鐔津文集 15.4

15.4

始視韓子原道。止以仁義為道德。謂韓子如此當絕不識儒之道德也。其後見彼顏子不貳過論曰。聖人抱誠明之正性根中庸之正德。又引中庸曰。自誠明謂之性。自明誠謂之教。又曰。皆謂不能無生於其心而不暴之於外。考之於聖之道差為過耳。夫中庸誠明者。真聖賢道德仁義百行之根源也。如此韓子固亦知有中庸誠明之道德。原道何故棄之而不言也。謂人不足與知此道耶。謂人固不可忽歟。或將匿善而不盡言耶。君子固不可匿善也。是必韓子徒。見其誠明中庸之語。而心未通其理乎。然理最為幾微。精審而不易至也。七十二子之徒。孔子於此獨與顏淵。乃曰。其殆庶幾乎。而顏子至之。故其言鮮過。今韓子推本乎聖人之道德仁義與人何尚。其文字前無後有自相反亂。是可謂至其至乎。心不達誠明中庸至理。雖益著書可傳以為法乎。

When I first examined Master Han's *Yuan dao* ("Inquiry into the Way"), he merely took humaneness and righteousness as the Way and virtue, so I thought that Master Han must have been utterly ignorant of the Confucian Way and virtue. Later, I saw his *Essay on Yanzi Not Repeating a Fault*, which says: "The sage embraces the correct nature of sincerity and clarity, and roots himself in the correct virtue of the Mean." He also cited the *Zhongyong*: "From sincerity arises clarity, which is called nature; from clarity arises sincerity, which is called education." He further said: "All these mean that faults cannot but arise in the mind, yet they are not manifested externally; evaluated by the Way of the sage, a slight deviation is called an error." Now, the Mean, sincerity, and clarity are truly the root and source of the sages' and worthies' Way, virtue, humaneness, righteousness, and myriad practices. If so, Master Han certainly also knew that there are the Way and virtue of the Mean, sincerity, and clarity. Why then did *Yuan dao* discard them and speak nothing of them? Did he consider people unfit to be taught this Way? Or did he consider that people must not be neglected? Or was he about to conceal what is good and not speak exhaustively? A gentleman surely must not conceal the good. It must be that Master Han merely saw the words "sincerity," "clarity," and "Mean," yet his mind had not penetrated their principle. However, principle is most subtle; it is refined and precise, and not easily attained. Among the seventy-two disciples, Confucius conceded this to Yan Yuan alone, saying: "He is nearly there, is he not?" Yanzi attained it, so his words rarely erred. Now, when Master Han traces the root of the sages' Way, virtue, humaneness, and righteousness, what does he esteem above others? His writings have it absent earlier and present later, contradicting and throwing themselves into confusion. Can this be called reaching the utmost? If his mind did not penetrate the ultimate principle of sincerity, clarity, and the Mean, even if he wrote more books, could they be transmitted as a standard?