內 篇 The Inner Chapters——第一卷 諫上

1.1 [1] 莊公矜勇力不顧行（義）晏子諫

齊莊公崇尚勇力不在乎德行，晏子進諫

【原文】

莊公奮乎勇力，不顧于行。（義）〔尚〕勇力之士，無忌于國，貴（賤）〔戚〕不薦善，逼邇不引過，故晏子見公。公曰：“古者亦有徒以勇力立于世者乎？”晏子對曰：“嬰聞之，輕死以行禮謂之勇，誅暴不避強謂之力。故勇力之立也，以行其禮義也。湯、武用兵而不為逆，并國而不為貪，仁義之理也。誅暴不避強，替罪不避眾，勇力之行也。古之為勇力者，行禮義也；今上無仁義之理，下無替罪誅暴之行，而徒以勇力立于世，則諸侯行之以國危，匹夫行之以家殘。昔夏之衰也，有推侈、大戲；殷之衰也，有費仲、惡來，足走千里，手裂兕虎，任之以力，凌轢天下，威戮無罪，崇尚勇力，不顧義理，是以桀、紂以滅，殷、夏以衰。今公自奮乎勇力，不顧乎行，（義）〔尚〕勇力之士，無忌于國，身立威強，行本淫暴，貴戚不薦善，逼邇不引過，反圣王之德，而循滅君之行，用此存者，嬰未聞有也。”

【今譯】

齊莊公崇尚勇力，不在乎德行。崇尚勇猛有力的人，在國內肆無忌憚，王室親族不能進獻忠言，親近之臣也不敢指出（莊公的）過失，于是晏子來見莊公。莊公問道：“古時候也有僅憑勇力便能立于世間的人嗎？”晏子回答說：“我聽說，為了遵行禮法而不惜性命叫作‘勇’，誅除兇暴而不畏強悍叫作‘力’。所以‘勇’和‘力’的存在，就是為了推行禮義。商湯和周武王發動戰爭而不被稱作叛逆，兼并國家也不被視為貪婪，道理就在于他們的做法符合仁義的要求。誅除兇暴不畏強悍，消滅罪惡不怕（對方）人多，這才是勇猛有力的行為。古時候勇猛有力的人，遵行禮義；現在君主在上不推行仁義的道理，臣民在下也沒有消滅罪惡、誅除兇暴的行為，（這時候）如果僅靠勇力立于世間，那么諸侯這樣做就會國危，百姓這樣做就會家破。昔日夏朝衰敗的時候，有推侈、大戲；商朝衰敗的時候，有費仲、惡來，（這些人都是）足可行千里，手可撕兕虎的勇力之士，（君主）因為勇力而任用他們，他們就會恃勇而欺凌天下百姓，屠戮無罪之人。推崇尊尚勇力，不顧仁義之禮，這就是夏桀滅亡、商紂衰敗的道理。現在您奮揚勇力，不在乎德行，崇尚勇猛有力之人，在國內肆無忌憚，（他們）立身朝野威權日盛，行為卻荒淫殘暴，王室親族不能進獻忠言，親近之臣也不敢指出（您的）過失，（您）一反圣王的德政而因循亡國之君的行為，靠這種行為保全國家的，我從來沒有聽說過。”

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]

---

注釋

[1]Duke Zhuang of Qi 齊莊公 succeeded Duke Ling 靈公 (r. 581–554 BCE) and reigned in Qi 齊 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 義 (SBCK,I/5a4) delete 尚 (JS,2/3).

[3]According to the Zuozhuan 左傳,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 義 (SBCK,I/5b7-8) delete 尚 (JS,2/3).

[5]吾聞,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 成湯,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 大戲,or 大犧,were in the service of King Jie 桀 of the Xia. See also Mozi 墨子,8.3/54/15.

[11]Fei Zhong 費仲 and Wu Lai 惡來 served Zhou X in 紂辛,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 紂 w ere the last tyrant kings,respectively,of the X ia and Shang dynasties.

[14]Retain 義 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 禮) and “righteousness” (yi 義),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.”