冯友兰中国哲学简史中英文版之第五章　墨子：孔子的第一个反对者

冯友兰中国哲学简史中英文版之第五章　墨子：孔子的第一个反对者 CHAPTER 5 MO TZU, THE FIRST OPPONENT OF CONFUCIUS THE next major philosopher after Confucius was Mo Tzu. His family name was Mo and his personal name was Ti. As the Shih Chi or Historical Records does not say where he came from, and in fact tells us almost nothing about his life, there has been a difference of opinion regarding his native state. Some scholars hold that he was a native of Sung (in what is today eastern Honan and western Shantung), and others that he came from Lu, the same state as Confucius. His exact dates are also uncertain, hut probably he lived sometime within the years 479~38l B.C. The main source for the study of his thought is the book bearing his name, the Mo-tzu, which contains 53 chapters and is a collection of writings by his followers as well as by himself. 孔子之后下一个主要的哲学家是墨 子。他姓墨名翟。《史记》上没有说 他是哪国人，关于他的生平也说的很 少，实际上等于没有说。因而关于墨 子是哪国人历来有意见分歧。有些学 者说他是宋（今豫东鲁西）人，另一 些学者说他是鲁人。他的生卒也不能 肯定是哪年，大概是在公元前479一 前381年以内。研究墨子思想。主要 资料 新概念英语资料下载李居明饿命改运学pdf成本会计期末资料社会工作导论资料工程结算所需资料清单 是《墨子》一 书 关于书的成语关于读书的排比句社区图书漂流公约怎么写关于读书的小报汉书pdf ，共五十三篇， 是墨子本人及其后学的著作总集。 Mo Tzu was the founder of a school known after his name as the Mohist school. In ancient times his fame was as great as that of Confucius, and his teaching was no less influential. The contrast between the two men is interesting. Confucius felt a sympathetic understanding for the traditional institutions, rituals, music, and literature of the early Chou dynasty, and tried to rationalize and justify them in ethical terms; Mo Tzu, on the contrary, questioned their validity and usefulness, and tried to replace them with something that was simpler but, in his view, more useful. In short, Confucius was the rationalizer and justifier of the ancient civilization, while Mo Tzu was its critic. Confucius was a refined gentleman, while Mo Tzu was a militant preacher. A major aim of his preaching was to oppose both the traditional institutions and practices, and the theories of Confucius and the Confucianists. 墨子创立的学派名为墨家。在古代， 墨子与孔子享有同等的盛名。墨学的 影响也不亚于孔学。把这两个人进行 对比，是很有趣的。孔子对于西周的 传统 制度 关于办公室下班关闭电源制度矿山事故隐患举报和奖励制度制度下载人事管理制度doc盘点制度下载 、礼乐文献，怀有同情的了 解，力求以伦理的言辞论证它们是合 理的，正当的；墨子则相反，认为它 们不正当，不合用，力求用简单一些， 而且在他看来有用一些的东西代替 之。简言之，孔子是古代文化的辩护 者，辩护它是合理的，正当的，墨子 则是它的批判者。孔子是文雅的君 子，墨子是战斗的传教士。他传教的 目的在于，把传统的制度和常规，把 孔子以及儒家的学说，一齐反对掉。 Social Background of the Mohist School During the feudal age of the Chou dynasty, kings, princes, and feudal lords all had their military specialists. These were the hereditary warriors who constituted the backbone of the armies of that time. With the disintegration of feudalism that took place in the latter part of the Chou dynasty, however, these warrior specialists lost their positions and titles, scattered throughout the country, and made a living by offering their services to anyone who could afford to employ them. This class of people was known as the hsieh or yu hsieh, terms which can both be translated as knights-errant. Concerning such knights errant, the Shih Chi says: "Their words were always sincere and trustworthy, and their actions always quick and decisive. They were always true to what they promised, and without regard to their own persons, they would rush into dangers threatening others. (Ch. 12-4) Such was their professional ethics. A large part of Mo Tzu's teaching was an extension of this ethics. 墨家的社会背景 在周代，天子、诸侯、封建主都有他 们的军事专家。当时军队的骨干，由 世袭的武士组成。随着周代后期封建 制度的解体，这些武士专家丧失了爵 位，流散各地，谁雇佣他们就为谁服 务，以此为生。这种人被称为“游侠”， 《史记》说他们“其言必信，其行必果， 已诺必诚，不爱其躯，赴士之厄困” （《游侠列传》）。这些都是他们的职 业道德。大部分的墨学就是这种道德 的发挥。 In Chinese history both the ju or literati and the hsieh or knightserrant originated as specialists attached to the houses of the aristocrats, and were themselves members of the upper classes. In later times the ju continued to come mainly from the upper or middle classes, but the hsieh, on the contrary, more frequently were recruited from the lower classes. In ancient times, such social amenities as rituals and music were all exclusively for the aristocrats; from the point of view of the common man, therefore, they were luxuries that had no practical utility. It was from this point of view that Mu Tzu and the Mohists criticised the traditional institutions and their rationalizers, Confucius and the Confucianists. This criticism, together with the elaboration and rationalization of the professional ethics of their own social class, that of the hsieh, constituted the central core of the Mohist philosophy. 在中国历史上，儒和侠都源出于依附 贵族“家”的专家，他们本身都是上层 阶级的分子。到了后来，儒仍然大都 出身于上层或中层阶级；而侠则不 然，更多的是出身于下层阶级。在古 代，礼乐之类的社会活动完全限于贵 族；所以从平民的观点看来。礼乐之 类都是奢侈品，毫无实用价值。墨子 和墨家，正是从这个观点，来批判传 统制度及其辩护者孔子和儒家。这种 批判，加上对他们本阶级的职业道德 的发挥和辩护，就构成墨家哲学的核 心。 There is plenty of evidence for the inference that Mo Tzu and his followers came from the hsieh. From the Mo-tzu, as well as from other contemporary sources, we know that the Mohists constituted a strictly disciplined organization capable of military action. The leader of the Mohist organization was called the Chü Tzu, "Great Master," and had the authority of life or death over the members of the group. We are also told that Mo Tzu was the first "Great Master" of his group, and that at least once he actually led his followers to prepare for the military defense of Sung, when that state was threatened with invasion from the neighboring state of Ch'u. 墨子及其门徒出身于侠，这个论断有 充分的证据。从《墨子》以及同时代 的其他文献，我们知道，墨者组成一 个能够进行军事行动的团体，纪律极 为严格。这个团体的首领称为“钜子”， 对于所有成员具有决定生死的权威。 墨子就是这个团体的第一任钜子，他 领导门徒实际进行的军事行动至少 有一次，就是宋国受到邻国楚国侵略 威胁的时候，他们为宋国准备了军事 防御。 The story of this episode is interesting. It is said in the Mo-tzu that a noted mechanical inventor, Kung-shu Pan, then employed by the state of Ch'u, had completed the construction of a new weapon for attacking city walls. Ch'u was preparing to attack Sung with this new weapon. Hearing of this, Mo Tzu went to Ch'u to persuade its king to desist. There he and Kung-shu Pan made a demonstration before the king of their weapons of attack and defense. Mo Tzu first untied his belt and laid out a city with it, using a small stick as a weapon. Kung-shu Pan thereupon set up nine different miniature machines of attack, but Mo Tzu nine times repulsed him. Finally, Kung-shu Pan had used up all his machines of attack, while Mo Tzu was far from being exhausted in the defense. Then Kung-shu Pan said: "l know how to defeat you, but I will not say it." To which Mo Tzu replied: "I know what it is, but I too will not say it." 这段情节很有趣，见于《墨子》的《公 输》篇。据此篇说，有一位著名的机 械发明家公输般，当时受楚国雇用， 造成一种新式的攻城器械。楚国准备 用这种新式器械进攻宋国。墨子听说 这件事，就去到楚国，要对楚王进行 劝阻。在那里，他和公输般在楚王面 前演习了他们的进攻和防御的器械。 墨子先解下他的腰带，用它摆成一座 城，又拿一根小棍棒当作武器。接着 公输般使用九种不同的微型进攻器 械，九次都被墨子击退了。最后，公 输般用尽了他的全部进攻器械，可是 墨子的防御手段还远远没有用完。于 是公输般说：“我知道怎样打败你，但 是我不愿意说出来。”墨子回答说：“我 知道你的办法，但是我也不愿意说出 来。” On being asked by the king what was meant, Mo Tzu continued: "Kung-shu Pan is thinking of murdering me. But my disciples Ch'in Ku-li and others, numbering three hundred men, are already armed with my implements of defense, waiting on the city wall of Sung for the invaders from Ch' u. Though I be murdered, you cannot exterminate them. To which the King exclaimed: "Very well! Let us not attack Sung." (Ch. 50.) 楚王问墨子这是什么意思，墨子继续 说：“公输般是想杀我。但是我的弟子 禽滑厘等三百人，早已手持我的防御 器械，在宋国的城上等候楚国侵略 者，就算杀了我，你也不能灭绝他们。” 楚王听了这番话，嚷了起来：“好啦好 啦！我说不要攻宋了。” If this story is true, it would give a good example for our present world in settling disputes between two countries. A war would not need to be fought in the field. All that would be necessary would be for the scientists and engineers of the two countries to demonstrate their laboratory weapons of attacking and defense, and the war would be decided without fighting! 这段故事若是真的，倒是为当今世界 解决两国争端，树立了良好榜样。战 争不必在战场上进行。只要两国的科 学家、 工程 路基工程安全技术交底工程项目施工成本控制工程量增项单年度零星工程技术标正投影法基本原理 师把他们实验中的攻守武 器拿出来较量一番，战争也就不战而 决胜负了！ Regardless of whether the story is true or not, it illustrates the nature of the Mohist organization, which is also confirmed from other sources. Thus in the Huai-nun-tzu, a work of the second century B.C., it is stated that the disciples of Mo Tzu were one hundred and eighty in number, all of whom he could order to enter fire or tread on sword blades, and whom even death would not cause to turn on their heels. (Ch. 20.) And in the Mo-tzu itself, no less than nine chapters deal with the tactics of fighting a defensive war and the techniques of building instruments for defending city walls. All of this shows that the Mohists, as originally constituted, were a group of warriors. 不管这段故事是真是假，也可以反映 出墨者团体的性质，别的书上也说到 这种性质。例如《淮南子?泰族训》中 说：“墨子服役者百八十人。皆可使赴火蹈刃，死不旋踵。”《墨子》一书的 本身，差不多有九篇是讲防御战术和 守城器械。这一切表明，当初组成墨 家的人是一群武士。 Mo Tzu and his followers, however, differed from the ordinary knights-errant in two respects. In the first place, the latter were men ready to engage in any fighting whatever, only provided that they were paid for their efforts or favored by the feudal lords. Mo Tzu and his followers, on the contrary, were strongly opposed to aggressive war; hence they agreed to fight only in wars that were strictly for self-defense. Secondly, the ordinary hsieh confined themselves wholly to their code of professional ethics. Mo Tzu, however, elaborated this professional ethics and gave it a rationalistic justification. Thus though Mo Tzu's background was that of a hsieh, he at the sametirne became the founder of a new philosophic school. 可是，墨子及其门徒。与普通的游侠 有两点不同。第一点，普通的游侠只 要得到酬谢，或是受到封建主的恩 惠，那就不论什么仗他们都打；墨子 及其门徒则不然，他们强烈反对侵略 战争，所以他们只愿意参加严格限于 自卫的战争。第二点，普通的游侠只 限于信守职业道德的条规，无所发 挥；可是墨子却详细阐明了这种职业 道德，论证它是合理的，正当的。这 样，墨子的社会背景虽然是侠，却同 时成为一个新学派的创建人。 Mo Tzu's Criticism of Confucianism According to Mo Tzu, "the principles of the Confucianists ruin the whole world in four ways": (1) The Confucianists do not believe in the existence of God or of spirits, "with the result that God and the spirits are displeased." (2) The Confucianists insist on elaborate funerals and the practice of three years of mourning on the death of a parent, so that the wealth and energy of the people are thereby wasted. (3) The Confucianists lay stress on the practice of music, leading to an identical result. (4) The Confucianists believe in a predetermined fate, causing the people to be lazy and to resign themselves to this fate. (The Mo-tzu, ch. 48.) In another chapter entitled "Anti-Confucianism," the Mo-tzu also says: "Even those with long life cannot exhaust the learning required for their [Confucianist] studies. Even people with the vigor of youth cannot perform all the ceremonial duties. And even those who have amassed wealth cannot afford music. They [the Confucianists] enhance the beauty of wicked arts and lead their sovereign astray. Their doctrine cannot meet the needs of the age, nor can their learning educate the people." (Ch.39.) 墨子对儒家的批判 墨子认为，“儒之道，足以丧天下者四 焉”：（１）儒者不相信天鬼存在，“天 鬼不悦”。（２）儒者坚持厚葬，父母 死后实行三年之丧，因此把人民的财 富和精力都浪费了。（３）儒者强调 音乐，造成同样的后果。（４）儒者 相信前定的命运，造成人们懒惰，把 自己委之于命运（《墨子?公孟》）。《墨子》的《非儒》篇还说：“累寿不能尽其学，当年不能行其礼，积财不能赡 其乐。盛饰邪术，以营世君；盛为声 乐，以淫遇民：其道不可以期世，其 学不可以导众。” These criticisms reveal the differing social backgrounds of the Confucianists and Mohists. Already before Confucius, persons who were better educated and more sophisticated had been abandoning the belief in the existence of a personal God and of divine spirits. People of the lower classes, however, had, as always in such matters, lagged behind in this rise of skepticism, and Mo Tzu held the point of view of the lower classes. This is the significance of his first point of criticism against the Confucianists. The second and third points, too, were made from the same basis. The fourth point, however, was really irrelevant, because, though the Confucianists often spoke about Ming (Fate, Decree), what they meant by it was not the predetermined fate attacked by Mo Tzu. This has been pointed out in the last chapter, where we have seen that Ming, for the Confucianists, signified something that is beyond human control. But there are other things that remain within man's power to control if he will exert himself. Only after man has done everything he can himself, therefore, should he accept with calm and resignation what comes thereafter as inevitable. Such is what the Confucianists meant when they spoke of "knowing Ming." 这些批评显示出儒墨社会背景不同。 在孔子以前，早已有些饱学深思的人 放弃了对天帝鬼神的信仰。下层阶级 的人，对于天鬼的怀疑，通常是发生 得迟缓一些。墨子所持的是下层阶级的观点。他反对儒家的第一点，意义就在此。第二、第三点，也是在这个基础上提出的。至于第四点，则是不相干的，因为儒家虽然常常讲到“命”， 所指的并不是墨子攻击的那种前定的命。前一章已经指出过这一点，就是在儒家看来。命是指人们所能控制的范围以外的东西。但是，他若是竭尽全力，总还有一些东西是在他力所能及的控制范围以内。因此，人只有已经做了他自己能够做的一切以后，对于那些仍然要来到的东西才只好认为是不可避免的，只好平静地、无可奈何地接受它。这才是儒家所讲的 “知命”的意思。 All-embracing Love Mo Tzu makes no criticism of the Confucianists' central idea of jen (human- heartedness) and yi (righteousness); in the Mo-tzu, indeed, he speaks often of these two qualities and of the man of jen and man of yi. What he means by these terms, however, differs somewhat from the concept of them held by the Confucianists. For Mo Tzu, jen and yi signify an all-embracing love, and the man of jen and man of yi are persons who practice this all-embracing love. This concept is a central one in Mo Tzu's philosophy, and represents a logical extension of the professional ethics of the class of hsieh (knightserrant) from which Mo Tzu sprang. This ethics was, namely, that within their group the hsieh enjoy equally and suffer equally. (This was a common saying of the hsieh of later times.) Taking this group concept as a basis, Mo Tzu tried to broaden it by preaching the doctrine that everyone in the world should love everyone else equally and without discrimination. 兼爱 儒家的中心观念仁、义，墨子并没有 批评；在《墨子》一书中，他倒是常 讲到仁、义，常讲仁人、义人。不过 他用这些名词所指的，与儒家所指 的，还是有些不同。照墨子的意思， 仁、义是指兼爱，仁人、义人就是实 行这种兼爱的人。兼爱是墨子哲学的 中心概念。墨子出于游侠，兼爱正是 游侠职业道德的逻辑的延伸。这种道 德，就是，在他们的团体内“有福同享， 有祸同当（这是后来的侠客常常说的”话）。以这种团体的概念为基础，墨 子极力扩大它，方法是宣扬兼爱学 说，即天下的每个人都应该同等地、 无差别地爱别的一切人。 In the Mo-tzu, there are three chapters devoted to the subject of all-embracing love. In them, Mo Tzu first makes a distinction between what he calls the principles of "discrimination' and ' all-embracingness." The man who holds to the principle of discrimination says: It is absurd for me to care for friends as much as I would for myself, and to look after their parents as I would my own. As a result, such a man does not do very much for his friends. But the man who holds to the principle of all-embracingness says,on the contrary: I must care for my friends as much as I do for myself, and for their parents as I would my own. As a result, he does everything he can for his friends. Having made this distinction, Mo Tzu then asks the question: Which of these two principles is the right one? 《墨子》中有三篇专讲兼爱。墨子在 其中首先区别他所谓的“兼”与“别”。坚持兼爱的人他名之为“兼士”，坚持爱有差别的人他名之为“别士”。“别士之言曰：吾岂能为吾友之身若为吾身， 为吾友之亲若为吾亲”，他为他的朋友 做的事也就很少很少。兼士则不然， 他“必为其友之身若为其身，为其友之 亲若为其亲”，他为他的朋友做到他能 做的一切。作出了这样的区别之后， 墨子问道：兼与别哪一个对呢？（引 语见《墨子?兼爱下》） Mo Tzu thereupon uses his "tests of judgment" to determine the right and wrong of these principles. According to him, every principle must be examined by three tests, namely: "Its basis, its verifiability, and its applicability. A sound and right principle should be based on the Will of Heaven and of the spirits and on the deeds of the ancient sage-kings." Then "it is to be verified by the senses of hearing and sight of the common people." And finally, "it is to be applied by adopting it in government and observing whether it is beneficial to the country and the people." (Mo-tzu, ch. 35.) Of these three tests, the last is the most important. "Being beneficial to the country and the people" is the standard by which Mo Tzu determines all values. 然后墨子用他的“三表”来判断兼与别 （以及一切言论）的是非。所谓三表， 就是“有本之者，有原之者，有用之者。 于其本之也，考之天鬼之志、圣王之 事。”（《墨子?非命中》）“于何原之？ 下原察百姓耳目之实。于何用之？发 以为刑政，观其中国家百姓人民之 利。”（《墨子?非命上》）三表之中，最后一表最重要。“中国家百姓人民之利”是墨子判定一切价值的 标准 excel标准偏差excel标准偏差函数exl标准差函数国标检验抽样标准表免费下载红头文件格式标准下载 。 This same standard is the chief one used by Mo Tzu to prove the desirability of all-embracing love. In the third of three chapters, all of which are titled "All-embracing Love, "he argues: 这个标准，也就是墨子用以证明兼爱 最可取的主要标准。在《兼爱下》这 一篇中，他辩论说： "The task of the human-hearted man is to procure benefits for the world and to eliminate its calamities. Now among all the current calamities of the world, which are the greatest? I say that attacks on small states by large ones, disturbances of small houses by large ones, oppression of the weak by the strong, misuse of the few by the many, deception of the simple by the cunning, and disdain toward the humble by the honored: these are the misfortunes of the world....When we come to think about the causes of all these calamities, how have they arisen? Have they arisen out of love of others and benefiting others? We must reply that it is not so. Rather we should say that they have arisen out of hate of others and injuring others. If we classify those in the world who hate others and injure others, shall we call them 'discriminating' or 'all-embracing'? We must say that they are 'discriminating.' So, then, is not mutual discrimination the cause of the major calamities of the world? Therefore the principle of discrimination is wrong. “仁人之事者，必务求兴天下之利，除 天下之害。然当今之时，天下之害孰 为大？曰：大国之攻小国也，大家之 乱小家也；强之劫弱，众之暴寡，诈 之谋愚，贵之傲贱：此天下之害 也。……姑尝本原若众害之所自生， 此胡自生？此自爱人、利人生与？即 必曰：非然也。必曰：从恶人、贼人 生。分名乎天下恶人而贼人者，兼 与？别与？即必曰：别也。然即之交 别者，果生天下之大害者与？是故别 非也。 "Whoever criticizes others must have something to substitute for what he criticizes. Therefore I say: Substitute all-embracingness for discrimination. What is the reason why all-embracingness can be substituted for discrimination? The answer is that when everyone regards the states of others as he regards his own, who will attack these other states? Others will be regarded like the self. When everyone regards the cities of others as he regards his own, who will seize these other cities? Others will be regarded like the self. When everyone regards the houses of others as he regards his own, who will disturb these other houses? Others will be regarded like the self. “非人者必有以易之。……是故子墨子 曰：兼以易别。然即兼之可以易别之 故何也？曰：藉为人之国，若为其国， 夫谁独举其国以攻人之国者哉？为 彼者犹为己也。为人之都，若为其都， 夫谁独举其都以伐人之都者哉？为 彼犹为己也。为人之家，若为其家， 夫谁独举其家以乱人之家者哉？为 彼犹为己也。 "Now, when states and cities do not attack and seize one another, and when clans and individuals do not disturb and harm one another, is this a calamity or a benefit to the world? We must say it is a benefit. When we come to consider the origin of the various benefits, how have they arisen?Have they arisen out of hate of others and injuring others? We must say not so. We should say that they have arisen out of love of others and benefiting others. If we classify those in the world who love others and benefit others, shall we call them 'discriminating or 'all-embracing ? We must say that they are 'all-embracing.' Then is it not the case that 'mutual all-embrae-ingness is the cause of the major benefit of the world? Therefore I say that the principle of all-embracingness is right." (Mo-tzu, ch. 16.) “然即国都不相攻伐，人家不相乱贼， 此天下之害与？天下之利与？即必 曰：天下之利也。姑尝本原若众利之 所自生。此胡自生？此自恶人、贼人 生与？即必曰：非然也。必曰：从爱 人、利人生。分名乎天下爱人而利人 者，别与？兼与？即必曰：兼也。然 即之交兼者，果生天下之大利者与？ 是故子墨子曰；兼是也。”（《兼爱下》） Thus, using a utilitarianistic argument, Mo Tzu proves the principle of all-embracing love to be absolutely right. The human-hearted man whose task it is to procure benefits for the world and eliminate its calamities, must establish all-embracing love as the standard of action both for himself and for all others in the world. When everyone in the world acts according to this standard, then attentive ears and keen eyes will respond to serve one another, limbs will be strengthened to work for one another, and those who know the proper principle will untiringly instruct others. Thus the aged and widowers will have support and nourishment with which to round out their old age, and the young and weak and orphans will have a place of support in which to grow up. When all-embracing love is adopted as the standard, "such are the consequent benefits." (Ibid.) This, then, is Mo Tzu's ideal world, which can be created only through the practice of all-embracing love. 墨子用这种功利主义的辩论，证明兼 爱是绝对正确的。仁人的任务是为天 下兴利除害，他就应当以兼爱作为他 自己以及天下所有的人的行动标准， 这叫做以“兼”为“正”。“以兼为正，是 以聪耳明目，相与视听乎；是以股肱 毕强，相为动宰乎。而有道肄相教诲， 是以老而无妻子者，有所侍养以终其 寿；幼弱孤童之无父母者，有所放依 以长其身。今唯毋以兼为正，即若其 利也。”（同上）这也就是墨子的理想 世界，它只能通过实行兼爱而创造出 来。 The Will of God and Existence of Spirits There remains, however, a basic question: How to persuade people thus to love one another? One may tell them, as was said above, that the practice of all-embracing love is the only way to benefit the world and that every human-hearted man is one who practices all-embracing love. Yet people may still ask: Why should I personally act to benefit the world and why should I be a human-hearted man? One may then argue further that if the world as a whole is benefited, this means benefit for every individual in the world as well. Or as Mo Tzu says: "He who loves others, must also be loved by others. He who benefits others, must also be benefited by others. He who hates others, must also be hated by others. He who injures others, must also be injured by others." (Mo-tzu, ch. 17.) Thus, then, the love of others is a sort of personal insurance or investment, which pays, as Americans would say. Most people, however, are too shortsighted to see the value of a long term investment of this sort, and there are a few instances in which such an investment does, indeed, fail to pay. 天志和明鬼 可是还有一个根本问题：如何说服人们兼爱呢？你可以把上面所说的告诉人们，说实行兼爱是利天下的唯一道路，说仁人是实行兼爱的人。可是人们还会问：我个人行动为什么要利天下？我为什么必须成为仁人？你可以进一步论证说，如果对全天下有利，也就是对天下的每个人都有利。或者用墨子的话说，“夫爱人者，人必 从而爱之；利人者，人必从而利之；恶人者，人必从而恶之；害人者，人必从而害之。”（《兼爱中》）这样说来， 爱别人就是一种个人保险或投资，它是会得到偿还的。可是绝大多数人都 很近视，看不出这种长期投资的价 值。也还有一些实例，说明这样的投 资根本得不到偿还。 In order, therefore, to induce people to practice the principle of all-embracing love, Mo Tzu, in addition to the foregoing arguments, introduces a number of religious and political sanctions. Thus in the Mo-tzu there are chapters on "The Will of Heaven," and also ones "titled Proof of the Existence of Spirits." In these we read that God exists; that He loves mankind; and that His Will is that all men should love one another. He constantly super vises the activities of men, especially those of the rulers of men. He punishes with calamities persons who disobey His Will, and rewards with good fortune those who obey. Besides God, there are also numerous lesser spirits who likewise reward men who practice all-embracing love, and punish those who practice "discrimination." 为了诱导人们实行兼爱，所以墨子在 上述的道理之外，又引进了许多宗教 的、政治的制裁。因此，《墨子》有 几篇讲“天志”，“明鬼”。其中说，天帝 存在，天帝爱人，天帝的意志是一切 人要彼此相爱。天帝经常监察人的行 动，特别是统治者的行动。他以祸惩 罚那些违反天意的人，以福奖赏那些 顺从天意的人。除了天帝，还有许多 小一些的鬼神，他们也同天帝一样， 奖赏那些实行兼爱的人，惩罚那些交 相“别”的人。 In this connection there is an interesting story about Mo Tzu: "When Mo Tzu was once ill, Tieh Pi came to him and inquired: "Sir, you hold that the spirits are intelligent and control calamities and blessings. They reward the good and punish the evil. Now you are a sage. How then can you be ill? Is it that your teaching is not entirely correct or that the spirits are after all not intelligent? 'Mo Tzu replied:'Though I am ill, why should the spirits be unintelligent? There are many ways by which a man can contract diseases. Some are contracted from cold or heat, some from fatigue. If there are a hundred doors and only one be closed, will there not be ways by which robbers can enter? "' (Mo-tzu, ch. 48.) In modern logical terminology, Mo Tzu would say that punishment by the spirits is a sufficient cause for the disease of a man, but not its necessary cause. 有一个墨子的故事与此有关，很有趣 味。故事说：“子墨子有疾。跌鼻进而 问曰：先生以鬼神为明，能为祸福， 为善者赏之，为不善者罚之。今先生 圣人也，何故有疾？意者先生之言有 不善乎？鬼神不明知乎？子墨子曰： 虽使我有病，鬼神何遽不明？人之所 得于病者多方：有得之寒暑，有得之 劳苦。百门而闭一门焉，则盗何遽无 从入？”（《墨子?公孟》）如果用现代 逻辑的术语，墨子可以说，鬼神的惩 罚是一个人有病的充足原因，而不是 必要原因。 A Seeming Inconsistency Here it is timely to point out that both the Mohists and the Comfucianists seem to be inconsistent in their attitude toward the existence of spirits and the performance of rituals connected with the spirits. Certainly it seems inconsistent for the Mohists to have believed in the existence of the spirits, yet at the same time to have opposed the elaborate rituals that were conducted on the occasion of funerals and of the making of sacrifices to the ancestors. Likewise, it seems inconsistent that the Confucianists stressed those funeral and sacrificial rituals, yet did not believe in the existence of the spirits. The Mohists, for their part, were quite ready to point out this seeming inconsistency as regards the Confucianists. Thus we read in the Mo-tzu: "Kung-meng Tzu [a Confucianist] said: 'There are no spirits.' Again he said: 'The superior man should learn the rituals of sacrifice. 'Mo Tzu said: 'To hold that there are no spirits, and yet to learn sacrificial ceremonies, is like learning the ceremonies of hospitality when there are no guests, or throwing fish nets when there are no fish. '"(Ch. 48.) 一种似是而非的矛盾 现在正是个适当的时候来指出，不论 墨家、儒家，在对待鬼神的存在和祭 祀鬼神的态度上，都好像是矛盾的。 墨家相信鬼神存在。可是同时反对丧 葬和祭祀的缛礼，固然好像是矛盾 的。儒家强调丧礼和祭礼，可是并不 相信鬼神存在，同样也好像是矛盾 的。墨家在谈到儒家的时候，自己也 十分明快地指出过这种矛盾。公孟子 是个儒家的人。“公孟子曰„无鬼神?， 又曰„孟子必学祭祀?。子墨子曰：„执 无鬼而学祭礼，是犹无客而学客礼 也，是犹无鱼而为鱼罟也。（《墨子”?公 孟》） Yet the seeming inconsistencies of the Confucianists and Mohists are both unreal. According to the former, the reason for performing the sacrificial rituals is no longer a belief that the spirits actually exist, though no doubt this was the original reason. Rather, the performance springs from the sentiment of respect toward his departed forebears held by the man who offers the sacrifice. Hence the meaning of the ceremonies is poetic, not religious. This theory was later developed by Hsün Tzu and his school of Confucianism in detail, as we shall see in chapter thirteen of this book. Hence there is no real inconsistency at all. 儒家、墨家这些好像是矛盾的地方， 都不是真正的矛盾。照儒家所说，行 祭礼的原因不再是因为相信鬼神真 正存在，当然相信鬼神存在无疑是祭 礼的最初原因。行礼只是祭祀祖先的 人出于孝敬祖先的感情，所以礼的意 义是诗情的，不是宗教的。这个学说 后来被荀子及其学派详细地发挥了， 本书第十三章将要讲到。所以根本没 有什么真正的矛盾。 Likewise there is no actual inconsistency in the Mohist point of view, for Mo Tzu' s proof of the existence of spirits is done primarily in order that he may introduce a religious sanction for his doctrine of all-embracing love, rather than because of any real interest in supernatural matters. Thus in his chapter on "Proof of the Existence of Spirits, "he attributes the existing confusion of the world to" a doubt (among men) as to the existence of spirits and a failure to understand that they can reward the good and punish the bad. "He then asks: "If now all the people of the world could be made to believe that the spirits can reward the good and punish the bad, would the world then be in chaos?" (Ch. 31.) Thus his doctrine of the Will of God and the existence of spirits is only to induce people to believe that they will be, rewarded if they practice all-embracing love, and punished if they do not. Such a belief among the people was something useful; hence Mo Tzu wanted it. "Economy of expenditure" in the funeral and sacrificial services was also useful; hence Mo Tzu wanted it too. From his ultra-utilitarian point of view, there was no inconsistency in wanting both things, since both were useful. 同样在墨家的观点中也没有实际的 矛盾。因为墨子要证明鬼神存在，本 来是为了给他的兼爱学说设立宗教 的制裁，并不是对于超自然的实体有 任何真正的兴趣。所以他把天下大乱 归咎于“疑惑鬼神之有与无之别，不明 乎鬼神之能赏贤而罚暴也”，并且接着 问道：“今若使天下之人偕若信鬼神之 能赏贤而罚暴也，则夫天下岂乱哉？”（《墨子?明鬼下》）所以他的“天志”、“明鬼”之说都不过是诱导人们相信： 实行兼爱则受赏，不实行兼爱则受 罚。在人心之中有这样的一种信仰也 许是有用的，因此墨子需要它。“节用”、“节葬”也是有用的，因此墨子也 需要它。从墨子的极端功利主义观点 看来，需要这两种东西是毫不矛盾 的，因为两者都是有用的。 Origin of the State Besides religious sanctions, political ones are also needed if people are to practice all-embracing love. In the Mo-tzu, there are three chapters titled "Agreement with the Superior, "in which Mo Tzu expounds his theory of the origin of the state. According to this theory, the authority of the ruler of a state comes from two sources: the will of the people and the Will of God. Furthermore, the main task of the ruler is to supervise the activities of the people, rewarding those who practice all -embracing love and punishing those who do not. In order to do this effectively, his authority must be absolute. At this point we may ask: Why should people voluntarily choose to have such an absolute authority over them? 国家的起源 人们若要实行兼爱，除了宗教的制裁，还需要政治的制裁。《墨子》有《尚同》三篇，其中阐述了墨子的国家起源学说。照这个学说所说，国君的权威有两个来源：人民的意志和天帝的意志。它更进一步说，国君的主要任务是监察人民的行动，奖赏那些实行兼爱的人、惩罚那些不实行兼爱的人。为了有效地做到这一点，他的权威必须是绝对的。在这一点上，我们可能要问：为什么人们竟然自愿选择，要有这样的绝对极威来统治他们呢？ The answer, for Mo Tzu, is that the people accept such an authority, not because they prefer it, but because they have no alternative. According to him, before the creation of an organized state, people lived in what Thomas Hobbes has called "the state of nature." At this early time, "everyone had his own standard of right and wrong. When there was one man, there was one standard. When there were two men, there were two standards. When there were ten men, there were ten standards. The more people there were, the more were there standards. Every man considered himself as right and others as wrong. "The world was in great disorder and men were like birds and beasts. They understood that all the disorders of the world were due to the fact that there was no political ruler. Therefore, they selected the most virtuous and most able man of the world, and established him as the Son of Heaven." (Mo-tzu, ch. 11.) Thus the ruler of the state was first established by the will of the people, in order to save themselves from anarchy. 墨子的回答是，人们接受这样的权 威，并不是由于他们选中了它，而是 由于他们无可选择。照他所说，在建 立有组织的国家之前，人们生活在如 汤玛斯?霍布士所说的“自然状态”之 中。在这个时候“盖其语，曰天下之人 异义。是以一人则一义，二人则二义， 十人则十义，其人兹众，其所谓义者 亦兹众。是以人是其义，以非人之义， 故交相非也。”“天下之乱，若禽兽然。 夫明乎天下之所以乱者，生于无政 长。是故选天下之贤可者，立以为天 子。”（《墨子?尚同上》）如此说来， 国君最初是由人民意志设立的，是为 了把他们从无政府状态中拯救出来。 In another chapter bearing the same title, Mo Tzu says: Of old when God and the spirits established the state and cities and installed rulers, it was not to make their rank high or their emolument substantial....It was to procure benefits for the people and eliminate their adversities; to enrich the poor and increase the few; and to bring safety out of danger and order out of confusion. (Ch. 12.)According to this statement, therefore, the state and its ruler were established through the Will of God. 在另一篇中，墨子又说：“古者上帝鬼 神之建设国都、立正长也，非高其爵、 厚其禄、富贵佚而错之也，将以为万 民兴利、除害、富贫、众寡、安危、 治乱也。”（《墨子?尚同中》）照这个 说法，国家和国君又都是通过天帝的 意志设立的了。 No matter what was the way in which the ruler gained his power, once he was established, he, according to Mo Tzu, issued a mandate to the people of the world, saying: "Upon hearing good or evil, one shall report it to one's superior. What the superior thinks to be right, all shall think to be right. What the superior thinks to be wrong, all shall think to be wrong." (Ch. 11.) This leads Mo Tzu to the following dictum: "Always agree with the superior; never follow the inferior. (Ibid.) 不论国君是怎样获得权力的，只要他 一朝权在手，就把令来行。照墨子所 说，天子就要“发政于天下之百姓，言 曰：闻善而不善，皆以告其上；上之 所是，必皆是之；上之所非，必皆非 之。”（《墨子?尚同上》）这就引导出 墨子的名言：“上同而不下比（同上），” 就是说，永远同意上边的，切莫依照 下边的。 Thus, Mo Tzu argues, the state must be totalitarian and the authority of its ruler absolute. This is an inevitable conclusion to his theory of the origin of the state. For the state was created precisely in order to end the disorder which had existed owing to the confused standards of right and wrong. The state's primary function, therefore, is, quoting Mo Tzu, "to unify the standards." Within the state only one standard can exist, and it must be one which is fixed by the state itself. No other standards can be tolerated, because if there were such, people would speedily return to "the state of nature " in which there could be nothing but disorder and chaos. In this political theory we may see Mo Tzu's development of the professional ethics of the hsieh, with its emphasis upon group obedience and discipline. No doubt it also reflects the troubled political conditions of Mo Tzu's day, which caused many people to look with favor on a centralized authority, even if it were to be an autocratic one. 如是墨子论证出，国家必须是极权主 义的，国君的权威必须是绝对的。这 是他的国家起源学说的必然结论。因 为国家的设立，有其明确的目的，就 是结束混乱，混乱的存在则是由于“天 下之人异义”。因此国家的根本职能是 “一同国之义”（均见《墨子?尚同上》）。一国之内，只能有一义存在，这一义 必须是国家自身确定的一义。别的义 都是不能容忍的，因为如果存在别的 义，人们很快就会返回到“自然状态”， 除了天下大乱，一无所有。在这种政 治学说里，我们也可以看出，墨子发 展了侠的职业道德，那是非常强调团 体内的服从和纪律的。它无疑也反映 了墨子时代的混乱政治局面，使得许 多人向往一个中央集权的政权，哪怕 是一个专制独裁的也好。 So, then, there can be only one standard of right and wrong. Right, for Mo Tzu, is the practice of mutual all-embracingness, and wrong is the practice of "mutual discrimination." Through appeal to this political sanction, together with his religious one, Mo Tzu hoped to bring all people of the world to practice his principle of all-embracing love. 这样，就只能够存在一义。义，墨子 认为就是“交相兼”，不义就是“交相 别”。这也就是唯一的是非标准。通过诉诸这种政治制裁，结合他的宗教制 裁，墨子希望，能够使天下一切人都 实行他的兼爱之道。 Such was Mo Tzu's teaching, and it is the unanimous report of all sources of his time that in his own activities he was a true example of it. 墨子的学说就是如此。与墨子同时的 一切文献，一致告诉我们，墨子本人 的言行，就是他自己学说的真正范 例。