A Treatise Faulting Liu Zihou for Faulting the Guoyu (國語)非柳子厚非國語論
柳子厚之非國語。予復以爲非也。左氏親受經於仲尼。凡事之可以因經而附者。皆釋於傳。採其餘以爲國語。旣載之傳。而又見於國語者。亦衆矣。何皆誣淫不槩于聖耶。柳子所以非其所非而非之者。請先以一二篇明之。國語曰。周之三川震。伯陽父曰。周將亡矣云云。柳子非之曰。山川者。特天地陰陽之氣。自動自休。自峙自休。是惡乎與我謀。或吸或吹。如輪如機。其孰能知之云云。苟如是則山川之崩震。果可謂非災耶。孔子書春秋地震五。山陵崩陁二。其餘災異。不可勝紀。孔子其可非之耶。詩曰。百川沸騰。山谷卒崩。詩可非之歟。況伯陽父所言。非特左氏書之國語也。後至司馬遷，班固。亦取而載之史矣。夫史者。標準萬世之書也。若誣淫不經之說。則二子何取而書之耶。國語曰。趙宣子驟諫公。公使鋤麑賊之。鋤麑自殺云云。柳子非之曰。宣子之諫君。爲社稷之衛久矣。麑胡不聞之。乃以假寐爲賢耶。不知其大而賢其小耶。是宣子大德不見赦。而以小敬免也。左氏多於文辭。以著其言云云。此亦非所非而非之者也。大抵人之於人。雖素所賢之者。當其時有見其失而非之者。素所未賢者。或於後。有見可敬而禮之者。麑雖素聞宣子之賢。以君命也。不得不往焉。則殺之其任也。脫若復見其失。則殺之心愈堅矣。及見其盛服假寐。而後益賢之而不忍害焉。乃反自殺。是固義也。故左氏旣書于傳。而又載之國語矣。柳子何於傳不非。而獨於此非之耶。凡非其所非而非之者。多此類也。
Liu Zihou's faulting of the Guoyu I fault in my turn. Master Zuo learned the classics in person from Zhongni. Of all matters, those that could be attached to the classic he explained in the Commentary (傳), and the rest he dug out and made the Guoyu. There is much besides that was set down in the Commentary already and yet appears in the Guoyu too. How can it all be called false and extravagant, unfit to be measured against the sage? Let me make clear first, with one or two pieces, how Master Liu faulted what is not to be faulted.
The Guoyu says, 「The three rivers of Zhou shook. Boyangfu (伯陽父) said, 'Zhou is about to perish.'」 Master Liu faulted this, saying, 「Mountains and rivers are only the breath of the yin and the yang of Heaven and earth; they move of themselves and stop of themselves, tower up of themselves and cease of themselves. What have these to plot with us? Now they breathe in and now they breathe out, like a wheel, like a spring; who can know it?」
If it were so, could it be said that the falling and the shaking of mountains and rivers is indeed no calamity? Confucius recorded earthquakes five times in the Spring and Autumn Annals (春秋) and recorded the falling and tilting of hills and mounds twice, and the rest of the calamities and strange events are beyond all recording. Can Confucius be faulted? The Book of Songs (詩) says, 「All the streams boil up, and the hills and the valleys fall at last.」 Can the Book of Songs be faulted? And what Boyangfu said was not set down by Master Zuo in the Guoyu alone; later, when it came to Sima Qian and Ban Gu, they too took it up and put it in their histories. Now a history is writing that stands as a standard for ten thousand ages. If these were false and extravagant words that did not fit the rule, how should those two men have taken them up and recorded them?
The Guoyu says, 「Zhao Xuanzi (趙宣子) remonstrated with his lord often, and the lord sent Chu Ni (鋤麑) to kill him. Chu Ni killed himself.」 Master Liu faulted this, saying, 「Xuanzi had long remonstrated with his lord in order to preserve the altars of the state. How should Chu Ni not have heard of it? And was it then for dozing with his clothes still on that he thought him worthy? Did he fail to know the great thing in him and think him worthy for the small? Here Xuanzi's great virtue could win him no pardon, and it was a small act of reverence that got him off. Master Zuo had an excess of literary flourish, and so he set these words down.」
This too is a faulting of what is not to be faulted. Now in a man's dealing with a man, there are those who, though they had thought him worthy in ordinary times, see his fault at some moment and fault him; and there are those who, though they had not thought him worthy in ordinary times, see later something to be respected in him and treat him with ceremony. Chu Ni, though in ordinary times he had heard of Xuanzi's worth, could not but go, since it was his lord's command, and to kill him was his charge. Had he seen a fault of his besides, his mind to kill him would have been the firmer. But after he had seen him dozing with his clothes fully on, he thought him the worthier, and could not bear to harm him, and killed himself instead; and this was righteous indeed. Therefore Master Zuo, having already recorded it in the Commentary, put it in the Guoyu as well. Why then does Master Liu not fault it in the Commentary, and fault it here alone? What he faults that is not to be faulted is for the most part of this kind.