---
title: "Liezi 列子 – Vol. 7 | Daozang"
url: "https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0124/juan/7/"
canonical: "https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0124/juan/7/"
lang: "en"
source: "Kanripo 漢籍リポジトリ（京都大学）"
license: "CC BY-SA 4.0"
---

# 《列子》Vol. 7

Dongshen 洞神部 · Vol. 7 / 8 · 7,937 characters

另有[张湛注本](https://daozang.app/text/KR5c0125/)（四库全书本）。

## Vol. 7 / 8

楊朱第七楊朱游於魯，舍於孟氏。孟氏問曰：「人而已矣，奚以名為？」曰：「以名者為富。」「既富矣，奚不已焉？」曰：「為貴。」「既貴矣，奚不已焉？」曰：「為死。」「既死矣，奚為焉？」曰：「為子孫。」「名奚益於子孫？」曰：「名乃苦其身、燋其心。乘其名者，澤及宗族，利兼鄉黨；況子孫乎？」「凡為名者必廉，廉斯貧；為名者必讓，讓斯賤。」曰：「管仲之相齊也，君淫亦淫，君奢亦奢。志合言從，道行國霸。死之後，管氏而已。田氏之相齊也，君盈則己降，君歛則己施。民皆歸之，因有齊國；子孫享之，至今不絕。」「若實名貧，偽名富。」曰：「實無名，名無實。名者、偽而已矣。昔者，堯舜偽以天下讓許由、善卷，而不失天下，享祚百年。

**Interpretation**

Yang Zhu (a Daoist thinker of the Warring States period) traveled to the state of Lu and stayed with the Meng family. A member of the Meng household asked him: "If people should simply live their lives fully while alive, why pursue fame?" Yang Zhu replied: "Fame can bring wealth." Meng pressed further: "But once wealthy, why remain unsatisfied?" Yang Zhu answered: "One then seeks high status." Meng continued: "Having attained status, why not stop?" Yang Zhu responded: "One must still consider matters after death."

Meng questioned: "What could the dead possibly desire?" Yang Zhu explained: "Planning for descendants." Meng remained puzzled: "How does fame benefit descendants?" Yang Zhu said: "Pursuing fame indeed exhausts body and mind. Yet established reputation brings blessings to the entire clan, benefits extending throughout the community—how much more for one's descendants?"

At this point, an interjector remarked: "Those who seek fame must be incorruptible, and incorruptibility leads to poverty. Fame-seekers must be humble, and humility leads to low status." Yang Zhu countered with examples: "When Guan Zhong served Qi, if the ruler indulged, he indulged; if the ruler was extravagant, he was extravagant. Sharing the ruler's temperament, his governance succeeded, making Qi a hegemon. Yet after his death, the Guan clan declined. When the Tian clan served Qi, if the ruler was arrogant, they were modest; if the ruler hoarded, they distributed. The people flocked to them, until the Tian clan eventually replaced Qi's ruling house, their descendants enjoying wealth and status unbroken to this day."

Yang Zhu concluded: "Genuine fame-seekers become poor, while fake fame-seekers grow rich. In truth, authentic people need no fame, and fame doesn't signify authenticity. What we call fame is ultimately illusory. Consider antiquity—when Yao and Shun pretended to cede the empire to Xu You and Shan Juan (legendary hermits), they actually never relinquished power, yet ruled securely for a hundred years."

伯夷、叔齊實以孤竹君讓而終亡其國，餓死於首陽之山。實、偽之辯，如此其省也。」楊朱曰：「百年、壽之大齊，得百年者千无一焉。設有一者，孩抱以逮昏老，幾居其半矣。夜眠之所弭，晝覺之所遺，又幾居其半矣。痛疾哀苦，亡失憂懼，又幾居其半矣。量十數年之中，逌然而自得亡介焉之慮者，亦亡一時之中爾。則人之生也奚為哉？奚樂哉？為美厚爾，為聲色爾。而美厚復不可常猒足，聲色不可常翫聞。乃復為刑賞之所禁勸，名法之所進退；遑遑爾競一時之虛譽，規死後之餘榮；偊偊爾順耳目之觀聽，惜身意之是非；徒失當年之至樂，不能自肆於一時。重囚纍梏，何以异哉？太古之人知生之暫來，知死之暫往；故從心而動，不違自然所好；當身之娛非所去也，故不為名所勸。從性而游，不逆萬物所好；死後之名非所取也，故不為刑所及。名譽先後，

**Interpretation**

Bo Yi and Shu Qi indeed yielded to each other over the throne of the state of Guzhu, a small state during the Shang dynasty. In the end, their country fell, and they starved to death on Mount Shouyang. The distinction between what is genuine and what is false is this simple and clear.

Yang Zhu, a Daoist thinker of the Warring States period, said: “A human life lasts at most a hundred years, and among a thousand people, scarcely one lives to that age. Imagine such a long-lived person: the time from infancy to the confusion of old age takes up almost half of life. Nighttime sleep and daytime daze take up nearly the other half. Add the time spent in illness and sorrow, worry and fear, and these consume much of what remains. By this reckoning, across several decades of life, the time truly spent carefree and at ease does not amount to even a moment. What, then, do people live for? What joy can there be in life?”

People live merely for fine food and splendid clothes, for music and beautiful women. Yet these pleasures cannot bring lasting satisfaction, and enjoyment of sound and sight cannot endure forever. People are also constrained by punishments and rewards, restricted by reputation and laws. They anxiously compete for empty fame and scheme for posthumous glory; they carefully cater to others’ opinions and weigh whether their own words and actions are right or wrong. They waste the happiness of the present, unable to live freely even for a moment. How is this any different from being a prisoner bound in heavy chains?

People in antiquity understood that life is brief and death inevitable. So they acted as their hearts led them, without violating their natural disposition. They did not deliberately give up present pleasures, and so were not enticed by empty fame. They lived in accord with their nature, without resisting the natural course of things. They did not seek a reputation after death, and so were not ensnared by punishment. The order of precedence in reputation...

年命多少，非所量也。楊朱曰：「萬物所異者生也，所同者死也。生則有賢愚、貴賤，是所異也；死則有臭腐、消滅，是所同也。雖然，賢愚、貴賤非所能也，臭腐、消滅亦非所能也。故生非所生，死非所死；賢非所賢，愚非所愚，貴非所貴，賤非所賤。然而萬物齊生齊死，齊賢齊愚，齊貴齊賤。十年亦死，百年亦死。仁聖亦死，凶愚亦死。生則堯、舜，死則腐骨；生則桀、紂，死則腐骨。腐骨一矣，孰知其異？且趣當生，奚遑死後？」楊朱曰：「伯夷非亡欲，矜清之郵，以放餓死。展季非亡情，矜貞之郵，以放寡宗。清貞之誤善之若此！」楊朱曰：「原憲窶於魯，子貢殖於衛。原憲之窶損生，子貢之殖累身。」「然則窶亦不可，殖亦不可；其可焉在？」曰：「可在樂生，可在逸身。故善樂生者不窶，善逸身者不殖。」

**Interpretation**

Yang Zhu (a Daoist thinker of the Warring States period) said: The difference between all things lies in their state while alive, while their sameness is found in their inevitable death. In life, there are distinctions between wisdom and foolishness, nobility and baseness—these are differences; in death, all things decay and vanish—this is commonality. Yet neither the distinctions of wisdom/foolishness and nobility/baseness, nor the processes of decay and disappearance, are matters that humans can fully control.

Thus, life is not something one can determine how to live, nor is death something one can decide how to die; wisdom cannot be attained through deliberate pursuit, nor is foolishness something one intentionally feigns—the same applies to nobility and baseness. In the end, all things are born the same, die the same, and share the same fate in wisdom and foolishness, nobility and baseness.

Those who live ten years will die, and those who live a hundred years will also die. Benevolent sages die, and wicked fools die as well. In life, one may be a sage-king like Yao or Shun, but in death, they are merely dry bones; in life, one may be a tyrant like Jie or Zhou, but in death, they too turn into dry bones. Since all become indistinguishable rotting bones in the end, who can discern the differences they held in life? It is better to live well in the present—why worry about what comes after death?

Yang Zhu further illustrated his point with examples: Bo Yi (a recluse of the late Shang dynasty) was not without desires, but his excessive pursuit of purity led him to starve to death on Shouyang Mountain; Zhan Ji (Liu Xiahui, famous for his moral restraint) was not without emotions, but his extreme insistence on chastity resulted in few descendants. Excessive pursuit of purity and chastity, in the end, only harms oneself.

He also compared Yuan Xian (a disciple of Confucius who embraced poverty) living in destitution in Lu to Zigong (a disciple skilled in commerce) amassing great wealth in Wei. Yuan Xian’s poverty damaged his life, while Zigong’s wealth burdened his body and mind. If neither poverty nor wealth is ideal, what then should one do? Yang Zhu believed the key lies in enjoying life and nurturing physical and mental ease. Those who truly understand how to live well do not subject themselves to hardship, and those skilled in self-cultivation are not weighed down by material wealth.

楊朱曰：「古語有之：『生相憐，死相捐。』此語至矣。相憐之道，非唯情也；勤能使逸，饑能使飽，寒能使溫，窮能使達也。相捐之道，非不相哀也；不含珠玉，不服文錦，不陳犧牲，不設明器也。晏平仲問養生於管夷吾。管夷吾曰：『肆之而已，勿壅勿閼。』晏平仲曰：『其目柰何？』夷吾曰：『恣耳之所欲聽，恣目之所欲視，恣鼻之所欲向，恣口之所欲言，恣體之所欲安，恣意之所欲行。夫耳之所欲聞者音聲，而不得聽，謂之閼聰；目之所欲見者美色，而不得視，謂之閼明；鼻之所欲向者椒蘭，而不得嗅，謂之閼顫；口之所欲道者是非，而不得言，謂之閼智；體之所欲安者美厚，而不得從，謂之閼適；意之所欲為者放逸，而不得行，謂之閼性。凡此諸閼，廢虐之主。去廢虐之主，

**Interpretation**

Yang Zhu, a thinker of the Warring States period, said:

An old saying goes, “While alive, people cherish one another; after death, they leave one another behind.” It captures the matter perfectly.

Cherishing one another in life means more than showing affection. It also means offering practical help: easing someone’s hardships, feeding them when they are hungry, keeping them warm when they are cold, and helping them through difficulty.

Leaving one another behind after death does not mean failing to mourn. It means not placing pearls and jade in the deceased person’s mouth, dressing them in splendid brocade, offering sacrificial animals, or displaying burial figurines and objects.

Yan Pingzhong, a senior official of the state of Qi during the Spring and Autumn period, asked Guan Yiwu—also known as Guan Zhong, a senior official of Qi—about the art of caring for life. Guan Yiwu replied, “Let life unfold naturally. Do not obstruct or repress it.”

Yan Pingzhong asked, “What should one do in practice?”

Guan Yiwu said, “Let the ears listen freely to what they want to hear, the eyes look freely at what they want to see, the nose smell freely what it wants to smell, and the mouth say freely what it wants to say. Let the body rest in comfort, and let the mind act freely.

“What the ears want to hear is music, but preventing them from hearing it is called obstructing hearing. What the eyes want to see is beautiful scenery, but preventing them from seeing it is called obstructing sight. What the nose wants to smell is the fragrance of Sichuan pepper and orchids, but preventing it from doing so is called obstructing smell. What the mouth wants to speak of is right and wrong and the principles behind them, but preventing it from speaking is called obstructing wisdom.

“The body wants comfort and abundance, but preventing it from having them is called repressing well-being. The mind wants to unfold freely, but preventing it from acting is called repressing one’s nature.

“All these forms of repression are sources of harm and suffering. Remove these sources that damage and constrain life…”

熙熙然以俟死，一日、一月、一年、十年，吾所謂養。拘此廢虐之主，錄而不舍，戚戚然以至久生，百年、千年、萬年，非吾所謂養。』管夷吾曰：『吾既告子養生矣，送死柰何？』晏平仲曰：『送死略矣，將何以告焉？』管夷吾曰：『吾固欲聞之。』平仲曰：『既死，豈在我哉？焚之亦可，沈之亦可，瘞之亦可，露之亦可，衣薪而棄諸溝壑亦可，袞文繡裳而納諸石椁亦可，唯所遇焉。』管夷吾顧謂鮑叔黃子曰：『生死之道，吾二人進之矣。』」子產相鄭，專國之政；三年，善者服其化，惡者畏其禁，鄭國以治。諸侯憚之。而有兄曰公孫朝，有弟曰公孫穆。朝好酒，穆好色。朝之室也聚酒千鐘，積麴成封，望門百步，糟漿之氣逆於人鼻。方其荒於酒也，不知世道之安危，人理之悔𠫤，室內之有亡，九族之親踈，存亡之哀樂也。

**Interpretation**

This passage from the *Liezi* vividly conveys the Daoist perspective on life and death through several conversations and examples.

When Guan Zhong (Guan Yiwu) and Yan Ying (Yan Pingzhong) discuss the art of nurturing life, they observe that spending all one’s time rushing about while waiting to die—whether one lives a day, a month, a year, or ten years—is not true cultivation of life. Yet being overly attached to extending one’s life, living for a hundred, a thousand, or ten thousand years, is no closer to its true meaning. This reflects the central Daoist idea of following the natural course of things.

When Guan Zhong asks how one should arrange for what happens after death, Yan Ying replies with complete ease: once a person dies, the matter is out of their hands. They may be cremated, buried in water or earth, left exposed, wrapped in a straw mat and thrown into a ditch, or dressed in fine robes and placed in a stone coffin. One should simply accept whatever comes to pass. This complete indifference to posthumous arrangements expresses the Daoist philosophical ideal of viewing life and death as equal.

The passage also mentions that Zichan, prime minister of Zheng, governed successfully, while his brothers Gongsun Chao and Gongsun Mu indulged in drink and sensual pleasures. Gongsun Chao’s house was piled high with wine, with heaps of yeast stacked like mountains; the smell of wine could be detected a hundred paces away. When drunk, he paid no heed to worldly dangers, the warmth or coldness of human relationships, the fate of his household, or ties among relatives. This example contrasts with the earlier discussion, suggesting that excessive attachment to pleasure, like excessive attachment to longevity, goes against the natural Dao.

Taken as a whole, the passage uses the words and actions of different figures to vividly explain the Daoist principles that life and death are one and that we should follow nature. It opposes both the deliberate pursuit of immortality and unrestrained indulgence, advocating instead a detached attitude toward the course of life.

雖水火兵刃交於前，弗知也。穆之後庭比房數十，皆擇稚齒婑媠者以盈之。方其聃於色也，屏親昵，絕交游，逃於後庭，以晝足夜；三月一出，意猶未愜。鄉有處子之娥姣者，必賄而招之，媒而挑之，弗獲而後已。子產日夜以為戚，密造鄧析而謀之，曰：「喬聞治身以及家，治家以及國，此言自於近至於遠也。喬為國則治矣，而家則亂矣。其道逆邪？將奚方以救二子？子其詔之！」鄧析曰：「吾怪之久矣，未敢先言。子奚不時其治也，喻以性命之重，誘以禮義之尊乎？」子產用鄧析之言，因閒以謁其兄弟，而告之曰：「人之所以貴於禽獸者，智慮。智慮之所將者，禮義。禮義成，則名位至矣。若觸情而動，聃於嗜慾，則性命危矣。子納喬之言，則朝自悔而夕食祿矣。」朝穆曰：「吾知之久矣，擇之亦久矣，

**Interpretation**

Even when weapons, floods, and fires pressed in around him, he remained entirely unaware. Duke Mu’s inner palace had dozens of adjoining rooms, all filled with young, beautiful women he had chosen. When he gave himself over to their charms, he avoided his relatives and friends, cut off all social contact, and hid in the inner palace all day. He indulged in sensual pleasures day and night, emerging only once every three months, yet still felt unsatisfied.

Whenever a village had a beautiful young woman, he would offer money to secure her, sending people to make the proposal and entice her. He would not give up until he had her. Zichan, the chief minister of Zheng, worried about this day and night. He secretly visited Deng Xi, a thinker of the School of Names, to consult him. “I have heard that one must cultivate oneself before bringing order to one’s family, and bring order to one’s family before governing the state. This is the principle of proceeding from near to far. My government is reasonably well ordered, yet my two younger brothers behave so recklessly. Could the principle be reversed? What can be done to save them? Please advise me.”

Deng Xi replied, “I have long found this strange, but did not dare speak first. Why not counsel them while they are clearheaded? Guide them by explaining that life is precious, and persuade them by showing the dignity of ritual and righteousness.” Zichan took his advice and found an opportunity to speak to his two brothers. “What makes people nobler than birds and beasts is their reason. Ritual and righteousness are what reason follows. If you practice them, honor and status will come of their own accord. But if you give free rein to desire and lose yourselves in indulgence, your lives will be in danger. If you heed my advice, repent in the morning, and by evening you can obtain office and rank.”

Zhaomu replied, “I have known these principles for a long time. I chose this way of life only after thinking it through carefully.” (This implies that they knew they were doing wrong but had no wish to give up their indulgent way of life.)

豈待若言而後識之哉？凡生之難遇而死之易及。以難遇之生，俟易及之死，可孰念哉？而欲尊禮義以夸人，矯情性以招名，吾以此為弗若死矣。為欲盡一生之歡，窮當年之樂。唯患腹溢而不得恣口之飲，力憊而不得肆情於色；不遑憂名聲之醜、性命之危也。且若以治國之能夸物，欲以說辭亂我之心，榮祿喜我之意，不亦鄙而可憐哉？我又欲與若別之。夫善治外者，物未必治，而身交苦；善治內者，物未必亂，而性交逸。以若之治外，其法可蹔行於一國，未合於人心；以我之治內，可推之於天下，君臣之道息矣。吾常欲以此術而喻之，若反以彼術而教我哉？」子產忙然无以應之。他日以告鄧析。鄧析曰：「子與真人居而不知也，孰謂子智者乎？鄭國之治偶耳，非子之功也。」衛端木叔者、子貢之世也。藉其先貲，家累萬金。不治世故，放意所好。其生民之所欲為，

**Interpretation**

Must one wait to hear it from others before understanding this truth? Human life is hard to attain, yet death may come at any moment. To use this rarely obtained life in waiting for death that comes so easily—what could possibly be worth clinging to?

Some wish to glorify themselves through ritual propriety and moral virtue, suppressing their true nature to seek fame. I say such people might as well be dead. In this human existence, one ought to fully enjoy present joys and pursue worldly pleasures. One should only fear having a stomach too full to drink freely, or lacking the strength to indulge in sensual delights—how could there be leisure to worry about reputation's rise and fall, or life's safety and peril?

If you flaunt your talent for governing states to impress me, attempting to confuse my mind with clever words and delight me with rank and wealth—is this not utterly shallow and pitiable? I shall part ways with you here.

Those skilled at managing external affairs may not truly govern things well, yet exhaust their body and mind in the attempt; those adept at inner cultivation may find external things don't necessarily fall into disorder, while their innate nature grows ever more tranquil.

Your method of external governance might work temporarily in one state, but it contradicts human hearts and innate nature. My art of inner cultivation could extend throughout the world, making even the distinctions between ruler and minister disappear. I originally intended to enlighten you with this principle—yet you would instruct me with that approach instead?

Zichan (renowned minister of Zheng) heard this and was left speechless in bewilderment. Later he recounted it to Deng Xi (logician of the School of Names), who remarked: "You've kept company with one who has attained the Dao yet didn't recognize him—who would still call you wise? That Zheng was well-governed was mere coincidence, not your achievement."

In Wei there was a man named Duanmu Shu, descendant of Zigong (disciple of Confucius). Inheriting his ancestors' accumulated wealth, he possessed ten thousand gold pieces. He ignored worldly affairs, living exactly as his heart desired. Whatever activities common people wished to pursue, he experienced them all to the fullest.

人意之所欲玩者，无不為也，无不玩也。牆屋臺榭，園囿池沼，飲食車服，聲樂嬪御，擬齊、楚之君焉。至其情所欲好，耳所欲聽，目所欲視，口所欲嘗，雖殊方偏國，非齊土之所產育者，无不必致之；猶藩牆之物也。及其游也，雖山川阻險，塗逕脩遠，无不必之，猶人之行咫步也。賓客在庭者日百住，庖廚之下不絕煙火，堂廡之上不絕聲樂。奉養之餘，先散之宗族；宗族之餘，次散之邑里；邑里之餘，乃散之一國。行年六十，氣幹將衰，棄其家事，都散其庫藏、珍寶、車服、妾媵。一年之中盡焉，不為子孫留財。及其病也，无藥石之儲；及其死也，无瘞埋之資。一國之人受其施者，相與賦而藏之，反其子孫之財焉。禽骨釐聞之，曰：「端木叔、狂人也，辱其祖矣。」段干木聞之，曰：「木叔、達人也，德過其祖矣。其所行也，其所為也，

**Interpretation**

Among those who desire pleasure, there is nothing they will not do and nothing they will not try. They build high walls and spacious compounds, pavilions and towers; lay out gardens and ponds; enjoy fine food and splendid clothes; and watch music and dance performances on a scale rivaling the rulers of Qi and Chu.

Whatever they truly desire—what their ears want to hear, their eyes want to see, or their mouths want to taste—even rare treasures from distant minor states, things not produced in the Central States, they are sure to obtain. They acquire them as easily as picking fruit from their own gardens.

When they go traveling for pleasure, no matter how high the mountains, dangerous the waters, or long the journey, they are sure to go, as easily as ordinary people take a few steps. Hundreds of guests pass through their homes every day. The kitchen fires never go out, and music and dancing fill the halls day and night.

Beyond what he keeps for his own enjoyment, he first distributes his wealth among his clan and relatives. Whatever remains after that he gives to his neighbors; whatever is left after helping them, he shares with the people throughout the realm. At sixty, feeling his strength begin to wane, he abandons his household affairs and gives away all the treasures in his storehouses, his carriages and horses, fine clothes, concubines, and servants. He disperses his entire fortune within a year, leaving not the slightest inheritance for his descendants.

When he falls ill, his family has no money even to buy medicine. When he dies, they cannot afford his burial. But people throughout the realm who had benefited from his generosity pool their money to bury him, and return to his descendants the wealth he had once given away.

When Qin Guli, a scholar of the Warring States period, heard of this, he remarked, “Duanmu Shu was a madman who brought shame upon his ancestors.” Duan Ganmu, a worthy man of the same era, said instead, “Duanmu Shu was a man of understanding, whose virtue surpassed that of his ancestors. What he did…”

聚意所經，而誠理所取。衛之君子多以禮教自持，固未足以得此人之心也。」孟孫陽問楊子曰：「有人於此，貴生愛身，以蘄不死，可乎？」曰：「理无不死。」「以蘄久生，可乎？」曰：「理无久生。生非貴之所能存，身非愛之所能厚。且久生奚為？五情好惡，古猶今也；四體安危，古猶今也；世事苦樂，古猶今也；變易治亂，古猶今也。既聞之矣，既見之矣，既更之矣，百年猶厭其多，況久生之苦也乎？」孟孫陽曰：「若然，速亡愈於久生；則踐鋒刃，入湯火，得所志矣。」楊子曰：「不然；既生，則廢而任之，究其所欲，以俟於死。將死，則廢而任之，究其所之，以放於盡。无不廢，无不任，何遽遟速於其閒乎？」楊朱曰：「伯成子高不以一毫利物，舍國而隱耕。大禹不以一身自利，一體偏枯。

**Interpretation**

This dialogue records a discussion of life between Yang Zhu, a Daoist thinker of the Warring States period, and Meng Sunyang. In essence, it goes like this:

Meng Sunyang asked Yang Zhu, “If someone cherishes life and cares for their body above all else, hoping to attain immortality, can they succeed?” Yang Zhu replied, “In principle, there is no way to avoid death.” Meng Sunyang asked again, “Then surely one can at least seek a long life?” Yang Zhu said, “There is no way to live forever, either. Life does not grow longer because you cherish it, and the body does not remain healthy forever because you care for it.”

Yang Zhu went on to explain: What is the point of living a long time? Human emotions—joy, anger, sorrow, and pleasure—are much the same in every age. The body’s experiences of safety and danger have not changed over time; the world’s pains and pleasures are the same; and the shifts between social order and disorder repeat themselves from one era to another. Since people experience much the same things, even a hundred years can seem too long. How much more so would a longer life bring still more suffering?

Meng Sunyang objected, “By that reasoning, dying young is better than living a long time. Why not go straight to a mountain of blades or into a sea of fire to seek death?” Yang Zhu immediately corrected him: “That is not what I mean. Since you are alive, live naturally, satisfy the desires that are proper to you, and continue until death comes. When facing death, accept it calmly and let your life come to its natural end. Do not deliberately resist life, and do not deliberately seek death. Why rush to choose between life and death?”

The passage ends by contrasting two historical figures. Bocheng Zigao, an ancient recluse, would not sacrifice even a single hair for anything outside himself; he gave up the throne and withdrew to farm. Yu the Great, the legendary sage who controlled the floods, disregarded his personal safety and devoted himself so fully to the work that his body was injured. These radically different choices in life both express the core Daoist idea of following nature.

古之人損一毫利天下、不與也，悉天下奉一身、不取也。人人不損一毫，人人不利天下，天下治矣。」禽子問楊朱曰：「去子體之一毛以濟一世，汝為之乎？」楊子曰：「世固非一毛之所濟。」禽子曰：「假濟，為之乎？」楊子弗應。禽子出語孟孫陽。孟孫陽曰：「子不達夫子之心，吾請言之。有侵若肌膚獲萬金者，若為之乎？」曰：「為之。」孟孫陽曰：「有斷若一節得一國，子為之乎？」禽子默然有閒。孟孫陽曰：「一毛微於肌膚，肌膚微於一節，省矣。然則積一毛以成肌膚，積肌膚以成一節。一毛固一體萬分中之一物，柰何輕之乎？」禽子曰：「吾不能所以荅子。然則以子之言問老聃、關尹，則子言當矣；以吾言問大禹、墨翟，則吾言當矣。」孟孫陽因顧與其徒說他事。楊朱曰：「天下之美歸之舜、禹、周、孔，天下之惡歸之桀、紂。然而舜耕於河陽，

**Interpretation**

Some people in ancient times believed that even if sacrificing a single hair could benefit all under Heaven, they would not do it; and even if all under Heaven were offered to one person, that person would not accept it. If no one harmed a single hair of their own, and no one sought to benefit all under Heaven, then all under Heaven would naturally be at peace.

Qin Zi asked Yang Zhu, “If pulling out one hair from your body could save the whole world, would you do it?”

Yang Zhu replied, “The world cannot be saved by pulling out a single hair.”

Qin Zi asked again, “Suppose pulling out one hair really could save the world. Would you do it?”

Yang Zhu did not answer.

After Qin Zi left, he told Meng Sunyang what had happened. Meng Sunyang said, “You do not understand the Master’s meaning. Let me explain it. If someone could injure your skin and thereby gain ten thousand measures of gold, would you agree?”

Qin Zi said, “I would.”

Meng Sunyang continued, “If someone could cut off one of your limbs and thereby gain a whole state, would you agree?”

Qin Zi fell silent for a while.

Meng Sunyang said, “A hair is finer than the skin, and the skin is finer than a limb. That much is clear. But hairs accumulate to form the skin, and the skin accumulates to form a limb. A single hair is part of the whole body, one ten-thousandth of it. How can it be dismissed as insignificant?”

Qin Zi said, “I do not know how to answer you. But if you put your words to Lao Dan and Guan Yin, they would agree with you; if you put mine to Yu the Great and Mo Di, they would agree with me.”

Meng Sunyang then turned away and began talking with his disciples about something else.

Yang Zhu said, “All the good names under Heaven belong to Shun, Yu the Great, the Duke of Zhou, and Confucius; all the evil names belong to Jie and Zhou. Yet Shun once farmed in Heyang…”

陶於雷澤，四體不得蹔安，口腹不得美厚；父母之所不愛，弟妹之所不親。行年三十，不告而娶。及受堯之禪，年已長，智已衰。商鈞不才，禪位於禹，戚戚然以至於死。此天人之窮毒者也。鯀治水土，績用不就，殛諸羽山。禹纂業事讎，惟荒土功，子產不字，過門不入；身體偏枯，手足胼胝。及受舜禪，卑宮室，美紱冕，戚戚然以至於死：此天人之憂苦者也。武王既終，成王幼弱，周公攝天子之政。邵公不悅，四國流言。居東三年，誅兄放弟，僅免其身，戚戚然以至於死：此天人之危懼者也。孔子明帝王之道，應時君之聘，伐樹於宋，削迹於衛，窮於商周，圍於陳、蔡，受屈於季氏，見辱於陽虎，戚戚然以至於死：此天民之遑遽者也。凡彼四聖者，生无一日之歡，死有萬世之名。名者、固非實之所取也。雖稱之弗知，雖賞之不知，

**Interpretation**

This passage recounts the arduous life experiences of four ancient sages, revealing the stark contrast between fame and lived reality.

Shun toiled in the marshlands of Leize during his youth, enduring extreme hardship with no rest for his body and no delicacies to eat. His parents showed him no affection, nor did his siblings cherish him. At thirty, he took a wife without his parents' consent. When he later received Yao's abdication, he was already aged and mentally diminished. Because his son Shangjun proved unworthy, he ultimately passed the throne to Yu the Great, dying in sorrow and suffering. This exemplifies a life of utmost misery shaped by both heavenly will and human action.

Yu the Great inherited his father Gun's failed flood control mission after Gun was exiled and executed at Mount Yu. Devoting himself entirely to taming the waters, Yu neglected even his wife and newborn child, passing his own doorstep without entering. Prolonged labor left him half-paralyzed, with calloused hands and feet. Even after receiving Shun's abdication, he continued living in simple quarters, focusing only on ritual propriety and ceremonial dress, ultimately dying in distress. This represents a life of sorrow forged by both divine decree and human effort.

After King Wu of Zhou's death, the young King Cheng ascended the throne with the Duke of Zhou (Ji Dan) acting as regent. This provoked Duke Shao's resentment, while regional lords spread malicious rumors. The Duke of Zhou retreated to the eastern capital for three years, during which he was forced to execute his rebellious elder brother Guan Shu and exile his younger brother Cai Shu to barely preserve his own life, ultimately dying in anxiety and fear. This illustrates a life of peril created by both celestial mandate and mortal affairs.

Confucius, though thoroughly versed in the ways of sovereign rule, wandered between states answering feudal lords' summons only to face persecution—being driven away by felled trees in Song, expelled from Wei, reduced to poverty in the former Shang and Zhou territories, besieged between Chen and Cai, wronged by the Ji clan, and humiliated by Yang Hu—ultimately dying in restless agitation. This depicts the fate of heaven's chosen: a life of constant toil and movement.

These four sages knew not a single day of joy in life, yet their names shine through millennia after death. Such fame fundamentally bears no relation to actual lived experience. Though people praise them, they cannot know it; though they receive honor, they cannot feel it.

(Note: The term "qīqī rán" describes a state of sorrow and suffering. "The extreme misery/sorrow/peril/agitation wrought by both heaven and man" refers to dire circumstances created by the interplay of divine will and human action.)

與株塊无以異矣。桀藉累世之資，居南面之尊，智足以距群下，威足以震海內；恣耳目之所娛，窮意慮之所為，熙熙然以至於死：此天民之逸蕩者也。紂亦藉累世之資，居南面之尊；威无不行，志无不從；肆情於傾宮，縱欲於長夜；不以禮義自苦，熙熙然以至於誅：此天民之放縱者也。彼二凶也，生有從欲之歡，死被愚暴之名。實者、固非名之所與也，雖毀之不知，雖稱之弗知，此與株塊奚以異矣。彼四聖、雖美之所歸，苦以至終，同歸於死矣。彼二凶、雖惡之所歸，樂以至終，亦同歸於死矣。楊朱見梁王，言治天下如運諸掌。梁王曰：「先生有一妻一妾而不能治，三畝之園而不能芸；而言治天下如運諸掌，何也？」對曰：「君見其牧羊者乎？百羊而群，使五尺童子荷箠而隨之，欲東而東，欲西而西。使堯牽一羊，舜荷箠而隨之，

**Interpretation**

This passage recounts the stories of two notorious tyrants: Jie of Xia and Zhou of Shang. Though they inherited accumulated wealth and power through generations, sitting upon royal thrones with intellect sufficient to dominate their ministers and authority mighty enough to awe the realm, they indulged their desires and wallowed in pleasure until death. Jie pursued sensory gratification at will, while Zhou reveled in debauchery through the night within lavish palaces, utterly disregarding ritual propriety and virtue. Though they lived in extravagant luxury, they left behind only reputations of cruelty and folly after death.

Yet the author observes that posthumous reputation holds no meaning for the dead. Like blocks of wood or lumps of earth, they remain oblivious whether people praise or condemn them. The four sage-kings (Yao, Shun, etc.) gained glorious reputations but endured lifelong toil, while the two tyrants left infamous legacies yet enjoyed boundless pleasure—yet all ultimately faced the same inevitable death, their final outcomes fundamentally identical.

The text further relates the story of Yang Zhu meeting King Liang of Wei. Yang Zhu claimed governing the world would be "as easy as turning one's palm," to which the king retorted: "If you can't even manage your own household and vegetable garden, what qualifies you to govern the empire?" Yang Zhu responded with a shepherd's analogy: "Having a child whip-drive a hundred sheep is simple, but making sage-kings like Yao and Shun herd a single sheep would prove difficult." This illustrates that governing lies not in micromanagement, but in mastering fundamental methods.

則不能前矣。且臣聞之：吞舟之魚不游枝流；鴻鵠高飛，不集汙池。何則？其極遠也。黃鐘、大呂不可從煩奏之舞。何則？其音䟽也。將治大者不治細，成大功者不成小，此之謂矣。」楊朱曰：「太古之事滅矣，孰誌之哉？三皇之事若存若亡，五帝之事若覺若夢，三王之事或隱或顯，億不識一。當身之事或聞或見，萬不識一。目前之事或存或廢，千不識一。太古至于今日，年數固不可勝紀。但伏羲已來三十餘萬歲，賢愚、好醜，成敗、是非，无不消滅；但遟速之閒耳。矜一時之毀譽，以焦苦其神形，要死後數百年中餘名，豈足潤枯骨？何生之樂哉？」楊朱曰：「人肖天地之䫉，懷五常之性，有生之最靈者也。人者、爪牙不足以供守衛，肌膚不足以自捍禦，趨走不足以逃利害，无毛羽以禦寒暑，必將資物以為養（性），任智而不恃力。

**Interpretation**

This passage conveys two main ideas through vivid analogies and philosophical reasoning:

The first layer illustrates how those with grand aspirations don't dwell on trivial matters. Just as giant fish capable of swallowing boats don't swim in narrow streams, and soaring swans refuse to perch by muddy ponds—because their ambitions lie beyond. The solemn tones of Huangzhong and Dalu (the most refined ancient musical pitches) cannot accompany vulgar dances, as their harmonies are too dignified. Those destined for great achievements won't tangle with petty affairs, just as builders of monumental works don't calculate minor losses—this is the fundamental principle.

The second layer presents the philosophy of Yang Zhu (a Daoist thinker from the Warring States period). He argues that ancient history has become irrecoverable, the deeds of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors are indistinguishable from legend, and even contemporary events remain largely unknowable. Over the 300,000 years since Fuxi's era, whether wise or foolish, beautiful or ugly, successful or failed—all ultimately vanish with time, differing only in duration. To torment body and mind for fleeting fame, pursuing posthumous reputation lasting mere centuries—what meaning does such fame hold for dry bones? Where then lies life's joy?

Yang Zhu further elaborates: Though humans embody heaven-earth's form (referring to the body's correspondence with cosmic patterns) and possess the Five Constant Virtues (humanity, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness), making us nature's most spiritual beings, our physical form remains fragile—nails and teeth insufficient for defense, skin and muscles inadequate for protection, running speed unable to escape calamity, lacking feathers to withstand temperature extremes. Thus human survival fundamentally depends on external resources, requiring wise utilization of intellect rather than reliance on brute strength.

故智之所貴，存我為貴；力之所賤，侵物為賤。然身非我有也，既生，不得不全之；物非我有也，既有，不得而去之。身固生之主，物亦養之主。雖全生，（身）不可有其身；雖不去物，不可有其物。有其物，有其身，是橫私天下之身，橫私天下之物。不橫私天下之身，不橫私天下物者，其唯聖人乎！公天下之身，公天下之物，其唯至人矣！此之謂至至者也。」楊朱曰：「生民之不得休息，為四事故：一為壽，二為名，三為位，四為貨。有此四者，畏鬼，畏人，畏威，畏刑：此謂之遁民也。可殺可活，制命在外。不逆命，何羨壽？不矜貴，何羨名？不要勢，何羨位？不貪富，何羨貨？此之謂順民也。天下无對，制命在內。故語有之曰：人不婚宦，情欲失半；人不衣食，君臣道息。

**Interpretation**

The most precious aspect of wisdom lies in recognizing that preserving oneself is true value; the most despicable use of strength is to harm external things. The human body does not truly belong to oneself, yet since we live, we must preserve it; external possessions are not truly ours either, yet since we have them, we cannot recklessly discard them. The body is the foundation of life, while external things serve as its nourishment.

Though we must safeguard life, we should not cling possessively to this body; though we do not abandon external things, we must not greedily hoard them. To obsessively claim ownership of both body and possessions is to forcibly seize what belongs to all under heaven. Only a sage could refrain from such forceful appropriation. To regard all bodies under heaven as communal and all things as shared—this is achievable only by those who have reached the pinnacle of Dao (the Way) and De (Virtue). Such a person is called the "ultimate ultimate one" (the highest embodiment of realization).

Yang Zhu (a Warring States philosopher) said: "The reason people find no peace is due to four pursuits: the first is the craving for longevity, the second the chase for fame, the third the lust for power, and the fourth the hoarding of wealth. Those bound by these four things live in fear—of spirits, of others, of authority, of punishment. Such people are called 'fleeing folk' (ignorant beings who evade reality)."

(The true wise understand that) life and death can be faced with equanimity, for fate lies in the hands of external forces. If one does not resist destiny, why envy longevity? If one does not flaunt status, why chase empty fame? If one does not crave power, why fight for position? If one is not attached to wealth, why amass goods? Such a person is a "harmonious folk" (one who aligns with the Dao of heaven). When one reaches a state unrivaled in the world, they truly master their own fate.

Thus, the ancient saying holds true: If a person neither establishes a household nor seeks office, their desires diminish by half; if one has no need for clothing or food, the hierarchy between ruler and subject naturally dissolves.

周諺曰：「田父可坐殺。」晨出夜入，自以性之恆；啜菽茹藿，自以味之極；肌肉麤厚，筋節腃急，一朝處以柔毛綈幕，薦以粱肉蘭橘，心㾓體煩，內熱生病矣。商、魯之君與田父侔地，則亦不盈一時而憊矣。故野人之所安，野人之所美，謂天下无過者。昔者、宋國有田夫，常衣縕黂，僅以過冬。暨春東作，自曝於日，不知天下之有廣廈隩室，綿纊狐狢。顧謂其妻曰：『負日之煊，人莫知者；以獻吾君，將有重賞。』里之富室告之曰：『昔人有美戎菽，甘枲莖芹萍子者，對鄉豪稱之。鄉豪取而嘗之，蜇於口，慘於腹，眾哂而怨之，其人大慚。子、此類也。』」楊朱曰：「豐屋美服，厚味姣色。有此四者，何求於外？有此而求外者，无猒之性。无猒之性、陰陽之蠹也。忠不足以安君，

**Interpretation**

A Zhou dynasty proverb states: "A farmer sitting idle may still lose his life." This illustrates the following truth: Peasants accustomed to rising with the sun and resting at dusk consider this rhythm divinely ordained; those used to eating bean leaves and wild herbs believe them the finest delicacies; their bodies grow sturdy and robust, their sinews taut with strength. Yet if made to recline on soft woolen carpets beneath silken canopies, dining on refined rice, fatty meats, and fragrant oranges, they would instead become agitated, developing internal heat and illness.

Were the rulers of Shang or Lu states forced to adopt a peasant's lifestyle, they too would quickly collapse from exhaustion. Thus what villagers consider comfortable living represents to them the pinnacle of earthly pleasure.

There was once a Song farmer who survived harsh winters clad in tattered hemp. Come spring ploughing, he basked in sunlight for warmth, wholly unaware of multi-storied heated chambers or fox-fur robes. Delighted, he told his wife: "This sunlight warmth is marvelous—others don't know about it! If we presented this method to our lord, we'd surely receive rich rewards." A wealthy villager hearing this remarked: "Long ago, someone considered wild beans, hemp stalks, water celery and duckweed exquisite fare, recommending them to the gentry. When tasted, these numbed mouths and wrung bellies with pain. All mocked him, leaving the man ashamed. You now resemble that very fellow."

Yang Zhu (Warring States philosopher) commented: "Spacious halls, fine garments, delicious food, beautiful women—with these four, what more need one seek? Those unsatisfied despite possessing these suffer from insatiable greed. Such bottomless craving acts like parasites, eroding one's yin-yang equilibrium."

[Supplementary note: This passage contrasts different social strata's lifestyles to demonstrate how habits and contentment remain relative. Peasants find sunlight blissful while rulers couldn't endure fieldwork; conversely, peasants suddenly living luxuriously fall ill. Yang Zhu critiques humanity's insatiable desires, arguing that once basic needs are met, excessive material pursuit becomes harmful.]

適足以危身；義不足以利物，適足以害生。安上不由於忠，而忠名滅焉；利物不由於義，而義名絕焉。君臣皆安，物我兼利，古之道也。鬻子曰：『去名者无憂。』老子曰：『名者、實之賓。』而悠悠者趨名不已。名固不可去，名固不可賓邪？今有名則尊榮，亡名則卑辱。尊榮則逸樂，卑辱則憂苦。憂苦、犯性者也，逸樂、順性者也。斯實之所係矣。名胡可去？名胡可賓？但惡夫守名而累實。守名而累實，將恤危亡之不救，豈徒逸樂憂苦之閒哉

**Interpretation**

This passage from the *Liezi* discusses the dialectical relationship between reputation and substance. Excessive pursuit of empty fame can bring harm: chasing reputation to extremes endangers one's life, while flaunting benevolence and righteousness may actually harm living beings. Those in high positions don't attain stability through loyalty alone, yet the reputation of "loyalty" vanishes precisely because of this. Performing good deeds shouldn't be for showcasing virtue, yet the reputation of "righteousness" gets severed in the process. The ideal state is when both ruler and ministers dwell in peace, and all things benefit along with the self—this was the way of the ancient sages.

Master Yu (a Zhou dynasty worthy) said: "Only those who abandon empty fame can be free from worries." Laozi also pointed out: "Reputation is but the guest of substance." Yet people constantly chase after fame with restless urgency. Can reputation truly be completely discarded? Must it always remain secondary? In reality, those with renown receive respect while the unknown suffer contempt; respect brings ease and pleasure, while contempt leads to sorrow and suffering.

Sorrow and suffering violate our fundamental nature, whereas ease and pleasure align with heavenly disposition. These matters are intimately connected to actual life. Given this, how can reputation be entirely abandoned? How can it remain merely supplementary? The crux lies in not allowing stubborn attachment to empty fame to burden one's real existence. If one clings to reputation at the expense of substance, there may not even be time to avert peril—let alone oscillate between ease and sorrow.

？」

---

原文底本：Kanripo 漢籍リポジトリ（京都大学），CC BY-SA 4.0。  
Source text: Kanripo Chinese Classics Repository (Kyoto University), CC BY-SA 4.0.  
HTML version: https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0124/juan/7/