内 篇 The Inner Chapters——第一卷 谏上

1.1 [1] 庄公矜勇力不顾行（义）晏子谏

齐庄公崇尚勇力不在乎德行，晏子进谏

【原文】

庄公奋乎勇力，不顾于行。（义）〔尚〕勇力之士，无忌于国，贵（贱）〔戚〕不荐善，逼迩不引过，故晏子见公。公曰：“古者亦有徒以勇力立于世者乎？”晏子对曰：“婴闻之，轻死以行礼谓之勇，诛暴不避强谓之力。故勇力之立也，以行其礼义也。汤、武用兵而不为逆，并国而不为贪，仁义之理也。诛暴不避强，替罪不避众，勇力之行也。古之为勇力者，行礼义也；今上无仁义之理，下无替罪诛暴之行，而徒以勇力立于世，则诸侯行之以国危，匹夫行之以家残。昔夏之衰也，有推侈、大戏；殷之衰也，有费仲、恶来，足走千里，手裂兕虎，任之以力，凌轹天下，威戮无罪，崇尚勇力，不顾义理，是以桀、纣以灭，殷、夏以衰。今公自奋乎勇力，不顾乎行，（义）〔尚〕勇力之士，无忌于国，身立威强，行本淫暴，贵戚不荐善，逼迩不引过，反圣王之德，而循灭君之行，用此存者，婴未闻有也。”

【今译】

齐庄公崇尚勇力，不在乎德行。崇尚勇猛有力的人，在国内肆无忌惮，王室亲族不能进献忠言，亲近之臣也不敢指出（庄公的）过失，于是晏子来见庄公。庄公问道：“古时候也有仅凭勇力便能立于世间的人吗？”晏子回答说：“我听说，为了遵行礼法而不惜性命叫作‘勇’，诛除凶暴而不畏强悍叫作‘力’。所以‘勇’和‘力’的存在，就是为了推行礼义。商汤和周武王发动战争而不被称作叛逆，兼并国家也不被视为贪婪，道理就在于他们的做法符合仁义的要求。诛除凶暴不畏强悍，消灭罪恶不怕（对方）人多，这才是勇猛有力的行为。古时候勇猛有力的人，遵行礼义；现在君主在上不推行仁义的道理，臣民在下也没有消灭罪恶、诛除凶暴的行为，（这时候）如果仅靠勇力立于世间，那么诸侯这样做就会国危，百姓这样做就会家破。昔日夏朝衰败的时候，有推侈、大戏；商朝衰败的时候，有费仲、恶来，（这些人都是）足可行千里，手可撕兕虎的勇力之士，（君主）因为勇力而任用他们，他们就会恃勇而欺凌天下百姓，屠戮无罪之人。推崇尊尚勇力，不顾仁义之礼，这就是夏桀灭亡、商纣衰败的道理。现在您奋扬勇力，不在乎德行，崇尚勇猛有力之人，在国内肆无忌惮，（他们）立身朝野威权日盛，行为却荒淫残暴，王室亲族不能进献忠言，亲近之臣也不敢指出（您的）过失，（您）一反圣王的德政而因循亡国之君的行为，靠这种行为保全国家的，我从来没有听说过。”

Duke Zhuang showed great enthusiasm for courage and strength^[3] to the extent of neglecting righteous conduct.^[4] Tremendously strong and courageous officers stopped at nothing in their dealings in the capital; ministers of ducal blood did not offer good advice,and his intimate courtiers did not point out faults. And so Yanzi went to have an audience w ith the Duke.

The Duke said: “Surely there were those in ancient times who established their prom inence in the world solely on the basis of courage and strength,were there not?”

Yanzi answered: “I have heard^[5] that to carry out the rites w ith little thought of death is called courage. Punishing the violence undeterred by the powerful is called strength. Therefore,to set up courage and strength depends upon practicing the rites and righteousness. Tang^[6] and Wu^[7] resorted to arms,and yet they were not considered rebellious; they annexed lands of others to their own territory and yet they were not considered avaricious–all because of their principles of humaneness and righteousness. When punishing the violent,they were undeterred by the powerful; when abolishing criminal behavior,they were undeterred by the mob. Such was their practice of courage and strength.^[8] Those among the ancients who were courageous and strong were those who implemented rites and righteousness. But now,superiors lack the principles of humaneness and righteousness and inferiors lack the practice of abolishing crim inal behavior and punishing the violent. Regional princes attempting to establish their prominence in the world solely on the basis courage and strength do so at the cost of putting their states in peril,and the high officers^[9] do so at the cost of bringing ruin upon their fam ilies. In the time of the Xia dynasty’s decline,there lived Tui Chi and Da Xi;^[10] in the time of the Yin dynasty’s decline,there lived Fei Zhong and Wu Lai.^[11] Their legs were strong enough to walk for a thousand li^[12] and their arms could tear apart rhinoceroses and tigers. They were recruited into service because of their strength,but they oppressed the world and massacred the innocent. Because Jie and Zhou^[13] prized courage and strength and neglected righteousness and moral principle,they were destroyed,and Yin and Xia declined. And now you,my Lord,show great enthusiasm for courage and strength to the extent of neglecting righteous conduct.^[14] Tremendously strong and courageous officers stop at nothing in their dealings in the capital; they establish their prominence through power and strength and act on the basis of excessive violence. Your ministers of ducal blood do not offer good advice,and your intimate courtiers do not point out faults. This behavior contradicts the virtue of the sage-kings and follows a course of action that leads to the downfall of rulers. I have never heard of anyone who survived while conducting himself in this manner.”^[15]

---

注释

[1]Duke Zhuang of Qi 齐庄公 succeeded Duke Ling 灵公 (r. 581–554 BCE) and reigned in Qi 齐 between 553–548 BCE. He was invested as the ruler of Qi by the pow erful Cui Zhu 崔杼,who later assassinated him for having an extra-marital affair w ith his w ife. For a detailed description of Duke Zhuang’s assassination and for an exposition of Yanzi’s moral dilemma over serving the new ruler of Qi,Duke Jing景公 (r. 547–490 BCE),who was also enthroned by Cui Zhu,see Item 5.3 [113]; Zuozhuan,B9.25.2/282.

[2]Retain 义 (SBCK,I/5a4) delete 尚 (JS,2/3).

[3]According to the Zuozhuan 左传,B9.21.8/272/11,Duke Zhuang established a special official rank to honor courageous men. For several interesting discussions of the concept of “courage” in the Analects and Mencius,see Philip J. Ivanhoe,“Mengzi’s Conception of Courage.” Dao 5.2 (2006): 221-34; Xinyan Jiang,“Confucius’s View of Courage.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy,39.1 (2012): 44-59; Bryan W. Van Norden,“Mencius on Courage.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 21 (1997): 237-56; Lee H. Yearley,Mencius and Aquinas: Theories of Virtue and Conceptions of Courage. SUNY Series,Toward a Comparative Philosophy of Religions,A lbany,1990.

[4]Retain 义 (SBCK,I/5b7-8) delete 尚 (JS,2/3).

[5]吾闻,literally: “I have heard,” a rhetorical pattern that in many cases introduces a truism,akin to the expression: “it is well known that.”

[6]Emperor Cheng Tang 成汤,the first king of the Shang 商 (Yin 殷) dynasty (17th–11th cent. BCE).

[7]King Wu 武王 (1169–1116 BCE),the first sovereign of the Zhou 周 dynasty (11th cent.–221 BCE).

[8]For an identical view of w hat constitutes “moral courage,” see Mencius,3.2/15/13.

[9]匹夫→大夫 (JS,3-4/8).

[10]Tui Chi 推侈,which also appears as the variant names Tui Duo 推哆 or Tui Yi 推移,and Da Xi 大戏,or 大牺,were in the service of King Jie 桀 of the Xia. See also Mozi 墨子,8.3/54/15.

[11]Fei Zhong 费仲 and Wu Lai 恶来 served Zhou X in 纣辛,the last tyrant of Shang (Yin) dynasty. See Mozi,8.3/54/25.

[12]A li 里 was a unit of linear measure of approximately 0.4 kilometer.

[13]Jie 桀 and Zhou 纣 w ere the last tyrant kings,respectively,of the X ia and Shang dynasties.

[14]Retain 义 delete 尚 (JS,2/3).

[15]The present Item,which records a philosophical exchange between Duke Zhuang and Yanzi,provides a conceptual and rhetorical framework from which many of the next 215 items of the YZCQ emerge. This opening Item seem s to have a strong rhetorical affiliation w ith M encius’ style of argument w ith King Hui of Liang 梁惠王 in the first lines of Mencius (1.1/1/3-9). However,the conceptual focus in this passage is not on “profit–利,” as in Mencius,but rather on “courage and strength.”As the item unfolds,Duke Zhuang’s great passion for the performance of acts of “courage and strength–勇力” induces him and his staff to neglect moral conduct and therefore threatens to engulf the whole state of Qi in chaos and the threat of immediate destruction. Hence,Yanzi comes to see the Duke in order to give up the destructive endorsement of these virtues and to replace it w ith a different,moral dimension. In a nutshell: for Yanzi,“courage and strength” depends upon the practice of “the rites” (li 礼) and “righteousness” (yi 义),and spring from the principles of “humanness” (ren 仁) and “righteousness” as defined by the moral conduct of the ancient sage-kings. Notably,chronologically speaking,this item is close to heretical–it obliquely implies that,at a time before Confucius (551–479 BCE) was born,Yanzi (590–500 BCE) was already urging his contemporaries in the state of Qi to return to the ways of the ancient sage-kings as guiding paradigms,and that he played a significant role in transm itting and iconizing their conceptual design of “humanness,” “righteousness,” and ‘the rites.”