孟子 告子上孟子 告子上
孟子孟子
Tap any character for its reading and meaning.
告告子子曰曰
性性
猶犹杞杞柳柳也也
義义
猶犹桮桮棬棬也也
以以人人性性為为仁仁義义
猶犹以以杞杞柳柳為为桮桮棬棬
孟孟子子曰曰
子子能能順顺杞杞柳柳之之性性
而而以以為为桮桮棬棬乎乎
將将戕戕賊贼杞杞柳柳
而而後后以以為为桮桮棬棬也也
如如將将戕戕賊贼杞杞柳柳
而而以以為为桮桮棬棬
則则亦亦將将戕戕賊贼人人
以以為为仁仁義义與与
率率天天下下之之人人而而禍祸仁仁義义者者
必必子子之之言言夫夫
告告子子曰曰
性性
猶犹湍湍水水也也
決决諸诸東东方方則则東东流流
決决諸诸西西方方則则西西流流
人人性性之之無无分分於于善善不不善善也也
猶犹水水之之無无分分於于東东西西也也
孟孟子子曰曰
水水信信無无分分於于東东西西
無无分分於于上上下下乎乎
人人性性之之善善也也
猶犹水水之之就就下下也也
人人無无有有不不善善
水水無无有有不不下下
今今夫夫水水
搏搏而而躍跃之之
可可使使過过顙颡
激激而而行行之之
可可使使在在山山
是是豈岂水水之之性性哉哉
其其勢势則则然然也也
人人之之可可使使為为不不善善
其其性性亦亦猶犹是是也也
告告子子曰曰
生生之之謂谓性性
孟孟子子曰曰
生生之之謂谓性性也也
猶犹白白之之謂谓白白與与
曰曰
然然
白白羽羽之之白白也也
猶犹白白雪雪之之白白
白白雪雪之之白白
猶犹白白玉玉之之白白歟欤
曰曰
然然
然然則则犬犬之之性性猶犹牛牛之之性性
牛牛之之性性猶犹人人之之性性歟欤
告告子子曰曰
食食
色色
性性也也
仁仁
內内也也
非非外外也也
義义
外外也也
非非內内也也
孟孟子子曰曰
何何以以謂谓仁仁內内義义外外也也
曰曰
彼彼長长而而我我長长之之
非非有有長长於于我我也也
猶犹彼彼白白而而我我白白之之
從从其其白白於于外外也也
故故謂谓之之外外也也
曰曰
異异
於于白白馬马之之白白也也
無无以以異异於于白白人人之之白白也也
不不識识長长馬马之之長长也也
無无以以異异於于長长人人之之長长歟欤
且且謂谓長长者者義义乎乎
長长之之者者義义乎乎
曰曰
吾吾弟弟則则愛爱之之
秦秦人人之之弟弟則则不不愛爱也也
是是以以我我為为悅悦者者也也
故故謂谓之之內内
長长楚楚人人之之長长
亦亦長长吾吾之之長长
是是以以長长為为悅悦者者也也
故故謂谓之之外外也也
曰曰
嗜嗜秦秦人人之之炙炙
無无以以異异於于嗜嗜吾吾炙炙
夫夫物物則则亦亦有有然然者者也也
然然則则嗜嗜炙炙亦亦有有外外歟欤
孟孟季季子子問问公公都都子子曰曰
何何以以謂谓義义內内也也
曰曰
行行吾吾敬敬
故故謂谓之之內内也也
鄉乡人人長长於于伯伯兄兄一一歲岁
則则誰谁敬敬
曰曰
敬敬兄兄
酌酌則则誰谁先先
曰曰
先先酌酌鄉乡人人
所所敬敬在在此此
所所長长在在彼彼
果果在在外外
非非由由內内也也
公公都都子子不不能能答答
以以告告孟孟子子
孟孟子子曰曰
敬敬叔叔父父乎乎
敬敬弟弟乎乎
彼彼將将曰曰
敬敬叔叔父父
曰曰
弟弟為为尸尸
則则誰谁敬敬
彼彼將将曰曰
敬敬弟弟
子子曰曰
惡恶在在其其敬敬叔叔父父也也
彼彼將将曰曰
在在位位故故也也
子子亦亦曰曰
在在位位故故也也
庸庸敬敬在在兄兄
斯斯須须之之敬敬在在鄉乡人人
季季子子聞闻之之
曰曰
敬敬叔叔父父則则敬敬
敬敬弟弟則则敬敬
果果在在外外
非非由由內内也也
公公都都子子曰曰
冬冬日日則则飲饮湯汤
夏夏日日則则飲饮水水
然然則则飲饮食食亦亦在在外外也也
公公都都子子曰曰
告告子子曰曰
性性無无善善無无不不善善也也
或或曰曰
性性可可以以為为善善
可可以以為为不不善善
是是故故文文武武興兴則则民民好好善善
幽幽厲厉興兴則则民民好好暴暴
或或曰曰
有有性性善善
有有性性不不善善
是是故故以以堯尧為为君君而而有有象象
以以瞽瞽瞍瞍為为父父而而有有舜舜
以以紂纣為为兄兄之之子子且且以以為为君君
而而有有微微子子啟启
王王子子比比干干
今今曰曰
性性善善
然然則则彼彼皆皆非非歟欤
孟孟子子曰曰
乃乃若若其其情情則则可可以以為为善善矣矣
乃乃所所謂谓善善也也
若若夫夫為为不不善善
非非才才之之罪罪也也
惻恻隱隐之之心心
人人皆皆有有之之
羞羞惡恶之之心心
人人皆皆有有之之
恭恭敬敬之之心心
人人皆皆有有之之
是是非非之之心心
人人皆皆有有之之
惻恻隱隐之之心心
仁仁也也
羞羞惡恶之之心心
義义也也
恭恭敬敬之之心心
禮礼也也
是是非非之之心心
智智也也
仁仁義义禮礼智智
非非由由外外鑠铄我我也也
我我固固有有之之也也
弗弗思思耳耳矣矣
故故曰曰
求求則则得得之之
舍舍則则失失之之
或或相相倍倍蓰蓰而而無无算算者者
不不能能盡尽其其才才者者也也
詩诗
曰曰
天天生生蒸蒸民民
有有物物有有則则
民民之之秉秉彝彝
好好是是懿懿德德
孔孔子子曰曰
為为此此詩诗者者
其其知知道道乎乎
故故有有物物必必有有則则
民民之之秉秉彝彝也也
故故好好是是懿懿德德
孟孟子子曰曰
富富歲岁
子子弟弟多多賴赖
兇凶歲岁
子子弟弟多多暴暴
非非天天之之降降才才爾尔殊殊也也
其其所所以以陷陷溺溺其其心心者者然然也也
今今夫夫麰麰麥麦
播播種种而而耘耘之之
其其地地同同
樹树之之時时又又同同
浡浡然然而而生生
至至於于日日至至之之時时
皆皆熟熟矣矣
雖虽有有不不同同
則则地地有有肥肥磽硗
雨雨露露之之養养
人人事事之之不不齊齐也也
故故凡凡同同類类者者
舉举相相似似也也
何何獨独至至於于人人而而疑疑之之
聖圣人人與与我我同同類类者者
故故龍龙子子曰曰
不不知知足足而而為为屨屦
我我知知其其不不為为蕢蒉也也
屨屦之之相相似似
天天下下之之足足同同也也
口口之之於于味味
有有同同嗜嗜也也
易易牙牙先先得得我我口口之之所所嗜嗜者者也也
如如使使口口之之於于味味也也
其其性性與与人人殊殊
若若犬犬馬马之之與与我我不不同同類类也也
則则天天下下何何嗜嗜皆皆從从易易牙牙之之於于味味也也
至至於于味味
天天下下期期於于易易牙牙
是是天天下下之之口口相相似似也也
惟惟耳耳亦亦然然
至至於于聲声
天天下下期期於于師师曠旷
是是天天下下之之耳耳相相似似也也
惟惟目目亦亦然然
至至於于子子都都
天天下下莫莫不不知知其其姣姣也也
不不知知子子都都之之姣姣者者
無无目目者者也也
故故曰曰
口口之之於于味味也也
有有同同嗜嗜焉焉
耳耳之之於于聲声也也
有有同同聽听焉焉
目目之之於于色色也也
有有同同美美焉焉
至至於于心心
獨独無无所所同同然然乎乎
心心之之所所同同然然者者
何何也也
謂谓
理理也也
義义也也
聖圣人人先先得得我我心心之之所所同同然然耳耳
故故理理義义之之悅悦我我心心
猶犹芻刍豢豢之之悅悦我我口口
孟孟子子曰曰
牛牛山山之之木木嘗尝美美矣矣
以以其其郊郊於于大大國国也也
斧斧斤斤伐伐之之
可可以以為为美美乎乎
是是其其日日夜夜之之所所息息
雨雨露露之之所所潤润
非非無无萌萌蘗蘗之之生生焉焉
牛牛羊羊又又從从而而牧牧之之
是是以以若若彼彼濯濯濯濯也也
人人見见其其濯濯濯濯也也
以以為为未未嘗尝有有材材焉焉
此此豈岂山山之之性性也也哉哉
雖虽存存乎乎人人者者
豈岂無无仁仁義义之之心心哉哉
其其所所以以放放其其良良心心者者
亦亦猶犹斧斧斤斤之之於于木木也也
旦旦旦旦而而伐伐之之
可可以以為为美美乎乎
其其日日夜夜之之所所息息
平平旦旦之之氣气
其其好好惡恶與与人人相相近近也也者者幾几希希
則则其其旦旦晝昼之之所所為为
有有梏梏亡亡之之矣矣
梏梏之之反反覆复
則则其其夜夜氣气不不足足以以存存
夜夜氣气不不足足以以存存
則则其其違违禽禽獸兽不不遠远矣矣
人人見见其其禽禽獸兽也也
而而以以為为未未嘗尝有有才才焉焉者者
是是豈岂人人之之情情也也哉哉
故故茍茍得得其其養养
無无物物不不長长
茍茍失失其其養养
無无物物不不消消
孔孔子子曰曰
操操則则存存
舍舍則则亡亡
出出入入無无時时
莫莫知知其其鄉乡
惟惟心心之之謂谓與与
孟孟子子曰曰
無无或或乎乎王王之之不不智智也也
雖虽有有天天下下易易生生之之物物也也
一一日日暴暴之之
十十日日寒寒之之
未未有有能能生生者者也也
吾吾見见亦亦罕罕矣矣
吾吾退退而而寒寒之之者者至至矣矣
吾吾如如有有萌萌焉焉何何哉哉
今今夫夫弈弈之之為为數数
小小數数也也
不不專专心心致致志志
則则不不得得也也
弈弈秋秋
通通國国之之善善弈弈者者也也
使使弈弈秋秋誨诲二二人人弈弈
其其一一人人專专心心致致志志
惟惟弈弈秋秋之之為为聽听
一一人人雖虽聽听之之
一一心心以以為为有有鴻鸿鵠鹄將将至至
思思援援弓弓繳缴而而射射之之
雖虽與与之之俱俱學学
弗弗若若之之矣矣
為为是是其其智智弗弗若若與与
曰曰
非非然然也也
孟孟子子曰曰
魚鱼
我我所所欲欲也也
熊熊掌掌
亦亦我我所所欲欲也也
二二者者不不可可得得兼兼
舍舍魚鱼而而取取熊熊掌掌者者也也
生生
亦亦我我所所欲欲也也
義义
亦亦我我所所欲欲也也
二二者者不不可可得得兼兼
舍舍生生而而取取義义者者也也
生生亦亦我我所所欲欲
所所欲欲有有甚甚於于生生者者
故故不不為为茍茍得得也也
死死亦亦我我所所惡恶
所所惡恶有有甚甚於于死死者者
故故患患有有所所不不辟辟也也
如如使使人人之之所所欲欲莫莫甚甚於于生生
則则凡凡可可以以得得生生者者何何不不用用也也
使使人人之之所所惡恶莫莫甚甚於于死死者者
則则凡凡可可以以辟辟患患者者何何不不為为也也
由由是是則则生生而而有有不不用用也也
由由是是則则可可以以辟辟患患而而有有不不為为也也
是是故故所所欲欲有有甚甚於于生生者者
所所惡恶有有甚甚於于死死者者
非非獨独賢贤者者有有是是心心也也
人人皆皆有有之之
賢贤者者能能勿勿喪丧耳耳
一一簞箪食食
一一豆豆羹羹
得得之之則则生生
弗弗得得則则死死
嘑嘑爾尔而而與与之之
行行道道之之人人弗弗受受
蹴蹴爾尔而而與与之之
乞乞人人不不屑屑也也
萬万
鍾钟
钟钟
鍾钟
則则不不辨辨禮礼義义而而受受之之
萬万
鍾钟
钟钟
鍾钟
於于我我何何加加焉焉
為为宮宫室室之之美美
妻妻妾妾之之奉奉
所所識识窮穷乏乏者者得得我我與与
鄉乡為为身身死死而而不不受受
今今為为宮宫室室之之美美為为之之
鄉乡為为身身死死而而不不受受
今今為为妻妻妾妾之之奉奉為为之之
鄉乡為为身身死死而而不不受受
今今為为所所識识窮穷乏乏者者得得我我而而為为之之
是是亦亦不不可可以以已已乎乎
此此之之謂谓失失其其本本心心
孟孟子子曰曰
仁仁
人人心心也也
義义
人人路路也也
舍舍其其路路而而弗弗由由
放放其其心心而而不不知知求求
哀哀哉哉
人人有有雞鸡犬犬放放
則则知知求求之之
有有放放心心
而而不不知知求求
學学問问之之道道無无他他
求求其其放放心心而而已已矣矣
孟孟子子曰曰
今今有有無无名名之之指指
屈屈而而不不信信
非非疾疾痛痛害害事事也也
如如有有能能信信之之者者
則则不不遠远秦秦
楚楚之之路路
為为指指之之不不若若人人也也
指指不不若若人人
則则知知惡恶之之
心心不不若若人人
則则不不知知惡恶
此此之之謂谓不不知知類类也也
孟孟子子曰曰
拱拱把把之之桐桐
梓梓
人人茍茍欲欲生生之之
皆皆知知所所以以養养之之者者
至至於于身身
而而不不知知所所以以養养之之者者
豈岂愛爱身身不不若若桐桐
梓梓哉哉
弗弗思思甚甚也也
孟孟子子曰曰
人人之之於于身身也也
兼兼所所愛爱
兼兼所所愛爱
則则兼兼所所養养也也
無无尺尺寸寸之之膚肤不不愛爱焉焉
則则無无尺尺寸寸之之膚肤不不養养也也
所所以以考考其其善善不不善善者者
豈岂有有他他哉哉
於于己己取取之之而而已已矣矣
體体有有貴贵賤贱
有有小小大大
無无以以小小害害大大
無无以以賤贱害害貴贵
養养其其小小者者為为小小人人
養养其其大大者者為为大大人人
今今有有場场師师
舍舍其其梧梧槚槚
養养其其樲樲棘棘
則则為为賤贱場场師师焉焉
養养其其一一指指
而而失失其其肩肩背背而而不不知知也也
則则為为狼狼疾疾人人也也
飲饮食食之之人人
則则人人賤贱之之矣矣
為为其其養养小小以以失失大大也也
飲饮食食之之人人
無无有有失失也也
則则口口腹腹豈岂適适為为尺尺寸寸之之膚肤哉哉
公公都都子子問问曰曰
鈞钧是是人人也也
或或為为大大人人
或或為为小小人人
何何也也
孟孟子子曰曰
從从其其大大體体為为大大人人
從从其其小小體体為为小小人人
曰曰
鈞钧是是人人也也
或或從从其其大大體体
或或從从其其小小體体
何何也也
曰曰
耳耳目目之之官官不不思思
而而蔽蔽於于物物
物物交交物物
則则引引之之而而已已矣矣
心心之之官官則则思思
思思則则得得之之
不不思思則则不不得得也也
此此天天之之所所與与我我者者
先先立立乎乎其其大大者者
則则其其小小者者不不能能奪夺也也
此此為为大大人人而而已已矣矣
孟孟子子曰曰
有有天天爵爵者者
有有人人爵爵者者
仁仁
義义
忠忠
信信
樂乐善善不不倦倦
此此天天爵爵也也
公公卿卿大大夫夫
此此人人爵爵也也
古古之之人人
修修其其天天爵爵而而人人爵爵從从之之
今今之之人人
修修其其天天爵爵以以要要人人爵爵
既既得得人人爵爵而而棄弃其其天天爵爵
則则惑惑之之甚甚者者也也
終终亦亦必必亡亡而而已已矣矣
孟孟子子曰曰
欲欲貴贵者者
人人之之同同心心也也
人人人人有有貴贵於于己己者者
弗弗思思耳耳矣矣
人人之之所所貴贵者者
非非良良貴贵也也
趙赵孟孟之之所所貴贵
趙赵孟孟能能賤贱之之
詩诗
云云
既既醉醉以以酒酒
既既飽饱以以德德
言言飽饱乎乎仁仁義义也也
所所以以不不愿愿人人之之膏膏粱粱之之味味也也
令令聞闻廣广譽誉施施於于身身
所所以以不不愿愿人人之之文文繡绣也也
孟孟子子曰曰
仁仁之之勝胜不不仁仁也也
猶犹水水之之勝胜火火
今今之之為为仁仁者者
猶犹以以一一杯杯水水救救一一車车薪薪之之火火也也
不不熄熄
則则謂谓之之水水不不勝胜火火
此此又又與与於于不不仁仁之之甚甚者者也也
亦亦終终必必亡亡而而已已矣矣
孟孟子子曰曰
五五穀谷者者
種种之之美美者者也也
茍茍為为不不熟熟
不不如如荑荑稗稗
夫夫仁仁
亦亦在在乎乎熟熟之之而而已已矣矣
孟孟子子曰曰
羿羿之之教教人人射射
必必志志於于彀彀
學学者者亦亦必必志志於于彀彀
大大匠匠誨诲人人
必必以以規规矩矩
學学者者亦亦必必以以規规矩矩
香香港港中中學学文文憑凭考考試试指指定定文文言言篇篇章章
Translation
Gaozi I The philosopher Gao said, 'Man's nature is like the qi-willow , and righteousness is like a cup or a bowl. The fashioning benevolence and righteousness out of man's nature is like the making cups and bowls from the qi-willow.' Mencius replied, 'Can you, leaving untouched the nature of the willow, make with it cups and bowls? You must do violence and injury to the willow, before you can make cups and bowls with it. If you must do violence and injury to the willow in order to make cups and bowls with it, on your principles you must in the same way do violence and injury to humanity in order to fashion from it benevolence and righteousness! Your words, alas! would certainly lead all men on to reckon benevolence and righteousness to be calamities.' The philosopher Gao said, 'Man's nature is like water whirling round in a corner. Open a passage for it to the east, and it will flow to the east; open a passage for it to the west, and it will flow to the west. Man's nature is indifferent to good and evil, just as the water is indifferent to the east and west.' Mencius replied, 'Water indeed will flow indifferently to the east or west, but will it flow indifferently up or down? The tendency of man's nature to good is like the tendency of water to flow downwards. There are none but have this tendency to good, just as all water flows downwards. Now by striking water and causing it to leap up, you may make it go over your forehead, and, by damming and leading it you may force it up a hill - but are such movements according to the nature of water? It is the force applied which causes them. When men are made to do what is not good, their nature is dealt with in this way.' The philosopher Gao said, 'Life is what we call nature!' Mencius asked him, 'Do you say that by nature you mean life, just as you say that white is white?' 'Yes, I do,' was the reply. Mencius added, 'Is the whiteness of a white feather like that of white snow, and the whiteness of white snow like that of white jade?' Gao again said 'Yes.' 'Very well,' pursued Mencius. 'Is the nature of a dog like the nature of an ox, and the nature of an ox like the nature of a man?' The philosopher Gao said, 'To enjoy food and delight in colours is nature. Benevolence is internal and not external; righteousness is external and not internal.' Mencius asked him, 'What is the ground of your saying that benevolence is internal and righteousness external?' He replied, 'There is a man older than I, and I give honour to his age. It is not that there is first in me a principle of such reverence to age. It is just as when there is a white man, and I consider him white; according as he is so externally to me. On this account, I pronounce of righteousness that it is external.' Mencius said, 'There is no difference between our pronouncing a white horse to be white and our pronouncing a white man to be white. But is there no difference between the regard with which we acknowledge the age of an old horse and that with which we acknowledge the age of an old man? And what is it which is called righteousness? The fact of a man's being old? Or the fact of our giving honour to his age?' Gao said, 'There is my younger brother; I love him. But the younger brother of a man of Qin I do not love: that is, the feeling is determined by myself, and therefore I say that benevolence is internal. On the other hand, I give honour to an old man of Chu, and I also give honour to an old man of my own people: that is, the feeling is determined by the age, and therefore I say that righteousness is external.' Mencius answered him, 'Our enjoyment of meat roasted by a man of Qin does not differ from our enjoyment of meat roasted by ourselves. Thus, what you insist on takes place also in the case of such things, and will you say likewise that our enjoyment of a roast is external?' The disciple Meng Ji asked Gong Du, saying, 'On what ground is it said that righteousness is internal?' Gong Du replied, 'We therein act out our feeling of respect, and therefore it is said to be internal.' The other objected, 'Suppose the case of a villager older than your elder brother by one year, to which of them would you show the greater respect?' 'To my brother,' was the reply. 'But for which of them would you first pour out wine at a feast?' 'For the villager.' Meng Ji argued, 'Now your feeling of reverence rests on the one, and now the honour due to age is rendered to the other - this is certainly determined by what is without, and does not proceed from within.' Gong Du was unable to reply, and told the conversation to Mencius. Mencius said, 'You should ask him, "Which do you respect most, your uncle, or your younger brother?" He will answer, "My uncle." Ask him again, "If your younger brother be personating a dead ancestor, to which do you show the greater respect, to him or to your uncle?" He will say, "To my younger brother." You can go on, "But where is the respect due, as you said, to your uncle?" He will reply to this, "I show the respect to my younger brother, because of the position which he occupies," and you can likewise say, "So my respect to the villager is because of the position which he occupies. Ordinarily, my respect is rendered to my elder brother; for a brief season, on occasion, it is rendered to the villager."' Meng Ji heard this and observed, 'When respect is due to my uncle, I respect him, and when respect is due to my younger brother, I respect him; the thing is certainly determined by what is without, and does not proceed from within.' Gong Du replied, 'In winter we drink things hot, in summer we drink things cold; and so, on your principle, eating and drinking also depend on what is external!' The disciple Gong Du said, 'The philosopher Gao says, "Man's nature is neither good nor bad." Some say, "Man's nature may be made to practise good, and it may be made to practise evil, and accordingly, under Wen and Wu, the people loved what was good, while under Yu and Li, they loved what was cruel." Some say, "The nature of some is good, and the nature of others is bad. Hence it was that under such a sovereign as Yao there yet appeared Xiang; that with such a father as Gu Sou there yet appeared Shun; and that with Zhou for their sovereign, and the son of their elder brother besides, there were found Qi, the viscount of Wei, and the prince Bi Gan. And now you say, "The nature is good." Then are all those wrong?' Mencius said, 'From the feelings proper to it, it is constituted for the practice of what is good. This is what I mean in saying that the nature is good. If men do what is not good, the blame cannot be imputed to their natural powers. The feeling of commiseration belongs to all men; so does that of shame and dislike; and that of reverence and respect; and that of approving and disapproving. The feeling of commiseration implies the principle of benevolence; that of shame and dislike, the principle of righteousness; that of reverence and respect, the principle of propriety; and that of approving and disapproving, the principle of knowledge. Benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and knowledge are not infused into us from without. We are certainly furnished with them. And a different view is simply owing to want of reflection. Hence it is said, "Seek and you will find them. Neglect and you will lose them." Men differ from one another in regard to them - some as much again as others, some five times as much, and some to an incalculable amount - it is because they cannot carry out fully their natural powers. It is said in the Book of Poetry, "Heaven in producing mankind, Gave them their various faculties and relations with their specific laws. These are the invariable rules of nature for all to hold, And all love this admirable virtue." Confucius said, "The maker of this ode knew indeed the principle of our nature!" We may thus see that every faculty and relation must have its law, and since there are invariable rules for all to hold, they consequently love this admirable virtue.' Mencius said, 'In good years the children of the people are most of them good, while in bad years the most of them abandon themselves to evil. It is not owing to any difference of their natural powers conferred by Heaven that they are thus different. The abandonment is owing to the circumstances through which they allow their minds to be ensnared and drowned in evil. There now is barley. Let it be sown and covered up; the ground being the same, and the time of sowing likewise the same, it grows rapidly up, and, when the full time is come, it is all found to be ripe. Although there may be inequalities of produce, that is owing to the difference of the soil, as rich or poor, to the unequal nourishment afforded by the rains and dews, and to the different ways in which man has performed his business in reference to it. Thus all things which are the same in kind are like to one another; why should we doubt in regard to man, as if he were a solitary exception to this? The sage and we are the same in kind. In accordance with this the scholar Long said, "If a man make hempen sandals without knowing the size of people's feet, yet I know that he will not make them like baskets." Sandals are all like one another, because all men's feet are like one another. So with the mouth and flavours - all mouths have the same relishes. Yi Ya only apprehended before me what my mouth relishes. Suppose that his mouth in its relish for flavours differed from that of other men, as is the case with dogs or horses which are not the same in kind with us, why should all men be found following Yi Ya in their relishes? In the matter of tastes all the people model themselves after Yi Ya; that is, the mouths of all men are like one another. And so also it is with the ear. In the matter of sounds, the whole people model themselves after the music-master Kuang; that is, the ears of all men are like one another. And so also it is with the eye. In the case of Zi Du, there is no man but would recognise that he was beautiful. Any one who would not recognise the beauty of Zi Du must have no eyes. Therefore I say, Men's mouths agree in having the same relishes; their ears agree in enjoying the same sounds; their eyes agree in recognising the same beauty - shall their minds alone be without that which the similarly approve? What is it then of which they similarly approve? It is, I say, the principles of our nature, and the determinations of righteousness. The sages only apprehended before me that of which my mind approves along with other men. Therefore the principles of our nature and the determinations of righteousness are agreeable to my mind, just as the flesh of grass and grain-fed animals is agreeable to my mouth.' Mencius said, 'The trees of the Niu mountain were once beautiful. Being situated, however, in the borders of a large State, they were hewn down with axes and bills - and could they retain their beauty? Still through the activity of the vegetative life day and night, and the nourishing influence of the rain and dew, they were not without buds and sprouts springing forth, but then came the cattle and goats and browsed upon them. To these things is owing the bare and stripped appearance of the mountain, and when people now see it, they think it was never finely wooded. But is this the nature of the mountain? And so also of what properly belongs to man; shall it be said that the mind of any man was without benevolence and righteousness? The way in which a man loses his proper goodness of mind is like the way in which the trees are denuded by axes and bills. Hewn down day after day, can it - the mind - retain its beauty? But there is a development of its life day and night, and in the calm air of the morning, just between night and day, the mind feels in a degree those desires and aversions which are proper to humanity, but the feeling is not strong, and it is fettered and destroyed by what takes place during the day. This fettering taking place again and again, the restorative influence of the night is not sufficient to preserve the proper goodness of the mind; and when this proves insufficient for that purpose, the nature becomes not much different from that of the irrational animals, and when people now see it, they think that it never had those powers which I assert. But does this condition represent the feelings proper to humanity? Therefore, if it receive its proper nourishment, there is nothing which will not grow. If it lose its proper nourishment, there is nothing which will not decay away. Confucius said, "Hold it fast, and it remains with you. Let it go, and you lose it. Its outgoing and incoming cannot be defined as to time or place." It is the mind of which this is said!' Mencius said, 'It is not to be wondered at that the king is not wise! Suppose the case of the most easily growing thing in the world; if you let it have one day's genial heat, and then expose it for ten days to cold, it will not be able to grow. It is but seldom that I have an audience of the king, and when I retire, there come all those who act upon him like the cold. Though I succeed in bringing out some buds of goodness, of what avail is it? Now chess-playing is but a small art, but without his whole mind being given, and his will bent, to it, a man cannot succeed at it. Chess Qiu is the best chess-player in all the kingdom. Suppose that he is teaching two men to play. The one gives to the subject his whole mind and bends to it all his will, doing nothing but listening to Chess Qiu. The other, although he seems to be listening to him, has his whole mind running on a swan which he thinks is approaching, and wishes to bend his bow, adjust the string to the arrow, and shoot it. Although he is learning along with the other, he does not come up to him. Why? Because his intelligence is not equal? Not so.' Mencius said, 'I like fish, and I also like bear's paws. If I cannot have the two together, I will let the fish go, and take the bear's paws. So, I like life, and I also like righteousness. If I cannot keep the two together, I will let life go, and choose righteousness. I like life indeed, but there is that which I like more than life, and therefore, I will not seek to possess it by any improper ways. I dislike death indeed, but there is that which I dislike more than death, and therefore there are occasions when I will not avoid danger. If among the things which man likes there were nothing which he liked more than life, why should he not use every means by which he could preserve it? If among the things which man dislikes there were nothing which he disliked more than death, why should he not do everything by which he could avoid danger? There are cases when men by a certain course might preserve life, and they do not employ it; when by certain things they might avoid danger, and they will not do them. Therefore, men have that which they like more than life, and that which they dislike more than death. They are not men of distinguished talents and virtue only who have this mental nature. All men have it; what belongs to such men is simply that they do not lose it. Here are a small basket of rice and a platter of soup, and the case is one in which the getting them will preserve life, and the want of them will be death; if they are offered with an insulting voice, even a tramper will not receive them, or if you first tread upon them, even a beggar will not stoop to take them. And yet a man will accept of ten thousand zhong, without any consideration of propriety or righteousness. What can the ten thousand chung add to him? When he takes them, is it not that he may obtain beautiful mansions, that he may secure the services of wives and concubines, or that the poor and needy of his acquaintance may be helped by him? In the former case the offered bounty was not received, though it would have saved from death, and now the emolument is taken for the sake of beautiful mansions. The bounty that would have preserved from death was not received, and the emolument is taken to get the service of wives and concubines. The bounty that would have saved from death was not received, and the emolument is taken that one's poor and needy acquaintance may be helped by him. Was it then not possible likewise to decline this? This is a case of what is called "Losing the proper nature of one's mind."' Mencius said, 'Benevolence is man's mind, and righteousness is man's path. How lamentable is it to neglect the path and not pursue it, to lose this mind and not know to seek it again! When men's fowls and dogs are lost, they know to seek for them again, but they lose their mind, and do not know to seek for it. The great end of learning is nothing else but to seek for the lost mind.' Mencius said, 'Here is a man whose fourth finger is bent and cannot be stretched out straight. It is not painful, nor does it incommode his business, and yet if there be any one who can make it straight, he will not think the way from Qin to Chu far to go to him; because his finger is not like the finger of other people. When a man's finger is not like those of other people, he knows to feel dissatisfied, but if his mind be not like that of other people, he does not know to feel dissatisfaction. This is called "Ignorance of the relative importance of things."' Mencius said, 'Anybody who wishes to cultivate the tong or the zi, which may be grasped with both hands, perhaps with one, knows by what means to nourish them. In the case of their own persons, men do not know by what means to nourish them. Is it to be supposed that their regard of their own persons is inferior to their regard for a tong or zi? Their want of reflection is extreme.' Mencius said, 'There is no part of himself which a man does not love, and as he loves all, so he must nourish all. There is not an inch of skin which he does not love, and so there is not an inch of skin which he will not nourish. For examining whether his way of nourishing be good or not, what other rule is there but this, that he determine by reflecting on himself where it should be applied? Some parts of the body are noble, and some ignoble; some great, and some small. The great must not be injured for the small, nor the noble for the ignoble. He who nourishes the little belonging to him is a little man, and he who nourishes the great is a great man. Here is a plantation-keeper, who neglects his wu and jia, and cultivates his sour jujube-trees; he is a poor plantation-keeper. He who nourishes one of his fingers, neglecting his shoulders or his back, without knowing that he is doing so, is a man who resembles a hurried wolf. A man who only eats and drinks is counted mean by others; because he nourishes what is little to the neglect of what is great. If a man, fond of his eating and drinking, were not to neglect what is of more importance, how should his mouth and belly be considered as no more than an inch of skin?' The disciple Gong Du said, 'All are equally men, but some are great men, and some are little men - how is this?' Mencius replied, 'Those who follow that part of themselves which is great are great men; those who follow that part which is little are little men.' Gong Du pursued, 'All are equally men, but some follow that part of themselves which is great, and some follow that part which is little - how is this?' Mencius answered, 'The senses of hearing and seeing do not think, and are obscured by external things. When one thing comes into contact with another, as a matter of course it leads it away. To the mind belongs the office of thinking. By thinking, it gets the right view of things; by neglecting to think, it fails to do this. These - the senses and the mind - are what Heaven has given to us. Let a man first stand fast in the supremacy of the nobler part of his constitution, and the inferior part will not be able to take it from him. It is simply this which makes the great man.' Mencius said, 'There is a nobility of Heaven, and there is a nobility of man. Benevolence, righteousness, self-consecration, and fidelity, with unwearied joy in these virtues; these constitute the nobility of Heaven. To be a gong, a qing, or a da fu; this constitutes the nobility of man. The men of antiquity cultivated their nobility of Heaven, and the nobility of man came to them in its train. The men of the present day cultivate their nobility of Heaven in order to seek for the nobility of man, and when they have obtained that, they throw away the other - their delusion is extreme. The issue is simply this, that they must lose that nobility of man as well.' Mencius said, 'To desire to be honoured is the common mind of men. And all men have in themselves that which is truly honourable. Only they do not think of it. The honour which men confer is not good honour. Those whom Zhao the Great ennobles he can make mean again. It is said in the Book of Poetry, "He has filled us with his wine, He has satiated us with his goodness." "Satiated us with his goodness," that is, satiated us with benevolence and righteousness, and he who is so satiated, consequently, does not wish for the fat meat and fine millet of men. A good reputation and far-reaching praise fall to him, and he does not desire the elegant embroidered garments of men.' Mencius said, 'Benevolence subdues its opposite just as water subdues fire. Those, however, who now-a-days practise benevolence do it as if with one cup of water they could save a whole waggon-load of fuel which was on fire, and when the flames were not extinguished, were to say that water cannot subdue fire. This conduct, moreover, greatly encourages those who are not benevolent. The final issue will simply be this: the loss of that small amount of benevolence.' Mencius said, 'Of all seeds the best are the five kinds of grain, yet if they be not ripe, they are not equal to the ti or the bai. So, the value of benevolence depends entirely on its being brought to maturity.' Mencius said, 'Yi, in teaching men to shoot, made it a rule to draw the bow to the full, and his pupils also did the same. A master-workman, in teaching others, uses the compass and square, and his pupils do the same.'
This is one text of 1,200+. The full study room adds stroke order, read-aloud audio, your own annotations, 平仄 for regulated verse, and a 30,895-idiom 成語 collection.
Enter the study room — $49, lifetimeMore free readings: 靜夜思 · 李白 山居秋暝 · 王維 春望 · 杜甫 · All texts 書庫 · Browse 成語