鐔津文集 14.6.1

14.6.1

韓子議論拘且淺。 不及儒之至道可辯。 予始見其目曰。 原道徐視。 其所謂仁與義為定名。 道與德為虛位。 考其意。 正以仁義人事必有。 乃曰。 仁與義為定名。 道德本無緣仁處致爾。 迺曰。 道與德為虛位。 此說特韓子思之不精也。 夫緣仁義而致道德。 苟非仁義自無道德焉。 得其虛位果有仁義。 以由以足道德。 豈為虛耶。 道德既為虛位。 是道不可原也。 何必曰原道。 舜典曰。 敬敷五教。 蓋仁義五常之謂也。 韓子果專仁義。 目其書曰原教可也。 是亦韓子之不知考經也。 其曰博愛之謂仁。 行而宜之之謂義。 由是而之焉之謂道。 足於己無待於外之謂德。 夫道德仁義四者。 迺聖人立教之大端也。 其先後次第有義有理。 安可改易。 雖道德之小者。 如道謂才藝。 德謂行善。 亦道德處其先。 彼曰仁義之道者。 彼且散說。 取其語便道或次下耳。 自古未始有四者連出而道德處其後也。 曲禮曰。 道德仁義非禮不成。 說卦曰。 和順道德而理於義。 論語曰。 志於道據於德。 依於仁游於義。 禮運曰。 義者藝之分仁之節也。 協於藝講於仁。 得之者強。 此明游於義者乃聖人用義之深旨耳。 楊子曰。 道以導之。 德以得之。 仁以人之。 義以宜之。 老子雖儒者不取其稱。 儒亦曰。 道而後德。 德而後仁。 仁而後義。 道先開通。 釋曰開通。 即繫辭云。 開物成務。 又曰。 通天下之志。 是也。 由開通方得其理。 故德次之。 得理為善。 以恩愛惠物。 而仁次之既仁且愛。 必裁斷合宜。 而義又次之。 道德仁義相因而有之。 其本末義理如此。 聖人為經定其先後。 蓋存其大義耳。 今韓子戾經。 先仁義而後道德。 臆說比大開通得理。 不乃顛倒僻紆無謂邪。 然儒之道德固有其小者大者焉。 小者如曲禮別義。 一說道謂才藝德為行善在己。 是也。 大者如繫辭一陰一陽之謂道。 繼之者善也。 成之者性也。 仁者見之謂之仁。 智者見之謂之智。 百性日用而不知。 故君子之道鮮矣。 說卦曰。 昔者聖人之作易也。 將以順性命之理。 立天之道曰陰與陽。 立地之道曰柔與剛。 立人之道曰仁與義。 中庸曰。 天命之謂性。 率性之謂道。 修道之謂教。 是也。 繫辭以其在陰陽而妙之者為道。 人則稟道以成性。 仁者智者雖資道而見仁智。 遂滯執乎仁智之見。 百姓雖日用乎道。 而茫知是道。 故聖人之道顯明為昧少耳（昧或作衰）然聖人之道。 豈止乎仁義而已矣。 說卦以性命之理。 即至神之理也。 天地萬物莫不與之。 故聖人作易重卦。 順從此理。 乃立天地人三才之道。 天道資始。 則有陰有陽。 地道成形。 則有柔有剛。 人道情性。 則有仁有義。 乃資道而有之也。 中庸以循率此性。 乃謂之道。 修治此道。 乃謂之教。 教則仁義五常也。 是豈道止仁義。 而仁義之先果無道乎。 若說卦者。 若論語者。 若曲禮之別義者。 若老子楊子者。 其所謂道德。 皆此之大道也。 然是道德在禮則中庸也誠明也。 在書則洪範皇極也。 在詩則思無邪也。 在春秋則列聖大中之道也。 孔子謂曾子曰。 參乎。 吾道一以貫之。 曾子曰。 唯。 又謂子貢曰。 非也。 予一以貫之。 但曾子緣弟子問之。 而曾子以其弟子小子未足以盡道。 故以近道者諭之。 乃對之曰。 夫子之道忠恕而已矣。 曾子蓋用中庸所謂忠恕去道不遠之意也。 後儒不通。 便以忠恕遂為一貫。 誤矣。 繫辭曰。 天下之動貞夫一。 又曰。 一致而百慮。 禮運曰。 禮必本於太一。 中庸曰。 其為物不二。 其生物也不測。 以此較而例諸。 烏得以忠恕而輒為其一貫乎。 顏淵喟歎曰。 仰之而彌高。 鑽之而彌堅。 瞻之在前忽焉在後。

Master Han's arguments are narrow and shallow, falling far short of the utmost Dao of Confucianism that can be debated. When I first saw his title, 'Tracing the Dao to Its Source' (Yuandao), I examined it slowly: his assertion that humaneness and righteousness are fixed designations, whereas the Dao and virtue are empty positions. Investigating his intent, precisely because humaneness and righteousness inevitably exist in human affairs, he then said that humaneness and righteousness are fixed designations; and because the Dao and virtue inherently have no [fixed locus] but are attained by relying on humaneness, he then said that the Dao and virtue are empty positions. This explanation merely shows that Master Han's contemplation was not rigorous. Now, if one attains the Dao and virtue by relying on humaneness and righteousness, then were it not for humaneness and righteousness, there would naturally be no Dao or virtue. If one realizes that empty position, then humaneness and righteousness indeed exist; since the Dao and virtue are proceeded from and fulfilled by them, how could they be 'empty'? Since the Dao and virtue are already regarded as empty positions, this Dao cannot be traced to its source; why must he entitle it 'Tracing the Dao to Its Source'? The 'Canon of Shun' says: 'Reverently distribute the five teachings'—this refers to humaneness, righteousness, and the five constant virtues. If Master Han truly specialized exclusively in humaneness and righteousness, he should have entitled his work 'Tracing the Teachings to Their Source' (Yuanjiao), and that would have been proper. This also shows Master Han's failure to examine the classics. He said: 'Universal love is called humaneness; acting appropriately is called righteousness; proceeding from these is called the Dao; being self-sufficient without relying on the external is called virtue.' Now, the Dao, virtue, humaneness, and righteousness—these four are the great fundamentals by which the sages established their teachings. Their sequence and precedence possess appropriateness and principle; how could they be altered? Even in the minor senses of the Dao and virtue—such as the Dao meaning talents and arts, and virtue meaning performing goodness—the Dao and virtue still occupy the foremost position. When people speak of 'the dao of humaneness and righteousness,' they are merely speaking in general terms, adopting convenient phrasing where 'dao' happens to follow. From antiquity to the present, there has never been a case where these four appear in succession and yet the Dao and virtue are placed last. The 'Quli' says: 'The Dao, virtue, humaneness, and righteousness are not perfected without ritual.' The 'Shuogua' says: 'Harmonizing with and according with the Dao and virtue, and ordering through righteousness.' The Analects says: 'Set your aspiration upon the Dao, rely on virtue, lean upon humaneness, and play in the arts (yi; here glossed as righteousness).' The 'Liyun' says: 'Righteousness is the distribution of arts and the regulation of humaneness; harmonizing in arts and lecturing on humaneness, those who attain it are strong.' This clarifies that 'playing in righteousness' is indeed the profound intent of the sage in utilizing righteousness. Yangzi said: 'Guide them by the Dao; attain them by virtue; humanize them by humaneness; make them appropriate by righteousness.' Although Confucians do not adopt the assertions of Laozi, Confucians also say: 'After the Dao comes virtue; after virtue comes humaneness; after humaneness comes righteousness.' The Dao first opens and penetrates. (Explanation: 'Opening and penetrating' is just what the Xici means by 'opening up things and accomplishing tasks,' and also by 'penetrating the aspirations of the world.') Only by opening and penetrating does one obtain its principle; therefore, virtue comes next. Obtaining principle constitutes goodness, which benefits things through kindness and love; thus humaneness comes next. Once there is humaneness and love, one must exercise judgment and fit what is appropriate; thus righteousness comes next again. The Dao, virtue, humaneness, and righteousness exist by depending upon one another. Their root and branches, principle and coherence, are like this. When the sages composed the classics, they determined their sequence precisely to preserve their great meaning. Now Master Han contravenes the classics, placing humaneness and righteousness first and putting the Dao and virtue last; his conjectural words, when compared with the great opening and penetrating to attain principle, are they not upside down, perverse, circuitous, and nonsensical? However, the Dao and virtue in Confucianism certainly have their minor and major aspects. The minor aspects are as in the separate meaning in the 'Quli', where one interpretation says the Dao means talents and arts, while virtue means performing goodness within oneself; this is one such case. The major aspects are as in the Xici: 'One yin and one yang are called the Dao. That which continues it is good; that which completes it is the nature. The humane person sees it and calls it humaneness; the wise person sees it and calls it wisdom. The common people use it daily without knowing it; hence the Dao of the noble person is rare.' The 'Shuogua' says: 'In ancient times, when the sages made the Changes, they intended thereby to accord with the principle of the nature and destiny. They established the Dao of Heaven, called yin and yang; they established the Dao of Earth, called the soft and the firm; they established the Dao of Man, called humaneness and righteousness.' The Zhongyong says: 'What Heaven imparts is called the nature; following the nature is called the Dao; cultivating the Dao is called teaching.' This is another such case. The Xici considers that which is subtle within yin and yang to be the Dao. Humans receive the Dao to complete their nature. Although the humane and the wise rely on the Dao to perceive humaneness and wisdom, they end up stagnating and clinging to the perspectives of humaneness and wisdom. Although the common people use the Dao daily, they are completely ignorant that it is the Dao. Therefore, the sagely Dao being manifest and bright becomes obscure and rare (some texts have 'decayed' for 'obscure'). Yet how could the Dao of the sages be restricted merely to humaneness and righteousness? The 'Shuogua' regards the principle of nature and destiny as the most spiritual principle. Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things all partake in it. Therefore, when the sages composed the Changes and doubled the hexagrams, they followed this principle, thereby establishing the Dao of the three powers of Heaven, Earth, and Man. The Dao of Heaven provides the beginning, so there are yin and yang; the Dao of Earth completes form, so there are the soft and the firm; the Dao of Man embodies feelings and nature, so there are humaneness and righteousness. These all exist by relying on the Dao. The Zhongyong considers following this nature to be called the Dao, and cultivating this Dao to be called teaching. Teaching is humaneness, righteousness, and the five constant virtues. How could the Dao be confined to humaneness and righteousness, and could there truly be no Dao prior to humaneness and righteousness? Cases like the 'Shuogua', the Analects, the alternative meaning in the 'Quli', or Laozi and Yangzi—what they call the Dao and virtue are all this Great Dao. Yet this Dao and virtue: in the Rites, it is the Mean (Zhongyong) and sincerity and brightness; in the Classic of Documents, it is the Grand Plan (Hongfan) and the August Ultimate (Huangji); in the Classic of Poetry, it is 'having no depravity in thoughts'; in the Spring and Autumn Annals, it is the Great Middle Way of the succession of sages. Confucius said to Zengzi: 'Shen! My Dao is bound together by a single thread.' Zengzi said: 'Yes.' He also said to Zigong: 'No, I bind it together with a single thread.' But because disciples asked about it, and Zengzi considered those junior disciples not yet capable of fully fathoming the Dao, he therefore instructed them with what was near to the Dao, answering them: 'The Master's Dao is loyalty and reciprocity (zhong and shu), and nothing more.' Zengzi was probably using the idea from the Zhongyong that 'loyalty and reciprocity are not far from the Dao.' Later Confucians failed to comprehend this, and directly took loyalty and reciprocity to be the single thread; this is an error! The Xici says: 'The movements of the world are steadfast in unity.' It also says: 'They arrive at the same destination through a hundred different deliberations.' The 'Liyun' says: 'Ritual must be rooted in the Great Unity.' The Zhongyong says: 'Its existence as a thing is unfragmented; its generation of things is unfathomable.' Comparing and exemplifying through these, how could one arbitrarily take loyalty and reciprocity to be that single thread? Yan Yuan sighed deeply: 'I look up to it and it grows higher; I bore into it and it grows harder; I behold it in front of me, and suddenly it is behind me.'