Chapter 21: Dispelling Blindness

凡人之患，蔽於一曲，而闇於大理。治則復經，兩疑則惑矣。天下無二道，聖人無兩心。今諸侯異政，百家異說，則必或是或非，或治或亂。亂國之君，亂家之人，此其誠心，莫不求正而以自為也。妒繆於道，而人誘其所迨也。私其所積，唯恐聞其惡也。倚其所私，以觀異術，唯恐聞其美也。是以與治雖走，而是己不輟也。豈不蔽於一曲，而失正求也哉！心不使焉，則白黑在前而目不見，雷鼓在側而耳不聞，況於使者乎？德道之人，亂國之君非之上，亂家之人非之下，豈不哀哉！

The calamity for all men is to be blinded by one corner and to fail to grasp the great pattern. When order comes they revert to the constant; when they doubt both ends they are lost. Under heaven there are not two Ways, nor do sages have two minds. Now the lords of the states differ in government and teaching, and the hundred schools differ in doctrine, so inevitably some are right and some wrong, some bring order and some bring disorder. The lord of a disordered state and the man of a disordered school—in their sincere hearts none fails to seek what is right and act accordingly himself. They resent and misjudge the Way, while others tempt them toward what lies near at hand. Partisan to what they have amassed, they fear to hear anything ill of it; relying on what they are partisan to, they look upon different methods and fear to hear anything good of them. Thus they run counter to order and never cease approving themselves. Is this not to be blinded by one corner and to lose the proper quest? If the mind is not put to work upon it, black and white can lie before the eyes unseen and thundering drums at one's side go unheard—how much more so for that which commands the mind! As for one who has attained the Way, the lords of disordered states condemn him from above and the men of disordered schools condemn him from below—is that not pitiful!

故為蔽：欲為蔽，惡為蔽，始為蔽，終為蔽，遠為蔽，近為蔽，博為蔽，淺為蔽，古為蔽，今為蔽。凡萬物異則莫不相為蔽，此心術之公患也。

Thus the things that can become a blindness: desire can blind, aversion can blind, beginnings can blind, endings can blind, the distant can blind, the near can blind, breadth can blind, shallowness can blind, antiquity can blind, the present can blind. Among the myriad things, wherever there are differences there is none that cannot blind the others—this is the common calamity of the workings of the mind.

昔人君之蔽者，夏桀殷紂是也。桀蔽於末喜斯觀，而不知關龍逢，以惑其心，而亂其行。桀蔽於妲己、飛廉，而不知微子啟，以惑其心，而亂其行。故群臣去忠而事私，百姓怨非而不用，賢良退處而隱逃，此其所以喪九牧之地，而虛宗廟之國也。桀死於鬲山，紂縣於赤旆。身不先知，人又莫之諫，此蔽塞之禍也。成湯監於夏桀，故主其心而慎治之，是以能長用伊尹，而身不失道，此其所以代夏王而受九有也。文王監於殷紂，故主其心而慎治之，是以能長用呂望，而身不失道，此其所以代殷王而受九牧也。遠方莫不致其珍；故目視備色，耳聽備聲，口食備味，形居備宮，名受備號，生則天下歌，死則四海哭。夫是之謂至盛。詩曰："鳳凰秋秋，其翼若干，其聲若簫。有鳳有凰，樂帝之心。"此不蔽之福也。

Among rulers of men who were blinded in former times, Jie of Xia and Zhou of Yin are examples. Jie was blinded by Mo Xi and Si Guan, so that he did not recognize Guan Longfeng; thus his heart was confused and his conduct thrown into disorder. Zhou was blinded by Da Ji and Fei Lian, so that he did not recognize Qi, the Viscount of Wei (in the base text the latter clause reads 'Jie was blinded by Da Ji'; 'Jie' is a copyist's error for 'Zhou'); thus his heart was confused and his conduct thrown into disorder. Therefore their ministers abandoned loyalty to serve private ends, the people resented and denounced them and were not employed, and the worthy and good withdrew into hiding—these are the reasons they lost the pastoral lands of the nine provinces and emptied the state of their ancestral temples. Jie died at Mount Li, and Zhou's head was hung from a crimson banner. They could not foresee it themselves, and no one remonstrated with them—this is the calamity of blindness. Tang took warning from Jie of Xia, so he mastered his heart and governed carefully; thus he was able to employ Yi Yin for long and did not himself lose the Way—this is how he took the nine provinces in place of the king of Xia. King Wen took warning from Zhou of Yin, so he mastered his heart and governed carefully; thus he was able to employ Lü Wang for long and did not himself lose the Way—this is how he took the pastoral lands of the nine provinces in place of the king of Yin. From distant regions there were no treasures that were not sent to them; thus their eyes beheld every color to the full, their ears heard every sound to the full, their mouths tasted every flavor to the full, their bodies dwelt in palaces complete, and their names received titles complete. In life all under heaven sang of them; in death all within the four seas wept for them. This is called the utmost greatness. The Book of Songs says: 'The phoenix flutters; its wings are like shields; its voice is like the xiao. There are phoenix and phoenix to gladden the heart of the Lord on High.' This is the blessing of being unblinded.

昔人臣之蔽者，唐鞅奚齊是也。唐鞅蔽於欲權而逐載子，奚齊蔽於欲國而罪申生；唐鞅戮於宋，奚齊戮於晉。逐賢相而罪孝兄，身為刑戮，然而不知，此蔽塞之禍也。故以貪鄙、背叛、爭權而不危辱滅亡者，自古及今，未嘗有之也。鮑叔、甯戚、隰朋仁知且不蔽，故能持管仲，而名利福祿與管仲齊。召公、呂望仁知且不蔽，故能持周公而名利福祿與周公齊。傳曰："知賢之為明，輔賢之謂能，勉之強之，其福必長。"此之謂也。此不蔽之福也。

Among ministers of men who were blinded in former times, Tang Yang and Xi Qi are examples. Tang Yang was blinded by the desire for power and drove out Zai Zi; Xi Qi was blinded by the desire for the state and brought a charge against Shensheng. Tang Yang was killed in Song; Xi Qi was killed in Jin. They drove out worthy ministers and brought charges against filial elder brothers; their own persons suffered execution, yet they never understood—this is the calamity of blindness. Thus from antiquity to the present there has never been one who, through greed, betrayal, and contention for power, did not end in peril, disgrace, and destruction. Bao Shu, Ning Qi, and Xi Peng were humane and wise and not blinded, so they were able to uphold Guan Zhong, and their fame, gain, fortune, and emolument were equal to Guan Zhong's. The Duke of Shao and Lü Wang were humane and wise and not blinded, so they were able to uphold the Duke of Zhou, and their fame, gain, fortune, and emolument were equal to the Duke of Zhou's. A commentary says: 'To recognize the worthy is called discernment; to assist the worthy is called ability. Encourage it and make it firm, and that blessing will surely endure.' This is what is meant. This is the blessing of being unblinded.

昔賓孟之蔽者，亂家是也。墨子蔽於用而不知文。宋子蔽於欲而不知得。慎子蔽於法而不知賢。申子蔽於埶而不知知。惠子蔽於辭而不知實。莊子蔽於天而不知人。故由用謂之道，盡利矣。由欲謂之道，盡嗛矣。由法謂之道，盡數矣。由埶謂之道，盡便矣。由辭謂之道，盡論矣。由天謂之道，盡因矣。此數具者，皆道之一隅也。夫道者體常而盡變，一隅不足以舉之。曲知之人，觀於道之一隅，而未之能識也。故以為足而飾之，內以自亂，外以惑人，上以蔽下，下以蔽上，此蔽塞之禍也。孔子仁知且不蔽，故學亂術足以為先王者也。一家得周道，舉而用之，不蔽於成積也。故德與周公齊，名與三王並，此不蔽之福也。

Among wandering persuaders who were blinded in former times, the disordered schools are examples. Mozi was blinded by 'utility' and did not know refinement. Master Song was blinded by 'desire' and did not know attainment. Master Shen (Shen Dao) was blinded by 'law' and did not know worthiness. Master Shen (Shen Buhai) was blinded by 'positional power' and did not know wisdom. Master Hui was blinded by 'phrases' and did not know realities. Master Zhuang was blinded by 'heaven' and did not know man. Thus to speak of the Way in terms of utility makes it all profit; in terms of desire, all contentment; in terms of law, all method; in terms of positional power, all expediency; in terms of phrases, all disputation; in terms of heaven, all passive reliance. These several things are each a single corner of the Way. The Way embodies the constant and exhausts every change; one corner cannot encompass it. A man of one-sided knowledge sees one corner of the Way and fails to recognize the whole; taking it to be sufficient, he embellishes it, using it inwardly to throw himself into disorder, outwardly to delude others, upwardly to blind those below, and downwardly to blind those above—this is the calamity of blindness. Confucius was humane and wise and not blinded, so that in studying the methods of order he sufficed to become like the former kings. The one school that attained the Way in its completeness raised it up and put it to use, unblinded by settled habits. Therefore his virtue ranked equal to the Duke of Zhou's and his name stands beside the Three Kings—this is the blessing of being unblinded.

聖人知心術之患，見蔽塞之禍，故無慾、無惡、無始、無終、無近、無遠、無博、無淺、無古、無今，兼陳萬物而中縣衡焉。是故眾異不得相蔽以亂其倫也。

The sage knew the calamity of the workings of the mind and saw the ruin of blindness, so he had no desire, no aversion, no beginning, no end, no near, no far, no broad, no shallow, no ancient, no modern. He ranged all the myriad things side by side and hung the balance in their midst; thus their many differences could not blind one another and disorder their categories.

何謂衡？曰：道。故心不可以不知道；心不知道，則不可道，而可非道。人孰欲得恣，而守其所不可，以禁其所可？以其不可道之心取人，則必合於不道人，而不合於道人。以其不可道之心與不道人論道人，亂之本也。夫何以知？曰：心知道，然後可道；可道然後守道以禁非道。以其可道之心取人，則合於道人，而不合於不道之人矣。以其可道之心與道人論非道，治之要也。何患不知？故治之要在於知道。

What is meant by the balance? I say: the Way. Therefore the mind cannot be allowed not to know the Way. If the mind does not know, it does not approve the Way but approves what is not the Way. Who among men, wishing to indulge himself, keeps to what he does not approve in order to forbid what he approves? To choose men with a mind that does not approve the Way is bound to accord with men without the Way and not with men who have it. To take a mind that does not approve the Way and, in company with men who lack the Way, discuss men who have it—this is the root of disorder. By what does one know? I say: when the mind knows, then it can approve the Way; having approved the Way, it can keep to the Way and forbid what is not the Way. To choose men with a mind that approves the Way is to accord with men who have the Way and not with men who lack it. To take a mind that approves the Way and, in company with men who have the Way, discuss what is not the Way—this is the essential of order. Why fret over not knowing? Thus the essential of order lies in knowing the Way.

人何以知道？曰：心。心何以知？曰：虛壹而靜。心未嘗不臧也，然而有所謂虛；心未嘗不兩也，然而有所謂壹；心未嘗不動也，然而有所謂靜。人生而有知，知而有志；志也者，臧也；然而有所謂虛；不以所已臧害所將受謂之虛。心生而有知，知而有異；異也者，同時兼知之；同時兼知之，兩也；然而有所謂一；不以夫一害此一謂之壹。心臥則夢，偷則自行，使之則謀；故心未嘗不動也；然而有所謂靜；不以夢劇亂知謂之靜。未得道而求道者，謂之虛壹而靜。作之：則將須道者之虛則人，將事道者之壹則盡，盡將思道者靜則察。知道察，知道行，體道者也。虛壹而靜，謂之大清明。萬物莫形而不見，莫見而不論，莫論而失位。坐於室而見四海，處於今而論久遠。疏觀萬物而知其情，參稽治亂而通其度，經緯天地而材官萬物，制割大理而宇宙裡矣。恢恢廣廣，孰知其極？睪睪廣廣，孰知其德？涫涫紛紛，孰知其形？明參日月，大滿八極，夫是之謂大人。夫惡有蔽矣哉！

By what does man know? I say: the mind. By what does the mind know? I say: emptiness, unity, and stillness. The mind has never ceased storing things, yet there is what is called emptiness; the mind has never lacked two ends, yet there is what is called unity; the mind has never ceased moving, yet there is what is called stillness. Man is born with awareness; awareness brings memory. Memory is storing, yet there is what is called emptiness—not letting what is already stored up harm what is about to be received is called emptiness. The mind is born with awareness, and awareness makes distinctions. Distinctions mean knowing two things at once; knowing two things at once is duality, yet there is what is called unity—not letting that one harm this one is called unity. When the mind sleeps it dreams; at ease it roams of itself; put to work it deliberates. Thus the mind has never ceased moving, yet there is what is called stillness—not letting dreams and turmoil disturb awareness is called stillness. One who has not yet attained the Way but seeks it must be told of emptiness, unity, and stillness. Put into practice: one who would await the Way can, by emptiness, let it enter; one who would serve the Way can, by unity, exhaust it; one who would ponder the Way can, by stillness, discern it. To know and then discern, to know and then act—this is one who embodies the Way. Emptiness, unity, and stillness are called the Great Pure Illumination. Of the myriad things, none takes form that is not seen, none is seen that is not placed in its rank, none is ranked that loses its position. Sitting in a room he sees all the four seas; dwelling in the present he ranks the far distant. He surveys the myriad things broadly and knows their true state; he examines and tests order and disorder and comprehends their measures; he lays out the warp and woof of heaven and earth and fashions the myriad things; he orders the great pattern, and the pattern of the cosmos is obtained (the base text reads li, 'village,' a copyist's error for li, 'pattern'). Vast, vast—who knows its limit? Boundless, boundless—who knows its virtue? Rolling, tumbling—who knows its shape? Its brightness matches the sun and moon; its greatness fills the eight extremes. Such a one is called the Great Man. What blindness could remain for him!

心者，形之君也，而神明之主也，出令而無所受令。自禁也，自使也，自奪也，自取也，自行也，自止也。故口可劫而使墨云，形可劫而使詘申，心不可劫而使易意，是之則受，非之則辭。故曰：心容－－其擇也無禁，必自現，其物也雜博，其情之至也不貳。詩云："采采卷耳，不盈傾筐。嗟我懷人，寘彼周行。"傾筐易滿也，卷耳易得也，然而不可以貳周行。故曰：心枝則無知，傾則不精，貳則疑惑。以贊稽之，萬物可兼知也。身盡其故則美。類不可兩也，故知者擇一而壹焉。

The mind is the lord of the bodily frame and the master of the spirit's illumination; it issues commands and accepts none. Of itself it forbids, of itself it is employed, of itself it takes away, of itself it takes, of itself it proceeds, of itself it stops. Thus the mouth can be coerced into silence or into speech, the body can be coerced to bend or stretch, but the mind cannot be coerced to change its intent: what it deems right it accepts; what it deems wrong it refuses. Hence it is said: as for the state of the mind, its choices admit no compulsion and must show themselves of themselves; its objects are motley and broad; when its true condition reaches the utmost it is undivided. The 'Juan Er' in the 'Airs of Zhou and the South' of the Book of Songs says: 'I pick and pick the plantain, yet cannot fill my slanting basket. I sigh for the man I long for, and set him in the ranks of Zhou.' A slanting basket is easy to fill, and plantain easy to gather, yet one may not let the mind be divided regarding the ranks of Zhou. Thus it is said: when the mind branches it cannot know; when it tilts it cannot be keen; when it is divided it is perplexed. If one uses it to aid in examination, the myriad things can all be known. When a man exhausts their reasons in himself, it is beautiful. Categories cannot belong to two at once, so the wise choose one and give it undivided devotion.

農精於田，而不可以為田師；賈精於市，而不可以為市師；工精於器，而不可以為器師。有人也，不能此三技，而可使治三官。曰：精於道者也。精於物者也。精於物者以物物，精於道者兼物物。故君子壹於道，而以贊稽物。壹於道則正，以贊稽物則察；以正志行察論，則萬物官矣。昔者舜之治天下也，不以事詔而萬物成。處一危之，其榮滿側；養一之微，榮矣而未知。故道經曰："人心之危，道心之微。"危微之幾，惟明君子而後能知之。故人心譬如盤水，正錯而勿動，則湛濁在下，而清明在上，則足以見鬒眉而察理矣。微風過之，湛濁動乎下，清明亂於上，則不可以得大形之正也。心亦如是矣。故導之以理，養之以清，物莫之傾，則足以定是非決嫌疑矣。小物引之，則其正外易，其心內傾，則不足以決麤理矣。故好書者眾矣，而倉頡獨傳者，壹也；好稼者眾矣，而後稷獨傳者，壹也。好樂者眾矣，而夔獨傳者，壹也；好義者眾矣，而舜獨傳者，壹也。倕作弓，浮游作矢，而羿精於射；奚仲作車，乘杜作乘馬，而造父精於御：自古及今，未嘗有兩而能精者也。曾子曰："是其庭可以搏鼠，惡能與我歌矣！"

The farmer is keen at the fields, but he cannot be made master of the fields; the merchant is keen at the market, but he cannot be made master of the market; the artisan is keen at implements, but he cannot be made master of implements. There is a kind of man who cannot perform these three skills, yet can be set to govern these three offices. I say: he is one keen on the Way; they are ones keen on things. One keen on things uses a thing to put another thing to work; one keen on the Way can put all things to work at once. Thus the noble man gives undivided devotion to the Way and uses it to aid in examining things. Undivided devotion to the Way is rectitude; using it to aid in examining things is discernment. When one puts discerning discourse into practice with a rectified will, all the myriad things receive their offices. In former times Shun governed all under heaven; he did not direct every single affair, yet the myriad things were accomplished. Dwelling in unity and keeping watch over it, his glory filled all around him; nurturing the hidden subtleties of unity, he attained glory and did not himself know it. Thus the Canon of the Way says: 'The mind of man is perilous; the mind of the Way is subtle.' Only an enlightened noble man can know the first sproutings of peril and subtlety. Therefore the mind of man is like water in a basin: set it upright and do not stir it, and the muddy sediment sinks below while the clear rises above, enough to see one's temples and brows and examine the texture of the skin. Let a light breeze pass over it: the sediment stirs below, the clear is ruffled above, and one can no longer obtain a true image of the great form. The mind is also like this. Thus guide it with the pattern, nourish it with clarity, let no thing make it tilt, and it will suffice to determine right and wrong and decide doubtful cases. If petty things pull at it, its rectitude is altered without and its heart tilted within, and it cannot decide even coarse and shallow matters. Thus many were fond of writing, yet only Cang Jie has come down to us—undivided devotion. Many were fond of husbandry, yet only Hou Ji has come down to us—undivided devotion. Many were fond of music, yet only Kui has come down to us—undivided devotion; many were fond of rightness, yet only Shun has come down to us—undivided devotion. Chui made the bow and Fuyou made the arrow, yet Yi was keen at archery; Xizhong made the chariot and Cheng Du first yoked horses, yet Zaofu was keen at driving. From antiquity to the present, no one has ever been keen at two things at once. Master Zeng said: 'That courtyard of yours could catch a rat—how could it join me in song!'

空石之中有人焉，其名曰觙。其為人也，善射以好思。耳目之欲接，則敗其思；蚊虻之聲聞，則挫其精。是以闢耳目之欲，而遠蚊虻之聲，閒居靜思則通。思仁若是，可謂微乎？孟子惡敗而出妻，可謂能自強矣，未及思也；有子惡臥而焠掌，可謂能自忍矣；未及好也。闢耳目之欲，遠蚊虻之聲，可謂危矣；未可謂微也。夫微者，至人也。至人也，何忍！何強！何危！故濁明外景，清明內景，聖人縱其欲，兼其情，而制焉者理矣；夫何強！何忍！何危！故仁者之行道也，無為也；聖人之行道也，無強也。仁者之思也恭，聖者之思也樂。此治心之道也。

In the caverns of Kongshi there was a man whose name was Ji. By nature he was good at archery and fond of pondering. As soon as the desires of eye and ear touched him, they ruined his pondering; as soon as he heard the whine of mosquitoes and gnats, it crushed his concentration. So he shunned the desires of eye and ear and kept far from the whine of insects; dwelling in quiet and pondering in stillness, he came through. If pondering humaneness were like this, could it be called subtle? Mencius, hating its ruin, sent away his wife—this can be called self-mastery, but it had not yet reached pondering. Master You, hating to fall asleep, scorched his palm—this can be called self-endurance, but it had not yet reached fondness. Shunning the desires of eye and ear and keeping far from the whine of insects can be called perilous, but it cannot yet be called subtle. The subtle is the perfect man. For the perfect man, what need of endurance! what need of mastery! what need of peril! Thus the brightness of the turbid is an outer light; the brightness of the clear is an inner light. The sage lets his desires run free and gives full use to his feelings, yet what regulates them is the pattern—what need of mastery! what need of endurance! what need of peril! Thus the humane man practices the Way without forced action; the sage practices the Way without strain. The humane man's pondering is reverent; the sage's pondering is joyful. This is the way to govern the mind.

凡觀物有疑，中心不定，則外物不清。吾慮不清，未可定然否也。冥冥而行者，見寢石以為伏虎也，見植林以為後人也：冥冥蔽其明也。醉者越百步之溝，以為蹞步之澮也；俯而出城門，以為小之閨也：酒亂其神也。厭目而視者，視一為兩；掩耳而聽者，聽漠漠而以為哅哅：埶亂其官也。故從山上望牛者若羊，而求羊者不下牽也：遠蔽其大也。從山下望木者，十仞之木若箸，而求箸者不上折也：高蔽其長也。水動而景搖，人不以定美惡：水埶玄也。瞽者仰視而不見星，人不以定有無：用精惑也。有人焉以此時定物，則世之愚者也。彼愚者之定物，以疑決疑，決必不當。夫苟不當，安能無過乎？

In general, when the observation of things is doubtful and the heart is unsettled, outer things cannot be clear. If my reflections are not clear, I cannot decide what is so and what is not. A man walking in the dark sees a recumbent stone and takes it for a crouching tiger; he sees a stand of upright trees and takes it for men behind him—the darkness blinds his sight. A drunkard strides across a hundred-pace ditch, taking it for a half-pace gutter; with head bowed he walks out of a city gate, taking it for a small chamber door—wine has disturbed his spirit. A man who presses on his eyes sees one thing as two; a man who covers his ears hears stillness as clamor—the pressure disturbs his organs of sense. Thus from atop a mountain an ox looks like a sheep, yet no seeker of sheep goes down the mountain to lead it home—distance has blinded him to its size. From below, a tree ten ren tall looks like a chopstick, yet no seeker of chopsticks goes up the mountain to break one off—height has blinded him to its length. When water moves, the reflection wavers, and no one uses it to judge beauty or ugliness—the play of the water dazzles. A blind man lifts his head and cannot see the stars, and no one uses him to determine whether they exist—the instrument of discernment is at fault. If anyone judges things at moments like these, he is the world's fool. When that fool judges things, he uses doubt to decide doubt, and his decision is certainly inapt; and if it is inapt, how can he fail to go astray?

夏首之南有人焉；曰涓蜀梁。其為人也，愚而善畏。明月而宵行，俯見其影，以為伏鬼也；仰視其發，以為立魅也。背而走，比至其家，失氣而死。豈不哀哉！凡人之有鬼也，必以其感忽之間，疑玄之時定之。此人之所以無有而有無之時也，而己以定事。故傷於溼而痺，痺而擊鼓烹豚，則必有敝鼓喪豚之費矣，而未有俞疾之福也。故雖不在夏首之南，則無以異矣。

South of Xiashou there was a man named Juan Shuliang. By nature he was foolish and easily frightened. Walking at night under a bright moon, he lowered his head, saw his shadow, and took it for a crouching ghost; he raised his head, saw his hair, and took it for a standing demon. He turned and ran, and by the time he reached his house his breath gave out and he died. Is that not pitiful! Whenever men suppose that ghosts exist, they must have decided it in a moment of trance and deluded confusion. This is when man mistakes nothing for something and something for nothing, and uses it to settle matters for himself. Thus a man injured by dampness who goes numb will, upon going numb, beat drums and boil a pig—and he is sure to incur the cost of a broken drum and a lost pig without the blessing of a cure. So even if he is not south of Xiashou, there is no difference.

凡以知，人之性也；可以知，物之理也。以可以知人之性，求可以知物之理，而無所疑止之，則沒世窮年不能無也。其所以貫理焉雖億萬，已不足浹萬物之變，與愚者若一。學、老身長子，而與愚者若一，猶不知錯，夫是之謂妄人。故學也者，固學止之也。惡乎止之？曰：止諸至足。曷謂至足？曰：聖王。聖也者，盡倫者也；王也者，盡制者也；兩盡者，足以為天下極矣。故學者以聖王為師，案以聖王之製為法，法其法以求其統類，以務象效其人。向是而務，士也；類是而幾，君子也；知之，聖人也。故有知非以慮是，則謂之懼；有勇非以持是，則謂之賊；察孰非以分是，則謂之篡；多能非以修蕩是，則謂之知；辯利非以言是，則謂之詍。傳曰："天下有二：非察是，是察非。"謂合王制不合王制也。天下不以是為隆正也，然而猶有能分是非、治曲直者邪？

In general, that by which we know is the nature of man; that which can be known is the pattern of things. To take man's nature, which can know, and seek after the pattern of things, which can be known, without any point of rest is to spend a whole life, to exhaust one's years, and still not reach the end. The principles he uses to thread them through may be millions upon millions, yet they will not suffice to compass the changes of the myriad things, and he is the same as a fool. To study until he is old and his sons are grown, and still be the same as a fool, and still not know to let it go—such a one is called a vain man. Therefore learning is, at bottom, learning the point at which to stop. Where does one stop? I say: at utmost sufficiency. What is utmost sufficiency? I say: the sage king. Sagehood exhausts the human relations; kingship exhausts the regulations. To exhaust both suffices to be the pole of all under heaven. Therefore the learner takes the sage king as his teacher, and accordingly takes the sage king's regulations as his model, models himself on that model in order to seek their guiding threads, and strives to imitate that man. One who strives toward this is a scholar; one who approximates and draws near to this is a noble man; one who knows this is a sage. Thus to have knowledge yet not use it to ponder this is called timidity; to have courage yet not use it to uphold this is called brigandage; to have keenness of discernment yet not use it to distinguish this is called usurpation; to have many abilities yet not use them to cultivate and magnify this is called cleverness; to have a fluent tongue yet not use it to speak this is called babbling. A commentary says: 'Under heaven there are two faces: using the wrong to examine the right, and using the right to examine the wrong.' This speaks of what accords with the kingly regulations and what does not. If under heaven does not take this as the grand standard, can it still distinguish right from wrong and order the crooked from the straight?

若夫非分是非，非治曲直，非辨治亂，非治人道，雖能之無益於人，不能無損於人；案直將治怪說，玩奇辭，以相撓滑也；案強鉗而利口，厚顏而忍詬，無正而恣孳，妄辨而幾利；不好辭讓，不敬禮節，而好相推擠：此亂世奸人之說也，則天下之治說者，方多然矣。傳曰："析辭而為察，言物而為辨，君子賤之。博聞強志，不合王制，君子賤之。"此之謂也。

As for those who do not distinguish right from wrong, do not order the crooked from the straight, do not discriminate order from disorder, and do not manage the ways of men—what they can do is of no benefit to men, and what they cannot do is no loss to men. They only set about treating weird doctrines and toying with strange phrases in order to throw one another into confusion; they coerce by force and wield sharpened tongues, endure insults with brazen faces, run wild and multiply without rectitude, make reckless arguments near to the pursuit of gain; they have no love for courteous deference, no respect for the rites and measures, and delight in jostling one another aside—this is the talk of the villainous men of a disordered age, and such are most of those who work up doctrines in the world today. A commentary says: 'To dissect phrases and call it discernment, to discourse on names and call it dialectic—the noble man despises it. Broad hearing and strong memory that do not accord with the kingly regulations—the noble man despises it.' This is what is meant.

為之無益於成也，求之無益於得也，憂戚之無益於幾也，則廣焉能棄之矣，不以自妨也，不少頃幹之胸中。不慕往，不閔來，無邑憐之心，當時則動，物至而應，事起而辨，治亂可否，昭然明矣。

What would accomplish nothing if done, obtain nothing if sought, and avail nothing for the sproutings of peril if grieved over—such things he can cast far away, does not let hinder him, and does not allow to intrude upon his breast for a moment. He does not envy the past nor pity the future; he harbors no brooding or regretful heart. When the season comes he moves; when a thing arrives he responds; when an affair stirs he discriminates. Order and disorder, the permissible and the impermissible, stand clear before him.

周而成，洩而敗，明君無之有也。宣而成，隱而敗，闇君無之有也。故人君者，周則讒言至矣，直言反矣；小人邇而君子遠矣！詩云："墨以為明，狐狸而蒼。"此言上幽而下險也。君人者，宣則直言至矣，而讒言反矣；君子邇而小人遠矣！詩云："明明在下，赫赫在上。"此言上明而下化也。

To succeed by concealment and fail by disclosure—no enlightened lord does this. To succeed by openness and fail by hiding—no benighted lord does this. Thus for one who is a lord of men, if he is secretive, slanderous words arrive and straight words turn back; the petty draw near and noble men keep away. The Book of Songs says: 'Taking darkness for brightness, the foxes turn grizzled.' This speaks of darkness above and deceit below. For one who is a lord of men, if he is open, straight words arrive and slanderous words turn back; noble men draw near and the petty keep away. The 'Da Ming' in the Greater Odes of the Book of Songs says: 'Bright below, illustrious above.' This speaks of light above and transformation below.

后王之成名：刑名從商，爵名從周，文名從禮，散名之加於萬物者，則從諸夏之成俗曲期，遠方異俗之鄉，則因之而為通。

The names fixed by the later kings: names for punishments followed the Shang, names for ranks followed the Zhou, names for the forms and ornaments of ritual followed the Ritual, and the scattered names applied to the myriad things followed the settled customs and common conventions of the Xia lands; districts with different customs in remote regions relied on these to communicate.

散名之在人者：生之所以然者謂之性；性之和所生，精合感應，不事而自然謂之性。性之好、惡、喜、怒、哀、樂謂之情。情然而心為之擇謂之慮。心慮而能為之動謂之偽；慮積焉，能習焉，而後成謂之偽。正利而為謂之事。正義而為謂之行。所以知之在人者謂之知；知有所合謂之智。所以能之在人者謂之能；能有所合謂之能。性傷謂之病。節遇謂之命：是散名之在人者也，是后王之成名也。

The scattered names applied to man: that by which he is as he is at birth is called nature. What is born of nature's harmony, what the vital spirit joins and responds to, and what is so of itself without being made is called nature. Nature's liking, disliking, joy, anger, grief, and delight are called the feelings. When the feelings are so and the mind makes a choice among them, it is called deliberation. When the mind deliberates and the abilities act upon it, it is called conscious activity; when deliberation has been amassed and the abilities practiced so that something is afterward completed, it is called conscious activity. Doing what is right for the sake of profit is called affairs. Doing what is right for the sake of rightness is called conduct. The faculty of knowing in man is called awareness; when awareness coincides with things it is called intelligence. The faculty of capability in man is called ability; when ability coincides with things it too is called ability. When nature suffers harm it is called illness. What is met with in one's lot is called fate. These are the scattered names applied to man, the names fixed by the later kings.

故王者之制名，名定而實辨，道行而志通，則慎率民而一焉。故析辭擅作名，以亂正名，使民疑惑，人多辨訟，則謂之大奸。其罪猶為符節度量之罪也。故其民莫敢托為奇辭以亂正名，故其民愨；愨則易使，易使則公。其民莫敢托為奇辭以亂正名，故壹於道法，而謹於循令矣。如是則其跡長矣。跡長功成，治之極也。是謹於守名約之功也。今聖王沒，名守慢，奇辭起，名實亂，是非之形不明，則雖守法之吏，誦數之儒，亦皆亂也。若有王者起，必將有循於舊名，有作於新名。然則所為有名，與所緣以同異，與制名之樞要，不可不察也。

Therefore when a king fixes names, once the names are fixed the things are distinguished; once the Way is practiced the will is communicated; and then he carefully leads the people and makes them one. Thus anyone who dissects phrases and presumptuously makes names so as to throw the correct names into disorder, to leave the people in doubt and multiply disputation, is called a great villain; his crime is like the crime of forging tallies, measures, and weights. Therefore his people dare not fabricate strange phrases to throw the correct names into disorder, and so his people are simple. Being simple they are easy to direct, and being easy to direct they are impartial. Since his people dare not fabricate strange phrases to throw the correct names into disorder, they are united in devotion to the Way and its models and heedfully follow orders. When it is so, his accomplishments endure; enduring accomplishments and completed achievement are the utmost of order. This is the efficacy of carefully holding to the conventions of names. Now the sage kings are gone; keeping to names is slack, strange phrases arise, names and realities are confounded, and the forms of right and wrong are not manifest—so that even law-keeping officials and Ru who recite the measures are all thrown into disorder. If a true king should arise, he is bound to follow the old names in some cases and create new names in others. Therefore why names are necessary, by what the same and the different are distinguished, and the pivotal points in fixing names—these cannot but be examined.

異形離心交喻，異物名實玄紐，貴賤不明，同異不別；如是，則志必有不喻之患，而事必有困廢之禍。故知者為之分別制名以指實，上以明貴賤，下以辨同異。貴賤明，同異別，如是則志無不喻之患，事無困廢之禍，此所為有名也。

When different forms part from the mind and explain one another, when the names and realities of different things are darkly tangled together, when noble and base are not made manifest and same and different are not distinguished, then the will is certain to suffer the calamity of being unable to make itself understood, and affairs are certain to suffer the calamity of being stymied and abandoned. Therefore the wise made separate names for them in order to indicate the realities, using them upward to make noble and base manifest and downward to distinguish same and different. With noble and base manifest and same and different distinguished, the will suffers no calamity of going uncommunicated and affairs suffer no calamity of being stymied and abandoned. This is why names are necessary.

然則何緣而以同異？曰：緣天官。凡同類同情者，其天官之意物也同。故比方之疑似而通，是所以共其約名以相期也。形體、色理以目異；聲音清濁、調竽、奇聲以耳異；甘、苦、鹹、淡、辛、酸、奇味以口異；香、臭、芬、鬱、腥、臊、漏庮、奇臭以鼻異；疾、癢、凔、熱、滑、鈹、輕、重以形體異；說、故、喜、怒、哀、樂、愛、惡、欲以心異。心有徵知。徵知，則緣耳而知聲可也，緣目而知形可也。然而徵知必將待天官之當簿其類，然後可也。五官簿之而不知，心徵知而無說，則人莫不然謂之不知。此所緣而以同異也。

Then by what are sameness and difference known? I say: by the faculties received from nature. All beings of the same kind and same condition apprehend things through their natural faculties in the same way; thus by comparing what resembles, things can be communicated—this is how the conventional names are shared for mutual agreement. Bodily form, color, and pattern are differentiated by the eye; sound clear or muddy, harmonious tune, and strange noise are differentiated by the ear; sweet, bitter, salty, bland, acrid, sour, and strange tastes are differentiated by the mouth; fragrant, fetid, flowery, rank, fishy, goaty, and strange odors are differentiated by the nose; pain, itch, cold, heat, smoothness, roughness, lightness, and heaviness are differentiated by the body; contentment, vexation, joy, anger, grief, delight, love, hate, and desire are differentiated by the mind. The mind has verifying knowledge. With verifying knowledge, then by way of the ear sound can be known, and by way of the eye form can be known. Yet verifying knowledge must wait upon the natural faculties each properly recording its own kind before it can be. If the five organs record but there is no knowing, or the mind verifies and knows but there is no way to say it, then everyone would call this not-knowing. This is by what sameness and difference are known.

然後隨而命之，同則同之，異則異之。單足以喻則單，單不足以喻則兼；單與兼無所相避則共；雖共不為害矣。知異實者之異名也，故使異實者莫不異名也，不可亂也，猶使同實者莫不同名也。

Then, accordingly, names are bestowed: what is the same is given the same name; what is different is given a different name. When a single name suffices to make it understood, a single name is used; when a single name does not suffice, a compound name is used; when single and compound names do not conflict, they are used in common, and being used in common does no harm. Knowing that different realities ought to have different names, one ensures that different realities never lack different names—this must not be thrown into disorder, just as one ensures that the same realities never bear different names.

故萬物雖眾，有時而欲無舉之，故謂之物；物也者，大共名也。推而共之，共則有共，至於無共然後止。有時而欲偏舉之，故謂之鳥獸。鳥獸也者，大別名也。推而別之，別則有別，至於無別然後至。

Therefore although the myriad things are many, sometimes one wishes to take them all up without remainder—hence the name 'thing.' 'Thing' is the greatest common name. One pushes it out into the common; where the common ends there is still the common, and one stops only when there is nothing more common. Sometimes one wishes to take up a portion of them—hence the name 'birds and beasts.' 'Birds and beasts' is the greatest differentiating name. One pushes it out into differentiation; where differentiation ends there is still differentiation, and one stops only when there is nothing more to differentiate.

名無固宜，約之以命，約定俗成謂之宜，異於約則謂之不宜。名無固實，約之以命實，約定俗成，謂之實名。名有固善，徑易而不拂，謂之善名。

Names have no inherent appropriateness: they name by convention; when the convention is established by custom it is called appropriate, and what differs from the convention is called inappropriate. Names have no inherent reality: by convention a reality is named; when the convention is established by custom it is called the name of that reality. Some names are inherently good: direct, plain, and not contrary—these are called good names.

物有同狀而異所者，有異狀而同所者，可別也。狀同而為異所者，雖可合，謂之二實。狀變而實無別而為異者，謂之化。有化而無別，謂之一實。此事之所以稽實定數也。此制名之樞要也。后王之成名，不可不察也。

Among things there are those with the same shape in different places, and those with different shapes in the same place; they can be distinguished. When two have the same shape in different places, though they may be named together, they are called two realities. When the shape changes yet the reality is not divided but becomes different, it is called transformation. When there is transformation without division, it is called one reality. This is how affairs examine realities and determine their number. This is the pivotal point in fixing names. The names fixed by the later kings cannot but be examined.

"見侮不辱"，"聖人不愛己"，"殺盜非殺人也"，此惑於用名以亂名者也。驗之所為有名，而觀其孰行，則能禁之矣。"山淵平"，"情慾寡"，"芻豢不加甘，大鐘不加樂"，此惑於用實，以亂名者也。驗之所緣以同異，而觀其孰調，則能禁之矣。"非而謁楹"，"有牛馬非馬也，"此惑於用名以亂實者也。驗之名約，以其所受，悖其所辭，則能禁之矣。

'To suffer insult is no disgrace,' 'the sage does not love himself,' 'to kill a robber is not to kill a man'—these are confusions that use names to throw names into disorder. Test them against why names are necessary, observe which course works, and they can be stopped. 'Mountains and abysses are level,' 'the desires are few,' 'flesh adds no sweetness, the great bell adds no music'—these are confusions that use realities to throw names into disorder. Test them against by what the same and the different are known, observe which is adjusted to the case, and they can be stopped. 'Denying yet deferring to the pillar,' 'possessing an ox-and-horse is not possessing a horse'—these are confusions that use names to throw realities into disorder. Test them against the convention of names, use what he accepts to confute what he refuses, and they can be stopped.

凡邪說辟言之離正道而擅作者，無不類於三惑者矣。故明君知其分而不與辨也。夫民易一以道，而不可與共故。故明君臨之以埶，道之以道，申之以命，章之以論，禁之以刑。故民之化道也如神，辨說惡用矣哉！今聖王沒，天下亂，奸言起，君子無埶以臨之，無刑以禁之，故辨說也。實不喻，然後命，命不喻，然後期，期不喻，然後說，說不喻，然後辨。故期命辨說也者，用之大文也，而王業之始也。名聞而實喻，名之用也。累而成文，名之麗也。用麗俱得，謂之知名。名也者，所以期累實也。辭也者，兼異實之名以論一意也。辨說也者，不異實名以喻動靜之道也。期命也者，辨說之用也。辨說也者，心之象道也。心也者，道之工宰也。道也者，治之經理也。心合於道，說合於心，辭合於說。正名而期，質請而喻，辨異而不過，推類而不悖。聽則合文，辨則盡故。以正道而辨奸，猶引繩以持曲直。是故邪說不能亂，百家無所竄。有兼聽之明，而無矜奮之容；有兼覆之厚，而無伐德之色。說行則天下正，說不行則白道而冥窮。是聖人之辨說也。詩曰："顒顒卬卬，如圭如璋，令聞令望，豈弟君子，四方為綱。"此之謂也。

In general, perverse doctrines and crooked sayings that depart from the right Way and are made on private authority are all like these three confusions. Therefore the enlightened lord knows their boundaries and does not dispute with them. The people can be unified by the Way but cannot be made partners in the reasons. So the enlightened lord overawes them with his position, guides them with the Way, makes things clear by commands, makes things manifest by explanation, and forbids by punishments. Thus his people are transformed by the Way as if by the divine—what need is there for disputation! Now the sage kings are gone, all under heaven is in disorder, and villainous sayings arise. The noble man has no position with which to overawe and no punishments with which to forbid, and for that reason he disputes. When realities cannot be made understood, then names are bestowed; when names cannot make it understood, then agreements are made; when agreements cannot make it understood, then explanations are given; when explanations cannot make it understood, then disputation is used. Thus agreement, naming, and disputation are the grandest of forms in use, and the beginning of the kingly enterprise. When a name is heard and the reality is made understood, that is the use of names. When names are accumulated into phrases, that is the pairing of names. When use and pairing are both apt, it is called knowing names. Names are what aggregate accumulated realities. Phrases join the names of different realities to discourse on a single meaning. Disputation explains the Way of action and stillness without letting name and reality diverge. Agreement and naming are the use of disputation. Disputation is the mind's imitation of the Way. The mind is the steward of the Way. The Way is the constant pattern of order. When the mind accords with the Way, speech accords with the mind, and phrases accord with speech. Names are made correct and agreed upon; substance and circumstances are weighed and made understood; distinctions are drawn without excess; analogies are pressed without contradiction. In listening it accords with form; in disputing it exhausts the reasons. Using the right Way to discriminate the villainous is like stretching the marking-line to hold the crooked and the straight. Thus perverse doctrines cannot throw it into disorder, and the hundred schools have nowhere to hide. It has the clarity to hear all sides without a demeanor of proud self-assertion; it has the generosity to cover all without a look of vaunted virtue. When its doctrine prevails, all under heaven is set right; when its doctrine does not prevail, it magnifies the Way and dwells in obscurity and want. This is the disputation of the sage. The 'Juan E' in the Greater Odes of the Book of Songs says: 'Dignified and exalted, like the jade scepter, like the jade baton, of fair renown and fair aspect; the happy and gracious noble man is the guiding line for the four quarters.' This is what is meant.

辭讓之節得矣，長少之理順矣；忌諱不稱，祅辭不出。以仁心說，以學心聽，以公心辨。不動乎眾人之非譽，不治觀者之耳目，不賂貴者之權埶，不利傳闢者之辭。故能處道而不貳，咄而不奪，利而不流，貴公正而賤鄙爭，是士君子之辨說也。詩曰："長夜漫兮，永思騫兮，大古之不慢兮，禮義之不愆兮，何恤人之言兮！"此之謂也。

When the forms of courteous deference are fitting, the ordering of elder and younger is followed; what is taboo is not uttered, and wicked and uncanny phrases do not pass the lips. He speaks with a humane heart, listens with a heart of learning, and disputes with a heart of impartiality. He is not moved by the crowd's blame or praise; he does not dress himself up for the eyes and ears of onlookers; he does not court the power of the honored; he has no greed for the phrases of those who spread crooked sayings. Thus he can abide in the Way undivided, endure straits unshaken, and remain undissolute in success; he values impartiality and despises mean contention—this is the disputation of the scholar and the noble man. The Book of Songs says: 'The long night stretches on; long I ponder my failings. Of the great ancients none was remiss; in ritual and rightness they never erred—why should I fret over the words of others!' This is what is meant.

君子之言，涉然而精，俛然而類，差差然而齊。彼正其名，當其辭，以務白其志義者也。彼名辭也者，志義之使也，足以相通，則舍之矣。苟之，奸也。故名足以指實，辭足以見極，則舍之矣。外是者，謂之訒，是君子之所棄，而愚者拾以為己寶。故愚者之言，芴然而粗，嘖然而不類，誻誻然而沸，彼誘其名，眩其辭，而無深於其志義者也。故窮借而無極，甚勞而無功，貪而無名。故知者之言也，慮之易知也，行之易安也，持之易立也，成則必得其所好，而不遇其所惡焉。而愚者反是。詩曰："為鬼為蜮，則不可得。有靦面目，視人罔極。作此好歌，以極反側。"此之謂也。

The noble man's words are deep and keen, close at hand yet ordered in classes, uneven yet evenly arranged. He makes the names correct and the phrases apt, striving to make manifest the meaning of his intent. Names and phrases are the envoys of intent; once they suffice to communicate it, he stops. To grasp at more perfunctorily is villainy. Therefore names suffice to indicate realities, phrases suffice to show the utmost, and there he stops. What goes beyond this is called making speech laborious; it is what the noble man discards, and what the fool picks up as his treasure. Thus the fool's words are vague and crude, clamorous and without classes, buzzing and boiling; he beguiles the names into disorder and dazzles the phrases, with no depth in the meaning of his intent. So he strains through borrowing upon borrowing without limit, toils grievously without achievement, and covets without a name. Therefore the wise man's words are easy to know when pondered, easy to rest in when practiced, easy to stand on when upheld, and when brought to completion they are certain to obtain what he loves and not encounter what he hates. The fool is the opposite of this. The 'He Ren Si' in the Lesser Odes of the Book of Songs says: 'Whether ghost or water-sprite, it cannot be caught. With that shamefaced look, you treat men without any rule. I made this good song to plumb your shifts and turnings.' This is what is meant.

凡語治而待去欲者，無以道欲而困於有欲者也。凡語治而待寡慾者，無以節慾而困於多欲者也。有欲無慾，異類也，生死也，非治亂也。欲之多寡，異類也，情之數也，非治亂也。欲不待可得，而求者從所可。欲不待可得，所受乎天也；求者從所可，所受乎心也。所受乎天之一欲，制於所受乎心之多，固難類所受乎天也。人之所欲生甚矣，人之惡死甚矣；然而人有從生成死者，非不欲生而欲死也，不可以生而可以死也。故欲過之而動不及，心止之也。心之所可中理，則欲雖多，奚傷於治？欲不及而動過之，心使之也。心之所可失理，則欲雖寡，奚止於亂？故治亂在於心之所可，亡於情之所欲。不求之其所在，而求之其所亡，雖曰我得之，失之矣。

All those who discuss order but wait for desires to be eliminated are people who have nothing with which to guide desires and are troubled by having desires. All those who discuss order but wait for desires to be reduced are people who have nothing with which to regulate desires and are troubled by having many desires. Having desires and not having desires belong to different categories; they are matters of life and death, not of order and disorder. Whether desires are many or few likewise belongs to a different category; it is a matter of the reckoning of the feelings, not of order and disorder. Desires do not wait until they can be satisfied before arising, but those who seek follow what they approve. That desires arise without waiting for what can satisfy them is something received from Heaven; that seekers follow what they approve is something received from the mind. The single desire received from Heaven, regulated by the many things received from the mind, can hardly resemble what was originally received from Heaven. Life is what men desire most intensely, and death is what men hate most intensely; yet there are those who turn from life toward death — not because they do not desire life and instead desire death, but because life is not possible and death is. So when desire exceeds it yet action falls short, it is the mind that has stopped it. When what the mind approves accords with principle, then even if desires are many, what harm can they do to order? When desire falls short yet action exceeds it, it is the mind that has driven it. When what the mind approves loses principle, then even if desires are few, how can disorder be stopped? Therefore order and disorder lie in what the mind approves, not in what the feelings desire. If one does not seek it where it lies but seeks it where it does not lie, then even though one says 'I have obtained it,' one has lost it.

性者、天之就也；情者、性之質也；欲者、情之應也。以所欲為可得而求之，情之所必不免也。以為可而道之，知所必出也。故雖為守門，欲不可去，性之具也。雖為天子，欲不可盡。欲雖不可盡，可以近盡也。欲雖不可去，求可節也。所欲雖不可盡，求者猶近盡；欲雖不可去，所求不得，慮者欲節求也。道者、進則近盡，退則節求，天下莫之若也。

Nature is what Heaven perfects; the feelings are the substance of nature; desires are the responses of the feelings. To regard what one desires as attainable and to seek it is what the feelings inevitably cannot avoid. To deem a thing permissible and to guide oneself toward it is what knowledge inevitably puts forth. Thus even a gatekeeper cannot do away with desires, for they are furnished by nature; and even the Son of Heaven cannot exhaust his desires. Yet although desires cannot be exhausted, they can be brought near to fulfillment. Although desires cannot be removed, the seeking can be regulated. Though what is desired cannot be exhausted, the seeker can still bring it near to fulfillment; and though desires cannot be removed, when what is sought is not obtained, the man who deliberates wishes to regulate his seeking. As for the Way: advancing, one brings desires near to fulfillment; retreating, one regulates one's seeking. Nothing under Heaven can compare with it.

凡人莫不從其所可，而去其所不可。知道之莫之若也，而不從道者，無之有也。假之有人而欲南，無多；而惡北，無寡，豈為夫南之不可盡也，離南行而北走也哉！今人所欲，無多；所惡，無寡，豈為夫所欲之不可盡也，離得欲之道，而取所惡也哉！故可道而從之，奚以損之而亂？不可道而離之，奚以益之而治？故知者論道而已矣，小家珍說之所願者皆衰矣。凡人之取也，所欲未嘗粹而來也；其去也，所惡未嘗粹而往也。故人無動而不可以不與權俱。衡不正，則重縣於仰，而人以為輕；輕縣於俛，而人以為重；此人所以惑於輕重也。權不正，則禍托於欲，而人以為福；福托於惡，而人以為禍；此亦人所以惑於禍福也。道者，古今之正權也；離道而內自擇，則不知禍福之所託。易者，以一易一，人曰：無得亦無喪也，以一易兩，人曰：無喪而有得也。以兩易一，人曰：無得而有喪也。計者取所多，謀者從所可。以兩易一，人莫之為，明其數也。從道而出，猶以一易兩也，奚喪！離道而內自擇，是猶以兩易一也，奚得！其累百年之慾，易一時之嫌，然且為之，不明其數也。

There is no man who does not follow what he approves and abandon what he disapproves. To know that nothing compares with the Way and yet not follow the Way — there is no such person. Suppose a man wished to go south — no matter how far, he would not think it too much — and hated to go north — no matter how little, he would not think it too little. Would he, just because the south cannot be traversed to its end, abandon walking south and run north instead? Now what men desire, they do not regard as too much; what they hate, they do not regard as too little. Would they, just because what is desired cannot be exhausted, abandon the Way that obtains what is desired and take instead what they hate? So if one can approve of the Way and follow it, how could that diminish it and lead to disorder? If one cannot approve of the Way and abandons it, how could that augment it and lead to order? Therefore the wise man discourses on the Way and nothing more, and the hopes entertained by petty and fanciful doctrines all fade away. In all that men take, what they desire never comes entirely pure; in all that they relinquish, what they hate never departs entirely pure. Therefore no man can act without keeping the balance and the weight with him. If the beam is not true, then a heavy thing hangs high and men think it light, while a light thing sinks low and men think it heavy — this is why men are misled about lightness and heaviness. If the weight is not true, then calamity may lodge in what is desired yet men take it for blessing, and blessing may lodge in what is hated yet men take it for calamity — this too is why men are misled about fortune and misfortune. The Way is the true standard of all ages past and present. If one departs from the Way and chooses by one's own heart, one will not know where fortune and misfortune lodge. In exchange, trading one for one, men say there is neither gain nor loss. Trading one for two, men say there is no loss but gain. Trading two for one, men say there is no gain but loss. The calculating man takes the greater amount; the planning man follows what he approves. Trading two for one — no man does it, because he understands that reckoning. To set out from the Way is like trading one for two — where is the loss? To depart from the Way and choose by one's own heart is like trading two for one — where is the gain? To trade away desires accumulated for a hundred years in exchange for a single moment of disgust, and yet still do it — that is not understanding the reckoning.

有嘗試深觀其隱而難者：志輕理而不重物者，無之有也；外重物而不內憂者，無之有也；行離理而不外危者，無之有也；外危而不內恐者，無之有也。心憂恐，則口銜芻豢而不知其味，耳聽鐘鼓而不知其聲，目視黼黻而不知其狀，輕暖平簟而體不知其安。故向萬物之美而不能嗛也。假而得間而嗛之，則不能離也。故向萬物之美而盛憂，兼萬物之美而盛害，如此者，其求物也，養生也？粥壽也？故欲養其欲而縱其情，欲養其性而危其形，欲養其樂而攻其心，欲養其名而亂其行，如此者，雖封侯稱君，其與夫盜無以異；乘軒戴絻，其與無足無以異。夫是之謂以己為物役矣。

I once tried looking deeply into what is hidden, subtle, and difficult. For the will to slight principle and yet not set store by external things — there is no such thing. To prize external things on the outside yet have no anxiety within — there is no such thing. For conduct to depart from principle yet meet no danger without — there is no such thing. To be in danger without yet feel no fear within — there is no such thing. When the heart is anxious and fearful, the mouth may hold meat yet not know its taste; the ears may listen to bells and drums yet not know their sound; the eyes may behold fine embroideries yet not know their appearance; the body may lie on light, warm, level mats yet not know their comfort. Thus a man may enjoy the finest of the myriad things and still not be satisfied; and even if he is briefly satisfied, the anxiety will not leave him. So to enjoy the finest of the myriad things while harboring great sorrow, and to possess all the benefits of the myriad things while harboring great harm — in such a case, when he pursues things, is he nourishing his life, or is he selling out his lifespan? Therefore, to wish to nourish one's desires yet indulge one's feelings, to wish to nourish one's nature yet endanger one's body, to wish to nourish one's joys yet assault one's heart, to wish to nourish one's reputation yet disorder one's conduct — a man like this, even if enfeoffed as a marquis and called a lord, is no different from a robber; even if he rides in a grand carriage wearing the ceremonial cap, he is no different from one who has no ground to stand on. This is called letting oneself be enslaved by things.

心平愉，則色不及傭而可以養目，聲不及傭而可以養耳，蔬食菜羹而可以養口，麤布之衣，麤紃之履，而可以養體。局室、蘆簾、稿蓐、敝機筵，而可以養形。故雖無萬物之美而可以養樂，無埶列之位而可以養名。如是而加天下焉，其為天下多，其私樂少矣。夫是之謂重己役物。

When the heart is calm, upright, and content, then colors that fall short of the ordinary can still nourish the eyes, sounds that fall short of the ordinary can still nourish the ears, plain vegetables and vegetable broth can nourish the mouth, clothes of coarse cloth and shoes of rough hemp can nourish the body. A cramped room, a reed curtain, a straw mat, a worn-out table and mat — these can still nourish the frame. So even without the finest of the myriad things one may nourish one's joy, and even without a place in the ranks of power and position one may nourish one's good name. If such a man were given the whole world, he would do much for the world's sake but take little for his private pleasure. This is called valuing oneself and making things serve you.

無稽之言，不見之行，不聞之謀，君子慎之。

The gentleman treats with caution all claims he has not been able to examine, conduct he has not witnessed, and plans he has not heard about.

人之性惡，其善者偽也。－－今人之性，生而有好利焉，順是，故爭奪生而辭讓亡焉；生而有疾惡焉，順是，故殘賊生而忠信亡焉；生而有耳目之欲，有好聲色焉，順是，故淫亂生而禮義文理亡焉。然則從人之性，順人之情，必出於HTTP/1.0502犯分亂理，而歸於暴。故必將有師法之化，禮義之道，然後出於辭讓，合於文理，而歸於治。用此觀之，人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。

Man's nature is evil; his goodness is the result of conscious exertion. Now man's nature is such that at birth he is fond of profit. Following this, strife and contention arise while modest deference is lost. At birth he is given to envy and hatred. Following this, cruelty and villainy arise while loyalty and faithfulness are lost. At birth he has the desires of the ears and eyes and a fondness for sounds and colors. Following this, licentiousness and disorder arise while ritual and moral principles and proper form are lost. This being so, to let man's nature run free and follow his feelings inevitably leads to strife and contention, to the violation of social stations and the disruption of order, ending in violence. [The base text reads 'HTTP/1.0502', a scraping artifact; it should read 'contention.'] Therefore there must first be the transforming influence of teachers and models and the guidance of ritual and moral principles; only then do men come forth in modesty and deference, conform to proper form and order, and arrive at good government. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion.

故枸木必將待檃栝、烝矯然後直；鈍金必將待礱厲然後利；今人之性惡，必將待師法然後正，得禮義然後治，今人無師法，則偏險而不正；無禮義，則悖亂而不治，古者聖王以人性惡，以為偏險而不正，悖亂而不治，是以為之起禮義，製法度，以矯飾人之情性而正之，以擾化人之情性而導之也，始皆出於治，合於道者也。今人之化師法，積文學，道禮義者為君子；縱性情，安恣孳，而違禮義者為小人。用此觀之，人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。

Thus crooked wood must await the straightening frame and steaming and bending before it becomes straight; blunt metal must await grinding and sharpening before it becomes keen. So too man's nature, being evil, must await teachers and models before it becomes upright, and must obtain ritual and moral principles before it becomes ordered. Now if a man is without teachers and models, he is partial, perverse, and not upright; without ritual and moral principles, he is refractory, disorderly, and ungoverned. In ancient times the sage kings, because man's nature is evil and men were partial, perverse, and not upright, refractory, disorderly, and ungoverned, therefore raised up ritual and moral principles for them and established laws and standards, in order to reshape and straighten man's feelings and nature and to tame and guide them, so that all would come forth in order and conform to the Way. Nowadays a man who is transformed by teachers and models, who accumulates learning and letters, and who practices ritual and moral principles is a gentleman; one who gives free rein to his inborn feelings, rests content in unbridled license, and violates ritual and moral principles is a petty man. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion.

孟子曰："今之學者，其性善。"

Mencius said: 'That men now devote themselves to learning shows that their nature is good.'

曰：是不然。是不及知人之性，而不察乎人之性偽之分者也。凡性者，天之就也，不可學，不可事。禮義者，聖人之所生也，人之所學而能，所事而成者也。不可學，不可事，而在人者，謂之性；可學而能，可事而成之在人者，謂之偽。是性偽之分也。今人之性，目可以見，耳可以聽；夫可以見之明不離目，可以聽之聰不離耳，目明而耳聰，不可學明矣。

I say: this is not so. It shows that he has not yet come to know man's nature and has not examined the distinction between nature and conscious exertion. In general, nature is what Heaven perfects; it cannot be learned and cannot be produced by effort. Ritual and moral principles were created by the sages; they are what men learn to master and produce through effort. What cannot be learned and cannot be produced by effort, yet resides in man, is called nature. What can be learned and mastered, can be produced by effort, and resides in man is called conscious exertion. This is the distinction between nature and conscious exertion. Now as for man's nature: the eyes can see and the ears can hear. The keen sight by which they see does not depart from the eyes, and the keen hearing by which they hear does not depart from the ears. That eyes are keen and ears acute clearly cannot be learned.

孟子曰："今人之性善，將皆失喪其性故也。"

Mencius said: 'Now since man's nature is good, all evil comes from his having lost his nature.'

曰：若是則過矣。今人之性，生而離其樸，離其資，必失而喪之。用此觀之，然則人之性惡明矣。所謂性善者，不離其樸而美之，不離其資而利之也。使夫資樸之於美，心意之於善，若夫可以見之明不離目，可以聽之聰不離耳，故曰目明而耳聰也。今人之性，飢而欲飽，寒而欲暖，勞而欲休，此人之情性也。今人見長而不敢先食者，將有所讓也；勞而不敢求息者，將有所代也。夫子之讓乎父，弟之讓乎兄，子之代乎父，弟之代乎兄，此二行者，皆反於性而悖於情也；然而孝子之道，禮義之文理也。故順情性則不辭讓矣，辭讓則悖於情性矣。用此觀之，人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。

I say: if this were so, it would be mistaken. If man's nature upon birth departed from its raw simplicity and its natural endowment, it would necessarily be lost altogether. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is meant by saying nature is good is that, without departing from its raw simplicity, it is beautified, and without departing from its natural endowment, it is made beneficial. It would make the endowed simplicity relate to beauty and the heart relate to goodness the way keen sight does not depart from the eyes and keen hearing does not depart from the ears — hence we say the eyes are keen and the ears acute. Now by man's nature, when hungry he wants to be full, when cold he wants warmth, when weary he wants rest — this is man's emotional nature. Yet now a man sees an elder and dares not eat first, because he must yield to him; weary, he dares not seek rest, because he must toil in another's place. A son yields to his father, a younger brother yields to his elder brother; a son toils in his father's place, a younger brother toils in his elder brother's place. These two courses of conduct both run counter to nature and violate the feelings; yet they are the way of the filial son and the proper form of ritual and moral principles. Therefore, if one follows one's feelings and nature there is no deference; where there is deference it is contrary to the feelings and nature. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion.

問者曰："人之性惡，則禮義惡生？"

The questioner said: 'If man's nature is evil, then from what do ritual and moral principles arise?'

應之曰：凡禮義者，是生於聖人之偽，非故生於人之性也。故陶人埏埴而為器，然則器生於陶人之偽，非故生於人之性也。故工人斲木而成器，然則器生於工人之偽，非故生於人之性也。聖人積思慮，習偽故，以生禮義而起法度，然則禮義法度者，是生於聖人之偽，非故生於人之性也。若夫目好色，耳好聽，口好味，心好利，骨體膚理好愉佚，是皆生於人之情性者也；感而自然，不待事而後生之者也。夫感而不能然，必且待事而後然者，謂之生於偽。是性偽之所生，其不同之徵也。

I answer: all ritual and moral principles are born of the sages' conscious exertion; they were not originally produced from man's nature. Thus when the potter kneads clay and makes a vessel, the vessel is born of the potter's conscious exertion, not originally produced from man's nature. So too when the craftsman carves wood and makes a vessel, the vessel is born of the craftsman's conscious exertion, not originally produced from man's nature. The sage accumulated reflection and deliberation and became practiced in deliberate works, and thereby produced ritual and moral principles and established laws and standards; hence ritual, moral principles, laws, and standards are born of the sages' conscious exertion, not originally produced from man's nature. As for the eyes' fondness for color, the ears' fondness for sound, the mouth's fondness for flavor, the heart's fondness for profit, and the bones, body, and skin's fondness for ease — these are all produced from man's emotional nature; they respond to stimulus spontaneously and do not await effort to be produced. What does not come about upon stimulus but must await effort before becoming so is called what is born of conscious exertion. These are the different evidences of what nature and what conscious exertion each produce.

故聖人化性而起偽，偽起而生禮義，禮義生而製法度；然則禮義法度者，是聖人之所生也。故聖人之所以同於眾，其不異於眾者，性也；所以異而過眾者，偽也。夫好利而欲得者，此人之情性也。假之有弟兄資財而分者，且順情性，好利而欲得，若是，則兄弟相拂奪矣；且化禮義之文理，若是，則讓乎國人矣。故順情性則弟兄爭矣，化禮義則讓乎國人矣。

Therefore the sage transforms man's nature and raises up conscious exertion; with conscious exertion raised up he produces ritual and moral principles; with ritual and moral principles produced he establishes laws and standards. Thus ritual, moral principles, laws, and standards are what the sage produced. Wherein the sage is the same as the multitude and not different from them is his nature; wherein he differs from and surpasses the multitude is his conscious exertion. Being fond of profit and wanting to gain — this is man's emotional nature. Suppose brothers had property to divide: if they followed their emotional nature, being fond of profit and wanting to gain, then brothers would contend with one another; but if transformed by the proper form of ritual and moral principles, they would yield even to strangers. So following the feelings and nature, brothers quarrel; transformed by ritual and moral principles, they defer even to their countrymen.

凡人之慾為善者，為性惡也。夫薄願厚，惡願美，狹願廣，貧願富，賤願貴，苟無之中者，必求於外。故富而不願財，貴而不願埶，苟有之中者，必不及於外。用此觀之，人之慾為善者，為性惡也。今人之性，固無禮義，故強學而求有之也；性不知禮義，故思慮而求知之也。然則性而已，則人無禮義，不知禮義。人無禮義則亂，不知禮義則悖。然則性而已，則悖亂在己。用此觀之，人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。

In general, men want to do good precisely because their nature is evil. The shallow wish to be deep; the ugly wish to be beautiful; the narrow wish to be broad; the poor wish to be rich; the lowly wish to be noble — if one lacks it within oneself, one inevitably seeks it outside. Thus the rich no longer wish for wealth and the noble no longer wish for power — if one has it within oneself, one certainly does not seek it outside. From this it is clear that men want to do good because their nature is evil. Now man's nature originally lacks ritual and moral principles; therefore men force themselves to study, seeking to possess them. Nature does not know ritual and moral principles; therefore men think and reflect, seeking to know them. So on nature alone, man lacks ritual and moral principles and does not know them. Without them men fall into disorder; not knowing them they grow perverse. So on nature alone, perversity and disorder reside within oneself. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion.

孟子曰："人之性善。"

Mencius said: 'Man's nature is good.'

曰：是不然。凡古今天下之所謂善者，正理平治也；所謂惡者，偏險悖亂也：是善惡之分也矣。今誠以人之性固正理平治邪，則有惡用聖王，惡用禮義哉？雖有聖王禮義，將曷加於正理平治也哉？今不然，人之性惡。故古者聖人以人之性惡，以為偏險而不正，悖亂而不治，故為之立君上之埶以臨之，明禮義以化之，起法正以治之，重刑罰以禁之，使天下皆出於治，合於善也。是聖王之治而禮義之化也。今當試去君上之埶，無禮義之化，去法正之治，無刑罰之禁，倚而觀天下民人之相與也。若是，則夫強者害弱而奪之，眾者暴寡而譁之，天下悖亂而相亡，不待頃矣。用此觀之，然則人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。

I say: this is not so. In all ages under Heaven, what is called good is what is upright, principled, peaceful, and ordered; what is called evil is what is partial, perverse, rebellious, and disorderly — this is the distinction between good and evil. Now if we truly supposed man's nature was originally upright, principled, peaceful, and ordered, then what need would there be for sage kings? What need for ritual and moral principles? Even with sage kings and ritual and moral principles, what could they add to uprightness, order, peace, and government? But in fact this is not so, for man's nature is evil. Therefore in ancient times the sages, because man's nature is evil and men were partial, perverse, and not upright, refractory, disorderly, and ungoverned, established for them the authority of the ruler to watch over them, made ritual and moral principles manifest to transform them, raised laws and governance to rule them, and made punishments weighty to restrain them, so that all under Heaven would come forth in order and conform to goodness. This is the rule of the sage kings and the transforming influence of ritual and moral principles. Now try it: remove the authority of the ruler, do away with the transforming influence of ritual and moral principles, discard the rule of laws and governance, abolish the restraint of punishments, and then stand back and watch how the people of the world get along with one another. In such a case the strong will injure the weak and take from them, the many will tyrannize the few and shout them down, and the whole world will fall into perversity and disorder and perish together before a moment has passed. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion.

故善言古者，必有節於今；善言天者，必有徵於人。凡論者貴其有辨合，有符驗。故坐而言之，起而可設，張而可施行。今孟子曰："人之性善。"無辨合符驗，坐而言之，起而不可設，張而不可施行，豈不過甚矣哉！故性善則去聖王，息禮義矣。性惡則與聖王，貴禮義矣。故檃栝之生，為枸木也；繩墨之起，為不直也；立君上，明禮義，為性惡也。用此觀之，然則人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。

Therefore those who are good at speaking of antiquity must be verified in the present; those who are good at speaking of Heaven must be verified in man. Every doctrine is valued for possessing a demonstrable tally, for having the verification of matching credentials. Thus what is said sitting down can, on standing up, be set in place, and when spread out can be put into practice. Now Mencius says 'man's nature is good.' It has no demonstrable tally and no verification; said sitting down, it cannot on standing up be set in place, and spread out it cannot be put into practice — is this not too great an error! Therefore if nature is good, the sage kings are dispensed with and ritual and moral principles are set aside. If nature is evil, the sage kings are honored and ritual and moral principles are prized. Thus the straightening frame was invented for the sake of crooked wood; the carpenter's inked line was devised for the sake of what is not straight; the ruler was established and ritual and moral principles made manifest because man's nature is evil. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion.

直木不待檃栝而直者，其性直也。枸木必將待檃栝烝矯然後直者，以其性不直也。今人之性惡，必將待聖王之治，禮義之化，然後始出於治，合於善也。用此觀之，人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。

Straight wood does not await the straightening frame to be straight, because its nature is straight. Crooked wood must await the straightening frame and steaming and bending before it becomes straight, because its nature is not straight. Now man's nature is evil; it must await the rule of the sage kings and the transforming influence of ritual and moral principles before it comes forth in order and conforms to goodness. From this it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion.

問者曰："禮義積偽者，是人之性，故聖人能生之也。"

The questioner said: 'Ritual, moral principles, and accumulated effort are part of man's nature; that is why the sage could produce them.'

應之曰：是不然。夫陶人埏埴而生瓦，然則瓦埴豈陶人之性也哉？工人斲木而生器，然則器木豈工人之性也哉？夫聖人之於禮義也，闢則陶埏而生之也。然則禮義積偽者，豈人之本性也哉！凡人之性者，堯舜之與桀蹠，其性一也；君子之與小人，其性一也。今將以禮義積偽為人之性邪？然則有曷貴堯禹，曷貴君子矣哉！凡貴堯禹君子者，能化性，能起偽，偽起而生禮義。然則聖人之於禮義積偽也，亦猶陶埏而為之也。用此觀之，然則禮義積偽者，豈人之性也哉！所賤於桀蹠小人者，從其性，順其情，安恣孳，以出乎貪利爭奪。故人之性惡明矣，其善者偽也。天非私曾騫孝己而外眾人也，然而曾騫孝己獨厚於孝之實，而全於孝之名者，何也？以綦於禮義故也。天非私齊魯之民而外秦人也，然而於父子之義，夫婦之別，不如齊魯之孝具敬文者，何也？以秦人從情性，安恣孳，慢於禮義故也，豈其性異矣哉！

I answer: this is not so. When the potter kneads clay and produces tiles, are the tiles and the clay part of the potter's nature? When the craftsman carves wood and produces a vessel, are the vessel and the wood part of the craftsman's nature? The sage's relation to ritual and moral principles is, by analogy, like the potter kneading clay to produce them. So how could ritual, moral principles, and accumulated effort be man's original nature? As for the nature of all men — Yao and Shun on the one hand, Jie and Robber Zhi on the other — their nature is the same; gentleman and petty man — their nature is the same. Now if you were to take ritual, moral principles, and accumulated effort as man's nature, then why prize Yao and Yu? Why prize the gentleman? In general, Yao, Yu, and the gentleman are prized because they could transform their nature, could raise up conscious exertion, and with conscious exertion raised up produced ritual and moral principles. So the sage's relation to ritual, moral principles, and accumulated effort is again like the potter's kneading clay to make vessels. From this it is clear — how could ritual, moral principles, and accumulated effort be man's nature? The reason we despise Jie, Robber Zhi, and the petty man is that they give free rein to their nature, follow their feelings, rest content in unbridled license, and end in greed and contention. Therefore it is clear that man's nature is evil and that his goodness is conscious exertion. Heaven shows no partiality to Zeng Shen, Min Ziqian, and Xiaoji, nor does it slight the multitude; yet Zeng Shen, Min Ziqian, and Xiaoji alone were rich in the substance of filial piety and preserved intact the fame of filial piety — why? Because they exerted themselves to the utmost in ritual and moral principles. Heaven shows no partiality to the people of Qi and Lu, nor does it slight the people of Qin; yet in the duty between father and son and the distinction between husband and wife, the people of Qin fall short of the filial completeness and respectful refinement of Qi and Lu — why? Because the people of Qin give free rein to their feelings and nature, rest content in unbridled license, and are lax in ritual and moral principles — hardly because their nature is different!

"塗之人可以為禹。"曷謂也？

'A man on the road can become a Yu.' What does this saying mean?

曰：凡禹之所以為禹者，以其為仁義法正也。然則仁義法正有可知可能之理。然而塗之人也，皆有可以知仁義法正之質，皆有可以能仁義法正之具，然則其可以為禹明矣。今以仁義法正為固無可知可能之理邪？然則唯禹不知仁義法正，不能仁義法正也。將使塗之人固無可以知仁義法正之質，而固無可以能仁義法正之具邪？然則塗之人也，且內不可以知父子之義，外不可以知君臣之正。今不然。塗之人者，皆內可以知父子之義，外可以知君臣之正，然則其可以知之質，可以能之具，其在塗之人明矣。今使塗之人者，以其可以知之質，可以能之具，本夫仁義法正之可知可能之理，可能之具，然則其可以為禹明矣。今使塗之人伏術為學，專心一志，思索孰察，加日縣久，積善而不息，則通於神明，參於天地矣。故聖人者，人之所積而致矣。

I say: in general, what made Yu Yu was that he practiced benevolence, righteousness, law, and right governance. So benevolence, righteousness, law, and right governance have principles that can be known and can be practiced. Now every man on the road possesses the endowment by which benevolence, righteousness, law, and right governance can be known, and the equipment by which they can be practiced; thus it is clear that he can become a Yu. Now would you hold that benevolence, righteousness, law, and right governance originally have no principle by which they can be known or practiced? Then even Yu could not have known or practiced them. Or will you hold that the man on the road originally lacks the endowment to know them and the equipment to practice them? Then the man on the road could not know the duty between father and son at home, nor the right order between ruler and minister abroad. But in fact this is not so. Every man on the road can know the duty between father and son within and the right order between ruler and minister without; so the endowment capable of knowing and the equipment capable of practicing clearly reside in the man on the road. Now if the man on the road applies himself to mastering the methods and learning, concentrates his mind with a single purpose, ponders and scrutinizes, and accumulates day after day for a long time, amassing goodness without cease, he will reach spiritual illumination and form a triad with Heaven and Earth. Therefore the sage is what a man becomes through accumulation.

曰："聖可積而致，然而皆不可積，何也？"

Someone said: 'Sagehood can be reached through accumulation, yet men are all unable to accumulate. Why is that?'

曰：可以而不可使也。故小人可以為君子，而不肯為君子；君子可以為小人，而不肯為小人。小人君子者，未嘗不可以相為也，然而不相為者，可以而不可使也。故塗之人可以為禹，則然；塗之人能為禹，則未必然也。雖不能為禹，無害可以為禹。足可以遍行天下，然而未嘗有遍行天下者也。夫工匠農賈，未嘗不可以相為事也，然而未嘗能相為事也。用此觀之，然則可以為，未必能也；雖不能，無害可以為。然則能不能之與可不可，其不同遠矣，其不可以相為明矣。

I say: they can, but they cannot be made to do so. Thus a petty man can become a gentleman, but is unwilling to become a gentleman; a gentleman can become a petty man, but is unwilling to become a petty man. Petty man and gentleman — never is it that they cannot become one another; yet they do not become one another, because it is possible but cannot be compelled. So the saying that a man on the road can become a Yu is right in this sense; that the man on the road can actually become a Yu is not necessarily so. Yet even if he cannot actually become a Yu, that does not hinder his being able to become a Yu. The feet can walk everywhere under Heaven, yet there has never been a man who walked everywhere under Heaven. Craftsmen, farmers, and merchants — never is it that they cannot practice one another's trades, yet none has ever been able to practice one another's trades. From this it is clear that what can be done is not necessarily what can be accomplished; and even what cannot be accomplished does not prevent its being possible. Thus ability and inability are far removed from possibility and impossibility — that they cannot substitute for one another is plain.

堯問於舜曰："人情何如？"舜對曰："人情甚不美，又何問焉！妻子具而孝衰於親，嗜慾得而信衰於友，爵祿盈而忠衰於君。人之情乎！人之情乎！甚不美，又何問焉！唯賢者為不然。"

Yao asked Shun: 'What are men's feelings like?' Shun answered: 'Men's feelings are very unlovely — why ask about them! Once a man has wife and children, his filial devotion to his parents declines; once his cravings are satisfied, his faithfulness to his friends declines; once his rank and emolument are filled up, his loyalty to his lord declines. Man's feelings! Man's feelings! Very unlovely — why ask about them! Only the worthy man is not like this.'

有聖人之知者，有士君子之知者，有小人之知者，有役夫之知者。多言則文而類，終日議其所以，言之千舉萬變，其統類一也：是聖人之知也。少言則徑而省，論而法，若佚之以繩：是士君子之知也。其言也諂，其行也悖，其舉事多悔：是小人之知也。齊給便敏而無類，雜能旁魄而無用，析速粹孰而不急，不恤是非，不論曲直，以期勝人為意，是役夫之知也。

There is the knowledge of the sage, the knowledge of the scholar-gentleman, the knowledge of the petty man, and the knowledge of the menial servant. To speak much yet with refinement and proper categories, discoursing all day on the reasons why things are so, expounding with a thousand points and myriad changes while the unifying thread remains one — this is the knowledge of the sage. To speak little, direct and concise, discoursing with method as if drawn along by the carpenter's inked line — this is the knowledge of the scholar-gentleman. Words that flatter, conduct that is perverse and disorderly, deeds that often end in regret — this is the knowledge of the petty man. Quick of tongue without categories, broadly capable in sundry skills yet useless, swift and practiced at analysis but unconnected to pressing affairs, heedless of right and wrong, indifferent to crooked and straight, taking the hope of defeating others as his heart's aim — this is the knowledge of the menial servant.

有上勇者，有中勇者，有下勇者。天下有中，敢直其身；先王有道，敢行其意；上不循於亂世之君，下不俗於亂世之民；仁之所在無貧窮，仁之所亡無富貴；天下知之，則欲與天下同苦樂之；天下不知之，則傀然獨立天地之間而不畏：是上勇也。禮恭而意儉，大齊信焉，而輕貨財；賢者敢推而尚之，不肖者敢援而廢之：是中勇也。輕身而重貨，恬禍而廣解苟免，不恤是非然不然之情，以期勝人為意：是下勇也。

There is superior courage, middling courage, and inferior courage. When there is a just mean in the world, he dares to stand his body upright; when the former kings had a Way, he dares to carry out its intent; above he does not follow along with the lords of a disorderly age, below he does not merge with the people of a disorderly age; where benevolence is found he does not count it poverty, and where benevolence is lost he does not count it wealth or honor; if the world knows him, he wishes to share the world's joys and sorrows; if the world does not know him, he stands towering alone between Heaven and Earth without fear — this is superior courage. Respectful in ritual and modest in intent, greatly prizing single-minded integrity while holding goods and wealth lightly; daring to promote the worthy and set them above, daring to pull down the unworthy and dismiss them — this is middling courage. Holding his person lightly and goods heavily, at ease amid calamity, glibly excusing himself and scrambling to escape, heedless of the true facts of right and wrong, taking the hope of defeating others as his heart's aim — this is inferior courage.

繁弱、鉅黍古之良弓也；然而不得排檠則不能自正。桓公之蔥，太公之闕，文王之錄，莊君之曶，闔閭之干將、莫邪、鉅闕、闢閭，此皆古之良劍也；然而不加砥厲則不能利，不得人力則不能斷。驊騮、騹驥、纖離、綠耳，此皆古之良馬也；然而必前有銜轡之制，後有鞭策之威，加之以造父之駛，然後一日而致千里也。夫人雖有性質美而心辯知，必將求賢師而事之，擇良友而友之。得賢師而事之，則所聞者堯舜禹湯之道也；得良友而友之，則所見者忠信敬讓之行也。身日進於仁義而不自知也者，靡使然也。今與不善人處，則所聞者欺誣詐偽也，所見者汙漫淫邪貪利之行也，身且加於刑戮而不自知者，靡使然也。傳曰："不知其子視其友，不知其君視其左右。"靡而已矣！靡而已矣！

Fanruo and Jushu were fine bows of antiquity; yet without the straightening frame they could not set themselves right. Duke Huan's Cong, the Grand Duke's Que, King Wen's Lu, Lord Zhuang's Hu, and Helü's Ganjiang, Moye, Juque, and Pilü — these were all fine swords of antiquity; yet without grinding they could not be keen, and without a man's strength they could not cut. Hualiu, Qiji, Xianli, and Lü'er — these were all fine horses of antiquity; yet they needed the restraint of bit and bridle before, the threat of whip and goad behind, and the driving skill of a Zaofu besides, before they could travel a thousand li in a day. So too a man, even one of fine endowment with a mind capable of discernment, must seek a worthy teacher to serve and choose good friends to keep company with. Having obtained a worthy teacher to serve, what he hears is the Way of Yao, Shun, Yu, and Tang; having found good friends to keep company with, what he sees is conduct of loyalty, faithfulness, respect, and deference. His person daily enters into benevolence and righteousness without his knowing it — gradual influence makes it so. Now if he lives among bad men, what he hears is deceit, slander, and falsehood; what he sees is conduct foul, wasteful, licentious, perverse, and greedy for gain; his person will come to punishment and execution without his knowing it — gradual influence makes it so. The tradition says: 'If you do not know the son, look at his friends; if you do not know the lord, look at his attendants.' It is only gradual influence! It is only gradual influence!