Jin Si Lu (近思錄) · Volume 10

聖人為戒必於方盛之時方其盛而不知戒故狃安富則驕侈生樂舒肆則紀綱壊忘禍亂則釁孽萌是以浸淫不知亂之至也【臨卦彖傳驕侈每生於安富之餘綱紀每廢於舒肆之日釁端禍孽每兆於無虞之中故方盛之時實將衰之漸聖人為戒於早則可保其長盛】

"The sage gives warning precisely when things are at their height. If one does not know to take warning in prosperity, one becomes used to peace and wealth and arrogance and extravagance arise; one delights in ease and license and discipline decays; one forgets calamity and disorder and the seeds of trouble sprout; so gradually one soaks in it and does not know disorder has come. [The Judgment commentary of Lin. Arrogance and extravagance are always born after peace and wealth, discipline always decays in days of ease and license, and the seeds of calamity always appear in times of no worry. So the time of height is really the gradual beginning of decline. If the sage warns early, one can preserve long prosperity.]"

復之六三以隂躁處動之極復之頻數而不能固者也【震下坤上為復三既隂躁又處震動之終其於復善也躁動而不能固守者也】復貴安固頻複頻失不安於復也復善而屢失危之道也【有失而後有復屢復而屢失不當其徳危之道也】聖人開其遷善之道與其復而危其屢失故云厲無咎不可以頻失而戒其復也頻失則為危屢復何咎過在失而不在復也【屢失故危厲屢復故無咎無咎者補過之稱也】劉質夫曰頻復不已遂至迷復【劉絢字質夫程子門人也頻複頻失而不止久則玩溺而不能復必至上九之迷復矣】

"The third yin line of Fu, being yin and restless, is at the extreme of movement, so it returns again and again and cannot hold firm. [Zhen below and Kun above make Fu. The third line is both yin and restless and located at the end of Zhen's stirring, so it is restless and cannot hold fast to the good of returning.] Return values steadiness and firmness. Returning again and again and losing again and again is being unsettled in return. To return to goodness yet lose it repeatedly is the way of danger. [Only after losing is there return; to return repeatedly and lose repeatedly fails to fit the virtue and is the way of danger.] The sage opens the way of turning toward goodness, and approves the return while seeing danger in the repeated loss, hence he says 'danger, but no blame': one must not warn against returning because of frequent loss. Frequent loss is dangerous, but what blame is there in repeated return? The fault lies in the losing, not the returning. [Repeated loss is why there is danger, repeated return is why there is no blame. 'No blame' is the word for making amends.] Liu Zhifu said: 'Return again and again without end, and one ends in a confused return.' [Liu Xuan, styled Zhifu, was a disciple of Master Cheng. To return and lose again and again without stopping, in time one becomes absorbed and drowned and cannot return, and ends in the confused return of the top yang line.]"

伊川先生曰睽極則咈戾而難合剛極則躁暴而不詳明極則過察而多疑聧之上九有六三之正應實不孤而其才性如此自睽孤也【兊下離上為睽上居睽之終是睽之極也以九居上是剛之極也居離之終是明之極也有是一者何往而不睽孤哉雖有正應亦不合矣】如人雖有親黨而多自疑猜妄生乖離雖處骨肉親黨之間而常孤獨也【多自疑猜過明之患也妄生乖離遇剛好睽之致也】

Master Yichuan said: "When estrangement reaches its extreme, there is conflict and difficulty in uniting; when firmness reaches its extreme, there is violence and ill omen; when clarity reaches its extreme, there is over-scrutiny and much suspicion. The top yang line of Kui has the proper correspondent in the third yin line and truly is not alone, but with such a temperament it is estranged and solitary of itself. [Dui below and Li above make Kui. The top line is at the end of Kui, the extreme of estrangement; as a yang line at the top it is the extreme of firmness; at the end of Li it is the extreme of clarity. With these three, wherever it goes it will be estranged and alone. Even with a proper correspondent it does not unite.] It is like a person who, though having kin and friends, is often suspicious and distrustful and needlessly creates estrangement, so that even among flesh and blood he is always alone. [Much self-suspicion is the fault of excessive clarity, and needlessly creating estrangement is the result of meeting one's own firmness and being fond of estrangement.]"

解之六三曰負且乘致寇至貞吝伊川易傳曰小人而竊盛位雖勉為正事而氣質卑下本非在上之物終可吝也【負者小人之事也乘者君子之器也故為小人竊盛位之象勉為正事者貞也然而隂柔卑下之質冒居內卦之上非其所安是以吝也】若能大正則如何曰大正非隂柔所能也若能之則是化為君子矣

On the third yin line of Jie: "Carrying a load while riding, he invites robbers; though correct, there is shame." Yichuan's Commentary on the Changes says: "A petty person who usurps a prominent position, though he strives to do what is right, is of low quality and by nature does not belong above, and in the end there is shame. [Carrying is the work of petty people and riding is the vehicle of gentlemen, hence the image of a petty person usurping a high position. Striving to do what is right is 'correct'; but a soft, low-grade nature that occupies the top of the inner trigram is not where it is at ease, and hence 'shame'.] If he could be greatly correct, what then? I say: great correctness is not within the power of the yin and soft. If he could achieve it, he would have been transformed into a gentleman."

益之上九曰莫益之或擊之伊川易傳曰理者天下之至公利者眾人所同欲苟公其心不失其正理則與眾同利無侵於人人亦欲與之若切於好利蔽於自私求自益以損於人則人亦與之力爭故莫肯益之而有擊奪之者矣【在上者推至公之理而與眾同其利則眾亦與之同其利苟懐自私之心而惟利己則人亦各欲利其己而奪其所利矣益之上九人莫益之而或擊之者以其求益之過也】

On the top yang line of Yi: "No one benefits him, and someone strikes him." Yichuan's Commentary on the Changes says: "Principle is the utmost impartiality of the world, and profit is what the multitude all desire. If one is impartial in his mind and does not lose right principle, he shares profit with the multitude, encroaches on none, and others are willing to share with him. If one is keen on profit and blinded by self-interest, seeking to benefit himself at others' expense, then others contend with him strongly, so no one is willing to benefit him and some strike him and seize from him. [One in high position who extends the principle of utmost impartiality and shares benefit with the multitude will find the multitude sharing benefit with him; if he harbors a selfish mind and cares only for his own profit, each person will want to profit himself and take away what he profits. In the top yang line of Yi, no one benefits him and someone strikes him, because his seeking benefit is excessive.]"

艮之九三曰艮其限列其夤厲薰心伊川易傳曰夫止道貴乎得宜行止不能以時而定於一其堅強如此則處世乖戾與物睽絶其危甚矣【限界分也列絶也夤膂肉也亦一身上下之限也三居內卦之上實內外之分故取象皆為限止之義所貴於止者謂各得所宜止而無過與不及也不度時中而一於限止焉堅執強忍如此則違世絶物危厲甚矣】人之固止一隅而舉世莫與宜者則艱蹇忿畏焚撓其中豈有安裕之理厲薰心謂不安之勢薰爍其中也

On the third yang line of Gen: "Stopping at the waist, splitting the flesh along the spine; danger sears the heart." Yichuan's Commentary on the Changes says: "The Way of stopping values what is fitting. If one's going and stopping cannot be settled according to the time but are fixed to one course, being so rigid, one will be perverse in the world and cut off from things, and the danger is great. [A limit is a boundary, 'split' means cut off, and the spinal flesh is the dividing line between the upper and lower body. The third line sits at the top of the inner trigram and really is the division between inner and outer, so all the images are of limit and stopping. What is valued in stopping is that each thing finds what is fitting, and stops without excess or deficiency. If one does not measure the timely mean and is fixed on stopping at a limit, holding on stubbornly and enduring so, one will run against the world and cut off from things, and the danger is great.] A person who sticks to one corner while the whole world cannot suit him will have hardship, frustration, anger, and fear burning and troubling him within; how could there be any ease and room? 'Danger sears the heart' means the force of unease scorches him within."

大率以說而動安有不失正者【歸妹彖傳兊下震上為歸妹兊說也震動也心有所好樂則不得其正況從欲而忘返者耶】

"In general, when one moves from delight, how could one not lose what is correct? [The Judgment commentary of Gui Mei. Dui below and Zhen above make Gui Mei. Dui is delight and Zhen is movement. If the mind has what it likes and enjoys, it does not obtain what is correct; how much more when one follows desire and forgets to return?]"

男女有尊卑之序夫婦有倡隨之理此常理也若徇情肆欲惟說是動男牽欲而失其剛婦狃說而忘其順則兇而無所利矣【同上震長男兊少女以說而動則徇情肆欲必且失其常理而致兇矣】雖舜之聖且畏巧言令色說之惑人易入而可懼也如此【兊卦六五傳巧言者工佞之言令色者善柔之色皆務以恱人也人心喜順惡逆故巧言令色易以惑人凡說之道皆然不可不戒也】

"Men and women have an order of high and low, and husband and wife have the principle of leading and following; this is constant principle. If one indulges feeling and gives rein to desire and moves only from delight, the man being pulled by desire loses his firmness and the woman, accustomed to delight, forgets her compliance, and the result is misfortune with nothing gained. [Same as above. Zhen is the eldest son and Dui the youngest daughter. To move by delight is to indulge feeling and give rein to desire, and one will surely lose constant principle and meet misfortune.] Even the sage Shun feared glib words and a flattering countenance: how easily delight enters and deludes people, and how fearful this is. [The commentary on the fifth yin line of Dui. Glib words are the speech of skilled flatterers, a flattering countenance is a soft and ingratiating look, and both aim to please. People's hearts like compliance and dislike opposition, so glib words and flattering looks easily delude. All ways of delight are like this and one must be on guard against them.]"

治水天下之大任也非其至公之心能捨己從人盡天下之議則不能成其功豈方命圯族者所能乎【方不順也命天理也圯族敗類也夫任天下之大事者非一人之私智所能集要必合天下之謀而後可也苟上不順乎天理下不依乎群情恃其才智任己而行烏能有濟】鯀雖九年而功弗成然其所治固非他人所及也惟其功有敘故其自任益強咈戾圯類益甚公議隔而人心離矣是其惡益顯而其功卒不可成也【經說下同公議隔而得失莫聞人心離而事業莫與共之者矣】

"Controlling the flood was the great task of the world. Without a mind of utmost impartiality able to give up one's own view and follow others and exhaust the opinions of the world, one could not accomplish this; how could one who disobeys orders and harms his kin do it? [To 'disobey' is not to comply; 'orders' means heavenly principle; harming kin means destroying one's own kind. One entrusted with a great matter of the world cannot gather it by one man's private cleverness and must unite the plans of the world before it can be done. If above one does not comply with heavenly principle and below one does not rely on the feelings of the multitude, relying on one's talent and acting on one's own, how can anything be accomplished?] Though Gun labored nine years and did not succeed, his handling of the flood was certainly beyond what others could do. Because his work had some order, he trusted himself the more, grew ever more perverse and destructive of his own kind, and public opinion was cut off and people's hearts were estranged. Thus his evil grew more evident and his work could never be completed. [From here on all from the Discourse on the Classics. When public opinion is cut off, no one hears of gains and losses; when people's hearts are estranged, there is no one to share the work.]"

君子敬以直內微生高所枉雖小而害直則大【子曰孰謂微生高直或乞醯焉乞諸其隣而與之微生姓高名君子敬以直內不容有一毫之邪枉所謂直也微生高以無為有曲意徇人蓋邪枉之態不能掩者事雖微所以害於直者甚大故聖人因以立教】

"The gentleman is upright within through reverence. What Weisheng Gao bent was small, but the harm to uprightness was great. [Confucius said: who says Weisheng Gao is upright? When someone begged vinegar from him, he begged it from a neighbor and gave it. Weisheng is the surname and Gao the name. The gentleman is upright within through reverence and allows not a hair's breadth of crookedness, which is what is called uprightness. Weisheng Gao pretended to have what he did not and bent his intention to please others, a crooked posture that cannot be concealed. Though the matter was small, the harm to uprightness was great, and so the sage took it to establish teaching.]"

人有欲則無剛剛則不屈於欲【謝上蔡曰剛與欲正相反能勝物之謂剛故常伸於萬物之上為物掩之謂欲故常屈於萬物之下】

"A person with desires has no firmness; one who is firm does not bend to desires. [Xie Shangcai said: firmness and desire are exact opposites. One who can overcome things is called firm and so always stands above the myriad things; one who is covered by things is called desiring and so always bends beneath the myriad things.]"

人之過也各於其類君子常失於厚小人常失於薄君子過於愛小人傷於忍【君子小人之分在於仁與不仁而已故仁者之過常在於厚與愛不仁者之過常在於薄與忍】

"People's faults each belong to their kind: the gentleman often errs on the side of generosity, the petty person often errs on the side of meanness; the gentleman's excess is in love, the petty person's harm is in cruelty. [The distinction between gentleman and petty person lies in benevolence and its lack. So the faults of the benevolent are always in generosity and love, and the faults of the unbenevolent always in meanness and cruelty.]"

明道先生曰富貴驕人固不善學問驕人害亦不細【遺書下同○君子之學為己而已以學問驕人非特其學為務外而傲惰敗徳學亦不進矣】

Master Mingdao said: "That wealth and rank make people arrogant is certainly bad, but that learning makes people arrogant does no small harm either. [From here on all from the Surviving Writings. The gentleman's learning is for himself alone. To be arrogant with learning means not only that his learning is aimed outward, but also that pride and laziness ruin virtue and the learning does not advance.]"

人以料事為明便駸駸入逆詐億不信去也【子曰不逆詐不億不信朱子曰逆未至而迎之也億未見而意之也愚謂事而無情曰詐言而無實曰不信詐者巧而不信者誕也揚子云謂匿行曰詐易言曰誕是也若事未顯而逆料臆度之則自流於巧而惑於疑未必得事之情實矣人以料事為明者必至於是周子曰謂能疑為明何啻千里】

"If a person takes anticipating events to be intelligence, he gradually slides into presuming deceit and suspecting bad faith. [Confucius said: do not presume deceit or suspect bad faith. Zhu Xi said: to presume is to meet what has not yet come, and to suspect is to guess at what has not yet been seen. Ye Cai comments: acting without sincerity is called deceit, and speaking without substance is called bad faith. The deceitful are crafty and those of bad faith are bombastic. Yang Ziyun said that hiding one's conduct is deceit and taking speech lightly is bombast. If events have not yet appeared and one presumes and guesses at them, one flows into craftiness and is deluded by suspicion, and does not necessarily get the real facts. A person who takes anticipating events as intelligence will certainly come to this. Master Zhou said: to call the ability to suspect intelligence is off by more than a thousand li.]"

人於外物奉身者事事要好只有自家一個身與心卻不要好苟得外面物好時卻不知道自家身與心卻巳先不好了也【所謂以小害大賤害貴者也】

"People want everything good in the outside things that serve their bodies, but only their own body and mind they do not want to be good. If they get the outer things good, they do not know that their own body and mind have already become bad. [This is what is called harming the great by the small and the noble by the base.]"

人於天理昏者是隻為嗜慾亂著他莊子言其嗜慾深者其天機淺此言卻最是【嗜慾多則志亂氣昏而天理微矣二者常相為消長】伊川先生曰閱機事之久機心必生葢方其閱時心必喜既喜則如種下種子【荘子曰有機械者必有機事有機事者必有機心】疑病者未有事至時先有疑端在心周羅事者先有周事之端在心皆病也【周羅俚語猶兜攬也事未至而有好疑喜事之端則事至之時有不當疑而疑不當攬而攬者矣故治心者必去其端】

"People who are dim about heavenly principle are only confused by appetites and desires. Zhuangzi said that those whose appetites and desires are deep have shallow heavenly springs, and this saying is most true. [Many appetites and desires confuse the will and darken qi, and heavenly principle becomes faint; the two always rise and fall against each other.] Master Yichuan said: "If one watches clever schemes for long, a scheming mind is sure to arise. For when one watches, the mind must be pleased, and once pleased it is like planting a seed. [Zhuangzi said: those who have machines will have machine affairs, and those with machine affairs will have a machine mind.] A suspicious person, before anything has come, has a seed of suspicion already in his mind; one who is a busybody has the seed of meddling already in his mind; both are illnesses. [A 'busybody' is colloquial, meaning someone who gathers things up. Before things come, to have a seed of being fond of suspicion or fond of affairs means that when things come one suspects what should not be suspected and takes on what should not be taken on. So one who governs the mind must remove the seed.]"

較事大小其弊為枉尺直尋之病【事無大小惟理是視或者有苟成急就之意謂道雖少屈而所伸者大義雖微害而所利者博則有冒而為之者原其初心止於權大小遂至枉尺直尋其末流之弊乃有不可勝言矣】

"To weigh the size of a matter is to fall into the fault of bending a foot to straighten eight. [In matters, large or small, look only to principle. Someone may have a mind to get things done quickly and say that though the Way is bent a little, what is gained is great, and though righteousness is slightly harmed, what is benefited is broad, and so dares to proceed. If one traces the original intent, it was only to weigh large against small, and that leads to bending a foot to straighten eight, and the evils at the end of the stream are beyond telling.]"

小人小丈夫不合小了他本不是惡【性無不善而局於氣質汩於利慾者自小之耳】

"The petty person, the small man: one should not belittle him, for he is not originally evil." [Nature is never not good; those who are confined by their physical endowment and drowned in desire for profit have only made themselves small.]

雖公天下事若用私意為之便是私【事出於公而以私意為之即是私也故學者以正心為本論人者必察其心不徒考其事】

"Even in handling the public affairs of the world, if one does it with private intent, it is private." [When a matter comes from the public good but is done with private intent, it is private. So the learner takes rectifying the heart as the root, and one who judges others must examine their hearts and not merely examine their deeds.]

做官奪人志【仕而志於富貴者固不必言或馳騖乎是非予奪之境而此志動於喜怒愛惡之私或經營於建功立業之間而此志防於計度區畫之巧徳未成而從政者未有不奪其志學者所當深省也】驕是氣盈吝是氣歉人若吝時於財上亦不足於事上亦不足凡百事皆不足必有歉歉之色【驕矜誇吝鄙嗇也驕氣盈者常覺其有餘吝氣歉者常覺其不足惟君子所志者道故無時而盈亦無所不足】

"Holding office robs a person of his resolve." [It goes without saying for those who take office with their will set on wealth and rank. Some race about in the realm of right and wrong, granting and taking away, so that the will is stirred by private joy, anger, love and hatred; others busy themselves in achieving merit and establishing careers, so that the will is trapped (the original has "fang" here) in clever calculation and planning. Those who enter government before their virtue is complete never fail to have their resolve robbed. Learners should reflect deeply on this.] "Arrogance is a surplus of qi; stinginess is a deficit of qi. When a person is stingy, he feels short in wealth, short in affairs, short in everything, and must wear a look of constant lack." [Arrogance is boasting; stinginess is meanness and miserliness. The one whose qi is in surplus always feels he has more than enough, and the one whose qi is in deficit always feels he lacks. Only the gentleman sets his will on the Way, and so he is never full yet never lacking in anything.]

未知道者如醉人方其醉時無所不至及其醒也莫不愧恥人之未知學者自視以為無缺及既知學反思前日所為則駭且懼矣

"One who does not yet know the Way is like a drunk: while drunk he goes to any length, and when he sobers he is ashamed. People who have not yet learned regard themselves as without flaw; once they know learning and look back on what they did before, they are alarmed and afraid."

邢恕雲一日三防檢明道曰可哀也哉其餘時理會甚事葢仿三省之說錯了可見不曾用功又多逐人面上說一般話明道責之邢曰無可說明道曰無可說便不得不說【曾子三省謂日以三事自省邢仿其言乃雲一日三次防檢】

Xing Shu said: "Each day I guard and check myself three times." Mingdao said: "How pitiful! What do you attend to the rest of the time?" He had imitated the Master Zeng's three daily self-examinations wrongly, which shows he had never applied effort. He also tended to say the same kind of words to each person's face. Mingdao rebuked him. Xing said: "There is nothing to say." Mingdao said: "If there is nothing to say, then you must say something." [Master Zeng's three examinations meant examining himself daily on three matters. Xing imitated his words and said he guarded and checked himself three times a day.]

橫渠先生曰學者舍禮義則飽食終日無所猷為與下民一致所事不逾衣食之間燕逰之樂耳【正防】

Master Hengqu said: "If a learner abandons ritual and rightness, he eats his fill all day with nothing to undertake, and is the same as the common people, his concerns going no further than clothing and food and the pleasures of banquets and outings." [From the Zhengmeng (the original has "fang" here for "zheng").]

鄭衛之音悲哀令人意思留連又生怠惰之意從而致驕淫之心雖珍玩竒貨其始惑人也亦不如是切從而生無限嗜好故孔子曰必放之亦是聖人經歴過但聖人能不為物所移耳【橫渠禮樂說】

"The music of Zheng and Wey is mournful, makes people's thoughts linger, and also breeds a spirit of laziness, which then leads to a heart of arrogance and licentiousness. Even precious curios and rare goods at first do not entice people so keenly, and from them arise endless cravings. That is why Confucius said it must be banished; he too, as a sage, had been through this, only a sage can avoid being swayed by things." [From Hengqu's Liyue shuo (Explanation of Ritual and Music).]

孟子言反經特於鄉原之後者以鄉原大者不先立心中初無主惟是左右看順人情不欲違一生如此【橫渠孟子說經常也古今不易之常道也是是非非必有定理而好善惡惡必有定見今鄉原浮沈俯仰無所可否葢其義理不立中無所主惟務恱人以是終身乃亂常之尤者君子反經復其常道則是非昭然而鄉原偽言偽行不得以惑之矣】

"When Mencius speaks of returning to the constant norm, he places it specifically after the village worthy, because the village worthy has not first established what is great; at the start his mind has no master, and he only looks left and right, goes along with human feelings, and does not want to offend anyone, living his whole life this way." [From Hengqu's Mengzi shuo. The constant norm is the constant Way that has not changed from ancient times to the present. Right and wrong must have fixed principle, and loving good and hating evil must have settled view. The village worthy now drifts and bobs, bows and bends, saying neither yes nor no; his rightness and principle are not established and his mind has no master, and he only works to please others, doing so all his life, which is the worst kind of disordering of the constant. The gentleman returns to the constant norm and restores its constant Way, so that right and wrong are clear, and the village worthy's false words and deeds cannot confuse him.]

此卷辨異端葢君子之學雖已至然異端之辨尤不可以不明苟於此有毫釐之未辨則貽害於人心者甚矣

This volume distinguishes heterodoxies. Even when the gentleman's learning has reached its goal, the distinction of heterodoxies must be made all the more clear. If on this point even a hair's breadth is left undistinguished, the harm done to the human heart is great.

明道先生曰楊墨之害甚於申韓佛老之害甚於楊墨【楊朱墨翟詳見孟子申不害者鄭人以刑名幹韓昭侯昭侯用以為相韓非韓之諸公子善刑名法術之學佛者本西域之人為寂滅之學自漢以來其說始入中國老者周柱下史老耼也其書論清浄無為之道】楊氏為我疑於仁墨氏兼愛疑於義申韓則淺陋易見故孟子只闢楊墨為其惑世之甚也【楊氏為我可謂自私而不仁矣然而猶疑似於無慾之仁墨氏兼愛可謂氾濫而無義矣然猶疑似於無私之義故足以惑人也若申韓之刑名功利淺陋而易見故孟子但闢楊墨恐其為人心之害而申韓不足闢也】佛老其言近理又非楊墨之比此所以為害尤甚楊墨之害亦經孟子闢之所以廓如也【遺書下同佛氏言心性老氏談道徳皆近於理又非楊墨之比故其為人心之害尤甚揚子云曰古者楊墨塞路孟子辭而闢之廓如也朱子曰楊朱即老耼弟子孟子闢楊墨則老莊在其中矣】

Master Mingdao said: "The harm of Yang and Mo is greater than that of Shen and Han, and the harm of Buddhism and Daoism is greater than that of Yang and Mo." [Yang Zhu and Mo Di are described in the Mencius. Shen Buhai was a man of Zheng who approached Marquis Zhao of Han with the doctrine of forms and names, and the Marquis employed him as chancellor. Han Fei was one of the princes of Han and was skilled in the learning of forms and names, law and technique. The Buddha was originally a man of the Western Regions who taught the learning of quiescent extinction, and his teaching began to enter China from the Han onward. Lao was Lao Dan, archivist of Zhou, whose book discusses the Way of purity and non-action.] "Yang's 'for oneself' might be mistaken for humaneness, Mo's 'universal love' might be mistaken for rightness, while Shen and Han are shallow and crude and easily seen through, so Mencius only refuted Yang and Mo, because they deluded the world most." [Yang's 'for oneself' may be called selfish and not humane, yet it resembles the humaneness of having no desires; Mo's universal love may be called overflowing and without rightness, yet it resembles the rightness of having no selfishness, and so they were able to mislead people. As for Shen and Han's forms and names and pursuit of profit, they are shallow and easily seen, so Mencius refuted only Yang and Mo, fearing that they would harm the human heart, while Shen and Han were not worth refuting.] "The words of Buddhism and Daoism come close to principle, and they are unlike Yang and Mo, which is why their harm is even greater. The harm of Yang and Mo was also refuted by Mencius, so the way was cleared." [The following passages are all from the Yishu. The Buddhists speak of the heart and nature and the Daoists discuss the Way and virtue, both close to principle and unlike Yang and Mo, so their harm to the human heart is all the greater. Yang Ziyun (Yang Xiong) said: In ancient times Yang and Mo blocked the road, and Mencius rejected and refuted them, clearing it. Zhu Xi said: Yang Zhu was a disciple of Lao Dan; when Mencius refuted Yang and Mo, Lao and Zhuang were included.]

伊川先生曰儒者潛心正道不容有差其始甚微其終則不可救如師也過商也不及於聖人中道師只是過於厚些商只是不及些然而厚則漸至於兼愛不及則便至於為我其過不及同出於儒者其末遂至楊墨至於楊墨亦未至於無父無君孟子推之便至於此葢其差必至於是也【師子張名商子夏名子張才高意廣泛愛兼容故常過乎中子夏篤信自守規模謹宻故常不及乎中二子於道亦未逺也然師之過其流必至於墨氏之兼愛子夏之不及其後傳田子方子方之後為莊周是楊氏為我之學也孟氏推楊墨之極致則兼愛者至於無父葢愛其父亦同於路人是無父也為我者至於無君葢自私其身而不知有上下是無君也】

Master Yichuan said: "Confucians who devote their minds to the correct Way cannot tolerate any error. Its beginning is very slight but its end cannot be repaired. Take Shi (Zizhang), who overshot, and Shang (Zixia), who fell short, in relation to the sage's mean: Shi merely overshot by being a bit too generous, and Shang merely fell short a bit. Yet generosity gradually leads to universal love, and falling short leads at once to 'for oneself.' Their overshooting and falling short both came from Confucians, and at the end of the line they led to Yang and Mo. As for Yang and Mo, they too had not reached the point of having no father and no ruler; it was Mencius who extended their doctrines to that point, since their error must end there." [Shi is Zizhang's personal name and Shang is Zixia's. Zizhang was of high talent and broad intent, loved widely and embraced all, so he often overshot the mean; Zixia was firmly trusting and kept to himself, his scale careful and close, so he often fell short of the mean. The two were not far from the Way. Yet Shi's overshooting must, in its stream, end in Mo's universal love; Zixia's falling short was passed on to Tian Zifang, and after Zifang came Zhuang Zhou, which is Yang's learning of 'for oneself.' Mencius pushed Yang and Mo to their extreme: universal love ends in having no father, because loving one's father the same as a passerby is having no father; 'for oneself' ends in having no ruler, because being selfish about one's own person and not knowing above and below is having no ruler.]

明道先生曰道之外無物物之外無道是天地之間無適而非道也即父子而父子在所親即君臣而君臣在所嚴以至為夫婦為長幼為朋友無所為而非道此道所以不可須臾離也然則毀人倫去四大者其外於道也逺矣【物由道而形故道外無物道以物而具故物外無道人於天地間不能違物而獨立故無適而非道也今釋氏乃毀棄人倫滅絶四大其戾於道逺矣釋氏以地水火風為四大謂四大幻假而成人身寂滅幻根防除一切】故君子之於天下也無適也無莫也義之與比若有適有莫則於道為有間非天地之全也【適可也莫不可也比從也君子之於天下無可無不可惟義之從也今釋氏可以寂滅無為而不可以察理應事必欲防除外相始見法性非天地本然全體之性矣】彼釋氏之學於敬以直內則有之矣義以方外則未之有也【釋氏習定欲得此心收斂虛靜亦若所謂敬以直內然有體而無用絶滅倫理何有於義】故滯固者入於枯槁疏通者歸於恣肆此佛之教所以為隘也吾道則不然率性而已斯理也聖人於易備言之【釋氏離器以為道故於日用事物之間或拘或肆皆為之病名為大自在而實則隘陋而一毫不容也若吾儒率性之道動靜各正既不病於拘亦不至於肆聖人贊易所謂知至至之可與幾也知終終之可與存義也敬以直內義以方外時止則止時行則行動靜不失其時體用本末備言之矣】又曰佛有一個覺之理可以敬以直內矣然無義以方外其直內者要之其本亦不是【佛學禪者覺也覺者心無倚著靈覺不昧所謂常惺惺法若可敬以直內矣然而無制事之義則其所謂覺者猶無寸之尺無心之兩其直內之本亦非矣】釋氏本怖死生為利豈是公道【釋氏謂有生必有滅故有輪廻今求不生不滅之理可免輪廻之苦此本出於利己之私意也】惟務上達而無下學然則其上達處豈有是也元不相連屬但有間防非道也【絶學而求頓悟故無下學工夫道器本不相離合舍物以明理泯跡以求心豈知道者哉】孟子曰盡其心者知其性也彼所謂識心見性是也若存心養性一段事則無矣【朱子曰釋氏恍惚之間略見得心性影子都不見裡面許多道理就使有存養之功亦只存養得他所見影子終不分明】彼固曰出家獨善便於道體自不足【道本人倫今曰出家則於道體虧欠大矣】或曰釋氏地獄之類皆是為下根之人設此怖令為善先生曰至誠貫天地人尚有不化豈有立偽教而人可化乎

Master Mingdao said: "Outside the Way there is no thing, and outside things there is no Way; between Heaven and Earth there is nowhere that is not the Way. Take father and son, and the father and son are what is to be loved; take ruler and minister, and the ruler and minister are what is to be revered; and so it is with husband and wife, elder and younger, friends: there is nothing that is not the Way. This is why the Way cannot be left for even a moment. Those who destroy human relations and discard the Four Elements are far outside the Way." [Things take form through the Way, so outside the Way there is no thing; the Way is complete through things, so outside things there is no Way. Humans cannot stand alone apart from things between Heaven and Earth, so there is nowhere that is not the Way. Now the Buddhists destroy and abandon human relations and extinguish the Four Elements, and they depart far from the Way. The Buddhists take earth, water, fire and wind as the Four Elements, saying that the Four Elements are illusory and temporary and form the human body, and that one should extinguish the illusory roots by quiescence and eliminate (the original reads "fang chu") everything.] "So the gentleman toward the world has no predisposition for and none against; he sides with what is right. If there is a 'for' and an 'against,' then there is a gap in the Way, and it is not the wholeness of Heaven and Earth." ["Predisposition for" means allowing, "against" means disallowing, and "sides with" means follows. The gentleman toward the world has nothing he insists on and nothing he rejects, and follows only rightness. Now the Buddhists may be quiescent and non-acting but cannot examine principle and respond to affairs, and they insist on eliminating (the original reads "fang chu") all outward appearances before seeing the nature of dharma, which is not the nature of the original wholeness of Heaven and Earth.] "The Buddhists' learning has 'reverence to straighten the inner,' but has nothing of 'rightness to square the outer.'" [Buddhists practice meditation, wanting the heart to be gathered in, empty and still, which resembles so-called 'reverence to straighten the inner'; but they have substance without function and cut off human relations, so how could they have rightness?] "So those who are stagnant and rigid fall into withered desolation, and those who are open and free return to unrestrained license. This is why the Buddha's teaching is narrow. Our Way is not so; it simply follows nature. This principle the sages set out in full in the Changes." [The Buddhists separate from concrete things to make the Way, so in daily affairs they are either constrained or licentious, and both are faults; they are called great freedom but are in fact narrow and petty, tolerating not a hair. As for our Confucian way of following nature, movement and stillness are each correct, and one is neither ill with constraint nor given to license. What the sages praised in the Changes, 'knowing the arrival and so reaching it, one can discern the incipient' and 'knowing the end and so ending it, one can preserve rightness,' 'reverence to straighten the inner, rightness to square the outer,' stopping when it is time to stop and moving when it is time to move, with movement and stillness never missing their time, sets out substance and function, root and branch in full.] He also said: "The Buddha has a principle of awakening, which can be taken as 'reverence to straighten the inner'; but it lacks rightness to square the outer. As for its straightening of the inner, in the end its root is not right either." [In Buddhist learning, Chan is awakening. Awakening is the heart leaning on nothing, spiritually aware and unclouded, what they call the 'always alert' method, which may seem like reverence to straighten the inner; but with no rightness to regulate affairs, this awakening is like a ruler without inches or a scale without marks, and the root of its straightening of the inner is also not right.] "The Buddhists are fundamentally terrified of birth and death and take advantage of that; how can this be the public Way?" [The Buddhists say whatever has birth must have extinction, hence reincarnation; now seeking the principle of no birth and no extinction one may escape the suffering of reincarnation. This originates in selfish intent to benefit oneself.] "They strive only for the higher and have no lower learning, so how can their higher have any truth? The two are originally unconnected, only broken (the original reads "jian fang"), and that is not the Way." [Abandoning study and seeking sudden enlightenment, they have no work of lower learning. The Way and concrete things were never separate; now abandoning things to clarify principle and erasing traces to seek the heart, how could they know the Way?] "Mencius said: 'He who fully realizes his heart knows his nature.' What they call recognizing the heart and seeing nature is this. But the matter of preserving the heart and nourishing the nature is not there at all." [Zhu Xi said: The Buddhists catch in a trance a vague shadow of the heart and nature, and do not see all the principles inside. Even if they do the work of preserving and nourishing, they only preserve and nourish the shadow they have seen, and it is never clear.] "They indeed speak of leaving the family to perfect oneself alone, which makes them lacking in the substance of the Way." [The Way is rooted in human relations. Now to speak of leaving the family is a great deficiency in the substance of the Way.] Someone said: The hells and the like of the Buddhists are all set up to terrify people of lesser capacity into doing good. The Master said: "Utmost sincerity penetrates Heaven and Earth, yet some people are still not transformed; how could they be transformed by setting up a false teaching?"

學者於釋氏之說直須如淫聲美色以逺之不爾則駸駸然入於其中矣顔淵問為邦孔子旣告之以二帝三王之事而復戒以放鄭聲逺佞人曰鄭聲淫佞人殆彼佞人者是他一邉佞耳然而於已則危只是能使人移故危也至於禹之言曰何畏乎巧言令色直消言畏只是須著如此戒慎猶恐不免釋氏之學更不消言常戒到自家自信後便不能亂得【初學立心未定必屏逺異端之說信道旣篤乃可考辨其失】

"Learners should treat the Buddhists' doctrines just like lewd music and beautiful women and keep far from them. Otherwise one will gradually slip into them. When Yan Yuan asked about governing a state, Confucius told him the affairs of the two emperors and three kings, and also warned him to banish the sounds of Zheng and keep glib people at a distance, saying that the sounds of Zheng are lewd and glib people are dangerous. Glib people are only glib in one respect, yet they are dangerous to oneself, simply because they can sway people, and that is why they are dangerous. As Yu said, 'Why fear clever words and a flattering look?' That he needed only to say 'fear' shows that one must be this cautious and yet may still not escape. With Buddhism there is no need to speak of constant caution; once one believes in oneself, one cannot be confused." [When a beginner's resolve is not yet set, he must keep far from heterodox teachings; once his faith in the Way is firm, he may examine and distinguish their errors.]

所以謂萬物一體者皆有此理只為從那裡來生生之謂易生則一時生皆完此理人則能推物則氣昏推不得不可道他物不與有也【天地之理流行化生人之與物均有是生則亦均具是理所謂萬物一體也然人所稟之氣通故能推物所稟之氣塞故不能推】人只為自私將自家軀殻上頭起意故看得道理小了他底放這身來都在萬物中一例看大小大快活【人知萬物一體之理不為私己之見自然與物各得其所】釋氏以不知此去他身上起意思奈何那身不得故卻厭惡要得去盡根塵為心源不定故要得如枯木死灰然沒此理要有此理除是死也【釋氏惟不知萬物一體順理而行本無障礙顧乃自生私見為吾身不能不交於物也遂欲盡去根塵空諸所有佛書以耳舌口鼻身意為六根以色聲香味觸法為六塵其說為幻塵滅故幻根亦滅幻根滅故幻心亦滅然心本生道有體則有用豈容絶滅哉】釋氏其實是愛身放不得故說許多譬如蝜蝂之蟲已載不起猶自更取物在身又如抱石投河以其重愈沈終不道放下石頭惟嫌重也【原釋氏之初本是愛己妄生計較欲世離生死而不知去私己之念本無事也】

"What is called the oneness of the myriad things is that all have this principle, just because they all come from there. 'Generating and regenerating is called Change'; when generated, they are generated at once, and all complete this principle. Humans can extend it, but things, because their qi is dull, cannot; it cannot be said that other things do not partake in it." [The principle of Heaven and Earth flows and generates; humans and things alike have this generation, and so alike have this principle; this is the so-called oneness of the myriad things. But the qi that humans receive is penetrating, so they can extend it; the qi that things receive is blocked, so they cannot extend it.] "People are merely selfish and start their thinking from their own bodily shell, so they see principle as small. If one places this body among the myriad things and views it as one among them, how great and delightful that is!" [If a person knows the principle of the oneness of the myriad things and does not hold the view of the private self, he will naturally let things each find their place.] "The Buddhists, not knowing this, start their thinking from their own bodies, and being unable to do anything with the body, they come to hate it and wish to get rid of all the sense roots and dust; because the source of the heart is unsettled, they want to be like withered wood and dead ashes. But there is no such principle. If there were, it would only be when one is dead." [The Buddhists only fail to know that the oneness of the myriad things and following principle are by nature unobstructed, and instead produce private views of their own: because my body cannot avoid interacting with things, they want to remove all sense roots and dust and empty out everything that exists. The Buddhist books take ear, tongue, mouth, nose, body and mind as the six roots, and form, sound, smell, taste, touch and dharma as the six dusts. Their theory is that since the illusory dust is extinguished the illusory roots are extinguished too, and since the illusory roots are extinguished the illusory heart is extinguished too. But the heart is originally the way of generating, and where there is substance there is function; how could it be extinguished?] "The Buddhists in truth love the body and cannot let go of it, which is why they say so much. It is like an insect carrying a load that already cannot be borne and still takes more onto its body; or like someone who embraces a stone and jumps into a river, the heavier it is the deeper he sinks, and he never says 'let go of the stone' but only complains that it is heavy." [Tracing the origin of the Buddhists, it was at first a love of self; they falsely calculate and want to escape birth and death, not knowing that if one removes the thought of the private self there is really nothing to do.]

人有語導氣者問先生曰君亦有術乎明道曰吾嘗夏葛而冬裘飢食而渴飲節嗜慾定心氣如斯而已矣【聖賢養生順理窒慾而已豈若偏曲之士為長生久視之術哉】

Someone spoke of guiding qi (breath cultivation) and asked the Master: "Do you have a technique too?" Mingdao said: "I wear linen in summer and fur in winter, eat when hungry and drink when thirsty, moderate my appetites and steady my heart and qi, and that is all." [The sages and worthies nourish life only by following principle and stopping desire; how could they be like one-sided people who pursue techniques for long life and lasting vision?]

佛氏不識隂陽書夜死生古今安得謂形而上者與聖人同乎【以上竝明道語伊川先生曰形而上者性命也隂陽書夜死生古今乃天命之流行二氣之屈伸釋氏指為輪迴為幻妄則其所談性命亦異乎聖人矣】

"The Buddhists do not know yin and yang, day and night, death and life, past and present; how can they claim that what is above form is the same as the sages'?" [All of the above are Mingdao's words. Master Yichuan said: What is above form is nature and destiny. Yin and yang, day and night, death and life, past and present are the flow of Heaven's mandate and the contraction and expansion of the two qi. The Buddhists point to them as reincarnation and illusory falsehood, so what they say about nature and destiny differs from the sages'.]

釋氏之說若欲窮其說而去取之則其說未能窮固已化而為佛矣只且於跡上考之其設教如是則其心果如何固難為取其心不取其跡有是心則有是跡王通言心跡之判便是亂說故不若且於跡上斷定不與聖人合其言有合處則吾道固己有有不合者固所不取如是立定卻省易【此言雖為初學立心未定者設然孟子闢楊墨亦不過考其跡而推其心極之於無父無君此實辨異端之要領也】

"If one wanted to exhaust the Buddhists' theories and then keep or discard from them, one would not have finished exhausting them before one had already been transformed into a Buddhist. So just examine them by their traces: if their teaching is like this, what must their heart be like? It is hard to take their heart and not their traces. Where there is this heart there are these traces. Wang Tong's separation of heart and traces is simply confused talk. So it is better to decide from the traces that they do not accord with the sages: where their words agree, our Way already has it, and where they do not agree, we naturally do not take them. Settling it this way is simpler and easier." [Although this was set out for beginners whose resolve is not yet fixed, Mencius's refutation of Yang and Mo likewise only examined their traces and inferred their hearts, pushing them to the extreme of having no father and no ruler. This is truly the essential method of distinguishing heterodoxies.]

問神仙之說有諸明道曰若說白日飛昇之類則無若言居山林間保形煉氣以延年益夀則有之譬如一爐火置之風中則易過置之密室則難過有此理也又問子言聖人不師仙厥術異也聖人能為此等事否曰此是天地間一賊若非竊造化之機安能延年使聖人肯為周孔為之矣【人之精氣聚則生散則死彼有見於造化之機竊而用之使精氣固結而不散故能獨夀理之所有也顧其自私小技聖賢弗為耳】

Someone asked: Is there anything to the doctrine of immortals? Mingdao said: "If you mean ascending to heaven in broad daylight and the like, there is not; if you mean staying in mountain forests, preserving the body and refining qi to prolong life, then there is. It is like a fire in a stove: put it in the wind and it burns out quickly, put it in a closed room and it burns out slowly. This principle exists." He asked again: Yang Zi (the original has a rare character here that was lost in transcription) said the sage does not take immortals as teachers because their techniques differ. Could the sage do such things? He said: "This is a thief between Heaven and Earth. If they did not steal the pivot of creation and transformation, how could they prolong life? If the sages had been willing to do it, the Duke of Zhou and Confucius would have done it." [When a person's essence and qi gather, he lives; when they disperse, he dies. Those people had seen the pivot of creation and transformation, stole it and used it to make essence and qi congeal and not disperse, and so could alone enjoy long life; this is a principle that exists. Yet it is a petty selfish skill, which the sages and worthies simply did not practice.]

謝顯道歴舉佛說與吾儒同處問伊川先生先生曰恁地同處雖多隻是本領不是一齊差卻【外書大本既差則其說似同而實異】

Xie Xiandao listed in turn the points where Buddhist teachings agree with the Confucians and asked Master Yichuan. The Master said: "Although there are many points of agreement like these, the fundamental ground is not right, and they all go wrong together." [From the Waishu. Once the great root is wrong, the doctrine seems the same but is actually different.]

橫渠先生曰釋氏妄意天性而不知範圍之用反以六根之微因縁天地明不能盡則誣天地日月為幻妄【範圍猶裁成也聖儘性故能裁成天地之道釋氏乃欲識性而不知範圍之用則是未嘗知性也謂六根悉本天地六根起滅無有實相天地日月等為幻妄】蔽其用於一身之小溺其志於虛空之大此所以語大語小流遁失中【厭此身之小則蔽其用而不能推樂虛空之大則溺其志而不能反故其語大語小輾轉流遁皆失其中】其過於大也塵芥六合其蔽於小也夢幻人世謂之窮理可乎不知窮理而謂之儘性可乎謂之無不知可乎【上下四方為六合謂六合在虛空中特一微塵芥子耳所以言虛空之大一切有為法如夢幻泡影所以言人世之微此皆不能窮理盡性之過】塵芥六合謂天地為有窮也夢幻人世明不能究其所從也【正防下同○佛說謂虛空無窮天地有窮人世起滅皆為幻妄莫知所從來也】

Master Hengqu said: "The Buddhists rashly speculate about heavenly nature but do not know the function of encompassing and regulating, and instead use the tininess of the six sense roots to explain Heaven and Earth by dependent causes, and since their clarity cannot exhaust things, they slander Heaven, Earth, sun and moon as illusory and false." ["Encompass" is like "cut and complete." The sage fully realizes nature and so can cut and complete the Way of Heaven and Earth. The Buddhists want to recognize nature yet do not know the function of encompassing and regulating, which means they have never known nature. They say the six roots are all rooted in Heaven and Earth, that the arising and ceasing of the six roots has no real form, and that Heaven, Earth, sun and moon are illusory and false.] "They shut their functioning up in the smallness of one body and sink their will in the vastness of empty space, so that whether they speak of the large or the small they drift off and lose the mean." [Disliking the smallness of this body, they shut up its functioning and cannot extend it; delighting in the vastness of empty space, they sink their will and cannot return; so their talk of the large and the small drifts on and loses the mean.] "In going too far toward the large, they treat the six directions as dust motes; in being blind to the small, they treat the human world as a dream and an illusion. Can that be called investigating principle? Not knowing how to investigate principle, can it be called fully realizing nature? Can it be called knowing everything?" [Up, down and the four directions are the six directions. They say the six directions in empty space are just a speck of dust or a mustard seed, hence they speak of the vastness of empty space; all conditioned phenomena are like dreams, illusions, bubbles and shadows, hence they speak of the pettiness of the human world. These are all faults of being unable to investigate principle and fully realize nature.] "To treat the six directions as dust motes is to say that Heaven and Earth are finite; to treat the human world as a dream and illusion shows they cannot trace where it comes from." [The following is also from the Zhengmeng (the original has "fang" for "zheng"). The Buddhists say empty space is limitless and Heaven and Earth finite, and that the arising and ceasing of the human world are all illusory and false, with no knowledge of where they come from.]

大易不言有無言有無諸子之陋也【易曰一隂一陽之謂道葢隂陽之運其所以然者即道也體用相因精麤罔間不可以有無分後世異端見道不明始則以道為無以器為有有者為幻妄為土苴無者為妙為真空析有無而二之皆諸子之陋見也】

"The Great Changes does not speak of being and non-being. Speaking of being and non-being is the shallowness of the various schools." [The Changes says: One yin and one yang is called the Way. The movement of yin and yang, and that by which it is so, is the Way. Substance and function depend on each other, and the refined and coarse have no gap, so one cannot divide them into being and non-being. Later heterodoxies, whose view of the Way was unclear, at first took the Way as non-being and concrete things as being, treating what exists as illusory and as dregs, and what does not exist as profound and as true emptiness, splitting being and non-being into two; all this is the shallow view of the various schools.]

浮圗明謂有識之死受生循環遂厭苦求免可謂知鬼乎【精氣聚則為人散則為鬼散則澌滅就盡而已釋氏謂神識不散復寓形而受生是不明鬼之理也】以人生為妄見可謂知人乎【人生日用無非天理之當然釋氏指為浮生幻化豈為知人乎】天人一物輒生取舎可謂知天乎【天人一理今乃棄人事而求天性豈為知天乎】孔孟所謂天彼所謂道惑者指逰魂為變為輪迴未之思也大學當先知天徳知天徳則知聖人知神今浮圗劇論要歸必謂死生流轉非得道不免謂之悟道可乎【本注云悟則有義有命均死生一天人推知晝夜通隂陽體之無二○當生而生當死而死是則有義有命生死均安何所厭苦天人一致何所取舎知晝夜通隂陽則知生死之說何所謂輪】自其說熾傳中國儒者未容窺聖學門牆已為引取淪胥其間指為大道乃其俗達之天下致善惡知愚男女臧獲人人著信使英才間氣生則溺耳目恬習之事長則師世儒崇尚之言遂防然被驅因謂聖人可不修而至大道可不學而知故未識聖人心已謂不必求其跡未見君子志已謂不必事其文此人倫所以不察庶物所以不明治所以忽徳所以亂【世儒於聖門未有所見而耳目習熟固已防溺於異端乃謂不假修為立地成佛不立文字教外別傳不修而至故謂不必求其跡不學而知故謂不必事其文】異言入耳上無禮以防其偽下無學以稽其弊自古詖淫邪遁之辭翕然竝興一齣於佛氏之門者千五百年向非獨立不懼精一自信有大過人之才何以正立其間與之較是非計得失哉【詭服異行非修先王之禮何以防其偽邪說異教非通聖人之學何以稽其弊】

"The Buddhists explain ghosts by saying that the conscious being, on dying, receives a new birth in a cycle, and so, loathing suffering, they seek release; can this be called knowing ghosts?" [When essence and qi gather one becomes a person, and when they disperse one becomes a ghost, and once dispersed they dwindle and are simply exhausted. The Buddhists say the spirit-consciousness does not disperse and again lodges in a form to receive birth; this is not understanding the principle of ghosts.] "Taking human life as a false view: can that be called knowing humans?" [Human life and daily affairs are nothing but what Heavenly principle makes proper. The Buddhists point to them as floating life and illusory transformation; how is that knowing humans?] "Heaven and humans are one thing, yet they start choosing between them: can that be called knowing Heaven?" [Heaven and humans share one principle; now they abandon human affairs to seek Heaven's nature, so how is that knowing Heaven?] "What Confucius and Mencius call Heaven, they call the Way. The deluded point to the wandering soul becoming change as reincarnation, without having thought it through. In learning, one must first know the virtue of Heaven; knowing the virtue of Heaven, one knows the sage and knows ghosts and spirits. Now the Buddhists, in their intense discussions and final conclusions, insist that the flowing of death and life cannot be escaped without attaining the Way; can that be called awakening to the Way?" [The original note says: To awaken is to have rightness and destiny, to equalize death and life, to unite Heaven and humans, to know day and night, to penetrate yin and yang, and to embody them without two. Ye Cai notes: To live when one should live and to die when one should die is to have rightness and destiny, and with life and death equally accepted, what is there to loathe and suffer? With Heaven and humans as one, what is there to choose between? Knowing day and night and penetrating yin and yang, one knows the doctrine of life and death, so what is there to call reincarnation?] "Since their teaching spread blazingly through China, Confucians who had not yet been allowed to glimpse the gate and wall of the sages' learning were already drawn in and sunk into it together, calling it the great Way. Its customs have reached the whole world, so that good and evil, wise and foolish, men and women, servants and slaves, each person holds it in faith. Talented people of exceptional spirit, when young are drowned in things they hear and see and grow used to, and when grown take as teachers the words that worldly Confucians esteem, and so are swept away (the original has "fang" for "mi"), saying that the sage can be reached without cultivation and the great Way known without study. So before they have recognized the sage's heart, they say there is no need to seek his traces; before they have seen the gentleman's will, they say there is no need to practice his writings. This is why human relations are not examined, why the many things are not clarified, why government is neglected and virtue thrown into disorder." [Worldly Confucians have seen nothing of the sages' gate, and because their eyes and ears are accustomed, they are already sunk (the original has "fang" for "xian") in heterodoxy, claiming that no cultivation or effort is needed, that one becomes a Buddha on the spot, that there is a separate transmission outside the teachings without setting up words; 'reaching without cultivation' is why they say there is no need to seek the traces, and 'knowing without study' is why they say there is no need to practice the writings.] "When strange words enter the ear, above there is no ritual to guard against their falsehood, and below there is no learning to examine their abuses. From ancient times, biased, licentious, perverse and evasive words have risen together in concert, and for fifteen hundred years all of them have come out of the Buddhist gate. If not for one who stands alone without fear, who is refined, single-minded and self-confident, and who has talent far above others, how could one stand upright amid them and weigh right and wrong, gains and losses, against them?" [For strange dress and strange conduct, without cultivating the rites of the former kings, how can one guard against their falsehood? For perverse doctrines and heterodox teachings, without mastering the sages' learning, how can one examine their abuses?]

此卷論聖賢相傳之統而諸子附焉斷自唐虞堯舜禹湯文武周公道統相傳至於孔子孔子傳之顔曽曽子傳之子思子思傳之孟子遂無傳焉於是楚有荀卿漢有毛萇董仲舒揚雄諸葛亮隋有王通唐有韓愈雖未能傳斯道之統然其立言立事有補於世教皆所當攷也迨於宋朝人文再闢則周子唱之二程子張子推廣之而聖學復明道統復續故備著之

This volume discusses the lineage by which the sages and worthies transmitted the Way, with the various masters appended. It is cut off from Tang and Yu: Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, Wen, Wu and the Duke of Zhou transmitted the lineage of the Way down to Confucius; Confucius transmitted it to Yan and Zeng; Master Zeng transmitted it to Zisi; Zisi transmitted it to Mencius, after whom it was not transmitted. Then there were Xun Qing in Chu; Mao Chang, Dong Zhongshu, Yang Xiong and Zhuge Liang in Han; Wang Tong in Sui; and Han Yu in Tang, who, though unable to transmit the lineage of this Way, still established words and deeds that benefited the teaching of the age, and all deserve to be studied. When the Song dynasty came, culture and learning were opened up again; Master Zhou initiated it, and Masters Cheng, Cheng and Zhang extended it, so that the sages' learning was clear again and the lineage of the Way was resumed, which is why they are recorded in full.

明道先生曰堯與舜更無優劣及至湯武便別孟子言性之反之自古無人如此說只孟子分別出來便知得堯舜是生而知之湯武是學而能之文王之德則似堯舜禹之德則似湯武要之皆是聖人【遺書下同○性之者生而知之安而行之天性渾全不待修習者也反之者學而知之利而行之修身體道以復其性者也文王不識不知順帝之則蓋亦生知之性也禹克勤克儉不矜不伐蓋亦學能之事也】

Master Mingdao said: "Between Yao and Shun there is no difference of superior and inferior, but once we come to Tang and Wu there is a distinction. Mencius spoke of 'being so by nature' and 'returning to it'; no one had said this since ancient times, and only because Mencius made the distinction do we know that Yao and Shun were born knowing and Tang and Wu were capable through learning. King Wen's virtue resembles that of Yao and Shun, and Yu's virtue resembles that of Tang and Wu. In sum, all were sages." [The following are all from the Yishu. 'Being so by nature' means knowing by birth and acting with ease, with a heavenly nature whole and complete, not awaiting cultivation and practice; 'returning to it' means knowing through learning and acting with benefit in view, cultivating the self and embodying the Way to restore one's nature. King Wen, 'without knowing and without thinking, followed the pattern of the Lord,' which was also a nature of knowing by birth; Yu, who was diligent and frugal, not boastful and not self-praising, was also a matter of capacity through learning.]

仲尼元氣也顔子春生也孟子並秋殺盡見【夫子大聖之資猶元氣周流渾淪溥博無有涯涘罔見間隙顔子亞聖之才如春陽盎然發生萬物四時之首眾善之長也孟子亦亞聖之才剛烈明辨整齊嚴肅故並秋殺盡見】仲尼無所不包顔子示不違如愚之學於後世有自然之和氣不言而化者也孟子則露其材蓋亦時然而已【夫子道全德備故無所不包顔子不違如愚與聖人合德後世可想其自然和氣黙而成之不言而信者也孟子英才發越蓋亦戰國之時世道益衰異端益熾又無天子主盟於其上故其衛道之嚴辨論之明不得不然也】仲尼天地也顔子和風慶雲也孟子泰山岩巖之氣象也觀其言皆可見之矣【天地者高明而博厚也和風慶雲者協氣祥光也泰山岩巖者峻極不可逾越也】仲尼無跡顔子微有跡孟子其跡著【夫子渾然天成故無跡顔子不違如愚本亦無跡然為仁之問喟然之嘆猶可窺測其防至於孟子則發明底蘊故其跡彰彰】孔子盡是明快人顔子盡豈弟孟子盡雄辯【夫子清明在躬猶青天白日故極其明快顔子有若無實若虛犯而不校故極其豈弟孟子息邪說詎詖行放滛辭故極其雄辯○此段反覆形容大聖大賢氣象各臻其妙古今之言聖賢未有若斯者也學者其濳心焉】

"Zhongni was original qi, Master Yan was spring's generation, and Mencius showed both autumn's killing." [The Master had the endowment of a great sage, like original qi flowing around, undifferentiated and broad, without shore or limit and with no visible gap. Master Yan had the talent of a second sage, like the warmth of spring sun spreading, generating the myriad things, the head of the four seasons and the chief of all good. Mencius also had the talent of a second sage, was firm and fiery, clear in discrimination, orderly and stern, and so showed both autumn's killing.] "Zhongni embraced everything; Master Yan showed later ages the learning of 'never contradicting, like a fool,' having a natural harmonious qi that transformed without words. Mencius displayed his talent openly, which was also simply what the times required." [The Master's Way was whole and his virtue complete, so he embraced everything. Master Yan 'never contradicted, like a fool,' joining his virtue to the sage's, and later ages may imagine his natural harmonious qi, accomplishing in silence and trusted without words. Mencius's outstanding talent burst forth because it was the Warring States, when the age's Way was ever more in decline and heterodoxies ever more blazing, with no Son of Heaven above to preside over the covenant, so the strictness of his defense of the Way and clarity of his argument could not have been otherwise.] "Zhongni was Heaven and Earth, Master Yan was a gentle breeze and an auspicious cloud, and Mencius had the bearing of Mount Tai, towering and steep. One can see all this by looking at their words." [Heaven and Earth are lofty, bright, broad and thick; a gentle breeze and an auspicious cloud are harmonious qi and fortunate light; Mount Tai towering is lofty to the utmost and insurmountable.] "Zhongni left no traces, Master Yan left slight traces, and Mencius's traces are conspicuous." [The Master was whole and heavenly in his completion, so he left no traces. Master Yan 'never contradicted, like a fool,' and so originally also had no traces, yet in his question about humaneness and his sigh of admiration one can still glimpse a start (the original has "fang" here). Mencius brought out the hidden depths of the teaching, so his traces are plain.] "Confucius was entirely a clear and quick person, Master Yan entirely gentle and kindly, and Mencius entirely a mighty debater." [The Master had clarity in his person, like a blue sky and bright sun, and so was clear and quick to the utmost. Master Yan 'having seemed to have nothing, full seemed empty, and when offended did not retaliate,' and so was gentle and kindly to the utmost. Mencius quelled perverse doctrines, repelled biased conduct and banished licentious words, and so was a mighty debater to the utmost. Ye Cai notes: This passage repeatedly describes the bearing of the great sages and worthies, each reaching its marvel. Among all that has been said of the sages and worthies from ancient times to now, nothing is like this. Learners should devote their minds to it.]

曽子傳聖人學其德後來不可測安知其不至聖人如言吾得正而斃且休理防文字只看他氣象極好被他所見處大後人雖有好言語只被氣象卑終不類道【曽子悟一貫之旨已傳聖人之學矣至其易簀之言吾何求哉吾得正而斃焉斯可矣自非樂善不倦安行天理一息尚存必歸於正夫豈一時之所能勉強哉○遺書又曰曽子疾病只要以正不慮死與武王殺一不辜行一不義得天下不為同心】

"Master Zeng transmitted the sage's learning, and his virtue in later years was unfathomable; how can we know he did not reach sagehood? Take his saying 'I have obtained what is right and now die,' and leave aside reading (the original reads "li fang") his texts; just look at how excellent his bearing was and how great was what he saw. Later people may have fine words, but because their bearing is mean they in the end do not resemble the Way." [Master Zeng awakened to the point of the single thread and had already transmitted the sage's learning. As for his words about changing the mat: 'What more do I seek? I have obtained what is right and now die, and that is enough.' Unless one delights in the good without tiring and acts at ease with Heavenly principle, so that as long as one breath remains one returns to what is right, how could this be forced for a moment? Ye Cai notes: The Yishu also says: Master Zeng, when ill, wanted only to be correct and did not worry about dying, and was of one mind with King Wu, who would not kill one innocent person or do one unrighteous act to gain the world.]

傳經為難如聖人之後才百年傳之已差聖人之學若非子思孟子則幾乎息矣道何嘗息只是人不由之道非亡也幽厲不由也【群經定於夫子之手至孟子時才百年間微言絶而大義乖矣猶賴曽子之門有傳子思孟子之徒相繼纘述提綱挈領辟邪輔正以埀萬世如論語大學中庸孟子之書可見矣】荀卿才高其過多雄才短其過少【苟卿名況字卿為楚蘭陵令揚雄字子云為漢光祿卿荀卿才高敢為異論如以人性為惡以子思孟子為非其過多揚雄才短如作太以擬易法言以擬論語皆模仿前聖之遺言其過少】

"Transmitting the classics is difficult. For example, only a hundred years after the sage, the transmission had already gone astray. If not for Zisi and Mencius, the sage's learning would almost have ceased. But how did the Way ever cease? It is just that people did not follow it. The Way was not lost; Kings You and Li did not follow it." [The classics were fixed by the Master's own hand, and by Mencius's time, only about a hundred years later, the subtle words were cut off and the great meanings had gone awry. Still, there was transmission in Master Zeng's school, and Zisi, Mencius and their followers took up and continued it one after another, grasping the main threads, refuting the perverse and supporting the correct, to hand it down for ten thousand generations, as the books such as the Analects, the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean and the Mencius show.] "Xun Qing had high talent but many faults; Yang Xiong had meager talent but few faults." [Xun Qing's personal name was Kuang and his style Qing; he was magistrate of Lanling in Chu. Yang Xiong's style was Ziyun and he was Grand Master of the Palace in Han. Xun Qing, of high talent, dared to put forward heterodox arguments, such as taking human nature as evil and condemning Zisi and Mencius, so his faults were many. Yang Xiong, of meager talent, wrote the Taixuan in imitation of the Changes and the Fayan in imitation of the Analects, in both cases imitating the surviving words of earlier sages, so his faults were few.]

荀子極偏駁只一句性惡大本已失揚子雖少過然已自不識性更說甚道【率性之謂道荀子性惡揚子善惡混均之不識本然之性何以語道】董仲舒曰正其誼不謀其利明其道不計其功此董子所以度越諸子【自春秋以來舉世皆趨功利仲舒此言最為純正○朱子曰仲舒所立甚高後世所以不如吉人者以道義功利闗不透耳】

"Xunzi is extremely one-sided and impure; with the single phrase 'nature is evil' he has lost the great root. Master Yang had few faults, but he did not himself recognize nature, so what can he say about the Way?" [Following nature is called the Way. Xunzi says nature is evil and Master Yang says it is a mixture of good and evil; both fail to recognize the original nature, so how can they speak of the Way?] "Dong Zhongshu said: 'Rectify its rightness without scheming for its profit; clarify its Way without calculating its merit.' This is why Master Dong surpassed the various masters." [Since the Spring and Autumn period the whole age had rushed toward merit and profit, and Zhongshu's words are the purest and most correct. Ye Cai notes: Zhu Xi said: What Zhongshu set up was very lofty. The reason later ages fall short of the ancients is only that they cannot see through the gate between Way and rightness and merit and profit.]

漢儒如毛萇董仲舒最得聖賢之意然見道不甚分明下此卽至揚雄規模又窄狹矣【毛萇治詩為漢時獻王博士仲舒舉賢良對策為膠西相二子論治皆以修身齊家為本先德敎而後功利最為得聖賢意揚雄以清淨寂寞為道無儒者規模○或問伊川謂仲舒見道不分明朱子曰如雲性者生之質性非敎化不成似不識本然之性又問何所主而取毛公曰考之詩傳緊要有數處如闗雎所謂夫婦有別則父子親父子親則君臣敬君臣敬剛朝廷正朝廷正則王化鹹要之亦不多見只是氣象大槩好】

"Han Confucians such as Mao Chang and Dong Zhongshu most grasped the sages' and worthies' ideas, but their vision of the Way was not very clear. Below them comes Yang Xiong, whose scale was narrower still." [Mao Chang studied the Poetry and was an erudite under Prince Xian of Han. Zhongshu, recommended as worthy, gave his reply to the throne and became chancellor of Jiaoxi. Both took cultivating the self and regulating the family as the root of governing, putting moral teaching first and merit and profit after, which most accords with the sages' and worthies' ideas. Yang Xiong took pure quiet and solitude as the Way and had no Confucian scale. Someone asked why Yichuan said Zhongshu's vision of the Way was not clear. Zhu Xi said: For example, saying that nature is the raw material of life and that nature cannot be completed without education looks like not recognizing the original nature. Asked again why Master Mao was favored, he said: Looking at the Shi zhuan (Commentary on the Poetry), there are several key places, such as in the Guanju: if husband and wife are distinct, father and son are close; if father and son are close, ruler and minister are reverent; if ruler and minister are reverent, the court is correct; if the court is correct, the royal transformation is accomplished. In sum, such passages are not many, but his bearing is generally good.]

林希謂揚雄為祿隱揚雄後人只為見他著書便須要做他是怎生做得是【祿隱謂浮沉下位依祿而隱即祿仕之意也雄失身事莽以是祿隱何辭而可】

"Lin Xi said Yang Xiong was a 'salary recluse.' Later people, just because they see that he wrote books, insist on counting him right; how can he be counted right?" [A salary recluse is one who drifts in a low post and hides behind salary, which is the meaning of serving for pay. Xiong lost himself serving Wang Mang; by calling it being a salary recluse, what excuse could be given?]

孔明有王佐之心道則未盡王者如天地之無私心焉行一不義而得天下不為孔明必求有成而取劉璋聖人寧無成耳此不可為也【諸葛亮字孔明東漢末曾操據漢將簒孔明輔先主志欲攘除奸兇興復漢室而其規模宏逺操心公平有王佐之心然於王道則有所未盡蓋聖人之道如天地發育無有私意行一不義雖可以得天下而不為先主以詐取劉璋孔明不得以無責蓋其志於有成行不義而不暇顧若聖人則寧漢無興不忍為此】若劉表子琮將為曹公所並取而興劉氏可也【先主依劉表曹操南侵防表卒子琮迎降孔明說先主取荊州先主不忍琮降則地歸曹氏矣取以興漢何負於表較之取劉璋則曲直有間矣或謂先主雖得荊州未必能御曹操然此又特以利鈍言者也】

"Kongming had the heart to assist a king, but his Way was not complete. A true king, like Heaven and Earth, has no selfish heart, and would not do one unrighteous act even to gain the world. Kongming insisted on succeeding and took Liu Zhang's land, whereas the sage would rather not succeed. This should not be done." [Zhuge Liang's style was Kongming. At the end of the Eastern Han, Cao Cao held the Han general's power and was about to usurp; Kongming assisted the First Ruler, aiming to eliminate the wicked and restore the Han house, and his scale was grand and distant and his mind was fair, so he had the heart to assist a king, but in the Way of kings he was not complete. For the sage's Way is like Heaven and Earth giving growth, without private intent, and would not do one unrighteous act even to gain the world. The First Ruler took Liu Zhang by deceit, and Kongming cannot be free of blame, since he set his will on succeeding and in committing an unrighteous act had no time to look back. A sage would rather have the Han not revive than bear to do this.] "If it had been Liu Biao's son Cong, about to be annexed by Lord Cao, taking it from him to revive the house of Liu would have been acceptable." [The First Ruler relied on Liu Biao. Cao Cao invaded southward, and just then Biao died and his son Cong went out to surrender. Kongming urged the First Ruler to take Jingzhou, but the First Ruler could not bear to. Once Cong surrendered, the land would go to the Cao house, so taking it to revive the Han would wrong Biao in what way? Compared with taking Liu Zhang's land, there is a difference of right and wrong. Some say that even if the First Ruler had got Jingzhou he could not necessarily have resisted Cao Cao, but that speaks only of advantage and disadvantage.]

諸葛武侯有儒者氣象【孔明輔漢討賊以信義為主以節制行師以公誠待人至於親賢臣逺小人諮諏善道察納雅言有大臣格君之業朱子曰孔明雖嘗學申韓然資質好卻有正大氣象】孔明庶幾禮樂【文中子曰使孔明而無死禮樂其有興乎亮之治國政刑修舉而人心豫附名正言順禮樂其庶幾乎】

"Marquis Wu of Zhuge had the bearing of a Confucian." [Kongming assisted the Han in suppressing rebels, took good faith and rightness as chief, moderation and restraint in commanding armies, and fairness and sincerity in treating people. As for befriending worthy ministers and keeping petty men at a distance, consulting good ways and examining and accepting honest words, he had the accomplishment of a great minister correcting his ruler. Zhu Xi said: Although Kongming studied Shen and Han, his natural quality was good and he had an upright and grand bearing.] "Kongming almost achieved ritual and music." [Wenzhongzi said: If Kongming had not died, might ritual and music have flourished? In Liang's governing of the state, government and punishment were well conducted and people's hearts were pleased and attached, names were correct and words in order; ritual and music were within near reach.]

文中子本是一隱君子世人往往得其議論附防成書其間極有至言荀揚道不到處【文中子王氏名通隋末不仕敎授於河汾其弟王凝子福畤等收其議論増益為書名曰中說○朱子曰其書多為人添入眞偽難見然好處甚多就中論世變因革處說得極好又曰文中子論治體處高似仲舒而本領不及爽似仲舒而純不及】

"Wenzhongzi was originally a recluse gentleman. People of the age often took his discussions and, by forced association (the original reads "fu fang"), compiled them into a book, in which there are extremely fine words, to which Xun and Yang's Way did not reach." [Wenzhongzi, Wang Tong by name, did not take office in late Sui and taught between the Yellow and Fen rivers. His younger brother Wang Ning and his son Wang Fuzhi and others gathered his discussions and expanded them into a book, called the Zhongshuo (Discourses of the Mean). Ye Cai notes: Zhu Xi said: Much of the book was added by others, so true and false are hard to see, but there is much good in it, and its discussion of historical change and continuity is especially fine. He also said: Wenzhongzi's discussion of the substance of government is as lofty as Zhongshu's but his foundation is not equal, and as lively as Zhongshu's but not equal in purity.]