Xing'e — Human Nature Is Bad性惡篇
人之性惡，其善者僞也。今人之性，生而有好利焉，順是，故争奪生而辭讓亡焉；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，必出於争奪，合於犯分亂理而歸於曓。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，然則人之性惡明矣，其善者僞也。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，以爲偏險而不正，悖亂而不治，是以爲之起禮義，制法度，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，道禮義者爲君子；縱性情，安恣睢，而違禮義者爲小人。用此觀之，人之性惡明矣，其善者，僞也。孟子曰：「今之學者，其性善。」曰：是不然。是不及知人之性，而不察乎人之性、僞之分者也。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僞。是性、僞之分也。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。孟子曰：「今人之性善，將皆失喪其性故也。」曰：若是，則過矣。今人之性，生而離其朴，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，不離其朴而美之，不離其資而利之也。使夫資朴之於美，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，寒而欲煖，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，其善者僞也。
Man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
Now man's nature is born with a love of gain. Because he follows this, struggle and robbery arise and yielding is lost. He is born with envy and hate. Because he follows this, harming and robbing arise and loyalty and good faith are lost. He is born with the desires of the ear and the eye, with a love of sound and color. Because he follows this, license and disorder arise and ritual and right, pattern and order, are lost.
Then if a man goes along with his nature and follows his feelings, he is sure to come out in struggle and robbery, to fall in with breaking the divisions and throwing order into confusion, and to end in violence. So there must be the transforming of teacher and law and the guidance of ritual and right. Only then does he come out in yielding, fall in with pattern and order, and end in good government.
Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
So bent wood must wait for the straightening frame and the steaming and the bending, and only then is it straight. Blunt metal must wait for the whetstone and the file, and only then is it sharp. Now man's nature is evil. He must wait for teacher and law, and only then is he upright. He must get ritual and right, and only then is there order. Now if a man has no teacher and no law, he is one-sided and dangerous and not upright. If he has no ritual and right, he is perverse and disorderly and without order.
The sage kings of old held that man's nature is evil, that he is one-sided and dangerous and not upright, perverse and disorderly and without order. So for his sake they raised up ritual and right and made laws and measures, to straighten and adorn the feelings and the nature of man and set them right, to tame and transform the feelings and the nature of man and lead them. In this way all began to come out in good government and to fall in with the way.
Now among men, the one who is transformed by teacher and law, who piles up letters and learning, who follows ritual and right, becomes a gentleman. The one who lets his nature and his feelings go loose, who is easy in his own willfulness, who turns against ritual and right, becomes a petty man. Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
Mencius said, "The nature of those who now learn is good." I say, this is not so. This does not reach to knowing man's nature, and it does not look into the division between man's nature and deliberate effort.
Whatever is nature is finished by heaven. It cannot be learned and it cannot be worked at. Ritual and right are what the sage brought forth. They are what a man learns and so can do, what he works at and so completes. What is in a man and cannot be learned and cannot be worked at is called nature. What is in a man and can be learned and so done, worked at and so completed, is called deliberate effort. This is the division between nature and deliberate effort.
Now in man's nature the eye can see and the ear can hear. The clearness that can see does not leave the eye, and the sharpness that can hear does not leave the ear. That the eye is clear and the ear is sharp cannot be learned. This is plain.
Mencius said, "Man's nature now is good, and it is because they are all going to lose that nature." I say, if it is like this, he goes too far. Now man's nature, from birth, leaves its plain wood and leaves its raw stuff, and is sure to lose them. Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil.
To say that nature is good is to say that it is made beautiful without leaving its plain wood, and made useful without leaving its raw stuff. Let the raw stuff and the plain wood stand to beauty, and the heart and its thoughts stand to goodness, as the clearness that can see does not leave the eye and the sharpness that can hear does not leave the ear. That is why it is said that the eye is clear and the ear is sharp.
Now man's nature is to want to be full when hungry, to want warmth when cold, to want rest when tired. These are man's feelings and nature. Now a man sees an elder and does not dare to eat first, because there is someone he yields to. He is tired and does not dare to ask for rest, because there is someone whose work he would take on.
A son yields to his father and a younger brother yields to his elder brother. A son takes his father's place and a younger brother takes his elder brother's place. These two ways of acting both go against nature and run counter to the feelings. Yet they are the way of the filial son, the pattern and order of ritual and right. So follow the feelings and the nature and there is no yielding, and if there is yielding it runs counter to the feelings and the nature. Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
問者曰：「人之性惡，則禮義惡生？」應之曰：凡禮義者，是生於聖人之僞，非故生於人之性也。故陶人埏埴而爲器，然則器生於陶人之僞，非故生於人之性也。故工人斲木而成器，然則器生於工人之僞，非故生於人之性也。聖人積思慮，習僞故，以生禮義而起法度，然則禮義法度者，是生於聖人之僞，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，謂之生於僞。是性、僞之所生，其不同之徵也。故聖人化性而起僞，僞起而生禮義，禮義生而制法度。然則禮義法度者，是聖人之所生也。故聖人之所以同於衆，其不異於衆者，性也；所以異而過衆者，僞也。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。故順情性則弟兄争矣，化禮義則讓乎國人矣。凡人之欲爲善者，爲性惡也。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，人之欲爲善者，爲性惡也。今人之性，固無禮義，故彊學而求有之也；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，其善者僞也。
A questioner said, "If man's nature is evil, then where were ritual and right born?"
The answer to him is this. Whatever is ritual and right was born from the deliberate effort of the sage. It was not born from man's nature at all.
So the potter kneads clay and makes a vessel. Then the vessel was born from the potter's deliberate effort. It was not born from man's nature at all. The craftsman cuts wood and completes a vessel. Then the vessel was born from the craftsman's deliberate effort. It was not born from man's nature at all.
The sage piled up thought and care and practiced deliberate effort, and so brought forth ritual and right and raised up laws and measures. Then ritual and right, laws and measures, were born from the sage's deliberate effort. They were not born from man's nature at all.
That the eye loves color, the ear loves listening, the mouth loves taste, the heart loves gain, and bone and flesh and skin love ease and rest, all this is born from man's feelings and nature. It feels and is so of itself. It does not wait upon work and then come to be. What feels and yet cannot be so, what must wait upon work and only then is so, is said to be born from deliberate effort. This is the proof that what nature is born from and what deliberate effort is born from are not the same.
So the sage transforms his nature and raises up deliberate effort. Deliberate effort rises and brings forth ritual and right. Ritual and right come forth and make laws and measures. Then ritual and right, laws and measures, are what the sage brought forth. So wherein the sage is the same as the crowd and does not differ from the crowd is nature. Wherein he differs and goes beyond the crowd is deliberate effort.
To love gain and want to get it is man's feelings and nature. Suppose a younger and an elder brother have goods to divide. If they follow their feelings and their nature, loving gain and wanting to get it, then the elder and the younger brother will push each other aside and snatch. If they are transformed by the pattern and order of ritual and right, they will yield even to the people of the country. So follow the feelings and the nature and younger and elder brother struggle. Be transformed by ritual and right and they yield to the people of the country.
That a man wants to do good is because his nature is evil. The thin wish to be thick, the ugly wish to be beautiful, the narrow wish to be broad, the poor wish to be rich, the low wish to be honored. What a man truly does not have within, he is sure to seek outside. So the rich do not wish for goods and the honored do not wish for power. What a man truly has within, he does not reach outside for. Seen by this, that a man wants to do good is because his nature is evil.
Now man's nature has no ritual and right in it at all, so he studies by force and seeks to have them. His nature does not know ritual and right, so he thinks and considers and seeks to know them. Then with nature alone a man has no ritual and right and does not know ritual and right. With no ritual and right he is disordered, and not knowing ritual and right he is perverse. Then with nature alone, perverseness and disorder are in him. Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
孟子曰：「人之性善。」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。是善惡之分也已。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，以爲偏險而不正，悖亂而不治，故爲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，則夫彊者害弱而奪之，衆者曓寡而譁之，天下悖亂而相亡不待頃矣。用此觀之，然則人之性惡明矣，其善者僞也。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，爲枸木也；繩墨之起，爲不直也；立君上，明禮義，爲性惡也。用此觀之，然則人之性惡明矣，其善者僞也。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，然後皆出於治，合於善也。用此觀之，人之性惡明矣，其善者僞也。
Mencius said, "Man's nature is good." I say, this is not so.
What all the world, in old times and now, calls good is upright order and even government. What it calls evil is one-sidedness and danger, perverseness and disorder. This and no more is the division between good and evil.
Now is man's nature truly upright order and even government in itself? Then what use would there be for the sage kings, what use for ritual and right? Even if there were sage kings and ritual and right, what would they add to upright order and even government?
It is not so. Man's nature is evil. So the sages of old held that man's nature is evil, that he is one-sided and dangerous and not upright, perverse and disorderly and without order. So for his sake they set up the power of a ruler above him to look down on him, made ritual and right clear to transform him, raised up law and correctness to govern him, and made punishment heavy to restrain him, and so made all under heaven come out in good government and fall in with goodness. This is the government of the sage kings and the transforming of ritual and right.
Now suppose the power of the ruler above were taken away and the transforming of ritual and right done away with, the government of law and correctness taken away and the restraint of punishment done away with, and one leaned back and watched how the people of the world dealt with one another. If it were like this, the strong would harm the weak and rob them, and the many would be violent to the few and shout them down, and the world would be perverse and disordered and destroy one another in no time at all. Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
So one who speaks well of old times must have something that fits the present, and one who speaks well of heaven must have proof in man. In argument, what is prized is that the distinctions match and that there is proof as tallies match. So what is spoken sitting down can be set up when one rises, and can be spread out and carried into practice.
Now Mencius says, "Man's nature is good." There is no matching of distinctions and no proof of tallies. Spoken sitting down, it cannot be set up when one rises, and it cannot be spread out and carried into practice. Is this not going much too far?
So if nature were good, the sage kings would be put aside and ritual and right would be let go. Because nature is evil, men stand with the sage kings and prize ritual and right. So the straightening frame came to be because of bent wood. The marking line was raised up because things are not straight. Rulers were set up and ritual and right made clear because nature is evil. Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
Straight wood that does not wait for the straightening frame and is straight, its nature is straight. Bent wood that must wait for the straightening frame and the steaming and the bending and only then is straight, this is because its nature is not straight. Now man's nature is evil. He must wait for the government of the sage kings and the transforming of ritual and right, and only then does he come out in good government and fall in with goodness. Seen by this, it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
問者曰：「禮義積僞者，是人之性，故聖人能生之也。」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，辟則陶埏而生之也，然則禮義積僞者，豈人之本性也哉？凡人之性者，堯、舜之與桀、跖，其性一也；君子之與小人，其性一也。今將以禮義積僞爲人之性邪？然則有曷貴堯、禹，曷貴君子矣哉？凡貴堯、禹、君子者，能化性，能起僞，僞起而生禮義。然則聖人之於禮義積僞也，亦猶陶埏而爲之也。用此觀之，然則禮義積僞者，豈人之性也哉！所賤於桀、跖、小人者，從其性，順其情，安恣睢，以出乎貪利争奪。故人之性惡明矣，其善者僞也。天非私曾、騫、孝己而外衆人也，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、魯之孝具敬父者，何也？以秦人從情性，安恣睢，慢於禮義故也。豈其性異矣哉？
A questioner said, "Ritual and right and piled-up deliberate effort are man's nature, and that is why the sage could bring them forth."
The answer to him is this. It is not so. The potter kneads clay and brings forth a tile. Then how could the tile and the clay be the potter's nature? The craftsman cuts wood and brings forth a vessel. Then how could the vessel and the wood be the craftsman's nature?
The sage stands to ritual and right as the potter stands to the clay he kneads and brings forth. Then how could ritual and right and piled-up deliberate effort be man's own nature?
As for man's nature, in Yao and Shun and in Jie and Dao Zhi the nature is one. In the gentleman and in the petty man the nature is one. Now would one call ritual and right and piled-up deliberate effort man's nature? Then why prize Yao and Yu, and why prize the gentleman?
Yao and Yu and the gentleman are prized because they could transform their nature and could raise up deliberate effort, and deliberate effort rose and brought forth ritual and right. Then the sage stands to ritual and right and piled-up deliberate effort as the potter stands to the clay he kneads and makes. Seen by this, how could ritual and right and piled-up deliberate effort be man's nature?
Jie and Dao Zhi and the petty man are held low because they go along with their nature and follow their feelings and are easy in their own willfulness, and so come out in greed for gain and in struggle and robbery. So it is clear that man's nature is evil. What is good in him is deliberate effort.
Heaven did not favor Zeng Shen and Min Ziqian and Xiao Ji and hold the crowd at a distance. Yet Zeng Shen and Min Ziqian and Xiao Ji alone were thick in the substance of filial duty and whole in the name of filial duty. Why was this? Because they went to the utmost in ritual and right.
Heaven did not favor the people of Qi and Lu and hold the men of Qin at a distance. Yet in the rightness between father and son and the separation between husband and wife they do not match Qi and Lu, where filial duty is complete and the father is honored. Why is this? Because the men of Qin go along with their feelings and their nature, are easy in their own willfulness, and are slack in ritual and right. How could their nature be different?
「塗之人可以爲禹」，曷謂也？曰：凡禹之所以爲禹者，以其爲仁義法正也。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，然則其可以爲禹明矣。今以仁義法正爲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。不然。今塗之人者，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，然則其可以爲禹明矣。今使塗之人伏術爲學，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。曰：「聖可積而致，然而皆不可積，何也？」曰：可以而不可使也。故小人可以爲君子而不肯爲君子，君子可以爲小人而不肯爲小人。小人、君子者，未嘗不可以相爲也，然而不相爲者，可以而不可使也。故塗之人可以爲禹則然，塗之人能爲禹則未必然也。雖不能爲禹，無害可以爲禹。足可以徧行天下，然而未嘗有徧行天下者也。夫工匠、農、賈，未嘗不可以相爲事也，然而未嘗能相爲事也。用此觀之，然則可以爲，未必能也；雖不能，無害可以爲。然則能不能之與可不可，其不同遠矣，其不可以相爲明矣。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，嗜欲得而信衰於友，爵禄盈而忠衰於君。人之情乎！人之情乎！甚不美，又何問焉！」唯賢者爲不然。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。其言也謟，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，以期勝人爲意，是役夫之知也。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，以期勝人爲意：是下勇也。繁弱、鉅黍，古之良弓也，然而不得排㯳則不能自正。桓公之蔥，大公之闕，文王之禄，莊君之曶，闔閭之干將、莫邪、鉅闕、辟閭，此皆古之良劒也，然而不加砥厲則不能利，不得人力則不能斷。驊騮、騹、驥、纖離、緑耳，此皆古之良馬也，然而必前有銜轡之制，後有鞭策之威，加之以造父之馭，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，則所聞者欺誣詐僞也，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。
"The man on the road can become Yu." What does this mean?
I say, what made Yu Yu was that he did benevolence and rightness, law and correctness. Then benevolence and rightness, law and correctness, have a principle that can be known and can be done, and every man on the road has the stuff by which he can know benevolence and rightness, law and correctness, and has the equipment by which he can be able in benevolence and rightness, law and correctness. Then it is clear that he can become Yu.
Now would one say that benevolence and rightness, law and correctness, have in themselves no principle that can be known and can be done? Then even Yu would not know benevolence and rightness, law and correctness, and would not be able in them.
Would one say that the man on the road has in himself no stuff by which he can know benevolence and rightness, law and correctness, and no equipment by which he can be able in them? Then the man on the road could not know within the rightness of father and son and could not know without the correctness of ruler and minister. It is not so. Now every man on the road can know within the rightness of father and son and can know without the correctness of ruler and minister. Then it is clear that the stuff by which he can know and the equipment by which he can be able are in the man on the road.
Now let the man on the road take the stuff by which he can know and the equipment by which he can be able, and make his root that principle of benevolence and rightness, law and correctness, which can be known and can be done. Then it is clear that he can become Yu.
Now let the man on the road hold to a method and learn, make his heart single and his will one, think and search and look closely, add days and hold on long, pile up goodness and never stop. Then he reaches through to the spirits and makes a third with heaven and earth. So the sage is what a man reaches by piling up.
It is asked, "Sagehood can be reached by piling up, and yet all cannot pile it up. Why is this?"
I say, they can, but they cannot be made to. So the petty man can become a gentleman and is not willing to be a gentleman, and the gentleman can become a petty man and is not willing to be a petty man. The petty man and the gentleman have never been unable to become each other. That they do not become each other is because they can, but cannot be made to.
So it is true that the man on the road can become Yu, but that the man on the road is able to become Yu is not therefore true. Though he is not able to become Yu, it does no harm that he can become Yu. The foot can walk over the whole world, yet there has never been one who walked over the whole world. Craftsman and farmer and merchant have never been unable to do one another's work, yet they have never been able to exchange their work. Seen by this, what can be done is not surely what one is able to do, and though one is not able, it does no harm that it can be done. Then being able and not being able are far from being possible and not possible. It is clear that they cannot be taken for each other.
Yao asked Shun, "What are man's feelings like?"
Shun answered, "Man's feelings are far from beautiful. Why ask further? When a man has wife and child, his filial duty to his parents grows weak. When he gets what he likes and desires, his good faith to his friends grows weak. When rank and pay are full, his loyalty to his ruler grows weak. Man's feelings! Man's feelings! They are far from beautiful. Why ask further?"
Only the worthy man is not so.
There is the knowing of the sage. There is the knowing of the scholar and the gentleman. There is the knowing of the petty man. There is the knowing of the hired man.
Much speech, yet well formed and holding to its kind. All day he weighs the reasons for a thing, and his words rise in a thousand ways and change in ten thousand, but their thread and their kind are one. This is the knowing of the sage.
Little speech, yet straight and spare. He argues and it meets the law, as though he had set it by the marking line. This is the knowing of the scholar and the gentleman.
His words fawn and his acts are perverse, and in what he undertakes he has much to regret. This is the knowing of the petty man.
Quick and nimble, yet holding to no kind. Of mixed skill and wide reach, yet of no use. Fast at splitting things and well practiced, yet not on what is urgent. He does not care for right and wrong and does not weigh crooked and straight, and he makes it his whole mind to beat others. This is the knowing of the hired man.
There is the courage of the high sort. There is the courage of the middle sort. There is the courage of the low sort.
When there is a mean under heaven, he dares to make his body straight. When the former kings have a way, he dares to act on his will. Above, he does not follow the rulers of a disordered age. Below, he does not take the ways of the people of a disordered age. Where benevolence is, there is no poverty and no straits. Where benevolence is not, there is no wealth and no honor. If the world knows him, he wants to share its bitterness and its joy with the world. If the world does not know him, he stands up alone between heaven and earth and is not afraid. This is the courage of the high sort.
His ritual is respectful and his mind is sparing. He makes good faith great and even and makes light of goods. He dares to push the worthy forward and raise him up. He dares to pull the unworthy out and set him aside. This is the courage of the middle sort.
He makes his body light and goods heavy. He is calm about disaster and explains it away at length. He gets off as best he can, and does not care for right and wrong or for the truth of what is so and what is not so, and he makes it his whole mind to beat others. This is the courage of the low sort.
Fanruo (繁弱) and Jushu (鉅黍) were good bows of old, yet without the straightening frame they could not come right of themselves. Duke Huan's Cong (蔥), Taigong's Que (闕), King Wen's Lu (禄), Lord Zhuang's Hu (曶), and Helü's Ganjiang and Moye and Juque and Pilü were all good swords of old, yet unless they were laid to the whetstone they could not be sharp, and without the strength of a man they could not cut. Hualiu and Qi and Ji and Xianli and Lu'er were all good horses of old, yet there must be the cutting of bit and rein in front and the awe of the whip behind, with the driving of Zaofu added to them, and only then do they reach a thousand li in a day.
Though a man's nature and stuff be beautiful and his heart clear in knowing, he must seek a worthy teacher and serve him, and choose a good friend and befriend him. If he gets a worthy teacher and serves him, what he hears is the way of Yao and Shun and Yu and Tang. If he gets a good friend and befriends him, what he sees is conduct that is loyal and faithful, respectful and yielding. Day by day he goes forward in benevolence and rightness and does not know it himself. The soaking in it made him so.
Now if he lives with men who are not good, what he hears is cheating and lying and trickery and falseness, and what he sees is conduct that is filthy and loose, wanton and crooked and greedy for gain. His body is about to come to punishment and death and he does not know it himself. The soaking in it made him so.
The word handed down goes, "If you do not know the son, look at his friends. If you do not know the ruler, look at those at his side." It is the soaking and nothing else. It is the soaking and nothing else.