加密数字货币交易所-《论语》详解：给所有曲解孔子的人-子曰：君子之於天下也，无适也，无莫也，义之於比

Confucius said: The gentleman regarding the world has no fixed approach, no aversion, and measures things by righteousness.

Yang Bojun: Confucius said: “The gentleman’s actions towards the affairs of the world are not prescribed; he does what is reasonable and appropriate, and does not follow any fixed pattern.”

Qian Mu: The master said: “The gentleman has no fixed master in worldly affairs, nor does he oppose anything in particular; he simply follows what is in accordance with righteousness.”

Li Zehou: Confucius said: “The gentleman, when dealing with various worldly matters, neither harbors hostility nor envies; he uses what is proper and reasonable as his standard.”

Detailed explanation:

First, all three interpretations above have logical issues. Yang’s explanation, “do what is reasonable and appropriate,” is a rule—how can it be said that there are no rules? And according to Qian’s interpretation, the gentleman clearly has a preference for “in accordance with righteousness” and opposes what is not, so how can it be said that he “has no fixed master nor fixed opposition”? Li’s explanation has the same problem: if “proper and reasonable” are standards, then there are feelings of hostility and envy—these feelings are based on the standard of “proper and reasonable.”

“Appropriate” (适), originally means “to go towards” or “to arrive,” and extended to mean “to return to” or “to be directed at.”

“莫” is a phonetic loan for “慕,” meaning “to yearn for” or “to long for.”

“义” (righteousness), as a noun used as a verb, means “to take righteousness as the basis.” But this is not the “taking righteousness” in “sacrificing life for righteousness,” where “righteousness” becomes a divine-like moral norm. Here, “义” is an ancient character for “appearance” or “bearing.”

“比” refers to the “petty person comparing and not being thorough” in the phrase “小人比而不周.”

“Return to” is an action; “longing” is just a thought. Therefore, “莫” is somewhat lighter in degree than “适.” The gentleman, regarding worldly affairs, will not establish an absolute standard or divine pattern to “approach” or “avoid” these things, not even in thought. But throughout history, countless people have tried to manipulate worldly affairs to create something for others to “approach” or “avoid,” and then their followers become cannon fodder or missionaries, constantly causing trouble. All of this is not what a gentleman would do. A gentleman not only avoids “approaching” or “avoiding” idols, gods, or doctrines but also does not create such things. In this world, there is no law to follow, no law to lose; there is nothing worth “approaching” or “avoiding.”

But simply having no “approach” and no “avoid” is still not the behavior of a gentleman. A gentleman does not “approach” or “avoid” any worldly thing, but he also does not despise anything in the world. The claim of having no “approach” or “avoid” and pretending to be a sage or a high scholar is just “approaching” and “avoiding” these so-called lofty figures’ trivialities. In the eyes of a gentleman, there is neither purity nor filth; heaven and hell come and go freely. A gentleman can mingle among petty people, “taking righteousness” in relation to “comparison,” presenting a “comparison” appearance, acting like a petty person but without the petty person’s “approach” or “avoid.”

Most people equate Bodhisattvas with some imagined sacred objects, but do beggars, prostitutes, courtesans, or murderers lack Bodhisattva qualities? Bodhisattva practices are boundless; hell, heaven, gods, ghosts, and beasts—high or low—are everywhere. Bodhisattva practices without attachment, without attachment, and everywhere. Even acting in “approach” and “avoid” is a Bodhisattva’s practice, and the principles of a gentleman’s conduct are the same.

Bodhisattvas can be seen as Bodhisattvas; gentlemen can be seen as gentlemen. There are also petty people who pretend that their petty nature is just “righteousness in comparison,” claiming to have no “approach” or “avoid,” thus easily deceiving ordinary people. When people are deceived, they deserve it. Such things have happened countless times in history. Especially those who like to use slogans, propaganda, and grand theories to deceive the world—aren’t they just normal occurrences? Isn’t this the most common thing in the “world of ignorance”? Don’t think that Hitler’s evil or Japan’s militarism’s cruelty makes being deceived tragic or worthy of sympathy. Without these so-called deceived or those who submit to tyranny, there would be no Hitler or Japanese militarism.

The most poisonous flower cannot grow without its soil. The “world of ignorance” is the best soil for all poisonous flowers. The most poisonous thing is the human heart. All evil acts are the result of collective karma; don’t think of yourself as an innocent baby. Laozi claimed that babies are the purest; wanting to return to that is foolishness. The cruelty of babies is no less than that of adults; they just lack the ability to manifest it.

But human kindness is also the purest; all good deeds are also the result of collective karma. Good and evil are born from your own heart. You are the one who becomes a gentleman or a petty person; no one can replace you.

Someone might ask: knowing there is “no approach” and “no avoidance,” why do people still “approach” and “avoid”? This is because their mental strength is pulled by karma, and their own power has not reached that level. The wind of karma can only blow away what can be blown away by karma; true freedom is freedom from this web of karma—“no approach,” “no avoidance”—free within all circumstances.

Life and death are great karmic forces. Just shouting “no approach” and “no avoidance,” how much do we dislike death and reincarnation? Yet, “death” and “reincarnation” still remain unpleasant. A true gentleman not only regards the world with no approach or avoidance but also regards life and death with no approach or avoidance. Therefore, the following sentence is also essential for a gentleman: “The gentleman, regarding life and death, has no approach, no avoidance, and measures it by righteousness in death.”

Chán Zhong’s plain translation of Zen sayings