Chuan Xi Lu (傳習錄) · Volume 1

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."