- 论语英译及评注:汉、英
- (美)金安平译注
- 6631字
- 2021-03-23 22:16:34
为政第二
2.1 子曰:“为政以德,譬如北辰,居其所而众星共之。”
The Master said, “To rule by virtue is like the way the North Star rules, standing in its place with all the other stars revolving around it and paying court to it.”
“政”,即“正”,意思是“正其身”。孔子在12.17中说:“子帅以正,孰敢不正?”清代学者宋翔凤写道,一个真正的君王“上承天之所为”,其权威来自德。但君王不是天,而是人。一个人即便生而有仁,也要努力“下以正其所为”来养成德。许多学者遵循汉代经学家包咸的解释,认为这种为政之道相当于“无为”而治。另一些学者的观点是,“为政以德”是“有为”,只是“有为如无为也”。因此,即便是舜这样“无为而治”的贤君,也要“恭己正南面而已”。
2.2 子曰:“《诗》三百,一言以蔽之,曰‘思无邪’。”
The Master said,“The three hundred poems from the Book of Poetry could be summed up in a single phrase:“They never swerve from the path [思无邪].”
孔子所言“思无邪”引自《诗经》第297篇《鲁颂·駉》。诗中描绘了在野外驱驾马群的动作——虽然“以车彭彭/以车/以车绎绎/以车祛祛”,但“思无邪”。一些学者认为“思无邪”是“志无虚邪”的意思,在我看来,这种观点不仅没有呼应原诗,还丢失了孔子学说中很重要的一点:人的天性充满活力,在人生之路上疾驰时,也需要鞭策和驾驭。《论语》3.20中,孔子借由对爱情诗《关雎》的解读,阐述了“思无邪”的观点。公元前三世纪的儒家荀子提出相似的观点,他说:“《国风》之好色也,《传》曰:‘盈其欲而不愆其止。’”
2.3 子曰:“道之以政,齐之以刑,民免而无耻。道之以德,齐之以礼,有耻且格。”
The Master said, “If you guide the people with ordinances and statutes and keep them in line with [threats of ] punishment, they will try to stay out of trouble but will have no sense of shame. If you guide them with exemplary virtue [德] and keep them in line with the practice of the rites [ 礼 ], they will have a sense of shame and will know to reform themselves.”
2.3延伸自2.1,但此处的君王不像北辰那样仅居于一处,以德为政:对于人民,他还要“齐之以礼”。在孔子眼中,西周的封建分封制与理想政治极为接近。周天子凭借既有的权力分封诸侯,为初肇的王朝开辟新的封地,治国的基础是君王的道德及其与诸侯间的信任。礼乐教化进一步巩固国家,因此无须繁琐的律法就可以使民“齐之”。
2.4 子曰:“吾十有五而志于学,三十而立,四十而不惑,五十而知天命,六十而耳顺,七十而从心所欲不逾矩。”
The Master said, “At fifteen, I set my heart on learning. At thirty, I found my balance through the rites. At forty, I was free from doubts [about myself ]. At fifty, I understood what Heaven intended me to do. At sixty, I was attuned to what I heard. At seventy, I followed what my heart desired without overstepping the line.”
这是孔子自述其精神之所至,从志于学开始,终至从心所欲之境。在此历程中,他通过学礼而达到自立,进而放下他对自身可能存在的怀疑,并理解了天命。因此,当他最后全然从心所欲时,也可以“思无邪”。正如无为是治国之道的极致,这段话也揭示了道德的最高境界。
2.5 孟懿子问孝。子曰:“无违。”樊迟御,子告之曰:“孟孙问孝于我,我对曰,无违。”樊迟曰:“何谓也?”子曰:“生,事之以礼。死,葬之以礼,祭之以礼。”
Meng Yizi asked about being filial. The Master responded, “Do not abandon [无违][the rites].”
When Fan Chi was driving the chariot, the Master told him about this conversation, saying, “Mengsun asked me about filiality, and I replied, ‘Do not abandon [the rites].’”
Fan Chi asked, “What did you mean by that? ”
The Master said, “When your parents are alive, observe the rites in serving them; when they die, observe the rites in burying them; observe the rites in sacrificing to them.”
孟懿子是鲁国三桓之一孟孙氏的后人,其先祖公子庆父是鲁庄公的兄弟。孟懿子和孔子的关系难以遽定。一些学者认为他是孔子的弟子,另一些则认为他是孔子的政敌,挫败了孔子推翻鲁国三桓的计划,间接导致他周游列国。樊迟是孔子较年轻的弟子,以勇武知名的战士。《左传》记载,公元前484年,孔子结束周游回到家乡前不久,樊迟和另一个弟子冉求率领鲁军战胜齐军。
“无违”一词有点问题,若是命令,则缺少对象;放在孟懿子提问的语境,其含义可能是“无违其父母之命”,但这显然不是孔子的原意。孔子对樊迟所说的“孝”是指:对父母“事生”“葬死”“追祭”时,不可违礼。在之后的2.6、2.7、2.8三章中,可以更清晰和具体地认识礼和孝的关系。
2.6 孟武伯问孝。子曰:“父母唯其疾之忧。”
Meng Wubo asked about being filial. The Master said, “Give your parents no cause for worry other than your illness.”
孟武伯是2.5中提到的孟懿子的儿子。对此句的解读,我采取一世纪的经学家马融之说:“孝子不妄为非,惟有疾病然后使父母忧耳。”东汉王充、高诱则提出不同的解释,认为“人子忧父母之疾为孝”。这两种解读都有道理,但马融诠释的“孝”较难理解,因此更为人关注。
2.7 子游问孝。子曰:“今之孝者,是谓能养。至于犬马,皆能有养。不敬,何以别乎?”
Ziyou asked about being filial. The Master said, “Nowadays this is taken to mean being able to feed your parents. But dogs and horses can do as much. If you are not respectful, how are you different? ”
子游是孔子较年轻的一位弟子。他出现在《论语》卷十九中,这表明他可能是《论语》的编纂者之一。孔子曾评价说“文学:子游、子夏”,但从19.12可以看出,孔子殁后,两人产生分歧。子游批评子夏的教学忽略本原,仅仅着重于旁枝末节。子夏则认为子游未分清楚传授学问的先后主次。
包咸指出,此章第三句的意思可能是“犬以守御,马以代劳,皆养人者”,即犬马也能养人,也可能是犬马也得人之养。两种解读都合理,不过大多数注疏都遵循第一种解释(也是我的解读),而朱熹评注和大多数英文翻译都参照第二种。伯顿·华兹生(Burton Watson)这样阐释:“But we do as much for dogs and horses as well. If there is no reverence, how is it any different? ”
2.8 子夏问孝。子曰:“色难。有事,弟子服其劳。有酒食,先生馔。曾是以为孝乎?”
Zixia asked about being filial. The Master said, “The difficult part is the facial expression. As for the youngsters taking on the burden when there is work to be done and the older ones being served first when there is food and wine, can this be called filial conduct? ”
汉代经学家包咸认为“色”代表父母脸上的神色——人子时刻留意父母的神色、观察其悦和不悦、体会其意愿,是件难事。另一位汉代学者郑玄则认为“色”即人子的神色——侍奉父母时,时常保持和颜悦色,只有真正的孝子才能做到。
2.9子曰:“吾与回言终日,不违,如愚。退而省其私,亦足以发,回也不愚。”
The Master said, “I can speak to Hui all day, and he does not disagree with me or question what I said. Thus it seems as though he were stupid. But afterward, when I observe what he does on his own, I realize that he is able to give full play to what he has learned. Hui is not stupid at all.”
回,就是颜回,孔子最喜爱的弟子。他安静、谦逊,就连孔子一开始都疑心他是不是迟钝不善思考。但当孔子深入体察后,他发现颜回倾向于“默而识之”,尔后私下实践所学。在9.11中,颜回曾感叹,即便有夫子的教导和鼓励,对知识的追寻仍然何其困难。
2.10 子曰:“视其所以,观其所由,察其所安。人焉廋哉?人焉廋哉?”
The Master said, “Observe [ 视 ] what a person does. Look into [观] what he has done [由]. Consider [察] where he feels at home. How then can he hide his character? ”
尽管孔子很少对他人遽下论断,他仍认为了解一个人的本质是可能且有益的。他还鼓励弟子们省察自己(正如孔子省察自身),将自己的长处同了解的人加以比较。
传统注疏指出了“视”和“观”的区别,刘宝楠还提出“察”在《说文》中的含义是“覆审也”。这些注疏都同意“由”字涉及过去的经历或“前日所行事”。
2.11 子曰:“温故而知新,可以为师矣。”
The Master said, “A person is worthy of being a teacher if he is able to gain new insights from chewing over what he already knew.”
“温故”的字面含义是“保持对已知事情的热度”。“可以为师”,则指学习新知时还能牢记旧学的人,或温习已有学问时还能开悟新意的人。
2.12 子曰:“君子不器。”
The Master said, “The gentleman [ 君子 ] is not a vessel [ 器 ].”
君子精神宽广,心智敏锐,可以解决不同的问题,而且“无所不施”,因此不是仅作专门用途的“器”。大多数注疏都这样诠释。十八世纪的思想史家章学诚则从另一角度理解“器”的含义。章学诚说,孔子的每一位弟子都从老师那里习得一些东西,并放入器中;弟子想要传授给自己学生的,就是放在器中的事物。但这仅代表对孔子学说的一种具体解读,如果其他弟子不赞同这种解读,就会发生纷争,甚至延及后世。章学诚引19.3中子张和子夏的弟子的纷歧作为早先的例子,又引十二世纪朱熹学派和陆象山学派之间的门户之争作为其后的例子。然而君子不应这样:他欢迎激烈的辩论,且一开始就不会将自己视作器——有限知识的容器。
2.13 子贡问君子。子曰:“先行其言,而后从之。”
Zigong asked about the gentleman. The Master said, “He first puts his words into action. He then lets his words follow his action.”
一些学者认为,句读不同,解读也不同:“先行,其言而后从之。”无论哪一种解读,孔子的言论在《礼记》中都有很好的诠释:“故君子寡言,而行以成其信,则民不得大其美而小其恶。”
2.14 子曰:“君子周而不比,小人比而不周。”
Confucius said , “ The gentleman [君子 ] is fair-minded and generous; he is not partisan or divisive. A petty man [ 小人 ] is partisan and divisive; he is not fair-minded or generous.”
这里首次将“小人”一词作为“君子”的对立面。刘宝楠指出,“小人”可能是“微贱之人”或“无德之人”,此处孔子的意思是第二种。多数注疏认为君子能“亲爱人”,因为他的行为“主忠信”。小人则“利己”,且“引党以封己”,不利于公众利益。2.14、2.12及2.13为我们描绘出君子的基本特征:宽厚公正;言行忠信;且不“器”。
2 .15 子曰:“学而不思则罔,思而不学则殆。”
The Master said, “If you learn but do not think, you will be dazed. If you think but do not learn, you will be in danger.”
刘宝楠按照两位儒家先哲孟子和荀子的思想解读第一句话。《孟子·告子上》第15节:“心之官则思,思则得之,不思则不得也。”荀子在《劝学》中写道:“君子之学也,入乎耳,箸乎心,布乎四体,形乎动静。端而言,蝡而动,一可以为法则。小人之学也,入乎耳,出乎口;口耳之间则四寸耳,曷足以美七尺之躯哉?”
对第二句话的解读,刘宝楠引述孔子的原话:“吾尝终日不食,终夜不寝,以思,无益,不如学也。”
2.16 子曰:“攻乎异端,斯害也已。”
The Master said, “To pursue strange theories or to get sidetracked in your studies can only bring harm.”
此处孔子的话不易理解,因为“异端”一词在公元前四世纪之后就指“他技”/“小道”。孟子视杨朱和墨翟的学说为邪说。宋儒也将佛教和道教视作异端。但若这样解读2.16,就有颠倒时代的问题了。在魏代学者何晏看来,孔子并不认为求学之道只有一种途径。何晏的解释是“善道有统,殊途而同归。异端,不同归者也”。其他的评注指出,19.4中子夏有言,认为“异端”的意思可能是“小道”,亦有其可观之处,但会让人在学问上偏离正道或停滞不前。“攻”字也需商榷。“攻”的意思可以是“攻伐”或“攻读、研习”。将“攻”理解为“攻伐”的人这样解读:“谓攻其异端,使吾道明,则异端之害人者自止。”但另一些学者,譬如焦循就认为恰好相反:“盖异端者各为一端,彼此互异,惟执持不能通则悖,悖则害矣。”
2.17 子曰:“由!诲女知之乎!知之为知之,不知为不知,是知也。”
The Master said, “You, do you know what I have been trying to teach you? To say that you know something when you know it and to say that you do not know something when you do not know it——this is true knowing [ 知 ].”
对第一句话的不同理解有“You, shall I tell you what it means to know something? ”,以及“You, pay close attention to what I am going to teach you.”由,即子路,在孔子离开鲁国前,他是孔子的弟子和政治盟友。子路仅比孔子小九岁,以勇敢和忠诚著称。但他容易生气,行事冲动。孔子在这里的教导理应是针对他而言。荀子在《子道》一文中对2.17加以阐发,而在《儒效》中的解释则更为深刻。谈到“雅儒”——有教养而且深知礼节的人——荀子说,“知之曰知之,不知曰不知,内不自以诬,外不自以欺”。有关2.17中孔子对子路的教导,荀子认为,子路除了要诚实面对自己所知道的,还要确定那些自认为知道的并非虚幻。
2.18子张学干禄。子曰:“多闻阙疑,慎言其余,则寡尤。多见阙殆,慎行其余,则寡悔。言寡尤,行寡悔,禄在其中矣。”
Zizhang was studying with the hope of obtaining an official position. The Master said, “Use your ears well and widely, and leave out what is suspect; speak with caution about the rest, and you will make few mistakes. Use your eyes well and widely, and stay away from potential perils; act with caution even after the perils are kept at bay, and you will have few regrets. To make few mistakes in your speech and to have few regrets in your action——these are the keys to securing a career as a salaried official.”
子张机敏有口才,是年轻弟子中反应最敏捷的。他的同门认为他自大,即便如此,也承认子张“难能也”。子张会提出犀利的问题。事实上,孔子关于人性和道德修养最精辟的一些见解,都出自他和子张的对话。此处的论点似乎更为实际:子张想要做官,寻求建议,孔子教给他一些专业的窍门。然而几个世纪以来,学者们喜欢为孔子的回答添上道德色彩。比如郑玄就说,“言行如此,虽不得禄,亦同得禄之道”。刘宝楠也引郑玄的评注:“古者乡举里选之法,皆择士之有贤行学业而以举而用之,故寡尤寡悔即是得禄之道。”但春秋时期推举制基本被废止。贵族世家独占政府机构。有才能的人隐居起来,大多数绝缘于仕途。因此郑玄认为,“寡尤、寡悔”,虽无由得禄,但也相当于古人所说的得禄之道了。
2.19 哀公问曰:“何为则民服?”孔子对曰:“举直错诸枉,则民服;举枉错诸直,则民不服。”
Duke Ai asked, “What should I do to make the common people come under my sway? ”
Confucius replied, “Promote the upright and place them above the crooked, and the people will be in awe of you and come under your sway [ 服 ]. The opposite will happen if you promote the crooked and place them above the upright.”
哀公即公元前484年邀请孔子回鲁国的鲁哀公。他在位的时间是公元前494至前466年,但当时鲁国军政几乎都在贵族世家的把持之下,哀公并无威信和实权。因此,刘宝楠等学者将2.19中的对话放入历史环境,认为哀公是在向孔子求教,如何从鲁国三桓那里夺回权力。对这位国君,孔子的回答是德行的力量:把正直的人置于邪曲的人之上,人民自然就归顺于你,无需强迫。大多数英文译者将“服”理解为“服从”(to submit)。传统经典注疏对“服”的解释是:人民因“信服”而“敬服”君王而“为之任使”。因此,我将“服”译为“to come under the sway of”,与12.19中孔子对季康子的回答一致。
2.20 季康子问:“使民敬忠以劝,如之何?”子曰:“临之以庄则敬。孝慈则忠。举善而教不能则劝。”
Ji Kangzi asked, “How can I get the common people to be respectful, to do their best, and to encourage each other to strive forward? ”
The Master said, “Oversee the people with dignity, and the people will be respectful. Honor the elderly, cherish the young, and the people will do their best. Acknowledge the good, teach the incompetent, and the people will encourage each other to strive forward.”
季康子是季孙氏的宗主,鲁哀公的正卿。孔子结束周游回到鲁国时,他是当时鲁国权力最大的政治人物。孔子的许多弟子,特别是冉求和樊迟,就是季孙氏家臣。虽然孔子有时将季康子视作政敌,但当季康子问政于他时,他没有拒绝。孔子对季康子说的话和对哀公说的差不多:如果你培养自己的德行,负起道德责任,人民就会效法你的作为。
2.21 或谓孔子曰:“子奚不为政?”子曰:“ 《书》云:‘孝乎惟孝,友于兄弟,施于有政。’是亦为政,奚其为为政?”
Someone said to Confucius, “Why do you not take part in government? ”The Master said,“The Book of Documents says,‘Filial, only be filial, and a friend to your older and younger brothers——this has an influence on the way of government.' To do this is to take part in government. Why must I take on a position in order ‘to take part in government'? ”
汉代《白虎通》记载:“孔子之对或人,盖在哀公十一年后也。”也就是说这段对话发生在孔子回到鲁国之后。刘宝楠同意这个说法,说孔子返鲁后,“且亦与闻国政,但不出仕居位而为之”。这就是有人问孔子为何不出仕的缘由。《左传》载,孔子回鲁国时被尊为“国老”。鲁国国君哀公和大夫季康子都向他寻求建议,但他已经无意从政。刘宝楠还提出,2.21的对话紧随2.19中孔子与哀公、2.20中与季康子的谈话,并非巧合。
2.22 子曰:“人而无信,不知其可也。大车无,小车无,其何以行之哉?”
The Master said, “If a person does not have the trust of others, I don't see how he can get anywhere. A large cart without a linchpin in its yoke bar and a small cart without a linchpin in its collar bar——how can you get them to go anywhere? ”
不论是牛拉的大车还是马拉的小车,若无輗或軏这样的关键部位,车子也就无法前行。人若失信,亦是如此。所以顾梦麟说:“已失其所以行之具矣。”
2.23 子张问:“十世可知也?”子曰:“殷因于夏礼,所损益可知也。周因于殷礼,所损益可知也。其或继周者,虽百世可知也。”
Zizhang asked, “Can we know what things will be like ten generations from now? ”
The Master said, “The Yin followed the rites of the Xia, and what was added and subtracted can be known. The Zhou followed the rites of the Yin, and what was added and subtracted can be known. Whoever succeeds the Zhou, even a hundred generations from now, will be able to know [what was added and subtracted from the rites of the Zhou].”
最后一句话的另一种译法可以是:“Whoever succeeds the Zhou, we are able to know what things will be like even a hundred generations from now.”两种解读反映了争论的两面:孔子是在强调学习过去的重要,还是说未来是可预测的?宋代学者胡安国和清代学者陈澧倾向于第一种解读,而多数汉代学者则认可第二种。胡安国说,孔子意不在回答子张预测未来的问题,因为孔子对过去更感兴趣。我以为,这和我们从《论语》中看到的孔子——以历史来阐释自己学说的形象相吻合。这也和汉代司马迁对这段话的理解一致,他在《史记·孔子世家》中写道:“孔子……追迹三代之礼……编次其事……观殷夏所损益……曰‘后虽百世可知也’。”这当然是史学家的解读,但我支持这种观点。
尽管历代学者对本段最后一句话意见不一,但似乎都认为孔子对子张的回答关乎“常”与“变”。“常”是人际关系的准则——比如仁、义——都以“礼”系之,需要“礼”的支撑和充实。“变”指的是礼器、服饰、度量衡、次要的准则与规定——这些都会随着实际考量和习俗变迁而变化。孔子在9.3中的观点就可以例证。
2.24 子曰:“非其鬼而祭之,谄也。见义不为,无勇也。”
The Master said, “To offer sacrifice to spirits who are not your ancestors is ingratiating. Faced with what is right yet doing nothing about it shows a lack of courage.”
汉代学者质疑“非其鬼而祭之”者的意图。郑玄写道:“人身曰鬼。非其祖考而祭之者,是谄求福。”何休认为,这种行为“非礼”,而且“亦必不能获福”。刘宝楠引3.6为例,指出季孙氏只是大夫而祭祀泰山是僭越谄媚,冉求明知非礼却不去阻止,是懦弱的行为。