鐔津文集 6.12

6.12

辯者曰。是世文隆天下其將成乎。其隆者文言也。而文言烏足以驗乎天下成邪。何文其可驗乎。曰必也人文也。易曰。觀乎人文而天下化成。斯之謂也。曰何謂人文乎。曰文武王之道也。文武相濟以賁人道。故曰人文也。文者德也。武者刑也。德以致大業。刑以扶盛德。德其至也。刑其次也。會文武者所以以文總之。故曰人文也。夫聖人以盛德教天下。而天下保其德也。示大刑所以約之也。既正則停刑而達德也。德也者待刑而輔之也。刑也者待德而忘之也（忘或司字）是故文武皆得則其政和而其民安。刑德皆敝則其政失而其民散。此君子所以見天下之成敗也。吾觀周文。文武至之也。宣其甚刑而平其德衰也。吾觀漢文。高文僅至也。惠其減德武其多兵也。吾觀唐文。文皇大正而小繆也。曰三代之道有質焉有文焉。曰文而亡質。王道其可盡乎。故曰質文者聖人之所以適變而救敝也。質文本正而末敝也。質如不敝何以文為。文如不正何以質為。故吾所謂文者。蓋言文治之正也。孔子曰。虞夏之質。殷周之文至矣。曰言文將無用乎。曰孰不用也。人文至焉。言文次焉。以言文而驗其人。人其廋哉。以人文而驗其世。世其廋哉。故人文者天下之道之所存也。言文者聖賢之志之所寓也。先天下而後聖賢者。聖賢發己矣。天下至公也。故公者至而己者次也。孰曰言文其無用乎。

The disputant said: "In this age, culture and writing flourish; will the world soon reach completion? What flourishes is rhetorical eloquence, but how can rhetorical eloquence suffice to verify the world's completion? What kind of culture can verify it?" I say: It must be the culture of humanity. The Book of Changes says: "Observe human culture to transform and complete the world." This is what it means. He asked: "What is meant by the culture of humanity?" I said: It is the Way of Kings Wen and Wu. Wen (civility) and Wu (martial might) aid each other to adorn the human way; hence it is called human culture. Civility is virtue; martial might is penal law. Virtue achieves the great enterprise; penal law supports abundant virtue. Virtue is supreme; penal law is secondary. Uniting civility and martial might, one subsumes them under "culture"; hence it is called human culture. The sage instructs the world through abundant virtue, and the world preserves its virtue. Displaying severe penal law is the means to restrain them. Once [the world] is rectified, penal law is suspended and virtue is extended. Virtue depends upon penal law to support it; penal law depends upon virtue to be forgotten. Therefore, when both civility and martial might are attained, governance is harmonious and the people are secure. When penal law and virtue both decline, governance is lost and the people disperse. This is how the noble person perceives the success and failure of the world. I observe the culture of the Zhou: Wen and Wu brought it to perfection; Xuan relied excessively on penal law, and under Ping, its virtue declined. I observe the culture of the Han: Gaozu and Wendi barely attained it; Huidi diminished virtue, and Wudi waged many military campaigns. I observe the culture of the Tang: Taizong had great correctness alongside minor errors. He said: "The Way of the Three Dynasties possessed substance and possessed culture. If there is culture without substance, can the Kingly Way be complete?" Therefore it is said: substance and culture are how the sage adapts to changes and remedies defects. Substance and culture are fundamentally upright, but their extremities decline. If substance did not decline, what need would there be for culture? If culture were not rectified, what need would there be for substance? Thus what I call culture refers to the correctness of civil governance. Confucius said: "The substance of Yu and Xia, and the culture of Yin and Zhou were consummate." He asked: "Is literary rhetoric then to be of no use?" I said: "Who says it is not used? Human culture is supreme; literary rhetoric is secondary. If you examine a person through literary rhetoric, how can that person hide? If you examine an era through human culture, how can that era hide? Therefore, human culture is where the Way of the world resides; literary rhetoric is where the aspirations of sages and worthies lodge. Setting the world first and sages and worthies second is because sages and worthies manifest themselves, while the world is supremely public. Therefore what is public is supreme, and what is personal is secondary. Who could say that literary rhetoric has no use?"