。全體瑩徹，略無纖塵染著」。曰，「偏倚是有所染著。如著在好色好利好名等項上，方見得偏倚。若未發時，美色名利皆未相看。何以便知其有所偏倚」？曰，「雖未相著，然平日好色好利好名之心，原未嘗無。既未嘗無，即謂之有。既謂之有，則亦不可謂無偏倚。譬之病瘧之人，雖有時不發，而病根原不曾除，則亦不得謂之無病之人矣。須是平日好色好利好名等項一應私心，掃除盪滌，無復纖毫留滯。而此心全體廓然，純是天理。方可謂之喜怒哀樂未發之中。方是天下之大本」。

Lu Cheng asked: "The centrality and harmony of joy, anger, sorrow and delight, in their whole substance, ordinary people of course cannot have. But if on a small matter where there should be joy or anger, one normally has no heart of joy or anger, yet at the time hits the measure, can that also be called centrality and harmony?" The Master said: "In the matter of a moment it can of course be called centrality and harmony, but it cannot yet be called the great root and the universal Way. Human nature is all good. Centrality and harmony are originally in everyone; how can one say they are absent? But when the ordinary person's mind is clouded and obscured, even if its original substance also appears from time to time, it is after all briefly bright and briefly dim, and is not the whole substance and great function. When there is nothing it does not hit the center, then it is called the great root; when there is nothing it is not in harmony, then it is called the universal Way. Only the most sincere in the world can establish the great root of the world." Lu Cheng said: "Cheng still does not understand the meaning of the word 'center.'" The Master said: "This must be recognized in your own mind and cannot be explained by words. The center is only heavenly principle." Asked: "What is heavenly principle?" The Master said: "Remove human desire and you recognize heavenly principle." Asked: "Why is heavenly principle called the center?" The Master said: "Because it leans in no direction." Asked: "What atmosphere is there in leaning in no direction?" The Master said: "Like a bright mirror, whole and transparent, with not a speck of dust attached." Asked: "Leaning is being attached. For instance, when attached to love of beauty, profit, fame and so on, one sees the leaning. But when unmanifested, beauty, fame and profit have not touched it; how can one know it has a leaning?" The Master said: "Though they have not touched it, the mind that loved beauty, profit and fame in ordinary times has originally not been absent. Since it has not been absent, it is called present. Since it is called present, one cannot say there is no leaning. It is like a man with malaria: though at times it does not erupt, the root of the illness has not been removed, and so he cannot be called a person without illness. Only when all the private minds of ordinary times, loving beauty, profit and fame and the like, have been swept and washed away, with not a hair's trace remaining, and the whole of this mind is vast and purely heavenly principle, can it be called the centrality of joy, anger, sorrow and delight unmanifested, and be the great root of the world."

○問，「『顏子沒而聖學亡』。此語不能無疑」。先生曰，「見聖道之全者惟顏子。觀喟然一嘆可見。其謂『夫子循循然善誘人。博我以文，約我以禮』。是見破後如此說。博文約禮，如何是善誘人。學者須恩之。道之全體，聖人亦難以語人。須是學者自修自俉。顏子『雖欲從之，未由也已』即文王望道未見意。望道未見，乃是真見。顏子沒，而聖學之正派，遂不盡傳矣」。

Asked: "'When Yan Zi died the learning of the sage was lost'; this saying cannot but be doubted." The Master said: "The only one who saw the whole of the sage's Way was Yan Zi. One can see this from his sigh. He said, 'The Master is good at leading people step by step, broadening me with culture and restraining me with ritual,' which he said after seeing through it. How broadening with culture and restraining with ritual is skillful guidance, learners must think. The whole substance of the Way is hard even for a sage to tell people; learners must cultivate and awaken it themselves. Yan Zi's 'Though I wish to follow it, I find no way' is the meaning of King Wen 'gazing at the Way as if he had not seen it.' Gazing at the Way and not having seen it is truly seeing. When Yan Zi was gone, the correct line of the learning of the sage could not be fully transmitted."

○問，「身之主為心，心之靈明是知。知之發動是意。意之所看為物。是如此否」？先生曰，「亦是」。

Asked: "The master of the body is the mind, the spiritual brightness of the mind is knowing, the stirring of knowing is intention, and where intention is, there is the thing. Is this so?" The Master said: "Yes."

○只存得此心常見在便是學。過去未來事，思之何益？徒放心耳。

Only keep this mind constantly present, and that is learning. Of past and future matters, what good is thinking about them? It only sends the mind away.

○言語無序，亦足以見心之不存。

When speech has no order, that is enough to show that the mind is not kept in place.

○尚謙問，「孟子之不動心與告子異」。先生曰，「告子是硬把捉著此心，要他不動。孟子卻是集義到自然不動」。又曰，「心之本體原自不動。心之本體即是性。性即是理。性元不動。理元不動。集義是復其心之本體」。

Xue Kan (courtesy name Shangqian) asked: "Mencius's unmoved mind differs from Gaozi's." The Master said: "Gaozi forcibly grasps this mind and wants it not to move. Mencius accumulates righteousness until it is naturally unmoved." He also said: "The original substance of the mind is itself unmoving. The original substance of the mind is nature. Nature is principle. Nature is originally unmoving and principle is originally unmoving. Accumulating righteousness is restoring the original substance of the mind."

○萬象森然時亦沖漠無朕沖漠無朕，即萬象森然。沖漠無朕者一之父。萬象森然者精之母。一中有精。精中有一。

When the myriad phenomena stand in array, it is also void and without trace; being void and without trace is the myriad phenomena standing in array. Void and without trace is the father of the One, and the myriad phenomena standing in array is the mother of the refined. In the One there is the refined, and in the refined there is the One.

○心外無物。如吾心發一念孝親，即孝親便是物。

Outside the mind there is no thing. For instance, when my mind gives rise to a thought of serving my parents, then serving my parents is the thing.

○先生曰，「今為吾所謂格物之學者，尚多流於口耳。況為口耳之學者，能反於此乎？天理人慾，其精微必時時用力省察克治，方日漸有見。如今一說話之間，雖只講天理。不知心中倏忽之間，已有多少私慾。蓋有竊發而不知者。雖用力察之，尚不易見。況徒口講而可得盡知乎？今只管講天理來頓放著不循，講人慾來頓放著不去，豈格物致知之學？後世之學，其極至，只做得個義襲而取的工夫」。

The Master said: "Those who now practice what I call the learning of the investigation of things still mostly drift into mouth-and-ear learning. How then can those who practice only mouth-and-ear learning turn back to this? In the subtlety of heavenly principle and human desire, one must at all times apply effort to examine and conquer oneself in order to see gradually more each day. Now even as we speak, though only discussing heavenly principle, we do not know how many private desires have already arisen in the mind in a flash. Some arise secretly without one knowing. Even when applying effort to examine them, they are not easy to see; how much less can one know them all merely by lecturing? Now to go on lecturing about heavenly principle and leave it aside without following it, to lecture about human desire and leave it aside without removing it, is that the learning of investigating things and extending knowledge? At its utmost, the later learning only accomplishes the work of acquiring righteousness by borrowing."

○問，「知止者，知至善只在吾心，元不在外也，而後志定」。曰，「然」。

Asked: "Knowing where to rest means knowing that the highest good is only in my own mind and was originally not outside, and only then is the aim settled." The Master said: "Right."

○問格物。先生曰，「格者，正也。正其不正，以歸於正也」。

Asked about the investigation of things. The Master said: "To investigate is to rectify. It is to rectify what is not correct so as to return to correctness."

○問，「格物於動處用功否」？先生曰，「格物無間動靜。靜亦物也。孟子謂『必有事焉』。是動靜皆有事」。

Asked: "Is the investigation of things done in movement?" The Master said: "The investigation of things does not depend on movement or stillness. Stillness is also a thing. When Mencius says 'one must be at work on it,' it means there is work in both movement and stillness."

○工夫難處，全在格物致知上。此即誠意之事。意既誠，大段心亦自正，身亦自修。但正心修身工夫，亦各有用力處。修身是日發邊。正心是未發邊。心正則中。身修則和。

The hard part of the work lies entirely in the investigation of things and extension of knowledge. This is the matter of making the will sincere. When the will is sincere, in general the mind is naturally rectified and the person naturally cultivated. But the work of rectifying the mind and cultivating the person also each have their own place for effort. Cultivating the person is on the side of the manifested, and rectifying the mind is on the side of the unmanifested. A rectified mind is the center, and a cultivated person is harmony.

○自格物致知至平天下，只是一個明明德。雖親民亦明德事也。明德是此心之德，即是仁。「仁者以天地萬物為一體」。使有一物失所，便是吾仁有未盡處。

From the investigation of things and extension of knowledge to bringing peace to the world, it is only one thing, making bright the bright virtue. Even loving the people is a matter of bright virtue. Bright virtue is the virtue of this mind, which is benevolence (ren; the vital impulse by which people and things are mutually responsive, which the term "benevolent love" cannot replace). "The benevolent take heaven, earth and the myriad things as one body." If one thing fails to find its place, then there is something in my benevolence that is not yet complete.

○只說明明德而不說親民，便似老佛。

To speak only of making bright virtue bright and not of loving the people is like Laozi, Zhuangzi and the Buddhists.

○至善者性。性元無一毫之惡，故曰至善。止之，是復其本然而已。

The highest good is nature ([character lost in transcription]). Nature originally has not a hair of evil, so it is called the highest good. To rest in it is only to return to its original state.

○問，「知至善即吾性。吾性具吾心。吾心乃至善所止之地。則不為向時之紛然外求，而定則不擾，不擾而靜。靜而不妄動則安。安則一心一意只在此處。千思萬想，務求必得此至善。是能慮而得矣。如此說是否」？先生曰，「大略亦是」。

Asked: "When one knows that the highest good is my own nature, that my nature is complete in my mind, and that my mind is the place where the highest good rests, then one no longer seeks outward in a muddle as before, and when settled one is not disturbed, not being disturbed one is still, being still and not moving rashly one is at ease, and being at ease one's whole mind is only here, thinking a thousand times and ten thousand times, striving to obtain this highest good; this is being able to deliberate and attain. Is this right?" The Master said: "Roughly so."

○問，「程子云，『仁者以天地萬物為一體』。何墨氏兼愛，反不得謂之仁」？先生曰，「此亦甚難言。須是諸君自體認出來始得。仁是造化生生不息之理。雖瀰漫周遍，無處不是。然其流行發生，亦只有個漸。所以生生不息。如冬至一陽生。必自一陽生，而後漸漸至於六陽，若無一陽之生，豈有六陽？陰亦然。惟有漸，所以便有個發端處。惟其有個發端處，所以生。惟其生，所以不息。譬之木。其始抽芽，便是木之生意發端處。抽芽然後發乾。發乾然後生枝生葉。然後是生生不息。若無芽，何以有幹有枝葉？能抽芽，必是下面有個根在。有根方生。無根便死。無根何從抽芽？父子兄弟之愛，便是人心生意發端處。如木之抽芽。自此而仁民，而愛物。便是發乾生枝生葉。墨氏兼愛無苦等。將自家父子兄弟與途人一般看。便自沒了發端處。不抽芽，便知得他無根。便不是生生不息。安得謂之仁？孝弟為仁之本。卻是仁理從裡面發生出來」。

Asked: "Master Cheng said 'the benevolent take heaven, earth and the myriad things as one body.' Why is it that Mo Zi's universal love cannot be called benevolence?" The Master said: "This is also hard to explain. You gentlemen must recognize it yourselves. Benevolence is the principle of creative life that never ceases. Though it pervades everywhere and there is no place it is not, its flowing and arising also has gradualness. So it is unceasing. As with the one yang that arises at the winter solstice: it must begin with one yang and then gradually reach six yangs; without the arising of one yang, where would the six yangs come from? Yin is the same. Precisely because there is gradualness, there is a place of beginning. Precisely because there is a place of beginning, there is arising. Precisely because there is arising, it is unceasing. Take a tree: when it begins to sprout, that is the place where the tree's vital impulse begins. After sprouting it puts out a trunk, after the trunk it puts out branches and leaves, and then there is unceasing growth. If there were no sprout, how could there be trunk, branches and leaves? To be able to sprout there must be a root below. With a root it lives; without a root it dies. Without a root, where would it sprout? The love between father and son and brothers is the place where the vital impulse of the human heart begins, like the sprouting of a tree. From here one extends to loving the people and cherishing things, which is putting out the trunk, branches and leaves. Mo Zi's universal love makes no distinctions, treating his own father, son and brothers like passers-by, and so he has no place of beginning. If it does not sprout, one knows he has no root, and it is not unceasing growth; how can it be called benevolence? Filial piety and brotherly respect are the root of benevolence, yet it is the principle of benevolence that arises from within."

○問，「延平云，『當理而無私心』。當理與無私心，如何分別」？先生曰，「心即理也。無私心，即是當理。未當理，便是私心。若析心與理言之，恐亦未善」。又問，「釋氏於世間一切情慾之私，都不染著。似無私心。但外棄人倫。卻是未當理」。曰，「亦只是一統事。都只是成就他一個私己的心」。

Asked: "Yanping said 'accord with principle and have no private mind.' How do accord with principle and no private mind differ?" The Master said: "Mind is principle. To have no private mind is to accord with principle. Not yet according with principle is having a private mind. If one separates mind and principle and discusses them apart, probably that is also not appropriate." Asked again: "The Buddhists are not attached to any of the private worldly feelings and desires, and seem to have no private mind. But they abandon human relationships outwardly, which is not yet according with principle." The Master said: "It is also one and the same thing, all only fulfilling a private self-regarding mind."

○侃問，「持志如心痛。一心在痛人安有工夫說閒語，管閒事」？先生曰，「初學工夫如此用亦好。但要使知『出入無時，莫知其鄉』。心之神明，原是如此。工伕力有著落。若只死死守著著，恐於工夫上又發病」。

Xue Kan asked: "Holding to one's aim is like a heart pain. With the whole mind in the pain, where is the time to speak idly or to meddle in idle matters?" The Master said: "For a beginner's work, applying it this way is good. But one must also let people know that 'it goes out and comes in at no fixed time, and no one knows its abode.' The spiritual brightness of the mind is originally like this. Then the work has a place to settle. If one only clings to it rigidly, I fear the work will again get sick."

○侃問，「專涵養而不務講求，將認欲作理。則如之何」？先生曰，「人須是知學講求，亦只是涵養。不講求，只是涵養之志不切」。曰，「何謂知學」？曰，「且道為何而學？學個甚」？曰，「嘗聞先生教。學是學存天理。心之本體，即是天理。體認天理，只要自心地無私意」。曰，「如此則只須克去私意便是。又愁甚理欲不明」？曰，「正恐這些私意認不真」？曰，「總是志未切。志切，目視耳聽皆在此。安有認不真的道理？是非之心，人皆有之。不假外求。講求亦只是體當自心所見。不成去心外別有個見」。

Xue Kan asked: "If one focuses on nourishing and does not work at study and discussion, one will mistake desire for principle; what then?" The Master said: "A person must know what learning is. Study and discussion too are only nourishing. If one does not discuss, it is only that the aim of nourishing is not earnest." Asked: "What is knowing learning?" The Master said: "Say, what do you learn for? What do you learn?" He said: "I have heard the Master teach that learning is learning to preserve heavenly principle. The original substance of the mind is heavenly principle. To recognize heavenly principle, one need only have no private will in one's mind." The Master said: "In that case one need only remove private will, and why worry about not clearly seeing principle and desire?" He said: "I fear that I cannot identify these private wills accurately." The Master said: "It is all that the aim is not yet earnest. When the aim is earnest, what the eyes see and the ears hear are all here; how could one fail to identify them accurately? The sense of right and wrong is in everyone and is not sought from outside. Study and discussion too are only embodying what one sees in one's own mind; is there some other seeing outside the mind?"

○先生問在坐之友，此來工夫何似？一友舉虛明意思。先生曰，「此是說光景」。一友敘今昔異同。先生曰，「此是說效驗」。二友惘然。請是。先生曰，「吾翡今日用功，只是要為善之心真切。此心真切，見善即遷，有過即改，力是真切工夫。如此則人慾日消，天理日明。若只管求光景，說效驗，卻是助長外馳病痛，不是工夫」。

The Master asked the friends present how their work was lately. One friend raised the idea of emptiness and brightness. The Master said: "This is speaking of scenery." Another friend described the differences between past and present. The Master said: "This is speaking of effects." The two friends were at a loss and asked what the right way was. The Master said: "Our work today is only that the mind to do good be sincere. When this mind is sincere, on seeing good one moves toward it and on having a fault one corrects it; this is truly sincere work. Then human desire diminishes day by day and heavenly principle brightens day by day. If one only seeks scenery and speaks of effects, that is aiding the illness of racing outward, and is not work."

○朋友觀書，多有摘議晦庵者。先生曰，「是有心求異，即不是。吾說與晦庵時有不同者，為入門下手處有毫釐千里之分。不得不辯。然吾之心與晦庵之心，未嘗異也。若其餘文羲解得明當處，如何動得一字」？

Friends reading books often pointed out and criticized Zhu Xi (Huian). The Master said: "This is deliberately seeking difference and is wrong. What I say sometimes differs from Huian because at the point of entering and starting there is a difference of a hair's breadth that becomes a thousand li, and I cannot but argue it. Yet my mind and Huian's mind have never differed. Where he explained the meaning of texts clearly and appropriately, how could one change a single character?"

○希淵問，「聖人可學而至。然伯夷伊尹於孔子，才力終不同。其同謂之聖者安在」？先生曰，聖人之所以為聖，只是其心純乎天理，而無人慾之雜。猶精金之所以為精，但以其成色足而無銅鉛之雜也。人到純乎天理方是聖。金到足色方是精。然聖人之才力，亦有大小不同。猶金之分兩有輕重。堯舜猶萬鎰。文王孔子猶九千鎰。禹湯武王猶七八千鎰。伯夷伊尹猶四五千鎰。才力不同，而純乎天理則同。皆可謂之聖人。猶分兩雖不同，而足色則同。皆可謂之精金。以五千鎰者而人於萬鎰之中，其足色同也。以夷尹而廁之堯孔之間。其純乎天理同也。蓋所以為精金者，在足角，而不在分兩。所以為聖者，在純乎天理，而不在才力也。故雖凡人。而肯為學，使此心純乎天理，則亦可為聖人。猶一兩之金，此之萬鎰。分兩雖懸絕，而其到足色處，可以無愧。故曰『人皆可以為堯舜』者以此。學者學聖人，不過是去人慾而存天理耳。猶鍊金而求其足色。金之成色，所爭不多，則煅煉之工省，而功易成。成色愈下，則煅煉愈難。人之氣質，清濁粹駁。有中人以上，中人以下。其於道，有生知安行，學知利行，其下者，必須人一己百，人十己千。及其成功則一。後世不知作聖之本是純乎天理。卻專去知識才能上求聖人。以為聖人無所不知，無所不能。我須是將聖人許多知識才能，逐一理會始得。故不務去天理上看工夫。徒弊精竭力。從冊子上鑽研，名物上考索，形逃上此擬。知識愈廣而人慾愈滋。才力愈多而天理愈蔽。正如見人有萬鎰精金，不務煅煉成色，求無愧於彼之精純。而乃妄希分兩，務同彼之萬鎰。錫鉛銅鐵，雜然而投。分兩愈增，而成色愈下。既其梢末，無復有金矣」。時曰仁在傍曰，「先生此喻，足以破世儒支離之惑。大有功於後學」。先生又曰，「吾輩用力，只求日減，不求日增。

Cai Xiyuan asked: "A sage can be reached by learning. But Boyi and Yi Yin, compared with Confucius, differ in talent and strength after all. They are alike called sages; on what basis?" The Master said: "The reason a sage is a sage is only that his mind is purely heavenly principle, without any admixture of human desire. Just as pure gold is pure only because its fineness is complete and it has no admixture of copper or lead. A person is a sage when he is purely heavenly principle, as gold is pure when its fineness is full. But the sage's talent and strength also differ in size, as gold differs in weight. Yao and Shun are like ten thousand yi, King Wen and Confucius like nine thousand yi, Yu, Tang and King Wu like seven or eight thousand yi, and Boyi and Yi Yin like four or five thousand yi. Talent and strength differ, but being purely heavenly principle is the same, and all can be called sages. Just as though weights differ, the fullness of fineness is the same, and all can be called pure gold. Put a five-thousand-yi piece among ten-thousand-yi pieces, and its full fineness is the same; put Boyi and Yi Yin between Yao and Confucius, and their being purely heavenly principle is the same. What makes it pure gold is full fineness, not weight; what makes one a sage is being purely heavenly principle, not talent and strength. So even an ordinary person who is willing to learn, making this mind purely heavenly principle, can also become a sage. Like a one-liang piece of gold compared with ten thousand yi: though the weight is vastly different, when it comes to full fineness it has nothing to be ashamed of. So it is said 'everyone can become a Yao or Shun,' and the basis is here. For learners to learn from the sage is only to remove human desire and preserve heavenly principle, like refining gold to seek full fineness. If the gold's fineness is not much lacking, the work of refining is little and the effect easily achieved. The lower the fineness, the harder the refining. People's physical endowments, clear or turbid, pure or mixed, are above or below the average. As for the Way, some know by birth and act with ease, some learn to know and act for benefit, and those lower must do a hundred where others do one and a thousand where others do ten, but when they succeed it is the same. Later people did not know that the root of becoming a sage is being purely heavenly principle, and went to seek the sage in knowledge and ability alone, thinking that the sage knows everything and can do everything and that I must master all the sage's many kinds of knowledge and ability one by one. So they do not work on heavenly principle, and only wear out their spirits and exhaust their strength, delving into books, searching among names and things, and comparing outward traces. The wider the knowledge, the more human desire grows; the more the talent, the more heavenly principle is obscured. It is exactly like seeing someone with ten thousand yi of pure gold, and not working on refining one's own fineness to be worthy of his purity, but recklessly seeking weight and insisting on matching his ten thousand, throwing in tin, lead, copper and iron in a jumble; as the weight grows the fineness declines, and when it is finally melted down there is no gold left." At that time Xu Ai was beside him and said: "This metaphor of the Master's is enough to dispel the confusion of the fragmenting worldly Confucians, and is of great merit to later learners." The Master also said: "In our effort, we seek only daily reduction and not daily increase.

減得一分人慾，便是復得一分天理。何等輕快脫灑？何等簡易」？

(The Master continued:) Reduce one measure of human desire and you regain one measure of heavenly principle. How light and free is that? How simple and easy?"

○士德問曰，「格物之說，如先生所教，明白簡易，人人見得。文公聰明絕世，於此反有未審。何也」？先生曰，「文公精神氣魄大。是他早年合下便要繼往開來。故一向只就考索著述上用功。若先切己自修，自然不暇及此。到得德盛後，果憂道之不明，如孔子退修六籍，刪繁就簡，開示來學，亦大段不費甚考索。文公早歲便著許多書。晚年方悔是倒做了」。士德曰，「晚年之悔，如謂『向來定本之悟』。又謂『雖讀得書，何益於吾事』？又謂『此與守書籍，泥言語，全無交涉』，是他到此方悔從前用功之錯，方去切己自修矣」。曰，「然。此是文公不可及處。他力量大。一悔便轉。可惜不久即去世。平日許多錯處皆不及改正」。

Yang Shide asked: "The doctrine of the investigation of things, as the Master teaches it, is clear, simple and visible to everyone. Wengong (Zhu Xi) was of unparalleled intelligence; why was he, on the contrary, not clear on this?" The Master said: "Wengong's spirit and stature were great. In his early years he wished to carry on the past and open the future, so he always worked on research and writing. If he had first earnestly cultivated himself, he would naturally not have had time to look into these things. After his virtue was abundant, if he had truly been anxious about the Way not being clear, as Confucius withdrew to edit the Six Classics, cutting the complex down to the simple and revealing it to later learners, he would in general not have spent much on research. Wengong wrote many books in his early years, and only in his later years regretted that this was doing things backwards." Shide said: "His later regret, as when he said 'the error of the fixed text I made before' (the base text has "wu", an error for "wu" meaning error), and also said 'though I have read books, what benefit has it been to my own matter,' and also said 'this has no connection at all with guarding books and clinging to words,' was when he regretted the mistake of his earlier effort and began to cultivate himself earnestly." The Master said: "Yes. This is what cannot be matched in Wengong. His strength was great and he turned at once on regret. It is a pity that he died soon after, and the many mistakes of his ordinary days he had no time to correct."

○侃去花問草。因曰，「天地間何善難培，惡難去」？先生曰，「未培未去耳」。少間曰，「此等看善惡，皆從軀殼起念。便會錯」。侃未達。曰，「天地生意，花草一般。何曾有善惡之分？子欲觀花，則以花為善，以草為惡。如欲用草時，復以草為善矣。此等善惡，皆由汝心好惡所生。故知是錯」。曰，「然則無善無惡乎」？曰，「無善無惡者理之靜。有善有惡者氣之動。不動於氣，即無善無惡。是謂至善」。曰，「佛氏亦無善無惡。何以異」？曰，「佛氏著在無善無惡上，便一切都不管。不可以治天下。聖人無善無惡。只是無有作好，無有作惡。不動於氣。然遵王之道，會其有極。便自一循天理。便有個裁成輔相」。曰，「草既非惡，即草不宜去矣」？曰，「如此卻是佛老意見。草若是礙，何妨汝去」？曰，「如此又是作好作惡」。曰，「不作好惡，非是全無好惡。卻是無知覺的人。謂之不作者，只是好惡一循於理。不去，又著一分意思。如此即是不曾好惡一般」。曰，「去草如何是一循於埋，不看意思」？曰，「草有妨礙，理亦宜去。去之而已。偶未即去，亦不累心。若著了一分意思，即心體便有貽累，便有許多動氣處」。曰，「然則善惡全不在物」。曰，「只在汝心。循理便是善。動氣便是惡」。曰，「畢竟抑無善惡」。曰，「在心如此。在物亦然，世儒惟不知此，舍心逐物。將格物之學錯看了。絳日馳求於外，只做得個義襲而取。終身行不著，習不察」。曰，「如好好色，如惡惡臭，則如何」？曰，「此正是一循於理。是天理合如此。本無私意作好作惡」。曰，「如好好色，如惡惡臭。安得非意」？曰，「卻是誠意。不是私意。誠意只是循天理。雖是循天理，亦看不得一分意。故有所念懥好樂，則不得其正。須是廓然大公，方是心之本體。

Xue Kan was weeding the grass among the flowers and said: "Why is it that in the world goodness is hard to cultivate and evil hard to remove?" The Master said: "It is just that you have not yet cultivated it and not yet removed it." After a while he said: "To look at good and evil this way is to form thoughts from the bodily shell, and that is a mistake." Xue Kan did not understand. The Master said: "The life-force of Heaven and Earth is the same for flowers and grass; when did it ever distinguish good from evil? If you wish to look at flowers, you take the flowers as good and the grass as evil. If you need the grass, you take the grass as good. This good and evil arises from your heart's likes and dislikes, so know that it is a mistake." He asked: "Then is there neither good nor evil?" The Master said: "Neither good nor evil is the stillness of principle; having good and evil is the movement of qi. If one is not moved by qi, there is neither good nor evil; this is called the highest good." He asked: "The Buddhists also have neither good nor evil; what is the difference?" The Master said: "The Buddhists cling to neither good nor evil, and so they care about nothing, and cannot govern the world. The sage has neither good nor evil only in that he has no making of likes and no making of dislikes, and is not moved by qi. Yet he follows the way of the kings and meets the supreme ultimate, so he naturally follows Heavenly principle in everything, and then there is a shaping and assisting." He asked: "If the grass is not evil, should it not be left alone?" The Master said: "That would be the view of the Buddhists and Daoists. If the grass is in the way, what harm is there in your removing it?" He asked: "That would again be making likes and dislikes." The Master said: "Not making likes and dislikes does not mean having no likes and dislikes at all, which would make one a person without awareness. 'Not making' means only that likes and dislikes entirely follow principle, without adding any further intention. Then it is as if one had not liked or disliked at all." He asked: "How is removing the grass entirely following principle without adding intention?" The Master said: "If the grass is a hindrance, principle too says it should be removed, so remove it and that is all. If by chance it is not removed at once, the heart is not burdened. If you add a trace of intention, the substance of the heart is burdened, and there are many places where qi is moved." He asked: "Then good and evil are not in things at all." The Master said: "They are only in your heart. Following principle is good, and being moved by qi is evil." He asked: "In the end, things have no good or evil." The Master said: "It is so in the heart, and so also in things. Worldly scholars simply do not know this; they abandon the heart and chase things, and have misread the learning of investigating things. All day they gallop outward in search and only manage to take things by borrowed righteousness, and all their lives they act without knowing and practice without examining." He asked: "What about 'loving beauty as one loves beauty, hating a bad smell as one hates a bad smell'?" The Master said: "That is precisely following principle entirely: it is as Heavenly principle should be, and originally there is no private intention making likes and dislikes." He asked: "How can 'loving beauty as one loves beauty, hating a bad smell as one hates a bad smell' not be intention?" The Master said: "It is sincere intention, not private intention. Sincere intention is only following Heavenly principle. Even following Heavenly principle, one cannot add a trace of intention. So when there is anger, resentment, liking or pleasure, one does not attain correctness. One must be open, vast and impartial; only then is it the original substance of the heart.

知此即知未發之中」，伯生曰，「先生云，『草有妨礙，理亦宜去』。緣何又是軀殼起念」？曰，「此須汝心自體當。汝要去草，是甚麼心？周茂叔窗前草不除，是甚麼心」？

(The Master continued:) Knowing this is knowing the center before it is manifested." Meng Bosheng said: "The Master said that 'if grass is a hindrance, principle too says it should be removed.' Why is that again forming thoughts from the bodily shell?" The Master said: "This you must come to understand in your own heart. When you want to remove grass, what heart is it? When Zhou Dunyi (Maoshu) did not remove the grass before his window, what heart was that?"

○先生謂學者曰，「為學須得個頭腦工夫，方有看落。縱未能無間，如舟之有舵，一提便醒。不然，雖從事於學，只做個義襲而取。只是行不著，習不察，非大本達道也」。又曰，「見得時，橫說豎說皆是。若於此處通，彼處不通，只是未見得」。

The Master said to the students: "In learning one must have the work of a guiding principle, and only then is there something to rely on. Even if it is not yet without interruption, it is like a boat with a rudder: one lift and it is awake. Otherwise, though one engages in learning, one only manages to take things by borrowed righteousness, acting without knowing and practicing without examining; this is not the great root or the penetrating Way." He also said: "When one sees it, to speak across or down is all right. If it is clear here but not clear there, one has simply not yet seen it."

○或問，「為學以親故，不免業舉之累」。先生曰，「以親之故而業舉為累於學，則治田以養其親者亦有累於學乎？先正云，『惟患奪志』。但恐為學之志不真切耳」。

Someone asked: "In learning, for the sake of my parents I cannot avoid being burdened by the civil service examinations." The Master said: "If taking the examinations for the sake of one's parents burdens learning, then does a farmer who plows to support his parents also burden learning? The former worthies said: 'The only worry is that the will is taken away.' The only fear is that one's will in learning is not genuine."

○崇一問，「尋常意思多忙。有事固忙，無事亦忙。何也」？先生曰，「天地氣機，元無一息之停。然有個主宰。故不先不後，不急不緩。雖千變萬化，而主宰常定。人得此而生。若主宰定時，與天運一般不忌。雖酬酢萬變，常是從容自在。所謂『天君泰然，百體從令』。若無主宰，便只是這氣奔放。如何不忙」？

Ouyang Chongyi asked: "My ordinary state of mind is mostly busy. When there is work, I am busy; when there is none, I am also busy. Why?" The Master said: "The workings of qi in Heaven and Earth have never stopped for a single breath. Yet there is a master, so that nothing is earlier or later, hurried or slow. Though it changes a thousand ways, the master is always fixed. Humans are born by obtaining this. If the master is fixed, one is unceasing like the movement of Heaven. Even when responding to a myriad changes one is always at ease and unhurried. This is what is meant by 'when the ruler of Heaven is calm, the hundred members follow his command.' If there is no master, the qi merely rushes about; how could one not be busy?"

○先生曰，「為學大病在好名」。侃曰，「從前歲，自謂此病已輕。此來精察，乃知全未。豈必務外為人？只聞譽而喜，聞毀而悶，即是此病發來」。曰，「最是。名與實對。務實之心重一分，則務名之心輕一分。全是務實之心，即全無務名之心。若務實之心，如飢之求食，渴之求飲，安得更有工夫好名」？又曰，「『疾沒世而名不稱』。稱字去聲讀。亦『聲聞過情，君子恥之』之意。實不稱名，生猶可補。沒則無及矣。『四十五十而無聞』，是不聞道，非無聲聞也。孔子云，『是聞也，非達也』。安肯以此忘人」？

The Master said: "The great fault in learning is the love of fame." Xue Kan said: "Since the year before last I have thought this illness was mild in me. Recently, on careful examination, I realized it was not so at all. Must one necessarily pursue externals and perform for others? Merely rejoicing at praise and being depressed at blame is this illness breaking out." The Master said: "Exactly. Fame and reality are opposed. As the heart that pursues reality grows heavier by a degree, the heart that pursues fame grows lighter by a degree. If it is wholly the heart of pursuing reality, there is wholly no heart of pursuing fame. If the heart of pursuing reality is like a hungry man seeking food or a thirsty man seeking drink, how could one have time to love fame?" He also said: "'The gentleman is troubled if his name is not praised after his death': the word 'praised' is read in the departing tone, and it also carries the meaning of 'when reputation exceeds the facts, the gentleman is ashamed of it.' If reality does not match the name, one can still make up for it while alive; once dead, it is too late. 'At forty or fifty without being heard of' means not having heard the Way, not lacking reputation. Confucius said: 'That is reputation, not penetration.' How could he have taught people with this?"

○侃多悔。先生曰，「悔悟是去病之藥。以改之為貴。若留滯於中，則又因藥發病」。

Xue Kan often regretted things. The Master said: "Regret and awakening are the medicine that cures illness, and the value lies in correcting. If it lingers in the heart, then the medicine in turn causes illness."

○德章曰，「聞先生以精金喻聖，以分兩喻聖人之分量，以煅煉喻學者之工夫。最為深切。惟謂堯舜為萬鎰，孔子為九千鎰。疑未安」。先生曰，「此又是軀殼上起念，故替聖人爭分兩。若不從軀殼上起念，即郋堯舜萬鎰不為多，孔子九千鎰不為少。堯舜萬鎰，只是孔子的。孔子尢千鎰，只是堯舜的。原無彼我。所以謂之聖。只論精一，不論多寡。只要此心純乎天理處同。便同謂之聖。若是力量氣魄，如何盡同得？後儒只在分兩上較量，所以流入功利。若除去了此較分兩的心，各人盡著自己力量精神，只在此心純天理上用功，即人人自有，個個圓成，便能大以成大，小以成小。不假外慕，無不具足。此便是實實落落，明善誠身的事。後儒不明聖學。不知就自己心地良知良能上體認擴充。卻去求知其所不知，求能其所不能。一味只是希高慕大。不知自己是桀籿心地。動輒要做堯舜事業。如何做得？終年碌碌，至於老死。竟不知成就了個甚麼。可哀也已」。

De Zhang said: "I have heard that the Master compares sages to pure gold, compares the weight to the sage's measure, and compares smelting to the student's effort, which is most apt. But saying Yao and Shun are ten thousand yi and Confucius nine thousand yi, I doubt whether that is right." The Master said: "This is again forming thoughts from the bodily shell, so one argues over the sages' weights. If one does not form thoughts from the bodily shell, one knows that Yao and Shun's ten thousand yi is not too much and Confucius's nine thousand yi is not too little. Yao and Shun's ten thousand yi is just Confucius's, and Confucius's nine thousand yi is just Yao and Shun's. Originally there is no this and that. The reason one is called a sage is only purity and unity, not quantity. As long as the heart is pure in Heavenly principle in the same way, one is called a sage. As for strength and spirit, how could they all be the same? Later scholars only compare weights, and so they drift into utility and profit. If one removes the heart that compares weights, and each person devotes his own strength and spirit to working only on making the heart pure in Heavenly principle, then everyone has it themselves and everyone is perfectly complete, and the great can become great and the small can become small. One does not envy from outside, and nothing is lacking. This is the real and solid matter of making goodness clear and making oneself sincere. Later scholars did not understand the sages' learning, and did not know to recognize and extend their own innate knowing and innate ability in their own heart, but sought to know what they do not know and to be able to do what they cannot, and went only for the high and grand. Not knowing that their own heart is that of Jie and Zhou, they readily want to do the work of Yao and Shun; how could they? Year after year they toil until they grow old and die, and never know what they have achieved. How sad."

○侃問，「先儒以心之靜為體，心之動為用。如何」？先生曰，「心不可以動靜為體用。動靜時也。即體而言用在體。即用而言體在用。是謂『體用一源』。若說靜可以見其體，動可以見其用，卻不妨」。

Xue Kan asked: "The former scholars took the stillness of the heart as substance and the movement of the heart as function. What do you think?" The Master said: "The heart cannot take movement and stillness as substance and function. Movement and stillness are times. Speaking from substance, the function is in the substance; speaking from function, the substance is in the function; this is called 'substance and function have one source.' But to say that stillness shows its substance and movement shows its function does no harm."

○問，「上智下愚，如何不可移」？先生曰，不是不可移。只是不肯移」。

He asked: "Why can the highest wisdom and the lowest stupidity not be changed?" The Master said: "It is not that they cannot be changed, only that they are unwilling to change."

○問「子夏門人問交」章。先生曰，「子夏星言小子之交。子張是言成人之交。若善用之，亦俱是」。

He asked about the chapter "Zixia's disciples asked about friendship." The Master said: "Zixia was speaking of children's friendships, and Zizhang of adults' friendships. If one uses them well, both are right."

○子仁問，「『學而時舀之，不亦說乎』？先儒以學為效先覺之所為。如何」？先生曰，「學是學去人慾，存天理。從事於去人慾存天理，則自正諸先覺，考諸古訓。自下許多間辨思索存省克治工夫。然不過欲去此心之人慾，存吾心之天理耳。若曰效先覺之所為，則只說得學中一件事。事亦似專求諸外了。『時習』者，『坐如屍』，非專習坐也。坐時習此心也。『立如齋』，非專習立也。立時習此心也。『說』是『理義之說我心』之『說』。人心本自說理義。如目本說色，耳本說聲。惟為人慾所蔽所累，始有不說。今人慾日去，則理羲日洽浹。安得不說」？

Ziren asked: "'To learn and to practice it in due time, is that not a pleasure?' The former scholars took learning to be imitating what the earlier awakened ones did. What do you think?" The Master said: "Learning is learning to remove human desires and preserve Heavenly principle. Engaging in removing human desires and preserving Heavenly principle, one naturally corrects oneself by the earlier awakened and examines the ancient teachings, and naturally there is much work of questioning, discerning, thinking, examining and conquering. Yet it is only to remove human desire from this heart and preserve Heavenly principle in my heart. If one says to imitate what the earlier awakened did, that only speaks of one matter within learning, and the matter also seems to be sought wholly from outside. As for the meaning of 'in due time': 'sit like a corpse' does not mean only practicing sitting, but practicing this heart while sitting; 'stand like a fasting person' does not mean only practicing standing, but practicing this heart while standing. 'Pleasure' is the 'pleasure' of 'principle and righteousness please my heart.' The human heart originally delights in principle and righteousness, just as the eyes originally delight in color and the ears in sound. It is only because they are covered and burdened by human desires that there is no delight. Now, as human desires are removed day by day, principle and righteousness permeate day by day; how could one not delight?"

○國英問，「曾子三省雖切。恐是未聞一貫時工夫」。先生曰，「一貫是夫子見曾子未得用功之要，故告之。學者果能忠恕上用力，豈不是一貫？一如樹之根本，貫如樹之枝葉。未種根，何枝葉之可得？體用一慷，體未立，用安從生！謂『曾子於其用處蓋已隨事精察而力行之。但未知其體之一』。此恐未盡」。

Chen Guoying asked: "Zengzi's three daily self-examinations are sincere, but I fear it was his effort before he heard the one thread." The Master said: "The one thread was told to Zengzi because the Master saw that he had not yet grasped the essential of effort. If a student could truly make effort in loyalty and reciprocity, would that not be the one thread? The one is like the root of a tree, and the thread is like the branches and leaves. If the root is not planted, where could branches and leaves come from? Substance and function have one source; if the substance is not established, where would the function be born? To say 'in his function Zengzi had already examined carefully by each matter and practiced it with effort, but did not know the oneness of the substance' probably does not fully capture it."

○黃誠甫問，「汝與回也孰愈」章。先生曰，「子貢多學而識，在聞見上用力。顏子在心地上用功。故聖人間以啟之。而子貢所對，又只在知見上。故聖人嘆惜之。非許之也」。

Huang Chengfu asked about the chapter "Which is better, you or Hui?" The Master said: "Zigong learned much and remembered it, and made effort in what is heard and seen. Yan Zi worked on the ground of the heart. So the sage asked in order to rouse him, and Zigong's answer was again only in knowing and seeing. So the sage sighed over him, not approving him."

○顏子不遷怒，不貳過，亦是有未發之中始能。

That Yan Zi did not transfer his anger and did not repeat a fault was also possible only through having the center before it is manifested.

○種樹者必培其根。種德者必養其心。欲樹之長，必於始生時刪其繁枝。欲德之盛，必於始學時去夫外好。如外好詩文，則精神日漸漏洩在詩文上去。凡百外好皆然。又曰，「我此論學，是無中生有的工夫。諸公須要信得及。只是立志。學者一念為善之志，如樹之種，但勿助勿忘，只管培植將去。自然日夜滋長。生氣日完，枝葉日茂。樹初生時，便抽繁枝。亦須刊落。然後根幹能大。初學時亦然。故立志貴專一」。

One who plants a tree must cultivate its root, and one who plants virtue must nourish his heart. To make a tree grow, one must prune its excessive branches when it first sprouts. To make virtue flourish, one must remove outside fondnesses when one first begins to study. If one is outwardly fond of poetry and prose, one's spirit leaks away day by day into poetry and prose. All outside fondnesses are like this. He also said: "My way of discussing learning is the work of producing something from nothing. You must believe it fully. It is simply establishing the will. A student's single thought of the will to do good is like the seed of a tree: simply do not help it grow and do not forget it, just keep cultivating it, and naturally it will grow day and night. As the life force becomes complete day by day, branches and leaves flourish day by day. When a tree first sprouts and puts out too many branches, it must be pruned, and only then can the root and trunk grow large. It is the same when one first begins to study. So in establishing the will, what matters is singleness."

○因論先生之門。某人在涵養上用功，某人在識見上用功。先生曰，「專涵養者，日見其不足。專識見者，日見其有餘。日不足者，日有餘矣。日有餘者，日不足矣」。

Then the discussion turned to the Master's disciples. Some worked on cultivation, and some on knowledge and views. The Master said: "One who devotes himself to cultivation sees himself as insufficient day by day; one who devotes himself to knowledge and views sees himself as having a surplus day by day. One who is daily insufficient becomes daily in surplus; one who is daily in surplus becomes daily insufficient."

○梁日孚問，「居敬窮理是兩事。先生以為一事。何如」？先生曰，「天地間只有此一事。安有兩事？若論萬殊，禮儀三百，威儀三千，又何止兩？公且道居敬是如何？窮理是如何」？曰，「居敬是存養工夫。窮理是窮事物之理」。曰，「存養個甚」？曰，「是存養此心之天理」。曰，「如此亦只是窮理矣」。曰，「且道如何窮事物之理」？曰，「如事親，便要窮孝之理。事君，便要窮忠之理」。曰，「忠興孝之理，在君親身上？在自己心上？若在自己心上，亦只是窮此心之理矣。且道如何是敬」？曰，「只是主一」。「如何是主一」？曰，「如讀書，便一心在讀書上。接事，便一心在接事上」。曰，「如此則飲酒便一心在飲酒上，好色便一心在好色上。卻是逐物。成甚居敬功夫」？日孚請問曰，「一者，天理。主一是一心在天理上。若只知主一，不知一即是理，有事時便是逐物，無事時便是看空。惟其有事無事，一心皆在天理上用功。所以居敬亦即是窮理。就窮理專一處說，便謂之居敬。就居敬精密處說，便謂之窮理。卻不是居敬了，別有個心窮理。窮理時，別有個心居敬。名睢不同。功夫只是一事。就如易言『敬以直內，義以方外』。敬即是無事時羲，羲即是有事時敬。兩句合說一件。如孔子言『修己以敬』，即不須言義。孟子言集義，即不須言敬。會得時，橫說璧說，工夫總是一般。若泥文逐句，不識本領，即支離決裂。工夫都無下落」。問，「窮理何以即是儘性」？曰，「心之體，性也。性即理也。窮仁之理，真要仁極仁。窮義之理，真要義極義。仁義只是吾性。故窮理即是儘性。如孟子說『充其惻隱之心，至仁不可勝用』。這便是窮理工夫」。日孚曰，「先儒謂『一草一木亦皆有理。不可不察』。如何」？先生曰，「夫我則不暇。公且先去理會自己性情。須能盡人之性，然後能盡物之性」。

Liang Rifu asked: "Dwelling in reverence and exhausting principle are two matters. You, Master, take them as one. How is that?" The Master said: "In Heaven and Earth there is only this one matter; how could there be two? If one speaks of the myriad differences, the three hundred rules of ritual and three thousand rules of deportment, what is that but more than two? Tell me, what is dwelling in reverence? What is exhausting principle?" He said: "Dwelling in reverence is the work of preserving and nourishing; exhausting principle is exhausting the principle of things." The Master said: "What does one preserve and nourish?" He said: "The Heavenly principle of this heart." The Master said: "Then that too is only exhausting principle." He asked: "Then how does one exhaust the principle of things?" He said: "For example, in serving parents one exhausts the principle of filial piety; in serving the ruler one exhausts the principle of loyalty." The Master said: "Are the principles of loyalty and filial piety in the ruler and parents? Or in your own heart? If in your own heart, that too is only exhausting the principle of this heart. Tell me, what is reverence?" He said: "It is just being focused on one." "What is focusing on one?" He said: "When reading, one's whole heart is on reading; when dealing with affairs, one's whole heart is on the affairs." The Master said: "Then in drinking wine one's whole heart would be on drinking, and in lusting after beauty one's whole heart would be on lust, which is chasing things; what kind of work of dwelling in reverence is that?" Rifu asked for instruction. The Master said: "The one is Heavenly principle. Focusing on one is having the whole heart on Heavenly principle. If one only knows to focus on one and does not know that the one is principle, then when there are affairs it is chasing things, and when there are none it is clinging to emptiness. Only if, with or without affairs, the whole heart works on Heavenly principle, is dwelling in reverence also exhausting principle. Speaking of the singleness in exhausting principle, it is called dwelling in reverence; speaking of the thoroughness in dwelling in reverence, it is called exhausting principle. It is not that after dwelling in reverence there is another heart that exhausts principle, or that when exhausting principle there is another heart that dwells in reverence. The names differ but the work is one. It is like the Changes saying 'reverence makes the inside straight, righteousness makes the outside square.' Reverence is righteousness when there is no affair, and righteousness is reverence when there is an affair. The two sentences together speak of one thing. As when Confucius said 'cultivate oneself with reverence,' there is no need to say righteousness; when Mencius spoke of accumulating righteousness, there is no need to say reverence. If one understands, speaking across or down the work is always the same. If one clings to the text and chases each sentence and does not know the root, then it is fragmented and split, and the work has nowhere to land." He asked: "Why is exhausting principle the same as fulfilling nature?" The Master said: "The substance of the heart is nature. Nature is principle. To exhaust the principle of humaneness one must truly be humane to the utmost; to exhaust the principle of righteousness one must truly be righteous to the utmost. Humaneness and righteousness are only my nature, so exhausting principle is fulfilling nature. As Mencius said, 'Extend the heart of compassion, and humaneness cannot be used up,' this is the work of exhausting principle." Rifu said: "The former scholars said 'every blade of grass and every tree also has principle and one must examine it.' What do you think?" The Master said: "I have no leisure for that. First go and understand your own nature and feelings. One must be able to fulfill the nature of people, and only then can one fulfill the nature of things."

日孚悚然有悟。

Rifu was startled and had an awakening.

○惟幹問，「知如何是心之本體」？先生曰，「知是理之靈處。就其主宰處說便謂之心。就其稟賦處說便謂之性。孩提之童，無不知愛其親，無不知敬其兄。只是這個靈能不為私慾遮隔，充拓得盡，便完完是他本體。便與天地合德。自聖人以下，不能無蔽。故須格物以致其知」。

Weigan asked: "How is knowing the original substance of the heart?" The Master said: "Knowing is the spiritual part of principle. Speaking of its function as master, it is called the heart; speaking of what it was endowed with, it is called nature. A small child never fails to know to love his parents and never fails to know to respect his elder brother. If only this spiritual capacity is not obstructed by selfish desires and is extended completely, it is wholly and entirely its original substance, and it unites virtue with Heaven and Earth. From sages downward, no one is without obstruction, so one must investigate things to extend one's knowing."

○守衡問，「大學工夫只是誠意。誠意工夫只是格物修齊治平。只誠意盡矣。又有正心之功。有所念懥好樂，則不得其正。何也」？先生曰，「此要自思得之。知此則知未發之中矣」。守衡再三請。曰，「為學工夫有淺深。初時若不看實用意去好善惡惡，如何能為善去惡？這著實用意，便是誠意。然不知心之本體原無一物，一向著意去好善惡惡，便又多了這分意思，便不是廓然大公。書所謂『無有作好作惡』，方是本體。所以說有所念懥好樂，則不得其正。正心只是誠意工夫裡面。體當自家心體，常要鑑空衡平，這便是未發之中」。

Shouheng asked: "The work of the Great Learning is only sincere intention. The work of sincere intention is only investigating things, cultivating the self, regulating the family, governing the state, and bringing peace to the world. Sincere intention alone would exhaust it. Yet there is also the work of rectifying the heart. When there is anger, resentment, liking or pleasure, one does not attain correctness. Why?" The Master said: "You must think this out yourself. Knowing this, you know the center before it is manifested." Shouheng asked again and again. The Master said: "The work of learning has shallow and deep levels. At first, if one does not truly apply intention to loving good and hating evil, how can one do good and remove evil? This real application of intention is sincere intention. Yet if one does not know that the original substance of the heart has nothing in it, and always applies intention to loving good and hating evil, one adds that much intention and it is not open, vast and impartial. 'There is no making of likes and no making of dislikes,' as the Book of Documents says, is the original substance. So it is said that when there is anger, resentment, liking or pleasure, one does not attain correctness. Rectifying the heart is only within the work of sincere intention. Understand your own heart's substance, so that it is always like an empty mirror and a level scale; this is the center before it is manifested."

○正之問，「戒懼是己所不知時工夫。慎獨是己所獨知時工夫。此說如何」？先生曰，「只是一個工夫。無事時固是獨知。有事時亦是獨知。人若不知於此獨知之地用力，只在人所共知處用功，便是作偽，便是『貝君子而後厭然』。此獨知處便是誠的萌芽。此處不論善念惡念，更無虛假。一是百是，一錯百錯。正是王霸義利誠偽善惡界頭。於此一立立定，便是端本澄源，便是立誠。古人許多誠身的工夫。精神命脈，全體只在此虛。真是莫見莫顯，無時無處，無終無始。只是此個工夫。今若又分戒懼為己所不知。即工夫便支離，亦有間斷。既戒懼，即是知。己若不知，是誰戒懼？如此見解，便要流入斷滅禪定」。曰，「不論善念惡念，更無虛假。則獨知之地，更無無念時邪」？曰，「戒懼亦是念。戒懼之念，無時可息。若戒懼之心稍有不存，不是昏瞶，便已流入惡念。自朝至暮，自少至老，若要無念，即是己不知。此除是昏睡，除是槁木死灰」。

Huang Zhengzhi asked: "Being cautious and apprehensive is the work for what one does not know oneself; being watchful when alone is the work for what only oneself knows. How is this saying?" The Master said: "It is one work. When there is nothing to do, it is indeed what only oneself knows, and when there is something to do, it is also what only oneself knows. If a person does not know to apply effort in this place that only oneself knows, and works only where others know, that is deception, 'seeing the gentleman and then shrinking.' This place known only to oneself is the sprout of sincerity. Here, whether a thought is good or evil, there is nothing false. If one is right, all are right; if one is wrong, all are wrong. It is precisely the boundary between king and hegemon, righteousness and profit, sincerity and falsity, good and evil. To set oneself firmly here is to make the root upright and clear the source, and is establishing sincerity. All the many works of the ancients on making oneself sincere have their spirit and life blood entirely only in this place. Truly nothing is more visible or manifest, there is no time or place, no end or beginning, and it is only this work. If one now further divides being cautious and apprehensive as what oneself does not know, then the work is fragmented and also interrupted. Being cautious and apprehensive is already knowing. If oneself does not know, who is being cautious and apprehensive? Such a view would flow into the extinction of dead meditation." He asked: "Whether a thought is good or evil, there is nothing false; then in the place known only to oneself, is there no time without thoughts?" The Master said: "Being cautious and apprehensive is also a thought. The thought of caution and apprehension cannot rest at any time. If the heart of caution and apprehension is slightly absent, one is not in confusion and has already flowed into evil thoughts. From morning to night, from youth to old age, if one wants to have no thoughts, that is oneself not knowing. That is only possible in deep sleep, or in withered wood and dead ashes."

○志道問，「荀子云，『養心莫善於誠』。先儒非之，何也」？先生曰，「此亦未可便以為非。『誠』字有以工夫說者。誠是心之本體。求復其本體，便是思誠的工夫。明道說『以誠敬存之』，亦是此意。大學『欲正其心，先誠其意』。荀子之言固多病，然不可一例吹毛求疵。大凡看人言語，若先有個意見，便有過當處。『為富不仁』之言，孟子有取於陽虎。此便見聖賢大公之心」。

Zhidao asked: "Xunzi said 'for nourishing the heart nothing is better than sincerity.' The former scholars criticized him; why?" The Master said: "This cannot be taken at once as wrong. The word 'sincerity' is sometimes used in the sense of work. Sincerity is the original substance of the heart. Seeking to restore its original substance is the work of reflecting on sincerity. Mingdao (Cheng Hao) said 'preserve it with sincerity and reverence,' which is also this meaning. The Great Learning says 'wishing to rectify the heart, first make the intention sincere.' Though Xunzi's words have many faults, one cannot find fault with everything by splitting hairs. In general, when looking at what others say, if one first has a view, one will go too far. 'He who seeks wealth is not humane': Mencius took this from Yang Hu. This shows the impartial heart of sages and worthies."

○蕭惠問，「己私難克。奈何」？先生曰，「將汝己私來替汝東」。又曰，「人頂有為己之心，方能克己。能克己，方能成己」。蕭惠曰，「惠亦頗有為己之心。不知緣何不能克己」？先生曰，「且說汝有為己之心是如何」。惠良久曰，「惠亦一心要做好人。便自謂頗有為己之心。今思之，看來亦只是為得個軀殼的己。不曾為個真己」。先生曰，「真己何曾離著軀殼？恐汝連那軀殼的己也不曾為。且道汝所謂軀殼的己，豈不是耳目囗鼻四肢」？惠曰，「正是為此，目便要色，耳便要聲，囗便要味，四肢便要逸樂，所以不能克」。先生曰，「美色令人目盲。美聲令人耳聾。美味令人囗爽。馳騁田獵令人發狂，這都是害汝耳目囗鼻四肢的。豈得是為汝耳目囗鼻四肢？若為看耳目囗鼻四肢時，便須思量耳如何聽，目如何祝，囗如何言，四肢如何動。必須非禮勿視聽言動，方才成得個耳目囗鼻四肢。這個才是為著耳目囗鼻四肢。汝今終日向外馳求，為名為利一逼都是為著軀殼外面的物事。汝若為著耳目囗鼻四肢，要非禮勿視聽言動時，豈是汝之耳目囗鼻四肢自能勿視聽言動？須由汝心。這視聽言動，皆是汝心。汝心之動發竅於目。汝心之聽發竅於耳。汝心之言發竅於囗。汝心之動發竅於四肢。若無汝心，便無耳目囗鼻。所謂汝心，亦不專是那一團血肉。若是那一團血肉，如今已死的人，那一團血肉還在。緣何不能視聽言動？所謂汝心，卻是那能視聽言動的。這個便是性，便是天理。有這個性，才能生這性之生理。便謂之仁。這性之生理，發在目便會視。發在耳便會聽。發在囗便會言。發在四肢便會動。都只是那天理髮生。以其主宰一身，故謂之心。這心之本體，原只是個天理。原無非禮。這個便是汝之真己。這個真己，是軀殼的主宰。若無真己，便無軀殼。真是有之即生，無之即死。

Xiao Hui asked: "It is hard to overcome the private self; what should I do?" The Master said: "Bring me your private self and I will overcome it for you." He also said: "A person must have a heart for the self before he can overcome the self. Only one who can overcome the self can complete the self." Xiao Hui said: "I too have quite a heart for the self. I do not know why I cannot overcome the self." The Master said: "Tell me, what is it like, your having a heart for the self?" After a long time Hui said: "I too wholeheartedly want to be a good person, and so I said I had quite a heart for the self. Now thinking it over, it seems I was only acting for the self of the bodily shell, not for the true self." The Master said: "When has the true self ever been apart from the bodily shell? I fear you have not even acted for the self of the bodily shell. Tell me, is the self of the bodily shell not your ears, eyes, mouth, nose and limbs?" Hui said: "It is for them. The eyes want color, the ears want sound, the mouth wants flavor, and the limbs want ease and pleasure, so I cannot overcome them." The Master said: "Beautiful colors make people blind, beautiful sounds make people deaf, fine flavors dull the mouth, and galloping and hunting drive people mad; these all harm your ears, eyes, mouth, nose and limbs; how can they be for them? If you were acting for your ears, eyes, mouth, nose and limbs, you would have to think how the ears should hear, how the eyes should see, how the mouth should speak, and how the limbs should move. You must not look, listen, speak or move contrary to ritual, and only then are the ears, eyes, mouth, nose and limbs completed. This is truly acting for the ears, eyes, mouth, nose and limbs. Now you gallop outward all day, for fame and profit, and all of it is for things outside the bodily shell. If you were acting for the ears, eyes, mouth, nose and limbs and wanted not to look, listen, speak or move contrary to ritual, could your own ears, eyes, mouth, nose and limbs not look, listen, speak or move by themselves? It must come from your heart. This looking, listening, speaking and moving are all your heart. The looking of your heart issues through the eyes, the listening of your heart issues through the ears, the speaking of your heart issues through the mouth, and the moving of your heart issues through the limbs. Without your heart there would be no ears, eyes, mouth or nose. What I call your heart is also not just that lump of flesh and blood. If it were that lump of flesh and blood, then in a person now dead that lump of flesh and blood would still be there; why can it not look, listen, speak or move? What I call your heart is what can look, listen, speak and move. This is nature, and this is Heavenly principle. Only with this nature can the life principle of this nature arise, and that is called humaneness. When this life principle of nature issues in the eyes it can see, in the ears it can hear, in the mouth it can speak, and in the limbs it can move, and all of this is just Heavenly principle arising. Because it is master of the whole body, it is called the heart. The original substance of this heart is originally only Heavenly principle, and originally has nothing contrary to ritual. This is your true self. This true self is the master of the bodily shell. Without the true self there is no bodily shell. Truly, with it one lives and without it one dies.

汝若真為那個軀殼的己，必須用著這個真己。便須常常保守著這個真己的本體。戒慎不《睹》，恐懼不聞。惟恐虧損了他一些。才有一毫非禮萌動，便如刀割，如針刺。忍耐不過。必須去了刀，拔了針。這才是有為己之心，力能克己。汝今正是認賊作子。緣何卻說有為己之心，不能克己」？

(The Master continued:) If you truly act for that self of the bodily shell, you must make use of this true self, and so you must always keep and guard the original substance of this true self, being cautious about what you do not see and apprehensive about what you do not hear, only fearing to damage it in the slightest. As soon as the least thing contrary to ritual stirs, it is like a knife cutting or a needle pricking, unbearable, and one must remove the knife and pull out the needle. This is having a heart for the self, and only then can one overcome the self. Now you are exactly taking a thief to be your son. Why then do you say you have a heart for the self but cannot overcome it?"

○有一學者病目。慼慼甚憂。先生曰，二苖乃貴目賤心」。

A student had a disease of the eyes and was very anxious and sorrowful. The Master said: "You are valuing the eyes and despising the heart." (The base text has a mistaken character here, to be read as 'you'.)

○蕭惠好仙釋。先生警之曰，「吾亦自幼篤志二氏。自謂既有所得，謂儒者為不足學。其後居夷三載，貝得聖人之學若是其簡易廣大。始自嘆悔錯用了三十年氣力。大抵二氏之學，其妙與聖人只有毫釐之間。汝今所學，乃其土苴。輒自信自好若此。真鴟鴞竊腐鼠耳」。惠請問二氏之妙。先生曰，「向汝說聖人之學簡易廣大。汝卻不問我悟的。只問我悔的」。惠慚謝。請問聖人之學。先生曰，「汝今只是了人事問。待汝辨個真要求為聖人的心來與汝說」。惠再三請。先生曰，「已與汝一句道盡。汝尚自不會」。

Xiao Hui was fond of immortals and Buddhas. The Master warned him, saying: "From youth I too was devoted to the two schools of Buddhism and Daoism, and I said I had attained something and thought Confucian scholars not worth learning from. Later, banished for three years among the barbarians, I saw that the sages' learning is so simple, easy, broad and great, and only then did I sigh with regret at having wasted thirty years of effort. In general the wonder of the two schools differs from the sages' only by a hair's breadth. What you now study is the dregs of it, and you are so self-confident and self-satisfied; you are truly an owl that has stolen a dead rat." Hui asked about the wonder of the two schools. The Master said: "I just told you that the sages' learning is simple, easy, broad and great, yet you do not ask about what I awakened to and ask only about what I regretted." Hui was ashamed and apologized, and asked about the sages' learning. The Master said: "For now you only ask me in a perfunctory way. When you have sorted out a heart that truly seeks to become a sage, I will tell you." Hui asked again and again. The Master said: "I have already told you everything in one sentence, and you still do not understand."

○劉觀時問，「未發之中是如何」？先生曰，「汝但戒慎不《睹》，恐懼不聞，養得此心純是天理，便自然見」。觀時請略示氣象。先生曰，「啞子吃苦瓜，與你說不得。你要知此苦，還須你自吃」。時曰仁在傍曰，「如此才是真知即是行矣」。一時在座諸友皆有省。

Liu Guanshi asked: "What is the center before it is manifested like?" The Master said: "Just be cautious about what you do not see and apprehensive about what you do not hear, and nourish this heart until it is purely Heavenly principle, and you will naturally see it." Guanshi asked for a brief indication of its character. The Master said: "It is like a mute eating bitter melon: I cannot tell you about it. If you want to know this bitterness, you must eat it yourself." At that time Xu Ai was present and said: "This is what it means that true knowing is acting." All the friends present had an awakening at that moment.

○蕭惠問死生之道。先生曰，「知晝夜，即知死生」。問晝夜之道。曰，「知晝則知夜」。曰，「晝亦有所不知乎」？先生曰，「汝能知晝，懵懵而興，蠢蠢而食。行不著，習不察。終日昏昏，只是夢晝。惟『息有養，瞬有存』。此心惺惺明明，天理無一忌間斷，才是能知晝。這便是天德。便是通乎晝夜之道而知。更有甚麼死生」？

Xiao Hui asked about the Way of death and life. The Master said: "Know day and night, and you know death and life." He asked about the Way of day and night. The Master said: "Know the day and you know the night." He asked: "Is there also something one does not know about the day?" The Master said: "Can you know the day? You get up in a daze, eat in a stupor, act without knowing and practice without examining, are muddled all day, and only dream through the day. Only with 'in each breath there is nourishing, in each blink there is preserving,' this heart alert and bright, Heavenly principle without a breath of interruption, can one be said to know the day. This is Heavenly virtue, and is knowing by penetrating the Way of day and night. What more is there of death and life?"

○馬子莘問，「修道之教，舊說謂聖人品節吾性之固有，以為法於天下，若禮樂刑政之屬。此意如何」？先生曰，「道即性即命。本是完完全全，增減不得，不假修飾的。何須要聖人品節？卻是不完全的對象。禮樂刑政是治天下之法，固亦可謂之教。但不是子思本旨。若如先儒之說，下面由教入道的，緣何舍了聖人禮樂刑政之教，別說出一段戒慎恐懼工夫？卻是聖人之敢為虛設矣」。子莘請問。先生曰，「子思性道教，皆從本原上說。天命於人，則命便謂之性。率性而行，則性便謂之道。修道而學，則道便謂之教。率性是誠者事。所謂『自誠明，謂之性』也。修道是誠之者事。所謂「自明誠，謂之教』也。聖人率性而行，即是道。聖人以下，未能率性於道。未免有過不及。故須修道，修道則賢知者不得而過，愚不肯者不得而不及。都要循著這個道，則道便是個教。此『教』字與『天道至教。風雨霜露，無非教也』之『教』同。『修道』字與『修道以仁』同。人能修道，然後能不違於道，以復其性之本體。則亦是聖人率性之道矣。下面戒慎恐懼便是修道的工夫。中和便是復其性之本體。如易所謂『窮理盡性，以至於命』。中和位育，便是儘性至命」。

Ma Zishen asked: "The old explanation of 'cultivating the Way is called teaching' says that the sages regulate what is inherent in my nature and take it as a model for the world, such as ritual, music, punishment and government. What do you think of that?" The Master said: "The Way is nature and is destiny; it is originally complete and whole, cannot be increased or reduced, and needs no cultivation or adornment. What need is there for sages to regulate it? That would make it something incomplete. Ritual, music, punishment and government are methods for governing the world and can indeed be called teaching, but this is not Zisi's original meaning. If it were as the former scholars said, then why, in the part below about entering the Way by teaching, did he leave aside the sages' teaching of ritual, music, punishment and government and speak instead of a section on the work of caution and apprehension? That would make the sages' teaching an empty setup." Zishen asked for instruction. The Master said: "When Zisi speaks of nature, the Way and teaching, he speaks from the source. What Heaven commands to people is called destiny; following nature in action is called the Way; cultivating the Way and learning it is called teaching. Following one's nature is the business of the sincere, as in 'from sincerity to understanding is called nature'; cultivating the Way is the business of one who makes himself sincere, as in 'from understanding to sincerity is called teaching.' The sage acts by following his nature, and that is the Way. Below the sage, none can follow nature in the Way without some excess or deficiency, so they must cultivate the Way. By cultivating the Way, the worthy and wise cannot go too far and the foolish and unworthy cannot fall short, and all follow this Way, so the Way is itself a teaching. This word 'teaching' is the same as in 'Heaven's Way is the highest teaching; wind, rain, frost and dew are all teaching.' The words 'cultivating the Way' are the same as in 'cultivate the Way with humaneness.' When a person can cultivate the Way, then he can avoid departing from the Way and restore the original substance of his nature, and that is also the sage's Way of following nature. The caution and apprehension below are the work of cultivating the Way, and centrality and harmony are restoring the original substance of nature. As the Changes says, 'exhaust principle and fulfill nature, in order to reach destiny.' Centrality, harmony, the placing of Heaven and Earth and the nurturing of the myriad things are fulfilling nature and reaching destiny."

○黃誠甫問，「先儒以孔子告顏淵為邦之問，是立萬世常行之道。如何」？先生曰，「顏子具體聖人。其於為邦的大本大原，都已完備。夫子平日知之已深。到此都不必言。只就制度文為上說。此等處亦不可忽略。須要是如此方盡善。又不可因自己本領是當了，便於防範上疏闊。須是要『放鄭聲，遠佞人』蓋顏子是個克己向裡德上用心的人。孔子恐其外面末節，或有疏略，故就他不足處幫補說。若在他人，須告以為政在人，取人以身，修身以道，修道以仁，達道九經，及誠身許多工夫，方始做得這個，方是萬世常行之道。不然，只去行了夏時，乘了殷輅，服了周冕，作了韶舞，天下便治得。後人但見顏子是孔門第一人，又問個為邦，便把做天大事看了」。

Huang Chengfu asked: "The former scholars took Confucius's answer to Yan Yuan's question about governing a state to be establishing the Way of constant practice for ten thousand generations. What do you think?" The Master said: "Yan Zi embodied the sage in his whole being, and in regard to the great root and source of governing a state he was already complete. The Master had long known this, so here there was no need to say it, and he spoke only of institutions and observances. These places also must not be neglected, and only in this way is it perfectly good. Moreover, one cannot, because one's own foundation is secure, become lax in guarding against danger. One must 'banish the music of Zheng and keep far from glib talkers.' Because Yan Zi was a man who overcame himself, turned inward, and put his heart into virtue, Confucius feared that he might have overlooked outer details, so he supplemented where he was lacking. For another person, he would have had to tell him that government depends on people, one gets people by one's own person, one cultivates the person by the Way, one cultivates the Way by humaneness, the nine standards of the universal Way, and the many works of making oneself sincere, and only then could he accomplish this; only that is the Way of constant practice for ten thousand generations. Otherwise, merely practicing the Xia calendar, riding the Yin carriage, wearing the Zhou cap and performing the Shao dance, could the world be governed? Later people only saw that Yan Zi was the first in Confucius's school and that he asked about governing a state, and so they treated it as a matter as great as Heaven."

○蔡希淵問，「文公大學新本，先格致而後誠意工夫。似與首章次第相合。若如先生從舊本之說，即誠意反在格致之前。於此尚未釋然」。先生曰，「大學工夫即是明明德。明明德只是個誠意。誠意的工夫只是格物致知。若以誠意為主，去用格物致知的工夫，即工夫始有下落。即為善去惡，無非是誠意的事。如新本先去窮格事物之理。即茫茫蕩蕩，都無著落處。須用添個敬字，方才牽扯得向身心上來。然終是沒根原。若須用添個敬字，緣何孔門倒將一個最緊要的字落了，直待千餘年後要人來補出？正謂以誠意為主，即不須添敬字。所以舉出個誠意來說。正是學問的大頭腦處。於此不察，真所謂毫釐之差，千里之繆。大抵中庸工夫只是誠身。誠身之極便是至誠。大學工夫只是誠意。誠意之極便是至善。工夫總是一般。今說這裡補個敬字，那裡補個誠字，未免晝蛇添足」。

Cai Xiyuan asked: "In Master Wen's new edition of the Great Learning, the work of investigating things and extending knowledge comes before sincere intention, which seems to fit the order of the first chapter. If one follows your view, Master, of the old edition, then sincere intention comes before investigating things and extending knowledge. I am still not at ease about this." The Master said: "The work of the Great Learning is to illustrate illustrious virtue. Illustrating illustrious virtue is only sincere intention. The work of sincere intention is only investigating things and extending knowledge. If one takes sincere intention as the main thing and uses the work of investigating things and extending knowledge, then the work has somewhere to land. Doing good and removing evil is nothing but a matter of sincere intention. In the new edition, one first exhausts and investigates the principles of things, and it is vague and drifting, with nowhere to land. One must add the word reverence, and only then is it pulled toward body and heart, yet it is still without a root. If one must add the word reverence, why did Confucius's school drop the most essential word and wait over a thousand years for someone to supply it? Precisely if one takes sincere intention as the main thing, there is no need to add the word reverence. So raising sincere intention is exactly the great guiding point of learning. If one does not see this, it is truly a difference of a hair leading to an error of a thousand li. The work of the Doctrine of the Mean is only making oneself sincere, and the utmost of making oneself sincere is perfect sincerity; the work of the Great Learning is only sincere intention, and the utmost of sincere intention is the highest good. The work is always the same. To say now that here one should add a word reverence and there a word sincerity is to draw feet on a snake."

德洪曰：昔南元善刻《博習錄》于越，凡二冊。下冊摘錄之。先師手書，凡八篇。其答徐成之二書，吾師自謂「天下是朱非陸，論定既久，一旦反之為難﹔二書姑為調渟兩可之說，便人自思得之。」故元善錄為下冊之首者，意亦以是歟？今朱、陸之耕明於天下久矣；洪刻先師文錄，置二書於外集者，示未全也，故今不復錄。其餘指知，行之本體，莫詳於答人論學與答周道通、陸清伯、歐陽崇一四書；而謂格物為學者用力日可見之地，莫詳於答羅年庵一書。平生冒天下之非詆，推陷萬死，一生遑遑然不忘講學，惟恐吾人不聞斯道，流於功利、機智以日墮於匈狄、禽獸而不叫，其一體同物之心，譊譊終身，至於斃而後已；此孔、孟以來賢聖苦心，雖門人子弗未足以慰其情也；是情也，莫貝於笞聶文蔚之第一書：此皆仍元善所錄之舊：而揭「必有事焉」即「致良知」功夫，明白簡切，使人言下即得入手，此又莫詳於答文蔚之第二書，故增錄之。元善當時洶洶，乃能以身明斯道，卒至遭奸被斥，油油然惟以此生得聞斯學為慶，而絕無有纖芥憤鬱不平之氣。斯錄之刻，人見其有功於同志甚大，而不知其虎時之甚艱也。今所去取，裁之時義則然，非忍有所加損於其間也。

Qian Dehong said: Formerly Nan Yuanshan printed the Instructions for Practical Living in Yue, in two volumes. The second volume excerpts our late master's handwritten letters, eight pieces in all. Among them the two letters in reply to Xu Chengzhi, our master himself said: "The world holds that Zhu is right and Lu is wrong, the judgment having long been settled, and it is hard to reverse it at once; the two letters provisionally offer a conciliatory view that could go either way, so that people may think it through and obtain it themselves." So Yuanshan put them at the head of the second volume, probably with this intention. Now the debate between Zhu and Lu has been clear to the world for a long time; when I printed our late master's Collected Writings, I put these two letters in the outer collection, to show that they are not complete, so I do not include them again here. As for the others, nothing explains the original substance of knowing and acting more fully than the four letters, the Reply to a Person on Learning and the replies to Zhou Daotong, Lu Qingbo and Ouyang Chongyi; and nothing explains more fully that investigating things is the place where students can see their effort day by day than the letter to Luo Zhengan. Our late master, throughout his life, braved the world's criticism and slander and was thrust into ten thousand deaths, yet in all his hurried life he did not forget to lecture on learning, fearing only that we would not hear this Way and would drift into utility and cleverness, sinking day by day into barbarism and beastliness without knowing it; his heart of being one body with all things went on pleading to the end of his life, until death; this was the bitter heart of the sages and worthies since Confucius and Mencius, and even his disciples and students were not enough to comfort his feelings. Nothing shows these feelings more than the first letter in reply to Nie Wenwei: these all follow Yuanshan's old record. And what raises the work of "one must work at it" as "extending innate knowing" (extending the naturally knowing brightness of the heart's substance to every affair and thing), clear, simple and urgent, so that one can get a grip on it as soon as it is spoken, nothing is fuller than the second letter in reply to Wenwei, so I have added it. Yuanshan, in the turbulent times, was able to make this Way clear by his own person, and in the end was slandered and dismissed by treacherous men, yet cheerfully took it only as a cause for celebration that in this life he had heard this learning, without the slightest trace of resentment or discontent. When this record was printed, people saw that it greatly benefited fellow students, but did not know how hard his situation was at the time. What is kept and what is dropped now was decided according to the demands of the time, and not because I was cruelly adding to or subtracting from it.

○來書云：近時學者務外遺內，博而寡要，故先生特倡「試意」一義，鉽砭千育，誠大惠也吾子洞貝時弊如此矣，亦將同以救之乎？然則鄙人之心，吾子固已一句道盡，復何言哉！復同言哉！若「詼意」之說，自是聖門教人用功第一義：但近世學者乃作第二義看，故稍與提掇緊要出來，非鄙人所能特倡也。

Your letter says: Recently students pursue externals and neglect the inner, are broad but lack the essential, so you, Master, have especially advocated the single idea of "sincere intention," lancing the sickness deep within; truly a great kindness. If you see the faults of the age so clearly, how then will you save it? Then as for my heart, you have already said it all in one sentence; what more is there to say! What more is there to say! As for the teaching of "sincere intention," it was originally the first principle by which the sages' school taught people to apply effort; but students of recent times have treated it as a secondary matter, so I have only slightly raised its importance, and it is not something I could specially advocate.

○來書云：但恐立說太高，用功太捷，後生師傅，影響謬誤，未免墜於佛氏明心、見性，定慧，頓悟之機拭，無怪聞者見疑。區區格，致、詖、正之說，是就學者本心、日用事為間，體究踐履，實地用功，是多少次第、多少積累在，正與空虛頓悟之說相反；聞者本無求為聖人之志，又未嘗講突其詳，篴以見疑，亦無足怪：若吾子之高明，自當一語之下挭瞭然矣：力亦謂立說太高，用功太捷，何邪？

Your letter says: I only fear that the doctrine is set too high and the effort is too quick, and that the young will pass it along, and the echoes will be mistaken, so that they will unavoidably fall into the Buddhist cleverness of illuminating the mind and seeing the nature, and sudden awakening of concentration and wisdom, and it is no wonder that listeners are suspicious. My teaching of investigating things, extending knowledge, making intention sincere, and rectifying the heart is about students' original hearts and the daily activities, embodying, investigating, practicing and working on actual ground, with many steps and much accumulation in between, and is exactly the opposite of the teaching of empty sudden awakening. The listeners originally had no will to seek to become sages and had not studied its details, so they are suspicious, which is not strange. With your brilliance, you ought to understand it at once in a single sentence; yet you also say the doctrine is set too high and the effort too quick; why?

○來書云：所喻知，行並進，不宜分別前後，即《中庸》尊德性而道問學之功，交養互發，內外本末，以寸之之道。然工夫次第，不能無先後之差：如知食乃食，知湯乃飲，知路乃行。未有不見是物，先有是事：此亦毫釐倏忽之間，非謂有等今日知之，而明日乃行也。既雲「交養互發，內外本末一以貫之」，則知行並進之說，無復可疑矣。又云「工夫次第能不無先後之差。」無乃自相矛盾已乎？知食乃食等說，此尤明白易見。但吾子為近聞障蔽自不察耳。夫人必有欲食之心，然後知食，欲食之心即是意，即是行之姶矣：食味之美惡待人口而後知，豈有不待入口而已先知食味之美惡者邪？必有欲行之心，然後知路，即是意、即是行之姶矣：路岐之險夷，必待身親履歷而後知，豈有不待身親履歷而已先知路岐之險夷者邪？知湯「飲，知衣服，以此例之，皆無可疑。若如吾子之喻，是乃所謂不見是物，而先有是事者矣。吾子又謂「此亦毫釐倏忽之間，非謂截然有等今日知之，而明日乃行也是亦察之尚有未精。然就加吾子之說，則知行之為合一併進，亦自斷無可疑矣。

Your letter says: What you have said about knowing and acting advancing together, not distinguishing before and after, is the work of "honoring the virtuous nature and pursuing inquiry and study" in the Doctrine of the Mean, mutually nourishing and mutually developing, the one Way that penetrates inner and outer, root and branch. Yet in the order of the work there cannot be no difference of before and after: for example, one knows food and then eats, knows soup and then drinks, knows the road and then walks. There is never an act before one sees the thing. This too is within a hair and an instant, not that one knows today and acts only tomorrow, with a sharp division. Since you say "mutually nourishing and mutually developing, the one Way that penetrates inner and outer, root and branch," there can be no further doubt about knowing and acting advancing together. Yet you also say "in the order of the work there cannot be no difference of before and after"; is that not self-contradictory? The saying that one knows food and then eats is especially clear and easy to see, but you are obstructed by what you have recently heard and do not examine it yourself. A person must have the heart to eat before he knows food; the heart to eat is intention, and is the beginning of acting. Whether the flavor of the food is good or bad is only known after it enters the mouth; how could one already know the flavor before it enters the mouth? A person must have the heart to walk before he knows the road; the heart to walk is intention, and is the beginning of acting. Whether the road forks and is dangerous or easy is only known after one has personally traveled it; how could one already know the dangers and ease of the road before personally traveling it? Knowing soup and then drinking, knowing clothes and then wearing, by this example there is no doubt in any of them. If it were as in your analogy, that would indeed be what is called having the act before seeing the thing. You also say "this too is within a hair and an instant, not that one knows today and acts only tomorrow, with a sharp division," which is again not examined quite precisely. Still, as you say, that knowing and acting are united and advance together is also beyond doubt.

○來書云：真知即所以為行，不行不足謂之知，此為學者吃緊立教，俾務躬行則可。若真謂行即是知，恐其專求本心，遂遺物理，必有闇而不達之處，抑豈聖門知行並進之成法哉？知之真切篤實處。既是行，行之明覺精察處。即是知，知行工夫，本不可離。只為後世學者分作兩截用功，先卻知、行本體，故有合一併進之說，真知即所以為行，不行不足謂之知。雲「知茛乃食」等說，可見前已略言之矣。此雖吃緊救弊而發，然知、行之體本來加是。非以己意抑揚其間，姑為是說，以苟一時之效者也。「專求本心，遂遺物理，」此蓋先其本心者也：夫物理小外於吾心，外吾心而求物理，無物理矣。遺物理而求吾心，吾心又何物邪？心之體，性也，性既理也。故有孝親之心，即有孝之理，無孝親之心，即無孝之理矣。有忠君之心，即有忠之理，無忠君之心，即無忠之理矣。理豈外於吾心邪？晦庵謂人之所以為學者與理而已：心雖主乎一身，而實管乎天下之理：理雖散在萬事，而實不外乎一人之心。是其一分一合之間，而未免已啟學者心、理為二之弊。此後世所以有「專求本心，遂遺物理」之患，正由不知心即理耳。夫外心以求物理，是以有誾而不達之處：此告子義外之說，孟子所以謂之不知義也。心一而已，以其全體惻怛而言，謂之仁，以其得宜而言謂之義，以其條理而言謂之理。不可外心以求仁，不可外心以求義，獨可外心以求理乎？外心以求理，此知、行之斫以二也。求理於吾心，此聖門知、行合一之教，吾子又何疑乎！

Your letter says: True knowing is acting, and what is not acted on is not enough to be called knowing; this is an urgent teaching for students, to make them devote themselves to personal practice, and so it is acceptable. But if one truly says that acting is knowing, I fear that by seeking only the original heart one will neglect the principles of things and surely have places that are dark and impenetrable; how could that be the established method of the sages' school for advancing knowing and acting together? The genuine and sincere part of knowing is acting, and the clear and careful part of acting is knowing. The work of knowing and acting can originally not be separated. It is only because later students made two sections of their efforts and lost the original substance of knowing and acting that there is a teaching of unity and advancing together. True knowing is acting, and what is not acted on is not enough to be called knowing. As for the saying "one knows food and then eats," it was already roughly explained above. Although this was said as an urgent remedy for a fault, the original substance of knowing and acting is indeed like this, and it is not that I have raised or lowered it by my own opinion and provisionally set up this saying to seek a momentary effect. "By seeking only the original heart one neglects the principles of things" probably describes those who have lost their original heart. The principles of things are not outside my heart; to seek the principles of things outside my heart is to have no principles of things; and to neglect the principles of things and seek my heart, what then is my heart? The substance of the heart is nature, and nature is principle. So when there is a heart of filial piety toward parents, there is the principle of filial piety, and when there is no heart of filial piety toward parents, there is no principle of filial piety; when there is a heart of loyalty toward the ruler, there is the principle of loyalty, and when there is no heart of loyalty toward the ruler, there is no principle of loyalty. How could principle be outside my heart? Hui'an (Zhu Xi) said that what people study is only heart and principle: the heart, though it governs one body, in fact rules the principles of the world; principle, though scattered in ten thousand things, in fact is not outside one person's heart. This separating and joining already opens the door to the fault of students treating heart and principle as two matters. This is why in later ages there is the trouble of "seeking only the original heart and neglecting the principles of things," precisely from not knowing that the heart is principle. Seeking the principles of things outside the heart gives rise to the places that are dark and impenetrable: this is Gaozi's theory that righteousness is external, which is why Mencius said he did not know righteousness. The heart is only one. Speaking of its whole body as compassionate and sorrowful, it is called humaneness; speaking of its attaining what is proper, it is called righteousness; speaking of its order, it is called principle. One cannot seek humaneness outside the heart, and one cannot seek righteousness outside the heart; can one alone seek principle outside the heart? Seeking principle outside the heart is exactly why knowing and acting are split into two sections. Seeking principle in my heart is the teaching of the unity of knowing and acting of the sages' school; what doubt could you have about it!"

○來書云．所釋大學古本謂「致其本體之知」。此固孟子盡心之旨。朱子亦以虛靈知覺為此心之量。然盡心由於知性。致知在於格物。「盡心由於知性。致知在於格物」。此語然矣。然而推本吾子之意，則其所以為是語者，尚有未明也。朱子以盡心知性知天為物格知致。以存心養性事天為誠意正心修身。以殀壽不貳修身以俟為知至仁盡。聖人之事。若鄙人之見，則與朱子正相反矣。未盡心知性知天者，生知安行，聖人之事也。存心養性事天者，學知利行，賢人之事也。殀壽不貳，修身以俟者，困知勉行，學者之事也。豈可專以盡心知性為如，存心養性為行乎？吾子驟聞此言，必又以為大駭矣。然其間實無可疑者。一為吾子言之。夫心之體，性也。性之原，天也。能盡其心，是能盡其性矣。中庸云，「惟天下至誠。為能盡其性」。又云，「知天地之化育」。「質諸鬼神而無疑，知天也」。此惟聖人而後能然。故曰，此生知安行，聖人之事也。存其心者，未能盡其心者也。故須加存之之功。必存之既久，不待於存，而自無不存，然後可以進而言盡。蓋知天之如，如知州知縣之知。知州，則一州之事皆己事也。知縣，則一縣之事皆己事也。是與天為一者也。事天則如子之事父，臣之事君。猶與天為二也。天之所以命於我者，心也，性也。吾但存之而不敢失，養之而不敢害，如「父母全而生之，子全而歸之」者也。故曰，此學知利行，賢人之事也。至於殀壽不貳，則與存其心者又有間矣。存其心者，雖未能盡其心，固己一心於為善。時有不存，則存之而已。今使之殀壽不貳，是猶以殀壽貳其心者也。猶以殀壽貳其心，是其為善之心猶未能一也。存之尚有所未可，而何盡之可云乎？今且使之不以殀壽貳其為善之心。若日死生殀壽，皆有定命，吾但一心於為善，修吾之身以俟天命而已。是其平日尚未知有天命也。

Your letter says: Your explanation of the old text of the Great Learning, that it means "extending the knowledge of the original substance," is of course the purport of Mencius's "exhausting the mind." Master Zhu too took the empty, spiritual awareness as the measure of this mind. Yet exhausting the mind comes from knowing the nature, and extending knowledge lies in investigating things. "Exhausting the mind comes from knowing the nature, and extending knowledge lies in investigating things": that saying is right. But when I weigh what you mean by it, there are still points that are not clear. Master Zhu took exhausting the mind, knowing the nature and knowing Heaven as the investigation of things and the extension of knowledge; he took preserving the mind, nourishing the nature and serving Heaven as making the will sincere, rectifying the mind and cultivating the person; and he took "not doubting whether one's life be short or long, but cultivating oneself and awaiting it" as the perfection of knowledge and benevolence, the affair of the sage. By my own view, this is exactly the opposite of Master Zhu. Exhausting the mind, knowing the nature and knowing Heaven is knowing at birth and practicing with ease, the affair of the sage; preserving the mind, nourishing the nature and serving Heaven is knowing by learning and practicing with advantage, the affair of the worthy; not doubting whether life be short or long, and cultivating oneself to await it, is knowing through hardship and practicing with effort, the affair of the learner. How can one take exhausting the mind and knowing the nature exclusively as knowing, and preserving the mind and nourishing the nature as practice? Hearing this suddenly, you will surely be greatly startled. Yet there is really nothing to doubt in it, and let me explain. The substance of the mind is the nature, and the origin of the nature is Heaven. One who can exhaust his mind can exhaust his nature. The Doctrine of the Mean says, "Only the one in the world who is perfectly sincere can exhaust his nature," and also, "he knows the transforming and nourishing of Heaven and earth," "he can put it to the test with the spirits and have no doubts: this is to know Heaven." Only a sage can do this. So I say this is knowing at birth and practicing with ease, the affair of the sage. One who preserves his mind is one who has not yet been able to exhaust his mind, so he must add the effort of preserving it. Only when he has preserved it for a long time, so that without waiting to preserve it, it is spontaneously never not preserved, can he go on to speak of exhausting it. The "knowing" in knowing Heaven is like the "zhi" in zhizhou, prefect, and zhixian, magistrate. A prefect treats all the affairs of a prefecture as his own affairs; a magistrate treats all the affairs of a county as his own affairs. This is being one with Heaven. Serving Heaven is like a son serving his father or a minister serving his ruler, which is still being two with Heaven. What Heaven has bestowed on me is the mind and the nature. I only preserve it and dare not lose it, nourish it and dare not harm it, as in "the parents gave birth to the child whole, and the child must return it whole." So I say this is knowing by learning and practicing with advantage, the affair of the worthy. As for not doubting whether life is short or long, that is a further step apart from preserving the mind. One who preserves his mind, though he has not yet been able to exhaust his mind, is already single-minded in doing good, and when it is at times not preserved, he simply preserves it again. Now to make someone not doubt about long or short life is to say he is still allowing length of life to make him doubt in his mind; if his mind is doubted by length of life, then his mind for doing good is not yet single. If even preserving is not yet attainable, what can be said of exhausting? Now one is made merely not to let length of life cause doubt in the mind to do good, and to say that life and death, short life and long life all have a fixed decree, and that I should just be single-minded in doing good and cultivate myself to await Heaven's decree; this means that in ordinary days he does not yet know there is a Heavenly decree.

事天雖與天為二，然己真知天命之所在。但惟恭敬奉承之而已耳。若俟之雲者，則尚未能真知天命之所在，猶有所俟者也。故曰，所以立命。立者，創立之立。如立德，立言，立功，立名之類。凡言立者，皆是昔未嘗有，而今始建立之謂。孔子所謂「不知命，無以為君子」者也。故日，此困知勉行，學者之事也。今以盡心知性知天為格物致知，使初學之士，尚未能不貳其心者。而遽責之以聖人生知安行之事。如捕風捉影，茫然莫知所措。其心幾何而不至於「率天下而路」也？今世致知格物之弊，亦居然可見矣。吾子所謂務外遺內，博而寡要者，無乃亦是過歟？此學問最緊要處。於此而差，將無往而不差矣。此鄙人之所以冒天下之非笑，忘其身之陷於罪戮，呶呶其言，其不容己者也。

(The Master continued:) Although serving Heaven is being two with Heaven, one has already truly known where Heaven's decree lies, and only reverently follows it. As for what the word "await" means, one has not yet truly known where Heaven's decree lies, and still has something to wait for. That is why it says "so as to establish one's destiny." "Establish" is the "li" of founding, as in establishing virtue, establishing words, establishing merit, establishing name. Wherever "establish" is said, it means something that never existed before and is only now founded. This is what Confucius meant by "without knowing destiny, one cannot be a gentleman." So I say this is knowing through hardship and practicing with effort, the affair of the learner. Now if one takes exhausting the mind, knowing the nature and knowing Heaven as the investigation of things and extension of knowledge, and demands of beginning students who cannot yet keep their minds free of doubt the affair of the sage who knows at birth and practices with ease, it is like catching the wind and clutching at shadows, utterly at a loss what to do, and how many of their minds will fail to "lead the world to run about on the road"? The faults of the investigation of things and extension of knowledge in the present age can also plainly be seen. What you call attending to the outer and neglecting the inner, being broad but lacking essentials, is probably this same mistake. This is the most critical point of learning. If one errs here, one will err everywhere. This is why I brave the ridicule of the world, forget that I am falling into the danger of punishment and death, and still keep on talking and cannot stop myself.

○來書云：聞語學者，乃謂「即物窮理」之說亦是玩物喪志，人取萁「厭繁就約」「涵養本原」數說標示學者，指為晚年定論，此亦恐非。朱子所謂格物雲者，在即物而窮其理也。即物窮理是就事事物物上求其所謂定理者也，是以吾心而求理於事事物物十「中，忻心與理為二矣；夫求理於事事物物者，如求孝之理於其親之謂也：求孝之理於其親，則孝之理其果在於吾之心邪？抑果在於親之身邪？假而果在於親之身，則親沒之後，吾心遂無孝之理歟？見孺子之入井，必有惻隱之理；是惻隱之理果在於孺子之身歟？抑在於吾心之良知歟？其或不可以從之於井歟？其或可以手而援之歟？是皆所謂理也。是果在於孺子之身歟？抑果出於吾心之良知歟？以是例之，萬事萬物之理莫不皆然。是可以知析心與理為二之非矣。夫析心與理而為二，此告於義外之說，孟子之所深闢也：「務外遺內，博而寡要」，吾子既已知之矣，是果何謂而然哉？謂之玩物喪志，尚猶以為不可歟？若鄙人所謂致知格物者，致吾心之良知於事事物物也。吾心之良知，即所謂「天理」也。致吾心良知之「天理」於事事物物，則事事物物皆得其理矣。致吾心之良知者，致知也。事事物物皆得其理者，格物也。是合心與理而為一者也。合心與理而為一，則凡區區前之所云，與朱子晚年之論，皆可以不言而喻矣。

Your letter says: I hear that in teaching students you say that even "investigating principle through things" is trifling with things and losing one's will; and you also take such expressions as "disliking the complicated and preferring the simple" and "nourishing the original source" and put them forward to students, designating them as Master Zhu's final conclusions, which I also fear is not right. What Master Zhu called the investigation of things lies in approaching things and exhausting their principle. Investigating principle through things means seeking the so-called fixed principle in each thing and event, that is, using my mind to seek principle within each thing and event, which splits mind and principle into two. To seek principle in things and events is like seeking the principle of filial piety in one's parents. If one seeks the principle of filial piety in one's parents, does the principle of filial piety then truly lie in my mind, or truly lie in the person of my parents? If it truly lies in the parents' persons, then after the parents die, does my mind then have no principle of filial piety? When one sees a child about to fall into a well, there is bound to be the principle of compassion; does this principle of compassion truly lie in the child's person, or in the good knowing of my mind? Perhaps one cannot follow the child into the well? Perhaps one can reach out a hand to rescue? These are all what is called principle. Does it truly lie in the child's person, or truly come from the good knowing of my mind? Take this as an example, and the principle of the ten thousand things is just the same. From this we know that splitting mind and principle into two is wrong. To split mind and principle into two is Gaozi's doctrine that righteousness is external, which Mencius deeply refuted. "Attending to the outer and neglecting the inner, being broad but lacking essentials": you already know it, and what truly causes it to be so? Is it still wrong to call it trifling with things and losing one's will? According to what I call extending knowledge and investigating things: it is extending the good knowing of my mind to every thing and event. The good knowing of my mind is what is called "Heavenly principle." To extend the Heavenly principle of my mind's good knowing to every thing and event is to make every thing and event obtain its principle. To extend the good knowing of my mind is to extend knowledge; for every thing and event to obtain its principle is to investigate things. This is to unite mind and principle as one. When mind and principle are united as one, then everything I said earlier, and Master Zhu's late views, can be understood without being spoken.

○來書云：人之心體，本無不明。而氣拘物蔽，鮮有不昏。非學問思辨，以明天下之理，則善惡之機，真妄之辨，不能自覺，任情恣意。其害有不可勝言者矣。此段大略，似是而非。蓋承沿舊說之弊。不可以不辨也夫學間思辨行，皆所以為學。末有學而不行者也。如言學孝，則必服勞奉養，躬行孝道，然後謂之學。豈徒懸空口耳講說，而遂可以謂之學孝乎？學射，則必張弓挾矢，引滿中的。學書，則必伸紙執筆，操觚染翰。盡天下之學，無有不行而可以言學者。則學之始，固已即是行矣。篤者，敦實篤厚之意。義行矣。而敦篤其行，不息其功之謂爾。蓋學之不能以無疑，則有間。間印學也，即行也。又不能無疑，則有思。思即學也，即行也。又不能無疑，則有辨。辨即學也，即行也。辨既明矣，思既慎矣，間即審矣，學既能矣，又從而不息其功焉，斯之謂篤行。非謂學問思辨之後而始措之於行也。是故以求能其事而言，謂之學。以求解其惑而言，謂之間。以求通其說而言，謂之思。以求精其察而言，謂之辨。以求履其實而言，謂之行。蓋析其功而言，則有五。合其事而言，則一而已。此區區心理合一之體，知行並進之功，所以異於後世之說者，正在於是。今吾子特舉學問思辨以窮天下之理，而不及篤行。是專以學問思辨為如，而謂窮理為無行也已。天下豈有不行而學者邪？豈有不挽而遂可謂之窮理者邪？明道云，「只窮理便儘性至命」。故必仁極仁，而後謂之能窮仁之理。義極義，而後謂之能窮義之理。仁極仁，則盡仁之性矣。義極義，則盡義之性矣。學至於窮理至矣，而尚未措之於行。天下寧有是邪？是故知不行之不可以為學，則知不行之不可以為窮理矣。知不行之不可以為窮理，則知知行之合一併進，而不可以分為兩箾事矣。夫萬事萬物之理，不外於吾心。而必日窮天下之埋。

Your letter says: The substance of man's mind is originally without darkness, but it is bound by material force and obscured by things, and few are not clouded. Without study, questioning, reflection and discrimination to illuminate the principles of the world, the springs of good and evil and the distinction between true and false cannot be perceived, and when one indulges feelings and gives rein to will, the harm is beyond telling. This passage is, in outline, plausible but wrong; it follows the fault of old theories and must be distinguished. Study, questioning, reflection, discrimination and practice are all ways of learning, and there has never been learning without practice. If one speaks of learning filial piety, one must serve with toil and provide support and personally practice filial piety, and only then is it called learning; how can merely discussing it in the air with mouth and ear be called learning filial piety? To learn archery, one must draw the bow, fit the arrow, pull it full and hit the target; to learn writing, one must spread the paper, hold the brush, and take up the tablet and dip the ink. In all the learning under heaven, there is none that can be called learning without practice. So the beginning of learning is already practice. "Earnest" means sincere and substantial. It means that one has already practiced, and further makes the practice earnest and does not rest in the effort. Since learning cannot be without doubt, there is questioning; questioning is itself learning and itself practice. Since one again cannot be without doubt, there is reflection; reflection is itself learning and itself practice. Since one again cannot be without doubt, there is discrimination; discrimination is itself learning and itself practice. When discrimination is clear, reflection careful, questioning thorough, and learning competent, and one then goes on without resting in effort, this is called earnest practice. It does not mean that only after study, questioning, reflection and discrimination does one begin to put things into practice. So in terms of seeking to be able to do the thing, it is called learning; in terms of seeking to resolve doubt, it is called questioning; in terms of seeking to make sense of the theory, it is called reflection; in terms of seeking to refine the examination, it is called discrimination; in terms of seeking to tread on the reality, it is called practice. Analyzed by effort there are five, and combined by the matter there is only one. This is exactly where my substance of the unity of mind and principle and my effort of knowledge and action advancing together differ from the theories of later ages. Now you specifically cite study, questioning, reflection and discrimination to exhaust the principles of the world and do not mention earnest practice, which is to take study, questioning, reflection and discrimination exclusively as knowing and to say that exhausting principle has no practice. How can there be learning without practice in the world? How can one call it exhausting principle without practice? Mingdao said, "Only exhaust principle and one fulfills the nature and reaches destiny." So one must be benevolent to the utmost, and only then is one called able to exhaust the principle of benevolence; one must be righteous to the utmost, and only then is one called able to exhaust the principle of righteousness. Being benevolent to the utmost fulfills the nature of benevolence; being righteous to the utmost fulfills the nature of righteousness. Could it be that learning reaches the utmost exhaustion of principle and yet has not been put into practice? So knowing that without practice one cannot call it learning, one knows that without practice one cannot call it exhausting principle; and knowing that without practice one cannot call it exhausting principle, one knows that knowledge and action are united and advance together and cannot be divided into two separate matters. The principles of the ten thousand things do not lie outside my mind, yet you insist on speaking of exhausting the principles of the world.

是殆以吾心之良知為未足，而必外求於天下之廣，以裨補增益之。是猶析心與理而為二也。夫學問思辨篤行之功，雖其困勉至於人一己百，而擴充之極，至於儘性知天，亦不過致吾心之良知而已。良知之外，豈復有加於毫末乎？今必曰窮天下之理，而不知反求諸其心，則凡所謂善惡之機，真妄之辨者，舍吾心之良知，亦將何所致其體察乎？吾子所謂氣拘物蔽者，拘此蔽此而已。今欲去此之蔽，不知致力於此，而欲以外求。是猶目之不明者，不務服．樂調理以治其目，而徒倀倀然求明於其外。明豈可以自外而得哉？任情恣意之害，亦以不毻精察天埋於此心之良知而已。此誠毫釐千里之謬者，不容於不拂。吾子毋謂其論之太刻也。

(The Master continued:) This is probably to regard the good knowing of my mind as insufficient, and to seek necessarily outside it in the breadth of the world to supplement and augment it, which still splits mind and principle in two. Though the effort of study, questioning, reflection, discrimination and earnest practice is such that one may do a hundred times what another does once, even to the utmost extension that fulfills the nature and knows Heaven, it amounts to nothing more than extending the good knowing of my mind. Apart from good knowing, is there anything that can add even a hair's breadth? Now if one insists on speaking of exhausting the principles of the world and does not know to seek back in one's own mind, then what are called the springs of good and evil and the distinction of true and false, apart from the good knowing of my mind, what else could one use to examine them? What you call being bound by material force and obscured by things is simply being bound and obscured in this. Now to remove this obscuration, not knowing to apply effort here and wishing to seek outside is like a man whose eyes are not clear, who does not take medicine and take care to treat his eyes, but vainly and blindly seeks light outside. How can light be obtained from outside? The harm of indulging feelings and giving rein to will also comes only from being unable to examine Heavenly principle in the good knowing of this mind. This is truly an error of a hair's breadth that becomes a thousand li, and cannot but be distinguished. Please do not think my words too harsh.

○來書云：教人以致知明德，而戒其即物窮理，試使昏闇之士，深居端坐，不聞教告，遂能至於知玫而德明乎？縱令靜而有覺，稍悟本性，則亦定慧無用之見：果能知十今，達事燮而玫用於天下國家之實否乎？其曰：「知者意之骷，物者意之用，格物如格君心之非之格。」語雖超悟，獨得不踵陳見，抑恐於道未相胳合？區區論致知恪物，正所以窮理，未嘗戒人窮理，使之深居端坐而一無所事也。若謂即物窮理，如前所云務外而遺內者，則有所不可耳。昏誾之士，果能隨事隨物精察此心之天理，以致其本然之良知，則雖愚必明，雖柔必強，大本立而達道行，九經之屬，可一以貫之而無遺矣：尚何患其無致用之實乎？彼頑空虛靜之徒，正惟不脬隨事隨物精察此心之天理，以致其本然之良知，而遺棄倫理、寂滅虛無以為常，是以要之不可以治家國天下。孰謂聖人窮理盡性之學，而亦有是弊哉！心者，身之主也，而心之虛靈明覺，即所謂本然之良知也。其虛靈明覺之良知應感而動者，謂之意。有知而後有意，無知則無意矣。知非意之體乎？意之所用，必有其物，物即事也。如意用於事親，既事親為一物，意用於治民，即治民為一物，意用於讀書，即讀書為一物，意用於聽訟，郥聽訟為一物。凡意之所用，無有無物者：有是意即有是物，無是意即無是物矣。物非意之用乎？「格」字之義，有以「至」字之訓者，如「格於文祖」，「有苗來格」，是以「至」訓者也。然「恪於文祖」，必純孝詼敬，幽明之間無一不得其理，而後謂之「格」：有苗之頑，實以文德誕敷而後格，則亦兼有「正」字之義在其間，未可專以「至」字盡之也。加「格其非心」，「大臣挌君心之非」之類，是則一皆「正其不正以歸於正」之義，而不可以「至」字為訓矣。且《大學》「格物」之訓，又安知其不以「正」字為訓，而必以「至」字為義乎？

Your letter says: You teach people to extend knowledge and illumine virtue and warn them against investigating principle through things; if you let a benighted scholar sit upright in deep seclusion, hearing no teaching, can he reach the extension of knowledge and the illumination of virtue? Even if in stillness there is awareness and he slightly awakens to his original nature, that too is the useless view of fixed concentration and wisdom, and can he really know the present age fully, comprehend the changes of affairs, and apply it truly to the state and the world? You also say: "Knowing is the substance of the will, things are the function of the will, and investigating things is the 'investigating' in 'rectifying the ruler's mind's wrongs.'" Though the words are transcendent and insightful, singularly not following old views, I fear they may not yet match the Way. When I discuss extending knowledge and investigating things, it is precisely to exhaust principle, and I have never warned people against exhausting principle or made them sit upright in deep seclusion doing nothing at all. If investigating principle through things means attending to the outer and neglecting the inner, as I said above, then it cannot be accepted, that is all. A benighted scholar who truly can, in each event and thing, closely examine the Heavenly principle of this mind and so extend his original good knowing will, however foolish, become bright, and however weak, become strong; the great root is established and the universal Way is carried out, and the nine constants and the like can be linked through with nothing left out; what then does he worry about in lacking real application? Those who cling to empty void and stillness are precisely the ones who cannot examine in each event and thing the Heavenly principle of this mind to extend their original good knowing, and who discard human relations and take extinction and nothingness as constant, so in the end they cannot govern family, state, or the world. Who says the sage's learning of exhausting principle and fulfilling the nature could have this fault! The mind is the master of the body, and the empty, spiritual brightness and awareness of the mind is what is called the original good knowing. That which the empty, spiritual, bright, aware good knowing moves in response to a stimulus is called the will. Only when there is knowing is there will; without knowing there is no will. Is knowing not the substance of the will? Wherever the will is applied there must be a thing, and a thing is an event. If the will is applied to serving parents, serving parents is a thing; if the will is applied to governing the people, governing the people is a thing; if the will is applied to reading, reading is a thing; if the will is applied to hearing lawsuits, hearing lawsuits is a thing. Wherever the will is applied there is never no thing: where there is this will there is this thing, and where there is not this will there is not this thing. Are things not the function of the will? As for the meaning of the word "ge," some explain it as "to arrive," as in "to arrive at the cultured ancestors" and "the Miao came to arrive." But "arriving at the cultured ancestors" requires pure filial piety and sincere reverence, with everything between the unseen and the seen finding its principle, and only then is it called "arriving"; the stubbornness of the Miao was truly arrived at only after cultural virtue was widely spread, so it also contains the meaning of "rectify," and cannot be exhausted by "arrive" alone. In cases like "rectify his wrong mind" and "a great minister rectifies the wrong in his ruler's mind," the meaning is invariably "to rectify what is not right and return it to the right," and "arrive" cannot serve as the explanation. Moreover, in the Great Learning's explanation of "investigating things," how do you know it does not take "rectify" as the explanation, and must take "arrive" as the meaning?"

如以「至」字為義者，必日「窮至事物之理」，而後其說始通。是其用功之要，全在一「窮」字，用力之地，全在一「理」字也。若上去一窮，下去一理字，而直曰「致知在至物」，其可通乎？夫「窮理盡性」，聖人之成訓，見於繄辭者也。荀「恪物」之說而果即「窮理」之義，則聖人何不直口「致知在窮理」，而必為此轉折不完之語，以啟後世之弊邪？蓋《大學》「挌物」之說，自與「繄辭，」「窮理」大旨雖同，而微有分辨：「窮理」者，兼格致誠正而為功也。故言「窮理」，則挌、致、誠、正之功皆在其中，言「恪物」，則必兼舉致知、誠意、正心，而後其功始備而密。今偏舉「格物」而遂謂之「窮理」，此所以專以「窮理」屬「知」，而謂「格物」未常有行。非惟不得「恪物」之旨，並「窮理」之義而矢之矣。此後世之學所以析知、行為先後兩截，日以支離決裂，而聖學益以殘晦者，其端實始於此。吾子蓋亦未免承沿積習，則見以為「於道未相吻合」，不為過矣。

(The Master continued:) If "arrive" is taken as the meaning, one must say "exhaust and arrive at the principle of things," and only then does the saying make sense. Then the key to effort lies entirely in the one word "exhaust," and the place to apply strength lies entirely in the one word "principle." If one removes the "exhaust" above and the "principle" below and says directly "extending knowledge lies in arriving at things," does that make sense? "Exhausting principle and fulfilling the nature" is a ready-made teaching of the sage, found in the Appended Remarks. If the doctrine of "investigating things" truly meant "exhausting principle," why did the sage not say directly "extending knowledge lies in exhausting principle," and instead make this roundabout, incomplete statement that opened the abuse of later ages? The Great Learning's doctrine of "investigating things" and the Appended Remarks' "exhausting principle" are the same in main purport, but there is a slight distinction: "exhausting principle" works through investigating, extending, making sincere and rectifying together. So when one speaks of "exhausting principle," the efforts of investigating, extending, making sincere and rectifying are all in it; when one speaks of "investigating things," one must also bring up extending knowledge, making the will sincere and rectifying the mind, and only then is the effort complete and close. Now to single out "investigating things" and call it "exhausting principle" assigns "exhausting principle" exclusively to "knowing" and says that "investigating things" never had practice. This not only fails to grasp the point of "investigating things" but also loses the meaning of "exhausting principle." That is why the learning of later ages splits knowing and acting into two separate sections, one before and one after, becoming more fragmented and broken day by day, and the sages' learning more damaged and obscure; the beginning of it truly lies here. You have probably not been able to avoid following the accumulated habits, so that you see it as "not yet matching the Way," and that is no great fault.

○來書云：謂致知之功，將如何為溫清、如何為奉養即是「誠意」，非別有所謂「格物」，此亦恐非。此乃吾子自以己意揣度鄙見而為是說，非鄙人之所以告吾子者矣。若果如吾子之言，寧復有可通乎！蓋鄙人之見，則謂意欲溫清、意欲奉養者．所謂「意」也，而未可謂之「誠意」：必實行其溫清奉養之意，務求自慷而無自欺，然後謂之「誠意」。知如何而為溫清之節．知如何而為奉養之宜者，所謂「知」也，而未可謂之「致知」：必致其知如何為溫清之節者之知，而實以之溫清，致其知如何為奉養之宜者之知，而實以之奉養，然後謂之「致知」。溫清之事，奉養之事，所謂「物」也而未可謂之「格物」：必其於溫清之事也，一如其良知之所知當如何為溫清之節者而為之，無一毫之不盡，於奉養之事也，一如其良知之所知當如何為奉養之宜者而為之，無一毫之不盡，然後謂之「格物」。溫清之物格，然後知溫清之良知始致：奉養之物格，然後知奉養之良知始致。故日「物格而後知至」：致其知溫清之良知，而後溫清之意始誠：致其知奉養之良知，而後奉養之意始誠。故曰「知至而後意誠誠」；此區區「誠詼意、致知、格物」之說蓋如此：吾子更熟思之，將亦無可疑者矣。

Your letter says: You say that the effort of extending knowledge is, for example, how to keep parents warm and cool and how to support them, which is "making the will sincere," and not some separate "investigating things"; I fear this is also not right. This is you speculating on my view with your own ideas and making this statement; it is not what I told you. If it were truly as you say, would it make sense! By my view, wanting to keep parents warm and cool and wanting to support them is what is called the "will," but it cannot yet be called "making the will sincere": one must actually carry out that will to keep them warm and cool and support them, striving to be self-satisfied and without self-deception, and only then is it called "making the will sincere." Knowing how to keep them warm and cool in proper measure and how to support them suitably is what is called "knowing," but it cannot yet be called "extending knowledge": one must extend the knowledge of how to keep them warm and cool in proper measure and actually warm and cool them with it, extend the knowledge of how to support them suitably and actually support them with it, and only then is it called "extending knowledge." The matter of keeping them warm and cool and the matter of supporting them are what is called "things," but it cannot yet be called "investigating things": in the matter of warming and cooling, one must do exactly as his good knowing knows how to warm and cool in proper measure, without a hair's breadth of shortfall; in the matter of support, one must do exactly as his good knowing knows how to support suitably, without a hair's breadth of shortfall, and only then is it called "investigating things." Only when the thing of warming and cooling is investigated is the good knowing of warming and cooling extended; only when the thing of supporting is investigated is the good knowing of supporting extended. So it says, "Things are investigated, and then knowledge is complete." Only after the good knowing of warming and cooling is extended is the will to warm and cool sincere; only after the good knowing of supporting is extended is the will to support sincere. So it says, "Knowledge is complete, and then the will is sincere." This is roughly my doctrine of "making the will sincere, extending knowledge, investigating things." Think about it again carefully, and you will have nothing left to doubt.

○來書云：道之大瑞，易於明臺，所謂「良知，良能」，愚夫愚埽可與及者。至於節目時燮之詳，毫釐千里之謬，必待學而後知。今語孝於溫泠定省，孰不知之？至於舜之不告而娶，式之不葬而興師，養志、冬口，小杖，大杖，剖股，廬墓等事，處常，處燮，過與不及之，必須討論是非，以為制事之本，然後心體無蔽，臨事無失。道之大端易於明白，此語誠然。顧後之學者忽其易於明白者而弗由，而求其難於明白者以為學，此其所以「道在邇而求諸遠，事在易而求諸難「也。孟子云：「夫道若大路然，豈難知哉？人病不由耳。」良知、良能，愚夫、愚婦與聖人同：但惟聖人能致其良知，而愚夫、愚婦不能致，此聖愚之所由分也。節目時變，聖人夫豈不知，但不專以此為學：而其所謂學者，正惟致其真知，以精審此心之天理，而與後世之學不同耳。吾子未暇真知之致，而汲汲焉顧是之憂，此正求其離於明白者以為學之蔽也。夫良知之於節目時變，猶規矩尺度之於方圓長短也：節目時變之不可預定，猶方圓長短之不可勝窮也。故規矩誠立，則不可欺以方圓，而天下之方圓不可勝用矣：尺度誠陳，則不可欺以長短，而天下之長短不可勝用矣：良知誠致，則不可欺以節目時變，而天下之節目時變不可勝應矣。毫釐千里之繆，不於吾心真知一念之微而察之，亦將何所用其學乎！是不以規矩而欲定天下之方圓，不以尺哽而欲盡天下之長短，吾見其乖張謬戾，日勞而無成也已。吾子謂「語孝於溫清定省，孰不知之。」然而能致其知者鮮矣。若謂粗知溫清定省之儀節，而遂謂之能致其知，則凡知君之當仁者，皆可謂之能致其仁之知，知臣之當忠者，皆可謂之能致其忠之知，則天下孰非致知者邪？以是而言可以知致知之必在於行，而不行之不可以為致知也，明矣。知、行合一之體，不益較然矣乎？

Your letter says: The main points of the Way are easy to understand, as in what are called "good knowing and good ability," which foolish men and women can reach. But the details of procedure and changes of circumstance, and errors of a hair's breadth that become a thousand li, must await learning before they are known. Now, in speaking of filial piety, who does not know about keeping warm and cool and attending morning and evening? But for such cases as Shun marrying without informing his parents, King Wu raising an army without burying his father, nourishing the will versus nourishing the mouth and body, the small stick and the large stick, cutting flesh from the thigh and living in a hut at the grave, whether in ordinary or exceptional circumstances, in excess or in shortfall, one must discuss right and wrong and take them as the basis for managing affairs, and only then is the substance of the mind free of obscuration and does one make no error when facing affairs. That the main points of the Way are easy to understand is indeed true. But later learners neglect what is easy to understand and do not follow it, and instead seek what is hard to understand and take it as learning, which is why it is said "the Way is near, yet people seek it afar; the affair is easy, yet people seek it in what is difficult." Mencius said: "The Way is like a great road; how hard is it to know? The trouble is that people do not follow it." Good knowing and good ability are the same in foolish men and women as in sages; only the sage can extend his good knowing, while foolish men and women cannot extend it, and this is where sage and fool diverge. As for details and changes of circumstance, how could the sage not know them? But he does not take them as the sole object of learning; what he calls learning is precisely extending his good knowing in order to examine closely the Heavenly principle of this mind, and in that it differs from the learning of later ages. You have not yet had leisure for extending good knowing and are anxiously concerned with these things, which is exactly the obscuration of seeking what is hard to understand and taking it as learning. Good knowing in relation to details and changes of circumstance is like the compass, square, and rule in relation to squares, circles, and lengths: the impossibility of fixing details and changes in advance is like the impossibility of exhausting all squares, circles, and lengths. So if the compass and square are truly established, one cannot be deceived about squares and circles, and the world's squares and circles cannot be used up; if the rule is truly laid out, one cannot be deceived about lengths, and the world's lengths cannot be used up; if good knowing is truly extended, one cannot be deceived about details and changes, and the world's details and changes cannot be fully responded to. If one does not examine the errors of a hair's breadth that become a thousand li in the subtle single thought of the good knowing of my own mind, then what else can one use one's learning for! This is wanting to fix all the world's squares and circles without a compass and square, and to measure all the world's lengths without a rule, and I see it as perverse and contradictory, laboring daily and achieving nothing. You say "in speaking of filial piety, who does not know about warming and cooling and morning and evening attendance," yet few can extend their knowledge of it. If one says that roughly knowing the forms of warming, cooling and attendance means being able to extend knowledge, then everyone who knows that a ruler should be benevolent can be called able to extend the knowledge of benevolence, and everyone who knows that a minister should be loyal can be called able to extend the knowledge of loyalty; then who in the world is not someone who extends knowledge? From this one can see that extending knowledge necessarily lies in practice, and that without practice one cannot be said to extend knowledge, and this becomes clear. Is the substance of the unity of knowing and acting not all the more evident?

夫舜之不告而娶，豈舜之前已有不告而娶者為之準則，故舜得以考之何典，問諸何人，而為此邪？抑亦求諸其心一念之真知，權輕重之宜，不得已而為此邪？武之不葬而興師，豈武之前已有不葬而興師者為之準則，故武得以考之何典，問諸何人，而為此邪？抑亦求諸其心一念之良知，權輕重之宜，不得已而為此邪？使舜之心而非誠，武之心而非誠於為救民，則其不告而娶與不葬而興師，乃不孝．不忠之大者。而後之人不務致其良知，以精察義理於此心感應酬酢之間，顧欲懸空討論此等變常之事，執之以為制事之本，以求臨事之無失，其亦遠矣。其餘數端，皆可類推，則古人致知之學，從可知矣。

(The Master continued:) When Shun married without informing his parents, was there already someone before Shun who had married without informing, serving as his standard, so that Shun could look up what canon and ask what person before doing this? Or did he seek in the single thought of good knowing in his own mind, weigh what was fitting between the lighter and the weightier, and do this because he had no choice? When King Wu raised an army without burying his father, was there already someone before Wu who had raised an army without burial, serving as his standard, so that Wu could look up what canon and ask what person before doing this? Or did he seek in the single thought of good knowing in his own mind, weigh what was fitting between the lighter and the weightier, and do this because he had no choice? Had Shun's heart not been truly sincere in longing for his parents, and Wu's heart not truly sincere in saving the people, then their marrying without informing and raising an army without burial would have been among the gravest unfilial and disloyal acts. Yet people of later ages, not striving to extend their good knowing so as to examine righteousness and principle closely in the stimulus and response of this mind, wish instead to discuss in the air these exceptional matters, and to hold on to them as the basis for managing affairs so as to make no error when facing events; that is far off the mark. The other points can all be inferred by analogy, and from this one can know the learning of extending knowledge as practiced by the ancients.

○來書云：謂《大學》「格物」之說，專求本心，猶可牽合：至於六經、四書所載「多閃多見」，「前古往行」，「好古敏求」，「博學審問」，「，溫故知新」、「博學詳說」，「奸問好察」，是皆明臺求於事為之際、資於論說之間者，用功節目固不容紊矣。「格物」之義，前已詳悉，牽合之疑，想已不俟復解矣。至於「多聞多見」，乃孔子因子張之務外好高，徒欲以多聞多見為學，而不能求諸其心，以闕疑殆，此其言行所以不免於尤悔，而所謂見聞者，適以資其務外好高而已：蓋所以救子張多聞多見之病，而非以是教之為學也：夫子嘗曰：「蓋有不知而作之者，我無是也。」是猶孟子「是非之心，人皆有之」之義也。此言正所以明德性之良知非由於聞見耳。若日「多聞擇其善者而從之，多見而識之」，則是專求諸見聞之末，而已落在第二義矣，故日「如之次也。」夫以見聞之知為次，則所謂知之上者果安所指乎？是可以窺聖門致知用力之地矣。夫子謂子貢曰：「賜也，汝以予為多學而識之者歟？非也，予一以貫之。」使誠在於「多學而識」，則夫子胡力謬為是說，以欺子貢者邪？「一以貫之」，非致其良知而何？《易》曰：「君子多識前言往行，以畜其德。」夫以畜其德為心，則凡多識前言往行者，孰非畜德之事：此正知、行合一之功矣。「好古敏求」者，好古人之學，而敏求此心之理耳。心即理也。學者，學此心也：求者，求此心也。盂子云：「學問之道無他，求其放心而已矣。」非若後世廣記博誦古人之言詞，以為好古，而汲汲然惟以求功名利達之具於外者也。「博學、審問」，前言已盡。「溫故、知新」，朱子亦以「溫故」屬之「摩德性」矣：德性豈可以外求哉？惟夫「知新」必由於「溫故」，而「溫故」乃所以「知新」，則亦可以驗知、行之非兩節矣。「博學而詳說之者，將以反說約也。

Your letter says: You say that the Great Learning's doctrine of "investigating things" exclusively seeks the original mind, which can still be forced to fit; but as for what is recorded in the Six Classics and Four Books, such as "hearing much and seeing much," "former sayings and past deeds," "loving antiquity and seeking diligently," "studying broadly and inquiring carefully," "reviewing the old and knowing the new," "studying broadly and explaining in detail," "loving to ask and loving to examine," these plainly seek in the course of affairs and draw support from discussion and explanation, and the stages of effort must of course not be confused. The meaning of "investigating things" has been explained in detail before, and the doubt about forced fitting hardly needs further explanation. As for "hearing much and seeing much," it was said by Confucius because Zizhang concentrated on the outside and loved the lofty, and wanted merely to take much hearing and seeing as learning, and could not seek in his own mind, so as to leave doubt aside and avoid risk; thus his words and actions could not avoid fault and regret, and what he saw and heard served only to feed his attention to the outside and love of loftiness: it was to cure Zizhang's illness of much hearing and seeing, and not to teach him this as learning. The Master said: "There may be people who act without knowing, but I am not like that." This is still the meaning of Mencius's "the mind of right and wrong is in everyone." These words precisely make clear that the good knowing of one's moral nature does not come from hearing and seeing. As for "hear much, choose what is good and follow it; see much and remember it," this is seeking exclusively in the tip of hearing and seeing, already fallen to the second rank, so it is called "the next level of knowing." If the knowing of hearing and seeing is the next level, then what does the highest level of knowing actually refer to? From this one can glimpse where the sage's school applied effort in extending knowledge. The Master said to Zigong: "Ci, do you think I am one who learns much and remembers it? No, I link it all with one thread." If it truly lay in "learning much and remembering," why would the Master falsely say this to deceive Zigong? What is "linking all with one thread" if not extending good knowing? The Book of Changes says: "The gentleman learns much of former sayings and past deeds, so as to accumulate his virtue." With accumulating virtue as the aim, everyone who learns much of former sayings and past deeds is engaged in nothing but accumulating virtue: this is precisely the effort of the unity of knowing and acting. "Loving antiquity and seeking diligently" means loving the learning of the ancients and diligently seeking the principle of this mind. The mind is principle. Learning is learning this mind; seeking is seeking this mind. Mencius said: "The way of learning is nothing other than seeking one's lost mind." It is not like later ages, memorizing and reciting the ancients' words widely and calling that loving antiquity while anxiously seeking only the tools of fame and advancement outside. "Studying broadly and inquiring carefully" has been fully explained earlier. As for "reviewing the old and knowing the new," Master Zhu too assigned "reviewing the old" to "honoring the moral nature": how can the moral nature be sought outside? Only that "knowing the new" must come from "reviewing the old," and "reviewing the old" is precisely how one "knows the new," which also verifies that knowing and acting are not two stages. "Studying broadly and explaining in detail is to return to explaining in summary.

」若無「反約」之云，則「博學．詳說」者，果何事邪？舜之「好問好察」，惟以用中而致其精一於道心耳。道心者，良知之謂也。君子之學，何嘗離去事為而廢論說：但其從事於事為、論說者，要皆知、行合一之功，正所以致其本心之良知，而非若世之徒事口耳談說以為知者，分知、行為兩事，而果有節目先後之可言也。

(The Master continued:) If there were no saying about "returning to the summary," what then would "studying broadly and explaining in detail" be about? Shun's "loving to ask and loving to examine" is merely taking the mean and extending the refinement and singleness of the mind of the Way. The mind of the Way is what is meant by good knowing. In the gentleman's learning, when has he ever left affairs and abandoned discussion? Only that what he does in affairs and discussion is all the effort of the unity of knowing and acting, precisely to extend the good knowing of his original mind, and is not like those in the world who merely engage in talk by mouth and ear and take it for knowing, dividing knowing and acting into two matters and truly having stages of before and after to speak of.

○來書云：楊、墨之為仁義，鄉愿之亂忠信，堯舜子之之禪讓，湯，武，楚項之放伐，周公，莽操之攝輔，謾無印證，又焉適從？且於古今事變，禮樂、名物，未常考識，使國家欲興明堂，建辟雍，制歷律，草封禪，人將何所玫其用乎？故《論語》曰「生而知之」者，義理耳。若夫禮樂，名物，古今事變，亦必待學而後有以驗其行事之實。此則可謂定論矣；所喻楊、墨、鄉愿、堯、舜、子之、湯、武、楚項、周公、莽、操之辨，與前舜、武之論，大略可以類推，古今事變之疑，前於良知之說，已有規矩尺度之喻，當亦無俟多贅矣。至於明堂、辟雍諸事，似尚未容於無言者：然其說甚長，姑就吾子之言而取正焉，則吾子之惑將亦可少釋矣。失明堂．辟雍之制，始見於呂氏之「月令」，漢濡之訓疏，六經、四書之中，未嘗詳及也。豈呂氏、漢懦之知，乃賢於三代之賢聖乎？齊宣之時，明堂尚有未毀，則幽、厲之世，周之明堂皆無恙也。堯、舜茅茨土階，明堂之制末必備，而不害其為治幽、厲之明堂，固猶文武成康之舊，而無救於其亂：何邪？豈能「以不忍人之心，而行不忍人之政」，則雖茅茨土階，固亦明堂也：以幽、厲之心，而行幽、厲之政，則雖明堂，亦暴政所自出之地邪？武帝肇講於漢，而武盾盛作於唐，其治亂何如邪？天子之學日辟雍，諸侯之學日汻宮，皆象地形而為之名耳。然三代之學，其要皆所以明人倫，非以肝不肝，汻不汻為重輕也。孔子云：「人而不仁，如禮何！人而不仁，如樂何！」制禮作樂，必具中和之德，聲為律而身為度者，然後可以語此。若夫器數之末，樂工之事，祝史之守。故曾子曰：「君子所貴乎道者三，籩豆之事，則有司存也。」堯「命羲和，欽若昊天，曆象日月星！星辰」，其重在於「敬授入時」也。舜「在璇璣玉衡」，其重在於「以齊七政」也。

Your letter says: Yang Zhu and Mo Di's benevolence and righteousness, the village worthy's confusion of loyalty and good faith, the abdications of Yao, Shun and Zizhi, the banishing and attacking by Tang, Wu and the Chu and Xiang Yu, the regency and assistance of the Duke of Zhou versus Wang Mang and Cao Cao, there is no verification at all, so what is one to follow? Moreover, if one has not examined the changes of ancient and present affairs, rites and music, names and things, and the state wishes to build the Hall of Light, set up the Bi Yong, fix the calendar and musical pitches, or discuss the feng and shan sacrifices, to what use will people put their ability? So the Analects' "born with knowledge" refers only to righteousness and principle. As for rites and music, names and things, ancient and present changes, one must also wait to learn and then be able to verify the truth of practice. This can be called a settled conclusion. The distinctions you mention, among Yang, Mo, the village worthy, Yao, Shun, Zizhi, Tang, Wu, Chu and Xiang Yu, the Duke of Zhou, Mang and Cao, can roughly be inferred from the earlier discussion of Shun and Wu. The doubt about the changes of ancient and present affairs has been answered earlier in the analogy of the compass, square and rule in the doctrine of good knowing, and needs no more elaboration. As for the Hall of Light, Bi Yong and the like, it seems I cannot leave them without comment: but the discussion is very long, so let me take your words as a basis for correction, and your confusion may be somewhat resolved. The institutions of the Hall of Light and the Bi Yong first appear in Lu's Monthly Ordinances and the commentaries of Han scholars and are not discussed in detail in the Six Classics or Four Books. Could the knowledge of Lu and the Han scholars surpass that of the worthy sages of the Three Dynasties? In the time of King Xuan of Qi, the Hall of Light was still not destroyed, so in the age of Kings You and Li, the Zhou Hall of Light was all intact. Under Yao and Shun, with thatched roofs and earthen steps, the institutions of the Hall of Light were probably not complete, and yet it did not harm their governing; in the age of Kings You and Li, the Hall of Light was still the old one of Wen, Wu, Cheng and Kang, yet it did nothing to save them from disorder: why? Is it not that if one can "use a heart that cannot bear the suffering of others to carry out government that cannot bear the suffering of others," then even thatched roofs and earthen steps are truly a Hall of Light, while with the heart of You and Li carrying out the government of You and Li, even a Hall of Light is the very place from which tyranny arises? Emperor Wu began lecturing at it in Han and Empress Wu built it grandly in Tang; how was their order and disorder? The Son of Heaven's school is called Bi Yong and the lords' school is called Pan Gong, both simply named after the shape of the ground. But the main purpose of the schools of the Three Dynasties was always to illumine human relations, and not to weigh importance by whether it was Bi or not Bi, Pan or not Pan. Confucius said: "A person without benevolence, what has he to do with ritual! A person without benevolence, what has he to do with music!" To make rites and compose music, one must have the virtue of centered harmony, with his voice making the pitch and his person making the measure, and only then can one speak of this. As for the tip of vessels and numbers, that is the work of musicians and the charge of invocators and scribes. So Zengzi said: "What the gentleman values in the Way is three things; as for the matter of the bamboo and wooden vessels, there are officials for that." Yao "commanded Xi and He, reverently following august Heaven, to calculate and delineate the sun, moon and stars," and the emphasis was on "reverently giving the seasons to the people"; Shun "observed the jade armillary sphere and crossbar," and the emphasis was on "regulating the seven governors."

是皆汲汲然以仁民之心而行其養民之政，治歷明時之本，固在於此也。羲和歷數之學，皋、契未必能之也，禹、稷未必能之也，堯、舜之知而不偏物，雖堯、舜亦未必能之也：然至於今循羲和之法而世修之，雖曲知小慧之人，星術淺陋之士，亦能推步占侯而無所忒。則是後世曲知小慧之人，反賢於禹、稷、堯、舜者邪？「封禪」之說尤為不經，是乃後世佞人諛士所以求媚於其上，倡為誇侈，以蕩君心而靡國贊：蓋欺天罔人無恥之大者，君子之所不道，司馬相如之所以見譏於天下後世也。吾子乃以是為懦者所宜學，殆亦未之思邪？夫聖人之所以為聖者，以其生而知之也。而釋論語者曰：「『生而知之』者，義理耳。若夫禮樂、名物、占今事變：亦必待學而後有以驗其行事之實；」失禮樂、名物之類，果有關於作聖之功也，而聖人亦必待學而後能知焉，則是聖人亦不可以謂之「生知」矣。謂聖人為「生知」者，專指義理而言，而不以禮樂、名物之類，則是禮樂、名物之類無關於作聖之功矣，聖人之所以謂之「生知」者，專指義理而不以禮堤、名物之類，則是「學而知之」者，亦惟當學知此義理而已。「困而知之」者，亦惟當困知此義理而已。今學者之學聖人，於聖人之所能知者，未能「學而知之」，而顧汲汲焉求知聖人之所不能知者以為學，無乃失其所以希聖之方歟？凡此皆就吾子之聽惑者而稍為之分釋，末及乎拔本塞源之論也。

(The Master continued:) All of these were done with the anxious mind of benevolence toward the people, carrying out the government of nurturing the people, and the root of ordering the calendar and clarifying the seasons truly lies here. The learning of calendar calculation of Xi and He was probably not something Gao Yao or Xie could do, nor Yu or Ji; Yao and Shun, whose knowledge did not extend to every thing, could not necessarily do it either: yet to this day, following the methods of Xi and He, and cultivating them in each age, even a person of petty knowledge and small cleverness, or a man of shallow skill in star technique, can calculate and divine without error. Then are the petty-knowing people of later ages more worthy than Yu, Ji, Yao and Shun? The doctrine of "feng and shan" is especially groundless; it was put forward by flatterers of later ages seeking to please their rulers, promoting extravagance to dissolve the ruler's heart and waste the state's resources: it is the greatest of shameless deceptions of Heaven and men, which the gentleman does not speak of, and for which Sima Xiangru was ridiculed by the world and later ages. That you take this as what Confucians should study probably means you have not thought about it. The reason the sage is a sage is that he was born knowing. And the interpreters of the Analects say: "'Born with knowledge' refers only to righteousness and principle. As for rites and music, names and things, ancient and present changes, one must also wait to learn and then be able to verify the truth of practice." If rites and music, names and things and the like truly bear on the work of becoming a sage, and the sage too must wait to learn before knowing them, then the sage cannot be called "born knowing." If to call the sage "born knowing" refers only to righteousness and principle and not to rites and music, names and things, then rites and music, names and things have no bearing on the work of becoming a sage. If the sage is called "born knowing" with reference only to righteousness and principle and not to rites and music, names and things, then those who "know by learning" should only learn to know this righteousness and principle, and those who "know through hardship" should only come through hardship to know this righteousness and principle. Now learners, in learning from the sage, have not yet been able to "know by learning" what the sage can know, but anxiously seek to know what the sage cannot know and take it as learning; is that not losing the way to aspire to sagehood? All this only partly resolves what confuses you, and has not yet reached the doctrine of pulling out the root and stopping the source.

○夫拔本塞源之論不明於天下，則天下之學聖人者，將日繁日難，斯人倫於禽獸夷夥，而猶自以為聖人之學：吾之說雖或暫明於一時，終將凍解於西而冰堅於東，霧釋於前而云滃於後，呶呶焉危困以死，而卒無救於天下之分毫也已。夫聖人之心，以天地萬物為一體，其視天下之人，無外內遠近：凡有血氣，皆其昆弟赤子之親，莫不欲安全而教養之，以遂其萬物一體之念。天下之人心，其始亦非有異於聖人也，特其間於有我之私，隔於物欲之蔽，大者以小，通者以塞，人各有心，至有視其父、子、兄、弗如仇讎者。聖人有憂之，是以推其天地萬物一體之仁以教天下，使之皆有以克其私，去其蔽，以復其心體之同然。其教之大端，則堯、舜、禹之相授受，所謂「道心惟微，惟精惟一，允執厥中」：而其節目，則舜之命契，斫謂「父子有親，君臣有義，夫婦有別，長幼有序，胡友有信」五者而已。唐、虞、三代之世，教者惟以此為教，而學者惟以此為學。當是之時，人無異見，家無異習，安此者謂之聖，勉此者謂之貿，而背此者，雖其啟明如朱，亦謂之不肖。下至閭井、田野、農、工、商、賈之賤，莫不皆有是學，而惟以成其德行為務。何者？無有聞見之雜，記誦之煩，辭章之靡濫，功利之馳逐，而但使孝其親，弟其長，信其朋友，以復其心體之同然：是蓋性分之所固有，而非有假於外者，則人亦孰不能之乎？學挍之中，惟以成德為事：而才能之異，或有長於禮樂，長於政教，長於水土播值者，則就其成德，而因使益精其能於學挍之中。迨夫舉德而任，則使之終身居其職而不易。用之者惟知同心一德，以共安天下之民，視才之稱否，而不以崇卑為輕重，勞逸為美惡：效用者亦惟知同心一德，以共安天下之民，苟當其能，則終身扈於煩劇而不以為勞，安於卑瑣而不以為琖。

If the doctrine of pulling out the root and stopping the source is not made clear in the world, then those in the world who study the sages will grow more numerous and more difficult day by day, and these people will sink into the state of beasts and barbarians while still thinking they are practicing the learning of the sages. Although my teaching may be clear for a time, in the end it will be like ice melting in the west while freezing hard in the east, mist clearing in front while clouds surge behind, and I will talk on and on, in danger and hardship to the death, and in the end I will not help the world by even a hair. The sage's mind takes Heaven, earth and the ten thousand things as one body, and sees all the people of the world without distinction of inside and outside, far and near: whatever has blood and breath is a brother, a newborn child in his kinship, and he wishes to keep them all safe and teach and nourish them, to fulfill his thought of the oneness of the ten thousand things. At the beginning the minds of the world's people were not different from the sage's, but were interposed by the selfishness of having a self and separated by the obscuration of material desire; what was large became small, what was open became blocked, each person had his own mind, and some even viewed their fathers, sons, and brothers as enemies. The sage was troubled by this, so he extended his benevolence of oneness with Heaven, earth and the ten thousand things to teach the world, so that all could overcome their selfishness and remove their obscuration, and recover the mind's substance that is the same in all. The main points of his teaching are what Yao, Shun and Yu handed down to each other: "The mind of the Way is subtle; be refined, be single, and hold fast to the mean"; and its details are what Shun commanded Xie: "Between father and son there is affection, between ruler and minister there is righteousness, between husband and wife there is distinction, between elder and younger there is order, between friends there is good faith," these five only. In the age of Tang, Yu and the Three Dynasties, the teachers taught only this and the learners learned only this. At that time people had no different views, and families no different practices; those at ease in it were called sages, those striving at it were called worthies, and those who turned against it, though they were as enlightened as Danzhu, were called unworthy. Down to the village wells, the fields, and the lowly farmers, artisans and merchants, none was without this learning, and all strove only to perfect virtue and conduct. Why? There was no confusion of hearing and seeing, no tedium of memorization, no excess of embellished writing, no racing after profit and merit, but only making them filial to parents, respectful to elders and faithful to friends, to recover the mind's substance that is the same in all: this is what the nature originally has and does not borrow from outside, so who could not do it? In the schools they concerned themselves only with perfecting virtue; and if talents differed, so that some excelled in rites and music, in government and teaching, or in water, soil and sowing, then according to their perfected virtue they were helped to refine their ability further in the schools. When virtue was selected and given office, they were made to remain in that post for life without change. Those who employed them knew only to be of one mind and one virtue to bring peace to the people of the world, looking at whether the talent was suitable and not treating high or low rank as heavy or light, or toil or ease as good or bad; those who served knew only to be of one mind and one virtue to bring peace to the people of the world, and if the post fit their ability, they stayed in a burdensome post their whole lives without thinking it toil, and were content in a humble, petty post without thinking it lowly.

當是之時，天下之人熙熙皞皞，皆相視如一家之親。其才質之下者，則安其農、工、商、賈之分，各勤其業，以相生相養，而無有乎希高慕外之心。其才能之異，若皋、夔、稷、契者，則出而各效其能。若一家之務，或營其衣食，或通其有無，或傭其器用，集謀併力，以求遂其仰事俯育之願，惟恐當其事者之或怠而重己之累也。故復勤其稼，而不恥其不知教，視契之善教，即己之善教也：夔司其樂，而不恥於不明禮，視其夷之通禮，郥己之通禮也。蓋其心學純明，而有以全其萬物一體之仁，故其精神流貫，志氣通達，而無有乎己之分，物我之間：譬之一人之身，目視，耳聽，手持，足行，以濟一身之用，目不恥其無聰，而耳之所涉，目必營焉，是不恥其無執，而手之所探，足必前焉：蓋其元氣充同，血脈牒暢，是以癢痾呼吸，感觸神應，有不言而喻之妙。此聖人之學斫以至易至簡，易知易從，學易能而才易成者，正以大端惟在復心體之同然，而知識技能非斫與論也。

(The Master continued:) At that time the people of the world were happy and peaceful, all regarding each other as kin of one family. Those of lower talent were content with their lot as farmers, artisans and merchants, each diligent in his work, supporting and nourishing one another, without any heart to aspire upward or yearn for what was outside. Those of different ability, such as Gao Yao, Kui, Ji and Xie, came forward and each used his ability. It was like the affairs of one household, in which some manage clothing and food, some exchange what is present and absent, some prepare utensils, gathering plans and uniting strength to fulfill the wish to serve those above and nourish those below, only afraid that one in charge of a matter might grow negligent and increase his own burden. So Ji was diligent in farming and was not ashamed at not knowing how to teach, and regarded Xie's skill in teaching as his own skill in teaching; Kui was in charge of music and was not ashamed at not understanding ritual, and regarded Bo Yi's mastery of ritual as his own mastery of ritual. Their learning of the mind was pure and bright, and so they were able to complete the benevolence of the oneness of the ten thousand things; therefore their spirit flowed through and their aspiration reached everywhere, and there was no division of self and other, no gap between others and things: like the body of one person, where the eyes see, the ears hear, the hands hold and the feet walk to serve the whole body. The eyes are not ashamed at lacking hearing, and what the ears reach, the eyes will attend to; the hands are not ashamed at lacking walking, and where the hands reach, the feet will move forward: because the original qi fills the body and the blood vessels flow freely, so itching, illness, breathing, and touch are met with spiritual response, with a wondrous understanding that is felt without being spoken. This is why the sage's learning is extremely easy and simple, easy to know and easy to follow, easy to learn and easy to bring talent to completion, precisely because its main point lies in recovering the mind's substance that is the same in all, and knowledge and skills are not what is discussed.

○三代之衰，王道熄而霸術倡：孔、孟既沒，聖學晦而邪說橫：教者不復以此為教，而學者不復以此為學，霸者之徒，竊取先王之近似者，假之於外以內濟其私己之慾，天下靡然而宗之，聖人之道遂以蕪塞。相仿相效，日求所以富強之說，傾詐之謀，攻伐之計，一切欺天罔人，荀一時之得，以獵取聲利之術，若管、商、蘇、張之屬者，至不可名數。既其久也，鬥爭劫奪，不勝其禍，斯人惀於禽獸、夷狄，而霸術亦有所不能行矣。世之懦者慨然悲傷，搜臘先聖王之典一草法制而掇拾修補於煨燼之餘，蓋其為心頁亦欲以挽回先王之道。聖學既遠，霸術之慱積已深，雖在賢知，皆不免於習染，其所以講明修飾，以求宣暘光復於世者，僅是以增霸者之藩癱，而聖學之門穡，遂不復可靚：於是乎有訓詀之學，而慱之以為名，有記誦之學，而言之以為博，有詞章之學，而侈之以為麗：若是者，紛紛籍籍，堊超角立於天下，又不知其幾家，萬徑千蹊，莫知所適。世之學者如人百戲之場，讙謔跳踉、騁奇鬥巧、獻笑爭妍者，四面而競出，前瞻後盼，應接不遑，而耳目眩瞀，精神恍惑，日夜遨遊淹息其間，如病狂喪心之人，莫自知其家業之所歸：時君世主亦皆昏迷顛倒於其說，而終身從事於無用之虛文，莫自知其聽謂。間有覺其空疏謬妄：支離牽滯，而卓然自奮，欲以見諸行事之實者，極其所抵，亦不過為富強功利、五霸之事業而止。聖人之學囗遠日晦，而功利之習愈趨愈下：其間雖嘗瞽惑於佛、老，而佛、老之說卒亦未能有以勝其功利之心：雖又嘗折衷於群懦，而群濡之論終亦未能有以破其功利之見。蓋至於今，功利之毒淪浹於人之心髓，而習以成性也，幾千年矣。

With the decline of the Three Dynasties, the kingly way faded and the hegemonic arts were promoted; after Confucius and Mencius died, the sages' learning grew obscure and heterodox theories ran rampant. Teachers no longer taught this, and learners no longer learned this. The followers of the hegemons stole what resembled the former kings' ways and borrowed them externally to supply their private desires within, and the world followed and revered them in a wave, so that the sages' Way was overgrown and blocked. They imitated one another and sought every day theories of wealth and strength, schemes of deceit, plans of attack, all the arts of deceiving Heaven and men, of grasping a momentary gain and hunting for fame and profit, such as Guan, Shang, Su and Zhang, too many to name or count. After a long time, struggles, robbery and plunder brought unbearable disasters, and these people sank to the state of beasts and barbarians, and even the hegemonic arts could no longer be carried out. The Confucians of the world were grieved and sorrowful and collected the canons and institutions of the former sage kings, gathering and mending them from the embers, and their intention too was to restore the Way of the former kings. But the sages' learning was already distant, and the hidden accumulation of the hegemonic arts was deep, so that even among the worthy and the wise, none escaped being tainted, and what they discussed and polished in order to promote and restore it to the world only added to the hedges of the hegemons, while the gate and wall of the sages' learning could no longer be seen. Thus there arose the learning of exegesis, boasted of as fame; the learning of memorization, spoken of as breadth; the learning of rhetoric and composition, indulged in as beauty. Such schools, crowded and jostling, stood against one another in the world, and one does not know how many families there were, ten thousand paths and a thousand tracks, none knowing where to go. The learners of the world were like people who had entered a place of hundred entertainments, where noisy jesting and leaping, showing off wonders and competing in tricks, offering laughter and vying for beauty came from all sides, and they looked front and back and could not respond to it all, their eyes and ears dazzled and their spirits confused, and day and night they roamed and lingered there like people mad and out of their minds, none knowing where his family and work lay. The rulers of the age too were all confused and inverted by these theories, and for their whole lives engaged in useless empty forms, none knowing what he was doing. Among them some perceived that it was empty, erroneous, fragmented and cramped, and, rousing themselves with distinction, wished to show it in the reality of action, but the furthest they reached was merely wealth, strength, merit and profit, the enterprises of the Five Hegemons. The learning of the sages grew more distant and obscure each day, and the habit of merit and profit sank lower the more it was pursued. In the meantime they were at times deluded by Buddhism and Daoism, but the teachings of Buddhism and Daoism in the end could not overcome their heart of merit and profit; and at times they sought a compromise among the many Confucians, but the discussions of the Confucians in the end could not break their views of merit and profit. By today the poison of merit and profit has soaked into the marrow of people's minds and has become habit and second nature, for several thousand years already.

相矜以知，相軋以勢，相爭以利，相高以技能，相取以聲譽：其出而仕也，理錢榖者則欲兼夫兵刑，典禮樂者又欲與於銓軸，處郡縣則思藩臬之高，居臺諫則望宰執之要。故不能其事則不得以兼其官，不通其說則不可以要其譽：記諵之廣，適以長其放他：知識之多，適以行其惡也：聞見之博，適以肆其辨也：辭章之富，適以飾其為也。是以梟、夒、復、契所不能兼之事，而今之初學小生皆欲通其說，究其術。其稱名僭號，未嘗不囗吾欲以共成天下之務，而其誠心實意之所在，以為不如是則無以濟其私而滿其欲也。嗚呼，以若是之積染，以若是之心志，而又講之以若是之學術，宜其聞吾聖人之教，而視之以為贅疣衲鑿：則其以良知為未是，而謂聖人之學為無所用，亦其勢有所必至矣！嗚呼，士生期世，而尚同以求聖人之學乎！尚同以論聖人之學乎！土生斯世，而欲以為學者，不亦勞苫而繁難乎！不亦拘湍而險艱乎！嗚呼，可悲也已！所幸天理之在人心，終有所不可泯，而良知之明，萬占一日，則其聞吾拔本塞源之論，必有惻然而悲，戚然而痛，憤然而起，沛然若決匚河，而有岓不可御者矣。非夫豪傑之士，無所待而興起者，吾誰與望乎？

(The Master continued:) They boast to one another of knowledge, crush each other by power, contend with each other for profit, vie with each other in skill, and compete for reputation. When they go out to hold office, those who manage money and grain wish also to handle the military and punishments, those who administer rites and music also wish to take part in appointments, those in commanderies and counties think of the height of provincial offices, and those in the censorate and remonstrance posts long for the key posts of chief ministers. So when they cannot do the work, they cannot hold concurrent posts; if they do not understand a doctrine, they cannot seek its reputation: breadth of memorization only increases their arrogance, much knowledge only helps them carry out their evil, wide hearing and seeing only lets them indulge in argument, and richness of rhetoric only decorates their falsehood. So things that even Gao Yao, Kui, Ji and Xie could not take on together, today's beginners and young students all wish to master in theory and exhaust in technique. In claiming titles and styles, they never fail to say "I wish to help complete the affairs of the world," but where their sincere hearts and true intentions lie, they think that without it they cannot serve their private ends and satisfy their desires. Alas, with such accumulated taint, such minds and aims, and then taught such scholarship, no wonder that when they hear the teaching of our sages they regard it as a wart or a square peg in a round hole; that they take good knowing as insufficient and say that the sages' learning has no use is also the inevitable course of things! Alas, born into this age, how can a scholar still seek the sages' learning! How can he still discuss the sages' learning! Born into this age and wishing to study, is it not toilsome and difficult! Is it not cramped and dangerous! Alas, how sad! Fortunately the Heavenly principle in human hearts can never be wholly extinguished in the end, and the brightness of good knowing is the same through ten thousand ages; so those who hear my doctrine of pulling out the root and stopping the source will surely feel pity and sorrow, grief and pain, rise in indignation, and like a flood breaking the river dikes, will be irresistible. Apart from heroic men who rise without waiting for anything, whom can I look to?

○吳、曾兩生至，備道道通懇切為道之意，殊慰相念。若道通真可謂篤信好學者矣。憂病中會不能與兩生細論，然兩生亦自有志向、肯用功者，，每見輒覺有進，在區區誠不能無負於兩生之遠來，在兩生則亦庶幾無負其遠來之意矣。臨別以此冊致道通意，請書數語。荒憒無可言者，輒以道通來書中所問數節，略下轉語奉酬。草草殊不詳細，兩生當亦自能口悉也。來書云：用工夫只是「立志」，近來於先生每吉時時骷檢，念益明臺。然於朋友不能一時相離。若得朋友講習，則此志繞精健闊大，才有生意：若三五日不得朋友相講，便覺微弱，遏事便會困，亦時會忘。乃今蕪朋友相講之日，還只靜坐，或看書，或遊衍經行，凡寓目、措身，悉取以培養志，頗覺意思和適：然終不如朋友講聚，精神流動，生意更多也。林本索居之人，當更有何法以處之？此段足驗道通日用工夫聽得，工夫大略亦只是如此用，只要無間斷，到得純熟後，意思又自不同矣。大抵吾人為學，緊要大頭惱，只是「立志」所謂「困、忘」之病，亦只是志欠真切。今好色之人，未嘗病於困忘，只是一真切耳。自家痛庠，自家須會知得，自家須會搔摩得；既自知得痛癢，自家須不能不搔摩得。佛家謂之「方便法門」，須是自家調停斟酌，他人總難與力，亦更無別法可設也。

Wu and Zeng, the two students, came and told me in full of Daotong's earnest intention in pursuing the Way, which comforted me and made me think of him. Daotong may truly be called a man of firm faith and love of learning. In my illness and worry I could not discuss things in detail with the two students, yet they have their own aims and are willing to work hard, and each time I see them I feel they have advanced. I cannot but feel that I have failed the two students who came from afar, and the two students, for their part, may well not have failed the purpose of their long journey. On parting, they gave me this album with Daotong's message, asking me to write a few words. I am confused and have nothing to say, so I will simply offer brief replies to the several points Daotong asked about in his letter. These are hasty and not at all detailed, and the two students should be able to relate the details orally. You wrote: In applying effort, there is only "establishing the will." Recently, since you, Master, often speak of checking oneself at all times, the meaning has become clearer to me. Yet I cannot be apart from friends even for a moment. If I have friends to discuss and practice with, this will becomes refined, vigorous, broad, and full of life; if I go three or five days without friends to discuss with, I feel it weak, I become stuck when I meet affairs, and I often forget. On days when I have no friends to discuss with, I still sit quietly, or read, or stroll and walk about; whatever meets my eyes and wherever I place my body, I take it to nourish this will, and I feel quite comfortable; yet it is still not as good as gatherings with friends, where the spirit flows and life is greater. For a person living apart from the group, what method should be used to handle it? This passage is enough to verify what Daotong has gained in his daily effort; effort is roughly used just like this, and one only needs to keep it unbroken, and after it becomes fully familiar, the meaning will be different again. Generally, in our learning the essential main point is only "establishing the will." The ailments of what you call "getting stuck and forgetting" also simply come from the will lacking sincerity and earnestness. Take a man fond of women now: he has never suffered from getting stuck or forgetting; it is only that he is sincere and earnest. One must know one's own pain and itch, and one must be able to scratch and rub them oneself; having known one's own pain and itch, one cannot but scratch and rub. The Buddhists call this "the gate of expedient means," which one must adjust and weigh for oneself; others can hardly lend a hand, and there is no other method to set up.

○來書云：上蔡常問天下何思何慮。伊川雲；「有此理，只是發得太早。」在學者工夫，固是「必有事焉而勿忘」，然亦須識得「何思何慮」底氣象，一併看為是。若不識得這氣象，便有正與助長之病；若認得「何思何慮」，而忘「必有事焉」工夫，恐人墮於「無」也。須是不滯於「有」，不墮於「無」。然乎否也？所論亦相去不遠矣，只是契悟未盡。上蔡之問，與伊川之答，亦只是上蔡、尹川之意，與孔子「繄辭」原旨稍有不同。「繄」言「何思何慮」，是言斫思所慮只是一個天理，更無別思別慮耳，非謂無思無慮也。故曰：「與歸而殊途，一致而百慮，天下何思何慮。」雲「殊途」，雲「百慮」，則豈謂無思無慮邪？心之本體即是天理。天理只是一個，更有何可思慮得？天理原自寂然不動，原自感而遂通，學者用功，雖千思萬慮，只是要復他本來體用而已，不是以私意去安排思索出來。故明道云：「君子之學，莫若廓然而大公，物來而順應。」若以私意去安排思索便是用智自私矣。「何思何慮」正是工夫。在聖人分上，便是自然的：在學者分上，便是勉然的。尹川卻是把作效驗看了，斫以有「發得太早」之說。既而云：「卻好用功」，則已自覺其前言之有未盡矣。濂溪主靜之論亦是此意。今道通之言，雖已不為無見，然亦未免尚有兩事也。

You wrote: Shangcai (Xie Liangzuo) once asked, "What thinking and what worrying does the world have?" Yichuan said: "There is this principle, but it is expressed too early." For a student's effort, it is of course "there must be work, yet do not forget it," but one must also recognize the atmosphere of "what thinking, what worrying" and look at them together. If one does not recognize that atmosphere, there is the ailment of forcing and helping growth; if one recognizes "what thinking, what worrying" and forgets the effort of "there must be work," I fear one would fall into "nothingness" again. One must not be stuck in "being" nor fall into "nothing." Is this right? What you say is not far off, but your realization is not complete. The question of Shangcai and the answer of Yichuan are only the ideas of Shangcai and Yichuan, and differ a little from Confucius's original meaning in the Xici. When the Xici says "what thinking, what worrying," it means that what is thought and worried about is only the one Heavenly Principle, and there is no other thinking or worrying; it does not say there is no thinking and no worrying. Hence it says: "They arrive at the same place by different paths, and reach one conclusion through a hundred considerations; what thinking and worrying does the world have?" Since it speaks of "different paths" and also of "a hundred considerations," how could it mean no thinking and no worrying? The original substance of the mind is the Heavenly Principle. The Heavenly Principle is only one; what more is there to think or worry about? The Heavenly Principle is originally still and unmoving, and originally responds and then penetrates. When a student applies effort, though he may think a thousand thoughts and worry ten thousand worries, he only wishes to restore its original substance and function, and not to arrange and ponder it out by private will. Therefore Mingdao said: "The learning of the gentleman is nothing better than being open, vast, and perfectly impartial, and responding smoothly as things come." If one arranges and ponders by private will, that is using cleverness for selfishness. "What thinking, what worrying" is precisely the effort. In the case of the sage, it is natural; in the case of the student, it is by exertion. Yichuan took it as an effect, so he had the saying "expressed too early." Then he again said, "It is good effort," so he had already felt that his earlier words were not complete. The theory of Lianxi (Zhou Dunyi) of emphasizing stillness has the same meaning. Daotong's words now, though not without insight, still cannot avoid some remaining duality.

○來書云：凡學者才曉得做工夫，便要識得聖人氣象。蓋認得聖人氣象，把做準的，乃就寧地做工夫去，才不會差，才是作聖工夫。未知走不？先認聖人氣象，昔人嘗有是言矣，然亦欠有頭惱，聖人氣象自是聖人的，我從何處識認？若不就自己良知上真切體認，如以無星之稱而權輕重，未開之鏡而照妍榿，真斫謂以小人之腹，而度君子之心矣。聖人氣象何由認得自己良知原與聖人一般，若體認得自己良知明白，郥聖人氣象不在聖人而在我矣。程子嘗雲；「覷著堯學他行事，無仙許多聰明睿智，安能如彼之動容周旋中禮？」又云：「心通於道，然後能辨是非。」今且說通於道在何處？聰明睿智從何處出來？

You wrote: Whenever a student has just learned to apply effort, he must recognize the atmosphere of the sage. Having recognized the atmosphere of the sage and taken it as a standard, he can then go to work on solid ground without going wrong, and this is the effort of becoming a sage. I do not know whether this is right? Recognizing the sage's atmosphere first is something people of old said, but it lacks a main point. The atmosphere of the sage belongs to the sage; where would I recognize it? If one does not truly and earnestly recognize it on one's own innate knowing, it is like weighing heavy and light with a scale that has no marks, or reflecting beauty and ugliness with a mirror that has not been polished; it truly is measuring a gentleman's heart by a petty man's belly. How could one recognize the atmosphere of the sage? One's own innate knowing is originally the same as the sage's; if one clearly recognizes one's own innate knowing, then the atmosphere of the sage is not in the sage but in me. Master Cheng once said: "Looking at Yao and learning his conduct, without his many kinds of intelligence and wisdom, how could one be like him in moving with composure and turning about in accord with ritual?" He also said: "When the mind penetrates the Way, one can then distinguish right and wrong." Now tell me: where does penetrating the Way lie? From where do intelligence and wisdom come?

○來書古云：事上磨練。一日之內，不管無事，只一意培養本原。若遇事來感，或自己有惑，心上既有覺，安可謂無事？但因事凝心一會，大段覺得事理當如此，只如無事處之，盡吾心而已。然仍有處得善與未善，何也？人或事來得多，須要次第與處，每因才力不足，輒為所困，雖極力扶起而精神已千衰弱。遇此未免要十分退省，寧不了事，不可不加培冬。如何？所說工夫，就道通分上也只是如此用，然未免有出入在。凡人為學，終身只為這一事。自少至老，自朝至暮，不論有事無事，只是做得這一件，所謂「必有事焉」者也。若說「寧不了事，不同不加培養」，卻是尚為兩事也。「必有事焉而勿忘勿助」，事物之來，但盡吾心之良知以應之，所謂「忠恕違道不遠」矣。凡處得有善有未善及有困頓失次之患者，皆是牽於譭譽得喪，不能實致其良知耳。若能實致其良知，然後見得平日所謂善者未必是善，所謂末善者，卻恐正是牽於譭譽得喪，自賊其真知者也。

You wrote: Training oneself in affairs. Within a day, whether there are affairs or none, I only single-mindedly cultivate the original root. If affairs come to move me, or I have doubts myself, since my mind is already aware, how can it be said there are no affairs? But in each affair I concentrate my mind for a while, feel that for the most part the principle of the matter should be so, and treat it just as if there were no affairs, only doing my utmost. Yet there is still handling that is good and not good; why? When many people or affairs come, they must be dealt with in turn, and since my ability is insufficient, I am often hampered by them; though I strive to prop myself up, my spirit has already weakened first. Meeting this, I cannot but retreat and reflect fully, preferring not to finish the affair than to fail to cultivate myself. How about that? The effort you describe is, in Daotong's case, used just like this, but there is inevitably some deviation. All people in learning are, throughout life, only for this one thing. From youth to old age, from morning to night, whether there are affairs or none, one only does this one thing; this is what is meant by "there must be work." If one says, "Better not to finish the affair than not to cultivate," then these are still two things. "There must be work, yet neither forget nor force it": when affairs and things come, one only exhausts the innate knowing of one's own mind in responding to them, which is what is called "loyalty and reciprocity are not far from the Way." All those who handle things with some good and some not good, and with the ailment of being stuck and disordered, are only pulled by praise and blame, gain and loss, and cannot truly extend their innate knowing. If one can truly extend one's innate knowing, then one sees that what one ordinarily took to be good is not necessarily good, and what one took to be not good may exactly be what, pulled by praise, blame, gain, and loss, harms one's own innate knowing.

○來書云：致知之說，春間再承誨益，已頗知用力，覺得比舊尤為簡易。但鄙心則謂與初學吉之，還須帶「格物」意思，使之知下手處。本來「致知」「格物一一併下，但在初學未知下手用功，還說與「格物」，方曉得「致知」云云。「格物」是「致知」功夫，知得「致知」便已知得「格物」：若是未知「格物」，則是「致知」工夫亦未嘗知也。近有一書與友人論此頗悉，今往一通，細觀之，當自見矣。

You wrote: The teaching of extending knowledge, which I received from you again in the spring, I have already come to know how to apply effort in, and feel it is even simpler than before. But in my own opinion, when speaking of it to beginners, one must still carry the sense of "investigating things," so that they know where to start. Originally "extending knowledge" and "investigating things" go down together, but in beginners who do not yet know where to apply effort, one still tells them of "investigating things," and then they can understand "extending knowledge," and so on. "Investigating things" is the effort of "extending knowledge"; if one knows "extending knowledge," one already knows "investigating things"; if one does not yet know "investigating things," then one has never known the effort of "extending knowledge" either. Recently I wrote a letter to a friend discussing this in considerable detail, and I now send you a copy; read it carefully and you will see for yourself.

○來書云：今之為朱，陸之辨者尚未已：每對朋友吉，正學不明已久，且不須枉費心力為朱，陸爭是非，只依先生「．二志」二字點化人。,若其人果能辨得此志來，決意要知此學，已走大段明臺了；朱，陸雖不辨，彼自能分得。又常見朋友中見有人議先生之言者，輒為動氣；昔在朱，陸二先生所以近後世紛紛之議者，亦見二先生工夫有未純熟，分明亦有動氣之病：若明道則無此矣。觀其典吳師禮論介甫之學云：「為我盡達諸介甫，不有益於他，必有益於我也。」氣象何竽從容！常見先生與人書中亦引此言，願朋友皆如此，如何？此節議論得極是極是，願道通遍以告於同志，各自且論自己是非，莫論朱、陸是非也。以言語謗人，其謗淺，若自己不能身體實踐，而徒入耳出口，呶呶哽日，是以身謗也，其謗深矣。凡今天下之論議我者，苟能取以為善，皆是砥礪切磋我也，則在我無非譥惕修省進德之地矣。昔人謂攻吾之短者是吾師，師又可惡乎？

You wrote: The debate over Zhu and Lu has still not ended. Whenever I speak to friends, I say that correct learning has long been unclear, and there is no need to waste effort on contesting the rights and wrongs of Zhu and Lu, but only to enlighten people according to your two words "establishing the will." If a person can really discern this will and is resolved to know this learning, he already understands a great deal; even if he does not debate Zhu and Lu, he can distinguish them himself. I have also often seen that among friends, when someone criticizes your words, they immediately become angry. The reason Zhu and Lu came close to the many arguments of later generations is that the effort of the two masters was not yet fully ripe, and they clearly also had the ailment of anger; Mingdao did not have this. Look at how he discussed Jiefu (Wang Anshi)'s learning with Wu Shili, saying: "Tell Jiefu everything on my behalf; if it does not benefit him, it will surely benefit me." What composure! I have often seen that you also quote this saying in letters to people, and I wish that friends would all be like that; what do you think? What you say in this passage is exactly right. I hope Daotong will tell it to all those of like mind, and have each discuss their own rights and wrongs and not those of Zhu and Lu. To slander others with words is a shallow slander; if one cannot personally put it into practice, and merely lets it in at the ear and out of the mouth, chattering all day, that is slander with one's own body, and it is deep. If today all those in the world who criticize me can take what is good from it, then all of it is whetting and polishing me, and for me it is all ground for alertness, reflection, and the advancement of virtue. People of old said that one who attacks my shortcomings is my teacher; may a teacher be hated?

○來書云﹕有引程子「人生而靜，以上不容說，才說性便已不是性。」何故不容說.．何故不是性？晦庵答云：「不容說者，未有性之可言：不是性者，已不能無氣仃之雜矣。」二先生之言皆未能曉，每看書至此，輒為一惑，請問。「生之謂性」，生字即是氣字，猶言「氣即是性」也：氣即是性；「人生而靜，以上不容說」，才說「氣即是性」，即已落在一邊，不是性之本原矣。孟子性善，是從本原上說。然性善之端，須在氣上始見得，若無氣亦無可見矣。惻隱、羞惡、辭讓、是非即是氣。程子謂「論性不論氣，不備；論氣不論性，不明。」亦是為學者各認一邊，只得如此說。若見得自性明白時，氣即是性，性即是氣，原無性、氣之可分也。

You wrote: Someone cited Master Cheng's "Before birth, in stillness, nothing can be said; as soon as one speaks of nature, it is already not nature." Why can nothing be said? Why is it not nature? Huian answered: "What cannot be said means there is not yet a nature to speak of; what is not nature means it can no longer be without the mixture of material endowment." I do not understand the words of either master, and each time I read to this place I am confused; may I ask? "What is born is called nature": the character "born" is the character "qi," as if saying "qi is nature." Qi is nature. "Before birth, in stillness, nothing can be said": as soon as one says "qi is nature," it has already fallen to one side and is not the original source of nature. Mencius's goodness of nature speaks from the original source. Yet the beginnings of the goodness of nature must be seen in qi; without qi there would be nothing to see. Compassion, shame, deference, and discernment of right and wrong are just qi. Master Cheng said, "To speak of nature and not of qi is incomplete; to speak of qi and not of nature is unclear," which is also because students each recognize one side, so he had to put it this way. If one clearly sees one's own nature, qi is nature and nature is qi, and originally there is no division of nature and qi.

○來書云；下手工夫，分比心無時寧靜，妄心固動也，照心亦動也；心既恆動，則蕪刻足停也。是有意於求寧靜，是以愈不寧靜耳。夫妄心則動也，照心非動也；照照則恆動恆靜，天地之所以恆久而不已也；照心固照也，妄心亦照也。其為物不貳，則其生物下息，有刻暫停，則息矣，非至誠無息之學矣。

You wrote: In applying effort, I feel that this mind has no time of tranquility. The false mind moves, and so does the illuminating mind; since the mind is constantly moving, there is no moment of stopping. This is having an intention to seek tranquility, and so it is all the more untranquil. The false mind moves; the illuminating mind does not move. Constant illumination is constant movement and constant stillness, which is why Heaven and Earth are lasting and do not cease. The illuminating mind of course illuminates, and the false mind also illuminates. Its being as a thing is not dual, so its producing things does not rest; if there were a moment of pause there would be rest, and it would no longer be the learning of utmost sincerity without rest.

○來書云：良知亦有起處，云云。此或聽之末審；良知者，心之本體，即前所謂恆照者也。心之本體，無起無不起。雖妄念之發，而良知未嘗不在，但人不知存，則有時而或放耳：雖昏塞之極，而良知未嘗不明，但人不知察，則有時而或蔽耳。雖有時而或放，其體實未嘗不在也，存之而已耳：雖有時而或蔽，其體實未嘗不明也，察之而已耳。若謂真知亦有起處，則是有時而不在也，非其本體之謂矣。

You wrote: Innate knowing too has a point of arising, and so on. This may be from not listening carefully. Innate knowing is the original substance of the mind, that is, what was earlier called constantly illuminating. The original substance of the mind has neither arising nor not arising. Even when false thoughts arise, innate knowing is not absent; only if one does not know to preserve it, it is sometimes let go. Even in the extreme of dullness and blockage, innate knowing is never not bright; only if one does not know to examine it, it is sometimes obscured. Though it is sometimes let go, its substance is in truth never absent, and one need only preserve it; though it is sometimes obscured, its substance is in truth never not bright, and one need only examine it. If one says that innate knowing too has a point of arising, then it is sometimes absent, and that cannot be called its original substance.

○來書云：前日精一之論，即作聖之功否？「精一」之「精」以理言，「精神」之「精」以氣言。理者，氣之條理；氣者，理之運用。無條理則不能運用；無運用則亦無以見其所謂條理者矣。精則精，精則明，精則一，精則神，精則誠，一則精，一則明，一則神，一則誠，原非有二事也。但後世儒者之說與養生之說各湍於一隔，是以不相為用。前日「精一」之論，雖為原靜愛養精神而發，然而怍聖之功，實亦不外是矣。

You wrote: The previous discussion of refinement and unity, is it the effort of becoming a sage? The "refined" in "refinement and unity" speaks in terms of principle; the "essence" in "essence and spirit" speaks in terms of qi. Principle is the order of qi, and qi is the working of principle. Without order there can be no working, and without working there is no way to see what is called order. If refined, then refined; if refined, then bright; if refined, then unified; if refined, then spiritual; if refined, then sincere; if unified, then refined; if unified, then bright; if unified, then spiritual; if unified, then sincere: originally these are not two things. But the theories of later Confucians and the theories of life nurturing each stick to one corner, so they do not serve each other. The previous discussion of "refinement and unity," though it arose because Yuanjing loves to nourish his spirit and essence, in fact the effort of becoming a sage does not go beyond this.

○來書云：元神，元氣，元精必各有寄藏發生之處：又有真陰之精，真陽之氣，云云。夫良知一也，以其妙用而言謂之神，以其流行而言謂之氣，以其凝聚而壬呈昍之精，安可形象方斫求哉？真陰之精，即真陽之氣之母，真陽之氣，即真陰之精之父：陰根陽，陽桹陰，亦非有二也：苟吾良知之說明，即凡若此類，皆可以不言而喻；不然，則如來書所云三關、七返、九還之屬，尚有無窮可疑者也。

You wrote: The original spirit, original qi, and original essence must each have a place where they are stored and arise; there are also the essence of true yin and the qi of true yang, and so on. Innate knowing is only one: speaking of its wondrous function, we call it spirit; speaking of its flowing, we call it qi; speaking of its condensing, we call it essence; how can one seek it in forms and places? The essence of true yin is the mother of the qi of true yang; the qi of true yang is the father of the essence of true yin. Yin is rooted in yang and yang is rooted in yin; these are also not two. If my teaching of innate knowing is made clear, then all such things become self-evident without being spoken; otherwise, as in what you said about the three passes, seven returns, and nine revolutions, there are endless things to doubt.

○來書云：良知，心之本體，即所謂性善也，未發之中也，寂然不動之體也，廓然大公也，何常人皆不能而必待於學邪？中也，寂也，公也，既以屬心之二體，則良知是矣。今驗之於心，知無不良，而中、寂、大公實未有也，豈良知復超然於體用之外乎？性無不善，故知無不良。真知即是未發之中，郥是廓然大公，寂然不動之本體，人人之所同具者也：怛不能不昏蔽於物欲，故須學以去其昏蔽；然於良知之本體，初不能有帕損於毫末也。知無不良，而中、寂、大公未能全者，是昏蔽之未盡去，而存之未純耳。體既良知之體，用即良知之用，寧復有超然於體用之外者乎？

You wrote: Innate knowing, the original substance of the mind, is what is called the goodness of nature, the mean before it is aroused, the substance that is still and unmoving, open and perfectly impartial. Why can ordinary people not have it, and why must they wait for learning? Since the mean, stillness, and impartiality already belong to the original substance of the mind, then innate knowing is that. Now testing it in the mind, my knowing is all good, yet the mean, stillness, and great impartiality are actually not present; could innate knowing be outside both substance and function? Nature is entirely good, so knowing is entirely good. Innate knowing is the mean before it is aroused, the substance that is open, perfectly impartial, still, and unmoving, and it is possessed in common by every person. Only people cannot avoid being darkened and obscured by material desires, so they need learning to remove the darkening and obscuring; yet to the original substance of innate knowing nothing can be added or subtracted in the least. That knowing is all good while the mean, stillness, and great impartiality are not yet complete means that the darkening and obscuring have not been entirely removed, and preservation is not yet pure. Since the substance is the substance of innate knowing, the function is the function of innate knowing; how could there be anything beyond substance and function?

○來書云：周子曰「主靜」，程子曰「動亦定，靜亦定」，先生曰「定者心之本體」，是靜定也，決非不親不聞，無燕思無蕪為、二謂，必常知常存，常主於理之謂也。失常知常存、常主於理，明是動也，已發也，何以謂之靜？何以謂之本體？豈是靜定也，又有以貫乎心之動靜者邪？理無動者也。常知常存、常主於理，即不靚不聞，無思無為之謂也。不靚不聞，無思無為，非稿木死灰之謂也：靚聞思為一於理，而未嘗有所靚聞思為，即是動而未嘗動也；所謂「動亦定靜亦定」，體用一原者也。

You wrote: Master Zhou says "emphasize stillness," Master Cheng says "in movement also settled, in stillness also settled," and you say "settledness is the original substance of the mind." This stillness and settledness are surely not a matter of not seeing and not hearing, of no thought and no action, but must mean constantly knowing, constantly preserving, and constantly being governed by principle. Since one constantly knows, constantly preserves, and is constantly governed by principle, it is clearly moving, already aroused; why call it stillness? Why call it the original substance? Is there then something in this stillness and settledness that runs through both movement and stillness of the mind? Principle does not move. Constantly knowing, constantly preserving, and constantly being governed by principle is what is meant by not seeing and not hearing, no thought and no action. Not seeing and not hearing, no thought and no action do not mean withered wood and dead ashes: seeing, hearing, thinking, and acting are all unified in principle, while there has never been any seeing, hearing, thinking, or acting; that is moving yet never having moved; and what is called "in movement also settled, in stillness also settled" is substance and function from one source.

○來書云；此心未發之體，其在已發之前乎？其在已發之中而為之主乎，其無前後、內外而渾然之體者乎？今謂心之動、靜者，其主有事，無事而言乎？其主寂然，感通而言乎其主循理，從欲而吉乎？若以循理為靜，從欲為動，則於所謂「動中有靜，靜中有動，動極而靜，靜極而動」者，不可通矣。若以有事而感通為動，無事而寂然為靜，則於所謂「動而無動，靜而無靜」者，不可通矣。若謂未發在已發之先，靜而生動，走至試有息也，聖人有復也，人不可矣。若謂未發在已發之中，則不知未發，已發俱當主靜乎？抑未發為靜而已發為動乎？抑未發、已發俱無動無靜乎？俱有動有靜乎？幸教。未發之中，即良知也，無前後內外，而渾然一體者也。有事、無事可以言動、靜，而良知無分於有事、無事也；寂然、感通可以言動、靜，而良知無分於寂然、感通也。動、靜者，所遇之時；心之本體，固無分於動、靜也。理無動者也，動即為欲。循理則雖酬酢萬變，而未嘗動也。從欲則雖槁心一念，而未嘗靜也；「動中有靜，靜中有動」，又何疑乎？有事而感通，固可以言動，然而寂然者未嘗有增也。無事而寂然，固可以言靜，然而感通者未嘗有減也：「動而無動，靜而無靜」，又何疑乎？無前後內外而厙然一體，則至誠有息之疑，不待解矣：未狻在已發之中，而已發之中未嘗別有未發者在，已發在未發之中，而未發之中未嘗別有已發者存；是未嘗無動、靜，而不可以動、靜分者也。凡觀古人言語，在以意逆志而得其大旨：若必拘湍於文義，則「靡有孑遺」者，是周果無遺民也。周子「靜極而動」之說，荀不善觀，亦未免有病；蓋其意從「太極動而生陽，靜而生陰」說來。太極生生之理，妙用無息，而常體不易。太極之生生，即陰陽之生生。

You wrote: This original state of the mind before it is aroused, is it before the arousal? Or is it within the arousal and acting as its master? Or is it a unified whole without before and after, inside and outside? Now when we speak of the mind's movement and stillness, are we speaking of there being affairs or none? Of stillness and responsiveness? Or of following principle and following desire? If following principle is stillness and following desire is movement, then it cannot be reconciled with the saying "within movement there is stillness, within stillness there is movement; at the extreme of movement there is stillness, at the extreme of stillness there is movement." If having affairs and responding is movement and having none and being still is stillness, then it cannot be reconciled with "moving yet without movement, still yet without stillness." If the not-yet-aroused is before the aroused, and stillness gives rise to movement, then utmost sincerity has rest, and the sage has return, which makes no sense. If the not-yet-aroused is within the aroused, I do not know whether both the not-yet-aroused and the aroused should emphasize stillness; or whether the not-yet-aroused is stillness and the aroused is movement; or whether both the not-yet-aroused and the aroused have neither movement nor stillness; or both have movement and stillness. I ask for your instruction. The mean before it is aroused is innate knowing, which has no before or after, inside or outside, but is a unified whole. Having affairs or none can be spoken of as movement and stillness, but innate knowing makes no distinction between having affairs and none; stillness and responsiveness can be spoken of as movement and stillness, but innate knowing makes no distinction between stillness and responsiveness. Movement and stillness are the time one encounters; the original substance of the mind certainly makes no distinction between movement and stillness. Principle does not move; movement is desire. If one follows principle, though one responds to ten thousand changes, one has never moved; if one follows desire, though the mind is withered with a single thought, one has never been still. "Within movement there is stillness, within stillness there is movement": what is there to doubt in this? When there are affairs and one responds, one can certainly speak of movement, but the stillness has never increased; when there are no affairs and one is still, one can certainly speak of stillness, but responsiveness has never decreased. "Moving yet without movement, still yet without stillness": what is there to doubt in this? Since it is a unified whole without before and after, inside and outside, the doubt about utmost sincerity having rest needs no resolution. The not-yet-aroused is within the aroused, yet within the aroused there is never a separate not-yet-aroused; the aroused is within the not-yet-aroused, yet within the not-yet-aroused there is never a separate aroused; so there is never an absence of movement and stillness, yet it cannot be divided into movement and stillness. In reading the words of the ancients, one should grasp their general purport by letting meaning meet intention; if one must cling to the literal meaning, then in "not a single survivor remained," the Zhou truly had no remaining people. Master Zhou's saying "at the extreme of stillness, movement" may also be flawed if not read well; for his meaning comes from saying "the Supreme Ultimate moves and produces yang, rests and produces yin." The principle of the Supreme Ultimate's ceaseless producing has a wondrous function that does not rest, while its constant substance does not change. The Supreme Ultimate's producing is the producing of yin and yang.

就其生生之中，指其妙用無息者而謂之動，謂之陽之生，非謂動而徒生陽也：就其生生之中，指其常體不易者而謂十「靜，謂之陰之生，非謂靜而後生陰也；若果靜而後生隆，動而後生陽，則是陰陽動靜，截然各自為一物矣。陰陽一氣也，一氣屈伸而為陰陽：動靜一理也，一理隱顯而為動、靜。春夏可以為隅錢為動，而未嘗無陰與靜也：秋冬可以為陰、為靜，而未嘗無陽與動也。春夏此不息，秋冬此不息，皆可謂十「陽，謂之動也：春夏此常體，秋冬此常體，皆可謂之陰，謂之靜也。自元、會、運、世、哉、月、日、時以至刻、杪、忽、微，莫不皆然。所謂動靜無端，陰陽無始，在知道者默而識之，非可以言語窮也。若只牽文泥句，比擬仿像，則所謂心從法華轉，非是轉法華矣。

(The Master continued:) Within that producing, pointing to its wondrous function that does not rest we call it movement and call it the production of yang; this does not mean that after moving, yang is produced; within that producing, pointing to its constant substance that does not change we call it stillness and call it the production of yin; this does not mean that after resting, yin is produced. If it were truly that after rest yin is produced and after movement yang is produced, then yin and yang, movement and stillness, would each be sharply separate things. Yin and yang are one qi, which bends and extends to become yin and yang; movement and stillness are one principle, which is hidden and manifest as movement and stillness. Spring and summer can be taken as yang and movement, yet are never without yin and stillness; autumn and winter can be taken as yin and stillness, yet are never without yang and movement. In spring and summer this does not cease, in autumn and winter this does not cease, and all can be called yang and movement; in spring and summer this is the constant substance, in autumn and winter this is the constant substance, and all can be called yin and stillness. From the yuan, hui, yun, and shi, years, months, days, and hours, down to the moment, second, hu, and wei, everything is so. What is called movement and stillness having no beginning and yin and yang having no origin is something those who know the Way grasp in silence, not something that words can exhaust. If one only clings to texts and sticks to sentences, comparing and imitating, then it is as the saying goes, the mind is turned by the Lotus Sutra, and is not turning the Lotus Sutra.

○來書云：嘗試於心，喜、怒、憂、懼之感發也，雖動氣之極，而吾心良知一覺，即罔然消阻，或遏於初，式制於中，式悔於後。然則良知常若居優閒無事之地而為之主，於喜、怒、憂、懼若不與焉者，何歟？知此，則知末發之中、寂然不動之體，而有狻而中節之和、感而遂通之妙矣。然謂「良妯常若居於懮閒無事之地」，語尚有病。蓋良知雖不端於喜、怒、憂、懼，而喜、怒、憂、懼亦不外於良知也。

You wrote: I have tried examining my mind: when joy, anger, sorrow, and fear arise, though my qi is stirred to the extreme, as soon as my innate knowing is aware, it suddenly dissolves and is blocked, whether restrained at the start, or checked in the midst, or regretted afterward. Then innate knowing seems always to dwell in a place of leisure with nothing to do and act as the master, as if not taking part in joy, anger, sorrow, and fear; why is this? Knowing this, one knows the mean before it is aroused, the substance that is still and unmoving, and also the harmony of being aroused and hitting the proper measure, and the wonder of responding and then penetrating. Yet to say that "innate knowing always seems to dwell in a place of leisure with nothing to do" still has a flaw. For though innate knowing is not stuck in joy, anger, sorrow, and fear, joy, anger, sorrow, and fear are also not outside innate knowing.

○來書云：夫子昨以良知為照心。竊謂良知心之本體也，照心人所用功，乃戒慎恐催之心也。猶思也，而遂以戒慎恐催為良知，何歈？能戒慎恐懼者，是良知也。

You wrote: Yesterday you took innate knowing to be the illuminating mind. I humbly suppose that innate knowing is the original substance of the mind, while the illuminating mind is what people use in effort, the mind of caution and apprehension, like thought. Yet you then take caution and apprehension to be innate knowing; why? That which can be cautious and apprehensive is innate knowing.

○來書云：先生又曰：「照心非動也。」豈以其循理而謂之靜歟？「妄心亦照也。」豈以其良知未常不在於其中，未常不明於其中，而視聽言動之不過則者，皆天理歟？且既曰妄心，則在妄心可謂之照，而在照心則謂之妄矣。妄與息何異？今假妄之照以續至試之無息，竊所未明，幸再啟蒙。「照心非動」者，以其蒰於本體明覺之自然，而未嘗有斫動也：有岓動即妄矣：「妄心亦照」者，以其本體明覺之自然者，未嘗不在於其中，但有所動耳；無所動即照矣。無妄、無照，非以妄為照，以照為妄也。照心為照，妄心為妄，是猶有妄、有照也。有妄、有照，則猶貳也，貳則息矣。無妄、無照則不貳，不貳則不息矣。

You wrote: You also said, "The illuminating mind does not move." Is that because it follows principle and so is called still? "The false mind also illuminates": is that because innate knowing is never absent from it and never not bright within it, and the seeing, hearing, speaking, and moving that do not exceed the standard are all Heavenly Principle? Moreover, since it is called the false mind, in the false mind one can say it illuminates, while in the illuminating mind one calls it false. How do falsity and illumination differ? Now to borrow the illumination of falsity to continue the ceaselessness of utmost sincerity, I do not yet understand; please enlighten me again. The "illuminating mind does not move" because it follows the natural brightness and awareness of the original substance and has never moved; if there is something moved, that is falsity. "The false mind also illuminates" because the natural brightness and awareness of its original substance is never absent from it, only it has something moved; if nothing is moved, it is illumination. There is no falsity and no illumination; it is not taking falsity as illumination or illumination as falsity. To take the illuminating mind as illumination and the false mind as falsity is still to have falsity and illumination. If there is falsity and illumination, there is still duality, and duality means rest. With no falsity and no illumination there is no duality, and with no duality there is no rest.

○來書云：養生以清心寡慾為要。夫清心寡慾，作聖之功畢矣。然欲寡則心自清，清心非舍辛人事而獨居求靜之謂也：蓋欲使此心純乎天理，而無一毫人慾之私耳。今欲為此之功，而隨人慾生而克之，則病根常在，未危滅於東而生於西：若欲刊剝洗盪於釆欲未萌之先，則又無所用其力，徒使此心之不清。且欲未萌而搜剔以求去之，是猶引太上堂而逐之也，念不可矣。必欲此心純乎天理，而無一毫人慾之私，此阼聖之功也：必欲此心純乎天理，而蛀二毫人慾之私，非防於未萌之先而克於方萌之際不能也。防於未萌之先而克於方萌之際，此正《中庸》「戒慎恐懼」、《大學》「致知恪物」之功：舍此之外，無別功矣：夫謂滅於東而生於西、引太上堂而逐之者，是自私自利、將迎意必之為累，而非克治洗盪之為患也。今日「養生以清心寡慾為要」，只養生二字，便是自私自利、將迎意必之根。有此病桹潛伏於中，宜其有滅於東而生於西、引犬上堂而逐之之患也。

You wrote: In nurturing life, clearing the mind and reducing desires is the essential. When the mind is cleared and desires are reduced, the effort of becoming a sage is complete. Yet when desires are reduced, the mind is clear by itself; clearing the mind does not mean abandoning human affairs to live alone and seek stillness: it only means making this mind purely Heavenly Principle without the slightest private human desire. If one wishes to do this work and conquers desires as they arise, the root of the disease is always there, and it inevitably is extinguished in the east and arises in the west; if one wishes to peel off and wash out desires before they have sprouted, there is nowhere to apply effort, and it merely makes this mind unclear. Moreover, searching out and scraping away desires before they have sprouted is like leading a dog into the hall and chasing it out, which certainly cannot be done. One must make this mind purely Heavenly Principle without the slightest private human desire: this is the effort of becoming a sage; but to make this mind purely Heavenly Principle without the slightest private human desire is not possible without guarding before they sprout and conquering at the moment they sprout. Guarding before they sprout and conquering at the moment they sprout is exactly the effort of "caution and apprehension" in the Doctrine of the Mean and "extending knowledge and investigating things" in the Great Learning: apart from this there is no other effort. What is called being extinguished in the east and arising in the west, and leading a dog into the hall and chasing it out, is the burden of selfishness, of welcoming and escorting, of arbitrariness and insistence, and not the trouble of conquering and washing out. Now to say that "nurturing life is to clear the mind and reduce desires," just the two words "nurturing life" are already the root of selfishness, of welcoming and escorting, of arbitrariness and insistence. With this root of disease hidden within, it is only to be expected that there is the trouble of being extinguished in the east and arising in the west, and leading a dog into the hall and chasing it out.

○來書云：佛氏於「不思善，不思惡，時認本來面」，於吾儒「隨物而格」之功不同。吾若於不思善，不思惡時，用玫知之功，則已涉于思善矣。欲善惡不思，而心之良知清靜臺在，惟有寐而方醒之時耳。斯正孟子「夜氣」之說。但於斯光景不能久，倏忽之際，思慮已生：不知用功久者，其常寐初醒而思未起之時否乎？今澄欲求寧靜，念不寧靜，慾念無生，則念念生，如之何而能使此心前念易減，後念不生，良知獨顯，而與造物者遊乎？「不思善、不思惡，時認本來面目。」此佛氏為未識本來面目者設此方便：本來面目郥吾聖門斫謂真知；今訞認得真知明白，即已不消如北欣矣。「隨物而格」，是致知之功，即佛氏之「常惺惺」，亦是常存他本來面目耳，體段工夫大略相似，但佛氏有個自私自利之心，所以便有不同耳。今欲善惡不思，而心之良知清靜自在，此便有自私自利、將迎意必之心，所以有「不思善、不思惡時，用致知之功，則已涉于思善」之患。孟子說「夜氣」，亦只是為矢其良心之人指出個良心萌動處，使他從此培養將去，今已知得良知明白，常用致知之功，即已不消說「夜氣」：卻是得兔後不知守兔，而仍去守枺，免將復先之矣。欲求寧靜，慾念無生，此正是自私自利、將迎意必之病，是以念愈生而愈不寧靜。良知只是一個良知，而善惡自瓣，更有何善何惡可思﹗良知之體本自寧靜，今卻又添一個求寧靜，本自生生，今卻又添一個欲無生，非獨聖門致知之功不如此，雖佛氏之學亦未如此將迎意必也。只是一念良知，徹頭徹尾，無始無終，即是前念不滅，後念不生，今卻欲前念易滅，而後念不生，是佛氏所謂斷滅種性，人於槁木死灰之謂矣。

You wrote: The Buddhists, in "when not thinking of good and not thinking of evil, recognize your original face," differ from the effort of our Confucian "investigating things as they come." If I apply the effort of extending knowledge when not thinking of good or evil, it already involves thinking of good. If I wish not to think of good or evil and have the innate knowing of my mind be clear, still, and at ease, there is only the moment just on waking from sleep. This is exactly Mencius's saying about "the night qi." But this state does not last, and in an instant thoughts have already arisen. I do not know whether those who have long applied effort can often be in the time just waking from sleep before thought has arisen. Now, if I try to clarify desires and seek tranquility, I am all the more untranquil; if I wish thoughts not to arise, thoughts arise all the more. How can I make this mind such that the former thought is easily extinguished and the latter thought does not arise, innate knowing alone shines, and I roam with the Creator? "When not thinking of good and not thinking of evil, recognize your original face": this is an expedient set up by the Buddhists for people who do not yet recognize their original face. The original face is what our sagely school calls innate knowing. Now that you already clearly recognize innate knowing, there is no need to speak this way. "Investigating things as they come" is the effort of extending knowledge, which is the Buddhist "constant alertness," also merely constantly preserving their original face; in form and effort they are roughly similar, but the Buddhists have a mind of selfishness, and so there is a difference. Now to wish not to think of good or evil and have the innate knowing of the mind be clear, still, and at ease is to have a mind of selfishness, welcoming and escorting, arbitrariness and insistence, and so there is the trouble of "applying the effort of extending knowledge when not thinking of good or evil already involves thinking of good." When Mencius speaks of the "night qi," it is also only to point out to people who have lost their good mind the place where the good mind sprouts, so that they can cultivate it from there. Now that you already clearly know innate knowing and constantly apply the effort of extending knowledge, there is no need to speak of the "night qi": that would be, having got a hare, not knowing to keep the hare and still going to guard the stump, so the hare would be lost again. To seek tranquility and to wish thoughts not to arise is precisely the ailment of selfishness, welcoming and escorting, arbitrariness and insistence, and so thoughts arise all the more and one is all the more untranquil. Innate knowing is only one innate knowing, and good and evil are distinguished by themselves; what good or evil more is there to think of! The substance of innate knowing is originally tranquil by itself, yet now you add a seeking of tranquility; it is originally ever-producing, yet now you add a wish for no production. Not only does the effort of extending knowledge in the sagely school not work like this, even the Buddhists' learning is not so full of welcoming, escorting, arbitrariness, and insistence. It is only one thought of innate knowing, from beginning to end, with no start and no finish, which is the former thought not perishing and the latter thought not arising. Now you wish the former thought to be easily extinguished and the latter thought not to arise, which is what the Buddhists call cutting off the seed nature and entering withered wood and dead ashes.

○來書云：佛氐人有常提念頭之說，其猶孟子所謂「必有事」，夫子所謂「玫良知」之說乎？其印「常惺惺，常記得，常知得，常存得」者乎？於此念頭提在之時，而事至物來，應之必有其道。但恐此念頭提起時少，放下時多，則工夫間斷耳。且念頭放矢，多因私慾客氣之動而始，忽然驚醒而後提，其放而未提之問心之昏雜多不臺覺，今欲日精日明，常提不放，以何道乎？只此常提不放，即全功乎？押於常提不放之中，更宜加省克之功乎？雖日常提不放，而不加戒懼克治之功，恐私慾不去：若加戒懼克治之功焉，又為「思善」之事，而於「本來面目」人未迭一問也。如之何則可？戒懼克治即是常提不放之功，即是「必有事焉」，豈有兩事邪！此節所問，前一段已自說得分曉，末後卻是自生迷惑，說得支離，及有「『本來面目』未達一間」之疑，都是自私自利、將迎一意必之為病，去此病自無此疑矣。

You wrote: The Buddhists also have the teaching of constantly raising a thought; is it like Mencius's "there must be work" and the Master's "extending innate knowing"? Or is it also "constantly alert, constantly remembering, constantly knowing, constantly preserving"? When this thought is raised and affairs come and things arrive, there must be a way to respond. But I fear that this thought is raised seldom and put down often, so that effort is interrupted. Moreover, thoughts that are let go are mostly begun by the stirring of private desire and external qi, and then suddenly one is startled awake and raises it again. In between being let go and raised, the dullness and confusion of the mind often cannot be noticed. Now, to wish to become more refined and more clear day by day, constantly raising it without letting go, by what way? Is this constant raising without letting go the whole effort? Or should one, within constantly raising without letting go, further add the effort of examining and conquering? Though one says constantly raising without letting go, without the effort of caution, apprehension, and conquest I fear private desires will not be removed; if one adds the effort of caution, apprehension, and conquest, it is again a matter of "thinking of good," and one is still a hair's breadth from the "original face." How may it be done? Caution, apprehension, and conquest are exactly the effort of constantly raising without letting go, and are "there must be work"; how could they be two things! In this passage, the earlier part has already explained clearly, but at the end you give rise to confusion and speak in a fragmented way, even producing the doubt that one is "a hair's breadth from the original face"; this is all the ailment of selfishness, welcoming and escorting, arbitrariness and insistence. Remove this ailment and the doubt will naturally disappear.

○來書云：質美者明得盡，渣滓便渾化。如何謂明得盡？如何而能便渾化？良知本來自明。氣質不美者，渣滓多，障蔽厚，不易開明：賈美者，渣滓原少，無多障蔽，略加致知之功，此良知便自瑩徹，些少渣滓，如湯中浮雪，如同能怍障蔽。此本不甚難曉，原靜所以致疑於此，想是因一「明」字不明白，亦是稍有欲速之心。向曾面論明善之義，明則誠矣，非若後懦所謂明善之淺也。

You wrote: For those of fine endowment, when they are bright to the full, the dregs are fully dissolved. What does it mean to be bright to the full? How can they be fully dissolved? Innate knowing is originally bright by itself. Those with poor endowment have many dregs and thick obstruction, and are not easily opened; those of fine endowment have originally few dregs and not much obstruction, and with only a little effort of extending knowledge this innate knowing becomes translucent by itself, and the few dregs are like snow floating in hot water, how could they act as obstruction. This is not hard to understand. Yuanjing's doubt here is probably because the word "bright" is not clear to him, and also because he has a slight wish to hurry. Previously I discussed the meaning of brightening goodness face to face: if bright, then sincere; it is not as shallow as what later Confucians call brightening goodness.

○來書云：聰明睿知，果質乎？仁義禮智果性乎？車怒哀樂果情乎？私慾客氣呆一物乎？二物乎？古之其才，若子房、仲舒、叔度、孔明、文中、韓、範諸么，德業表著，皆良知中所發也，而不得謂之聞道者，果何在乎？苟曰此特生質之美耳，則生知安行者，不念於學知、困勉者乎？愚意竊雲謂諸公見道偏則可，謂全無聞則恐後儒崇尚記誦訓詁之近也。然乎否乎？性一而已。仁、義、禮、知，性之性也，聰、明、睿、知，性之質也，喜、怒、哀、樂，性之情也，私慾、客氣，性之蔽也：質有清濁，故情有過不及，而蔽有淺深也：私慾、客氣，一病兩痛，非二物也。張、黃、諸葛及韓、範諸公，皆天質之美，自多堷合道妙，雖末可盡謂之知學，盡謂之聞道，然亦自其有學，違道不遠者也：使其聞學知道，即伊、傅、周、召矣。若文中子則又不可謂之不知學者，其書雖多出於其徒，亦多有未是虛，然其大略則亦居然可見，但今相去遼遠，無有的然憑證，不可懸斷其所至矣。夫良知即是道。良知之在人心，不但聖貿、雖常人亦無不如此，若無有物慾牽蔽，但佰著真知發用流行將去，郥無不是道：但在常人多為物慾牽蔽，不能循得良知。如數公者，天質既自清明，自少物慾為之牽蔽，則其良知之發用流行處，自然是多，自然違道不遠。學者學循此良知而已。謂之知學，只是知得專在學循良知。數公雖未知專在良知上用功，而或氾濫於多岐，疑迷於影響，是以或離或合而末純：若知得時，便是聖人矣。後懦嘗以數子者，尚皆是氣質用事，末免於行不著，習不察：此亦未為過論。但後懦之所謂著、察者，亦是狃於聞見之俠，蔽於沿習之非，而依擬仿像於影響形跡之間，尚非聖門之所謂著、察者也。則亦安得以己之昏昏，而求人之昭昭也乎？所謂生知、安行，知、行二字，亦是就用功上說；

You wrote: Are intelligence, brightness, perceptiveness, and wisdom really endowment? Are benevolence, righteousness, ritual propriety, and wisdom really nature? Are joy, anger, sorrow, and happiness really feelings? Are private desires and external qi really one thing? Or two things? Among the gifted men of the past, such as Zifang, Zhongshu, Shudu, Kongming, Wenzhong, Han and Fan, whose virtue and achievements were manifest, all arose from innate knowing, yet they cannot be said to have heard the Way; where does the fault lie? If one says this was merely fine natural endowment, then are those who know by birth and practice with ease not superior to those who learn to know and those who strive in hardship? In my humble opinion, it is acceptable to say that these gentlemen saw the Way in a partial way, but to say that they heard nothing at all is perhaps the fault of later Confucians who esteem recitation and philology. Is this right? Nature is only one. Benevolence, righteousness, ritual propriety, and wisdom are the nature of nature; intelligence, brightness, perceptiveness, and wisdom are the endowment of nature; joy, anger, sorrow, and happiness are the feelings of nature; private desires and external qi are the obscuring of nature. Endowment may be clear or turbid, so feelings may be excessive or deficient, and obscurations shallow or deep. Private desires and external qi are one ailment with two aches, not two things. Zhang Liang, Huang Xian, Zhuge, Han Qi, Fan Zhongyan, and the other gentlemen all had fine natural endowment and mostly accorded by coincidence with the wonder of the Way; though it cannot be said that they entirely knew learning or entirely heard the Way, they also had their learning and were not far from the Way. Had they heard of learning and known the Way, they would have been like Yi Yin, Fu Yue, the Duke of Zhou, and the Duke of Shao. As for Wenzhongzi, he cannot be said not to have known learning; though his book mostly came from his disciples and has many errors, its general outline can still plainly be seen, but now so far in time, with no definite evidence, one cannot decide in advance what he reached. Innate knowing is the Way. Innate knowing in people's minds is such not only in sages and worthies but in ordinary people too. If there is no obstruction by material desires and one only follows innate knowing as it arises and flows, then everything is the Way. But in ordinary people, they are mostly obstructed by material desires and cannot follow innate knowing. As for these several gentlemen, since their natural endowment was clear and bright and they had little obstruction by material desires, the places where their innate knowing arose and flowed were naturally many, and they were naturally not far from the Way. Students merely learn to follow this innate knowing. To be called knowing learning is just to know to focus on learning to follow innate knowing. Though these gentlemen did not know to focus effort on innate knowing, and sometimes overflowed into many paths and were confused by shadows and echoes, so they were sometimes apart and sometimes joined and not yet pure; had they known, they would have been sages. Later Confucians have said that these gentlemen still let endowment take charge, and could not avoid not manifesting in action and not examining in practice, which is also not an exaggerated view. But what later Confucians call manifesting and examining are also bound by narrow hearing and seeing, obscured by the errors of habit, and merely imitate shadows and echoes among forms and traces, and are still not what the sagely school calls manifesting and examining. How then can one use one's own dimness to seek others' clarity? What is called knowing by birth and practicing with ease, the two words "knowing" and "practicing" are also spoken of in terms of applying effort.

若是知、行本體即是良知、良能，雖在困勉之人，亦皆可謂之生知、安行矣。知、行二字更宜精察。

(The Master continued:) If the original substance of knowing and practicing is innate knowing and innate ability, then even those who strive in hardship can all be called knowing by birth and practicing with ease. The two words "knowing" and "practicing" should be examined all the more closely.

○來書云：昔周茂叔每令伯淳尋仲尼，顏子樂處。敢問是樂也，與七情之樂同乎、否乎、若同，則常人之一遂所欲，皆能樂矣，何必聖賢？若別有真樂，則聖賢之遇大憂、大怒、大驚、大懼之事，此樂亦在否乎？且君子之心常存戒懼，是蓋終身之憂也，惡得樂？澄平生多悶，未常見真樂之走，令切願尋之。樂是心之本醴，雖不同於七情之樂，而亦不外於七情之樂；雖則聖賢別有真樂，而亦常人之所同有，但常人有之而不自知，反自求許多憂苦，自加迷棄。雖在憂苦迷棄之中，而此樂又未嘗不存，但一念開明，反身而誠，則即此而在矣。每與原靜論，無非此意，而原靜尚有「何道可得」之問，是猶未免於騎驢覓驢之蔽也。

You wrote: Formerly Zhou Maoshu always had Boshun (Cheng Hao) seek the joy of Confucius and Yan Zi. May I ask whether this joy is the same as the joy of the seven feelings, or not? If the same, then ordinary people can all be joyful whenever their desires are fulfilled, so why need sages and worthies? If there is a separate true joy, then when sages and worthies meet great grief, great anger, great fright, or great fear, is this joy still there? Moreover, the gentleman's mind always keeps caution and apprehension, which is a lifelong worry; how can there be joy? I, Cheng, have been mostly gloomy in my life and have never seen the taste of true joy, and now I earnestly wish to seek it. Joy is the original substance of the mind; though it is not the same as the joy of the seven feelings, it is also not outside the joy of the seven feelings; though sages and worthies have a separate true joy, it is also shared by ordinary people, only ordinary people have it without knowing it, and instead seek much worry and suffering and add confusion and abandonment to themselves. Even in the midst of worry, suffering, confusion, and abandonment, this joy has never been absent, and with one thought of opening and clearing, turning back to oneself and being sincere, it is right there. Whenever I discuss with Yuanjing, it is all to this effect, yet Yuanjing still asks, "By what way can it be obtained?" which is still not free from the blindness of riding a donkey looking for a donkey.

○來書云：《大學》以「心有好樂、忿懥、憂患，恐懼」為「不得其正」，而程子亦謂「聖人情順萬事而無情。」所謂有者，《傳習錄》中以病瘧譬之，極精切矣：若程子之言，則是聖人之付不生於心而生於物也，何謂耶？且事感而情應，則是走非非可以就格；事或未感時，謂之有則未形也，謂之無則病根在有無之間，何以玫吾知乎？學務魚情，累雖輕，而出儒入佛矣，可乎？聖人致知之功，至誠無息；其良知之體，皦如明鏡，略無纖翳，妍媸之來，隨物見形，而明鏡曾無留染：所謂「情順萬事而無情」也。「無所斫住而生其心」佛氏曾有是言，未為非也；明鏡之應物，妍者妍，媸者媸，一照而皆真，即是生其心處：妍者妍，媸者媸，一過而不留，即是無所住處。病瘧之喻，既已見其精切，則此節所問可以釋然，病瘥之人，瘧雖未發，而病根自在，則亦安可以其瘧之未發而遂忘其服藥調理之功乎？若必待瘥蒰而後服藥調理，則既晚矣；致知之功，無間於有事、無事，而豈論於病之已發、未發邪？大抵原靜所疑，前後雖若不一，然皆起於自私自利、將迎意必之為崇：此恨一去，則前後所疑，自將冰消霧澤，有不待於問辨者矣。

You wrote: The Great Learning takes "the mind having fondness, joy, anger, worry, or fear" as "not being correct," while Master Cheng also said, "The sage's feelings follow ten thousand things and yet are without feeling." As for what is called having feelings, the Chuanxilu compares it to suffering from malaria, which is extremely precise. As for Master Cheng's words, they would mean the sage's feelings do not arise from the mind but from things; how should that be explained? Moreover, if affairs move one and feelings respond, then right and wrong cannot be investigated in advance; when affairs have not yet moved one, to say there is feeling is to say it has not taken form, and to say there is none is to say the root of the disease lies between having and not having; how then to extend my knowing? If learning aims at having no feeling, though the burden is light, one leaves Confucianism and enters Buddhism; is that acceptable? The sage's effort of extending knowledge is utmost sincerity without rest; the substance of his innate knowing is bright like a clear mirror, without the least shade, so when beauty and ugliness come, forms are shown according to the object, and the clear mirror has never retained any stain: this is what is meant by "feelings follow ten thousand things and yet are without feeling." "Having no place to rest, yet the mind arises": the Buddhists have said this, and it is not wrong. When a clear mirror responds to things, the beautiful is beautiful and the ugly is ugly, and one illumination makes all true, which is where "the mind arises"; the beautiful is beautiful and the ugly is ugly, and once passed they are not retained, which is "having no place to rest." Since you have seen how precise the analogy of malaria is, the question in this passage can be resolved. A person who has recovered from illness, though the malaria has not yet recurred, still has the root of the disease in him, so how can one forget the effort of taking medicine and taking care because the malaria has not yet recurred? If one must wait until the disease flares up to take medicine and take care, it is already too late. The effort of extending knowledge makes no distinction between having affairs and having none, so how can it discuss whether the disease has flared or not? In general, the doubts of Yuanjing, though they seem different earlier and later, all arise from the haunting of selfishness, welcoming and escorting, arbitrariness and insistence. Once this root is removed, the earlier and later doubts will naturally melt like ice and dissolve like mist, with no need to ask and debate.

錢德洪跋：答原靜書出，讀者皆喜澄善問師善答，皆得聞所未聞。師曰：「原靜所是知解上轉，不得已與之逐節分疏：若信得良知，只在良知上用工，雖千經萬典無不朏合，異端典學一勘盡破矣，何必如此節節分解！佛家有『撲人逐塊』之喻，見塊撲人，則得人矣，見塊逐塊，於塊奚得哉？」在座諸友聞之，惕然皆有惺悟。此學貴反求，非知解可人也。

Postscript by Qian Dehong: When the reply to Yuanjing came out, readers all delighted that Cheng asked well and the Master answered well, and each heard what he had never heard before. The Master said: "What Yuanjing asked turns around in intellectual understanding, and I had no choice but to analyze it for him point by point. If one believes in innate knowing and applies effort only on innate knowing, then though there are a thousand classics and ten thousand canons, none will fail to match, and heterodox and crooked learning is entirely refuted at one examination; why need such point-by-point analysis! The Buddhists have an analogy of 'striking the man or chasing the clod': one who sees a man striking and goes after the man gets the man; one who sees a clod and chases the clod, what can he get from the clod?" The friends present who heard this were startled and all awakened. This learning values turning back to seek within, and cannot be entered by intellectual understanding.

○崇一來書云；師云：「德性之良知，非由於聞見，若曰多擇其車者而從之，多見而識之」，則是專求之見聞之未，而已落在第二義。」竊意良知雖不由見聞而有，然學者之知，未常不由見聞而發：滯於見聞固非，而見聞亦良知之用也；今日「落在第二義」，恐為寺以幾聞為學者而古，若玫其良知而求之見問，似亦知，行合一、二功矣：如何？良知不由見聞而有，而見聞莫非良知之用；故良知不滯於見聞，而亦不離於見聞。孔子云：「吾有知乎哉？無知也。」良知之外，別無知矣；故「致良知」是學問大頭腦，是聖人教人第一義：今雲專求之見聞之末，則是先卻頭惱，而已落在第二羕矣。近時同志中，蓋已莫不知有「致良妯」之說，然其功夫尚多鶻突者，正是欠此一問。大抵學問功夫只要主意頭惱是當：若主意頭惱專以「致良知」為事，則凡多聞、多見，莫非「致良知」之功；蓋日用之間，見聞醅酢，雖千頭萬緒，莫非良知之發竅用流行，除卻見聞醅酢，亦無良知可致矣；故只是一事：若曰致其良知而求之見聞，則語意之間未免為二。此與專求之見聞之末者雖稍不同，其為未得精一之旨，則一而已。「多聞擇其善者而從之，多見而識之。」既雲擇，又云識，其真知亦未嘗不行於其間：但其用意乃專在多聞多見上去擇、識，則已失卻頭惱矣。崇一於此等處見得當已分曉，今日之間，正為發明此學，於同志中極有益；但語意未瑩，則毫釐千里，亦不容不精察之也。

Chongyi wrote: The Master says, "The innate knowing of virtuous nature does not come from hearing and seeing. If one says, 'listen widely and choose the good to follow; see widely and remember it,' then one seeks only the tip of hearing and seeing, and has already fallen to a secondary meaning." I humbly think that although innate knowing does not exist because of hearing and seeing, the knowledge of a student has never failed to arise through hearing and seeing. Being stuck in hearing and seeing is of course wrong, but hearing and seeing are also functions of innate knowing. When it is now said that it "falls to a secondary meaning," I fear this is said of people who study by relying solely on hearing and seeing. If one extends innate knowing and seeks it in hearing and seeing, that also seems to be the effort of the unity of knowing and acting. What do you think? Innate knowing does not exist because of hearing and seeing, yet hearing and seeing are all functions of innate knowing; so innate knowing is not stuck in hearing and seeing, and also is not apart from hearing and seeing. Confucius said: "Do I have knowledge? I have no knowledge." Apart from innate knowing there is no other knowing. So "extending innate knowing" is the main point of learning and the first meaning in the sage's teaching of people. Now to say one seeks solely the tip of hearing and seeing is to lose the main point first, and to have already fallen to a secondary meaning. Among recent friends of like mind, there are none who do not know of the teaching of "extending innate knowing," yet their effort is still mostly muddled, precisely because this question is lacking. In general, the effort of learning only needs the main point to be right. If the main point is solely to make "extending innate knowing" one's business, then all the more hearing and seeing is nothing but the effort of "extending innate knowing." In daily life, in seeing, hearing, and responding, though there are a thousand threads and ten thousand strands, none is not the arising and flowing of innate knowing; apart from seeing, hearing, and responding there is no innate knowing to extend. So it is only one thing. If one says to extend innate knowing and seek it in hearing and seeing, then in the sense of the words it is inevitably two. Although this is slightly different from seeking solely the tip of hearing and seeing, it is the same in not having obtained the meaning of refinement and unity. "Listen widely and choose the good to follow; see widely and remember it." Since it says to choose, and also says to remember, innate knowing too has never failed to act within it; but if the intention is solely to choose and remember in much hearing and much seeing, then the main point has been lost. Chongyi has probably seen clearly in such places. Today's question is just what clarifies this learning and is very beneficial to friends of like mind; but if the sense of the words is not translucent, a hair's breadth becomes a thousand li, and one cannot but examine carefully.

○來書云：師云：「『罊』」言「何思何慮」，是言所思所慮只是天理，更無別思別慮耳，非謂無蕪思無慮也。心之本骷即是天理，有何丁思慮得！學者用功，雖千思萬慮，只是要復他本付，不走以私意去安排思索出來：若安排思索，便是自私用智矣。」學者之蔽，大率非沉空守寂，則安排思索。德辛壬之歲著前一病，近又著後一病。但思索亦是良知發用，其與私意安排者何所取別？恐認賊作子，惑而不知也。「思日睿，睿作聖。」「心之官則思，思則得之。」思其可少乎？沉空守寂，與安排思索，正是自私用智，其為喪失良知一也。良知是天理之昭明靈覺處。故良知即是天理，思是良知之發用。若是良知發用之思，則所思莫非天理矣。良知發用之思，自然明白簡易，良知亦自能知得。若是私意安排之思，自是紛紜勞擾，良知亦自會分別得。蓋思之是非邪正，良知無有不自知者。所以認賊怍子，正為致知之學不明，不知在良知上體認之耳。

You wrote: You said, "When the Xici says 'what thinking, what worrying,' it means that what is thought and worried about is only the Heavenly Principle, and there is no other thinking or worrying; it does not mean no thinking and no worrying. The original substance of the mind is Heavenly Principle; what is there to think or worry about! When a student applies effort, though he thinks a thousand thoughts and worries ten thousand worries, he only wishes to restore its original substance, and not to arrange and ponder it out by private will. If one arranges and ponders, that is selfishly using cleverness." The students' ailments are generally either sinking into emptiness and guarding stillness, or arranging and pondering. In the years Xin and Ren I suffered from the former ailment, and recently I have suffered from the latter. But pondering is also an arising function of innate knowing; how does it differ from arranging by private will? I fear mistaking a thief for a son, confused and not knowing. "Thought is called perceptive, and perceptive makes a sage." "The organ of the mind is thinking, and by thinking it obtains." Can thinking be dispensed with? Sinking into emptiness and guarding stillness, and arranging and pondering, are precisely selfishly using cleverness, and the loss of innate knowing is the same in both. Innate knowing is the place where Heavenly Principle is bright and aware, so innate knowing is Heavenly Principle, and thinking is the arising function of innate knowing. If it is thinking arising from innate knowing, then what is thought is all Heavenly Principle. The thinking that arises from innate knowing is naturally clear and simple, and innate knowing itself can know it. If it is thinking arranged by private will, it is naturally tangled and toilsome, and innate knowing can also distinguish it. For whether thinking is right or wrong, correct or crooked, innate knowing never fails to know it by itself. So mistaking a thief for a son is precisely because the learning of extending knowledge is not clear, and one does not know how to recognize it in innate knowing.

○來書又云：師云：「為學終身只是一事，不論有事無事，只是這一件。若說寧不了事，不可不加培養，卻是分為兩事也。」寂意覺籵力衰弱，不足以終豐者，良知也。寧不了事，且加休冬，玫知也。如何卻為兩豐？若事變之來，有事勢不容不了而精力雖衰，稍鼓舞亦能支持，則持志以帥氣可矣。然言動終無氣力，畢事則困憊已甚，不幾於暴其氣已乎？此其輕重緩急，良知固未嘗不知，然或迫於事勢，安能傾精力？或因於精力，安能傾事券？如之何則可？「寧不了事，不可不加培養之」意，且與初學如此詬亦不為無益。但怍兩事看了，挭有病扁。在孟子言必有事焉，則君子之學終身只是「集義」一事。義者，宜也，心得其宜之謂義。能致良知則心得其宜矣，故「集義」亦只是致良知，君子之酬酢萬變，當行則行，當止則止，當生則生，當死則死，斟酌調停，無非是致其真知，以求自慊而已。故「君子素其位而行」，「思不出其泣」。凡謀其力之所不及，而強其知之所不能者，皆不得為致真知，而凡「勞其筋骨，餓其體膚，空乏其身，行拂亂其所為，動心忍性以增益其所不能」者，皆所以致其真知也。若雲寧不了事，不可不加培養者，亦是先有功利之心，計較成敗利鈍而愛憎取捨於其間，是以將了事自阼一事，而培養又別怍一事，此便有是內、非外之意，便是自私用智，便是「義外」，便有「不得於心，勿求於氣」之病，便不是致真知以求自慊之功矣。所云「鼓舞支持，畢事則困憊已甚」，又云「迫於事勢，因於精力」，皆是把怍兩事做了，所以有此。凡學問之功，一則誠，二則為。凡此皆是致真知之意，欠誠一真切之故。《大學》言「誠其意者，如惡惡臭，如好好色，此之謂自慊。」曾見有惡惡臭，好好色，而須鼓舞支持者乎？曾見畢事則困憊已甚者乎？曾有迫於事勢，因於精力者乎？

Your letter also says: "You, Master, said, 'In learning, for one's whole life there is only one thing, whether or not there are affairs to deal with; there is just this one matter. To say that one would rather leave a task unfinished but must not fail to nourish oneself is to divide it into two things.' It seems to me that the feeling of being weak in energy and unable to finish the task is liangzhi (innate knowing), and preferring to leave the task unfinished and rest and recover is extending knowing. Why then are these two things? If, when events arrive, there is a situation in which the task cannot but be finished, and even though one's energy is weak, a little rousing can hold one up, then holding to one's resolve to lead the vital energy can see it through. Yet in speech and movement there is in the end no strength, and when the task is done one is utterly exhausted; does this not come close to abusing one's vital energy? On the weight and urgency of such things, liangzhi surely does not fail to know, but sometimes one is pressed by circumstances, and how could one disregard one's energy? Or one is limited by one's energy, and how could one disregard circumstances? What is the right way? The idea of 'rather leave the task unfinished but do not fail to nourish oneself' is not without benefit when said to beginners. But if it is seen as two things, then it becomes a fault. Mencius said 'there must be work to be done,' so the learning of the gentleman is for one's whole life just the one matter of 'accumulating righteousness.' Righteousness means appropriateness; when the mind attains what is appropriate, that is called righteousness. If one can extend liangzhi, the mind attains what is appropriate, so 'accumulating righteousness' is also just extending liangzhi. In the countless changes of response, the gentleman acts when he should act, stops when he should stop, lives when he should live, and dies when he should die; in weighing and adjusting, it is nothing other than extending his liangzhi in order to be content in himself. Hence 'the gentleman acts according to his position' and 'his thoughts do not go beyond his position.' Whoever plans what is beyond his strength or forces what his knowing cannot reach is not extending liangzhi; and whatever 'toils his sinews and bones, starves his body, leaves him in want, and frustrates what he does, stirring his mind and toughening his nature to increase what he cannot do,' is all the means of extending his liangzhi. To say 'rather leave the task unfinished but do not fail to nourish' means that one already has a mind of utility and profit, calculating success, failure, sharpness, and dullness, and loving, hating, taking, and rejecting among them, so that one makes finishing the task one thing and nourishing another. This then has the sense of the inner being right and the outer being wrong, which is using selfish cleverness, which is 'righteousness as external,' which has the fault of 'what is not gained in the mind, do not seek in the vital energy,' and it is no longer the work of extending liangzhi to be self-content. What you say about 'rousing and holding up, and then being utterly exhausted after the task' and also 'pressed by circumstances, limited by energy' all comes from making it two things. In all work of learning, there is one thing that is sincerity and another that is falsity. All this comes from the lack of sincere unity and earnestness in the intent to extend liangzhi. The Great Learning says: 'To make one's intentions sincere is like hating a bad smell and loving a beautiful color; this is called being self-content.' Have you ever seen someone hating a bad smell and loving a beautiful color who needed to rouse and hold himself up? Ever seen someone utterly exhausted when it was done? Ever seen someone pressed by circumstances or limited by energy?"

此可以知其受病之所從來矣。

(The Master continued:) From this one can know where the illness comes from.

○來書又有云：人情機詐百出，御之以不疑，往往為所欺，覺則自人於逆、億。夫逆詐，印詐也，億不信，印非信也，為人欺，又非覺也：不逆，不億而常先覺，其惟良知瑩徹乎。然而出入毫忽之閒，背覺合詐者多矣。不逆、不意而先覺，此孔子因當時人專以逆詐、億不信為心，而自陷於詐與不信，又有不逆、不憶者，然不知致良知之功，而往往又為人岓欺詐，故有是言：非教人以是存心，而專欲先覺人之詐與不信也。以是存心，即是後世猜忌險薄者之事：而只此一念，已不可與入堯、舜之道矣。不逆、不憶而為人所欺者，尚亦不先為善：但不如能致其良知，而自然先覺者之尤為賢耳。崇一謂「其惟良知瑩徹」者，蓋已得其旨矣。然亦穎悟斫及，恐未實際也。蓋良知之在人心，亙萬古、塞宇宙而不同；不慮而知，恆易以知險，不學而能，恆簡以知阻：「先天而天不違，天且不違，而況於人乎？況於鬼神乎？」夫謂背覺合詐者，是雖不逆人而或未能自欺也，雖不憶人而或未能果自信也，是或常有先覺之心，而未能常自覺也。常有求先覺之心，即已流於逆、億而足以自蔽其良知矣，此背覺合詐之所以未免也。君子學以為己：未嘗虞人之欺己也，恆不自欺其良知而已。是故不欺則良知無所偽而誠，誠則明矣：自信則良知無所惑而明，明則誠矣。明、誠相生，是故良知常覺，常照：常覺，常照則如明鏡之懸，而物之來者自不能遁其妍榿矣。何者？不欺而誠，則無所容其欺，荀有欺焉而覺矣：自信而明，則無所容其不信，苟不信焉而覺矣。

Your letter also says: "The tricks of human nature are endless; if one meets them with no suspicion, one is often deceived; if one becomes aware, one falls into anticipating deceit and presuming bad faith. To anticipate deceit is itself to deceive, and presuming bad faith is itself to lack good faith; yet being deceived by others is also not awareness. To neither anticipate nor presume and yet always be aware beforehand, is that not only possible through the perfect clarity of liangzhi? But in the space of a hair's breadth, many turn against awareness and fall in with deceit." As for not anticipating and not presuming yet being aware beforehand, Confucius said this because the people of his time took anticipating deceit and presuming bad faith as their mind, and so fell into deceit and bad faith themselves; and there were others who neither anticipated nor presumed but did not know the work of extending liangzhi and were often deceived, so he said these words. It was not to teach people to hold this in mind and to devote themselves to becoming aware beforehand of others' deceit and bad faith. To hold this in mind is the business of the suspicious and mean-spirited of later ages, and with this single thought alone one can no longer enter the Way of Yao and Shun. One who neither anticipates nor presumes yet is deceived still does not cease to be good; he is simply not as worthy as one who can extend his liangzhi and be naturally aware beforehand. Chongyi said 'only through the perfect clarity of liangzhi,' which has indeed grasped the point. Yet this is also something reached by quick insight and perhaps not yet real. For liangzhi in the human mind spans ten thousand ages and fills the universe without changing; knowing without thinking, it constantly and easily knows danger; able without learning, it constantly and simply knows obstruction. "He acts before Heaven and Heaven does not oppose him; if Heaven does not oppose him, how much less will men, and how much less will spirits?" As for those who turn against awareness and fall in with deceit, though they do not anticipate others, they may not yet be able to avoid deceiving themselves; though they do not presume bad faith in others, they may not yet truly trust themselves; thus they may often have the wish to be aware beforehand yet cannot be constantly self-aware. To constantly have the wish to be aware beforehand already slides into anticipating and presuming, and is enough to obscure one's own liangzhi; this is why turning against awareness and falling in with deceit cannot be avoided. The gentleman learns for his own sake: he never worries about being deceived by others, and only ever does not deceive his own liangzhi. So when one does not deceive, liangzhi has nothing false and is sincere, and with sincerity there is clarity; when one trusts oneself, liangzhi has nothing confused and is clear, and with clarity there is sincerity. Clarity and sincerity produce each other, and so liangzhi is constantly aware and constantly illuminating. Constantly aware and illuminating, it is like a bright mirror hung up, and things that come before it cannot hide their beauty or ugliness. Why? When one does not deceive and is sincere, there is no room for deceit, and if there is any deceit one becomes aware of it; when one trusts oneself and is clear, there is no room for distrust, and if there is any distrust one becomes aware of it.

是謂易以知險，簡以知阻，子思所謂「至誠如神，可以前知」者也，然子思謂「如神」，謂「可以前知」，猶二而言之，是蓋推言思誠者之功效，是猶為不能先覺者說也：若就至誠而言，則至誠之妙用，即謂之「神」，不必言「如神」，至誠則「無知而無不知」，不必言「可以前知」矣。

(The Master continued:) This is what is meant by easily knowing danger and simply knowing obstruction, and what Zisi called "Utmost sincerity is like the spirits and can foreknow." Yet Zisi said "like the spirits" and said "can foreknow" as two separate phrases; this probably extends the effects for those who think on sincerity, and is still said for those who cannot be aware beforehand. If one speaks of utmost sincerity itself, then the wondrous function of utmost sincerity is itself called "spirit," and there is no need to say "like" the spirits; with utmost sincerity there is "no knowing yet nothing unknown," and there is no need to say "can foreknow."

○某頓首啟：昨承教及《大學》，撥舟匆匆，未能奉答。曉來江行稍暇，復取手教而讀之。恐至贛後人事復紛沓，先具其略以請。來教雲；「見道固難，而體道尤難。道誠未易明，而學詼不可不講：恐未可安於所見而遂以為極則也。」幸甚幸甚！何以得聞斮言乎？其敢自以為極則而安之乎？正思就天下之道以講明之耳。而數年以來，聞其說而非笑之者有矣，詬訾之者有矣，置之不是較量辨議之者有矣，其肯遂以教我乎？其肯遂以教我，而反覆曉諭，惻然惟恐不及救正之乎？然則天下之愛我者，固莫有如執事之心深且至矣，感激當同如哉！夫「德之不修，學之不講」，孔子以為憂。而世之學者稍能傳習訓詀，即皆自以為知學，不復有所謂講學之求，可悲矣！夫道必體而後見，非已見道而後加體道之功也：道必學而後明，非外講學而復有所謂明道之事也。然世之講學者有二，有講之以身心者，有講之以口耳者。講之以口耳，揣摸測哽，求之影響者也：講之以身心，行著習察，實有諸己者也。知此，則知孔門之學矣。

I bow my head and report: yesterday I received your instruction and the Great Learning, but I was poling the boat in haste and could not reply. This morning, traveling on the river with a little leisure, I took up your letter again and read it. Fearing that after I reach Gan, affairs will again be tangled and numerous, I set out a brief reply first. You wrote: "Seeing the Way is truly hard, and embodying the Way is harder still. The Way is truly not easy to understand, and learning must truly be discussed. I fear one must not rest content in what one has seen and take it for the final standard." How fortunate, how fortunate! How could I have heard these words? Would I dare take my view as the final standard and rest content in it? I want precisely to take the Way of the world and discuss it and make it clear. But over the past several years, there have been those who, hearing my teaching, have mocked it, those who have reviled it, and those who have set it aside and disdained to weigh or debate it; would any of them be willing to instruct me? Would any be willing to instruct me, explaining again and again, and with compassion fearing only that they could not correct me in time? Then those in the world who care for me have surely none whose heart is as deep and thorough as yours, and how grateful I should be! "Virtue not cultivated and learning not discussed" were what Confucius worried about. Yet the scholars of the world, as soon as they can pass on some textual glosses, all take themselves to know learning and no longer seek what is called discussing learning; how sad! The Way must be embodied before it is seen; it is not that one first sees the Way and then adds the work of embodying it. The Way must be learned before it is clear; it is not that apart from discussing learning there is a further matter called making the Way clear. But those in the world who discuss learning are of two kinds: those who discuss it with body and mind, and those who discuss it with mouth and ear. Those who discuss with mouth and ear conjecture and speculate, seeking it in shadows and echoes; those who discuss with body and mind practice and examine, truly having it in themselves. Knowing this, one knows the learning of Confucius's school.

○來教謂某「《大學》古本之復，以人之為學但當求之於內，而程、朱『格物』之說不免求之於外，遂去朱子之分章，而削其所補之傳。」非敢然也。學豈有內外乎？《大學》古本乃孔門相慱舊本耳。朱子疑其有所脫誤而改正補緝之，在某則謂其本無脫誤，悉從其舊而已矣。失在於過信孔子則有之，非故去朱子之分章而削其慱也。失學貴得之心，求之於心而非也，雖其言之出於孔子，不敢以為是也，而況其未及孔子者乎？求之於心而是也，雖其言之出於庸常，不敢以為非也，而況其出於孔子者乎？且舊本之傳數千載矣，今讀其文詞，郥明白而可通，論其工夫，又易簡而可人：亦何所按據而斷其此段之必在於彼，彼段之必在於此，與此之如何而缺，彼之如何而補？而遂改正補緝之，無乃重於背朱而輕於叛孔已乎？

Your letter says of me: "The restoration of the old text of the Great Learning is because people in learning should seek only within, while the Cheng-Zhu theory of 'investigating things' inevitably seeks outside, and so he removed Zhu Xi's division into chapters and cut the commentary he supplemented." I do not dare do so. How could learning have an inside and outside? The old text of the Great Learning is simply the old text transmitted in Confucius's school. Zhu Xi suspected it had omissions and errors, and corrected and supplemented it; I hold that it originally had no omissions or errors, and follow the old entirely. If there is a fault, it is in trusting Confucius too much, not in deliberately removing Zhu Xi's chapter divisions and cutting his commentary. Learning prizes what is attained in the mind. If, seeking it in the mind, I find it not right, though the words come from Confucius I do not dare take them as right, let alone words that do not reach Confucius. If, seeking it in the mind, I find it right, though the words come from an ordinary person I do not dare take them as wrong, let alone words from Confucius. Moreover the old text has been handed down for thousands of years, and reading its wording now it is clear and makes sense; discussing its practice, it is simple and easy to enter. On what basis, then, could one assert that this passage must be there and that passage must be here, and how this one is missing and how that one is supplied, and then correct and supplement it? Is this not being heavier in turning away from Zhu Xi but lighter in rebelling against Confucius?

○來教謂「如必以學不資於外求，但當反觀、內省以為務，則『正心誠意』四字亦何不盡之有，何必於入門之際，便困以『格物一段工夫也？」誠然誠然！若語其要，則「惰身」二字亦足矣！何必又言「正心」？「正心」二字亦足矣，何必又言「誠意」？「誠意」二字亦足矣，何必又言「致知」，又言「格物」？惟其工夫之詳密，而要之只是一事，此斫以為「精一」之學，此正不可不思者也。夫理無內外，性無內外，故學無內外。講習、討論，未嘗非內也；反觀、內省，未嘗遺外也。夫謂學必資於外求，是以己性為有外也，是「義外」也，用智者也；謂反觀、內省為求之於內，是以己性為有內也，是有我也，自私者也：是皆不知性之無內外也。故日：「精義入神，以致用也；利用安身，以崇德也」：「性之德也，合內外之道也。」此可以知「格物」之學矣。「格物」者，《大學》之實下手處，徹首徹尾，自始學至聖人，只此工夫而已，非但入門之際有此一段也。夫「正心」、「誠意」、「致知」、「挌物」，皆所以「修身」：而「格物」者，其所用力，日可見之地。故「格物」者，格其心之物也，格其意之物也，挌其知之物也：「正心」者，正其物之心也：「誠意」者，誠其物之意也：「致知」者，致其物之知也。此豈有內外彼此之分哉？理一而已：以其理之凝聚而言則謂之「性」，以其凝聚之主宰而言則謂之「、心」，以其主宰之狻動而言則謂之「意」，以其猣動之明覺而言則謂之「知」，以其明覺之感應而言則謂之「物」：故就物而言謂之「格」，就知而言謂之「致」，就意而言謂之「誠」，就心而言謂之「正」。正者，正此也；誠者，誠此也；致者，致此也；格者，格此也；皆所謂窮理以儘性也；天下無性外之理，無性外之物。

Your letter says: "If learning must not rely on seeking outside, and one should take only turning to look within and self-examination as the task, then the four words 'rectifying the mind and making the intention sincere' would be sufficient; why at the very beginning of entering the way trouble people with the work of investigating things?" Truly so, truly so! If one speaks of the essentials, then the two words "cultivating the self" suffice; why add "rectifying the mind"? The two words "rectifying the mind" suffice; why add "making the intention sincere"? The two words "making the intention sincere" suffice; why add "extending knowing" and "investigating things"? It is just that the work is detailed and thorough, yet in essence it is only one matter, and this is what is meant by the learning of "refinement and unity," which one cannot but reflect on. Principle has no inside and outside, nature has no inside and outside, and so learning has no inside and outside. Study and discussion are never not inner; turning to look within and self-examination never leave out the outer. To say that learning must rely on seeking outside is to take one's own nature as having an outside, which is "righteousness as external" and using cleverness; to say that turning to look within and self-examination are seeking within is to take one's own nature as having an inside, which is having an ego and being selfish: both fail to know that nature has no inside and outside. Hence it is said: "Refining righteousness to enter the spirit is for the sake of application; applying it benefits and settles the body is for the sake of exalting virtue." "It is the virtue of nature, the way that joins inner and outer." From this one can know the learning of "investigating things." "Investigating things" is where the Great Learning truly puts the hand to work, thoroughly from beginning to end, from the beginning of learning to the sage, this work and nothing else, not only a section at the beginning of entering the way. "Rectifying the mind," "making the intention sincere," "extending knowing," and "investigating things" are all means to "cultivating the self," and "investigating things" is where one applies effort and sees results day by day. Thus "investigating things" means investigating the things of the mind, investigating the things of the intention, investigating the things of knowing; "rectifying the mind" means rectifying the mind of the things; "making the intention sincere" means making the intention of the things sincere; "extending knowing" means extending the knowing of the things. How could there be a division of inner and outer, this and that? Principle is only one: speaking of principle as condensed, it is called "nature"; of that condensation as the master, it is called "mind"; of the master as it stirs, it is called "intention"; of the stirring as clear awareness, it is called "knowing"; of the clear awareness as it responds, it is called "thing." So with regard to the thing it is called "investigating," with regard to knowing it is called "extending," with regard to intention it is called "making sincere," and with regard to the mind it is called "rectifying." To rectify is to rectify this; to make sincere is to make this sincere; to extend is to extend this; to investigate is to investigate this: all of it is what is called exhausting principle to fulfill nature. There is no principle beyond nature in the world, and no thing beyond nature.

學之不明，皆由世之懦者認理為外，認物為外，而不知「義外」之說，孟子蓋嘗闢之，力至襲陷其內而不覺，豈非亦有似是而難明者歟？不可以不察也！

(The Master continued:) That learning is not clear is all because the Confucian scholars of the world take principle as external and things as external, and do not know that Mencius refuted the theory of "righteousness as external," and even fall into it without noticing; is that not also something that seems right and is hard to see through? One must not fail to examine it!

○凡執事所以致疑於「格物」之說者，必謂其是內而非外也，必謂其專事於反觀、內省之為，而遺棄其講習討論之功也，必謂其一意於綱領、本原之約，而脫略於支條、節目之詳也，必謂其沉溺於枯槁、虛寂之偏，而不盡於物理、人事之變也。審如是，豈但獲罪於聖門，獲罪於朱子，是邪說誣民，叛道亂正，人得而誅之也：而況於執事之正直哉？審如是，世之稍明訓詁，聞先哲之緒論者，皆知其非也：而況執事之高明哉？凡某之所謂「挌物」，其於朱子九條之說，皆包羅統括於其中：但為之有要，作用不同，正所謂毫釐之差耳。無毫釐之差，而千里之繆，實起於此，不可不辨。

Where you doubt the theory of "investigating things," you must say it affirms the inner and denies the outer, that it devotes itself solely to turning to look within and self-examination and discards the work of study and discussion, that it is single-minded about the brevity of the guiding principles and original source while neglecting the detail of the branches and particulars, and that it sinks into the one-sidedness of dry stillness and empty quiet, not exhausting the principles of things and the changes of human affairs. If it were really so, not only would it offend against the school of Confucius and against Zhu Xi, it would be a heterodox doctrine deceiving the people, rebelling against the Way and confusing what is right, and people could rightly punish it, let alone one as upright as yourself. If it were really so, anyone in the world with some understanding of glosses who had heard the remarks of earlier sages would know it was wrong, let alone one as perceptive as you. What I call "investigating things" includes and embraces all of Zhu Xi's nine-point theory; but there is an essential in doing it, and the application differs, which is exactly what is called a hair's-breadth difference. Without a hair's-breadth difference, an error of a thousand li arises from just here, and one must distinguish it.

○孟子闢揚、墨，至於「無父、無君」。二子亦當時之賢者，使與孟子並世而生，未必不以之為貿；墨子兼愛，行仁而過耳，，楊子為我，行義而過耳，此其為說亦豈誠滅理亂常之甚，而足以眩天下哉？而其流之弊，孟子則比於禽獸、夷狄，所諝以學術殺天下後世也。今世學術之弊，其謂之學仁而過者乎？謂之學義而過者乎？抑謂之學不仁、不義而過者乎？吾不知其於洪水、猛獸何如也。孟子云；「予豈好辯哉？予不得已也。」楊、墨之道塞天下。孟子之時，天下之拿信楊、墨，當不下於今日之崇尚朱之說：而孟子獨以一人呶呶於其閒，噫，可哀矣！韓氏云：「佛、老之害甚於楊、墨。」韓愈之賢不及孟子，孟子不能救之於未壞之先，而韓愈乃欲全之於已壞之後，其亦不量其力，且見其身之危，莫之救以死也。嗚呼！若某者，其尤不量其力，果見其身之危，莫之救以死也矣！夫眾力嘻嘻之中，而猶出涕嗟若，舉世恬然以趨，而獨疾首蹙額以為憂，此其非病狂喪心，殆必誠有大苦者隱於其中，而非天下之至仁，其孰能察之。其為「朱子晚年定論」，蓋亦不得已而然。中間年歲早晚，誠有所未考，雖不必盡出於晚年，固多出於晚年者矣。然大意在委曲調停，以明此學為重。平生於朱子之說，如神明蓍龜，一日一與之背馳，心誠有所未忍，故不得已而為此。「知我者諝我心憂，不知我者謂我何求。」蓋不忍牴牾朱子者，其本心也，不得已而與之牴牾者，道固如是，不直則道不見也。執事所謂「決與朱子異」者，僕敢自欺其心哉？夫道，天下之公道也，學，天下之公學也，非朱子可得而私也，非孔子可得而私也，天下之公也，公言之而已矣。故言之而是，雖異於己，乃益於己也言。之而非，雖同於己，適損於己也。益於己者，己必喜之：損於己者，己必惡之；然則某今日之論，雖或於朱子異，未必非其所喜也。

Mencius refuted Yang and Mo, to the point of saying they were "without father and without ruler." The two were also worthy men of their time; if they had lived alongside Mencius, he might well have considered them worthy. Mozi's universal love was benevolence carried too far; Yang Zhu's "for oneself" was righteousness carried too far. How could their doctrines really have destroyed principle and thrown the constants into disorder so severely as to dazzle the world? Yet for the harm of their offshoots Mencius compared them to beasts and barbarians, saying they killed the world and later ages through learning. The harm of today's learning: shall it be called going too far in learning benevolence? Too far in learning righteousness? Or going too far in learning non-benevolence and non-righteousness? I do not know how it compares with flood and savage beasts. Mencius said: "Do I love to argue? I have no choice." The ways of Yang and Mo filled the world. In Mencius's time the world fully believed Yang and Mo, probably no less than today's reverence for Zhu Xi's teaching; yet Mencius alone, one man, chattered away among them. Alas, how sad! Han Yu said: "The harm of Buddhism and Daoism is worse than that of Yang and Mo." Han Yu was not as worthy as Mencius; Mencius could not save the world before it was ruined, while Han Yu wanted to preserve it after it was ruined, also failing to measure his strength, and saw his own life in danger with no one to save him from death. Alas! Someone like me fails to measure his strength even more, and indeed sees his life in danger with no one to save him from death! While the crowd is laughing merrily, he still weeps and sighs; while the whole world rushes on in ease, he alone knits his brow and worries. If this is not madness and loss of heart, then surely there is some great suffering hidden within, and without the utmost benevolence in the world, who could discern it? As for my "Zhu Xi's Final Conclusions in His Later Years," I also did it only because I had no choice. In the dating of earlier and later years there are indeed matters I have not examined, and though not all come from his later years, many do. But the main intent was to adjust and reconcile in a roundabout way in order to make this learning clear. All my life I have taken Zhu Xi's teachings like the spirits and the milfoil and tortoise; suddenly to go against them, my heart truly could not bear it, and so I did this because I had no choice. "Those who know me say my heart is troubled; those who do not know me ask what I seek." That I cannot bear to contradict Zhu Xi is my original heart; that I am forced to contradict him is because the Way is so: if it is not straightforward, the Way does not appear. You say I "decisively differ from Zhu Xi"; would I dare deceive my own heart? The Way is the public Way of the world; learning is the public learning of the world; it cannot be privately owned by Zhu Xi or by Confucius. What belongs to the world publicly can only be spoken of publicly. So when what is said is right, though it differs from oneself, it benefits oneself; when what is said is wrong, though it agrees with oneself, it only harms oneself. What benefits oneself, one is sure to delight in; what harms oneself, one is sure to dislike. Then my discussion today, though it may differ from Zhu Xi, is not necessarily something he would not delight in.

君子之過，如日月之食，其更七人皆仰之：而小人之過也必文。某雖不肖，固不敢以小人之心事朱子也。

(The Master continued:) The faults of the gentleman are like eclipses of the sun and moon; when he corrects them, all look up to him; the faults of the petty man are always dressed up. Though I am unworthy, I surely dare not serve Zhu Xi with the heart of a petty man.

○執事所以教，反覆數百言，皆以未悉鄙人「格物」之說；若鄙說一明，則此數百言皆可以不待辨說而釋然無滯，故今不敢縷縷，以滋瑣屑之洹，然鄙脫非面陳囗析，斷亦未能了了於紙筆閒也。嗟乎！執事所以開導啟迪於我者，可謂懇到詳切矣，人之愛我，寧有如執事者乎！僕雖甚愚下，寧不知所感刻佩服：然而不敢遽舍其中心之誠然而姑以聽受雲者，正不敢有負於深愛，亦思有以報之耳。秋盡東還，必求一面，以卒所請，千萬終教！

Your instruction, repeated in several hundred words, all arises because you have not yet fully understood my theory of "investigating things." If my theory is made clear, these several hundred words can be resolved without debate and without obstruction. Therefore I do not dare go into every detail now, lest I add to trivial annoyance. But my theory, unless presented in person, cannot be made fully clear on paper. Alas! What you have done to open and enlighten me is sincere and thorough. Could anyone's affection for me be like yours? Though I am very foolish and low, how could I not feel it deeply and keep it engraved in my mind? Yet I do not dare suddenly abandon what is truly in my heart merely to accept your words for now, precisely because I dare not fail your deep affection and hope to repay it. At the end of autumn I will return east and must seek a meeting to fulfill your request; please teach me to the end!

○春閒遠勞迂途，枉顧問證，惓倦此情，何可當也！已期二三同志，更處靜地，扳留旬囗，少效其鄙見，以求切劘之益：而公期俗絆，勢有不能，別去極怏怏如有所矢。忽承箋惠，反覆千餘言，讀之無甚浣慰，中間推許太過，蓋亦獎掖之盛心，而規礪真切，思欲納之於買聖之域，又托諸崇一以致其勤勤懇懇之懷，此非深交篤愛何以及是：知感知媿，且懼其無以堪之也。雖然，僕亦何敢不自鞭勉，而徒以感媿辭讓為乎哉！其謂「思、孟、周、程無意相遭於千載之下，與其盡信於天下，不若真信於一人；道固自在，學亦自在，天下信之不為多，一人信之不為少」者，斮固君子「不見是而無悶」之心，豈世之認譾屑屑者知足以及之乎！乃僕之情，則有大不得已者存乎其間，而非以計人之信與不信也。

In spring you took the trouble of a roundabout journey from afar to visit and question me, and your earnest sentiment, how could I deserve it! I had hoped to keep two or three like-minded friends in a quiet place for ten days, to offer a little of my humble views and seek the benefit of mutual refinement; but official dates and worldly ties made it impossible, and parting from you I felt dejected as if I had lost something. Suddenly I received your gracious letter, over a thousand words, and reading it again and again I was beyond measure refreshed and comforted. The overpraise in it is also the generous heart of encouragement; and your sincere admonitions, wishing to bring me into the realm of the sages, and entrusting Chongyi to convey your earnest and heartfelt care, who but a deep and loving friend could do this? I know gratitude and shame, and fear I cannot live up to it. Even so, how could I dare not spur myself on, and merely decline out of gratitude and shame? You say that "Zisi, Mencius, Zhou Dunyi, and the Cheng brothers had no intention of meeting across a thousand years, and rather than be fully trusted by the world, it is better to be truly trusted by one person; the Way is there of itself, learning is there of itself, and the world's believing it is not much, one person's believing it is not little." This is surely the heart of the gentleman who "is not troubled when unrecognized," and how could it be reached by the petty and paltry people of the world! As for my own feelings, there is something I cannot help in them, not a matter of counting whether people believe or not.

○夫人者，天地之心，天地萬物本吾一體者也。生民之困苦荼毒，孰非疾痛之切於吾身者乎？不知吾身之疾痛，無是非之心者也；是非之心，不慮而知，不學而能，所謂「良知」也：良知之在人心，無間於聖愚，天下古今之所同也，世之君子惟務其良知，則自能公是非，同好惡，視人猶己，視國猶家，而以天地萬物為一體，求天下無冶，不可得矣。古之人所以能見善不啻若己出，見惡不啻若己人，視民之飢猶己之飢溺，而一夫不獲若己推而納諸溝中者，非故為是而以蘄天下之信己也，務致其良知求自慊而已矣。堯、舜、三王之聖，言而民莫不信者，致其良知而言之也；行而民莫不說者，致其真知而行之也。是以其民熙熙皞皞，殺之不怨，利之不庸，施及蠻貊，而凡有血氣者莫不尊親；為其良知之同也。嗚呼！聖人之治天下，何其簡且易哉！○後世良知之學不明，天下之人用其私智以相比軋，是以人各有心，而偏瑣僻陋之見，狡偽陰邪之術，至於不可勝說：外假仨義之名，而內以行其自私自利之實，洈辭以阿俗，嬌行以幹譽：損人之善而襲以為己長，訐人之私而竊以為己直：忿以相勝而猶謂之徇義，險以相頄而猶謂之疾惡；妒賢忌能而猶自以為公是非，恣情縱欲而猶自以為同好惡；相陵相賊，自其一家骨肉之親，已不能無爾我勝負之意、彼此藩籬之形，而況於天下之大，民物之眾，又何能一體而視之，則無怪於紛紛籍籍而禍亂相尋於無窮矣。

Humans are the mind of heaven and earth. Heaven, earth, and the ten thousand things are originally one body with me. The hardship and bitter suffering of the common people, which of them is not an acute pain in my own body? To not know the pain in one's own body is to be a person without a sense of right and wrong. The sense of right and wrong, known without thinking and capable without learning, is what is called liangzhi. Liangzhi in the human mind makes no difference between sage and fool, and is the same throughout the world and all ages. If the gentlemen of the world only devote themselves to their liangzhi, they will naturally share the same judgments of right and wrong and the same likes and dislikes, regard others as themselves, regard the state as their home, and take heaven, earth, and the ten thousand things as one body; then to seek that the world not be well governed would be impossible. The reason the ancients could see goodness as though it came from themselves and see evil as though it had entered themselves, could regard the people's hunger and drowning as their own hunger and drowning, and when one man was not provided for felt as if they had pushed him into a ditch, was not that they did this deliberately to make the world trust them, but that they devoted themselves to extending their liangzhi to be content in themselves. The sagehood of Yao, Shun, and the Three Kings was such that when they spoke, the people all believed, because they spoke by extending their liangzhi; when they acted, the people all rejoiced, because they acted by extending their liangzhi. Hence their people were joyful and content, did not resent being killed and did not credit being benefited, and their influence reached the barbarians, so that all who have blood and breath honored and loved them: because their liangzhi was the same. Alas! How simple and easy the sages' governing of the world was! In later ages, the learning of liangzhi was not clear, and people of the world used their private cleverness to rival and crush one another, so that each person had his own mind, and narrow, petty, and crude views and cunning, false, and sinister arts are beyond counting. Outwardly borrowing the name of benevolence and righteousness, inwardly they carry out their own selfishness and self-interest; they use deceitful words to flatter the vulgar and feign conduct to seek reputation; they diminish others' goodness and seize it as their own strength, expose others' private matters and steal it as their own uprightness; they win through anger and yet call it following righteousness, they bring each other down through treachery and yet call it hating evil; they envy the worthy and begrudge the able and yet take themselves to share the same judgments of right and wrong, they indulge their feelings and desires and yet take themselves to share the same likes and dislikes. They trample and harm one another, so that even among one's own family and flesh and blood there cannot but be the idea of you and me, winning and losing, and the form of a fence between this side and that; how much less could they regard the vast world and its multitude of people and things as one body? It is no wonder that confusion and disorder, calamity and chaos follow one another without end.

○僕詼賴天之靈，偶有見於良知之學，以為必由此而後天下可得而治。是以每念斯民之陷溺，則為之戚然痛心，忘其身之不肖，而思以此救之，亦不自知其量者。天下之人見其若是，遂相與非笑而詆斥之，以為是病狂喪心之人耳。嗚呼，是奚足恤哉！吾方疾痛之切體，而瑕計人之非笑乎？人固有見其父子兄弟之墜溺於深淵者，呼號匍匐，裸跣顛頓，扳懸崖壁而下拯之。士之見者，方相與揖讓談笑於其旁，以為是棄其禮貌衣冠而呼號顛頓若此，是病珏喪心者也。故夫揖讓談笑於溺人之旁而不知救，此惟行路之人，無親戚骨肉之情者能之，然已謂之無惻隱之心，非人矣；若失在父子兄弗之愛者，則固未有不痛心疾首，狂奔盡氣，匍匐而拯之，彼將陷溺之禍有不顧，而況於病狂喪心之識乎？而又況於蘄人信與不信乎？嗚呼！今之人雖謂僕為病狂喪心之人，亦無不可矣。天下之人，皆吾之心也：天下之人猶有病狂者矣，吾安得而非病狂乎？猶有喪心者矣，吾安得而非喪心乎？

By the grace of Heaven's spirit, I happened to catch sight of the learning of liangzhi, and I believed that only through it can the world be well governed. So whenever I think of the people sunk and drowning, I am grieved and pained for them, forgetting my own unworthiness and thinking to save them by this, not knowing my own limits either. People of the world, seeing me like this, mock and revile me together, taking me for a man who has gone mad and lost his heart, nothing more. Alas, why should this be a concern! I am feeling the sharp pain in my own body; do I have leisure to count others' mockery? Suppose someone sees his father, sons, and brothers fallen into a deep abyss, crying and crawling, barefoot and stumbling, clinging to the cliff wall to climb down and rescue them. A scholar who sees this stands bowing politely and chatting and laughing beside them, saying that he has cast off his courtesy and robe and cap and cries and stumbles like this, that he is mad and has lost his heart. To bow politely and chat and laugh beside a drowning person without knowing to save him is something only passers-by with no feeling of kinship or flesh and blood can do, and even they are said to lack a heart of compassion and not to be human. As for those in the love of father and son or brothers, there is none who would not be pained to the heart and head, run wildly until out of breath, and crawl to rescue them. They would not care about the calamity of falling in and drowning, to say nothing of the ridicule of madness and loss of heart! And much less would they seek whether others believe them or not! Alas! Today people may call me a man who is mad and has lost his heart, and I could not object. The people of the world are all my own heart. If the people of the world still include those who are mad, how can I not be mad? If there are still those who have lost their heart, how can I not have lost my heart?

○昔者孔子之在當時，有議其為陷者，有譏其為佞者，有毀其未賢，詆其為不知禮，而侮之以為東家丘者，有嫉而沮之者，有惡而欲殺之者，晨門、荷蕢之徒，皆當時之賢士，且曰「是知其不可而為之者歟？」「鄙哉硜硜乎！莫己知也，斯已而已矣。」雖子路在升堂之列，尚不能無疑於其所見，不悅於其所欲往，而且以之為迂，則當時之不信夫子者，豈特十之二三而已乎？然而夫子汲汲遑遑，若求亡子於道路，而不暇於暖席者，寧以蘄人之知我、信我而已哉？蓋其天地萬物一體之仁，疾痛迫切，雖欲已之而自有所不容已，故其言曰：「吾非期人之徒與而誰與？」「欲潔其身而亂大倫。」「果哉，末之難矣！」嗚呼！此非誠以天地萬物為一體者，孰能以知夫子之心乎？若其遯世無悶，樂天知命者，則固無人而不自得，道並行而不相悖也。

Long ago, when Confucius was in his time, some criticized him as a flatterer, some mocked him as glib, some slandered him as not worthy, some decried him as not knowing ritual and insulted him as 'Qiu of the eastern neighbors,' some envied and obstructed him, some hated him and wished to kill him. The gatekeeper and the basket carrier were worthy men of the time, and they said: 'Is he the one who knows it cannot be done and yet does it?' and 'How petty and stubborn! No one knows him, so he should just stop.' Even Zilu, who was among those who had ascended the hall, could not but doubt what he saw, was displeased at where he wished to go, and thought him impractical; so those who did not believe the Master in his time were certainly not merely two or three in ten. Yet the Master hurried about restlessly as if searching for a lost son on the road, without leisure to warm his mat; was it merely to seek others' knowing and trusting him? It was because his benevolence of one body with heaven, earth, and the ten thousand things was so pained and urgent that though he wished to stop he could not, and so he said: 'If I am not a companion of these people, with whom shall I be?' 'To wish to keep oneself clean is to throw the great human relations into disorder.' 'How resolute! Nothing is hard for him then!' Alas! Who but one who truly takes heaven, earth, and the ten thousand things as one body could know the Master's heart? As for those who withdraw from the world without distress and delight in Heaven and know their fate, they are indeed content wherever they go, with ways that run together without conflict.

○僕之不肖，何敢以夫子之道為己任；顧其心亦已稍加疾扁之在身，是以彷徨四顧，將求其有助於我者，相與講去其病耳。今誠得豪傑同志之士，扶持匡翼，共明良知之學於天下，使天下之人皆知自致其良知，以柑安相養，去其自私自利之蔽，一洗讒妒勝忿之習，以濟於大同，則僕之狂病固將睨然以愈，而終免於喪心之患矣，豈不快哉？嗟乎！今誠欲求豪傑同志之士於天下，非如吾文蔚者，而誰望之乎？如吾文蔚之才與志，誠足以援天下之溺者，今又既知其具之在我，而無假於外求矣，循是而充，若決河注海，孰得而御哉？文蔚所謂一人信之不為少，其又能遜以委之何人乎？

Unworthy as I am, how would I dare take the Master's Way as my own responsibility; but my heart is already somewhat as if illness were in my body, so I wander and look around, seeking those who can help me, to discuss together and rid ourselves of this illness. Now if I could truly obtain heroic and like-minded gentlemen to support and assist me, to make clear the learning of liangzhi together throughout the world, so that the people of the world all know to extend their own liangzhi, support and nourish one another, remove the obscuration of selfishness and self-interest, wash away the habits of slander, envy, and contentiousness, and so reach the Great Unity, then my mad illness would be cured at once and in the end I would be spared the trouble of losing my heart; would that not be a joy? Alas! Now if I truly wished to find heroic, like-minded gentlemen in the world, if not one like our Wenwei, in whom would I place my hope? Wenwei's talent and will are truly enough to rescue the drowning of the world, and now that he already knows that the means are within himself and need no borrowing from outside, following this and extending it would be like breaching a river to pour into the sea; who could hold it back? What Wenwei called "one person's believing it is not little," to whom else could he humbly entrust it?

○會稽素啑山水之區，深林長谷，信步皆是，寒暑晦明，無時不宜，安居飽食，塵囂無擾，良朋四集，道蓑日新，懮哉遊哉，天地之閒寧復有樂於是者？孔子云：「不怨天，不尤人，下學而上達。」僕與二三同志力將請事斯語，奚暇外慕？燭其切膚之痛，乃有未能恝然者，輒復云云爾。咳疾暑毒，書札絕懶，盛使遠來，遲留經月，臨歧執筆，又不覺累紙，蓋於相知之深，雖已縷縷至此，殊覺有所未能盡也。

Kuaiji has long been known as a land of hills and waters, with deep forests and long valleys wherever one strolls, suitable at every season, in cold or heat, in dim or bright, where one can live in peace and eat one's fill, undisturbed by the dust and noise of the world, with good friends gathering from all sides, and Dao and righteousness renewed day by day, leisurely and carefree; between heaven and earth, is there any joy greater than this? Confucius said: "Not resenting Heaven, not blaming men, studying what is below and reaching what is above." I and two or three like-minded friends are about to put these words into practice; what leisure do I have to long for things outside? It is only that the pain that cuts to the skin is something I cannot simply set aside, and so I have gone on like this again. With a cough and summer heat, I am quite lazy about letters; your envoy came from far away and has stayed a month, and at the parting of ways, taking up my brush I find I have filled many pages without noticing. With such deep understanding between us, though I have gone on in detail to this extent, I still feel there is much I have not been able to say fully.

○得書，見近來所學之驟進，喜慰不可言。諦視數過，其間雖亦有一二未瑩徹處，卻是致良知之功尚未純熟，到純熟時自無此矣：譬之驅車，既已由於康莊大道之中或時橫斜迂曲者，乃馬性末調，銜勒不齊之故，然已只在康莊大道中，決不賺入旁蹊曲徑矣一近時海內同志，到此地位者曾末多見，喜慰不可言，斯道之幸也！琖軀舊有咳嗽畏熱之病，近入炎方，輒復大作。主上聖明洞察，責付甚重，不敢遽辭：地力軍務冗沓，皆輿疾從事。今卻幸已平定，已具本乞回養病，得在林下稍就清涼，或可廖耳。人還，伏枕草草，不盡傾企外惟歷一簡幸達致之。

I received your letter and saw how rapidly your learning has advanced lately, and my joy and comfort cannot be expressed. I looked at it carefully several times; though there are one or two places that are not yet entirely clear, this is only because the work of extending liangzhi is not yet fully ripe, and when it ripens such things will naturally be gone. It is like driving a carriage: having already entered the broad highway, sometimes it goes askew and winds about, but that is because the horse's nature is not yet tamed and the bit and reins are not even; still, it is already on the broad highway and will never be tricked into side paths and crooked lanes. Among like-minded friends within the seas lately I have seen few who have reached this position, and my joy and comfort cannot be expressed, and it is the good fortune of this Way! My humble body has long had the ailment of cough and fear of heat, and having recently entered the hot south, it has flared up again. The sovereign, wise and perceptive, has entrusted me with a heavy charge and I have not dared to decline outright. Military affairs in the region are tangled and numerous, and I have attended to them all while ill in a litter. Now, fortunately, order has been established, and I have submitted a memorial asking to return and recover; if I can be in the woods in a somewhat cooler place, perhaps I will be cured. The messenger is returning, and I write hastily on my pillow, not fully expressing my longing. Beyond this there is a short note for Junyi; I hope it may be delivered.

○來書所詢，草草奉復一二：近歲來山中講學者，往往多說「勿忘、勿助」工夫甚難。問之，則雲才著意便是助，才不著意便是忘，所以甚難。區區因問之雲「忘是忘個甚麼？助是助個甚麼？」其人默然無對，始請問。區區因與說，我此閒講學，卻只說個「必有事焉」，不說「勿忘、勿助」。「必有事焉」者只是時時去「集義」。若時時去用「必有事」的工夫，而或有時間斷，此便是忘了，即須二勿忘」：時時去用「必有事」的工夫，而或有時欲速求效，此便是助了，郥須「勿助」。其工夫全在「必有事焉」上用：「勿忘、勿助」，只就其間提撕警覺而已。若是工夫原不間斷，郥不須更說「勿忘」：原不欲速求效，即不須更說「勿助」。此其工夫何等明白簡易！何等儷脫自在！今卻不去「必有事」上用工，而乃懸空守著一個「勿忘、勿助」，此正如燒鍋煮飯，鍋內不曾漬水下米，而乃專去添柴放火，不知畢竟煮出個甚麼物來！吾恐火候未及調停，而鍋已先破裂矣。近日，種專在「勿忘、勿助」上用工者，其病正是如此：終日懸空去做個「勿忘」，又懸空去做個「勿助」，奔奔蕩蕩，全無實落下手虛，究一竟工夫，只做得個沉空守寂，學成一個痴騃漢，才遇些子事來，即便牽滯紛擾，不復能經綸宰制。此皆有志之士，而乃使之勞苫纏縛，擔擱一生，皆由學術誤人之故，甚可憫矣！

As for what you asked in your letter, I will reply briefly with one or two points. In recent years, those who lecture on learning in the mountains often say that the work of "neither forgetting nor helping" is very difficult. When I asked them, they said that as soon as one pays attention it is helping, and as soon as one does not pay attention it is forgetting, and so it is very difficult. I asked them: "What is forgotten when you forget? What is helped when you help?" The person fell silent without reply, and then asked for instruction. I told him: in my lectures on learning here I only say "there must be work to be done," and do not say "neither forget nor help." "There must be work to be done" is only to "accumulate righteousness" at all times. If one applies the work of "there must be work to be done" at all times, and at some moment there is a break, that is forgetting, and then one must "not forget"; if one applies the work of "there must be work to be done" at all times, and at some moment wants speed and seeks results, that is helping, and then one must "not help." The work is entirely applied to "there must be work to be done"; "neither forget nor help" is only to rouse and alert oneself in the midst of it. If the work is originally unbroken, there is no need to say "not forget"; if one originally does not want speed or seek results, there is no need to say "not help." How clear and simple this work is! How free and at ease! Now people do not apply effort to "there must be work to be done," but instead hold in the air to "neither forget nor help," which is just like cooking rice in a pot, where one has not put water and rice in the pot but only adds firewood and fire; who knows what would come out of it! I fear that before the fire is even adjusted the pot will crack. The fault of those who recently work only on "neither forgetting nor helping" is precisely this: all day long they hold in the air doing a "not forgetting" and then doing a "not helping," rushing about with no real place to get a grip, and in the end the work only produces sinking into emptiness and keeping stillness, learning to become a dull fool, who as soon as some matter comes up gets caught and tangled in confusion and can no longer manage and govern. These are all men of purpose who are made to toil and be bound, wasting their whole lives, all because learning has misled them; it is truly pitiable!

○夫「必有事焉」只是「集義」，「集義」只是「致良知」。說「集義」則一時末見頭惱，說「致良知」即當下便有實地步可用功；故區區專說「致良知」。隨時就事上致其良知，便是「格物」：著實去致良知，便是「誠意」，著實致其良知，而無一毫意必固我，便是「正心」。著實致真知，則自無忘之病：無一毫意必固我，則自無助之病。故說「格、致、詼、正」，則不必更說個「忘、助」。孟子說「忘、助」，亦就告子得病處立力。告子強制其心，是助的病痛，故孟子專說助長之害。告子助長，亦是他以義為外，不知就自心上「集義」，在「必有事焉」上用功，是以如此。若時時刻刻就自心上「集義」，則良知之體洞然明白，自然是是非非纖毫莫遁，又焉「不得於言，勿求於心；不得於心，勿求於氣」之弊乎？孟子「集義」、「養氣」之說，固大有功於後學，然亦是因病立方，說得大段，不若《大學》「格、致、誠、正」之功，尤極精一簡易，為徹上徹下，萬世無弊者也。

"There must be work to be done" is only "accumulating righteousness," and "accumulating righteousness" is only "extending liangzhi." To say "accumulating righteousness" is not at once to see the main point, while to say "extending liangzhi" gives one solid ground to apply effort right now; so I speak only of "extending liangzhi." To extend one's liangzhi on matters as they arise is "investigating things"; to extend liangzhi earnestly is "making the intention sincere"; to extend liangzhi earnestly with not a hair of presumption, insistence, obstinacy, or ego is "rectifying the mind." If one extends liangzhi earnestly, there will naturally be no fault of forgetting; if there is not a hair of presumption, insistence, obstinacy, or ego, there will naturally be no fault of helping. So when one speaks of "investigating, extending, making sincere, rectifying," there is no need to speak further of "forgetting and helping." When Mencius spoke of "forgetting and helping," he too set out a remedy for Gaozi's illness. Gaozi forced his mind, which is the fault of helping, and so Mencius spoke only of the harm of helping to grow. Gaozi's helping to grow also came from his taking righteousness as external, not knowing to "accumulate righteousness" in his own mind and apply effort on "there must be work to be done," and so he was like this. If one "accumulates righteousness" in one's own mind at every moment, the substance of liangzhi is perfectly clear, and naturally rights and wrongs cannot hide a hair's breadth; then how could there be the fault of "if you fail to get it in words, do not seek it in the mind; if you fail to get it in the mind, do not seek it in the vital energy"? Mencius's teaching on "accumulating righteousness" and "nourishing the vital energy" greatly benefited later learners, but it too is a remedy set out for an illness and spoken in broad terms, not like the work of "investigating, extending, making sincere, rectifying" in the Great Learning, which is supremely refined, unified, simple, and easy, penetrating from top to bottom and without fault for ten thousand ages.

○聖賢論學，多是隨時就事，雖言若人殊，而要其工夫頭腦，若合符節。緣天地之閒，原只有此性，只有此理，只有此良知，只有此一件事耳，故凡就古人論學虛說工夫，更不必攙和兼搭而說，自然無不朏合貫通者，才須攙和兼搭而說，即是自己工夫未明徹也。近時有謂「集義」之功，必須兼搭個「致良知」而後備者，則是「集義」之功尚未了徹也：「集養」之功尚未了徹，適足以為「致良知」之累而已矣。謂「致真知」之功，必須兼搭一個「勿忘、勿助」而後明者，則是「致良知」之功尚未了徹也；「致良知」之功尚未了徹也，適足以為「勿忘、勿助」之累而已矣。若此者，皆是就文義上解釋牽附，以求混融湊泊，而不曾就自己實工夫上體驗，是以論之愈精，而去之愈遠。文蔚之論，其於大本達道既已沛然無疑，至於「致知」「窮理」及「忘、助」等說，時亦有攙和兼搭處，卻是區區所謂康莊大道之中，或時橫斜迂曲者，到得工夫熟後，自將澤然矣。

When the sages and worthies discussed learning, they mostly followed the time and the matter, and though their words seem different in each, the essential point of their work fits together like two halves of a tally. This is because between heaven and earth there is originally only this nature, only this principle, only this liangzhi, only this one matter. So in speaking of the work of the ancients' discussions of learning, there is no need to mix in or add on other things, and naturally everything matches and connects; as soon as one needs to mix in or add on, that is because one's own work is not yet clear and thorough. Recently some say that the work of "accumulating righteousness" must be accompanied by "extending liangzhi" before it is complete; this means the work of "accumulating righteousness" is not yet thorough, and if the work of "accumulating righteousness" is not yet thorough, it will only become a burden to "extending liangzhi." Some say that the work of "extending liangzhi" must be accompanied by "neither forgetting nor helping" before it is clear; this means the work of "extending liangzhi" is not yet thorough, and if the work of "extending liangzhi" is not yet thorough, it will only become a burden to "neither forgetting nor helping." All such views explain and attach on the level of textual meaning, seeking to blend and patch things together, without testing it in one's own real work, so the more refined the discussion, the further it is from the goal. Wenwei's discussion is already without doubt about the great root and the universal Way, but on "extending knowing," "exhausting principle," and "forgetting and helping" and the like, there are sometimes places of mixing and adding, which are what I called sometimes going askew and winding on the broad highway; when the work ripens, they will naturally be gone.

○文蔚謂「致知」之說，求之事親、從兄之閒，挭覺有所持循者，此段最見近來真切篤實之功。但以此自為不妨，自有得力處，以此遂為定說教人，卻未免又有因藥發病之患，亦不可不一講也。蓋良知只是一個天理自然明覺發見處，只是一個真誠惻怛，便是他本體。故致此良知之真誠惻怛以事親便是孝，致此真知之真詼惻怛以從兄健是弟，致此真知之真詼惻怛以事君便是忠，只是一個真知，一個真詼惻怛。若是從兄的良知不能致其真誠惻怛，即是事親的真知不能致其真詼惻怛矣：事君的真知不能致其真詖惻怛，郥是從兄的真知不能致其真誠惻怛矣。故致得事君的真知，便是致卻從兄的真知，致得從兄的真知，便是致卻事親的良知。不是事君的真知不能致，卻須又從事親的良知上去擴充將來。如此，又是脫卻本原，著在支節上求了。真知只是一個，隨他發見流行處，當下具足，更無去來，不須假借。然其發見流行啑，卻自有輕重厚薄，毫髮不容增減者，所謂天然自有之中也。雖則輕重厚薄，毫髮不容增減，而原又只是一個：雖則只是一個，而其間輕重厚薄，又毫髮不容增減：若可得增減，若須假借，即已非其真誠惻坦之本體矣；此良知之妙用，所以無力體，無窮盡，語大天下莫能載，語小天下莫能破者也。

Wenwei says that, as for the theory of "extending knowing," when he seeks it in serving parents and following elder brothers he feels he has something to follow, and this passage shows the earnest and solid work he has done lately. But it is fine to take this for oneself, as it has its own effect; to make it a fixed doctrine for teaching others inevitably brings the harm of medicine causing illness, and this too must be discussed. For liangzhi is only the place where heavenly principle naturally becomes clear and appears, only a genuine sincerity and compassion, and this is its original substance. So to extend the genuine sincerity and compassion of this liangzhi in serving parents is filial piety, to extend the genuine sincerity and compassion of this liangzhi in following elder brothers is fraternal respect, and to extend the genuine sincerity and compassion of this liangzhi in serving the ruler is loyalty; it is only one liangzhi, one genuine sincerity and compassion. If the liangzhi in following elder brothers cannot extend its genuine sincerity and compassion, then the liangzhi in serving parents cannot extend its genuine sincerity and compassion either; if the liangzhi in serving the ruler cannot extend its genuine sincerity and compassion, then the liangzhi in following elder brothers cannot extend its genuine sincerity and compassion either. So to have extended the liangzhi in serving the ruler is to have extended the liangzhi in following elder brothers; to have extended the liangzhi in following elder brothers is to have extended the liangzhi in serving parents. It is not that the liangzhi in serving the ruler cannot be extended and must be expanded from the liangzhi in serving parents. That would again be leaving the original root and seeking in branches and joints. Liangzhi is only one, and wherever it appears and flows it is complete right there, with no coming or going and no need to borrow. Yet in its appearing and flowing there are naturally weights and degrees of thickness that do not allow a hair to be added or subtracted, what is called the naturally existing mean. Though weight and thickness allow no hair added or subtracted, it is still originally only one; though it is only one, within it weight and thickness allow no hair added or subtracted. If it could be added to or subtracted from, or needed borrowing, it would already not be the original substance of genuine sincerity and compassion. This is the wonderful function of liangzhi, which has no fixed direction or form and no end, so that, speaking of the great, nothing in the world can contain it, and speaking of the small, nothing in the world can break it.

○孟氏「堯舜之道，孝弟而已」者，是就人之良知發見得最真切篤厚、不容蔽昧處提省人，於人於事君、處友、仁民、愛物、與凡動靜語默閒，皆只是致他那一念事親、從兄真誠惻怛的良知，即自然無不是道。蓋天下之事雖千變萬化，至於不可窮詰，而但惟致此事親，從兄一念真誠惻怛之良知以應之，則更無有遺缺滲漏者，正謂其只有此一個良知故也。事親、從兄一念良知之外，更無有良知可致得者。故曰：「堯舜之道，孝弟而已矣。」此所以為「惟精惟一」之學，放之四海而皆準，「施諧後世而無朝夕」者也。文蔚云：「欲於事親、從兄之閒，而求所謂良知之學。」就自己用功得力處如此說，亦無不可：若日致其良知之誠惻怛以求盡夫事親，從兄之道焉，亦無不可也。明道云：「行仁自孝、弟始。孝、弟是仁之一事，謂之行仁之本則可，謂是仁之本則不可。」其說是矣。

Mencius's "The Way of Yao and Shun is only filial piety and brotherly respect" was said to alert people to the place where a person's liangzhi appears most genuinely, earnestly, and without room for obscuring: in serving the ruler, dealing with friends, being benevolent to the people, caring for things, and in all motion, stillness, speech, and silence, if one only extends that one thought of genuine sincerity and compassion of liangzhi in serving parents and following elder brothers, then naturally nothing is not the Way. For although the affairs of the world vary ten thousand ways to the point of being inexhaustible, if one only extends this liangzhi of one thought of genuine sincerity and compassion in serving parents and following elder brothers to meet them, then there is nothing left out or leaking, precisely because there is only this one liangzhi. Apart from the one thought of liangzhi in serving parents and following elder brothers, there is no other liangzhi to extend. So it is said: "The Way of Yao and Shun is only filial piety and brotherly respect." This is what makes it the learning of "only refinement, only unity," which spreads to the four seas and is valid everywhere, "applied to later ages and never failing morning or evening." Wenwei said: "I wish to seek the so-called learning of liangzhi in serving parents and following elder brothers." To say this about where one applies effort and gains strength is acceptable; to say that one extends the genuine sincerity and compassion of liangzhi to fulfill the way of serving parents and following elder brothers is also acceptable. Mingdao said: "Practicing benevolence begins from filial piety and brotherly respect. Filial piety and brotherly respect are one matter of benevolence; to call them the root of practicing benevolence is acceptable, but to call them the root of benevolence is not." His statement is right.

○「億、逆、先覺」之說，文蘭謂「誠則旁行曲防，皆良知之用」，甚善甚善！閒有攙搭處，則前已言之矣。惟浚之言，亦未為不是。在文蔚須有取於惟浚之言而後盡，在惟浚又須有取於文蔚之言而後明：不然，則亦未免各有倚著之病也。舜察邇言而詢芻堯，非是以邇言當察，芻堯當詢，而後如此，乃良知之發見流行，光明圓瑩，更無罣礙遮隔處，此所以謂之大知；才有執著意必，其知便小矣。講學中自有去取分辨，然就心地上著實用工夫，卻須如此方是。

On the theory of "presuming, anticipating, and being aware beforehand," Wenwei said that "with sincerity, indirect action and guarded preparation are all the function of liangzhi," which is very good, very good! Where there is some mixing and adding, I have already spoken of it above. Junyi's words are also not wrong. Wenwei should take something from Junyi's words to be complete, and Junyi should take something from Wenwei's words to be clear; otherwise each has the fault of leaning on one side. Shun examined plain words and consulted grass-cutters and firewood-gatherers; it was not that he took plain words as worth examining and grass-cutters as worth consulting and therefore did so, but that the appearing and flowing of liangzhi was bright and perfectly clear, with no hindrance or barrier; this is what is called great knowing, and as soon as there is clinging, presumption, or obstinacy, one's knowing becomes small. In discussing learning there is naturally selection and distinction, but in applying real effort on the ground of the mind, one must be like this.

○「盡心」三節，區區曾有「生知、學知、困知」之說，頗已明白，無可疑者。蓋盡心、知性、知天者，不必說存心、養性，事天不必說殀壽不貳、修身以俟，而存心、養悾與修身以俟之功已在其中矣：存心、養性、事天者，雖未到得盡心、知天的地位，然已是在那裡做個求到盡心、知天的工夫，更不必說殀壽不貳，修身以俟，而殀壽不貳，修身己俟之功已在其中矣。譬之行路，盡心、知天者，如年力壯健之人，既能奔走往來於數千裡之間者也：存心、事天者，如童樨之年，使之學習步趨於庭除之間者也。殀壽不貳、修身以俟者，如襁褓之孩，方便之扶穡傍壁，而慚學起立移步者也。既已能奔走往來於數千裡之間者，則不必更使之於庭除之間而學步趨，而步趨於硅除之間，自無弗能矣。既已能步趨於庭除之間，則不必更使之扶牆傍壁而學起立移步，而起立栘步自無弗能矣。然學起立移步，便是學步趨庭除之始，學步趨啀除，便是學奔走往來於數千裡之基，固非有二事，但其工夫之難易則相去懸絕矣。心也，性也，天也，一也。故及其知之成功則一。然而三者人品力量，自有階級，不可躐等而能也。細觀文蘭之論，其意以恐盡心、知天者，廢卻存心、修身之功，而反為盡心、知天之病：是蓋為聖人憂工夫之或間斷，而不知為自己憂工夬之未真切也。吾躋用工，卻須專心致志，在殀壽不貳、修身以俟上做，只此便是做盡心、知天工夫之始：正如學期起立移步，便是學奔走千里之始。吾方自慮其不能起立移步，而豈遽其不能奔走千里，又況為奔走千里者而慮其或遺忘於赸立移步之習哉？文蔚識見本自超絕邁往，而所論云然者，亦是未能脫去舊時解說文羕之習，是為此三段書分疏比臺，以求融會貫通，而自添許多薏見纏繞，反使用功不專一也；

On the three sections of "exhausting the mind," I once spoke of "knowing by birth, knowing by learning, knowing through hardship," and it is already quite clear, with nothing to doubt. For one who exhausts his mind, knows his nature, and knows Heaven, there is no need to speak of preserving the mind, nourishing nature, and serving Heaven, nor to speak of not wavering over short or long life and cultivating oneself to await it, since the work of preserving the mind, nourishing nature, and cultivating oneself to await is already within it. One who preserves the mind, nourishes nature, and serves Heaven, though not yet at the position of exhausting the mind and knowing Heaven, is already doing the work of seeking to reach the exhausting of the mind and knowing of Heaven, so there is no need to speak of not wavering over short or long life and cultivating oneself to await, since that work is already within it. It is like walking a road: one who exhausts the mind and knows Heaven is like a person in the strength of his years who can already run to and fro across thousands of li; one who preserves the mind and serves Heaven is like a child of tender years who is taught to practice walking in the courtyard; one who does not waver over short or long life and cultivates himself to await is like an infant in swaddling clothes who is just made to hold the wall and learn to stand and move his feet. One who can already run to and fro across thousands of li need not be made to learn walking in the courtyard, and walking in the courtyard he will certainly be able to do. One who can already walk in the courtyard need not be made to hold the wall and learn to stand and move his feet, and standing and moving his feet he will certainly be able to do. Yet learning to stand and move one's feet is the beginning of learning to walk in the courtyard, and learning to walk in the courtyard is the foundation of learning to run across thousands of li, so they are not two matters, but the difficulty of the work differs vastly. Mind, nature, and Heaven are one. So when their knowing succeeds, it is one. But the abilities and strength of the three kinds of persons have their own levels and cannot be skipped. Looking closely at Wenwei's discussion, his intent seems to fear that those who exhaust the mind and know Heaven would abandon the work of preserving the mind and cultivating the self, which would become the fault of exhausting the mind and knowing Heaven: this is worrying on behalf of the sages that the work might be broken off, and not knowing to worry for oneself that one's own work is not yet genuine. In our own work, we must be single-minded, applying ourselves to not wavering over short or long life and cultivating the self to await; this alone is the beginning of the work of exhausting the mind and knowing Heaven, just as learning to stand and move one's feet is the beginning of learning to run a thousand li. I am worrying that I cannot yet stand and move my feet; how could I abruptly worry that I cannot run a thousand li, and still more, for one running a thousand li, worry that he might forget the practice of standing and moving his feet? Wenwei's insight is originally outstanding and forward-going, but that he discusses in this way is because he has not yet shed the old habit of explaining textual meaning, and so he is dividing and comparing these three passages in order to blend and connect them, adding many views that tangle him and in fact make his effort less single-minded.

近時懸空去做勿忘、勿助者，其意見正有此病，最能擔誤人，不可不滌除耳。

(The Master continued:) The view of those who recently work in the air on neither forgetting nor helping has exactly this fault, which can mislead people the most and must be washed away.

○所謂「兼德性而道問學」一節至當歸一，更無可疑。此便是文蔚曾著實用功，然後能為此言。此本不是險僻難見的道理，人或意見不同者，還是良知尚有纖翳潛伏，若除去此纖翳，即自無不洞然矣。

The section on "honoring the moral nature and following the path of inquiry and study" comes down to one without any doubt. This is because Wenwei has applied genuine effort and could therefore say it. This is not a dangerous, remote, or hard-to-see principle. If people hold different views, it is that liangzhi still has some slight shade lurking in it; if this slight shade is removed, then everything will naturally be perfectly clear.

○已作書後，移臥薝閒，偶遇無事，遂復答此文蔚之學既已得其大者，此等處久當釋然自解，本不必屑屑如此分疏：但承相愛之厚，千里差人遠及，諄諄下問，而竟虛來意，又自不能已於言也。然直憨煩縷已甚，恃在信愛，當不為罪，惟浚處及謙之崇一處，各得轉錄一通寄視之，尤承一體之好也。

After writing the letter, I moved to lie under the eaves, and happening to be free of affairs, I answered this as well. Wenwei's learning has already grasped the great things, and such points will in time resolve themselves; there is originally no need to analyze them so minutely. But since I received your deep affection, and you sent a man a thousand li to ask repeatedly, to leave your intent unanswered I could not help but speak. But my frankness and simplicity have become very tedious, though relying on your trust and affection, I hope it is not an offense. Please let a copy be transcribed and sent to Junyi, and to Qianzhi and Chongyi, which will show our oneness of friendship.

○古之教者，教以人倫：後世記誦詞章之習超，而先王之教亡。今教童子，惟當以孝弟忠信禮義廉恥為專務；其栽培涵養之方，則宜誘之歌詩以發其志意，導之習禮以肅其威儀，諷之讀書以開其知覺。今人往往以歌詩、習禮為不切時務，此皆末俗庸鄙之見，烏足以知古人立教之意哉！大抵童子之情，樂嬉遊而憚拘檢，如草木之始萌芽，舒暢之則利達，摧撓之則衰痿。今教童子必使其趨向鼓舞，中心喜悅，則其進自不能已：譬之時雨春風，沾被卉木，莫不萌動狻赸，自然日長月化：若冰霜剝落，則生意蕭索，日就枯槁矣：故凡誘之歌詩者，非但發其志意而已，亦所以洩其跳號呼嘯於詠歌，宣其幽抑結滯於音節也：導之習禮者，非但肅其威儀而已，亦所以周旋揖讓而動盪其血脈，拜起屈伸而固束其筋骸也：諷之讀書者，非但開其知覺而已，亦所以沉潛反覆而存其心，抑揚諷誦以宣其志也：凡此皆所以順導其志意，調理其性情，潛消其鄙吝，默化其廘頑，日使之漸於禮義而不苦其難，人於中和而不知其故，是蓋先王立教之微意也；若近世之訓蒙摨者，日惟督以句讀課仿，責其檢束而不知導之以禮，求其聰明而不知養之以善，鞭撻繩縛，若待拘囚；彼視學舍如囹獄而不肯入，視師長如寇仇而不欲見，窺避掩覆以遂其嬉遊，設詐飾洈以肆其頑鄙，偷薄庸劣，日趨下流。是蓋驅之於惡而求其為善也，何可得乎！凡吾所以教，其意實在於此。恐時俗不察，視以為迂，且吾亦將去，故特叮嚀以告。爾諸教讀其務體吾意，永以為訓，毋輒因時俗之言，妀廢其繩墨，庶成「蒙以養正」之功矣，念之念之！

In ancient times, teaching meant teaching the human relationships. In later ages the habit of memorizing and reciting and of ornate composition arose, and the teaching of the former kings was lost. Now, in teaching children, we should concentrate solely on filial piety, fraternal duty, loyalty, good faith, propriety, righteousness, integrity and a sense of shame. As for the way of nurturing and cultivating them, one should draw them out by songs and poems to stir their aims and thoughts, guide them to practice ritual to dignify their bearing, and lead them to read books to open their awareness. People today often regard singing poems and practicing ritual as irrelevant to present needs; these are all the shallow and vulgar views of a degenerate age, and how could they understand the meaning of the ancients in setting up teaching! In general, children by nature love play and dislike restraint, like plants that have just begun to sprout: if allowed to stretch out freely they flourish, and if crushed and bent they wither. Now in teaching children one must make them inclined and inspired, delighted in their hearts, and then their progress will be unstoppable. It is like seasonal rain and spring wind that moistens the plants, so that all of them stir and burst forth and naturally grow day by day and month by month; if frost and ice strip them, their life withers and day by day they dry out. So when we draw children out by singing poems, it is not only to stir their aims and thoughts but also to release their leaping and shouting into chanting and to let out their pent-up gloom through rhythm and sound. When we guide them to practice ritual, it is not only to dignify their bearing but also to set their blood circulating through bowing and yielding and to firm their sinews and bones through kneeling, rising, bending and stretching. When we lead them to read books, it is not only to open their awareness but also to let them sink in, return to it repeatedly and so preserve their minds, and to let them release their will by intoning with rise and fall. All this follows and guides their aims, regulates their temperaments, quietly dissolves their meanness, and silently transforms their roughness and stubbornness, so that day by day they gradually become used to propriety and righteousness without finding it hard, and enter into balance and harmony without knowing why. This is the subtle intention of the former kings in setting up teaching. As for the way children are taught in recent times, they are supervised daily only on punctuation and copying models, scolded for lack of restraint without being guided by ritual, expected to be clever without being nurtured in goodness, whipped and bound as though treated like prisoners. They look on the school as a jail and refuse to enter, look on teachers as enemies and do not wish to see them, peek around and hide to indulge in play, use deceit and trickery to give rein to their stubbornness and meanness, and grow sneaky and inferior, sinking lower each day. This drives them into evil while hoping that they become good; how could that be possible! My intention in teaching lies entirely here. I fear that the customs of the age will not take notice and will regard it as impractical, and since I am about to leave, I have taken special care to tell you in detail. You teachers must grasp my intention, take it as a perpetual guide, and never change or abandon its rules because of common talk, so that you may achieve the effect of 'nurturing rectitude in the young.' Think of it, think of it!

○每日清晨，諸生參揖畢，教讀以次偏詢諧生：在家所以愛親敬畏之心，得無懈忽未能填切否？溫清定省之儀，得無虧缺未能實賤否？往來街衢步趨禮節，得無放蕩未能謹飭否？一應言行心術，得無欺妄非僻未能忠信篤敬否？諸童子務要各以實對，有則改之，無則加勉；教讀復隨時就事，曲加誨諭開發，然後各退就席肄業。

Every morning, after the students have finished bowing in greeting, the teacher goes through and asks each one in turn: In your home, has your heart of loving your parents and respecting your elders become lax or negligent, not yet sincere and true? Have the rituals of keeping them warm and cool and of inquiring after them been neglected, not yet put into practice? When going back and forth on the streets, has your walking and ritual manner become loose and dissolute, not yet careful and proper? In all your words, deeds and intentions, have you been deceitful, false, crooked or perverse, not yet loyal, truthful, steadfast and respectful? The children must each answer truthfully: if there is a fault, correct it; if not, strive further. The teacher then, as occasion arises, gives detailed instruction and enlightenment, and afterward they return to their seats to continue their studies.

○凡歌詩須要整容定氣，清朗其聲音，均審其筇調，毋躁而急，毋蕩而囂，毋餒而懾；久則精神宣暢，心氣和平矣。每學量童生多寡分為四班。每日輪一班歌詩，其餘皆就席斂容肅聽；每五日則總四班遞歌於本學。每朔望集各學會歌於書院。

In singing poems, one must compose the face and steady the breath, make the voice clear and bright, and make the rhythm and tune even and measured, neither hurried and impatient, nor loose and noisy, nor timid and cowering. Over time the spirit becomes open and flowing, and the mind and breath become calm and harmonious. In each school, divide the children into four groups according to their number. Each day one group takes turns singing, while the others return to their seats with composed faces and listen quietly. Every five days all four groups sing in turn at the school. On the first and fifteenth of each month, all the schools gather to sing together at the academy.

○凡習禮需要澄心肅慮，審其儀節，度其容止，毋忽而惰，毋沮而怍，毋徑而野，從容而不失之迂緩，修謹而不矢之拘局。久則禮貌習熟，德性堅定矣。童生班次皆如歌詩。每閒一日則輪一班習禮，其餘皆就席斂容肅觀。習禮之日，免其課仿。每十日則總四班遞習於本學。每朔望則集各學會習於書院。

In practicing ritual, one must clear the mind and be solemn in thought, attend to the forms of the rites, and measure one's bearing and deportment, neither neglectful and lazy, nor dispirited and ashamed, nor hasty and rustic; be composed without falling into slowness and pedantry, and careful without falling into stiffness and narrowness. Over time the courtesies become familiar and the virtuous nature firm. The groups of children are the same as for singing. Every other day, one group takes a turn practicing ritual, while the others return to their seats with composed faces and observe solemnly. On ritual days they are excused from copying exercises. Every ten days all four groups practice in turn at the school. On the first and fifteenth of each month, all the schools gather to practice at the academy.

○凡授書不在徒多，但貴精熟，量其資稟，能二百字者止可挼以一百字，常使精神力量有餘，則無厭苦之患，而有自得之美。諷諵之際；務令專心一志，口誦心惟，字字句句紬繹反覆，抑揚其音節，寬虛其心意，久則義禮浹洽，聰明日開矣。

In teaching books, the point is not to give a great deal but to make it thorough and familiar. Weigh each child's endowment: one who could manage two hundred characters should be given only one hundred, so that his spirit and strength always have something to spare. Then he will not suffer from weariness and bitterness and will enjoy the beauty of finding it himself. When reciting, make sure they concentrate with a single mind, recite with the mouth while thinking with the heart, turning over every word and sentence again and again, giving rhythm and rise and fall to the sounds, and keeping the mind relaxed and open. Over time the meaning and principle will permeate them, and their intelligence will open day by day.

○每日工夫，先考德，次背書誦書，次習禮或作課仿，次複誦書講書，次歌詩。凡習禮歌詩之數，皆所以常存童子之心，使其樂習不倦，而無瑕及於邪僻。教者如此，則知所施矣。雖然，此其大略也；神而明之，則存乎其人。

The daily order of work is: first examine virtue, then recite from memory and recite books, then practice ritual or do copying exercises, then recite again and explain books, and finally sing poems. The amount of ritual practice and singing all serves to keep the children's hearts constantly alive, so that they enjoy learning without tiring and have no leisure for evil or perverse things. If teachers do it this way, they will know what to apply. Even so, this is only the outline; to make it spiritual and bright depends on the person.

○正德乙亥，九川初見先生於龍江。先生與甘泉先生論「格物」之說。甘泉持舊說。先生日；「是求之於外了，」甘泉曰：「若以格物理為外，是自小其心也。」九川甚喜舊說之是。先生又論「盡心」一章，九川一聞卻遂無疑。後家居，復以「格物」遺質。先生答云：「但能賈地用功，入當自釋。」山閒方自錄《大學》舊本讀之，覺朱子「格物」之說非是：然亦疑先生以意之所在為物，物字未明。巳卯歸自京師，再見先生於洪都。先生兵務倥傯，乘隙講授，首問：「近年用功何如？」九川曰：「近年體驗得『明明德』功夫只是『誠意』。自『明明德於天下』，步步推入根源，到『誠意』上再去不得，如何以前又有『格致』工夫？後又體驗，覺得意之誠撝必先知覺乃可，以顏子『有不善未嘗不知，知之未嘗復行』為證，豁然若無疑：卻又多了『格物』工夫。又思來吾心之靈何有不知意之善惡？只是物慾蔽了：須格去物慾，始能如顏子未嘗不知耳。又自疑功夫顛倒，與『誠意』不成片段。後問希顏。希顏曰：『先生謂挌物致知是誠意功夫，極好。』九川曰：如何是誠意功夫？二希顏令再思體看。九川終不悟，請問。」先生曰：「惜哉！此可一言而悟，惟浚所舉顏子事便是了。只要知身、心、意、知、物是一件。」九川疑曰：「物在外，如何與身、心、意、知是一件？」先生曰：「耳、目、口、鼻、四肢，身也，非心安能視、聽、言、動？心欲視、聽、言、動，無耳、目、口、鼻、四肢亦不能。故無心則無身，無身則無心。但指其充塞處言之謂之身，指其主宰處言之謂之心，指心之發動處謂之意，指意之靈明處謂之知，指意之涉著處謂之物，只是一件。意未有懸空的，必著事物，故欲誠意，則隨意所在某事而挌之，去其人慾而歸於理，則良知之在此事者，無蔽而得致矣。此便是誠意的功夫。

In the yihai year of Zhengde, Jiuchuan first met the Master at Longjiang. The Master was discussing the theory of 'investigating things' with Master Ganquan. Ganquan held to the old explanation. The Master said, "This is seeking it outside." Ganquan said, "If investigating the principle of things is called external, that is belittling one's own mind." Jiuchuan was greatly pleased that the old explanation seemed right. The Master then discussed the chapter on 'exhausting the mind,' and as soon as Jiuchuan heard it he had no doubt. Later, at home, he again went to ask about 'investigating things.' The Master answered, "If you can only apply effort in practice, in time it will resolve itself." In the mountains Jiuchuan transcribed the old text of the Great Learning and read it, and felt that Master Zhu's theory of 'investigating things' was not right; yet he also doubted that the Master took 'the place where the intention rests' to be a 'thing,' since the word 'thing' was not clear. In the jimao year he returned from the capital and saw the Master again at Hongdu. The Master was pressed with military affairs but gave instruction in spare moments. He first asked, "How have you applied effort in recent years?" Jiuchuan said, "In recent years I have realized by experience that the effort of 'illuminating illustrious virtue' is simply 'making the intention sincere.' From 'illuminating illustrious virtue throughout the world,' pushing step by step to the source, one cannot go further than 'making the intention sincere,' so why did there have to be the earlier effort of 'investigating things and extending knowledge'? Later I experienced that whether the intention is sincere or false depends first on awareness, and taking as evidence Yan Zi's 'when he had something not good he never failed to know it, and having known it he never did it again,' I suddenly felt without doubt; but then the effort of 'investigating things' was extra again. I further thought: how could the spirit of my mind not know whether intentions are good or evil? It is only that material desires cover it, so one must investigate away material desires before one can, like Yan Zi, never fail to know. Then I doubted that my effort was upside down and did not form a whole with 'making the intention sincere.' Later I asked Xiyan. Xiyan said, 'The Master says that investigating things and extending knowledge is the effort of making the intention sincere, which is excellent.' I said, 'What is the effort of making the intention sincere?' Xiyan told me to think and experience it again. In the end Jiuchuan did not understand, and asked." The Master said, "What a pity! This can be understood in one sentence. What Junhe cited about Yan Zi is just it. You only need to know that body, mind, intention, knowledge and thing are one." Jiuchuan doubted and said, "Things are outside; how can they be one with body, mind, intention and knowledge?" The Master said, "The ears, eyes, mouth, nose and four limbs are the body, but without the mind how could they see, hear, speak or move? The mind wishes to see, hear, speak and move, but without ears, eyes, mouth, nose and four limbs it also cannot. So without the mind there is no body, and without the body there is no mind. Speaking of its filling out, it is called the body; speaking of its governing, it is called the mind; speaking of the mind's stirring, it is called the intention; speaking of the intention's spiritual clarity, it is called knowledge; speaking of what the intention touches, it is called a thing. It is only one. The intention is never suspended in the void; it must rest on an affair or thing. So if you want to make the intention sincere, then wherever the intention rests, in some affair, you investigate it, remove the human desire and return to principle, and then the innate knowing in this affair is unobstructed and can be extended. This is the effort of making the intention sincere.

」九川乃釋然破數年之疑。又問：「甘泉近亦信用《大學》古本，謂『格物』猶言『造道』，又謂窮如窮其巢穴之窮，以身至之也，故格物亦只是隨處醴認天理：似與先生之說漸同。」先生曰：「甘泉用功，所以轉得來。當時與說「親民」字不須改，他亦不信今論『格物」亦近但不須換物字作理字，只還他一物字便是。」後有人問九川曰：「今何不疑物字？」曰：《中庸》曰：『不誠無物。』程子曰：『物來順應』又如『物各付物氣胸中無物』之類皆古人常用字也。」他日先生亦云然。

(Jiuchuan continued the record:) Jiuchuan then felt relieved, and the doubts of several years were broken. He asked further, "Ganquan has recently also come to trust the old text of the Great Learning, saying that 'investigating things' is like 'reaching the Way,' and that 'exhausting' is like exhausting a nest, reaching it in person, so that investigating things is also just recognizing heavenly principle everywhere. This seems gradually to agree with the Master's theory." The Master said, "Ganquan applies effort, so he could turn around. At the time I told him that the word 'loving the people' did not need changing, and he did not believe it either. Now his discussion of 'investigating things' is close too, but he need not change the word 'thing' to 'principle'; just give back the word 'thing' to it." Later someone asked Jiuchuan, "Why do you no longer doubt the word 'thing'?" He said, "The Doctrine of the Mean says 'without sincerity there would be nothing' (wu), Master Cheng says 'respond to things as they come,' and also 'let each thing be assigned to its thing' and 'no thing in the heart,' and so on. These are all words the ancients commonly used." On another day the Master said the same.

○九川問：「近年因厭氾濫之學，每要靜坐，求屏息念慮，非惟不能，愈覺擾擾，如何？」先生曰：「念如何可息？只是要正。」曰：「當自有無念時否？」先生曰：「實無無念時。」曰：「如此卻如何言靜？」曰：「靜未嘗不動，動未嘗不靜。戌謹恐懼即是念，何分動靜。」曰：「周子何以言「定之以中正，仁而主靜？』」曰：「無慾故靜，是「靜亦定，動亦定』的定字，主其本體也；戒懼之念，是活潑潑地，此是天機不息處，所謂『維天之命，於穆不已。』一息便是死，非本體之念郥是私念。」

Jiuchuan asked, "In recent years, tired of scattered learning, I have often tried to sit in quiet, seeking to stop my breath and thoughts, but not only could I not do it, I felt more disturbed. What should I do?" The Master said, "How can thoughts be stopped? They only need to be right." He asked, "Should there be times when there is no thought?" The Master said, "In truth there is no time without thought." He asked, "If so, how can one speak of stillness?" He said, "Stillness is never without movement, and movement is never without stillness. Being cautious and apprehensive is itself thought, so why divide movement and stillness?" He asked, "Why did Master Zhou say 'settle it with the mean, rectitude, benevolence and righteousness, and emphasize stillness'?" He said, "Without desire there is stillness. It is the 'settling' of 'still is settled, moving is also settled,' which makes the original substance the master. The thought of caution and apprehension is lively and quick, the place where Heaven's mechanism does not cease, what is called 'the mandate of Heaven, how profound, never ceasing.' A single cessation is death. Any thought that is not the original substance is a selfish thought."

○又問：「用功收心時，有聲、色在前，如常聞、見，恐不是專一。」曰：「如何欲不聞、見？除是槁木死灰，耳聾、目盲則可。只是雖聞、見而不流去便是。」曰：「昔有人靜坐，其子隔壁讀書，不知其勤惰。程子稱其甚敬。何如？」曰：「伊川恐亦是譏地。」

He asked further, "When applying effort to gather the mind, if sounds and sights are before me and I hear and see them as usual, I fear this is not single-minded." The Master said, "How could one wish not to hear or see? Only if one were a withered tree and dead ashes, deaf and blind. It is enough that even though one hears and sees, one is not carried away." He asked, "Formerly there was a man who sat in quiet while his son read books in the next room, and he did not know whether the son was diligent or lazy. Master Cheng praised him as very reverent. What of this?" The Master said, "I suspect Yichuan was also mocking him."

○又問：「靜坐用功，頗覺此心收斂；遇事又斷了，旋起個念頭去事上省察：事過又尋舊功，還覺有內外，打不作一片。」先生曰：「此『格物』之說未透。心何嘗有內外？即如惟僣今在此講論，又豈有一心在內照管？這聽講說時專敬，即是那靜坐時心。功夫一貫，何須更起念頭？人須在事上磨練做功夫乃有益：若只好靜，遇事便亂，終無長進。那靜時功夫亦差似收斂，而實放溺也。」後在洪都，復與於中國裳論內外之說，渠皆雲物自有內外，但要內外並著功夫，不可有閒耳，以篔先生。曰：「功夫不離本體，本體原無內外：只為後來做功夫的分了內外，先其本體了，如今正要講明功夫不要有內外，乃是本體功夫：」是日俱有省。

He asked further, "When I sit in quiet and apply effort, I feel my mind quite gathered, but when something comes up it is broken off, and I then raise a thought to examine myself in the matter; once the matter has passed I look for the old effort again, and still feel an inside and an outside that do not form one piece." The Master said, "This is because the theory of 'investigating things' is not yet clear to you. How has the mind ever had an inside and outside? Take Junhe here now, discussing with me: is there some other mind inside looking after it? Your concentrated reverence when listening to a lecture is the same mind as when sitting in quiet. The effort is one thread, so why raise another thought? One must polish and apply effort in affairs to benefit. If one only likes quiet and becomes confused when something comes up, one will never make progress. That effort in quiet seems like gathering in, but really it is indulging and sinking." Later at Hongdu, he again discussed the question of inside and outside with Yuzhong and Guoshang, and they both said that things have their own inside and outside, but that one must apply effort to both without interruption, and brought this to ask the Master. The Master said, "Effort does not leave the original substance, and the original substance has no inside or outside. It is only because those who later applied effort divided inside and outside that the original substance was lost. Now we must explain that effort does not have inside and outside; that is effort of the original substance." That day they all had an insight.

○又問：「陸子之學何加？」先生曰；「濂溪、明道之後，還是象山：只是粗些。」九川曰：「看他論學，篇篇說出骨髓，句句似針膏肓，卻不見他粗。」先生曰：「然尥心上用過功夫，與揣摹依仿、求之文義自不同，但細看有粗扈。用功久，當見之。」

He asked further, "How about the learning of Master Lu?" The Master said, "After Lianxi and Mingdao, there is Xiangshan, only a bit rough." Jiuchuan said, "Looking at his discussions of learning, every essay speaks to the marrow and every sentence is like a needle to the vital spot; I do not see him as rough." The Master said, "He did apply effort to the mind, and so differs from those who imitate and seek in the meaning of the text, but looking closely, there are rough spots. With long effort you will see it."

○庚辰往虔州再見先生，問：「近來功夫雖若稍知頭惱，然難尋個穩當快樂扈。」先生曰：「爾卻去心上尋個天理，此正所謂理障。此閒有個訣竅。」曰：「請問如何？」曰：「只是致知。」曰：「如何致知。」曰：「爾那一點良知，是爾自家底準則。爾意念著扈，他是便知是，非便知非，更瞞地一些不得。爾只不要欺他，實實落落依著他做去，善便存，惡便去，他這裡何等穩當快樂；此便是『格物』的真訣，『致知』的實功。若不靠著這些真飢，如何去格物？我亦近年體貼出來如此分明，初猶疑只依尥恐有不足，精細看，無些小欠闕。」

In the gengchen year, I went to Qianzhou and saw the Master again. I asked, "Recently my effort seems to know the main point a little, but it is hard to find a stable and joyful place." The Master said, "You are going to look for heavenly principle in the mind; this is exactly what is called an obstruction of principle. There is a trick here." I asked, "Please tell me what it is." He said, "It is just extending innate knowing." I asked, "How do I extend knowing?" He said, "That bit of innate knowing of yours is your own standard. Where your intention rests, it knows right as right and wrong as wrong, and you cannot hide anything from it. Only do not deceive it; follow it honestly and act. Preserve the good and remove the evil, and how stable and joyful this is! This is the true key of 'investigating things' and the real effort of 'extending knowledge.' If you do not rely on this true mechanism, how can you investigate things? I too have recently come to realize it so clearly. At first I doubted that relying on it alone might not be enough, but looking closely, there is not the slightest lack."

○在虔與於中謙之同侍。先生曰：「人胸中各有個聖人，只自信不及，都自埋倒了。」因顧於中曰：「爾胸中原是聖人。」於中起不敢當。先生曰：「此是爾自家有的，如何要推？」於中又曰：「不敢。」先生曰：「眾人皆有之，況在於中，卻何故謙起來？謙亦不得；」於中乃笑受。又論「良知在人，隨你如何不能泯滅，雖盜賊亦自知不當為盜，喚尥怍娀，地還忸怩；」於中曰：「只是物慾遮蔽：良心在內，自不會失，如雲自蔽日，口何嘗矢了；」先生曰：「於中如此聰明，地人見不及此。」

In Qian, I was attending together with Yuzhong and Qianzhi. The Master said, "Everyone has a sage in their breast but does not trust it enough and buries it. Turning to Yuzhong he said, "In your breast there is originally a sage." Yuzhong rose and said he dared not accept it. The Master said, "This is what you yourself have; why push it away?" Yuzhong said again, "I dare not." The Master said, "All people have it, how much more Yuzhong; why be modest? Modesty will not do." Yuzhong then smiled and accepted. The Master also said, "Innate knowing in people cannot be wiped out however you try. Even a robber knows he should not rob, and if you call him a thief he still feels uneasy." Yuzhong said, "It is only that material desires cover it. The conscience is within and is never lost, like clouds covering the sun, when the sun has never been lost." The Master said, "Yuzhong is this intelligent; others cannot see this far."

○先生曰：「這些子看得透徹，隨他千言萬語是非誠偽，到前便明，合得的便是，臺不得的便非，如佛家說『心印』相似，真是個試金石，指南針。」

The Master said, "If you see this clearly, then whatever the thousand words and ten thousand matters of right and wrong, sincere and false, as soon as they come before you they are clear: what fits is right and what does not fit is wrong. It is like what the Buddhists call the 'mind seal,' truly a touchstone and a compass."

○先生曰：「人若知章良心訣竅，隨他多少邪思枉念，這裡一覺，都自消融；真個是靈丹一粒，點鐵成金。」

The Master said, "If a person knows this key of conscience, however many evil thoughts and false notions there are, once awakened here they all melt away by themselves. It is truly a single pellet of elixir, turning iron into gold."

○崇一曰：「先生『致知』之旨發盡精縊，看來這裡再去不得。」先生曰：「何言之易也上再用功半年看如何，又用功一年看如何。功夫愈久，愈覺不同，此難口說。」

Ouyang Chongyi said, "The Master's teaching on 'extending knowledge' has drawn out its subtlest meaning, and it seems one cannot go further." The Master said, "How easily you say that! Apply effort for another half year and see, then another year and see. The longer the effort, the more different it feels, and this is hard to express in words."

○先生問：「九川於『致知』之說體驗如何？」九川曰：「自覺不同：往時操持常不得個恰好處，此乃是恰好處。」先生曰：「可知是體來與聽講不同。我初與講時，知爾只是忽易，未有滋味；只這個要妙再體到深處，日見不同，是無窮盡的。」又曰：「此『致知』二字，真是個千古聖傳之秘，見到一逼裡，『百世以俟聖人而不惑』。」

The Master asked, "Jiuchuan, how has your experience of the doctrine of 'extending knowledge' been?" Jiuchuan said, "I feel it is different. In the past my grip never found the right spot, and this is the right spot." The Master said, "Of course experiencing it differs from hearing a lecture. When I first told you, I knew you only treated it lightly and found no flavor in it. If you take this key point and experience it to greater depth, you will find it different day by day, without end." He added, "These two words, 'extending knowledge,' are truly the secret transmitted by the sages through the ages. If you see to this point, then 'waiting a hundred generations for a sage, you are not in doubt.'"

○九川問曰：「伊川說到體用一原、顯微無間處，門人已說是洩天穖：先生『致知』之說，莫亦洩天撥太甚否？」先生曰：「聖人已指以示人，只為後人揜匿，我發明耳，何故說洩？此是人人自有的，覺來甚不打緊一般，然與不用實功人說，亦甚輕忽，可惜彼此無益；無實用功而不得其要者，提撕之甚沛然得力。」

Jiuchuan asked, "When Yichuan spoke of substance and function having one source and the manifest and subtle having no gap, his disciples already said he was leaking Heaven's secret. Does the Master's doctrine of 'extending knowledge' not leak Heaven's secret too much?" The Master said, "The sages have already pointed this out to people, and it was only hidden by later people; I merely bring it to light. Why call it leaking? This is something everyone has, and when one realizes it, it seems ordinary and not very important. Yet if I say it to someone who does not apply real effort, it is also treated lightly, which is a pity and no benefit to either side. But for one who applies real effort and has not grasped the key, pulling him up gives him abundant strength."

○又曰：「知來本無知，覺來本無覺，然不知則遂淪埋。」

He added, "Knowing, when it comes, is originally without knowing; awareness, when it comes, is originally without awareness. Yet if one does not know it, one sinks and is buried."

○先生曰：「大凡朋友須箴規指摘處少，誘掖獎勸意多，方是。」後又戒九川云：「與朋友論學，須委曲謙下，寬以居之。」

The Master said, "In general, among friends there should be few places of admonition and criticism, and more intention of drawing out, helping and encouraging; that is right." Later he cautioned Jiuchuan, "When discussing learning with friends, you must be accommodating and humble, and dwell in generosity."

○九川臥病虔州。先生云：「病物亦難格，覺得如何？」對曰：「功夫甚難。」先生曰：「常快活便是功夫。」

Jiuchuan lay ill in Qianzhou. The Master said, "It is also hard to investigate illness as a thing. How does it feel?" He answered, "The effort is very hard." The Master said, "To be constantly joyful is the effort."

○九川問：「自省念慮，或涉邪妄，或預料理天下事，思到極處，井井有味，便繾綣難屏，覺得早則易覺遲則難，用力克治，愈覺扞格，惟稍遷念他事，則隨兩忘。如此廓清，亦似無害。」先生曰：「何須如此，只要在良知上著功夫。」九川曰：「正謂那一時不知。」先生曰：「我這裹自有功夫，何緣得他來：只為爾功夫斷了，便蔽其知。既斷了，則纆續舊功便是，何必如此？」九川曰：「直是難鏖，雖知丟他不去。」先生曰：「須是勇；用功久，自有勇。故曰『是集義所生者；』勝得容易，便是大賈。」

Jiuchuan asked, "When I examine my thoughts, they may touch on evil or falsehood, or I may be planning ahead how to manage the affairs of the world, thinking to the utmost, orderly and full of savor, and then I get entangled and cannot dismiss it. If I notice early it is easy, but if I notice late it is hard. The harder I try to overcome it, the more it resists. Only if I slightly shift to thinking of other things do both disappear at once. Clearing it away this way seems to do no harm." The Master said, "Why is that needed? You only need to put effort into innate knowing." Jiuchuan said, "My problem is exactly that at that moment I do not know." The Master said, "I have effort here; how could they come? It is only because your effort was interrupted and so it obscures your knowing. Since it was interrupted, you simply reconnect with the old effort; why do all this?" Jiuchuan said, "It is truly hard to fight; though I know, I cannot throw it off." The Master said, "You must have courage. With long effort, courage will come by itself. That is why it is said, 'It is what is produced by accumulated righteousness.' If you win easily, you are a great worthy."

○九川問：「此功夫卻於心上禮驗明白，只解書不通。」先生曰：「只要解心。心明白，書自然融會。若心上不通，只要書上文義通，卻自生意見。」

Jiuchuan asked, "In this effort I can experience and understand clearly in my mind; it is only that I cannot make sense of books." The Master said, "Just understand the mind. When the mind is clear, books will naturally fuse in understanding. If the mind is not clear and you only want the meaning of the text to be clear, you will naturally form opinions."

○有一屬官，因久聽講先生之學，曰：「此學甚好，只是簿書訟獄繁難，不得為學。」先生聞之，曰：「我何嘗教爾離了簿書訟獄懸空去講學？爾既有官司之事，便從官司的事上為學，才是真格物。如問一詞訟，不可因其應對無狀，起個怒心：不可因他言語圓轉，生個喜心：不可惡其囑託，加意治之：不可因其請求，屈意從之：不可因自己事務煩冗，隨意苟且斷之；不可因旁人譖毀羅織，隨人意思處之：這許多意思皆私，只爾自知，須精細省察克治，惟恐此心有一毫偏倚，杜人是非，這便是格物致知。簿書訟獄之閒，無非實學。若離了事物為學，卻是著空。」

There was a subordinate official who had long listened to the Master's teachings and said, "This learning is very good, but with the burden of records and lawsuits, I cannot study." When the Master heard this, he said, "When did I ever teach you to leave your records and lawsuits and discuss learning in the air? Since you have official duties, study within the work of your office; that is true investigation of things. For example, when hearing a case, you must not get angry because the party answers rudely; you must not feel delight because his words are smooth; you must not hate his lobbying and judge him more harshly; you must not yield to his pleading and bend your own judgment; you must not decide carelessly because your own affairs are heavy; you must not handle it according to others' slander and framing. All of these thoughts are selfish, and only you yourself know them. You must examine and overcome them carefully, fearing only that your mind has even the slightest bias that would wrong someone's right or wrong. This is investigating things and extending knowledge. Within records and lawsuits there is nothing but real learning. If you leave affairs and things to study, you are clinging to emptiness."

○虔州將歸，有詩別先生云：「良知何事系多聞，妙合當時已種恨，好惡從之為聖學，將迎無處是幹元」。先生曰，「若未來講此學，不知說好惡從之從個甚麼？」敷英在座曰，「誠然。嘗讀先生大學古本序，不知所說何事。及來聽講許時，乃稍知大意。」

When I was about to leave Qianzhou, I wrote a poem to bid the Master farewell: "Why must innate knowing be tied to wide hearing? Its wondrous fit already had roots planted; following likes and dislikes is the sages' learning; there is nowhere to send off or welcome, all is the Qian source." (The source text writes 'Qian' as 'gan' here, but it should be 'Qian' as in Qian and Kun.) The Master said, "If I had not yet lectured on this learning, who knows what 'following likes and dislikes' would be following?" Fuying, who was present, said, "Indeed. I once read your preface to the old text of the Great Learning and did not know what it was about. Only after attending lectures for some time did I understand the gist."

○於中國裳輩同侍食，先生曰︰「凡飲食只是要養我身，食了要消化；若徒蓄橫在肚裡，便成痞了，加何長得肌官？後世擘者博聞多識，留滯胸中，皆傷食之病也。」

Yuzhong, Guoshang and the others were attending a meal together. The Master said, "All eating and drinking is only to nourish my body, and after eating it must be digested. If it is merely stored in the belly, it becomes a blockage, and how could it grow muscle and skin? Later scholars who hear and know widely and let it stay in their chests all suffer from indigestion."

○先生日﹕「聖人亦是『學知』，眾人亦是『生知』。」問曰︰「何如？」曰︰「這良知人人皆有，聖人只是保全無些障蔽，兢兢業業，疊疊翼翼，自然不息，便也是學，只是生的分敷多，所謂之『生知、安行』；眾人自孩提之童，莫不完具此知，只是障蔽多，然本髓之知自難泯息，雖問學克冶，也只憑他，只是學的分敷多，所以謂之『學知、利行』。」

The Master said, "The sages also are 'those who learn to know,' and ordinary people also are 'those born knowing.'" Someone asked, "How so?" He said, "This innate knowing is in everyone. The sage only preserves it intact without obscuration, being cautious and diligent, tireless and careful, and naturally never ceasing, and this too is learning, but the portion that is innate is greater, so he is called 'born knowing and practicing with ease.' Ordinary people, from childhood, all have this knowing complete, but there is much obscuring. Yet the original substance of knowing is hard to extinguish, and even in inquiry and self-discipline, they simply rely on it, but the portion that is learned is greater, so they are called 'learning to know and practicing with benefit.'"

○黃以方問，「先生格致之說，隨時恪物以致其知，則知是一節之知，非全體之知也，何以到得『溥博如天，淵泉如淵』地位？」先生曰：「人心是天．淵。心之本體，無所不該，原是一個天，只為私慾障礙，則天之本體失了：心之理無窮盡，原是一個淵，只為私慾窒塞，則淵之本體失了。如今念念致真知，將此障礙窒塞一齊去盡，則本體已復，便是天、淵了。」乃指天以示之曰：「比如面前見天，是昭昭之天，四外見天，也只是眧眧之天。只為許多房子牆壁遮蔽，便不見天之全體，若撤去房子牆壁，總是一個天矣。不可道跟前天是昭昭之天，外面又不是昭昭之天也。於此便見一節之知郥全體之知，全體之知郥一節之知，總是一個本體。」

Huang Yifang asked, "In the Master's doctrine of investigating things and extending knowledge, one investigates things as occasions arise to extend one's knowing, so the knowing is knowledge of one section, not knowledge of the whole. How can one reach the state of 'vast and extensive like Heaven, deep like a spring in an abyss'?" The Master said, "The human mind is Heaven and the abyss. The original substance of the mind includes everything and is originally a Heaven; only because selfish desires obstruct it, the original substance of Heaven is lost. The principle of the mind is inexhaustible and is originally an abyss; only because selfish desires block it, the original substance of the abyss is lost. Now if we extend innate knowing in every thought and remove all these obstructions and blockages together, the original substance is restored, and it is Heaven and the abyss." He pointed to the sky to show him: "For example, the sky seen in front of you is the shining sky; the sky seen on all four sides is also just the shining sky. It is only because so many houses and walls cover it that you do not see the whole of Heaven. If you removed the houses and walls, it would be all one sky. You cannot say the sky before your eyes is the shining sky and the sky outside is not. From this you see that knowledge of one section is knowledge of the whole, and knowledge of the whole is knowledge of one section; all is one original substance."

○先生曰：「聖賢非無功業氣節：但其循著這天理則便是道，不可以事功氣節名矣。」

The Master said, "The sages and worthies do not lack achievements and integrity, but what they follow is heavenly principle, which is the Way, and they cannot be named by achievements and integrity."

○「『發憤忘食』是聖人之志如此，真無有已時。『樂以忘憂』是聖人之道如此，真無有戚時。恐不必雲得不得也。」

"'Being so zealous as to forget to eat' is such a sage's aim, truly without end. 'Being so joyful as to forget sorrow' is such a sage's Way, truly without a time of grief. I fear one need not say whether one has attained it or not."

○先生曰﹕「我輩知，只是名隨分限所及；今日良知見在如此，只隨今日所知擴充到底，明日晨知又有開悟，便從明日所知擴充到底，如此方是精一功夫。與人論學，亦須隨人分限所及；如樹有這些萌芽，只把這些水去灌慨，萌芽再長，便又加水，自拱把以至合抱，灌溉之功皆是隨其分限所及，若些小萌芽，有一桶水在，盡要傾上，便浸壤他了。」

The Master said, "Our knowledge is only what each of us can reach according to our limits. If today our innate knowing appears like this, we simply extend what we know today to the end; if tomorrow innate knowing opens up further, we extend what we know tomorrow to the end. Only this is the effort of being refined and unified. In discussing learning with others one must also go as far as the other person's limits. A tree that has a little sprout is watered only with a little water; when the sprout grows more, more water is added. From a shoot to a trunk of a full armful, the work of watering follows its limits. If a little sprout is given a whole bucket of water and it is all poured on, it will be drowned."

○問知行合一。先生曰：「此須識我立言言宗旨今人學問，只因知、行分作兩件，故有一念猣動，雖是不善，然卻未曾行，便不去禁止。我今說個『知、行合一』，正要人曉得一念發動虛，便即是行了；猣動虛有不善，就將這不善的念克倒了，須要徹根徹底不使那一念不善潛伏在胸中：此是我上上言宗旨。」

He asked about the unity of knowledge and action. The Master said, "You must recognize the main point of my teaching. Because today's scholars divide knowing and acting into two things, when a thought arises, though it is not good, they have not yet acted on it and so do not stop it. Now I speak of the 'unity of knowledge and action' precisely so that people understand that the moment a thought arises, it is already action. If there is something not good in the arising, I overcome that bad thought, and it must be done to the root and to the bottom, so that no bad thought is allowed to lie hidden in the breast. This is the main point of my teaching."

○「聖人無所不知，只是知個天理：無所不能，只是能個天理。聖人本體明白，故事事知個天理所在，便去盡個天理：不是本體明後，卻於天下事物都便知得，便做得來也。天下事物，如名物度數、草木鳥獸之類，不勝其煩，聖人須是本體明瞭，亦何緣能盡知得。但不必知的，聖人自不消求知，其所當知的，聖人自能閒人：如『子入太廟，序事間』之類。先儒謂『雖知亦問，敬謹之至』；此說不可通。聖人於禮樂名物，不必盡知，然他知得一個天理，便自有許多節文度數出來，不知能問，亦即是天理節文所在。」

"The sage knows everything, but only knows heavenly principle; the sage can do everything, but only does heavenly principle. The sage's original substance is clear, so in every matter he knows where heavenly principle lies and then exhausts that principle. It is not that after the original substance becomes clear, he immediately knows and can do all the affairs and things of the world. The things of the world, such as names of things, systems of measures, plants, trees, birds and beasts, are too numerous to count. Even if the sage's original substance is clear, how could he know them all? But what he need not know, the sage does not seek to know; what he ought to know, the sage can ask others about, as in 'when the Master entered the Grand Temple he asked about everything.' Earlier scholars said, 'Though he knew, he asked, which was the utmost of reverence and care,' but this explanation does not make sense. The sage does not need to know all about rites, music and names of things, but since he knows heavenly principle, then many details of ceremony and measures come out of it naturally. When he does not know and can ask, that too is where heavenly principle's ceremonial detail lies."

○問：「先生嘗謂善、惡只是一物。善、惡兩端，如冰、炭相反，如同謂只一物？」先生曰：「至善者，心之本體。本體上才過當些子，便是惡了；不是有一個善，卻又有一個惡來相對也。故善、惡只是一物。」直因聞先生之說，則知程子所謂「善固性也，惡亦不可不謂之性。」又曰：「善、惡皆天理。謂之惡者，本非惡，但於本性上過與不及之閒耳。」其說皆無可疑。○先生嘗謂「人但得好善如好好色，惡惡如惡惡臭，便是聖人。」直初聞之，覺甚易，後禮驗得來，此個功夫著實是難。如一念雖知好善、惡惡，然不知不覺，又夾雜去了。才有夾雜，便不是好善如好好色、惡惡如惡惡臭的心。善能實實的好，是無一念不善矣：惡能實實的惡，是無念及惡矣。如同不是聖人？故聖人之學，只是一誠而已。

He asked, "The Master once said that good and evil are only one thing. But the two ends of good and evil are opposite like ice and charcoal; how can you say they are only one thing?" The Master said, "The highest good is the original substance of the mind. If the original substance goes even a little beyond measure, that is evil. It is not that there is a good and then there is also an evil standing opposite to it. So good and evil are only one thing." Huang Zhi, having heard the Master's words, then knew that what Master Cheng said, that 'good is of course nature, and evil too cannot but be called nature,' and also that 'good and evil are both heavenly principle; what is called evil is originally not evil but lies only in excess or deficiency of the original nature,' were beyond doubt. The Master once said, "If a person can love good as he loves a beautiful color and hate evil as he hates a foul smell, he is a sage." When Huang Zhi first heard this, he felt it was very easy, but later by experience realized that this effort is truly hard. For example, in one thought one may know to love the good and hate evil, but without noticing it, something gets mixed in. As soon as there is a mixture, it is no longer the mind that loves good as it loves a beautiful color and hates evil as it hates a foul smell. If one can truly love good, there is no thought that is not good; if one can truly hate evil, there is no thought of evil. How could such a person not be a sage? So the learning of the sage is only sincerity, and nothing more.

○問「修道說」言﹁率性之謂道」屬聖人分上事，「修道之謂教」屬賢人分上事。先生日︰﹁眾人亦率性也，但率性在聖人分上較多，故﹃率性之謂道﹄屬聖人事；聖人亦修道也，但修道在賢人分上多，故﹃修道之謂教﹄屬賢人事。」又日︰「︿中庸﹀一書，大抵皆是說修道的事︰放後面凡說君子，說顏淵，說子路，皆是能修道的；說小人，說賢知、愚不肖，說庶民，皆是不能修道的；其它言舜、文、周公、仲尼，至誠至聖之類，則又聖人之自能修道者也。」

He asked about the essay on Cultivating the Way, which says that 'following nature is called the Way' belongs to the sage and 'cultivating the Way is called teaching' belongs to the worthy. The Master said, "Ordinary people also follow nature, but following nature is more in the portion of the sage, so 'following nature is called the Way' is the sage's matter. The sage also cultivates the Way, but cultivating the Way is more in the portion of the worthy, so 'cultivating the Way is called teaching' is the worthy's matter." He also said, "The Doctrine of the Mean as a whole speaks mostly about cultivating the Way. So the later mentions of the gentleman, of Yan Yuan, and of Zilu are all about those who can cultivate the Way; the mentions of the small man, of those clever and those foolish or unworthy, and of the common people are all about those who cannot cultivate the Way. The other mentions of Shun, King Wen, the Duke of Zhou, Zhongni, the utmost sincere and the utmost sage are again about sages who can cultivate the Way by themselves."

○問︰「儒者到三更時分，掃蕩胸中思慮，空空靜靜，與釋氏之靜只一般，兩下皆不用，此時何所分別？﹂先生日︰「動、靜只是一個。那三更詩分，空空靜靜的，只是存天理，即是如今應事接物的心，如今應事接物的心，亦是循此理，便是那三更時分空空靜靜的心。故動、靜只是一個，分別不得。知得動、靜合一，釋氏毫釐差處亦自莫掩矣。」

He asked, "When a Confucian at the third watch of the night sweeps away the thoughts in his breast and becomes empty and still, it seems the same as the Buddhist's stillness, and neither is used in action. At this time, what is the difference?" The Master said, "Movement and stillness are only one. That empty stillness at the third watch is only preserving heavenly principle, which is the mind that responds to affairs and deals with things now; the mind that responds to affairs and deals with things now also follows this principle, and is the very mind that is empty and still at the third watch. So movement and stillness are only one and cannot be separated. If you know that movement and stillness are united, even a hair's breadth of the Buddhists' error cannot be hidden."

○門人在座，有動止甚矜持者。先生曰︰「人若矜持太過，終是有弊。」日﹕「衿得太過，如何有弊？」日︰「人只有許多精神，若專茌容貌上用功，刖於中心照管不及者多矣。」有太直率者，先生曰︰「如今講此學，卻外面全不檢束，又分心與事為二矣。」

Among the disciples present, one's conduct and bearing were very guarded and stiff. The Master said, "If a person is too guarded, in the end there is harm." He asked, "How is there harm in being too guarded?" He said, "A person has only so much spirit. If it is applied only to appearance, much will not be looked after in the heart." Of one who was too blunt and frank, the Master said, "Now you lecture on this learning but are wholly unrestrained outwardly, which again divides mind and affairs into two."

○門人作文送友行，問先生曰︰「作文字不免費思，作了後又一二日常記茌懷。」曰︰「文字思索亦無害；但作了常記在懷，則為文所累，心中有一物矣，此則未可也。」又作詩送人。先生看詩畢，謂日︰「凡作文字要隨我分限所及；若說得太過了，亦非修辭立誠矣。」

A disciple wrote an essay to send off a friend, and asked the Master, "In writing, it is hard to avoid spending thought, and after writing I often keep it in mind for a day or two." The Master said, "There is no harm in thinking about writing, but if after writing you keep it in mind, you are burdened by the essay and there is a thing in your mind, and this will not do." He also wrote a poem to send off someone. After the Master looked at the poem, he said, "In all writing you must follow what your limits reach; if you say too much, it is not cultivating words and establishing sincerity either."

○「文公『格物』之說，只是少頭腦。如所謂『察之於念慮之微』，此一句不該與『求之文字之中，驗之於事為之著，索之講論之際』混作一例看，是無輕重也。」

"Master Zhu's theory of 'investigating things' only lacks a main point. For example, his phrase 'examine it in the subtlety of thoughts' should not be treated as the same kind as 'seek it in the text, verify it in the traces of action, search for it in discussion,' as though there were no difference in weight."

○問有所忿懥一條。先生曰：「忿懥畿件，人心怎能無得，只是不可『有所』耳。幾人忿懥，著了一分意思，便怒得過當，非廓然大公之體了。故有所忿懥，便不得其正也。如今於凡忿懥等件，只是個物來順應，不要著一分意思，便心體廓然大公，得其本體之正了。且如出外見人相鬫，其不是的，我心亦怒：然雖怒，卻此心廓然，不曾動些子氣。如今怒人，亦得如此，方才是正。」

He asked about the passage on being angry. The Master said, "Anger and the like, how could a person's mind be without them? It is only that one should not 'have' them. When people are angry, if they hold on to even a bit of intent, their anger goes beyond measure and is not the substance of wide-open impartiality. So to have anger is not to be correct. Now, for all anger and the like, simply respond to things as they come without holding on to any intent, and the mind-substance is open and impartial and gains the rectitude of its original substance. For example, if you go out and see people fighting, the one in the wrong makes my mind angry too; yet though angry, this mind is open and has not stirred any qi. If we are angry at people now, it must be like this to be correct."

○先生嘗言：「佛氏不著相，其實著了相，吾儒著相，其實不著相。」請問。曰：「佛怕父子累，卻逃了父子，怕君臣累，卻逃了君臣，怕夫婦累，卻逃了夫婦，都是為個君臣、父子、夫婦著了相，便須逃避。如吾懦有個父子，還他以仁，有個君臣，還尥以義，有個夫婦，還他以別，何曾著父子、君臣、夫婦的相？以下門人黃修易錄

The Master once said, "The Buddhists do not cling to appearances, but in fact they do cling; we Confucians seem to cling to appearances, but in fact we do not." I asked for explanation. He said, "The Buddha feared being burdened by father and son, and so fled father and son; feared being burdened by ruler and minister, and so fled ruler and minister; feared being burdened by husband and wife, and so fled husband and wife. All this is because they clung to the appearances of ruler and minister, father and son, husband and wife, and so must flee. In our Confucian way, where there is father and son, we give them benevolence; where there is ruler and minister, we give them righteousness; where there is husband and wife, we give them distinction. When did we ever cling to the appearances of father and son, ruler and minister, husband and wife?" What follows was recorded by the disciple Huang Xiuyi.

○黃勉叔問：「心無惡念時，此心空空蕩蕩的，不知亦須存個善念否？」先生曰：「既去惡念，便是善念，便復心之本體矣：譬如日光被雲來遮蔽，雲去光已復矣。若惡念既去，又要存個善念，即是日光之中添燃一燈。

Huang Mianshu asked, "When the mind has no evil thoughts, it is empty and vast. I do not know whether one must still preserve a good thought." The Master said, "Once the evil thought is gone, that is the good thought, and the original substance of the mind is restored. It is like sunlight covered by clouds: when the clouds go, the light is restored. If after the evil thought is gone you still want to preserve a good thought, it is like lighting a lamp in the midst of sunlight."

○問﹕「近來用功，亦頗覺妄念不生，但腔子裡黑窸窸的，不知如何打得光明？」先生曰﹕「初下手用功，如何腔子裡便得光明？譬如奔流濁水，繞聹在缸裡，初然雖定，也只是昏濁的；須矣澄定既久，自然渣滓盡去，復得清來。汝只要在良知上用功；良知存入，黑窸窸自能光明也。今便要責效，卻是助長，不成工夫。」

He asked, "Recently when I apply effort, I do feel that false thoughts do not arise, but inside my chest it is dark and murky, and I do not know how to make it bright." The Master said, "When you first start to apply effort, how could your chest be bright right away? It is like turbid water rushing along: when it is first stored in a vat, although it settles, it is still dim and turbid. It must be left to settle for a long time before the dregs naturally go away and clearness returns. You only need to apply effort to innate knowing; when innate knowing has been preserved for a long time, the darkness will naturally become bright. If you want results right now, that is 'helping it grow' and not real effort."

○先生曰﹕「吾教人『致良知』，在『格物』上用功，卻是有根本的學問；日長貂一日，愈久愈覺精明。世儒教人事事物物上去尋討，卻是無根本的學問；方其莊時，雖暫能外面飾，不見有過，老則精神衰邁，終須放倒；譬如無根之樹，移栽水邊，雖暫時鮮好，終久要憔悴。」

The Master said, "When I teach people to 'extend innate knowing' through effort on 'investigating things,' this is learning that has a root, and it grows day by day, and the longer it goes the more refined and bright one feels. Worldly scholars teach people to go and search in every affair and thing, which is learning without a root. While one is in one's prime, one may for a time paper over things outwardly and appear to have no faults, but when old and the spirit is failing, in the end it must fall. It is like a tree with no roots, transplanted to the water's edge: though fresh and good for a while, in the end it will wither."

○問「志於道」一章。先生曰﹕「只『志道』一句，便含下面數句功夫，自住不得。譬如做此屋，『志於道』是念念要去擇地鳩材，經營成個區宅；『據德』卻是經畫已成，有付據矣；『依仁』卻是常常住在區宅內，更不離去；『遊藝』卻是加些畫採，美此區宅。藝者義也，理之所宜者也。如誦詩、讀書、彈琴、習射之類，皆所以調習此心，使之熟於道也。苟不知道而遊藝，卻如無狀小子，不先去置造區宅，只管要去買畫掛做門面。不知將掛在何處？」

He asked about the chapter 'set your will on the Way.' The Master said, "The single phrase 'set your will on the Way' already includes the effort of the following phrases and cannot stay by itself. It is like building a house: 'setting your will on the Way' is thinking in every thought of choosing a site and gathering materials and planning to make a dwelling; 'holding firm to virtue' is when the plan has been completed and one has something to rely on; 'relying on benevolence' is living constantly in the dwelling without leaving it; 'wandering in the arts' is adding some painting and color to beautify the dwelling. 'Arts' (yi) means 'what is fitting' (yi), what principle finds appropriate. Reciting poems, reading books, playing the zither and practicing archery are all ways to tune and train this mind and make it familiar with the Way. If someone wanders in the arts without knowing the Way, he is like a worthless youngster who does not first build a house but only wants to buy paintings to hang as a facade, and does not know where they will be hung."

○問：「讀書所以調攝此心，不可缺的。但讀之之時，一種科目意思牽引而來，不知同以免此？」先主曰：「只要良知真切，雖做舉榮，不為心累，雖有累，亦易覺克之而已。且如讀書時，良知知得強記之心不是，即克去之，有欲速之心不是，即克去之，有誇多鬥靡之心不是，即克去之：如此亦只是終日與聖賢印對，是個純乎天理之心。任他讀書，亦只是調攝此心而已，何累之有？」曰：「雖蒙開示，奈負質庸下，實難免累：竊聞窮通有命，上智之人，恐不屑此不肖為聲利牽纖，甘心為此，徙自苫耳。欲屏棄之，又制於親，不能捨去，奈何？」先生曰：「此事歸辭於親者多矣；其實只是無志。志立得時，良知千事萬事只是一事。讀書作文，安能累人，人自累於得失耳！」因嘆曰：「此學不明，不知此處擔擱了幾多英雄漢！」

He asked, "Reading books is the way to regulate and nurture the mind and cannot be lacking. But when reading, a kind of thought about examinations pulls at me. I do not know how to avoid it." The Master said, "If innate knowing is real and keen, even if one does the civil service examinations, they will not burden the mind; even if there is a burden, it is easy to notice it and overcome it. For example, when reading, if innate knowing knows that the mind of strong memorizing is wrong, remove it; if it knows that the mind of wanting to hurry is wrong, remove it; if it knows that the mind of showing off how much one knows and competing in ornament is wrong, remove it. In this way one is all day long being verified against the sages and worthies, a mind of pure heavenly principle. Whatever one reads, it is only a way to regulate and nurture the mind; what burden is there?" The student said, "Though I have received your instruction, my endowment is poor and I truly cannot avoid being burdened. I have heard that failure and success are fated, and men of the highest wisdom probably disdain this; I, unworthy, am entangled in fame and profit and willingly do this, only making myself suffer. I wish to cast it aside, but my parents restrain me and I cannot give it up. What can I do?" The Master said, "Many people blame their parents for this matter, but really it is only lack of resolve. When resolve is set, innate knowing makes the thousand matters and ten thousand matters one matter. How could reading and writing burden anyone? People are only burdened by gain and loss!" He then sighed and said, "Because this learning is not clear, who knows how many heroes have been delayed here!"

○問：「『生之謂性』，告子亦說得是，孟子如何非之？」先生曰﹕「固是性，但告子認得一邊去了，不曉得頭腦；若曉得頭腦，如此說亦是。孟子亦曰：「形色，天性也」，這也是指氣說。」又曰﹕「凡人信口說，任意行，皆說此是依我心性出來，此是所謂生之謂性；然卻要有過差。若曉得頭腦，依吾良知上說出來，行將去，便自是停當。然良知亦只是這口說，這身行，巖能外得氣，別有個去行去說：故曰：『論性不論氣，不備：論氣不論性，不明。』氣亦性也，性亦氣也，但須認得頭腦是當。」

He asked, "'Life is what is called nature' was also said by Gaozi, and was right; why did Mencius criticize it?" The Master said, "It is of course nature, but Gaozi grasped only one side and did not know the main point. If one knows the main point, it is right to say this too. Mencius also said 'form and color are heavenly nature,' which also refers to qi." He added, "When people speak freely and act as they please, they all say this comes from my heart and nature, which is what 'life is what is called nature' means, but there are errors in it. If one knows the main point and speaks and acts from our innate knowing, one is naturally fitting. Yet innate knowing is just this mouth speaking and this body acting; how could it be apart from qi and have something else to act and speak? So it is said, 'To discuss nature without discussing qi is incomplete; to discuss qi without discussing nature is unclear.' Qi is also nature and nature is also qi, but one must recognize the main point correctly."

○又曰：「諸君功夫，最不可『助長』。上智絕少，學者無超入聖人之理。一起一伏，一進一退，自是功夫節次。不可以我前日用得功夫了，今卻不濟，便要矯強做出一個沒破綻的模樣，這便便是『助長』，連前些子功夫都壞了。此非小過。譬如行路的人遭一蹶跌，起來便走，不要欺人做那不曾跌倒的樣子出來。諸君只要常常懷個『遁世無悶，不見是而無悶』之心，依此良知忍耐做去，不管人非笑，不管人毀謗，不管人榮辱，任他功夫有進有退，我只是這致良知的主宰，不息久久，自然有得力處，一切外事亦自能不動。」又曰：「人若著實用功隨人毀謗，隨人欺慢，處處得益，處處是進德之資；若不用功，只是魔也，終被累倒。」

He also said, "In your efforts, gentlemen, the most important thing is not to 'help it grow.' Those of highest wisdom are very rare, and a learner has no way to leap into sagehood. Rising and falling, advancing and retreating are naturally the stages of effort. You must not think, 'I put in effort a few days ago and today it fails,' and then force yourself to make a flawless appearance; this is 'helping it grow' and ruins even the little effort you had before. This is no small fault. It is like a traveler who stumbles: he gets up and walks on, and does not pretend to others that he never fell. You only need to keep always in your heart the mind of 'withdrawing from the world without distress, and not being recognized as right without distress.' Follow this innate knowing and persevere, not caring whether people laugh at you, not caring whether people slander you, not caring whether people honor or disgrace you. Let the effort go forward and back; I only keep my mastery of extending innate knowing without rest, and in time I will naturally find where my strength lies, and all outside matters will naturally not move me." He also said, "If a person applies real effort, then whoever slanders him and whoever deceives or slights him, he benefits everywhere and everywhere finds material for advancing in virtue; if one does not apply effort, it is only demonic and in the end he will be brought down by his burdens."

○先生一日出遊禹穴，顧田間禾曰：「能幾同時，又如此長了！」範兆期茌旁曰：「此只是有根。學問能自植根，亦不患無長。」先生曰：「人孰無根，良知即是天植靈根，自生生不息；但著了私累，把此恨戕賊蔽寒，不得發生耳。」

One day the Master went out to Yu's Cave and, looking at the grain in the fields, said, "How little time, and it has grown like this again!" Fan Zhaoqi at his side said, "This is only because it has roots. If learning can plant its own roots, there is no worry about growth." The Master said, "Who does not have roots? Innate knowing is the spiritual root planted by Heaven, naturally producing life without ceasing; it is only that it is covered by selfish burdens, which injure and block this root so that it cannot sprout."

○一友常易動氣責人，先生警之曰：「學須反己；若徒責人，只見得人不是，不見自已非；若能反己，方見自己有許多未盡處，奚瑕責人？舜能化得象的傲，其機括只是不見象的不是。若舜只要正他的奸惡，就見得象的不是矣；象是傲人必不肯相下，如同感化得他？」是友感悔。曰：「你今後只不要去論人之是非，「當責辨人時，就把做一件大己私，克去方可。」

A friend easily lost his temper and blamed others. The Master warned him, "Learning must be turned back on oneself. If one only blames others, one sees only others' faults and does not see one's own. If one can reflect on oneself, then one sees that one has many unfinished things; what leisure is there to blame others? Shun could transform Xiang's arrogance, and his mechanism was only not seeing Xiang's faults. If Shun had wanted to correct his treachery and evil, he would have seen Xiang's faults. Xiang was an arrogant man who would never be willing to yield; how could he have been moved and transformed?" The friend felt moved and repentant. The Master said, "From now on, you must not discuss others' rights and wrongs. At the very time you want to blame and argue with others, treat that as a great selfishness of your own and overcome it."

○先生曰：「凡朋友問難，縱有淺近粗疏，或露才揚己，皆是病發。當因其病而藥之可也，不可便懷鄙薄之心，非君子與人為善之心矣。」

The Master said, "When friends ask difficult questions, even if they are shallow or crude or show off their talent and exalt themselves, these are all symptoms of illness. You should treat their illness with medicine; you must not immediately develop a mind of contempt and disdain, which is not the mind of a gentleman helping others do good."

○問：「《易》，朱子主卜筮，程《傳》主理，何如？」先生曰：「卜筮是理，理亦是卜筮。天下之理孰有大於卜筮者乎？只為後世將卜筮專主在占卦上看了，所以看得卜筮似小藝。不知今之「師友問答，博學、審問、慎思、明辨、篤行之類，皆是卜筮。卜筮者，不過求決狐疑，神明吾心而已。《易》是間諸天；人有疑，自信不及，故以《易》問天；謂人心尚有所涉，惟天不容偽耳。」

He asked, "As for the Changes, Master Zhu takes it as divination and Cheng's Commentary takes it as principle. What do you say?" The Master said, "Divination is principle, and principle is divination. What principle under Heaven is greater than divination? It is only because later people looked at divination as solely about reading hexagrams that they came to see divination as a minor art. They do not know that today's questions and answers between teacher and friends, such as 'study widely, inquire carefully, think prudently, discriminate clearly, practice earnestly,' are all divination. Divination is nothing more than seeking to resolve doubts and make my mind spiritual and bright. The Changes ask of Heaven. When people have doubts and cannot trust themselves, they use the Changes to ask Heaven. It is said that the human mind still has things it is involved with, and only Heaven does not tolerate falsehood."

○黃勉之問：「『無適也，無莫也，義之與比。』事事要如此否？」先生曰：「固是事事要如此，須是識得個頭腦乃可。義即是良知，曉得良知是個頭腦，方無執著。且如受人饋送，也有今日當受的，他日不當受的。也有今日不當受的，他日當受的。你若執著了今日當受的，便一切受去。執著了今日不當受的，便一切不受去。便是適莫。便不是良知的本體。如何喚得做義？」

Huang Mianzhi asked, "'There is no preference and no prejudice; he sides with what is right.' Should one be like this in everything?" The Master said, "Of course in everything, but one must recognize the main point first. Righteousness is innate knowing. Only when one knows that innate knowing is the main point is there no clinging. For example, in accepting gifts from others, there are things to accept today but not accept another day, and things not to accept today but to accept another day. If you cling to what you should accept today and accept everything, or cling to what you should not accept today and accept nothing, that is preference and prejudice and is not the original substance of innate knowing. How could that be called righteousness?"

○問，「『思無邪』一言，如何便蓋得三百篇之義？」先生曰，「豈特三百篇？六經只此一言，便可該貫，以至窮古今天下聖賢的話。『思無邪』一言，也可該貫。此外便有何說？此是一了百當的功夫。」

He asked, "How can the single phrase 'having no depraved thoughts' cover the meaning of the three hundred Odes?" The Master said, "Not only the three hundred Odes. The Six Classics can all be bound through with this one phrase, and even all the words of the sages and worthies from ancient times to now can be bound through with 'having no depraved thoughts.' What else is there to say besides this? This is the effort that finishes one thing and settles a hundred."

○問道心人心。先生曰，「『率性之為道』，便是道心。但著些人的意思在，便是人心。道心本是無聲無臭，故曰微。依著人心行去，便有許多不安穩處，故曰惟危。」

He asked about the mind of the Way and the human mind. The Master said, "'Following nature is called the Way' is the mind of the Way. But as soon as a bit of human intention is added, it is the human mind. The mind of the Way is originally without sound or smell, so it is called subtle. Acting according to the human mind brings many unstable places, so it is called precarious."

○問：「『中人以下，不可以語上』，愚的人與之語上尚且不進，況不與之語可乎？」先生曰：「不是聖人終不與語，聖人的心憂不得人人都做聖人；只是人的資質不同，施教不可躐等，中人以下的人，便與他說性、說命，他也不省得，也須慢慢琢磨他起來。」

He asked, "'To those of middling ability and below, one cannot speak of higher things.' If speaking of higher things to the foolish does not advance them, would it be acceptable not to speak to them at all?" The Master said, "It is not that the sage never speaks to them. The sage's heart worries that not everyone can become a sage. It is only that people's endowments differ and teaching must not skip stages. For those of middling ability and below, even if you tell them about nature and fate they will not understand, and you must slowly polish them up."

○一友問：「讀書不記得如何？」先生曰：「只要曉得，如何要記得？要曉得已是落第二義了，只要明得自家本體。若徒要記得，便不曉得：若徒要曉得，便明不得自家的本體。」

A friend asked, "What if I cannot remember what I read?" The Master said, "You only need to understand; why must you remember? Even wanting to understand is already of secondary importance; you only need to make your own original substance clear. If you only want to remember, you will not understand; if you only want to understand, you will not make your own original substance clear."

○問：「『逝者如斯』是說自家心性活潑潑地否？」先生曰：「然。須要時時用致良知的功夬，方才活潑潑地，方才與他川水一般；若須臾閒斷，便與天地不相似。此是學問極至處，聖人也只如此。」

He asked, "Does 'what passes is like this' mean one's own mind-nature is lively and quick?" The Master said, "Yes. You must constantly apply the effort of extending innate knowing to be lively and quick and to be like the river's water. If there is even a moment's interruption, it is not like Heaven and Earth. This is the utmost point of learning, and the sages are also just like this."

○問志士、仁人章。先生曰：「只為世上人都把生身命子看得太重，不問當死不當死，定要宛轉委曲保全，以此把天理卻丟去了，忍心害理，同者不為。若違了天理，便與禽獸無異，便偷生茌世上百千年，也不過做了千百年的禽獸。學者要於此等處看得明白；比干、龍逢，只為也看得分明，所以能成就得他的仁。」

He asked about the chapter on the man of resolve and the benevolent man. The Master said, "It is only because people in the world all take their own life and body too seriously, and without asking whether they should die or not, insist on preserving themselves by twists and turns. In this way they throw away heavenly principle and, with a hard heart harming principle, there is nothing they will not do. If one goes against heavenly principle, one is no different from a beast, and even if one steals a life in the world for a hundred or a thousand years, it is only being a beast for a hundred or a thousand years. Learners must see this clearly. Bi Gan and Longfeng saw it clearly too, and so they could accomplish their benevolence."

○問：「叔孫武叔毀仲尼，大聖人如何猶不免於毀謗？」先生曰：「毀謗自外來的雖聖人如同免得？人只貴於自修，若自己實實落落是個聖賢，縱然人都毀他，也說他不著；卻若浮雲揜日如何損得日的光明。若自己是個象恭色莊、不堅不介的，縱然沒一個人說他，他的惡意終須一日發露。所以孟子說『有求全之毀，有不虞之譽：』譭譽在外的，安能避得，只要自修何如爾。」

He asked, "Shusun Wushu slandered Zhongni; how could such a great sage still not escape slander?" The Master said, "Slander comes from outside; how could even a sage avoid it? What people value is self-cultivation. If one is truly and solidly a sage or worthy, even if everyone slanders him, they cannot touch him, like floating clouds covering the sun; how could they diminish the sun's brightness? If one is outwardly respectful and solemn in appearance but not firm or upright, even if no one speaks of him, his evil will in the end be exposed one day. That is why Mencius said, 'There is praise that is unexpected and slander that comes from seeking perfection.' Praise and blame are outside; how can they be avoided? One only needs to cultivate oneself."

○劉君亮要在山中靜坐。先生曰：「汝若以厭外物之心去求之靜，是反養成一個驕惰之氣了；汝若不厭外物，復於靜處涵養，卻好。」

Liu Junliang wanted to sit in quiet meditation in the mountains. The Master said: "If you seek stillness with a mind that loathes external things, you will only cultivate arrogance and sloth. If you do not loathe external things and cultivate yourself again in a quiet place, that is good."

○王汝中、省曾侍坐。先生握扇命曰﹕「你們用扇。」省曾起對日﹕「不敢。」先生曰：「聖人之學不是這等捆縛苦楚的。不是裝做道學的模樣。」汝中曰：「觀仲尼與曾點言志一章略見。」先生曰：「然。以此章觀之，聖人何等寬洪，包含氣象。且為師者問志於群弟子，三子皆整頓以對，至於曾點，瓢飄然不看那三子在眼，自去鼓起瑟來，何等狂態：及至言志，又不對師之問目，都是狂言。設在伊川，彧斥罵起來了。聖人乃複稱許他，何等氣象。聖人教人，不是個束縛尥通做一般，只如狂者便從狂處成就他，狷者便從狷處成就地，人之才氣如何同得。」

Wang Ruzhong and Sheng Zeng were sitting in attendance. The Master held out a fan and said: "Please use the fan." Sheng Zeng rose and replied: "I dare not." The Master said: "The learning of the sages is not this sort of binding and bitterness, and it is not putting on the look of a Neo-Confucian." Ruzhong said: "This can be glimpsed in the chapter where Confucius and Zeng Dian state their aspirations." The Master said: "Yes. Looking at that chapter, how broad and embracing is the sage's manner! Moreover, when the teacher asked his disciples to state their aspirations, the other three all straightened up and answered; but Zeng Dian, drifting free and paying no mind to the other three, began to strum his zither by himself; what wildness! And when he stated his aspiration, he did not answer the teacher's question at all, but spoke only wild words. Had it been Yichuan, he might have scolded him. Yet the sage praised him instead; what a manner! The sage's teaching of people is not to bind them all into one mold: the wild are brought to completion through their wildness, and the cautious through their caution. How can people's talents and temperaments all be the same?"

○先生語陸元靜曰：「元靜少年亦要解五經，志亦好博。但聖人教人，只怕人不簡易，他說的皆是簡易之規：以今人好博之心觀之，卻似聖人教人差了。」

The Master said to Lu Yuanjing: "Yuanjing, you are young and want to explain the Five Classics, and your aspiration likes breadth. But in teaching people the sages feared only that people would not be simple and easy, and all they said were simple and easy rules. Looked at through the broad-loving minds of people today, it seems that the sages erred in their teaching."

○先生曰：「孔子無不知而作；顏子有不善未嘗不知：此是聖學真血脈路。」

The Master said: "Confucius never created anything without knowing; Yan Zi never failed to know when he had done something wrong. This is the true bloodline of the sages' learning."

○何廷仁、黃正之、李侯璧、汝中、德洪侍坐。先生顧而言曰：「汝輩學問不得長進，只是卡小上止志。侯璧起而對曰：「珙亦願立志。」先生曰：「難說不立，未是必為聖人之志耳。」對曰：「願立必為聖人之志。」先生曰：「你真有聖人之志，良知上更無不盡：良知上留得些子別唸掛帶，便非必為聖人之志矣。」洪初聞時心若未服，聽說到不覺悚汗。

He Tingren, Huang Zhengzhi, Li Houbi, Ruzhong and Dehong were sitting in attendance. The Master looked around and said: "The reason your learning does not make progress is simply that you have not yet set even a small aim." Houbi rose and replied: "I, Gong, also wish to set my aim." The Master said: "It is hard to say you have not set it; it is just that it is not yet the aim of surely becoming a sage." He replied: "I wish to set the aim of surely becoming a sage." The Master said: "If you truly had the aim of a sage, there would be nothing left unexhausted in innate knowing. If even a trace of another thought hangs on in innate knowing, it is not the aim of surely becoming a sage." When Dehong first heard this, his heart was not yet convinced, but on hearing this he broke into a sweat without realizing it.

○先生曰；「良知是造化的精靈，這些精靈，生天生地，成鬼成帝，皆從此出，真是與物無對。人若復得他完完全全，無少虧欠，自不覺手舞足蹈，不知天地閒更有何樂可代。」

The Master said: "Innate knowing is the spirit of creation and transformation. This spirit gives birth to heaven and earth and makes ghosts and gods; all come from it, and truly it has no counterpart among things. If a person recovers it whole and complete, with no lack, he will unconsciously dance with hands and feet, and not know what other joy between heaven and earth could replace it."

○一友靜坐有見，馳問先生。答曰：「吾昔居滁時，見諸生多務知解，口耳異同，無益於得，姑教之靜坐；一時藽見光景，頗收近效：久之漸有喜靜厭動，流入枯槁之病，或務為玄解妙覺，動人聽聞。故邇來只說『致良知』。良知明白，隨你去靜處體悟也好。隨你去事上磨練也好，良知本體原是無動無靜的：此便是學問頭腦。我這個話頭，自滁州到今，亦較過幾番，只是『致良知』三字無病。醫經摺肱，方能察人病理。」

A friend, who had seen something in quiet sitting, hurried to ask the Master. He answered: "When I lived in Chu, I saw that many students were busy with intellectual understanding and with differences between what they heard and spoke, which did not help them attain anything, so I temporarily taught them to sit in stillness. For a while they glimpsed a kind of light and received quite quick results. After a long time, they gradually fell into the fault of loving stillness and hating movement, sinking into dryness and desiccation, or striving for mysterious understanding and wondrous awakening to impress people's ears. Therefore recently I have only said 'extend innate knowing.' When innate knowing is clear, whether you go to quiet places to experience and awaken, or go to affairs to temper yourself, is fine, for the original substance of innate knowing is neither moving nor still. This is the head and source of learning. I have compared this teaching several times from Chuzhou until now, and only the three words 'extend innate knowing' have no fault. Only one who has broken his own arm can understand a person's illness."

○一友問：「功夫欲得此知時時接續，一切應感處反覺照管不及，若去事上週旋，又覺不見了。如何則可？」先生曰：「此只認良知未真，尚有內外之閒。我這裡功夫不由人急心，認得良知頭惱是當，去樸實用功，自會透徹。到此便是內外兩忘，又何心事不合一。」

A friend asked: "In my practice I want this knowing to continue at all times, but I feel I cannot keep watch over everything in response and stimulus; and if I go to deal with affairs, I feel I lose it. How can this be done?" The Master said: "This is just not recognizing innate knowing truly, still having a gap between inside and outside. The effort here does not depend on a hurried mind. Once you recognize the head and source of innate knowing properly and go work honestly, you will naturally see through it. Reaching this, both inside and outside are forgotten, and what matter of the mind could fail to be one?"

○又曰：「功夫不是透得這個真機，如何得他充實光輝？若能透得時，不由你聰明知解接得來。須胸中渣滓渾化，不使有毫髮沾帶始得。」

He also said: "If one's effort does not break through this true pivot, how can it become full and radiant? If one can break through, it does not come by cleverness and intellectual understanding. The dregs in the chest must be completely dissolved, with not a hair's breadth left clinging."

○先生曰：「『天命之謂性』，命即是性。『率性之謂道』，性即是道；『修道之謂教』，道即是教。」

The Master said: "'What Heaven decrees is called nature'; decree is nature. 'Following nature is called the Way'; nature is the Way. 'Cultivating the Way is called teaching'; the Way is teaching."

○問：「如何道即是教？」曰：「道即是良知：真知原是完完全全，是的還他是，非的還他非，是非只依著他，更無有不是處，這真知還是你的明師。」問：「『不睹不聞』是說本禮，『戒慎恐懼』是說功夫否？」先生曰：「此處須信得本體原是不睹不聞的，亦原是戒慎恐懼的，戒慎恐懼不曾在不睹不聞上加得些子。見得真時，便謂戒慎恐懼是本體，不睹不聞是功夫亦得。」

Someone asked: "How is the Way itself teaching?" He said: "The Way is innate knowing. Innate knowing is originally whole and complete: what is right it returns as right, and what is wrong it returns as wrong; if one follows it in right and wrong, nothing is ever wrong. This innate knowing is your enlightened teacher." He asked: "Does 'not seeing, not hearing' speak of the original substance, and 'being cautious and apprehensive' speak of effort?" The Master said: "Here one must trust that the original substance is originally not seen and not heard, and is also originally cautious and apprehensive. Caution and apprehension adds not a bit to the unseen and unheard. When one sees it truly, it is also fine to say that caution and apprehension is the substance, and not seeing and not hearing is the effort."

○問：「通乎畫夜之道而知。」先生曰：「良知原是知畫知夜的。」又間：「人睡熟時，良知亦不知了。」曰：「不知何以一叫便應？」曰：「良知常知，如何有睡熟時.．」曰：「嚮晦宴息，此亦造化常理。夜來天地混沌，形色俱泯，人亦耳目無岓睹聞，眾竅慏翕，此即良知收斂凝一時。天地既開、庶物露生，人亦耳目無所賭聞，眾竅俱闢，北郥良知妙用發生時。可見人心與天地一體。故上下與天地同流。今人不會宴息，夜來不是昏睡，郥是妄思黶寐。」曰：「睡時功夫如何用。」先生曰：「知畫即知夜矣。日閒良知是順應無湍的，夜間良知即是收斂凝一的，有夢即先兆。」

Someone asked about "penetrating the way of day and night and knowing." The Master said: "Innate knowing originally knows day and night." He asked again: "When a person sleeps soundly, innate knowing does not know either." He said: "If it does not know, why does it respond as soon as one calls?" He asked: "Innate knowing always knows, so how can there be deep sleep?" He said: "'At dusk to rest and feast' is also the constant principle of creation. At night heaven and earth are chaotic and form and color all vanish; people's ears and eyes also see and hear nothing, and all the apertures close; this is the time when innate knowing gathers and condenses into one. When heaven and earth open and the many things appear, people's ears and eyes also see and hear, and all the apertures open; this is the time when innate knowing's wondrous function arises. This shows that the human mind is one body with heaven and earth, and so flows together with heaven and earth above and below. People today do not know how to rest; at night, if they are not sunk in dull sleep, they are in false thoughts and nightmares." He asked: "How is effort applied during sleep?" The Master said: "Knowing day is knowing night. In the daytime innate knowing responds smoothly without stagnation, and at night innate knowing gathers and condenses into one. When there are dreams, they are an advance sign."

○又曰：「良知在夜氣發的力是本體，以其無物慾之雜也。學者要使事物紛擾之時，常如夜氣一般，就是『通乎畫夜之道而知。』。」

He also said: "What innate knowing gives forth in the night energy is the true original substance, because it is not mixed with material desires. If learners can make themselves, in the midst of the clamor of affairs and things, always like the night energy, that is 'penetrating the way of day and night and knowing.'"

○先生曰：「僊家說到虛，聖人豈能虛上加得一毫？佛氏說到無，聖人豈能無上加得一毫有？但僊家說虛從養生上來，佛氏說無從出離生死苫海上來，卻於本上加卻這些子意思在，便不是他虛無的本色了，便於本體有障礙。聖人只是還他良知的本色更不著些子意在。真知之虛便是天之太虛，良知之無便是太虛之無形，日、月、風、雷、山川、民、物，凡有貌象形色，皆在太虛無形中發用流行。未嘗作得天的障礙。聖人只是順其良知之發用，天地萬物慏在我真知的發用流行中，何嘗又有一物起於良知之外能怍得障礙？」

The Master said: "When the Daoists speak of emptiness, how could the sage add a hair to emptiness? When the Buddhists speak of nothingness, how could the sage add a hair of being to nothingness? But the Daoists speak of emptiness arising from nourishing life, and the Buddhists speak of nothingness arising from escaping the sea of birth and death; thus they add a bit of intent to the original substance, which is no longer the true color of their emptiness and nothingness, and so creates an obstacle to the original substance. The sage simply restores innate knowing to its original color and adds no trace of intent. The emptiness of innate knowing is the great emptiness of heaven, and the nothingness of innate knowing is the formlessness of the great emptiness. Sun, moon, wind, thunder, mountains, rivers, people and things, everything with appearance and form operates and flows in the formlessness of great emptiness, and has never been an obstacle to heaven. The sage simply follows the function of his innate knowing; heaven, earth and the myriad things are all within the operation of my innate knowing, so how could there be a single thing beyond innate knowing that could make an obstacle?"

○或問：「釋氏亦務養心，然要之不可以治天下，何也？」先生曰：「吾懦養心未嘗離卻事物，只順其天則自然就是功夫。釋氏卻要盡絕事物，把心看做幻相，漸入虛寂去了；與世間若嫵些子交涉，所以不可冶天下。」

Someone asked: "The Buddhists also devote themselves to nourishing the mind, yet it is said that they cannot govern the world; why?" The Master said: "Our Confucians' nourishing of the mind has never left affairs and things; simply following their heavenly norms and naturalness is the effort. The Buddhists want to cut off all affairs and things, take the mind as an illusory appearance, and gradually enter emptiness and stillness, with almost no dealings with the world, so they cannot govern the world."

○或問：「異端。」先生曰：「與愚夫、愚婦同的，是謂同德；與愚夫、愚婦異的，是謂異端。」

Someone asked about "heterodoxy." The Master said: "What is the same as ordinary men and women is called common virtue; what differs from ordinary men and women is called heterodoxy."

○先生曰：「孟子不動心與告子不動心，所異只在毫釐閒。告子只在不動心上著功，孟子便直從此心原不動處分曉。心之本體原是不動的：只為所行有不合義便動了。孟子不論心之動與不動，只是『集義』，所行無不是義，此心自然無可動扈。若告子只要此心不動，便是把捉此心，將他生生不息之根反阻橈了，此非徒無益，而又害之。孟子『集義』工夫，自是養得充滿，並無餒歉，自是縱橫自在，活潑潑地；此伊是浩然之氣。」

The Master said: "The unmoved mind of Mencius and that of Gaozi differ only by a hair's breadth. Gaozi works only on keeping the mind unmoved, while Mencius goes straight to where this mind is originally unmoved. The original substance of the mind is originally unmoved; it moves only because what one does is not in accordance with righteousness. Mencius does not discuss whether the mind moves or not, but simply 'accumulates righteousness'; when all one does is righteous, this mind naturally has nothing to be moved by. But Gaozi only wants this mind not to move, which is to restrain this mind and thus obstruct the root of its ceaseless generation. This is not only useless but also harmful. Mencius's effort of 'accumulating righteousness' naturally nourishes it to fullness without any deficiency, and it is naturally free in all directions and lively. This is the flood-like energy."

○又曰：「告子病源，從性無善無不善上見來。性無善無不善，雖如此說，亦無大差。但告子執定看了，便有個無善無不善的性在內，有善有惡又在物感上看，便有個物在外：卻做兩邊看了，便會差。無善無不善，性原是如此：悟得及時，只此一句便盡了，更無有內外之閒。告子見一個性在內，見一個物在外，便見他於性有未透徹虛。」

He also said: "Gaozi's illness comes from seeing that nature is neither good nor not good. To say that nature is neither good nor not good is not greatly wrong in itself. But Gaozi held fast to it, and so there is a nature neither good nor not good within; and since good and evil are viewed in response to things, there is a thing outside. Seeing it as two sides is where the error comes. Nature is originally so, neither good nor not good. If one awakens in time, this one sentence exhausts it, and there is no gap between inside and outside. Gaozi saw a nature within and a thing without, which shows that his grasp of nature was not yet thorough."

○朱本思問：「人有虛靈，方有良知。若草、木、瓦、石之頊，亦有良知否？」先生曰：「人的良知，就是草、木、瓦、石的真知：若草、木、瓦、石無人的良知，不可以為草、木、瓦、石矣。豈惟草、木、瓦、石為然，天、地無人的良知，亦不可為天、地矣。蓋天、地、萬物與人原是一體，其發竅之最精扈，是人心一點靈明，風、雨、露、雷，日、月、星、辰，禽、獸、草、木，山、川、土、石，與人原只一體。故五穀、禽獸之類皆可以責人，藥石之類皆可以療疾，只為同此一氣，故能相通耳。」

Zhu Bensi asked: "Humans have spiritual emptiness and so have innate knowing. Do things like grass, trees, tiles and stones also have innate knowing?" The Master said: "The innate knowing of humans is the innate knowing of grass, trees, tiles and stones. If grass, trees, tiles and stones lacked human innate knowing, they could not be grass, trees, tiles and stones. And not only grass, trees, tiles and stones: if heaven and earth lacked human innate knowing, they could not be heaven and earth. For heaven, earth and the myriad things are originally one body with humans, and the most refined point where this body opens its aperture is the one point of spiritual brightness in the human heart. Wind, rain, dew and thunder, sun, moon, stars and constellations, birds, beasts, grass and trees, mountains, rivers, earth and stones are originally one body with humans. That is why the five grains and birds and beasts can nourish people and why herbs and minerals can cure diseases; it is only because they share this same energy that they can interpenetrate."

○先生遊南鎮，一友指巖中花樹問曰：「天下無心，外之物：如此花樹，在深山中自開自落，於我心亦何相關？」先生曰：「你未看此花時，此花與汝心同歸於寂：你來看此花時，則此花顏色一時明白起來：便知此花不在你的心外。」

When the Master was traveling at Nanzhen, a friend pointed at a flowering tree among the rocks and asked: "You say there is nothing outside the mind. Such a flowering tree, blooming and falling by itself in the deep mountains, what does it have to do with my mind?" The Master said: "Before you looked at this flower, the flower and your mind were together in stillness. When you came and looked at this flower, its color at once became clear. So you know that this flower is not outside your mind."

○問：「大人與物同體，如何《大學》又說個厚薄？」先生曰：「惟是道理自有厚薄。比如身是一體，把手足捍頭目，豈是隔要薄手足，其道理合如此。禽獸與草木同是愛的，把草木去養禽獸，心又忍得：人與禽獸同是愛的，宰禽獸以養親與供祭祀，燕賓客，心又忍得：至親與路人同是愛的，如簞食豆羹，得則生，不得則死，不能兩全，寧救至親，不救路人，心又忍得：這是道理合該如此。及至吾身與至親，更不得分別彼此厚薄。蓋以仁民愛物皆從此出，此處可忍，更無所不忍矣。《大學》所謂厚薄，是良知上自然的條理，不可踰越，此便謂之義：順言個牒理，便謂之禮；知此條理，便謂之智；終始是這個條理，便謂之信。」

Someone asked: "The great man is one body with things; why does the Great Learning also speak of thick and thin?" The Master said: "It is only that principle itself has thick and thin. For example, the body is one, but using hands and feet to defend the head and eyes is not a deliberate belittling of hands and feet; the principle simply fits so. Birds and beasts and grass and trees are alike loved, yet using grass and trees to feed birds and beasts, how could one bear it? Humans and birds and beasts are alike loved, yet slaughtering birds and beasts to nourish parents, for sacrifices and to entertain guests, how could one bear it? One's closest kin and a stranger are alike loved, yet if there is a bowl of rice and a dish of soup, with whoever gets it living and whoever does not dying, and both cannot be saved, one would rather save one's closest kin and not the stranger; how could one bear it? The principle fittingly is so. But when it comes to one's own body and one's closest kin, there is no distinction of this or that, thick or thin. For benevolence toward people and love of things all come from here; if one can bear this, there is nothing one cannot bear. The thick and thin spoken of in the Great Learning is the natural pattern of innate knowing, which cannot be transgressed; this is called righteousness. To follow this pattern is called ritual. To know this pattern is called wisdom. To be this pattern from beginning to end is called trustworthiness."

○又曰：「目無體，以萬物之色為體；耳無體，以萬物之聲為體；鼻無體，以萬物之臭為體：口無體，以萬物之味為體；心無體，以天地萬物感之是非為體。」

He also said: "The eye has no substance of its own and takes the colors of the myriad things as its substance; the ear has no substance and takes the sounds of the myriad things as its substance; the nose has no substance and takes the smells of the myriad things as its substance; the mouth has no substance and takes the flavors of the myriad things as its substance; the mind has no substance and takes the right and wrong of the response between heaven, earth and the myriad things as its substance."

○問：「天壽不貳：」先生曰：「學問功夫，於一切聲利、嗜好，俱能脫落殆盡，尚有一種生死念頭毫髮掛帶，便於全體有末融釋處。人於生死念頭，本從生身命桹上帶來，故不易去；若於此處見得破，透得過，此心全體方是流行無礙，方是盡悾至命之學。」

Someone asked about "not wavering whether one's life is short or long." The Master said: "In the effort of learning, one may shed nearly all reputation, profit and cravings, but if there is still a hair's breadth of the thought of life and death hanging on, the whole substance still has something unmelted. People's thought of life and death comes originally from the root of life in the living body, so it is not easy to remove. If one can see through and pass beyond it here, the whole substance of the mind flows without hindrance, and this is the learning of fully realizing nature and reaching destiny."

○一友問：「欲於靜坐時，將好名，好色、好貨等根，逐一搜尋，掃除廓清，恐是剜肉做瘡否？」先生正色曰：「這是我醫人的方子，真是去得人病根，更有大本事人過了十數年，亦還用得著。你如不用，且放起，不要怍壞我的力子！」是友愧謝。少閒曰：「此量非你事，必吾們稍知意思者為此說以誤汝。」在坐者皆悚然。

A friend asked: "When sitting in quiet meditation, I want to search out the roots of the love of fame, of women, of goods and so on one by one and sweep them clean; is this perhaps like cutting out healthy flesh to make a sore?" The Master said sternly: "This is my prescription for healing people, and it truly removes the root of people's illness. Even a person of great ability will still find it useful after ten years. If you do not use it, put it aside, and do not spoil my prescription!" The friend was ashamed and apologized. After a while he said: "This view is not yours; it must be that someone among us who knows a little of the idea has said this and misled you." Everyone present was startled.

○一友問功夫不切。先生曰：「學問功夫，我已曾一句道盡，如何今日轉說轉遠，都不著根！」對曰：「致良知蓋聞教矣，然亦須講明。」先生曰：「既知致良知，又何可講明？良知本是明白，實落用功便是；不肯用功，只在語一言上轉說轉楜塗。」曰：「正求講明致之之功。」先生曰：「此亦須你自家求，我亦無別法可道。昔有禪師，人來問法，只把塵尾提起。一日，其徒將其塵尾藏過，試他如何設法。禪師尋塵尾不見，又只空手提起。我這個良知就是設法的塵尾，舍了這個，有何可提得？」少閒，又一友請問功夫切要。先生旁顧曰：「我塵尾安在？」一時在坐著皆躍然。

A friend asked about effort without it being practical. The Master said: "The effort of learning I have already exhausted in one sentence; why do I say it further and further away today, not touching the root at all!" He replied: "I have heard the teaching of extending innate knowing, but it still has to be explained clearly." The Master said: "Since you know extending innate knowing, how can it be explained? Innate knowing is originally clear; simply put effort into it practically. If one is unwilling to put in effort and just turns words around, one only grows more confused." He said: "I am just seeking an explanation of the effort of extending it." The Master said: "This you must seek for yourself, and I have no other method to tell you. Once there was a Chan master, and when people came to ask about the Dharma, he simply lifted his whisk. One day his disciple hid his whisk to test what method he would use. The master looked for the whisk and could not find it, and simply lifted his empty hand. This innate knowing of mine is the whisk of my method. If I give it up, what is there to lift?" After a while another friend asked about the essentials of effort. The Master looked to one side and said: "Where is my whisk?" Everyone present was suddenly enlivened.

○或問至誠前知。先生曰：「誠是實理，只是一個良知。實理之妙用流行就是神，其萌動處就是幾。詼神幾曰聖人。聖人不貴前知；禍福之來，雖聖人有所不免，聖人只是知幾，遇變而通耳。良知無前後，只知得見在的幾，便是一了百了。若有個前知的心，就是私心，就有趨避利害的意。邵子必於前知，終是利害心未盡扈。」

Someone asked about utmost sincerity foreknowing. The Master said: "Sincerity is real principle, and it is just one innate knowing. The wondrous function of real principle flowing is spirit, and its point of stirring is the incipient moment. Sincerity, spirit and incipience are called the sage. The sage does not prize foreknowledge. When misfortune or fortune comes, even a sage cannot avoid it. The sage simply knows the incipient moment and responds through change. Innate knowing has no before or after; knowing only the incipient moment of the present settles everything once and for all. If one has a mind to foreknow, that is a selfish mind, with the intent to pursue gain and avoid harm. Master Shao insisted on foreknowing, and in the end it was a place where his mind of gain and loss was not yet exhausted."

○先生曰：「無知無不知，本體原是如此。譬如日未嘗有心照物，而自無物不照，無照無不照，原是日的本體。良知本無知，今卻要有知，本無不知，今卻疑有不知，只是信不及耳。」

The Master said: "No knowing and nothing unknown: the original substance is thus. For example, the sun has never had a mind to illuminate things, yet there is nothing it does not illuminate. No illuminating and nothing not illuminated is originally the sun's substance. Innate knowing is originally without knowing, yet now one wants it to know; it is originally without anything unknown, yet now one doubts there is something it does not know. It is just a lack of trust."

○先生曰：「『惟天下之聖，為能聰明睿知』，舊看何等玄妙，今看來原是人人自有的；耳原是聰，目原是明，心思原是睿知，聖人只是一能之爾，能處正是良知。眾人不能，只是個不致知。何等明白簡易！」

The Master said: "'Only the most holy under heaven can be keen, bright, wise and knowing.' Formerly I saw this as so mysterious; now I see that everyone originally has it. The ear is originally keen, the eye originally bright, and the heart's thought originally wise and knowing. The sage simply is able in one thing, and what he is able in is innate knowing. Ordinary people cannot, simply because they do not extend their knowing. How clear and simple!"

○問：「孔子所謂遠慮，周公夜以日，與將迎不同何如？」先生曰：「遠慮不是茫茫蕩蕩去思慮，只是要存這天理。天理在人心，互古亙今，無有終始。天理郥是良知，千思萬慮，只是要致良知。良知愈思愈精明，若不精思，漫然隨事應去，真知便粗了。若只著在事上茫茫蕩蕩去思，教做遠慮，便不免有譭譽、得喪、人慾，攙入其中，就是將迎了。周公終夜以思，只是『戒慎不睹，恐懼不聞』的功夫；見得時其氣象與將迎自別。」

Someone asked: "What Confucius called far-reaching thought, and the Duke of Zhou's continuing day into night, are different from sending off and welcoming; how so?" The Master said: "Far-reaching thought does not mean thinking vaguely and boundlessly, but simply wanting to preserve this heavenly principle. Heavenly principle is in the human heart, from ancient times to the present, without end or beginning. Heavenly principle is innate knowing. A thousand thoughts and ten thousand worries are only to extend innate knowing. Innate knowing becomes clearer the more one thinks. If one does not think closely and just responds casually to things, innate knowing becomes coarse. If one dwells vaguely and boundlessly in affairs and calls that far-reaching thought, one cannot avoid the admixture of praise and blame, gain and loss and human desires, and that is sending off and welcoming. The Duke of Zhou thinking through the night was only the effort of 'being cautious about what is not seen and apprehensive about what is not heard.' When one sees it, the manner is different from sending off and welcoming."

○問：「『一日克己復禮，天下歸仁』，朱子作效驗說，如何？」先生曰：「聖賢只是為己之學，重功不重效驗。仁者以萬物為體：不能一體，只是己私未忘。全得仁體，則天下皆歸於吾仁，就是八荒皆在我闥意：天下皆與；其仁亦在其中。如『在邦無怨，在家無怨』，亦只是自家不怨，如『不怨天，不尤人』之意；然家邦無怨於我，亦在其中，但所重不在此。」

Someone asked: "'If for one day one overcomes the self and returns to ritual, the whole world returns to benevolence'; Master Zhu explained this as an effect. How is that?" The Master said: "Sages and worthies pursued only learning for oneself and valued effort, not effects. The benevolent take the myriad things as their body. If one cannot be one body with them, it is only that the self-interest of the self is not forgotten. If one fully realizes the benevolent substance, then the whole world returns to my benevolence, which is the meaning of the eight remote regions all being in my chamber. That all under heaven grant him their benevolence is also included. As in 'no resentment in the state, no resentment in the family,' this too is just one's own absence of resentment, as in 'not resenting heaven, not blaming others'; though that the family and state have no resentment toward me is also included, the emphasis is not there."

○問：「孟子『巧力、聖智』之說，朱子云：『三子力有餘而巧不足。』何如？」先生曰：「三子固有力亦有巧。巧、力實非兩事，巧亦只在用力處，力而不巧，亦是徒力。三子譬如射，一能步箭，一能馬箭，一能遠箭，他射得到俱謂之力，中虛俱可謂之巧；但步不能馬，馬不能遠，各有斫長，便是才力分限有不同處。孔子則三者皆長。然孔子之和只到得柳下惠而極，清只到得伯夷而極，任只到得伊尹而極，何曾加得些子。若謂『三子力有餘而巧不足』，則其力反過孔子了。『巧、力』只是發明『聖、知』之義，若識得『聖、知』本體是何物，便自了然。」

Someone asked: "Mencius's theory of 'skill and strength, sageliness and wisdom,' Master Zhu said 'the three had more than enough strength but not enough skill.' How is that?" The Master said: "The three certainly had strength and also skill. Skill and strength are really not two things. Skill too lies only in where one applies strength, and strength without skill is only wasted strength. The three are like archery: one can shoot on foot, one can shoot on horseback, one can shoot far. That they reach the target is all called strength, and that they hit the mark is all called skill. But the one who shoots on foot cannot do so on horseback, the one on horseback cannot shoot far; each has his strength, and this is where their talents and strength have different limits. Confucius was strong in all three. Yet Confucius's harmony reached its limit only in Liuxia Hui, his purity only in Bo Yi, and his responsibility only in Yi Yin; what could be added? If one says 'the three had more than enough strength but not enough skill,' then their strength would exceed Confucius's. 'Skill and strength' simply elucidates the meaning of 'sageliness and wisdom.' If one recognizes what the original substance of 'sageliness and wisdom' is, it becomes clear."

○先生曰：「『先天而天弗違』，天郥真知也。『後天而奉天時』，良知即天也。」

The Master said: "'Acting before Heaven, and Heaven does not oppose'; Heaven is innate knowing. 'Acting after Heaven, and following Heaven's seasons'; innate knowing is Heaven."

○「良知只是個是非之心：是非只是個好惡，只好惡就盡了是非，只是非就盡了萬事萬變。」又曰：「是非兩字是個大規矩，巧處則存乎其人。」

"Innate knowing is simply the mind of right and wrong. Right and wrong is simply liking and disliking. Liking and disliking alone exhaust right and wrong, and right and wrong alone exhaust ten thousand affairs and ten thousand changes." He also said: "The two words right and wrong are a great compass, and the skill lies in the person."

○「聖人之知，如青天之日，賢人如浮雲天日，愚人如陰霾天日，雖有昏明不同，其能辨黑白則一。雖昏黑夜裡，亦影影見得黑白，就是日之餘光未盡處。因學功夫，亦只從這點明處精察去耳。」

"The knowing of a sage is like the sun in a clear sky; that of a worthy is like the sun in floating clouds; that of a fool is like the sun in a murky haze. Although there is dim and bright, their ability to tell black from white is the same. Even in the dark of night one can faintly see black and white, which is where the sun's remaining light has not been exhausted. The effort of those who learn through hardship is also only to examine closely from this point of brightness."

○問：「知譬日，欲譬云，雲雖能蔽日，亦是天之一氣合有的，欲亦莫非人心臺有否？」先生曰：「喜、怒、哀、懼、愛、惡、欲，諝之七情，七者俱是人心臺有的：但要認得良知明白。比如日光，亦不可指著力斫，一隙通明，皆是日光所在：雖雲霧四塞：太虛中色象可辨，亦是日光不滅處：不可以雲能蔽日，教天不要生雲。七情順其自然之流行，皆是良知之目，不可分別善惡；但不可有所著。七情有著，俱謂之慾，俱為良知之蔽。然才有著時，良知亦自會覺，覺即蔽去，復其體矣。此處能勘得破，力是簡易透徹功夫。」

Someone asked: "Knowing is like the sun and desire is like clouds. Although clouds can cover the sun, they too are an energy that heaven properly has; is desire also something that the human heart properly has?" The Master said: "Joy, anger, sorrow, fear, love, hatred and desire are called the seven emotions. All seven are things the human heart properly has; one only needs to recognize innate knowing clearly. It is like sunlight: one cannot point to any one place, for wherever a gap is bright, that is where the sunlight is. Even when clouds and mist fill all four sides, colors and forms can be told apart in the great emptiness, and this too is where the sunlight has not been extinguished. One cannot say that because clouds can cover the sun, heaven should not produce clouds. If the seven emotions follow their natural flow, all are the function of innate knowing and cannot be divided into good and evil, only they must not be attached to. When the seven emotions have attachment, all are called desire and all become coverings of innate knowing. But as soon as there is attachment, innate knowing itself will notice, and with noticing the covering is gone and the substance is restored. If one can discern this clearly, that is a simple and thorough effort."

○問：「聖人生知、安行是自然的，如何有甚功夫？」先生曰：「知、行二字，即是功夫，但有淺深難易之殊耳。良知原是精精明明的。如欲孝親生知，安行的只是依此真知落實盡孝而已，學知、利行者只是時時省覺，務要依此真知盡孝已：至於困知、勉行者，蔽錮已深，雖要依此良知去孝，又為私慾所阻，是以不能，必須加人一己百、人十己千之功，方能依此真知以盡其孝。聖人雖是生知、安行，然其心不敢自是肯做困知、勉行的功夫。困知、勉行的卻要思量做生知、安行的事，怎生成得？」

Someone asked: "Sages who know by birth and act with ease do so naturally; what effort could they have?" The Master said: "The two words 'knowing' and 'acting' are themselves the effort, but they differ in depth and difficulty. Innate knowing is originally refined and bright. If one wishes to be filial to one's parents, one who knows by birth and acts with ease just relies on this innate knowing and puts filial piety into practice. One who knows through learning and acts for benefit only constantly examines himself and strives to fulfill filial piety by relying on this innate knowing. As for one who knows through hardship and acts through effort, the blockage is already deep; though he wants to be filial by relying on this innate knowing, he is hindered by selfish desire and so cannot, so he must put in a hundred times the effort when others put in one and a thousand times when others put in ten before he can rely on this innate knowing to fulfill his filial piety. Although the sage knows by birth and acts with ease, his mind does not dare to be self-satisfied and he is willing to do the effort of one who knows through hardship and acts through effort. One who knows through hardship and acts through effort, yet thinks of doing the work of one who knows by birth and acts with ease, how can he succeed?"

○問：「樂是心之本體，不知遇大故，於哀哭時，此樂還在否？」先生曰：「須是大哭一番了方樂，不哭便不樂矣；雖哭，此心安處是樂也；本體未嘗有動。」

Someone asked: "Joy is the original substance of the mind, but when one meets a great misfortune and weeps in grief, is this joy still there?" The Master said: "One must weep fully before there is joy; without weeping there is no joy. Even when weeping, where the mind is at peace is joy. The original substance has never moved."

○問：「良知一而已，文王作彖，周公系爻，孔子贊《易》，同以各自看理不同？」先生曰：「聖人何能拘得死格，大要出於良知同，便各為說何害？且如一園竹，只要同此忮節，便是大同：若拘定枝枝節節，都要高下大小一樣，便非造化妙手矣。汝輩只要去培養良知：良知同，更不妨有異處。汝輩若不肯用功，連芛也不曾抽得，何處去論枝節？」

Someone asked: "Innate knowing is just one, yet King Wen composed the judgments, the Duke of Zhou attached the line statements, and Confucius wrote the commentaries on the Book of Changes; why does each see the principle differently?" The Master said: "How could the sages be bound to a dead pattern? As long as the main point comes from the same innate knowing, what harm is there in each giving his own account? Take a garden of bamboo: so long as they share the same branches and joints, that is great sameness. If one insisted that every branch and joint be the same in height and size, one would not be the wondrous hand of creation. You should only cultivate innate knowing. When innate knowing is the same, there is no harm in differences. If you are unwilling to put in effort, you have not even sprouted shoots; where would you discuss branches and joints?"

○鄉人有父子訟獄請訴於先生，侍者欲阻之，先生聽之，言不終辭，其父子相抱慟哭而去：柴鳴治人問曰：「先生何言，致伊感悔之速？」先生曰：我言舜是世間大不孝的子，瞽是世間大慈的父。」鳴冶愕然請問。先生曰：「舜常自以為大不孝，所以能孝：瞽瞍常自以為大慈，所以下能慈：瞽瞍記得舜是我提孩長的，今何不曾豫悅我，不知自心已為後妻所移了，尚謂自家能慈，斫以愈不能慈：舜只思父提孩我時如何愛我，今日不愛，只是我不能盡孝，日思所以不能盡孝虛，所以愈能孝。及至瞽瞍底豫時，又不過復得此心原慈的本體。所以後世稱舜是個古今大孝的子，瞽瞍亦做成個慈父。」

A villager's father and son had a lawsuit and asked the Master to hear them. The attendants wanted to stop it. The Master listened, and before he had finished speaking, the father and son embraced, wept bitterly and left. Chai Mingzhi came in and asked: "What did you say, Master, that moved them to remorse so quickly?" The Master said: "I said that Shun was the most unfilial son in the world and Gusou was the most loving father in the world." Mingzhi was startled and asked for an explanation. The Master said: "Shun always thought himself greatly unfilial, and so was able to be filial; Gusou always thought himself greatly loving, and so could not be loving. Gusou remembered that he had raised Shun from a child, and wondered why Shun now did not please him, without realizing that his own mind had already been swayed by his later wife, still saying he was loving, and so he became less and less able to be loving. Shun only thought of how his father had loved him when raising him as a child, and that if he did not love him now it was because he himself could not fulfill filial piety, and daily thought about where he failed to fulfill filial piety, and so became more and more able to be filial. And when Gusou was finally pleased, it was only that he regained the original loving substance of his mind. That is why later ages call Shun the greatly filial son of all ages, and Gusou also became a loving father."

○先生曰：「孔子有鄙夫來問，未嘗先有知識以應之，其心只空空而已：但叩他自知的是非兩端，與之一剖決，鄙夫之心便已瞭然。鄙夫自知的是非，便是尥本來天則，雖聖人聰明，如何可與增減得一毫？他只不能自信，夫子與之一剖決，便已竭盡無餘了。若夫子與鄙失言時，留得些子知識在，便是不掛竭他的良知，道體即有二了。」

The Master said: "When a rustic came to ask Confucius a question, Confucius never first had knowledge ready to answer; his mind was just empty. He simply tapped the two ends of right and wrong that the man knew himself, and settled them with him, and the rustic's mind became clear. The right and wrong the rustic knew himself was his own original heavenly norm. Even with a sage's intelligence, how could one add or subtract a hair from it? He merely could not trust himself, and when the Master settled it with him, it was exhausted without remainder. If, when the Master spoke with the rustic, he had kept some trace of knowledge back, that would not have exhausted the man's innate knowing, and the substance of the Way would have been two."

○先生曰：「『烝烝乂，不格奸』，本注說象已進於義，不至大為奸惡。舜徵庸後，象猶日以殺舜為事，何大奸惡如之！舜只是自進於乂，以乂熏烝，不去正地奸惡。凡文過揜慝，此是惡人常態；若要指摘他是非，反去激尥惡性。舜初時致得象要殺己，亦是要象好的心太急，此就是舜之過處。經過來，乃知功夫只在自己，不去責人，所以致得『克諧』；此是舜動心忍性、增益不能處。古人言語，俱是自家經歷過來，所以說得親切，遺之後世，曲當人情：若非自家經過，如何得他許多苦心處。」

The Master said: "'Bringing them gradually to order, they did not come to wickedness.' The original commentary says that Xiang had already advanced in righteousness and did not reach great wickedness. After Shun was employed, Xiang still made killing Shun his daily business; what greater wickedness could there be! Shun simply advanced himself toward order and steamed Xiang with order, and did not go correct his wickedness. To cover faults and hide evil is the usual way of wicked people. If one points out their right and wrong, one only provokes their evil nature. At first Shun's making Xiang want to kill him was also because his mind of wanting Xiang to be good was too urgent, which was Shun's fault. Having passed through it, he learned that the effort lies in oneself and does not blame others, and so achieved 'being able to harmonize.' This was Shun's stirring of the mind and toughening of nature, increasing what he could not do. The words of the ancients all come from their own experience, so they are said with such closeness and, left to later ages, fit human feelings in detail. Without one's own experience, how could one reach so much of their painstaking care?"

○先生曰：「古樂不作久矣：今之戲子，尚與古樂意思相近。」未達，請問。先生曰：「『韶』之九成，便是舜的一本戲子：『武』之九變，便是武王的一本戲子。聖人一生實事，俱播在樂中，所以有德者聞之，便知他盡善、盡美與盡美未盡善處。若後世作樂，只是做些詞調，於民俗風化絕無關涉，何以化民善俗！今要民俗反樸還淳，取今之戲子，將妖淫詞調俱去了，只取忠臣、孝子故事，使愚俗百姓人人易曉，無意中感激他良知起來，卻於風化有益；然後古樂漸次可復矣。」曰：「洪要求元聲不可得，恐於古樂亦難復。」先生曰：「你說元聲在何處求？」對曰：「古人制管侯氣，恐是求元聲之法。」先生曰：「若要去葭灰黍粒中求元聲，卻如水底撈月，如何可得？元聲只在你心上求。」曰：「心如何求？」先生曰：「古人為治，先養得人心和平，然後作樂。比如在此歌詩，你的心氣和平，聽者自然悅懌興起，只此便是元聲之始。《書》云：『詩言志』，志便是樂的本：『歌永言』，歌便是作樂的本：『聲依永，律和聲』，律只要和聲，和聲便是制律的本：何嘗求之於外？」曰：「古人制侯氣法，是意何取？」先生曰：「古人具中和之體以作樂，我的中和原與天地之氣相應，候天地之氣，協鳳凰之音，不過去驗我的氣果和否：此是成律已後事，非必待此以成律也。今要侯灰管，必須定至曰：然至日子時恐又不準，又何處取得準來？」

The Master said: "Ancient music has not been performed for a long time. Today's actors are still close in spirit to ancient music." Not understanding, I asked about it. The Master said: "The nine movements of the Shao are a play of Shun; the nine changes of the Wu are a play of King Wu. The sage's whole life of real deeds is all spread in the music, so that those with virtue who hear it know where it is perfectly good and perfectly beautiful and where it is perfectly beautiful but not yet perfectly good. As for the music made in later ages, it is just a set of lyrics and tunes with no relation to popular customs and moral culture; how can it transform the people and improve customs! Now if we want to return the people's customs to simplicity and purity, take today's plays, remove all the seductive and lewd lyrics and tunes, and take only stories of loyal ministers and filial sons, making them easy for ignorant common people to understand, so that without intending it they are moved and their innate knowing is stirred; this would benefit morals and culture. Then ancient music can gradually be restored." I said: "Hong seeks the original tone and cannot find it, and I fear ancient music is also hard to restore." The Master said: "Where do you say the original tone is to be sought?" He answered: "The ancients made pitch pipes and watched for the energy of the seasons; perhaps that is the method of seeking the original tone." The Master said: "If you want to seek the original tone in reed ashes and millet grains, it is like fishing for the moon in water; how could you get it? The original tone is sought only in your own mind." He asked: "How is the mind sought?" The Master said: "The ancients, in governing, first nourished the people's hearts to be harmonious and peaceful, and then made music. For example, if you sing a poem here and your own mind and breath are harmonious and peaceful, the listeners will naturally be pleased and stirred; this is the beginning of the original tone. The Book of Documents says: 'Poetry expresses aspiration'; aspiration is the root of music. 'Song prolongs the words'; song is the root of making music. 'Tones follow the prolongation, and pitches harmonize the tones'; pitch only needs to harmonize tones, and harmonizing tones is the root of fixing pitches. Where is it sought outside?" He asked: "What intent did the ancients take in making the method of watching for the energy of the seasons?" The Master said: "The ancients, having the substance of moderation and harmony within, made music. My moderation and harmony originally respond to the energy of heaven and earth. Watching the energy of heaven and earth and harmonizing the sound of the phoenix is only to verify whether my own energy is truly harmonious. That is something after the pitches are completed, not something one must wait for to complete the pitches. If one wants to watch the ash pipes now, one must fix the solstice. But even the zi hour of the solstice is perhaps not accurate; where would one get accuracy?"

○先生曰：「學問也要點化，但不如自家解化者，自一了百當：不然，亦點化許多不得。」

The Master said: "Learning also needs pointing out and transformation, but it is not as good as understanding and transforming it yourself, which settles everything at once. Otherwise, however much is pointed out, you cannot be transformed."

○「孔子氣魄極大，凡帝王事業，無不一一理會，也只從那心上來：譬如大樹有多少枝葉，也只是根本上用得培養功夫，故自然能如此，非是從枝葉上用功做得根本也。學者學孔子，不在心上用功，汲汲然去學那氣魄，卻倒做了。」

"Confucius's spirit and breadth were extremely great; he dealt with all imperial and royal undertakings one by one, and it all came only from the mind. For example, a great tree has many branches and leaves, yet only the root receives nurturing effort, and so it naturally can be like that; one cannot make the root by working on the branches and leaves. Learners who study Confucius do not work on the mind but eagerly study his spirit and breadth, which is doing it backward."

○「人有過，多於過上用功，就是補甑，其流必歸於文過。」

"When people have faults and mostly work on the fault itself, it is like mending a cracked steamer, and the result will surely be covering up the fault."

○「今人於吃飯時，雖伏二事在前，其心常沒役不寧，只緣此心忙憒了，所以收攝不住。」

"Nowadays, even when eating a meal with nothing before them, people's minds are always busy and restless; it is only because the mind is flustered and confused that it cannot be gathered in."

○「琴、瑟、簡編，學者不可無，蓋有業以居之，心就不放。」

"Learners must not be without a zither, a lute and bamboo slips and books. For when one has a task to dwell in, the mind does not wander."

○先生嘆曰：「世間知學的人，只有這些病痛打不破，就不是善與人同。」崇一曰：「這病痛只是個好高不能忘己爾。」

The Master sighed and said: "Among those in the world who know to learn, it is only these faults that they cannot break; that is, they do not share the good with others." Chongyi said: "This fault is just liking to be lofty and being unable to forget oneself."

○問：「良知原是中和的，如何卻有過、不及？」先生曰：「知得過、不及處，就是中和。」

Someone asked: "Innate knowing is originally moderate and harmonious; how can there be excess and deficiency?" The Master said: "To know where there is excess or deficiency is itself moderation and harmony."

○「『所惡於上」是良知，『毋以使下」即是致知。」

"'What you dislike in those above' is innate knowing; 'do not use it on those below' is extending knowledge."

○先生曰：「蘇秦、張儀之智，也是聖人之資。後世事業文章，許多豪傑名家，只是學得儀、秦故智。儀、秦學術善揣摸人情，無一些不中人肯綮，故其說不能窮。儀、秦亦是窺見得良知妙用處，但用之於不善爾。」

The Master said: "The wisdom of Su Qin and Zhang Yi also had the makings of a sage. In later ages, among the many heroes and famous men in careers and writing, they only learned the old craft of Yi and Qin. The methods of Yi and Qin were good at guessing human feelings and never failed to hit the crux of what people thought, so their arguments could not be exhausted. Yi and Qin also glimpsed the wondrous function of innate knowing, but used it for what is not good."

○或問未發已發。先生曰，「只緣後儒將未發已發分說了。只得劈頭說個無未發已發，使人自思得之。若說有個已發未發，聽者依舊落在後儒見解。若真見得無未發已發，說個有未發已發，原不妨。原有個未發已發在」。問曰，「未發未嘗不和。已發未嘗不中。譬如鐘聲，未扣不付謂無，即扣不付謂有。畢竟有個扣與不扣，「何如」？先生曰，「未扣時原是驚天動地。即扣時也只是寂天默地」。

Someone asked about the unstirred and the stirred. The Master said: "Because later Confucians have spoken of the unstirred and the stirred separately, I could only say right at the start that there is no unstirred or stirred, so people can think it out for themselves. If I said there is a stirred and an unstirred, the listeners would fall back into the later Confucians' view. If one truly sees that there is no unstirred or stirred, then there is no harm in saying there is an unstirred and a stirred, since originally there is an unstirred and stirred." He asked: "The unstirred is never without harmony, and the stirred is never without moderation. Like the sound of a bell: before it is struck one cannot say it is absent, and when struck one cannot say it is present. Yet in the end there is striking and not striking; how is that?" The Master said: "Before it is struck it is already shaking heaven and earth, and when struck it is only silent heaven and earth."

○問：「古人論性，各有異同，何者乃為定論？」先生曰：「性無定體，論亦無定體，有自本體上說者，有自發用上說者，有自源頭上說者，有自流弊處說者：總而言之，只是一個性，但所見有淺深爾。若執定一邊，便不是了。悾之本體，原是無善、無惡的，發用上也原是可以為善、可以為不善的，其流弊也原是一定善、一定惡的。譬如眼，有喜時的眼，有怒時的眼，直視就是看的眼，微視就是覷的眼：總而言之，只是這個眼。若見得怒時眼，就說未嘗有喜的眼，見得看時眼，就說未嘗有覷的眼，皆是執定，就知是錯。孟子說性，直從源頭上說來，亦是說個大溉如此。荀子性惡之說，是從流弊上來，也未可盡說他不是：只是見得未精耳。眾人則失了心之本體。」問：「孟子從源頭上說性，要人用功在源頭上明徹：荀子從流弊說性，功夫只在末流上救正，便費力了。」先生曰：「然。」

Someone asked: "The ancients' discussions of nature each differ; which is the settled view?" The Master said: "Nature has no fixed substance and so the discussion has no fixed form. Some speak from the original substance, some from the functioning, some from the source, and some from the faulty outflow. In sum, there is only one nature, but the views differ in depth. If one holds to one side, it is wrong. The original substance of nature is originally neither good nor evil; in its functioning it can originally be good or not good; and in its faulty outflow it is originally definitely good or definitely evil. It is like the eye: there is the eye in joy, the eye in anger, looking straight is the eye of seeing, and looking slightly is the eye of peeping. In sum, it is just this one eye. If one sees the eye in anger and says there has never been an eye of joy, or sees the eye of looking and says there has never been an eye of peeping, this is all holding fast to one thing, and one sees it is wrong. When Mencius spoke of nature, he went straight to the source, and the point is also a general one. Xunzi's theory that nature is evil comes from the faulty outflow, and one cannot say he is entirely wrong; it is just that his vision was not refined. Ordinary people lose the original substance of the mind." He asked: "Mencius spoke of nature from the source and wanted people to put in effort to be clear at the source; Xunzi spoke of nature from the faulty outflow, and the effort lies only in correcting the end of the stream, which wastes effort." The Master said: "Yes."

○先生曰：「用功到精處，愈著不得言語，說理愈難。若著意在精微上，全體功夫反蔽泥了。」

The Master said: "When effort reaches its refined point, the less words can be applied and the harder it is to explain principle. If one fixes the mind on the subtle and fine, the effort of the whole substance is instead obstructed and muddied."

○楊慈湖不為無見，又著在無聲無臭上見了。」

"Yang Cihu was not without insight, but he too became fixated on seeing in the soundless and odorless."

○人一日間，古今世界都經過一番，只是人不見耳。夜氣清明時，無視無聽，無思無怍，淡然平懷，就是羲皇世界。平旦時，神清氣朗，雍雍穆穆，就是堯、舜世界；日中以前，禮巖交會，氣象秩然，就是三代世界：日中以後，神氣漸昏，往來雜擾，就是春秋、戰國世界；漸漸昏夜，萬物寢息，景象寂寥，就是人消物盡世界。學者信得良知過，不為氣所亂，便常做個羲皇已上人。」

In one day a person passes through all of ancient and modern worlds; it is just that people do not see it. When the night energy is clear and bright, with no seeing or hearing, no thinking or acting, calm and peaceful, that is the world of Fu Xi. At dawn, when the spirit is clear and the air is bright, harmonious and serene, that is the world of Yao and Shun. Before midday, when rites and etiquette meet and the scene is orderly, that is the world of the Three Dynasties. After midday, when spirit and energy grow gradually dim and comings and goings are mixed and disturbed, that is the world of the Spring and Autumn and Warring States. Gradually it grows dusky and dark, the myriad things sleep, and the scene is desolate: that is the world where people disappear and things are exhausted. If learners trust innate knowing and are not disordered by energy, they can always be people from before the age of Fu Xi."

○薛尚謙，鄒謙之，馬子萃，王汝止待坐。因嘆先生自徵寧藩以來，天下謗議益眾。請各言其故。有言先生功業勢位日隆，天下忌之者日眾。有言先生之學日明故為宋儒爭是非者亦日博。有言先生自南都以後，同志信從者日眾，而四方排阻者日力。先曰，「諸君之言，信皆有之。但吾一段自知處，諸君俱未道及耳」。諸友請問。先生曰，「我在南都已前，尚有些子鄉愿的意思在。我今信得這良知真是真非。信手行去。更不著些覆藏。我今繞做得個狂者的胸次。使天下之人都說我行不掩言也罷」。尚謙出曰，「信得此過，方是聖人的真血脈」。

Xue Shangqian, Zou Qianzhi, Ma Zishen and Wang Ruzhi were sitting in attendance. They sighed that since the Master subdued the Ning prince, slander and criticism in the world had grown greater, and asked each to give the reason. Some said that the Master's achievements and position grew greater by the day, so those who envied him grew in number by the day; some said that the Master's learning grew clearer by the day, so those who disputed right and wrong with Song Confucians also grew broader by the day; some said that since the Master left Nanjing, fellow aspirants who believed and followed him grew in number, and those who blocked and resisted him from all quarters also grew stronger. The Master said: "What you gentlemen say is all true. But there is one thing I know about myself that none of you has mentioned." The friends asked what it was. The Master said: "Before I was in Nanjing, I still had a bit of the village-worthy in me. Now I truly believe in this innate knowing as truly right and wrong, and act as it comes to hand without hiding anything. Only now have I attained the breast of a wild one. Let all the world say that my deeds do not cover my words; so be it." Shangqian came out and said: "Only one who can trust this far has the true bloodline of the sages."

○先生鍛鍊人處，一言之下，感人最深。一日，王汝止出遊歸，先生問曰：「遊何見？對曰：「見滿街人都是聖人。」先生曰：「你看滿街人是聖人，滿街人倒看你是聖人在。」又一日，董蘿石出遊而歸，見先生曰：「今日見一異事。」先生曰﹕「何異？」對曰：「見滿街人都是聖人。」先生曰：「此亦常事耳，何足為異？」蓋汝止圭角未融，蘿石恍見有悟，故問同答異，皆反其言而進之。洪與黃正之、張叔謙、汝中丙戌會試歸，為先生道塗中講學，有信有不信。先生曰：「你們拏一個聖人去與人講學，人見聖人來，都怕走了，如何講得行！須做得個愚夫、愚婦，方可與人講學。」洪又言今日要見人品高下最易。先生曰：「何以見之？，」對曰：「先生譬如泰山在前，有不知仰者，須是無目人。」先生曰：「泰山不如平地大，平地有何可見？」先生一言翦裁，剖破終年為外好高之病，在座者莫不悚懼。

The Master's way of tempering people moved them most deeply with a single word. One day, when Wang Ruzhi came back from an outing, the Master asked: "What did you see on your outing?" He answered: "I saw that everyone in the street is a sage." The Master said: "You see everyone in the street as a sage, but everyone in the street sees you as a sage." Another day Dong Luoshi came back from an outing and said to the Master: "Today I saw something strange." The Master said: "What was strange?" He answered: "I saw that everyone in the street is a sage." The Master said: "This is a common matter; what is strange about it?" For Ruzhi's sharp corners had not yet melted, while Luoshi had a sudden glimpse of awakening, so the same question received different answers, each reversing his words to push him forward. Dehong, with Huang Zhengzhi, Zhang Shuqian and Ruzhong, returned from the bingxu metropolitan examination and told the Master about lecturing on the road, where some believed and some did not. The Master said: "You take a sage to lecture to people, and when people see a sage coming they all run away; how can the lecturing succeed! You must become an ordinary man or woman before you can lecture to people." Dehong also said that today it is easiest to see people's character high or low. The Master said: "How can one see it?" He answered: "The Master is like Mount Tai before one; those who do not know to look up to it must be blind." The Master said: "Mount Tai is not as great as level ground; what is there to see in level ground?" With one word the Master cut away the fault of looking outward for loftiness throughout the year, and no one present was not startled and afraid.

○癸末春，鄒謙之來越問學，居數日，先生送別於浮峰。是夕與希淵諸友移舟宿延壽寺，秉燭夜坐，先生慨悵不已，曰：「江濤煙柳，故人倏在百里外矣！」一友問曰：「先生何念謙之之深也？」先生曰：「曾子所謂「以能問於不能，以多問於寡，有若無，宜若虛，犯而不校」，若謙之者良近之矣。」

In the spring of the guiwei year, Zou Qianzhi came to Yue to ask about learning, and after staying a few days the Master saw him off at Fufeng. That evening, with Cai Xiyuan and other friends, he moved his boat and stayed at Yanshou Temple, sitting through the night by candlelight, and the Master sighed without end and said: "River waves and misty willows; an old friend is suddenly a hundred li away!" A friend asked: "Master, why do you think of Qianzhi so deeply?" The Master said: "What Zengzi called 'asking the unable though able, asking the few though many, having though seeming to have not, being full though seeming empty, and not retaliating when offended'; a man like Qianzhi comes quite close to that."

○丁亥年九月，先生起復徵思田，將命行時，德洪與汝中論學；汝中舉先生教言：「無善無惡是心之體，有善有惡是意之動，知善知惡是良知，為善去惡是格物。」德洪曰：「此意如何？」汝中曰：「此恐未是究竟話頭：若說心體是無善、無惡，意亦是無善，無惡的意，知亦是無善、無惡的知，物亦是無善、無惡的物矣。若說意有善、惡，畢竟心體還有善、惡在。」德洪曰：「心體是『天命之性』，原是無善、無惡的：但人有習心，意念上貝有善惡在，格、致、誠、正、修，此正是復那性體功夫，若原無善惡，功夫亦不消說矣：」是夕侍坐天泉橋，各舉詩正。先生曰：「我今將行，正要你們來講破此意。二君之見，正好相資為用，不可各執一邊：我這裡接人，原有此二種。利根之人，直從本原上悟入，人心本體原是明瑩無湍的，原是個未發之中：利根之人一悟本體即是功夫，人己內外一齊俱透了。其次不免有習心在，本體受蔽，故且教在意念上實落為善、去惡，功夫熟後，渣滓去得盡時，本體亦明盡了；。汝中之見，是我這裡接利根人的：德洪之見，是我這裡為其次立法的。二君相取為用，則中人上下皆可引入於道：若各執一邊，跟前便有夫人，便於道體各有未盡。」既而曰：「已後與朋友講學，切不可矢了我的宗旨。無善，無惡是心之禮，有善、有惡是意之動，知善、知惡是良知，為善、去惡是格物。只依我這話頭隨人指點，自沒病痛，此原是徹上徹下功夫。利根之人，世亦難遇。本體功夫一悟盡透，此顏子、明道所不敢承當，豈可輕易望人。人有習心，不教他在良知上實用為善．去惡功夫，只去懸空想個本體，一切事為俱不著實，不過養成一個虛寂；此個病痛不是小小，不可不早說破。」是日德洪、汝中俱有省。

In the ninth month of the dingshou year, the Master was recalled to service to campaign against Sizhou and Tianzhou, and as he was about to set out, Dehong discussed learning with Ruzhong. Ruzhong cited the Master's teaching: "No good and no evil is the substance of the mind; good and evil are the stirring of the intention; knowing good and evil is innate knowing; doing good and removing evil is investigating things." Dehong said: "What is the meaning of this?" Ruzhong said: "I fear this is not the ultimate teaching. If the substance of the mind is without good or evil, then intention is also intention without good or evil, knowing is also knowing without good or evil, and things are also things without good or evil. If one says intention has good and evil, then in the end the substance of the mind still has good and evil in it." Dehong said: "The substance of the mind is 'the nature decreed by Heaven' and originally is without good or evil. But people have habituated minds, and in intention good and evil appear. Investigating, extending, making sincere, rectifying and cultivating is precisely the effort of recovering that nature's substance. If it were originally without good or evil, there would be no need even to speak of effort." That evening they sat in attendance at Tianquan Bridge and each presented his view for correction. The Master said: "I am about to leave, and I wanted you to come and explain this meaning fully. The views of you two are just right for mutual use and must not each cling to one side. Those I receive here originally fall into these two kinds. People of sharp roots go straight in from the source. The original substance of the human mind is originally bright and clear and without stagnation, originally the mean before stirring. For people of sharp roots, one awakening to the original substance is effort, and others and self, inner and outer, are all penetrated at once. The next kind cannot avoid having habituated minds, with the original substance covered, so I teach them for the time being to put effort into doing good and removing evil in their intentions. When effort is mature and the dregs are all removed, the original substance is also fully bright. Ruzhong's view is how I receive people of sharp roots; Dehong's view is how I set up methods for the next kind. If you two take from each other and use them together, people of middling grade, upper and lower, can all be led into the Way. If each clings to one side, then right before you there will be people lost, and each will have something incomplete about the substance of the Way." Then he said: "Afterward, when lecturing with friends, you must not lose my doctrine. No good and no evil is the substance of the mind; good and evil are the stirring of the intention; knowing good and evil is innate knowing; doing good and removing evil is investigating things. If you simply follow this teaching in guiding people, there will be no fault. This is an effort that penetrates both upward and downward. People of sharp roots are hard to meet in the world. To awaken to the original substance and effort and penetrate fully at one stroke is something that even Yan Zi and Mingdao did not dare claim, so how can one lightly hope for it in others? If people have habituated minds and one does not teach them to put real effort into doing good and removing evil on the basis of innate knowing, but only has them imagine an original substance in the air, then all their conduct is ungrounded, and they will only grow into emptiness and stillness. This fault is no small matter and I must say it plainly early." That day Dehong and Ruzhong both had insight.

先生初歸越時，朋友蹤跡尚寥落，既後四方來遊者日進：癸末年已後，環先生而居者比屋，如天妃、光相諸剎，每當一室，常合食者數十人，夜無臥處，更相就帟，歌聲徹昏旦。南鎮、禹穴、陽明洞諸山遠近寺剎，徒足所列，無非同志遊寓所在。先生每臨講座，前後左右環坐而聽者，常不下數百人，送往迎來，月無虛曰：至有在侍更歲，不能遍記其姓名者。每臨別，先生常嘆日；「君等雖別，不出天地間，苟同此志，吾亦可以忘形似矣。」諸生每聽講出門，未嘗不跳躍稱快。嘗聞之同門先輩曰：「南都以前，朋友從遊者雖眾。末有如在越之盛者。此雖講學日久，孚信漸博，要亦先生之學日進，感召之機，申變無力，亦自有不同也。」此後門人黃以方錄

When the Master first returned to Yue, friends were still few and scattered, but later those who came from all quarters increased daily. After the guiwei year, those who lived around the Master filled whole rows of houses, in temples such as Tianfei and Guangxiang; in each room there were often dozens eating together, and at night there was not enough room to sleep so they took turns at the mats, with singing that continued from dusk to dawn. In the mountain temples near and far, such as Nanzhen, Yu's Cave and Yangming Cave, the places visited on foot were all where fellow aspirants stayed. Whenever the Master took the lecture seat, those seated around in front, behind, left and right listening often numbered no fewer than several hundred; sending off those departing and welcoming those arriving, there was no month without such days. Some stayed in attendance for a year and could not remember all their names. At each parting the Master often sighed and said: "Though you gentlemen part, you do not go beyond heaven and earth, and if we share this aspiration, I can also forget physical likeness." Whenever the students left after a lecture, they invariably leapt and exclaimed in delight. I once heard from senior fellow students: "Before Nanjing, although many friends studied with him, there was none as flourishing as in Yue. Though this was because the lecturing had gone on for a long time and trust had gradually broadened, it was also because the Master's learning advanced daily, and the occasions for stirring and summoning, and divine transformation without limit, were also different." What follows was recorded by the later disciple Huang Yifang.

○黃以方問：「『博學於文」為隨事學存此天理，然則謂『行有餘力，則以學文』，其說似不相合。」先生曰：「《詩》、《書》、六藝皆是天理之發見，文字都包在其中，考之《詩》、《書》、六藝，皆所以學存此天理也，不特發見於事為者方為文耳。「餘力學文」，亦只「博學於文』中事。」或問「學而不思」二句。曰：「此亦有為而言，其實思即學也。學有所疑，便須恩之。『思而不學』者，蓋有此等人，只懸空去思，要想出一個道理，卻不在身心上宜用其力，以學存此天理：思與學作兩事做，故有『罔」與「殆」之病。其穴思只是思其所學，原非兩事也。」

Huang Yifang asked: "'Study the culture broadly' means to learn according to affairs to preserve this heavenly principle; but then 'when one has strength left over after conduct, study the culture' seems not to fit." The Master said: "The Odes, the Documents and the Six Arts are all manifestations of heavenly principle, and writing is all contained in them. To study the Odes, the Documents and the Six Arts is all to learn to preserve this heavenly principle; it is not only what appears in affairs that counts as culture. 'Studying culture with spare strength' is also just a matter within 'studying the culture broadly.'" Someone asked about the two sentences on "learning without thinking." He said: "This too was said for a purpose; in truth thinking is learning. When learning has doubt, one must think about it. As for 'thinking without learning,' there are such people who only think in the void, wanting to think up a principle, but do not truly apply effort on body and mind to learn to preserve this heavenly principle. They make thinking and learning two things, and so have the faults of 'being lost' and 'being in peril.' In fact thinking is just thinking about what one has learned, and they were never two things."

○先生曰：「先儒解「格物」為『格天下之物」，天下之物如何格得？且謂一草一木亦皆有理，今如何去格？縱格得草木來，如何反來誠得自家意？我解『格』作『正』字義，『物』作『事』字義。（大學》之所謂『身』，即耳、目、口、鼻、四肢是也。欲修身便是要目非禮勿視，耳非禮勿聽，口非禮勿言，四肢非禮勿動。要修這個身，身上如何用得工夫？心者身之主宰，目雖視而所以視者心也，耳雖聽而所以聽者心也，口與四肢雖言、動而所以言、動者心也，故欲修身在於體當自家心愷，常令廓然大公，無有些子不正處。主宰一正，則發竅於目，自無非禮之視；發竅於耳，自無非禮之聽；發竅於口與四肢，自無非禮之言、動；此便是修身在正其心。然至善者，心之本體也，心之本體那有不善？如今要正心，本體上何處用得功？必就心之援動處才可著力也。心之發動不能無不善，故須就此處著力，便是在誠意。如一念發在好善上，便實實落落去好善，一念發在惡惡上，便實實落落去惡惡，意之所發，既無不誠，則其本體如何有不正的？故欲正其心在誠意。工夫到誠意，始有著落處。然誠意之本，又在於致知也。斫謂人雖不知而已所獨知者，此正是吾心良知處。然知得善，卻不依這個良知便做去，知得不善，卻不依這個真知便不去做，則這個真知便遮蔽了，是不能致知也。吾心良知既不得擴充到底，則善雖知好，不能著實好了，惡雖知惡，不能著實惡了，如何得意誠？故致知者，意誠之本也。然亦不是孫空的致知，致知在實事上格。如意在於為善，便就這件事上去為，意在於去惡，便就這件事上去不為；去惡固是格不正以歸於正，為善則不善正了，亦是格不正以歸於正也。如此，則吾心良知無私慾蔽了，得以致其極，而意之所發，好善、去惡，無有不誠矣。誠意工夫實下手處在挌物也。

The Master said: "Earlier Confucians explained 'investigating things' as 'investigating all the things under Heaven.' But how can all the things under Heaven be investigated? And they say that every blade of grass and every tree has its principle; how would one investigate them now? Even if one did investigate the grass and trees, how could that in turn make one's own intention sincere? I explain 'investigate' as meaning 'rectify,' and 'thing' as meaning 'affair.' What the Great Learning calls 'the person' is just the ears, eyes, mouth, nose and four limbs. To cultivate the person is to look at nothing improper with the eyes, listen to nothing improper with the ears, say nothing improper with the mouth, and do nothing improper with the four limbs. But to cultivate this person, how can one apply effort to the body? The mind is the master of the body. Although the eyes see, it is the mind that makes them see; although the ears hear, it is the mind that makes them hear; although the mouth and limbs speak and move, it is the mind that makes them speak and move. So to cultivate the person lies in embodying one's own mind and intention, always keeping it open, vast and impartial, without the slightest point that is not upright. When the master is upright, then in its opening through the eyes there is naturally no improper seeing; in its opening through the ears, no improper hearing; in its opening through the mouth and limbs, no improper speech or movement. This is what is meant by cultivating the person lying in rectifying the mind. But the highest good is the original substance of the mind. How could the original substance of the mind be anything but good? Now, to rectify the mind, where can effort be applied on the original substance? One must apply strength at the point where the mind begins to stir. The stirring of the mind cannot be without some that is not good, so one must apply strength right there, and that is making the intention sincere. If a thought arises toward loving the good, one loves the good in truth and substance; if a thought arises toward hating evil, one hates evil in truth and substance. When what the intention puts forth is nowhere insincere, how could its original substance be anything but upright? So to rectify the mind lies in making the intention sincere. Only when effort reaches making the intention sincere does it have something to rest on. Yet the root of sincere intention lies in extending knowing. What is meant by 'what others do not know, but one alone knows' is precisely the place of the innate knowing of my mind. But if one knows what is good and yet does not act according to this innate knowing, or knows what is not good and yet does not refrain according to this innate knowing, then this innate knowing is obscured and one cannot extend knowing. When the innate knowing of my mind cannot be expanded to the end, then although I know good is to be liked, I cannot truly like it; although I know evil is to be hated, I cannot truly hate it; how can the intention be made sincere? So extending knowing is the root of sincere intention. But it is not an empty, hanging extension of knowing; extending knowing is investigated in actual affairs. If the intention is to do good, then one does it in this very matter; if the intention is to remove evil, then one refrains in this very matter. To remove evil is of course to rectify what is not upright and return it to uprightness; and to do good is to make what was not good upright, which is also rectifying what is not upright and returning it to uprightness. In this way the innate knowing of my mind is not obscured by selfish desires and can be extended to its limit, and what the intention puts forth, in loving good and removing evil, is nowhere insincere. The actual place to begin making the intention sincere is investigating things."

若如此格物，人人便做得：人皆可以為堯、舜，正在此也。」

(The Master continued:) "If investigating things is done this way, everyone can do it. That everyone can become a Yao or a Shun lies precisely here."

○先生曰：「眾人只說「格物」要依晦翁，何曾把他的說去用！我著實曾用來。初年與錢友同論做聖賢要格天下之物，如今安得這等大的力量：因指亭前竹子，令去挌看。錢子早夜去窮格竹子的道理，竭其心思至於三日，便致勞神成疾。當初說他這是精力不足，某因自去箬格，早夜不得其理，到七日，亦以勞思致疾，遂相與嘆聖賢是做不得的他大力量去格物了。及在夷中三年，頗見得此意思，方知天下之物本無可格者；其格物之功，只在身心上做；決然以聖人為人人可到，便自有擔當了。這裡意思，卻要說與諸公知道。」

The Master said: "People only say that 'investigating things' must follow Master Zhu, but when have they ever actually put his teaching to use! I truly did use it. In my early years, I discussed with my friend Qian that to become a sage or worthy one must investigate all the things under Heaven, and said, where would one now find such great strength? Then I pointed to the bamboo in front of the pavilion and told him to go investigate it. Qian investigated the principle of the bamboo from morning to night, exhausting his mind and thought for three days, until he fell ill from overwork. At first I said he lacked the strength, so I went myself to investigate it, but from morning to night I could not get its principle, and by the seventh day I too fell ill from overthinking; so together we sighed that being a sage or worthy is not for us, for we lack the great strength to investigate things. Later, after three years among the barbarians, I came to see this meaning fairly well, and only then knew that there was originally nothing among the things under Heaven that could be investigated; the work of investigating things is done only on the body and mind. I became firmly convinced that everyone can reach the state of a sage, and so I had something to take on as my own responsibility. I want to tell you all this meaning."

○門人有言邵端峰論童子不能格物，只教以儷掃、應對之說。先生曰：「儷掃、應對就是一件物。童子良知只到此便教去儷掃、應對，就是致他這一點頁知了。又如童子知畏先生長者，此亦是他良知了。故雖嬉戲中見了先生長者，便去作揖恭敬，是他能格物以致敬師長之頁知了。童子自有童子的挌物致知。」又曰：「我這裡言挌物，自童子以至聖人，皆是此等工夬：但聖人格物，便更熟得些子，不消費力如此格物，雖賣柴人亦是做得，雖公卿大夫以至天子，皆是如此做。」

A disciple mentioned that Shao Duanfeng, discussing how a child cannot investigate things, taught them only sweeping and answering. The Master said: "Sweeping and answering are themselves a thing. The child's innate knowing reaches only this far, so teaching him to sweep and answer is extending this little bit of innate knowing. Likewise, a child knows to fear teachers and elders, and this too is his innate knowing. So even in the midst of play, when he sees a teacher or elder, he bows and is respectful, which means he can investigate things to extend his innate knowing of respect for teachers and elders. A child has his own investigating of things and extending of knowing." He added: "The investigating of things I speak of here is the same kind of effort from the child up to the sage. Only the sage's investigating of things is somewhat more practiced and takes no effort. Investigating things in this way can be done even by a woodcutter, and even by ministers, senior officers and up to the Son of Heaven; all do it this way."

○或疑知行不合一，以「知之匪艱」二句為問。先生曰：「良知自知，原是容易的；只是不能致那良知，便是『知之匪艱，行之惟艱』；」

Someone doubted that knowing and acting are not unified, and asked about the two sentences beginning 'Knowing is not hard.' The Master said: "Innate knowing knows by itself; that is originally easy. It is only the failure to extend that innate knowing that makes it 'knowing is not hard, acting is what is hard.'"

○門人問曰：「知、行如何得合一？且如《中庸》言『博學之」，又說個「篤行之」，分明知、行是兩件。」先生曰：「博學只是事事學存此天理，篤行只是學之不已之意。」又問：「《易》『學以聚之』，又言『仁以行之』，此是如何？」先生曰：「也是如此。事事去學存此天理，則此心更無放矢時，故曰：「學以聚之。」然常常學存此天理，更無私慾間斷，此即是此心不息處，故曰「仁以行之」。」又問：「孔子言『知及之，仁不能守之」，知行卻是兩個了。」先生曰：「說「及之」，已是行了，但不能常常行，已為私慾間斷，便是「仁不能守」。」又問：「心郥理之說，程子云『在物為理」，如何謂心即理？」先生曰：「在物為理，在字上當添一心字：此心在物則為理，如此心在事父則為孝，在事君則為忠之類。」先生因謂之曰：「諸君要識得我立言宗旨。我如今說個心即理是如何，只為世人分心與理為二，故便有許多病痛。如五伯掇夷狄，弅周室，都是一個私心，使不當理，人卻說他做得當理，只心有未純，往往悅慕其所為，要來外面做得好看，卻與心全不相干。分心與理為二，其流至於伯道之偽而不自知。故我說個心即理，要使知心理是一個？便來心上做工夫，不去英義於外，便是王道之真。此我立言宗旨。」又問：「聖賢言語許多，如何卻要打做一個？」曰：「我不是要打做一個，如日「夫道一而已矣。』又曰「其為物不二，則其生物不測。」天地聖人皆是一個，如何二得？」

A disciple asked: "How can knowing and acting be unified? For example, the Doctrine of the Mean says 'study it broadly,' and also says 'practice it earnestly,' so clearly knowing and acting are two things." The Master said: "Studying broadly is only studying in every matter to preserve this heavenly principle, and practicing earnestly is only the meaning of never ceasing to study." He asked again: "The Book of Changes says 'gather it through learning' and also says 'practice it through humaneness'; what is that?" The Master said: "It is the same. Studying in every matter to preserve this heavenly principle means this mind is never lost, so it is said 'gather it through learning.' But constantly studying to preserve this heavenly principle, with no interruption by selfish desires, is the place where this mind does not cease, so it is said 'practice it through humaneness.'" He asked again: "Confucius said 'knowing may reach it, but humaneness cannot hold it,' so knowing and acting are two." The Master said: "To say 'reach it' is already acting, but if one cannot act constantly and it is interrupted by selfish desires, that is 'humaneness cannot hold it.'" He asked again: "On the teaching that the mind is principle, Master Cheng said 'principle is in things'; how can one say the mind is principle?" The Master said: "In 'principle is in things,' the word 'in' should have the word 'mind' added: this mind in things is principle. For example, this mind in serving one's father is filial piety, in serving one's ruler is loyalty, and so on." The Master then said to them: "All of you must know the main point of my teaching. Why do I now say the mind is principle? It is only because people of the world divide the mind and principle into two, and so have many ailments. For example, when the Five Hegemons repelled the barbarians and honored the Zhou house, it was all one selfish mind and did not accord with principle. People say he did what accords with principle, but only because their own minds are not pure, they often admire what he did and want to make things look good outside, which has nothing at all to do with the mind. Dividing the mind and principle into two leads at last to the falseness of the way of hegemony without one's knowing it. So I say the mind is principle, so that people know the mind and principle are one and come to work on the mind, and do not borrow righteousness from outside, which is the truth of the kingly way. This is the main point of my teaching." He asked again: "The sages and worthies said so many things; why must they be made into one?" He said: "It is not that I want to make them into one. As it says 'the Way is one and that is all,' and also 'in being a thing it is not two, so its giving birth to things is unfathomable.' Heaven, Earth and the sages are all one, so how can they be two?"

○「心不是一塊血肉，凡知覺處便是心；如耳目之知視聽，手足之知痛癢，此知覺便是心也。」

"The mind is not a lump of blood and flesh; wherever there is awareness, that is the mind. For example, the ears and eyes know seeing and hearing, and the hands and feet know pain and itching; this awareness is the mind."

○以方問曰：「先生之說「格物」，凡《中庸》之「慎獨」及「集義」「博約」等說，皆為『格物」之事。」先生曰：「非也，格物即慎擉，即戒懼；至於『集義』『博約』，工夫只一般，不是以那數件都做『格物』底事。」

Huang Yifang asked: "As to your teaching on 'investigating things,' the Doctrine of the Mean's 'being watchful when alone,' and the teachings on 'accumulating righteousness' and 'broad learning and restraint' are all matters of 'investigating things.'" The Master said: "Not so. Investigating things is itself being watchful when alone, which is itself being cautious and apprehensive; as to 'accumulating righteousness' and 'broad learning and restraint,' the work is just the same, and it is not that those several items are all made into matters of 'investigating things.'"

○以方問「咠德性」一條。先生曰：「『道問學』即所以「尊德性』也。晦翁言子靜以『尊德性』晦人，某教人豈不是『道問學」處多了些子，是分『尊德性氣道問學』作兩件且如今講習討論下許多工夫，無非只是存此心，不失其德性而已：豈有『尊德性』只空空去尊，更不去問學，問學只是空空去問學，更與德性無關涉？如此，則不知今之所以講習討論者，更學何事！」問「致廣大」二句。曰：「『盡精微』即所以「致廣大」也，「道中庸」郥所以『極高明』也。蓋心之本體自是廣大底，人不能『盡精微』，則便為私慾所蔽，有不勝其小者矣。故能細微曲折，無所不盡，則私意不足以蔽之，自無許多障礙遮隔處，如何廣大不致？」又問：「精微還是念慮之精微，事理之精微？」曰：「念慮之精微，即事理之精微也。」

Huang Yifang asked about the passage on 'honoring the virtuous nature.' The Master said: "'Following the path of inquiry and study' is itself how one 'honors the virtuous nature.' Master Zhu said that Zijing taught people by 'honoring the virtuous nature,' while my teaching of people has somewhat more on 'following the path of inquiry and study,' which divides 'honoring the virtuous nature' and 'following the path of inquiry and study' into two things. But all the effort now put into lecturing, studying and discussing is nothing but preserving this mind and not losing its virtuous nature. How could 'honoring the virtuous nature' be only an empty honoring without any inquiry and study, and inquiry and study be an empty inquiry and study with nothing to do with the virtuous nature? If so, I do not know what else we would study in our present lecturing, studying and discussing!" He asked about the two sentences beginning 'reach the broad and great.' He said: "'Exhausting the fine and subtle' is itself how one 'reaches the broad and great,' and 'following the Mean' is itself how one 'reaches the lofty and bright.' The original substance of the mind is naturally broad and great, but if a person cannot 'exhaust the fine and subtle,' then he is obscured by selfish desires and is overcome by petty things. So if one can be fine and subtle and go through every turn, exhausting everything, then selfish intentions are not enough to obscure it, and naturally there are not so many obstructions and barriers, so how could the broad and great not be reached?" He asked again: "Is the fine and subtle the fineness of thought, or the fineness of affairs and principles?" He said: "The fineness of thought is itself the fineness of affairs and principles."

○先生曰：「今之論性者，紛紛異同，皆是說性，非見性也。見性者無異同之可言矣。」

The Master said: "Those who now discuss human nature differ in countless ways, but they are all speaking about nature and have not seen nature. For those who have seen nature, there is no difference or similarity left to speak of."

○問：「聲、色、貨、利，恐良知亦不能無。」先生曰：「固然。但初學用功，卻須掃除盪滌，勿使留積，則適然來遇，始不為累，自然順而應之。良知只在聲、色、貨、利上用功。能致得良知精精明明，毫髮無蔽，則聲、色、貨、利之交，無非天則流行矣。」

Someone asked: "As for sound, form, wealth and profit, I fear that innate knowing cannot be without them." The Master said: "Certainly. But when a beginner applies effort, he must sweep and wash them away and not let them accumulate; then when they happen to come he is not burdened by them and naturally responds in accord. Innate knowing is applied just in sound, form, wealth and profit. If one can extend innate knowing until it is clear and bright, without a hair's obscuring, then in the interactions with sound, form, wealth and profit, everything is the flow of the heavenly norm."

○先生曰：「吾與諸公講『致知』『格物』，日日是此，講一二十年俱是如此。諸君聽吾言，實去用功，見吾講一番，自覺長進一番；否則只怍一場話說，雖聽之一同用。」

The Master said: "When I discuss 'extending knowing' and 'investigating things' with you, it is this every day, and for ten or twenty years it has been just this. If you listen to my words and actually apply effort, then each time you hear me discuss it you will feel you have progressed; otherwise it is only a talk, and hearing it is no different from not hearing it."

○先生曰：「人之本體，常常是寂然不動的，常常是感而遂通的。未應不是先，已應不是後。」

The Master said: "The original substance of a person is always still and unmoving, and is always responsive and comprehending when stirred. Before responding is not earlier, and after responding is not later."

○一友舉佛家以手指顯出，問曰，「眾曾見否」？眾曰，「見之」。復以手指入袖。問曰，「眾還見否」？眾曰，「不見」。佛說還未見性。此義未明。先生曰，「手指有見有不見。爾之見性，常在人之心神。只在有睹有聞上馳騖。不在不睹不聞上著實用功。盡不睹不聞，實良知本體。戒慎恐懼，是致良知的功夫。學者時時刻刻常睹其所不睹，常聞其所不聞，功夫方有個實落處。久久成熟後，則不須著力，不待防檢，而真性自不息亦。豈以在外者之聞見為累哉」？

A friend cited the Buddhists' showing of a finger and asked: "Have you all seen it?" The assembly said: "We have seen it." Then the finger was put into the sleeve and he asked: "Do you still see it?" The assembly said: "We do not." The Buddha said they had not yet seen their nature. The meaning was unclear. The Master said: "The finger can be seen or not seen. Your seeing of the nature is always present. People's mind and spirit only gallop in having seen and having heard, and do not apply real effort in not seeing and not hearing. For not seeing and not hearing is truly the original substance of innate knowing. Being cautious and apprehensive is the effort of extending innate knowing. When learners at every moment constantly see what is not seen and constantly hear what is not heard, then effort has a place to land. After long maturing it requires no strength, no guarding or checking, and the true nature naturally does not cease. How could it be burdened by what is seen and heard outside?"

○問：「先儒謂鳶飛魚躍，與『必有事焉」，同一活潑潑地。」先生曰：「亦是。天地閒活潑潑地，無非此理，便是吾良知的流行不息，『致良知」便是『必有事」的工夫。此理非惟不可離，實亦不得而離也。無往而非道，無往而非工夫。」

Someone asked: "Earlier Confucians said that the kite flying and the fish leaping are the same lively place as 'there must be work to be done.'" The Master said: "Yes. The liveliness between Heaven and Earth is nothing but this principle, which is the unceasing flow of my innate knowing. 'Extending innate knowing' is the work of 'there must be work to be done.' This principle not only must not be left, it really cannot be left. There is nowhere that is not the Way, and nowhere that is not effort."

○先生曰：「諸公在此，務要立個必為聖人之心，時時刻刻須是一棒一條痕，一摑一拳血，方能聽吾說話，句句得力。若茫茫蕩蕩度日，譬如一塊死肉，打也不知得痛症，恐終不濟事，回家只尋得舊時伎倆而已，豈不惜哉？」

The Master said: "All of you here must establish a mind resolved to become a sage. At every moment it must be a stripe for each blow and blood for each slap, and only then can you listen to my words and have every sentence take effect. If you drift through the days vaguely and idly, like a lump of dead flesh that cannot feel pain or itch when struck, I fear it will never help. You will go home and find only your old tricks; is that not a pity?"

○問：「近來妄念也覺少，亦覺不曾著想定要如何用功，不知此是工夫否？」先生曰：「汝且去著實用功，便多這些著想也不妨，久久自會妥帖；若才下得些功，便說效驗，何足為恃！」

Someone asked: "Recently I find I have fewer deluded thoughts, and I also feel I have not been deliberately thinking about how to apply effort. I do not know if this is effort." The Master said: "Just go and apply real effort, and even having a bit more deliberation does no harm; with time it will settle properly. If you apply a little effort and immediately speak of its effect, what is there to rely on!"

○一友自嘆：「私意萌時，分明自心知得，只是不能使他即去。」先生曰：「你萌時，這一知處便是你的命根，當下即去消磨，便是立命工夫。」

A friend lamented: "When a selfish intention sprouts, my own mind clearly knows it, but I cannot make it leave at once." The Master said: "At the moment of sprouting, this place of knowing is your life-root. To wear it away right then is the work of establishing one's destiny."

○「夫子說「性相近』，即孟子說「性善』，不可專在氣質上說。若說氣質，如剛與柔對，如何相近得，惟性善則同耳。人生初時善，原是同的，但剛的習於善則為剛善，習於惡則為剛惡，柔的習於善則為柔善，習於惡則為柔惡，便日相遠了。」

"The Master said 'By nature people are close,' which is Mencius's saying that 'nature is good,' and it should not be spoken of in terms of physical temperament alone. If speaking of temperament, firm is opposed to soft, so how could they be close? Only nature being good makes them the same. At birth people are good and originally the same. But the firm one who becomes habituated to good is firm and good, and if habituated to evil is firm and evil; the soft one who becomes habituated to good is soft and good, and if habituated to evil is soft and evil; so they grow further apart day by day."

○先生嘗語學者曰：「心禮上著不得一念留滯，就如眼著不得些子塵沙，些子能得幾多；滿眼便昏天黑地了。」又曰：「這一念不但是私念；便好的念頭亦著不得些子如眼中放些金玉屑，眼亦開不得了。」

The Master once said to his students: "On the substance of the mind one cannot allow a single thought to linger, just as the eye cannot allow a speck of dust or sand. How much can a speck be? Yet if the whole eye is full, everything is dark. He also said: "This thought is not only a selfish thought; even a good thought cannot be allowed to linger a bit. It is like putting a bit of gold or jade dust in the eye, and the eye cannot open either."

○問：「人心與物同體，如吾身原是血氣流通的，所以謂之同體：若於人便異體了，禽、獸、草、木益遠矣。而何謂之同體？」先生曰：「你只在感應之几上看；豈但禽、獸、草、木，雖天、地也與我同體的，鬼、神也與我同體的。」請問。先生曰：「你看這個天、地中間，甚麼是天、地的心？」對曰：「嘗聞人是天地的心。」曰：「人又甚麼叫做心？」對曰：「只是一個靈明。」「可妯充天塞地中間，只有這個靈明。人只為形體自問隔了。我的靈明，便是天、地、苨、神的主宰。天沒有我的靈明，誰去仰地高？地沒有我的靈明，誰去俯他深？鬼、神沒有我的靈明，誰去辯他吉、兇、災、祥？天、地、鬼、神、萬物，離卻我的靈明，便沒有天、地、鬼、神、萬物了；我的亞明，離卻天、地、鬼、神、萬物，亦沒有我的靈明。如此，便是一氣流通的，如何與他間隔得？」又問：「天、地、鬼、神、萬物，千古見在，何沒了我的靈明，便俱無了？」曰：「今看死的人，他這些精靈遊散了，他的天、地、鬼、神、萬物尚在何處？」

Someone asked: "A person's mind is of one body with things. Like my own body, which is originally filled with flowing blood and breath, and so is called one body; but with other people it is a different body, and with birds, beasts, grass and trees it is even farther. Why is it called one body?" The Master said: "Just look at the point of stimulus and response. Not only birds, beasts, grass and trees, even Heaven and Earth are of one body with me, and ghosts and spirits are of one body with me." He asked for an explanation. The Master said: "Look at what is between this Heaven and Earth: what is the mind of Heaven and Earth?" He answered: "I have heard that a person is the mind of Heaven and Earth." He said: "And what is the mind of a person?" He answered: "It is just a spiritual brightness." "You can see that filling Heaven and Earth there is only this spiritual brightness. People are separated only by their physical forms. My spiritual brightness is the master of Heaven, Earth, ghosts and spirits. If Heaven did not have my spiritual brightness, who would look up to its height? If Earth did not have my spiritual brightness, who would look down at its depth? If ghosts and spirits did not have my spiritual brightness, who would discern their good and ill fortune, disasters and omens? Heaven, Earth, ghosts, spirits and the myriad things, apart from my spiritual brightness, would not be Heaven, Earth, ghosts, spirits and the myriad things; and my spiritual brightness, apart from Heaven, Earth, ghosts, spirits and the myriad things, would also not be my spiritual brightness. In this way it is one qi flowing through, so how can I be separated from them?" He asked again: "Heaven, Earth, ghosts, spirits and the myriad things have existed through the ages; why would they all vanish once my spiritual brightness is gone?" He said: "Look now at a dead person. His spirit has wandered and scattered, so where are his Heaven, Earth, ghosts, spirits and the myriad things?"

○先生起行徵思田，德洪與汝中追送嚴灘，汝中舉佛家寅相幻相之說。先生曰：「有心俱是實，無心俱是幻；無心俱是實，有心俱是幻。」汝中曰：「有心俱是穴，無心俱是幻，是本體上說工夫：無心俱是寅，有心俱是幻，是工夫上說本體。」先生然其言。洪於是時尚未了達，數年用功，始信本體、工夫合一。但先生是時因問偶談，若吾儒指點人處，不必藉此立言耳。」

When the Master set out to campaign against Sien and Tianzhou, Dehong and Ruzhong saw him off as far as Yan Rapids. Ruzhong raised the Buddhist teaching of real form and illusory form. The Master said: "If there is mind, all is real; if there is no mind, all is illusion. If there is no mind, all is real; if there is mind, all is illusion." Ruzhong said: "'If there is mind, all is real; if no mind, all is illusion' speaks of effort in terms of original substance; 'if no mind, all is real; if mind, all is illusion' speaks of original substance in terms of effort." The Master agreed. At that time Hong still did not understand fully, and only after several years of effort did he come to believe that original substance and effort are unified. But the Master at that time spoke only in answer to a casual question; in the places where we Confucians point people to the Way, there is no need to borrow this to set up a teaching."

○嘗見先生送二三耆宿出門，退坐於中軒，若有憂色。德洪趨進請問。先生曰：「頃與諸老論及此學，真員鑿方柄。此道坦如道路，世儒往往自加荒塞，終身陷荊棘之場而不悔，吾不知其何說也？」德洪退謂朋友曰：「先生誨人，不擇衰朽，仁人憫物之心也。」

I once saw the Master see two or three elders to the door, then withdraw and sit in the central hall, looking as if he had some worry. Dehong went forward and asked about it. The Master said: "Just now I discussed this learning with the old gentlemen, and it was truly like a round peg in a square hole. This Way is as level as a road, but worldly Confucians often block and overgrow it themselves, and spend their whole lives trapped among brambles without regret; I do not know what they would say." Dehong withdrew and said to his friends: "The Master teaches people without picking out the old and decrepit, which is the heart of a humane man who pities others."

○先生曰：「人生大病，只是一傲字。為子而傲必不孝，為臣而傲必不忠，為父而傲必不慈，為友而傲必不信。故象與丹朱俱不肖，亦只一傲字，便結果了此生。諸君常要體此人心本是天然之理，精精明明，無致介染著，只是一無我而已：胸中切不可有，有即傲也。古先聖人許多好處，也只是無我而已，無我自能謙。謙者眾善之基，傲者眾惡之魁。」

The Master said: "The great ailment of human life is just the one word pride. A son who is proud is surely unfilial, a minister who is proud is surely disloyal, a father who is proud is surely unkind, and a friend who is proud is surely untrustworthy. So Xiang and Danzhu were both unworthy, and just the single word pride brought their lives to ruin. All of you should always reflect on this. The human mind is originally the natural principle, clear and bright, without the slightest stain, and is only a matter of having no self. One must never have anything in the chest; to have it is pride. The many good qualities of the ancient sages were also only having no self. Having no self, one is naturally humble. Humility is the foundation of all good, and pride is the chief of all evil."

○又曰：「此道至簡至易的，亦至精至微的。孔子曰：『其如示諸掌乎：』且人於掌何日不見，及至問他掌中多少文理，卻便不知，即如我良知二字，一講便明，誰不知得：若欲的見良知，卻誰能見得？」問曰：「此知恐是無方體的，最離捉摸。」先生曰，二真知即是《易》，『其為道也屢遷，變動不居，周流六虛，上下無常，剛柔相易，不可為典要，惟變所適。』此知如何捉摸得？見得透時便是聖人。」

(The Master continued:) "This Way is extremely simple and easy, and also extremely fine and subtle. Confucius said: 'It would be like looking at the palm of one's hand!' Yet which day do people not see their palms, but when asked how many lines are in the palm, they do not know. As with my two words 'innate knowing,' once explained they are clear, and who does not know them? But if one wishes to see innate knowing truly, who can see it?" He asked: "I fear that this knowing has no fixed form and is hardest to grasp." The Master said: "Innate knowing is the Changes: 'As a way it shifts often, with changes that do not dwell, flowing through the six empty places, going up and down without constancy, with firm and soft exchanging, so that it cannot be made a fixed rule, and only follows change.' How can this knowing be grasped? When one sees through it, one is a sage."

○問：「孔子曰：『回也非助我者也。』是聖人果以相助望門弟子否？」先生曰：「亦是實話。此道本無窮盡，問難愈多，則精微愈顯。聖人之言本自周遍，但有問難的人胸中窒礙，聖人被他一難，發揮得愈加精神。若顏子聞一知十，胸中瞭然，如何得問難：故聖人亦寂然不動，無所發揮，故日非助。」

Someone asked: "Confucius said: 'Hui is not one who helps me.' Does the sage really hope for help from his disciples?" The Master said: "It is true. This Way is originally without limit, and the more questions and objections there are, the more its fineness is revealed. The sage's words are originally all-encompassing, but when there is someone with objections whose chest is blocked, the sage, challenged by him, elaborates with even more spirit. If it were Yan Zi, who heard one thing and understood ten, whose chest was clear, how could he have objections? So the sage was also still and unmoving and had nothing to elaborate, hence the saying 'not one who helps.'"

○鄒謙之嘗語德洪曰：「舒國裳曾持一張紙，請先生寫『拱把之恫梓』一章。先生懸筆為書到『至於身而不知所以養之者』，顧而笑曰：『國裳讀書，中過狀元來豈誠不知身之所以當養，還須誦此以求警。』一時在侍諸友皆惕然。」

Zou Qianzhi once said to Dehong: "Shu Guoshang once held a sheet of paper and asked the Master to write the chapter 'A tree of one or two handbreadths.' The Master wrote with his brush raised, and when he reached 'but as for the body, they do not know how to nurture it,' he looked around and laughed, saying: 'Guoshang has read books and passed the exam as top scholar; is it that he truly does not know how the body should be nurtured? He still must recite this to seek a warning.' All the friends attending at the time were struck with awe."

嘉靖戊子冬德洪與王汝中奔師喪至廣信，訃告同門，約三年收錄遺言。後同門各以所記遺。洪擇其於問正者，合所私錄，得若干條。居吳時，將與文錄並刻矣。適以憂去，未遂當是時也，方講學日眾，師門宗旨既明，若無事於贅刻者，故不復縈念。去年，同門曾子漢得洪手抄復傍為採輯，名曰遺言，以刻行於荊。洪誑之，覺當時採錄精，力為刪其重，削去蕪蔓存其三分之一，名曰《傳習續錄》，復刻於寧國之水西精舍。今年夏，洪來遊蘄，沉君思長曰：「師門之教久行於四方，而獨未及於蘄。蘄之士得讀遺言若親，夫子之教，指見良知，若重靚日月之光。惟恐傳習之不博，而未以重複之為繁也，請哀其所逸者增刻之。若何？」洪曰：「然師門致知格物之旨，開示來學，學者躬修默悟，不敢以知解承，而惟以實體得，故吾師終日言是而不憚其煩，學者終日聽是而不厭其數。蓋指示專一，則皚悟日精，幾迎於言前，神發於言外，感遇之誠也。今吾師之沒未及三紀，而格言微旨漸覺淪晦，豈非吾黨身踐之不力，多言有以病之耶？學者之趨不一，師門之教不宣也。」乃復取逸稿，採其語之不背者，得一卷。其餘影響不真，與文錄既載者，皆削之。並易中卷為問答語，以付黃梅尹張君增刻之。庶幾誑者不以知解承而惟以實體得，則無疑於是錄矣。各靖丙辰夏四月，門人錢德洪拜古於斬之崇正書院。

In the winter of the wuzi year of Jiajing, Dehong and Wang Ruzhong hurried to the Master's funeral and reached Guangxin, and sent notice to fellow disciples, agreeing to collect his remaining words over three years. Later fellow disciples each sent what they had recorded. Hong selected those that were correct in their questions, combined them with what he had privately recorded, and obtained a number of entries. While living in Wu, I was going to print them together with the Collected Writings, but I happened to leave because of mourning and it was not done. At that time lecturing was becoming more and more popular, and since the main point of the Master's teaching was already clear, it seemed no one needed redundant printing, so I no longer thought of it. Last year, my fellow disciple Zeng Zihan obtained my handwritten copy and further collected more beside it, called it Remaining Words, and printed it in Jing. When I read it, I felt that the selection at that time was not careful, so I worked to remove the repetitions and trim the weeds, keeping a third, and called it the Continued Record of Instruction and Practice, and printed it again at the Shuixi Study in Ningguo. This summer, I came to travel in Qi. Mr. Shen Siwei said: "The Master's teaching has long been practiced in all directions, but has not yet reached Qi. If the scholars of Qi could read the Remaining Words, it would be like personally receiving the Master's teaching; pointing to innate knowing, it would be like seeing the light of the sun and moon again. I fear only that the transmission and practice is not broad enough, and do not mind repetition as burdensome. May I ask you to take pity on what was left out and print it additionally?" Hong said: "Yes. The Master's main point of extending knowing and investigating things was shown to later learners, and learners cultivated it personally and understood it silently, not daring to take it up through intellectual understanding but only to attain it by embodiment. So my teacher spoke of this all day without fear of burden, and learners listened to this all day without tiring of its frequency. For when the pointing is single-minded, awakening grows finer day by day, the subtle sign meets before the words, and the spirit is released beyond the words, which is the sincerity of stimulus and encounter. Now it has not yet been thirty-six years since my teacher's death, and his maxims and subtle meanings gradually seem to sink into obscurity; is it not that our group did not practice it vigorously and that too much talk has harmed it? Learners head in different directions, and the Master's teaching is not proclaimed." So I again took the left-out drafts and selected from them the words that did not go against it, and obtained one fascicle. The rest, whose echoes were not true, and those already recorded in the Collected Writings, I all removed. I also changed the middle fascicle into question-and-answer form and handed it to Magistrate Zhang of Huangmei to print additionally. May readers not take it up through intellectual understanding but attain it only by embodiment, and then they will have no doubt about this record. In the fourth month of summer in the bingchen year of Jiajing, written with a bow by the disciple Qian Dehong at the Chongzheng Academy in Qi.