A Discourse That Qu Yuan Ought Not to Have Died屈原不宜死論
古有殺身以成仁。若比干者是已。有殺身以成節者。若伯夷叔齊是已。比干當紂時。其惡不可不諫。諫而被其誅。是死得其所而成其仁也。虎王伐紂。猶有慙德。凡在義士。不可忍視。故孤竹二子。扣馬而諫。諫而不見聽。恥食其粟而死。是亦死得其所而成其節也。若楚之屈原。擧異於是。死不得其所。祇以顯君之惡耳。夫讒說之蔽明。邪諂之害正。自古而然。非楚國君臣而已。原以方正端直之志。爲王寵遇。專任國政。宜乎見同列之妬嫉也。故爲上官大夫所譖。見疏於王。此固常理而不足以爲恨者也。原於此時。宜度王之不寤。滅迹遠遁。混于常流。庶使其王之惡。漸久而稍滅也。原不然。復欲見容於襄王。反爲令尹子蘭所讒。放逐江潭。作湘之纍囚。至是雖欲遁去。其可得乎。是故。憔悴其容。行吟澤畔。作爲離騷。多有怨曠譏刺之辭。則是亦足以顯君之惡。而乃復投水而死。使天下之人。深咎其君。乃至楚俗爲競渡之曲。以慰其溺。賈誼作投水之文。以弔其冤。益使王之惡。大暴於萬世矣。湘水有盡。此惡何滅。且紂之惡。久已浮於天下。雖比干不死。未免爲獨夫而取刺於萬世矣。虎王擧大義忘小嫌。卒王天下。功業施于萬世矣。則其德不以二子之死大損也。況二子非虎王之臣也。乃紂之臣。諫伐其君而死。以成其節也。何與於虎王哉。若懷王則聽讒疏賢而已。當時此事。無國無之。原若不死。則王之惡。想不至大甚。吾故曰。原死非其所。以顯其君之惡耳。予之此論。乃所以雪原之冤。而益貶其君之惡。庶以諷後之信讒斥賢耳。非固譏原也。惜也其死之非其所宜也。嗚戲。
Of old there were those who killed their bodies and achieved benevolence (仁); such a one was Bi Gan (比干). There were those who killed their bodies and achieved integrity; such were Bo Yi and Shu Qi. Bi Gan, meeting the time of Zhou (紂), could not but remonstrate against his evil, and for remonstrating he was cut down: this was to die and to find the right place for it, and so to achieve his benevolence. When King Wu smote Zhou there was still something in his virtue to be ashamed of, and for a righteous scholar it was not to be borne to look upon. Therefore the two sons of Guzhu (孤竹) seized his bridle and remonstrated; and when they had remonstrated and were not heeded, they were ashamed to eat his grain and died: this too was to die and to find the right place for it, and so to achieve their integrity.
One like Qu Yuan (屈原) of Chu is altogether otherwise. He died and yet did not find the right place for it; he only brought his lord's evil into the open. Now that slandering words darken the clear-sighted and that flattery injures the upright has been so from of old, and not with the lord and the ministers of Chu alone. Qu Yuan, with his square and upright, straight purpose, received the king's favor and held the government of the state alone in his hands; it was fitting that he should meet with the envy and the jealousy of those of his own rank. Therefore he suffered the slander of the Grand Master Shangguan (上官大夫) and was put far from the king; and this is truly the ordinary course of things, and no matter for resentment.
Qu Yuan at that time ought to have reckoned that the king would not come to his senses, and should have hidden his traces and fled far off and mingled with the common run of men, so that his king's evil, as the years and the months grew long, might little by little have faded away. Qu Yuan did not do so: he wished rather to be received again by King Xiang (襄王), and for that he suffered instead the slander of the Chief Minister Zilan (令尹 子蘭) and was driven out to Jiangtan (江潭) and became a prisoner of the Xiang (湘水). When it had come to this, could he have fled even had he wished to?
And so, wasting his appearance away, he walked beside the water chanting and made 「Encountering Sorrow」 (離騷), in which there are many words of resentment and of emptiness, of reproach and of stabbing; and this too is enough to bring his lord's evil into the open. Yet beyond that he threw his body into the water and died, and so made the men of all the world lay deep blame upon his lord. It came at last to this, that in the usage of Chu a song of the rowing of boats was made to comfort him for his drowning, and that Jia Yi (賈誼) made a writing to cast into the water to mourn his wrong; and thus they made the king's evil stand out the greater for ten thousand ages. The Xiang may come to an end, but when will this evil fade away?
Moreover the evil of Zhou had long before been afloat in all the world, and even had Bi Gan not died, he would not have escaped becoming a lone man reproached for ten thousand ages. King Wu raised up the great righteousness and forgot the small scruple, and was king at last over all the world, and his work and merit were spread abroad for ten thousand ages; his virtue was not greatly diminished by the death of the two sons. How much the more when the two sons were not King Wu's subjects but the subjects of Zhou, who remonstrated against the smiting of their own lord and died and so achieved their integrity: what had that to do with King Wu?
One like King Huai (懷王) only listened to slander and put the worthy far from him. In that age there was no state without such a thing. Had Qu Yuan not died, the king's evil, I think, would not have come to be very great. I therefore say: 「Qu Yuan's death was not in its right place, and it only brought his lord's evil into the open.」 This discourse of mine is to wash away Qu Yuan's wrong and the more to lower his lord's evil, and so to satirize the trusting of slander and the driving away of the worthy in days to come; it is not that I am set on reproaching Qu Yuan. Alas, that his death was not in its rightful place! Ah.