鐔津文集 6.6

6.6

世所謂讓者宜有輕重。而學者混一而論之。於禮無別則後世何以取法乎。若夫天子以其天下讓諸侯。以其國讓卿大夫。以爵位讓士庶。以名利讓。是皆有所以而讓之者也。其所以讓之得其正。則其禮可取也。所以讓之不得其正則其禮何所取乎。夫讓也有以時而讓者。有以義而讓者。有以名而讓者。有以勢而讓者。有以苟而讓者。以時讓者仁。以義讓者勸。以名讓者矯。以勢讓者窮。以苟讓者亂。魯之隱公其苟讓者也。漢之孝平其勢讓者也。吳季札曹子臧其名讓者也。伯夷其義讓者也。堯舜其時讓者也。堯之時大同其時可讓。故遜于賢而天下戴其仁也。故曰以時讓者。仁禹之世浸異其時。不可讓于人。故其子承之而天下亦戴其仁也。太伯伯夷以賢相推而其義可讓也。讓之足以勸百世。故曰以義讓者勸。季札子臧當列國相爭而父子交殘。乃以讓名奮所以矯激其時也。故曰以名讓者矯。漢之孝平迫于強臣之勢而其身窮因殆不能振。遂以其天下讓。故曰以勢讓者窮。魯之隱公不以正讓非其人而苟去之卒至乎淫亂。故曰以苟讓者亂。孟子曰。天與賢則與賢。天與子則與子。荀子曰。堯舜禪讓（或作擅字。依荀子文也。此乃專擅意也。在理當作擅。與禪契）是不然也。天子勢位至尊無敵於天下者。夫有誰與讓矣。楊子曰。允哲堯擅舜之重。則不輕於由矣。韓子曰。堯舜之傳賢也。欲天下得所也。然四子皆不達乎聖賢之時也。其言孰為詳乎。如堯非其時則豈肯以天下讓于他人乎。使禹得堯之時而天下豈及其子乎。所謂堯舜禹其奮於萬世之上者。正以其時而為之者也。堯舜禹其聖之時者也。嗚呼後世者其人自私甚乎。禹之時也而傳授者不能本。禹曰吾慕堯舜為之禪讓。是亦妄矣。其知時乎。

What the world calls ‘yielding’ ought to have distinctions of degree and circumstance, yet scholars lump them together and treat them as one. If there is no differentiation within ritual propriety, how can later generations take them as a model? When the Son of Heaven yields the world, the feudal lords yield their states, the ministers and grandees yield their ranks and emoluments, and the scholars and commoners yield fame and profit, these all have that whereby they yield. If that whereby they yield attains what is correct, then their ritual propriety can be adopted; if that whereby they yield fails to attain what is correct, what is there in their ritual propriety to adopt? Now, among yieldings: there are those who yield according to the times; there are those who yield out of righteousness; there are those who yield for the sake of fame; there are those who yield out of forced circumstance; and there are those who yield carelessly. Those who yield according to the times are benevolent; those who yield out of righteousness encourage [others]; those who yield for fame make a display of rectitude; those who yield out of forced circumstance are at their wit's end; and those who yield carelessly bring about disorder. Duke Yin of Lu yielded carelessly; Emperor Xiaoping of the Han yielded out of forced circumstance; Jizha of Wu and Zicang of Cao yielded for fame; Boyi yielded out of righteousness; and Yao and Shun yielded according to the times. In the time of Yao, there was Great Concord; the times permitted yielding, so he yielded to the worthy, and the world revered his benevolence. Thus it is said: ‘Those who yield according to the times are benevolent.’ By the era of Yu, the times had gradually changed; the world could not be yielded to another, so his son succeeded him, and the world likewise revered his benevolence. Taibo and Boyi deferred to one another on account of worthiness, and their righteousness permitted yielding; their yielding was sufficient to encourage a hundred generations. Thus it is said: ‘Those who yield out of righteousness encourage [others].’ When Jizha and Zicang lived, the feudal states contended with one another, and fathers and sons mutually slaughtered each other; thereupon they exerted themselves to yield for the sake of fame, in order to rectify and arouse their times. Thus it is said: ‘Those who yield for fame make a display of rectitude.’ Emperor Xiaoping of the Han was coerced by the power of an overbearing minister; his person was at an impasse and in such danger that he could not rally, so he yielded the world. Thus it is said: ‘Those who yield out of forced circumstance are at their wit's end.’ Duke Yin of Lu did not yield in a proper manner, yielded to the wrong person, and carelessly gave it up, ultimately leading to depravity and disorder. Thus it is said: ‘Those who yield carelessly bring about disorder.’ Mencius said: ‘If Heaven gives it to the worthy, then give it to the worthy; if Heaven gives it to the son, then give it to the son.’ Xunzi said: ‘Yao and Shun's abdication and yielding (some texts have the character shan [meaning usurp/monopolize], following Xunzi's text; this carries the meaning of monopolizing, and in reason it should be shan [monopolize], which tallies with shan [abdication]) is not so. The power and position of the Son of Heaven is supremely honored and without peer in the world; to whom, then, could he yield?’ Yangzi said: ‘The truly wise Yao monopolized the weight of Shun, so he did not treat Xu You lightly.’ Hanzi said: ‘Yao and Shun transmitting [the throne] to the worthy was because they desired the world to find its proper place.’ However, none of these four masters comprehended the times of the sages and worthies. Whose words can be considered complete? If Yao had not met with such times, how could he have been willing to yield the world to another? Had Yu met with the times of Yao, how would the world have passed to his son? When Yao, Shun, and Yu stood preeminent above ten thousand generations, it was precisely because they acted according to the times. Yao, Shun, and Yu were those who were timely among the sages. Alas, how deeply selfish are the people of later generations! Living in the times of Yu, those who transmitted [the throne] could not base themselves on Yu and said: ‘I admire Yao and Shun, and shall abdicate and yield for them.’ This, too, is delusion. How could they know the times?