Wan Zhang, Part One萬章上
1He went out to the fields and cried out to Heaven
萬章問曰:「舜往于田,號泣于旻天。何為其號泣也?」 孟子曰:「怨慕也。」 萬章曰:「父母愛之,喜而不忘;父母惡之,勞而不怨。然則舜怨乎?」 曰:「長息問於公明高曰:『舜往于田,則吾既得聞命矣;號泣于旻天、于父母,則吾不知也。』公明高曰:『是非爾所知也。』夫公明高以孝子之心為不若是恝。『我竭力耕田,共為子職而已矣;父母之不我愛,於我何哉?』帝使其子九男二女,百官牛羊倉廩備,以事舜於畎畝之中。天下之士多就之者,帝將胥天下而遷之焉。為不順於父母,如窮人無所歸。天下之士悅之,人之所欲也,而不足以解憂。好色,人之所欲;妻帝之二女,而不足以解憂。富,人之所欲;富有天下,而不足以解憂。貴,人之所欲;貴為天子,而不足以解憂。人悅之、好色、富貴無足以解憂者,惟順於父母,可以解憂。人少則慕父母,知好色則慕少艾,有妻子則慕妻子,仕則慕君,不得於君則熱中。大孝終身慕父母,五十而慕者,予於大舜見之矣。」
Wan Zhang asked, "Shun went out to the fields and cried out to Heaven, weeping. Why did he cry out and weep?"
Mencius said, "He resented and he longed."
Wan Zhang said, "It is said, 'When his parents love him, he rejoices and does not forget them. When his parents hate him, he toils and does not resent them.' Then did Shun resent them?"
"Zhang Xi asked Gongming Gao, 'That Shun went out to the fields, I have already heard your teaching on that. But that he cried out weeping to Heaven and to his parents, this I do not understand.' Gongming Gao said, 'This is not something for you to know.'
Now Gongming Gao held that the heart of a filial son could not be so unfeeling. 'I plow with all my strength and do my duty as a son, and that is all. If my parents do not love me, what fault is there in me?'
Yao sent his nine sons and two daughters, with the hundred officers and oxen and sheep and filled storehouses, to serve Shun in the midst of the fields. Many of the scholars of all under heaven went over to him, and Yao was about to look over all under heaven and hand it to him. But because he was not in accord with his parents, he was like a man in distress with nowhere to turn.
To be liked by the scholars of all under heaven is what men desire, and yet it was not enough to undo his sorrow. A beautiful woman is what men desire, and though he took the two daughters of Yao as his wives it was not enough to undo his sorrow. Wealth is what men desire, and though he held all under heaven it was not enough to undo his sorrow. Honor is what men desire, and though he became Son of Heaven it was not enough to undo his sorrow. The liking of men, a beautiful woman, wealth and honor were not enough to undo his sorrow. Only being in accord with his parents could undo it.
When a man is young he longs for his parents. When he comes to know beauty he longs for the young and lovely. When he has a wife and children he longs for his wife and children. When he takes office he longs for his ruler, and if he does not win his ruler his heart burns. The great filial piety is to long for one's parents to the end of one's life. A man who still longed at fifty, I have seen in the great Shun."
2Why he married without telling them — Zichan and the fish
萬章問曰:「《詩》云:『娶妻如之何?必告父母。』信斯言也,宜莫如舜。舜之不告而娶,何也?」 孟子曰:「告則不得娶。男女居室,人之大倫也。如告則廢人之大倫以懟父母,是以不告也。」 萬章曰:「舜之不告而娶,則吾既得聞命矣。帝之妻舜而不告,何也?」 曰:「帝亦知告焉則不得妻也。」 萬章曰:「父母使舜完廩,捐階,瞽瞍焚廩。使浚井,出,從而掩之。象曰:『謨蓋都君咸我績。牛羊父母,倉廩父母,干戈朕,琴朕,弤朕,二嫂使治朕棲。』象往入舜宮,舜在床琴。象曰:『郁陶思君爾。』忸怩。舜曰:『唯茲臣庶,汝其于予治。』不識舜不知象之將殺己與?」 曰:「奚而不知也?象憂亦憂,象喜亦喜。」 曰:「然則舜偽喜者與?」 曰:「否。昔者有饋生魚於鄭子產,子產使校人畜之池。校人烹之,反命曰:『始舍之圉圉焉,少則洋洋焉,攸然而逝。』子產曰:『得其所哉!得其所哉!』校人出,曰:『孰謂子產智?予既烹而食之,曰:「得其所哉!得其所哉!」』故君子可欺以其方,難罔以非其道。彼以愛兄之道來,故誠信而喜之。奚偽焉?」
Wan Zhang asked, "The Shi says, 'How does a man take a wife? He must tell his parents.' If this word is to be trusted, no one should have kept it like Shun. How is it that Shun married without telling them?"
Mencius said, "Had he told them, he could not have married. That man and woman dwell together is the greatest of human bonds. Had he told them, he would have thrown away the greatest of human bonds and come to resent his parents. That is why he did not tell them."
Wan Zhang said, "That Shun married without telling them, I have already heard your teaching on that. How is it that Yao gave him his daughters and did not tell them?"
"Yao too knew that if he told them he could not give his daughters in marriage."
Wan Zhang said, "His parents had Shun repair the granary and then took away the ladder, and Gusou set fire to the granary. They had him clean out the well, and when he came out they followed and covered it over. Xiang (象) said, 'The plan to bury the lord of the capital was all my doing. The oxen and sheep go to my parents, the granaries go to my parents. The shield and spear are mine, the zither is mine, the bow is mine, and my two sisters-in-law shall keep my bed.'
Xiang went into Shun's house, and Shun was on his couch playing the zither. Xiang said, 'I have been longing for you, my brother, with a heavy heart,' and he looked ashamed. Shun said, 'These officers and people of mine, govern them for me.' Did Shun not know that Xiang meant to kill him?"
"How could he not know? When Xiang grieved he grieved with him, and when Xiang was glad he was glad with him."
"Then was Shun's gladness feigned?"
"No. Long ago a man sent a live fish to Zichan of Zheng. Zichan had the keeper of the pond raise it in the pond. The keeper boiled it and ate it, and came back and reported, 'When I first let it go it was limp and weak. In a little while it grew lively, and off it went at its ease.' Zichan said, 'It has found its place! It has found its place!' The keeper went out and said, 'Who calls Zichan wise? I had already boiled it and eaten it, and he says it has found its place, it has found its place.'
So a gentleman may be deceived by what fits reason, but he is hard to trap with what is not the Way. Xiang came in the Way of a brother's love, and so Shun truly believed him and was glad. What was feigned in that?"
Interlinear notes 1
The lord of the capital (都君) is Shun. — translator
3He gives Xiang (象) the fief of Youbi
萬章問曰:「象日以殺舜為事,立為天子,則放之,何也?」 孟子曰:「封之也。或曰放焉。」 萬章曰:「舜流共工于幽州,放驩兜于崇山,殺三苗于三危,殛鯀于羽山,四罪而天下咸服。誅不仁也。象至不仁,封之有庳。有庳之人奚罪焉?仁人固如是乎?在他人則誅之,在弟則封之。」 曰:「仁人之於弟也,不藏怒焉,不宿怨焉,親愛之而已矣。親之,欲其貴也;愛之,欲其富也。封之有庳,富貴之也。身為天子,弟為匹夫,可謂親愛之乎?」 「敢問『或曰放』者何謂也?」 曰:「象不得有為於其國,天子使吏治其國,而納其貢稅焉,故謂之放。豈得暴彼民哉?雖然,欲常常而見之,故源源而來。『不及貢,以政接于有庳』,此之謂也。」
Wan Zhang asked, "Xiang made it his daily business to kill Shun. When Shun became Son of Heaven, why did he cast him out?"
Mencius said, "He gave him a fief. Some say he cast him out."
Wan Zhang said, "Shun sent Gonggong into exile at Youzhou, cast out Huandou to Mount Chong, put the Sanmiao to death at Sanwei, and executed Gun at Mount Yu. He punished these four criminals, and all under heaven submitted. He was punishing those who were not benevolent. Xiang was utterly without benevolence, and yet he was given Youbi as a fief. What crime had the people of Youbi committed? Is a benevolent man truly like this, punishment for others and a fief for his younger brother?"
"Toward a younger brother the benevolent man keeps no anger hidden and lets no resentment stay overnight. He loves him as his own, and that is all. Holding him close, he wishes him honor. Loving him, he wishes him wealth. To give him Youbi was to make him rich and honored. If he himself were Son of Heaven while his brother was a common man, could that be called loving him as his own?"
"May I ask what is meant by 'some say he cast him out'?"
"Xiang could do nothing as he pleased in that state. The Son of Heaven sent officers to govern it and to bring in its tribute and taxes, and for this it is called casting out. How could Xiang have been harsh with those people?
Even so, Shun wished to see him again and again, and so had him come without cease. 'He did not wait for the time of tribute, but received Youbi on matters of government.' This is what that means."
4Do not let the letter harm the words
咸丘蒙問曰:「語云:『盛德之士,君不得而臣,父不得而子。』舜南面而立,堯帥諸侯北面而朝之,瞽瞍亦北面而朝之。舜見瞽瞍,其容有蹙。孔子曰:『於斯時也,天下殆哉,岌岌乎!』不識此語,誠然乎哉?」 孟子曰:「否,此非君子之言,齊東野人之語也。堯老而舜攝也,《堯典》曰:『二十有八載,放勛乃徂落,百姓如喪考妣。三年,四海遏密八音。』孔子曰:『天無二日,民無二王。』舜既為天子矣,又帥天下諸侯以為堯三年喪,是二天子矣。」 咸丘蒙曰:「舜之不臣堯,則吾既得聞命矣。《詩》云:『普天之下,莫非王土;率土之濱,莫非王臣。』而舜既為天子矣,敢問瞽瞍之非臣,如何?」 曰:「是詩也,非是之謂也,勞於王事而不得養父母也。曰:『此莫非王事,我獨賢勞也。』故說詩者,不以文害辭,不以辭害志;以意逆志,是為得之。如以辭而已矣。《雲漢》之詩曰:『周餘黎民,靡有孑遺。』信斯言也,是周無遺民也。孝子之至,莫大乎尊親;尊親之至,莫大乎以天下養。為天子父,尊之至也;以天下養,養之至也。《詩》曰:『永言孝思,孝思惟則』,此之謂也。《書》曰:『祗載見瞽瞍,夔夔齋栗,瞽瞍亦允若』,是為父不得而子也?」
Xianqiu Meng asked, "There is an old saying, 'An officer of full virtue cannot be made a subject by his ruler, nor a son by his father.' Shun stood facing south, and Yao led the feudal lords facing north to pay court to him, and Gusou too faced north and paid court. When Shun saw Gusou his face was uneasy, and Confucius said, 'At that time all under heaven was in danger, it was tottering!' Is this saying truly so?"
Mencius said, "No. These are not the words of a gentleman. They are the words of a rustic from the east of Qi. Yao had grown old, and Shun was acting as regent.
The Yao dian says, 'In the twenty-eighth year Fangxun at last passed away. The people mourned as for a father and mother. For three years within the four seas the eight kinds of music were stilled.' Confucius said, 'Heaven has no two suns, and the people have no two kings.' If Shun was already Son of Heaven and also led the feudal lords of all under heaven in three years of mourning for Yao, then there were two Sons of Heaven."
Xianqiu Meng said, "That Shun did not make Yao his subject, I have already heard your teaching on that. But the Shi says, 'Under the wide heaven there is no land that is not the king's, and to the farthest shore of the land there is no man who is not the king's subject.' Shun was already Son of Heaven. May I ask, then, how Gusou was not his subject?"
"This poem does not mean that. It speaks of one who toils in the king's service and cannot care for his parents. He says, 'None of this is not the king's business, and yet I alone toil at it.'
So one who explains the Shi does not let the letter harm the words, and does not let the words harm the intent. He meets the intent with his own mind, and then he has it. If one went by the words alone, the poem Yunhan says, 'Of the people left in Zhou, not one remained.' If this word is to be trusted, then Zhou had no people left.
The utmost of a filial son is nothing greater than honoring his parents, and the utmost of honoring his parents is nothing greater than supporting them with all under heaven. To be the father of the Son of Heaven is the utmost honor. To support them with all under heaven is the utmost support.
The Shi says, 'Long does he think of filial piety, and filial piety is his law.' This is what that means. The Shu says, 'Reverently he went about his work and appeared before Gusou, careful and trembling, and Gusou too came to be in accord.' Is this a father who cannot make him a son?"
Interlinear notes 1
Fangxun (放勛) is Emperor Yao. — translator
5Heaven gave it — Heaven sees with the eyes of the people
萬章曰:「堯以天下與舜,有諸?」 孟子曰:「否,天子不能以天下與人。」 「然則舜有天下也,孰與之?」 曰:「天與之。」 「天與之者,諄諄然命之乎?」 曰:「否,天不言,以行與事示之而已矣。」 曰:「以行與事示之者,如之何?」 曰:「天子能薦人於天,不能使天與之天下;諸侯能薦人於天子,不能使天子與之諸侯;大夫能薦人於諸侯,不能使諸侯與之大夫。昔者堯薦舜於天而天受之,暴之於民而民受之。故曰:天不言,以行與事示之而已矣。」 曰:「敢問薦之於天而天受之,暴之於民而民受之,如何?」 曰:「使之主祭而百神享之,是天受之。使之主事而事治,百姓安之,是民受之也。天與之,人與之,故曰:天子不能以天下與人。舜相堯,二十有八載,非人之所能為也,天也。堯崩,三年之喪畢,舜避堯之子於南河之南。天下諸侯朝覲者,不之堯之子而之舜;訟獄者,不之堯之子而之舜;謳歌者,不謳歌堯之子而謳歌舜;故曰『天』也。夫然後之中國,踐天子位焉。而居堯之宮,逼堯之子,是『篡』也,非『天與』也。《泰誓》曰:『天視自我民視,天聽自我民聽』,此之謂也。」
Wan Zhang said, "Yao gave all under heaven to Shun. Was there such a thing?"
Mencius said, "No. The Son of Heaven cannot give all under heaven to another."
"Then when Shun held all under heaven, who gave it to him?"
"Heaven gave it."
"When Heaven gave it, did it lay its charge on him in careful words?"
"No. Heaven does not speak. It shows by conduct and by affairs, and that is all."
"How does it show by conduct and by affairs?"
"The Son of Heaven can recommend a man to Heaven, but he cannot make Heaven give him all under heaven. A feudal lord can recommend a man to the Son of Heaven, but he cannot make the Son of Heaven give him a lordship. A great officer can recommend a man to a feudal lord, but he cannot make the feudal lord give him the place of a great officer.
Long ago Yao recommended Shun to Heaven, and Heaven accepted him. He showed him to the people, and the people accepted him. Therefore it is said, Heaven does not speak, it shows by conduct and by affairs, and that is all."
"May I ask how it was that he recommended him to Heaven and Heaven accepted him, and showed him to the people and the people accepted him?"
"He had him preside over the sacrifices, and the hundred spirits enjoyed them. This was Heaven accepting him. He had him preside over affairs, and affairs were well governed and the people were at peace. This was the people accepting him. Heaven gave it, and men gave it. Therefore it is said, the Son of Heaven cannot give all under heaven to another.
Shun helped Yao for twenty-eight years. This is not what a man could bring about. It was Heaven. When Yao died and the three years of mourning were over, Shun withdrew from the son of Yao to the south of the Southern River. Yet of the feudal lords of all under heaven, those who came to court went not to the son of Yao but to Shun. Those with suits went not to the son of Yao but to Shun. Those who sang did not sing of the son of Yao but sang of Shun. Therefore it is said, Heaven.
Only then did he go to the central states and take the throne of the Son of Heaven. Had he dwelt in the palace of Yao and pressed hard on the son of Yao, that would have been seizing it, not the gift of Heaven.
The Tai shi says, 'What Heaven sees comes from what our people see, and what Heaven hears comes from what our people hear.' This is what that means."
6The saying that virtue declined when it came to Yu
萬章問曰:「人有言『至於禹而德衰,不傳於賢而傳於子』,有諸?」 孟子曰:「否然也。天與賢則與賢,天與子則與子。昔者舜薦禹於天,十有七年;舜崩,三年之喪畢,禹避舜之子於陽城;天下之民從之,若堯崩之後不從堯之子而從舜也。禹薦益於天,七年,禹崩,三年之喪畢,益避禹子於箕山之陰;朝覲訟獄者,不之益而之啟,曰:『吾君之子也。』謳歌者不謳歌益而謳歌啟,曰:『吾君之子也。』丹朱之不肖,舜之子亦不肖;舜之相堯、禹之相舜也,歷年多,施澤於民久。啟賢,能敬承繼禹之道;益之相禹也,歷年少,施澤於民未久。舜、禹、益相去久遠,其子之賢不肖皆天也,非人之所能為也。莫之為而為者,天也;莫之致而至者,命也。匹夫而有天下者,德必若舜禹,而又有天子薦之者;故仲尼不有天下。繼世而有天下,天之所廢,必若桀紂者也;故益、伊尹、周公不有天下。伊尹相湯以王於天下,湯崩,太丁未立,外丙二年,仲壬四年。太甲顛覆湯之典刑,伊尹放之於桐三年;太甲悔過,自怨自艾,於桐處仁遷義,三年以聽伊尹之訓己也,復歸于亳。周公之不有天下,猶益之於夏、伊尹之於殷也。孔子曰:『唐虞禪,夏後、殷、周繼,其義一也。』」
Wan Zhang asked, "People say, 'When it came to Yu his virtue declined, and he handed the throne not to a worthy man but to his son.' Was there such a thing?"
Mencius said, "No, it was not so. If Heaven gives it to a worthy man, it goes to the worthy man. If Heaven gives it to a son, it goes to the son.
Long ago Shun recommended Yu to Heaven for seventeen years. When Shun died and the three years of mourning were over, Yu withdrew from the son of Shun to Yangcheng, and the people of all under heaven followed him, just as after Yao died they did not follow the son of Yao but followed Shun.
Yu recommended Yi (益) to Heaven for seven years. When Yu died and the three years of mourning were over, Yi withdrew from the son of Yu to the north side of Mount Ji. But those who came to court and those with suits went not to Yi but to Qi (啓), saying, 'He is the son of our ruler.' Those who sang did not sing of Yi but sang of Qi, saying, 'He is the son of our ruler.'
Danzhu was unworthy, and the son of Shun was unworthy too. Shun helped Yao and Yu helped Shun for many years, and they had given their benefit to the people for a long time. Qi was worthy and could reverently carry on the Way of Yu, while Yi helped Yu for few years and had given his benefit to the people for no long time.
The stretch of years between Shun and Yu and Yi, and whether their sons were worthy or unworthy, were all Heaven, and not what men could bring about. What is done though no one does it is Heaven. What comes though no one brings it is the decree (命).
For a common man to hold all under heaven, his virtue must be like that of Shun or Yu, and there must also be a Son of Heaven to recommend him. That is why Zhongni did not hold all under heaven.
Among those who held all under heaven by succession, the one Heaven casts down is always such a man as Jie or Zhou Xin. That is why Yi (益) and Yi Yin and the Duke of Zhou did not hold all under heaven.
Yi Yin helped Tang and made him king over all under heaven. When Tang died, Taiding did not take the throne. Waibing reigned two years, and Zhongren four. Taijia overturned the laws and punishments of Tang, and Yi Yin cast him out to Tong (桐) for three years. Taijia repented of his fault, blamed himself and mended himself. At Tong he dwelt in benevolence and moved to righteousness, and after three years of heeding what Yi Yin had taught him he returned to Bo (亳).
That the Duke of Zhou did not hold all under heaven was like Yi (益) under Xia and Yi Yin under Yin.
Confucius said, 'Tang and Yu handed it on, and Xia Hou and Yin and Zhou passed it by succession, but the meaning is one.'"
Interlinear notes 1
Tang and Yu (唐虞) are Emperors Yao and Shun. — translator
7The saying that Yi Yin sought Tang by his cooking
萬章問曰:「人有言『伊尹以割烹要湯』,有諸?」 孟子曰:「否,不然。伊尹耕於有莘之野,而樂堯舜之道焉。非其義也,非其道也,祿之以天下弗顧也,繫馬千駟弗視也。非其義也,非其道也,一介不以與人,一介不以取諸人。湯使人以幣聘之。囂囂然曰:『我何以湯之聘幣為哉?我豈若處畎畝之中,由是以樂堯舜之道哉?』湯三使往聘之。既而幡然改曰:『與我處畎畝之中,由是以樂堯舜之道,吾豈若使是君為堯舜之君哉?吾豈若使是民為堯舜之民哉?吾豈若於吾身親見之哉?天之生此民也,使先知覺後知,使先覺覺後覺也。予,天民之先覺者也。予將以斯道覺斯民也,非予覺之而誰也?』思天下之民匹夫匹婦有不被堯舜之澤者,若己推而內之溝中。其自任以天下之重如此,故就湯而說之以伐夏救民。吾未聞枉己而正人者也,況辱己以正天下者乎?聖人之行不同也,或遠或近,或去或不去,歸潔其身而已矣。吾聞其以堯舜之道要湯,未聞以割烹也。《伊訓》曰:『天誅造攻自牧宮,朕載自亳。』」
Wan Zhang asked, "People say, 'Yi Yin sought office with Tang by his carving and boiling of meat.' Was there such a thing?"
Mencius said, "No, it was not so. Yi Yin plowed in the fields of Youshen and delighted in the Way of Yao and Shun. If a thing was not righteous, if it was not the Way, though all under heaven were given him as his pay he would not look at it, and though a thousand teams of horses were tied up for him he would not glance at them. If a thing was not righteous, if it was not the Way, he would not give a single straw to another man, nor take a single straw from another man.
Tang sent men with gifts of silk to call him. He was unmoved and said, 'What are Tang's gifts of silk to me? What could be better than to live in the midst of the fields and delight there in the Way of Yao and Shun?'
Tang sent men three times to call him. Then at last he turned about and said, 'I live in the midst of the fields and delight there in the Way of Yao and Shun. What could that be beside making this ruler a ruler like Yao and Shun? What could it be beside making this people a people like those of Yao and Shun? What could it be beside seeing it with my own eyes in my own body?
When Heaven gave birth to this people, it had those who knew first awaken those who would know later, and those who awoke first awaken those who would awake later. I am one of Heaven's people who has awoken first. I shall awaken this people with this Way. If I do not awaken them, who will?'
He thought that if there was one man or one woman among the people of all under heaven who did not receive the benefit of Yao and Shun, it was as if he himself had pushed them into a ditch. He took the weight of all under heaven on himself like this, and so he went to Tang and urged him to strike Xia and save the people.
I have never heard of a man who bent himself and set others straight, still less of one who disgraced himself and set all under heaven straight. The conduct of sages is not the same. One keeps far off, another comes near. One leaves, another does not leave. But it comes back to keeping oneself clean, and that is all.
I have heard that he sought Tang by the Way of Yao and Shun. I have not heard that he did it by carving and boiling meat. The Yi xun says, 'The punishment of Heaven began its attack from the Mu palace. I began from Bo.'"
8The saying that Confucius lodged with Yongju
萬章問曰:「或謂『孔子於衛主癰疽,於齊主侍人瘠環』,有諸乎?」 孟子曰:「否,不然也,好事者為之也。於衛,主顏讎由。彌子之妻與子路之妻,兄弟也。彌子謂子路曰:『孔子主我,衛卿可得也。』子路以告,孔子曰:『有命。』孔子進以禮,退以義,得之不得曰:『有命』。而主癰疽與侍人瘠環,是無義無命也。孔子不悅於魯衛,遭宋桓司馬,將要而殺之,微服而過宋。是時孔子當厄,主司城貞子,為陳侯周臣。吾聞觀近臣,以其所為主;觀遠臣,以其所主。若孔子主癰疽與侍人瘠環,何以為孔子?」
Wan Zhang asked, "Some say, 'In Wei, Confucius lodged with Yongju, and in Qi with the attendant Jihuan.' Was there such a thing?"
Mencius said, "No, it was not so. Men who love to make stories made this up.
In Wei he lodged with Yan Chouyou. The wife of Mizi and the wife of Zilu were sisters. Mizi said to Zilu, 'If Confucius lodges with me, the place of high minister (卿) of Wei can be had.' Zilu reported this, and Confucius said, 'There is the decree (命).'
Confucius went forward by ritual and withdrew by righteousness, and whether he gained a place or not he said, 'There is the decree.' Had he lodged with Yongju and the attendant Jihuan, that would have been without righteousness and without the decree.
Confucius was not at ease in Lu and in Wei, and when Huan, the minister of war of Song, lay in wait to kill him, he passed through Song in plain clothes. At that time Confucius was in hardship, and he lodged with Zhenzi the minister of works, who was a vassal of Zhou (周), Marquis of Chen.
I have heard that to know a minister near at hand you look at whom he takes in, and to know a minister from afar you look at whose house he lodges in. If Confucius had lodged with Yongju and the attendant Jihuan, how could he be Confucius?"
9The saying that Baili Xi sold himself
萬章問曰:「或曰:『百里奚自鬻於秦養牲者,五羊之皮。食牛,以要秦繆公。』信乎?」 孟子曰:「否然,好事者為之也。百里奚,虞人也。晉人以垂棘之璧與屈產之乘,假道於虞以伐虢。宮之奇諫,百里奚不諫,知虞公之不可諫而去。之秦,年已七十矣,曾不知以食牛干秦繆公之為污也,可謂智乎?不可諫而不諫,可謂不智乎?知虞公之將亡而先去之,不可謂不智也。時舉於秦,知繆公之可與有行也而相之,可謂不智乎?相秦而顯其君於天下,可傳於後世,不賢而能之乎?自鬻以成其君,鄉黨自好者不為,而謂賢者為之乎?」 上一篇回目录下一篇
Wan Zhang asked, "Some say, 'Baili Xi sold himself to a keeper of animals in Qin for five sheepskins, and fed oxen to seek office with Duke Mu of Qin.' Is that true?"
Mencius said, "No, it was not so. Men who love to make stories made this up.
Baili Xi was a man of Yu. The men of Jin (晉) offered the jade of Chuiji and the horses bred at Qu, and asked passage through Yu in order to strike Guo. Gong Zhiqi remonstrated. Baili Xi did not remonstrate, for he knew that the Duke of Yu could not be remonstrated with, and he left.
When he went to Qin (秦) he was already seventy. If he did not know that seeking office with Duke Mu of Qin by feeding oxen was a foul thing, could he be called wise? He did not remonstrate because remonstrance was of no use. Can he be called unwise for that? He knew the Duke of Yu was about to fall and left before it, and he cannot be called unwise.
He was raised up in Qin at the right time, and he knew that Duke Mu was a man he could work with and helped him. Can he be called unwise for that? He helped Qin and made his ruler shine before all under heaven, so that it could be handed down to later ages. Could a man who was not worthy do this?
To sell oneself in order to make one's ruler great is a thing that even a man of the village who respects himself would not do. Shall it be said that a worthy man did it?"