Chuan Xi Lu (傳習錄) · Volume 8
○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."