Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“

of 'Universal Love'.' A lengthy exposition of this remains in the Writings which go by Mo's name, though it is not from his own pen, but that of a disciple. Such as it is, with all its repetitions, I give a translation of it. My readers will be able, after perusing it, to go on with me to consider the treatment which the doctrine received at the hands of Mencius.

UNIVERSAL LOVEI. PART I.

It is the business of the sages to effect the good government of the world. They must know, therefore, whence disorder and confusion arise, for without this knowledge their object cannot be effected. We may compare them to a physician who undertakes to cure men's diseases :—he must ascertain whence a disease has arisen, and then he can assail it with effect, while, without such knowledge, his endeavours will be in vain. Why should we except the case of those who have to regulate disorder from this rule? They must know whence it has arisen, and then they can regulate it.

It is the business of the sages to effect the good government of the world. They must examine therefore into the cause of disorder; and when they do so they will find that it arises from the want of mutual love. When a minister and a son are not filial to their sovereign and their father, this is what is called disorder. A son loves himself, and does not love his father;-he therefore wrongs his father, and seeks his own advantage: a younger brother loves himself, and does not love his elder brother ;--he therefore wrongs his elder brother, and seeks his own advantage : a minister loves himself, and does not love his sovereign ;-he therefore wrongs his sovereign, and seeks his own advantage :—all these are cases of what is called disorder. Though it be the father who is not kind to his son, or the elder brother who is not kind to his younger brother, or the sovereign who is not gracious to his minister :-the case comes equally under the general name of disorder. The father loves himself, and does not love his son ;-he therefore wrongs his son, and seeks his own advantage: the elder brother loves himself, and does not love his

自之之亂聖 攻所之人 所以

愛臣不君兄所起不聖知必起
也,此慈而而而謂起察人亂知
不亦 自自自亂不亂以之亂
愛天兄利利利也相之治所之

此臣弟子愛所天自所攻攻疾則起天

之不所自自自臣自下起自治之。者不焉下

慈謂愛愛愛子起 則起

[blocks in formation]

起焉能攻之不知疾之所向

起自治

·兼愛,兼 represents a hand grasping thoo stalks of grain 兼愛 d

grasps or unites many in its embrace.' I do not know how to render it better than by

'universal love.' Mencius and the literati generally find the idea of equality in it also, and

兼愛 is with them = To love all equally.

younger brother;-he therefore wrongs his younger brother, and seeks his own advantage: the sovereign loves himself, and does not love his minister;—he therefore wrongs his minister, and seeks his own advantage. How do these things come to pass? They all arise from the want of mutual love. Take the case of any thief or robber :—it is just the same with him. The thief loves his own house, and does not love his neighbour's house ;-he therefore steals from his neighbour's house to benefit his own: the robber loves his own person, and does not love his neighbour;-he therefore does violence to his neighbour to benefit himself. How is this? It all arises from the want of mutual love. Come to the case of great officers throwing each other's Families into confusion, and of princes attacking one another's States:-it is just the same with them. The great officer loves his own Family, and does not love his neighbour's ;— he therefore throws his neighbouris Family into disorder to benefit his own: the prince loves his own State, and does not love his neighbour's ;-he therefore attacks his neighbour's State to benefit his own. All disorder in the kingdom has the same explanation. examine into the cause of it, it is found to be the want of mutual love.

[ocr errors]

When we

Suppose that universal, mutual love prevailed throughout the kingdom ;—if men loved others as they love themselves, disliking to exhibit what was unfilial. . . .1 And moreover would there be those who were unkind? Looking on their sons, younger brothers, and ministers as themselves, and disliking to exhibit what was unkind. . . the want of filial duty would disappear. And would there be thieves and robbers? When every man regarded his neighbour's house as his own, who would be found to steal? When every one regarded his neighbour's person as his own, who would be found to rob? Thieves and robbers would disappear. And would there be great officers throwing one another's Families into confusion, and princes attacking one another's States? When officers regarded the Families of others as their own, what one would make confusion? When princes regarded other States as their own, what one would begin an attack? Great officers throwing one another's Families into confusion, and princes attacking one another's States, would disappear.

If, indeed, universal, mutual love prevailed throughout the kingdom; one State not attacking another, and one Family not throwing another into confusion; thieves and robbers nowhere existing; rulers and ministers, fathers and sons, all being filial and kind :—in such a condition

亂,若相視亂人亡不若察故家家利竊下臣自 盜使攻人家,身有慈使此攻故諸其異之故愛

賊天

無下者

君相有

臣愛

子,與

皆國

視人國若其國誰攻故大夫之相亂家諸侯之

侯其有

之身,盜視

國異

室為虧也, 以盜臣不

而愛

皆室

察此何自起皆起不相愛

故攻異國以利其國天下之亂物具此而已矣
故亂異家以利家諸侯各愛其國不愛異國

家諸侯之相攻國者亦然大夫各愛家不愛異

利其身此何也皆起不相愛雖至大夫之相亂

若愛愛。

[ocr errors][merged small]

弟。

利,故 賊然是虧

愛也,而

身,身

猶若惡惡

有其他施

家,其大室,不不

之竊.不猶 已異

離也 室,至不 亂。相視孝有國異亂以故天

1 There are evidently some omissions and confusion here in the Chinese text.

the nation would be well governed. On this account, how may sages, whose business it is to effect the good government of the kingdom, do but prohibit hatred and advise to love? On this account it is affirmed that universal mutual love throughout the country will lead to its happy order, and that mutual hatred leads to confusion. This was what our master, the philosopher Mo, meant, when he said, 'We must above all inculcate the love of others.'

[blocks in formation]

Our Master, the philosopher Mo, said, "That which benevolent men consider to be incumbent on them as their business, is to stimulate and promote all that will be advantageous to the nation, and to take away all that is injurious to it. This is what they consider to be their business.' And what are the things advantageous to the nation, and the things injurious to it? Our master said, 'The mutual attacks of State on State; the mutual usurpations of Family on Family; the mutual robberies of man on man; the want of kindness on the part of the ruler and of loyalty on the part of the minister; the want of tenderness and filial duty between father and son and of harmony between brothers :—these, and such as these, are the things injurious to the kingdom.’

And from what do we find, on examination, that these injurious things are produced'? Is it not from the want of mutual love?

Our Master said, 'Yes, they are produced by the want of mutual love. Hore is a prince who only knows to love his own State, and does not love his neighbour's;—he therefore does not shrink from raising all the power of his State to attack his neighbour. Here is the chief of a Family who only knows to love it, and does not love his neighbour's;-he therefore does not shrink from raising all his powers to seize on that other Family. Here is a man who only knows to love his own person, and does not love his neighbour's ;—he therefore does not shrink from using all his resources to rob his neighbour. Thus it happens, that the princes, not loving one another,

have their battle-fields; and the chiefs of Families, not loving one another, have

人野賊不
·賊不家家
不戰人愛

their mutual

必子

若天篇

家國其子何則惠之今也

用天忠 忠,相

事天

子言以不相愛生今諸侯獨知愛
何用生哉以不相愛生耶〇子墨
則天下之害也〇然則崇此害亦
惠忠父子不慈孝兄弟不和調此
之相篡人之與人之相賊君臣不
今若國之與國之相攻家之與家
也天下之害何也〇子墨子言日

此爲事者也〇然則天下之利何

必典天下之利除去天下之害以

子墨子言日仁人之所以爲事者

耶.崇

贼.

君必

臣相 不

相人则身其舉

愛與必以身其其其

墨亦此
此不家日,何

日,何以者。

? Here I would rend, in the Chinese text, 察 for 崇 and 由 for 用一然則察

此害亦何由生哉. The translation is accordingly.

其國不愛人之國是以不憚舉其

家.之國.
4.之愛

家、今

國,生.

家是

國以攻人之國今家主獨知愛其

賊人之身是故諸侯不相愛則必

不愛人之身是以不憚舉其身以
家以篡人之家今人獨知愛其身

usurpations; and men, not loving one another, have their mutual robberies; and rulers and ministers, not loving one another, become unkind and disloyal; and fathers and sons, not loving one another, lose their affection and filial duty; and brothers, not loving one another, contract irreconcileable enmities. Yea, men in genoral not loving one another, the strong make prey of the weak; the rich do despite to the poor; the noble are insolent to the mean; and the deceitful impose upon the stupid. All the miseries, usurpations, enmities, and hatreds in the world, when traced to their origin, will be found to arise from the want of mutual love. On this account, the benevolent condemn it.’

They may condemn it; but how shall they change it?

Our Master said, "They may change it by the law of universal mutual love and by the interchange of mutual benefits.'

How will this law of universal mutual love and the interchange of mutual benefits accomplish this ?

Our Master said, ‘It would lead to the regarding another's kingdom as one's own : another's family as one's own : another's person as one's own. That being the case, the princes, loving one another, would have no battle-fields; the chiefs of families, loving one another, would attempt no usurpations; men, loving one another, would commit no robberies 1; rulers and ministers, loving one another, would be gracious and loyal; fathers and sons, loving one another, would be kind and filial; brothers, loving one another, would be harmonious and easily reconciled. Yes, men in general loving one another, the strong would not make prey of the weak; the many would not plunder the few; the rich would not insult the poor; the noble would not be insolent to the mean; and the deceitful would not impose upon the simple. The way in which all the miseries,

則家,視愛兼既相愚强不則 ,不視人交相以愛凡必相不 禍則野人之相愛 生天熱愛惠 篡不戰之國,利 也下弱則

雖不下
然侮
天貧.人

之天

下子

之墨相則

難子愛慈

物言强孝之

則不惠忠父子不相愛則不慈孝兄弟

[blocks in formation]

相視其將之易仁怨侮

身和

○非其貴下

也。乃弱,相臣起賤

子之所必之則

起賤皆

於日不兄士使不愛其國奈法之者恨、貧,天 故然執弟君母

若愛相 詐相故
兼不則愛以不簒諸家子然子
則刧和則仁 人 若墨則言
善寡調惠者愚與相視子兼日,
矣富天忠譽凡人愛其言相以

以敖人、

以必相兄 不欺愛

1 The Chinese text is here very confused for several sentences. There are evidently transpositions, omissions, and additions. I have ventured to correct and arrange it as follows:—

After不相賊 I read,君臣相愛則惠忠父子相愛慈孝兄 弟相愛則和調天下之人皆相愛强不執弱不刧寡 不貧貴不敖賤詐欺愚凡天下禍篡怨恨,可使 毋起者以兼相愛生也是以仁者譽之。然而今天下 之士君子曰然乃若兼善矣雖然天下之難物也。 ○子墨子言曰天下之士君子特不識其利辯之故也 今若云云

usurpations, enmities, and hatreds in the world, may be made not to arise, is universal mutual love. On this account, the benevolent value and praise it.’

Yes; but the scholars of the kingdom and superior men say, "True; if there were this universal love, it would be good. It is, however, the most difficult thing in the world.'

Our Master said, "This is because the scholars and superior men simply do not understand the advantageousness of the law, and to conduct their reasonings upon that. Take the case of assaulting a city, or of a battle-field, or of the sacrificing one's life for the sake of fame :——this is felt by the people everywhere to be a difficult thing. Yet, if the ruler be pleased with it, both officers and people are able to do it :-how much more might they attain to universal mutual love, and the interchange of mutual benefits, which is different from this! When a man loves others, they respond to and love him; when a man benefits others, they respond to and benefit him; when a man injures others, they respond to and injure him; when a man hates others, they respond to and hate him:—what difficulty is there in the matter? It is only that rulers will not carry on the government on this principle, and so officers do not carry it out in their practice.

‘Formerly, the duke Wan of Tsin liked his officers to be coarsely dressed, and, therefore, they all wore rams' furs, a leathern swordbelt, and a cap of bleached cotton. Thus attired, they went in to the prince's levee, and came out and walked through the court. Why did they do this? The sovereign liked it, and therefore the ministers did it. The duke Ling of Ch'û liked his officers to have small waists, and, therefore, they all limited themselves to a single meal. They held in their breath in putting on their belts, and had to help themselves up by means of the wall. In the course of a year, they looked black, and as if they would die of starvation. Why did they do this1? The sovereign liked it, and, therefore, the ministers were able to do it. Kau-chi'en, the king of Yüeh, liked his ministers to be brave, and taught them to be accustomed to be so. At a general assembly of them, he set on fire the ship where they were, and to try thom, said, "All the precious things of Yüeh are here." He then with his own hands beat a drum, and urged them on. When they heard the drum thundering, they rushed confusedly about, and trampled in the fire, till more than a hundred of them perished, when he struck the gong, and called them back *.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

士勇之年,爲靈故帛文

日,教故朝節王何之公

越馴臣有脇好也

者,於

之人兼

人從愛苟殺

' In是其故是也, the second 是 is plainly a misprint for 何

? Here

a sentence or two are wanting, to complete the paragraph in harmony with the two which

precede. The characters which follow-長故子墨子言曰-sh

expunged. I have omitted them in the translation.

-should also be

« AnkstesnisTęsti »