| | 梁惠王下: |
齊宣王問曰：「文王之囿方七十里，有諸？」 |
| Liang Hui Wang II: |
The king Xuan of Qi asked, 'Was it so, that the park of king Wen contained seventy square li?' |
| | |
孟子對曰：「於傳有之。」 |
| |
Mencius replied, 'It is so in the records.' |
| | |
曰：「若是其大乎？」 |
| |
'Was it so large as that?' exclaimed the king. |
| | |
曰：「民猶以為小也。」 |
| |
'The people,' said Mencius, 'still looked on it as small.' |
| | |
曰：「寡人之囿方四十里，民猶以為大，何也？」 |
| |
The king added, 'My park contains only forty square li, and the people still look on it as large. How is this?' |
| | |
曰：「文王之囿方七十里，芻蕘者往焉，雉兔者往焉，與民同之。民以為小，不亦宜乎？臣始至於境，問國之大禁，然後敢入。臣聞郊關之內有囿方四十里，殺其麋鹿者如殺人之罪。則是方四十里，為阱於國中。民以為大，不亦宜乎？」 |
| |
'The park of king Wen,' was the reply, 'contained seventy square li, but the grass-cutters and fuel-gatherers had the privilege of entrance into it; so also had the catchers of pheasants and hares. He shared it with the people, and was it not with reason that they looked on it as small? When I first arrived at the borders of your kingdom, I inquired about the great prohibitory regulations, before I would venture to enter it; and I heard, that inside the barrier-gates there was a park of forty square lî, and that he who killed a deer in it, was held guilty of the same crime as if he had killed a man. Thus those forty square li are a pitfall in the middle of the kingdom. Is it not with reason that the people look upon them as large?' |
| | 公孫丑下: |
孟子之平陸。謂其大夫曰：「子之持戟之士，一日而三失伍，則去之否乎？」 |
| Gong Sun Chou II: |
Mencius having gone to Ping Lu, addressed the governor of it, saying, 'If one of your spearmen should lose his place in the ranks three times in one day, would you, Sir, put him to death or not?' |
| | |
曰：「不待三。」 |
| |
'I would not wait for three times to do so,' was the reply. |
| | |
「然則子之失伍也亦多矣。凶年饑歲，子之民，老羸轉於溝壑，壯者散而之四方者，幾千人矣。」 |
| |
Mencius said, 'Well then, you, Sir, have likewise lost your place in the ranks many times. In bad calamitous years, and years of famine, the old and feeble of your people, who have been found lying in the ditches and water-channels, and the able-bodied, who have been scattered about to the four quarters, have amounted to several thousand.' |
| | |
曰：「此非距心之所得為也。」 |
| |
The governor replied, 'That is a state of things in which it does not belong to me Ju Xin to act.' |
| | |
曰：「今有受人之牛羊而為之牧之者，則必為之求牧與芻矣。求牧與芻而不得，則反諸其人乎？抑亦立而視其死與？」 |
| |
'Here,' said Mencius, 'is a man who receives charge of the cattle and sheep of another, and undertakes to feed them for him - of course he must search for pasture-ground and grass for them. If, after searching for those, he cannot find them, will he return his charge to the owner? or will he stand by and see them die?' |
| | |
曰：「此則距心之罪也。」 |
| |
'Herein,' said the officer, 'I am guilty.' |
| | |
他日，見於王曰：「王之為都者，臣知五人焉。知其罪者，惟孔距心。為王誦之。」王曰：「此則寡人之罪也。」 |
| |
Another day, Mencius had an audience of the king, and said to him, 'Of the governors of your Majesty's cities I am acquainted with five, but the only one of them who knows his faults is Kong Ju Xin.' He then repeated the conversation to the king, who said, 'In this matter, I am the guilty one.' |
| | 離婁下: |
曾子居武城，有越寇。或曰：「寇至，盍去諸？」曰：「無寓人於我室，毀傷其薪木。」寇退，則曰：「修我牆屋，我將反。」寇退，曾子反。左右曰：「待先生，如此其忠且敬也。寇至則先去以為民望，寇退則反，殆於不可。」沈猶行曰：「是非汝所知也。昔沈猶有負芻之禍，從先生者七十人，未有與焉。」 |
| Li Lou II: |
When the philosopher Zeng dwelt in Wu Cheng, there came a band from Yue to plunder it. Someone said to him, 'The plunderers are coming - why not leave this?' Zeng on this left the city, saying to the man in charge of the house, 'Do not lodge any persons in my house, lest they break and injure the plants and trees.' When the plunderers withdrew, he sent word to him, saying, 'Repair the walls of my house. I am about to return.' When the plunderers retired, the philosopher Zeng returned accordingly. His disciples said, 'Since our master was treated with so much sincerity and respect, for him to be the first to go away on the arrival of the plunderers, so as to be observed by the people, and then to return on their retiring, appears to us to be improper.' Shen You Xing said, 'You do not understand this matter. Formerly, when Shen You was exposed to the outbreak of the grass-carriers, there were seventy disciples in our master's following, and none of them took part in the matter.' |
| | |
子思居於衛，有齊寇。或曰：「寇至，盍去諸？」子思曰：「如伋去，君誰與守？」 |
| |
When Zi Si was living in Wei, there came a band from Qi to plunder. Some one said to him, 'The plunderers are coming - why not leave this?' Zi Si said, 'If I go away, whom will the prince have to guard the State with?' |
| | |
孟子曰：「曾子、子思同道。曾子，師也，父兄也；子思，臣也，微也。曾子、子思易地則皆然。」 |
| |
Mencius said, 'The philosophers Zeng and Zi Si agreed in the principle of their conduct. Zeng was a teacher - in the place of a father or elder brother. Zi Si was a minister - in a meaner place. If the philosophers Zeng and Zi Si had exchanged places the one would have done what the other did.' |
| | 告子上: |
孟子曰：「富歲，子弟多賴；凶歲，子弟多暴，非天之降才爾殊也，其所以陷溺其心者然也。今夫麰麥，播種而耰之，其地同，樹之時又同，浡然而生，至於日至之時，皆熟矣。雖有不同，則地有肥磽，雨露之養，人事之不齊也。故凡同類者，舉相似也，何獨至於人而疑之？聖人與我同類者。故龍子曰：『不知足而為屨，我知其不為蕢也。』屨之相似，天下之足同也。口之於味，有同耆也。易牙先得我口之所耆者也。如使口之於味也，其性與人殊，若犬馬之與我不同類也，則天下何耆皆從易牙之於味也？至於味，天下期於易牙，是天下之口相似也惟耳亦然。至於聲，天下期於師曠，是天下之耳相似也。惟目亦然。至於子都，天下莫不知其姣也。不知子都之姣者，無目者也。故曰：口之於味也，有同耆焉；耳之於聲也，有同聽焉；目之於色也，有同美焉。至於心，獨無所同然乎？心之所同然者何也？謂理也，義也。聖人先得我心之所同然耳。故理義之悅我心，猶芻豢之悅我口。」 |
| Gaozi I: |
Mencius said, 'In good years the children of the people are most of them good, while in bad years the most of them abandon themselves to evil. It is not owing to any difference of their natural powers conferred by Heaven that they are thus different. The abandonment is owing to the circumstances through which they allow their minds to be ensnared and drowned in evil. There now is barley. Let it be sown and covered up; the ground being the same, and the time of sowing likewise the same, it grows rapidly up, and, when the full time is come, it is all found to be ripe. Although there may be inequalities of produce, that is owing to the difference of the soil, as rich or poor, to the unequal nourishment afforded by the rains and dews, and to the different ways in which man has performed his business in reference to it. Thus all things which are the same in kind are like to one another; why should we doubt in regard to man, as if he were a solitary exception to this? The sage and we are the same in kind. In accordance with this the scholar Long said, "If a man make hempen sandals without knowing the size of people's feet, yet I know that he will not make them like baskets." Sandals are all like one another, because all men's feet are like one another. So with the mouth and flavours - all mouths have the same relishes. Yi Ya only apprehended before me what my mouth relishes. Suppose that his mouth in its relish for flavours differed from that of other men, as is the case with dogs or horses which are not the same in kind with us, why should all men be found following Yi Ya in their relishes? In the matter of tastes all the people model themselves after Yi Ya; that is, the mouths of all men are like one another. And so also it is with the ear. In the matter of sounds, the whole people model themselves after the music-master Kuang; that is, the ears of all men are like one another. And so also it is with the eye. In the case of Zi Du, there is no man but would recognise that he was beautiful. Any one who would not recognise the beauty of Zi Du must have no eyes. Therefore I say, Men's mouths agree in having the same relishes; their ears agree in enjoying the same sounds; their eyes agree in recognising the same beauty - shall their minds alone be without that which the similarly approve? What is it then of which they similarly approve? It is, I say, the principles of our nature, and the determinations of righteousness. The sages only apprehended before me that of which my mind approves along with other men. Therefore the principles of our nature and the determinations of righteousness are agreeable to my mind, just as the flesh of grass and grain-fed animals is agreeable to my mouth.' |
