---
title: "Liezi 列子 – Vol. 8 | Daozang"
url: "https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0124/juan/8/"
canonical: "https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0124/juan/8/"
lang: "en"
source: "Kanripo 漢籍リポジトリ（京都大学）"
license: "CC BY-SA 4.0"
---

# 《列子》Vol. 8

Dongshen 洞神部 · Vol. 8 / 8 · 10,747 characters

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

## Vol. 8 / 8

說符第八子列子學於壺丘子林。壺丘子林曰：「子知持後，則可言持身矣。」列子曰：「願聞持後。」曰：「顧若影，則知之。」列子顧而觀影：形枉則影曲，形直則影正。然則枉直隨形而不在影，屈申任物而不在我。此之謂持後而處先。關尹謂子列子曰：「言美則響美，言惡則響惡；身長則影長，身短則影短。名也者、響也，行也者、影也。故曰：慎爾言，將有和之；慎爾行，將有隨之。是故聖人見出以知入，觀往以知來，此其所以先知之理也。度在身，稽在人。人愛我，我必愛之；人惡我，我必惡之。湯、武愛天下，故王；桀、紂惡天下，故亡，此所稽也。

**Interpretation**

Liezi (a prominent Daoist figure), when studying under his teacher Huqiu Zilin, was told: "If you understand the principle of maintaining humility and yielding, then we may discuss the Dao of self-cultivation." When Liezi inquired about the meaning of "chihou" (maintaining humble retreat), his teacher had him observe his own shadow.

Liezi noticed that when his body bent, the shadow became crooked; when he stood upright, the shadow straightened. This demonstrated that the shadow's form depended entirely on the body's posture, just as life's fortunes stem from one's own actions rather than external forces. This embodies the wisdom of "appearing to yield while actually taking the initiative" — what seems like retreat is in fact maintaining control.

Guan Yin (a disciple of Laozi) further explained to Liezi: "Beautiful words produce pleasant echoes, harsh words create grating echoes; a tall figure casts a long shadow, a short figure casts a short one. Reputation is like an echo, conduct like a shadow. Therefore, speak with care and responses will naturally harmonize; act with prudence and followers will naturally gather." The sages could perceive inner essence through outward manifestations and foresee the future by examining the past — this explains their capacity for prescience.

While personal conduct originates within oneself, its validation lies in others' responses. When people treat me kindly, I naturally reciprocate with goodwill; when others show hostility, I inevitably respond in kind. Emperor Tang of Shang and King Wu of Zhou ruled as sage kings because they cherished their people, while Jie of Xia and Zhou of Shang fell because they oppressed them — history provides the clearest testimony to this truth.

稽度皆明而不道也，譬之出不由門，行不從徑也。以是求利，不亦難乎？嘗觀之神農、有炎之德，稽之虞、夏、商、周之書，度諸法士賢人之言，所以存亡廢興而非由此道者，未之有也。」嚴恢曰：「所為問道者為富。今得珠亦富矣，安用道？」子列子曰：「桀、紂唯重利而輕道，是以亡。幸哉余未汝語也。人而无義，唯食而已，是雞狗也。彊食靡角，勝者為制，是禽獸也。為雞狗禽獸矣，而欲人之尊己，不可得也。人不尊己，則危辱及之矣。」列子學射中矣，請之於關尹子。關尹子曰：「子知子之所以中者乎？」對曰：「弗知也。」關尹子曰：「未可。」退而習之。三年，又以報關尹子。

**Interpretation**

These passages from the *Liezi* expound fundamental principles for human conduct. The first section observes that acting contrary to the Dao is like trying to enter a house without using the door or walking without following a path—how can one expect to attain benefit this way?

The text then draws from historical wisdom: examining the virtuous conduct (De) of the Divine Farmer Emperor (Shennong) and the Flame Emperor (Yandi), studying the classical texts of Yu, Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties, and evaluating the teachings of sages throughout history—in all cases, no nation that disregarded the Dao ever achieved prosperity or avoided destruction.

A man named Yan Hui once questioned: "Don't people seek the Dao just to attain wealth and status? If I can acquire riches through jewels, why would I need the Dao?" Liezi replied: "The tyrants Jie of Xia and Zhou of Shang valued profit above righteousness—that's why they met their downfall. Frankly, it's fortunate I haven't lectured you more about the Dao."

The third passage criticizes those who abandon moral principles for mere physical gratification, comparing them to chickens and dogs. If might makes right and the strongest rules, how are we different from beasts? Yet such beast-like individuals still expect others' respect—an impossible demand. Without genuine respect, calamity and disgrace inevitably follow.

The final anecdote recounts Liezi's archery training. After hitting the bullseye, he sought guidance from Master Guan Yin (a Daoist figure), who asked whether he understood why he succeeded. When Liezi admitted ignorance, Master Guan declared his skill insufficient. Only after three more years of dedicated practice did Liezi return to report his progress. This illustrates that true cultivation requires understanding the underlying principles, not just superficial technique.

關尹子曰：「子知子之所以中者乎？」列子曰：「知之矣。」關尹子曰：「可矣；守而勿失也。非獨射也，為國與身亦皆如之。故聖人不察存亡而察其所以然。」列子曰：「色盛者驕，力盛者奮，未可以語道也。故不班白語道矣，而況行之乎？故自奮則人莫之告。人莫之告，則孤而無輔矣。賢者任人，故年老而不衰，智盡而不亂。故治國之難在於知賢而不在自賢。」宋人有為其君以玉為楮葉者，三年而成。鋒殺莖柯，毫芒繁澤，亂之楮葉之中而不可別也。此人遂以巧食宋國。子列子聞之，曰：「使天地之生物，三年而成一葉，則物之有葉者寡矣。故聖人恃道化而不恃智巧。」

**Interpretation**

Guan Yinzi (a Daoist figure) asked Liezi: "Do you know why you can hit the target?" Liezi replied: "I know." Guan Yinzi said: "Excellent. Preserve this principle and never lose it. This truth applies not only to archery, but also to governing a state and cultivating one's character. Therefore, the sage does not obsess over observing the superficial appearances of existence and demise, but investigates their fundamental laws."

Liezi continued: "Those brimming with vitality (Qi) tend to be arrogant; those with great strength tend to be domineering. Such people cannot yet comprehend the great Dao (the Way). Thus, those whose hair hasn't turned white while discussing the Dao—how much less can they practice it? Those who persist in domineering behavior will find no one to warn them. Without warnings, they'll be left isolated and unsupported."

The truly wise excel at employing people's talents. Therefore, they neither decline with age nor become confused when their intellect wanes. The greatest challenge in governing a state lies not in one's own wisdom, but in recognizing truly capable individuals.

In the Song state, an artisan spent three years carving a lifelike mulberry leaf from jade, with such intricate vein patterns that it became indistinguishable when placed among real leaves. He made his living in Song through this craft. Hearing this, Liezi remarked: "If Heaven and Earth took three years to produce a single leaf during creation, there would be very few leafy plants. Therefore, the sage relies on the natural Dao (the Way) to transform and nurture all things, rather than depending on clever techniques."

(Supplementary note: Through examples like archery, statecraft, and jade carving, this passage illustrates core Daoist principles of "following nature's course" and "governing through Wuwei (non-action)," emphasizing that grasping fundamental laws matters more than superficial skill.)

子列子窮，容貌有飢色。客有言之於鄭子陽者，曰：「列禦寇蓋有道之士也，居君之國而窮，君无乃為不好士乎？」鄭子陽即令官遺之粟。子列子出見使者，再拜而辭。使者去。子列子入，其妻望之而拊心曰：「妾聞為有道者之妻子皆得佚樂。今有饑色，君過而遺先生食。先生不受，豈不命也哉？」子列子笑謂之曰：「君非自知我也。以人之言而遺我粟，至其罪我也，又且以人之言，此吾所以不受也。」其卒，民果作難而殺子陽。魯施氏有二子，其一好學，其一好兵。好學者以術干齊侯；齊侯納之，以為諸公子之傅。好兵者之楚，以法干楚王；楚王悅之，以為軍正。祿富其家，爵榮其親。

**Interpretation**

Liezi, a prominent Daoist figure, lived in poverty with a gaunt, hunger-stricken appearance. A visitor remarked to Ziyang, the prime minister of Zheng: "Lie Yukou (Liezi's given name) is a man who has attained the Dao. That such a worthy sage dwells in your state in such destitution might suggest you don't value men of virtue." Upon hearing this, Ziyang immediately sent an official to deliver grain to Liezi.

When Liezi met the messenger at his gate, he bowed respectfully but declined the gift. After the envoy departed, Liezi returned inside where his wife beat her chest in lament: "I've heard the families of Dao-realized men live in comfort. Here we endure hunger, yet when the prime minister sends provisions, my husband refuses them. Is this our fate?"

Liezi smiled and explained: "Ziyang doesn't truly know me. He sends grain because of another's words; tomorrow he might condemn me because of slander. That's why I couldn't accept." Later, when rebellion erupted in Zheng, Ziyang was indeed executed.

The Shi family of Lu had two sons—one devoted to scholarship, the other to military strategy. The scholar used his learning to advise the Marquis of Qi and was appointed tutor to the noble heirs; the strategist went to Chu where his military counsel pleased the king, who made him Army Rectifier (military judge). Both brought honor to their family, and their parents shared in their glory.

施氏之鄰人孟氏同有二子，所業亦同，而窘於貧。羨施氏之有，因從請進趣之方。二子以實告孟氏。孟氏之一子之秦，以術干秦王。秦王曰：「當今諸侯力爭，所務兵食而已。若用仁義治吾國，是滅亡之道。」遂宮而放之。其一子之衛，以法干衛侯。衛侯曰：「吾弱國也，而攝乎大國之間。大國吾事之，小國吾撫之，是求安之道。若賴兵權，滅亡可待矣。若全而歸之，適於他國，為吾之患不輕矣。」遂刖之，而還諸魯。既反，孟氏之父子叩胸而讓施氏。施氏曰：「凡得時者昌，失時者亡。子道與吾同，而功與吾異，失時者也，非行之謬也。且天下理无常是，事无常非。先日所用，今或棄之；

**Interpretation**

The Shi family had a neighbor named Meng. Both families had two sons who had learned the same skills, yet the Mengs were so poor they could barely put food on the table. Envious of the Shis' wealth, the Mengs went to ask for the secret of their success. The Shi brothers honestly shared their own story of how they rose to prosperity.

The elder Meng son went to the state of Qin, advocating benevolent governance to the king. But the king replied, "These days, all states compete through military might. What matters most are soldiers, horses, and provisions. For you to advise me to rule with benevolence would be courting destruction." He had the young man castrated and expelled.

The younger Meng son went to the state of Wei, promoting legalist policies to strengthen the state. But the Marquis of Wei said, "Our Wei is small, wedged between greater powers. To survive, we must submit to the strong and pacify the weak—that is how we maintain peace. If we pursued military dominance and stratagems, our downfall would be imminent. If I let you leave unharmed to serve another state, wouldn't that bring trouble to my doorstep?" So he had the boy's feet cut off and sent him back to Lu.

When the two crippled brothers returned home, the Meng family beat their chests in anguish, blaming the Shis for deceiving them. The Shis explained, "Seize the right moment, and you thrive; miss it, and you suffer. What you learned was the same as us, yet the results were worlds apart—not because the methods were wrong, but because the timing wasn’t right."

No principle in this world is eternally correct, nor is any approach forever wrong. What worked yesterday may be obsolete today; what’s discarded now may prove useful again in the future. Success depends entirely on whether it aligns with the needs of the time.

今之所棄，後或用之。此用與不用，无定是非也。投隙抵時，應事无方，屬乎智。智苟不足，使若博如孔丘，術如呂尚，焉往而不窮哉？」孟氏父子舍然无慍容，曰：「吾知之矣。子勿重言！」晉文公出會，欲伐衛，公子鋤仰天而笑。公問何笑。曰：「臣笑鄰之人有送其妻適私家者，道見桑婦，悅而與之言。然顧視其妻，亦有招之者矣。臣竊笑此也。」公寤其言，乃止。引師而還，未至，而有伐其北鄙者矣。晉國苦盜。有郄雍者，能視盜之貌，察其眉睫之閒，而得其情。晉侯使視盜，千百无遺一焉。晉侯大喜，告趙文子曰：「吾得一人，而一國盜為之盡矣，奚用多為？」文子曰：

**Interpretation**

What is discarded today may prove useful tomorrow. The value of usefulness or uselessness has no fixed standard.

Seizing the opportune moment and adapting to circumstances, handling affairs without rigid adherence to fixed methods—this is true wisdom. Without such wisdom, even with Confucius' erudition or Jiang Ziya's strategic brilliance, one would meet obstacles everywhere. Hearing this, the Meng father and son suddenly saw the light, their anger dissipated, saying: "We understand now—no need to explain further."

When Duke Wen of Jin prepared to ally with feudal lords to attack Wei, his son Chu looked up and laughed heartily. Asked why, Chu replied: "I laughed at my neighbor who escorted his wife back to her parents' home. On the way, he flirted with a mulberry-picking maiden, only to turn and find another man seducing his own wife. The irony amused me." The Duke grasped the implied warning and halted the expedition. Before his troops could return, Jin's northern borders were already under attack.

Banditry plagued Jin. A man named Xi Yong could identify thieves by observing their facial expressions, particularly the look in their eyes. When the Marquis of Jin employed him to capture thieves, not one escaped. Delighted, the Marquis told Zhao Wenzi: "With this single man, I can rid the entire state of bandits—why employ multitudes?"

「吾君恃伺察而得盜，盜不盡矣，且郄雍必不得其死焉。」俄而群盜謀曰：「吾所以窮者郄雍也。」遂共盜而殘之。晉侯聞而大駭，立召文子而告之曰：「果如子言，郄雍死矣！然取盜何方？」文子曰：「周諺有言：『察見淵魚者不祥，智料隱匿者有殃。』且君欲无盜，若莫舉賢而任之；使教明於上，化行於下，民有恥心，則何盜之為？」於是用隨會知政，而群盜奔秦焉。孔子自衛反魯，息駕乎河梁而觀焉。有懸水三十仞，圜流九十里，魚鱉弗能游，黿鼉弗能居，有一丈夫方將厲之。孔子使人並涯止之，曰：「此懸水三十仞，圜流九十里，魚鱉弗能游，黿鼉弗能居也。意者難可以濟乎？」丈夫不以錯意，遂度而出。孔子問之曰：「子巧乎？有道術乎？

**Interpretation**

This passage contains three stories, which I will explain separately:

The first story tells how the ruler of Jin relied on Xi Yong's investigative skills to catch thieves, yet the thieves kept multiplying. Wenzi predicted Xi Yong would meet a bad end, and sure enough, the thieves banded together to kill him. When the Jin ruler asked Wenzi what to do, Wenzi quoted a Zhou dynasty proverb: "Seeing fish in deep waters brings misfortune; discerning others' secrets invites calamity." He advised the ruler to employ virtuous officials to promote moral education, making people understand shame - then thieves would naturally disappear. After appointing the worthy minister Sui Hui as advised, all the thieves fled to Qin.

The second story describes Confucius returning from Wei to Lu, where he saw a 30-ren (about 54m) waterfall creating a 90-li whirlpool so treacherous even fish, turtles, and crocodiles couldn't survive. Yet a man prepared to cross. Confucius sent someone to warn him of the danger, but the man disregarded this and successfully crossed. Confucius then asked: "Did you accomplish this through skill or through Daoist cultivation (special spiritual methods)?"

These stories collectively illustrate that forceful measures prove inferior to moral transformation, while true masters often possess cultivation methods beyond ordinary comprehension.

所以能入而出者，何也？」丈夫對曰：「始吾之入也，先以忠信；及吾之出也，又從以忠信。忠信錯吾軀於波流，而吾不敢用私，所以能入而復出者，以此也。」孔子謂弟子曰：「二三子識之！水且猶可以忠信誠身親之，而況人乎？」白公問孔子曰：「人可與微言乎？」孔子不應。白公問曰：「若以石投水，何如？」孔子曰：「吳之善沒者能取之。」曰：「若以水投水，何如？」孔子曰：「淄、澠之合，易牙嘗而知之。」白公曰：「人固不可與微言乎？」孔子曰：「何為不可？唯知言之謂者乎！夫知言之謂者，不以言言也。爭魚者濡，逐獸者趨，非樂之也。故至言去言，至為无為。夫淺知之所爭者末矣。」白公不得已，遂死於浴室。

**Interpretation**

This dialogue conveys principles for navigating human relationships. A skilled swimmer explains to Confucius the secret of moving effortlessly through turbulent waters: when entering the water, he maintains zhongxin (loyalty and sincerity), and when exiting, he preserves the same integrity. This complete devotion allows his body to flow with the currents, free from selfish thoughts, ensuring safe passage both ways.

Confucius uses this lesson to instruct his disciples: if even water responds to sincere devotion, how much more should we apply this principle in human interactions? This illustrates that authenticity is the foundation of virtuous conduct.

Later, Duke Bai (a minister of Chu) asks Confucius: "Can one share secret words with others?" Confucius remains silent. The Duke presses further with metaphors: What if one throws a stone into water? Confucius replies that expert divers from Wu could retrieve it. What if one pours water into water? Even if mixing the distinct flavors of the Zi and Sheng rivers, the master chef Yi Ya could discern the difference.

The Duke persists: Is it truly impossible to confide in others? Confucius responds: It's not impossible, but one must find those who truly understand. Those who genuinely comprehend need no verbal explanations—just as fishermen accept wet clothes and hunters must run swiftly, not because they enjoy it but because it's necessary. Thus, the highest form of speech transcends words, and the most effective action follows natural flow. Those with shallow understanding quarrel over trivialities. Ultimately, Duke Bai fails to grasp this wisdom and later meets misfortune in his bathhouse.

Through metaphors of swimming and culinary arts, the text teaches that authenticity and naturalness are essential in human conduct. True communication lies not in superficial words but in mutual understanding. Those fixated on surface-level disputes often miss what truly matters.

趙襄子使新穉穆子攻翟，勝之，取左人、中人；使遽人來謁之。襄子方食而有憂色。左右曰：「一朝而兩城下，此人之所以喜也；今君有憂色。何也？」襄子曰：「夫江河之大也，不過三日；飄風暴雨不終朝，日中不須臾。今趙氏之德行无所施於積，一朝而兩城下，亡其及我哉！」孔子聞之曰：「趙氏其昌乎！夫憂者、所以為昌也，喜者、所以為亡也。勝非其難者也；持之，其難者也。賢主以此持勝，故其福及後世。齊、楚、吳、越皆嘗勝矣，然卒取亡焉，不達乎持勝也。唯有道之主為能持勝。」孔子之勁能拓國門之關，而不肯以力聞。墨子為守攻，公輸般服，而不肯以兵知。故善持勝者以彊為弱。

**Interpretation**

When Lord Xiang of Zhao dispatched Xinzhi Muzi to attack the State of Di, achieving victory by capturing the two cities of Zuoren and Zhongren, his attendants found him frowning during a meal as the battlefield report arrived. Puzzled, they asked: "Taking two cities in a single day is cause for celebration—why does my lord appear troubled instead?"

Lord Xiang explained: "Even the greatest river flood recedes within three days; violent storms never last a full day, nor does the midday sun linger at its zenith. Our Zhao clan's accumulated De (Virtue/Power) remains shallow, yet we've suddenly seized two cities in one day—this surely heralds impending calamity." When Confucius heard of this incident, he remarked: "The Zhao lineage shall prosper indeed! For understanding anxiety is the seed of flourishing, while mindless joy signals the omen of decline."

Confucius elaborated further: "Achieving victory isn't difficult—preserving it is the true challenge. A wise ruler maintains triumph through vigilant apprehension, thereby extending blessings to future generations. Though the states of Qi, Chu, Wu and Yue all tasted victory, their eventual destruction came from not knowing how to sustain it. Only sovereigns thoroughly versed in the Dao of governance can truly safeguard their triumphs."

The text cites two illustrative examples: Confucius possessed strength sufficient to lift a city gate's massive bar, yet never became renowned for martial prowess; Mozi mastered defensive tactics so thoroughly that even the legendary craftsman Gongshu Ban admired him, yet he never boasted of military skill. This demonstrates that those truly adept at preserving victory invariably manifest their strength through apparent softness.

宋人有好行仁義者，三世不懈。家无故黑牛生白犢，以問孔子。孔子曰：「此吉祥也，以薦上帝。」居一年，其父无故而盲。其牛又復生白犢，其父又復令其子問孔子。其子曰：「前問之而失明，又何問乎？」其父曰：「聖人之言先迕後合。其事未究，姑復問之。」其子又復問孔子。孔子曰：「吉祥也。」復教以祭。其子歸致命。其父曰：「行孔子之言也。」居一年，其子又无故而盲。其後楚攻宋，圍其城；民易子而食之，析骸而炊之；丁壯者皆乘城而戰，死者太半。此人以父子有疾皆免。及圍解而疾俱復。宋有蘭子者，以技干宋元君。宋元君召而使見。其技以雙枝，長倍其身，

**Interpretation**

In the state of Song, there was a family renowned for generations of virtuous conduct, upholding benevolence and righteousness for three consecutive generations. One day, their black ox unexpectedly gave birth to a white calf, which the family found peculiar. They sought counsel from Confucius, who said, "This is an auspicious sign. You may use it to make an offering to Heaven."

A year later, the head of the household suddenly and inexplicably lost his sight. Soon after, the black ox bore another white calf. The father again sent his son to consult Confucius. Hesitant, the son said, "After we consulted him last time, you lost your sight. Why ask again?" The father replied, "The words of sages often appear inauspicious at first but later prove fortunate. The matter is not yet concluded—we should still seek his guidance."

Once more, Confucius affirmed, "This is an auspicious sign," and repeated his advice to use the calf for sacrifice. The son relayed this to his father, who said, "Let us follow Confucius’ counsel." Another year passed, and the son, too, lost his sight without cause.

Later, when the state of Chu attacked Song and laid siege to its capital, the city’s inhabitants were reduced to such desperation that they exchanged children for food and used human bones as fuel. All able-bodied men were conscripted to defend the walls, and most perished. Only this family, with both father and son blind, was spared from conscription and the horrors of war. When the siege was finally lifted, miraculously, both men regained their sight.

(Another tale) In Song, there was a street performer named Lanzi, who sought an audience with Lord Yuan of Song to showcase his skills. His act involved walking on stilts twice his height while simultaneously juggling seven swords.

屬其脛，並趨並馳，弄七劍迭而躍之，五劍常在空中。元君大驚，立賜金帛。又有蘭子又能燕戲者，聞之，復以干元君。元君大怒曰：「昔有異技干寡人者，技无庸，適值寡人有歡心，故賜金帛。彼必聞此而進復望吾賞。」拘而擬戮之，經月乃放。秦穆公謂伯樂曰：「子之年長矣，子姓有可使求馬者乎？」伯樂對曰；「良馬、可以形容筋骨相也。相天下之馬者，若滅若沒，若亡若失。若此者絕塵弭𨅊。臣之子皆下才也，可告以良馬，而不可告以天下之馬也。臣有所與共擔纆采薪者，有九方皋，此其於馬，非臣之下也。請見之。」穆公見之，使行求馬。三月而反報曰：「已得之矣，在沙丘。」穆公曰：「何馬也？」對曰：「牝而黃。」

**Interpretation**

The *Liezi* records several intriguing anecdotes:

There was once an acrobat who could juggle seven swords by clamping them between his legs while keeping five perpetually suspended in midair. When Lord Yuan of Song witnessed this feat, he was utterly astonished and immediately rewarded the performer with gold, silver, and fine silks. Later, another entertainer who specialized in juggling heard about this incident and likewise went to demonstrate his skills before Lord Yuan. Unexpectedly, the ruler became furious, declaring: "The previous performer merely caught me in a generous mood—you've clearly come seeking rewards after hearing about this!" He had the man arrested and sentenced to death, though he was released after a month's imprisonment.

Another story tells how Duke Mu of Qin asked the horse expert Bole: "You're growing old—does your family still possess anyone capable of judging horses?" Bole replied: "Good horses can be identified by their physical form and bone structure, but recognizing a peerless thousand-mile steed requires superior discernment—such horses run so swiftly that not even dust can keep pace with them. My sons have mediocre talent and can only identify ordinary fine horses. However, I have a firewood-gathering companion named Jiufang Gao whose skill in judging horses equals my own." Duke Mu thereupon summoned Jiufang Gao and dispatched him to find such a horse. Three months later, Jiufang Gao returned to report he'd found a yellow mare at Shaqiu.

使人往取之，牡而驪。穆公不說，召伯樂而謂之曰：「敗矣，子之所使求馬者！色物、牝牡尚弗能知，又何馬之能知也？」伯樂喟然太息曰：「一至於此乎！是乃其所以千萬臣而无數者也。若皋之所觀者、天機也，得其精而忘其麤，在其內而忘其外，見其所見而不見其所不見，視其所視而遺其所不視。若皋之相者，乃有貴乎馬者也。」馬至，果天下之馬也。楚莊王問詹何曰：「治國柰何！」詹何對曰：「臣明於治身而不明於治國也。」楚莊王曰：「寡人得奉宗廟社稷，願學所以守之。」詹何對曰：「臣未嘗聞身治而國亂者也，又未嘗聞身亂而國治者也。故本在身，不敢對以末。」楚王曰：「善。」

**Interpretation**

Duke Mu of Qin sent someone to fetch a horse, but the man returned with a black stallion. Duke Mu was displeased. He summoned Bo Le, the expert judge of horses, and said, “This is hopeless! The person you sent to find a horse cannot even tell its color or whether it is male or female. How can he claim any skill at judging horses?”

Bo Le sighed deeply and said, “So it has reached this level! This is precisely where he surpasses me by countless times. When Jiu Fang Gao, my disciple, judges a horse, he looks to the workings of Heaven—that is, to the thing’s true nature. He grasps its essence and overlooks its outward appearance; he focuses on what is within and forgets its shape. He sees only what matters and disregards what is irrelevant. The art of judging horses that Jiu Fang Gao possesses is more precious than the skill of judging horses itself.” When the horse was brought to Duke Mu, it proved to be a rare steed capable of traveling a thousand li in a day.

King Zhuang of Chu asked Zhan He, a Daoist hermit, “How should I govern the state?” Zhan He replied, “I know only how to cultivate myself and nurture my nature; I do not know the art of governing a state.” The king said, “I inherited the legacy of my ancestors and want to learn how to protect the realm.” Zhan He answered, “I have never heard of a ruler who cultivated himself and kept his mind clear while the state was in disorder. Nor have I seen a ruler whose mind and body were in turmoil while the state enjoyed peace. The root lies in self-cultivation, so I dare not answer you with minor details.” The king said, “Well said.”

狐丘丈人謂孫叔敖曰：「人有三怨，子知之乎？」孫叔敖曰：「何謂也？」對曰：「爵高者，人妬之；官大者，主惡之；祿厚者，怨處之。」孫叔敖曰：「吾爵益高，吾志益下；吾官益大，吾心益小；吾祿益厚，吾施益博。以是免於三怨，可乎？」孫叔敖疾，將死，戒其子曰：「王亟封我矣，吾不受也。為我死，王則封汝。汝必无受利地！楚、越之閒有寢丘者，此地不利而名甚惡。楚人鬼而越人禨，可長有者唯此也。」孫叔敖死，王果以美地封其子。子辭而不受；請寢丘，與之，至今不失。牛缺者、上地之大儒也，下之邯鄲，遇盜於耦沙之中，盡取其衣裝車，牛步而去。

**Interpretation**

An elder from Huqiu (a place name) once said to Sunshu Ao, the renowned chancellor of Chu: "There are three situations that incur people's resentment—do you know them?" Sunshu Ao asked for clarification, and the elder explained: "Excessively high nobility invites jealousy, overly great office arouses the ruler's suspicion, and too generous emoluments provoke widespread resentment."

Sunshu Ao replied: "My approach is this: the higher my rank, the more humble my bearing; the greater my office, the more cautious my conduct; the richer my stipend, the broader my generosity. By these means to avert the three resentments—would this suffice?"

Later, when Sunshu Ao lay gravely ill and near death, he specifically warned his son: "The King of Chu has repeatedly tried to bestow honors upon me, which I always declined. After my death, the king will surely confer favors upon you. Remember—never accept fertile lands! At the border between Chu and Yue there's a place called Qinqiu (literally 'Corpse-Resting Hill'), with barren soil and an inauspicious name. The people of Chu believe in ghosts and spirits, while those of Yue practice divination—both consider this place taboo. Only such undesirable territory can be preserved across generations."

After Sunshu Ao's death, the King of Chu indeed attempted to grant his son rich lands. Following his father's final instructions, the son steadfastly declined fertile fiefs and instead requested the poor lands of Qinqiu. Consequently, this territory remained in their family for generations, never reclaimed by the state.

Another tale tells of Niu Que, a celebrated Confucian scholar from Shangdi region. While traveling to Handan, he encountered bandits at Ousha who robbed him of all possessions—clothes, carriage and horses. Yet Niu Que walked away unperturbed, showing no concern.

視之歡然无憂𠫤之色。盜追而問其故。曰：「君子不以所養害其所養。」盜曰：「嘻！賢矣夫！」既而相謂曰：「以彼之賢，往見趙君，便以我為，必困我。不如殺之。」乃相與追而殺之。燕人聞之，聚族相戒，曰：「遇盜，莫如上地之牛缺也！」皆受教。俄而其弟適秦。至闕下，果遇盜；憶其兄之戒，因與盜力爭。既而不如，又追而以卑辭請物。盜怒曰：「吾活汝弘矣，而追吾不已，迹將箸焉。既為盜矣，仁將焉在？」遂殺之，又傍害其黨四五人焉。虞氏者、梁之富人也，家充殷盛，錢帛无量，財貨无訾。登高樓，臨大路，設樂陳酒，擊博樓上。俠客相隨而行。樓上博者射，明瓊張中，反兩㯓魚而笑。

**Interpretation**

This man appeared exceedingly joyful, his face completely devoid of any trace of sorrow or fear. The bandits found this most peculiar and pursued him to ask the reason.

He replied, "A true gentleman would never harm his intrinsic nature for the sake of external possessions." Hearing this, the bandits sighed in admiration, exclaiming, "Ah! This man's spiritual attainment is truly lofty!" However, after discussing among themselves, they said, "A man of such wisdom, if he were to meet the ruler of Zhao and reveal our deeds, would surely bring us great trouble. It would be better to kill him." So they chased him down and slew him.

When the people of Yan heard of this incident, the entire clan warned one another, saying, "If you encounter bandits, never behave like that man from Shangdi named Niu Que!" Everyone took this lesson to heart. Not long after, Niu Que’s younger brother traveled to Qin and, upon reaching the city gates, encountered bandits. Remembering his brother’s fate, he desperately resisted them. When he found himself overpowered, he then chased after them, pleading humbly for the return of his belongings.

Furious, the bandits said, "We spared your life out of mercy, yet you persist in pursuit—this will expose our whereabouts. Since we are bandits, why should we care for benevolence and virtue?" So they killed him, along with four or five of his companions.

There was also a wealthy man of the Yu family, a great magnate of Liang, whose home overflowed with gold and silver, his wealth beyond reckoning. He often ascended his high tower with his attendants, feasting and drinking by the street-side, amusing himself with games of Liubo. Groups of wandering swordsmen frequently passed beneath the tower. One day, as the players above cast their dice and won the game, they flipped over two fish-shaped tokens and laughed triumphantly.

(Note: These three stories illustrate the Daoist principle of "not harming one's intrinsic nature for external things." In the first, Niu Que is killed for his transcendent demeanor; in the second, his brother is slain for both resistance and supplication; and the third introduces the Yu family’s ostentatious wealth, foreshadowing calamity—together demonstrating how excessive attachment to material things or deliberate displays inevitably invite misfortune.)

飛鳶適墜其腐鼠而中之。俠客相與言曰：「虞氏富樂之日久矣，而常有輕易人之志。吾不侵犯之，而乃辱我以腐鼠。此而不報，无以立慬於天下。請與若等戮力一志，率徒屬必滅其家為等倫。」皆許諾。至期日之夜，聚眾積兵以攻虞氏，大滅其家。東方有人焉，曰爰旌目，將有適也，而餓於道。狐父之盜曰丘，見而下壺餐以餔之。爰旌目三餔而後能視，曰：「子何為者也？」曰：「我狐父之人丘也。」爰旌目曰：「譆！汝非盜邪？胡為而食我？吾義不食子之食也。」兩手據地而歐之，不出，喀喀然，遂伏地而死。狐父之人則盜矣，而食非盜也。以人之盜因謂食為盜而不敢食，是失名實者也。

**Interpretation**

A putrid rat dropped by a flying eagle happened to hit a wandering swordsman. The group of swordsmen discussed among themselves: "The Yu family (local wealthy clan) has long lived in luxury and pleasure, yet always looked down upon others. Though we never provoked them, they insult us with this rotten rat. If we don't retaliate, how can we maintain our standing in the martial world? Let's unite and gather our forces to exterminate the entire Yu household." All agreed.

On the appointed night, the swordsmen assembled their forces and attacked the Yu residence with weapons, slaughtering every last member of the family.

In the eastern regions lived a man named Yuan Jingmu who collapsed from hunger by the roadside during his travels. A bandit named Qiu from Hufu saw him and offered food from his own provisions. After swallowing three mouthfuls, Yuan regained enough strength to open his eyes and asked, "What do you do for living?" The man replied, "I am Qiu of Hufu." Yuan suddenly exclaimed, "Ah! Aren't you that notorious bandit? Why are you feeding me? I adhere to moral principles and would never accept food from a thief!" He tried to vomit by pressing his hands against the ground, but couldn't expel the food. Eventually, he coughed up blood and died on the spot.

The commentator observes: While Qiu of Hufu was indeed a bandit, the food he offered wasn't stolen property. To reject sustenance simply because the giver was a thief represents a confusion between reputation and substance.

(Note: These two contrasting stories illustrate extreme behavioral patterns. The first shows brutality in exterminating a family over a trivial matter, while the second demonstrates rigid adherence to principle leading to starvation. Both serve as warnings about the importance of balanced judgment in human affairs.)

柱厲叔事莒敖公，自為不知己，去，居海上。夏日則食菱芰，冬日則食橡栗。莒敖公有難，柱厲叔辭其友而往死之。其友曰：「子自以為不知己，故去。今往死之，是知與不知无辨也。」柱厲叔曰：「不然；自以為不知，故去。今死，是果不知我也。吾將死之，以醜後世之人主之不知其臣者也。」凡知則死之，不知則弗死，此直道而行者也。柱厲叔可謂懟以忘其身者也。楊朱曰：「利出者實反，怨往者害來。發於此而應於外者唯請，是故賢者慎所出。」楊子之鄰人亡羊，既率其黨，又請楊子之豎追之。楊子曰：「嘻！亡一羊，何追者之眾？」鄰人曰：「多岐路。」既反，問：「獲羊乎？」

**Interpretation**

Zhu Lishu (an ancient recluse) originally served under Lord Ao of Ju, but feeling unrecognized, he left to live in seclusion by the sea. In summer, he sustained himself on water chestnuts, and in winter, he survived on acorns. Later, when Lord Ao of Ju faced peril, Zhu Lishu bid farewell to his friends and went to die for him.

His friends tried to dissuade him: "You left because you felt the ruler didn’t understand you, yet now you go to die for him—isn’t this contradictory?" Zhu Lishu replied, "Not at all. I left because he failed to recognize my worth, and now my death will prove precisely that. I will use my life to warn future rulers who fail to understand their subjects."

(This story illustrates that a truly upright person does not alter their principles based on whether a ruler recognizes their worth. Zhu Lishu employs an extreme act to express his unwavering commitment to the ideal of "reciprocity for recognition," using death to critique the ruler’s lack of discernment.)

Yang Zhu (a Warring States philosopher) said, "To benefit others invites gratitude, while to harm them invites retribution. Actions inevitably bring consequences—thus, the wise are cautious in speech and conduct."

Once, Yang Zhu’s neighbor lost a sheep and mobilized not only his entire household but also Yang Zhu’s servants to search for it. Yang Zhu found this odd: "Why such a large effort for one lost sheep?" The neighbor explained, "Because the paths branch too widely." When the searchers returned, Yang Zhu asked, "Did you find the sheep?"

(This parable conveys two lessons: ① the principle of cause and effect, and ② the importance of focusing on what truly matters—just as searching for a sheep across countless branching paths proves futile without the right approach. Yang Zhu uses this to expound his philosophy of "valuing the self," advocating for actions that yield practical results.)

曰：「亡之矣。」曰：「奚亡之？」曰：「岐路之中又有岐焉，吾不知所之，所以反也。」楊子戚然變容，不言者移時，不笑者竟日。門人怪之，請曰：「羊、賤畜，又非夫子之有，而損言笑者，何哉？」楊子不荅。門人不獲所命。弟子孟孫陽出以告心都子。心都子他日與孟孫陽偕入，而問曰：「昔有昆弟三人，游齊、魯之閒，同師而學，進仁義之道而歸。其父曰：『仁義之道若何？』伯曰：『仁義使我愛身而後名。』仲曰：『仁義使我殺身以成名。』叔曰：『仁義使我身名並全。』彼三術相反，而同出於儒。孰是孰非邪？」楊子曰：「人有濱河而居者，習於水，勇於泅，操舟鬻渡，利供百口。

**Interpretation**

A man said, "I have already lost my way."

Someone asked him, "How did you get lost?"

He replied, "There were forks within forks in the road—I simply couldn't tell which path to take, so I had to turn back the way I came."

When Yang Zhu (a Warring States period philosopher) heard this, his face darkened with sorrow. For a long time he remained silent, and throughout the entire day he wore no smile. His disciples found this strange and asked, "Sheep are but lowly livestock, and these weren't even yours, Master. Why should they affect your mood so?" Yang Zhu gave no reply.

The disciples couldn't fathom their teacher's meaning. One disciple named Meng Sunyang later recounted the incident to Xinduzi. Several days afterwards, Xinduzi and Meng Sunyang went together to see Yang Zhu and asked: "Long ago there were three brothers who traveled to study in the lands of Qi and Lu, learning the Dao of humaneness and righteousness from the same teacher. When they returned home after completing their studies, their father asked them: 'What exactly is this Dao of humaneness and righteousness?'"

"The eldest son said: 'Humaneness and righteousness have taught me to cherish life, placing reputation second.' The middle son said: 'Humaneness and righteousness enable me to sacrifice my life to achieve fame.' The youngest son said: 'Humaneness and righteousness allow me to both preserve my life and gain reputation.' These three statements completely contradict each other, yet all derive from Confucian teachings. Which one is correct?"

Yang Zhu replied: "This is like people who live by a river—they understand water's nature and are skilled swimmers, making their living by operating ferry boats, with earnings sufficient to support a hundred mouths.

裹糧就學者成徒，而溺死者幾半。本學泅，不學溺，而利害如此。若以為孰是孰非？」心都子嘿然而出。孟孫陽讓之曰：「何吾子問之迂、夫子荅之僻？吾惑愈甚。」心都子曰：「大道以多岐亡羊，學者以多方喪生。學非本不同，非本不一，而末異若是。唯歸同反一，為亡得喪。子長先生之門，習先生之道，而不達先生之況也，哀哉！」楊朱之弟曰布，衣素衣而出。天雨，解素衣，衣緇衣而反。其狗不知，迎而吠之。楊布怒，將扑之。楊朱曰：「子無扑矣，子亦猶是也。嚮者使汝狗白而往，黑而來，子豈能无怪哉？」楊朱曰：「行善不以為名，而名從之；名不與利期，而利歸之；利不與爭期，而爭及之；故君子必慎為善。」

**Interpretation**

The *Liezi* records several thought-provoking stories:

In one place, many people carried provisions to learn swimming, yet nearly half of them drowned. They had gone to learn swimming, not drowning, but the outcome was so different. This makes one ponder: which approach was truly correct? Xinduzi (a person's name) listened in silence and then left. Mengsunyang (another person's name) reproached him, saying, "Your question was too pedantic, and the teacher's answer was too biased—now I'm even more confused."

Later, Xinduzi explained: "A broad road with many forks makes it easy to lose sheep; seekers of knowledge, faced with too many methods, end up losing their way in life. The root of learning is neither different nor inconsistent, yet the specific methods vary so greatly. Only by returning to the root and unifying the principles can one avoid going astray. You've studied with the master for years, yet failed to grasp the true meaning of his analogy—how lamentable!"

Another story tells of Yang Zhu (a representative Daoist figure) and his younger brother Yang Bu. Yang Bu went out wearing white clothes but encountered rain, so he returned home in black. His dog didn't recognize him and barked furiously. Yang Bu grew angry and was about to beat the dog, but Yang Zhu advised him: "Don't strike it—you'd do the same. If your dog had gone out white and come back black, wouldn't you find it strange?"

Yang Zhu also said: "Doing good isn't for fame, yet fame naturally follows; fame isn't tied to profit, yet profit naturally gathers; profit doesn't invite conflict, yet conflict naturally arises. Thus, when a noble person does good, they must be cautious." These stories all remind us: act according to the root, don't be misled by appearances; when changing outward forms, consider others' perceptions; and do good sincerely, not for the sake of reward.

昔人言有知不死之道者，燕君使人受之，不捷，而言者死。燕君甚怒，其使者將加誅焉。幸臣諫曰：「人所憂者莫急乎死，己所重者莫過乎生。彼自喪其生，安能令君不死也？」乃不誅。有齊子亦欲學其道，聞言者之死，乃撫膺而恨。富子聞而笑之曰：「夫所欲學不死，其人已死而猶恨之，是不知所以為學。」胡子曰：「富子之言非也。凡人有術不能行者有矣，能行而无其術者亦有矣。衛人有善數者，臨死，以決喻其子，其子志其言而不能行也。他人問之，以其父所言告之。問者用其言而行其術，與其父无差焉。若然，死者奚為不能言生術哉？」邯鄲之民以正月之旦獻鳩於𥳑子，𥳑子大悅，厚賞之。客問其故。𥳑子曰：「正旦放生，示有恩也。」

**Interpretation**

There was once a man who claimed to know the method of immortality, so the ruler of Yan sent an envoy to learn it. Before the technique could be mastered, the self-proclaimed immortal himself died. The furious Yan ruler prepared to execute the envoy.

A favored minister advised: "What people fear most is death, and what they value most is life. Since this man who claimed to know immortality couldn't even preserve his own life, how could he make you deathless?" The ruler then spared the envoy.

A man named Qi Zi also sought the art of immortality. When he heard the teacher had died, he beat his chest in frustration. Hearing this, Fu Zi laughed at him: "You wanted to learn immortality, yet the teacher himself died—why lament when you don't understand the essence of learning?"

But Hu Zi disagreed: "Fu Zi is mistaken. In this world, some know methods but can't practice them, while others can practice without understanding. In Wei, there was a master calculator who revealed his secrets to his son on his deathbed. The son memorized the words but couldn't apply them. When others inquired, the son repeated his father's teachings, and those who practiced accordingly achieved the same results. So why couldn't a deceased person transmit immortality techniques?"

On New Year's Day, the people of Handan presented turtledoves to Jian Zi, who rewarded them generously. When asked why, Jian Zi explained: "Releasing life on the first day of the year demonstrates benevolence and virtue."

客曰：「民知君之欲放之，故競而捕之，死者眾矣。君如欲生之，不若禁民勿捕。捕而放之，恩過不相補矣。」𥳑子曰：「然。」齊田氏祖於庭，食客千人。中坐有獻魚鴈者，田氏視之，乃歎曰：「天之於民厚矣！殖五穀，生魚鳥以為之用。」眾客和之如響。鮑氏之子年十二，預於次，進曰：「不如君言。天地萬物與我並生，類也。類无貴賤，徒以小大智力而相制，迭相食；非相為而生之。人取可食者而食之，豈天本為人生之？且蚊蚋噆膚，虎狼食肉，非天本為蚊蚋生人、虎狼生肉者哉？」齊有貧者，常乞於城市。城市患其亟也，眾莫之與。遂適田氏之廄，從馬醫作役而假食。

**Interpretation**

A guest said to Lord Jian: "When the people learned of your intention to release captured animals, they competed to hunt them in order to gain your favor—resulting in even more creatures being killed. If you truly wish to protect living beings, it would be better to simply forbid hunting. This practice of capturing first and releasing later causes far greater harm than any perceived virtue." Lord Jian acknowledged the wisdom in these words.

The Tian clan, nobles of Qi, held a grand ancestral feast in their courtyard attended by thousands of guests. When fish and wild geese were presented as offerings, Lord Tian gazed at the sacrifices and sighed: "How generously Heaven treats humankind! It grows the Five Grains and nurtures fish and fowl—all for our enjoyment." The assembled guests echoed his sentiment like reverberating voices.

Then a twelve-year-old boy from the Bao family, seated at the humblest place, rose and said: "You speak wrongly. All beings between Heaven and Earth share equal life with humans—none are intrinsically noble or base. The food chain exists only because creatures restrain one another through differences in size and wisdom—not because Heaven specially created these as human provisions. Consider how humans eat what is edible—does that mean these things were born to serve us? By that logic, when mosquitoes bite people or tigers devour flesh, could we claim humans were made for mosquitoes or meat created for tigers?"

In Qi there lived a poor man who often begged in the city. The townspeople, annoyed by his frequent visits, gradually stopped giving alms. Eventually he had to seek work at the Tian family's stables, tending horses for the veterinarian in exchange for food.

郭中人戲之曰：「從馬醫而食，不以辱乎？」乞兒曰：「天下之辱莫過於乞。乞猶不辱，豈辱馬醫哉？」宋人有游於道？得人遺契者，歸而藏之，密數其齒。告鄰人曰：「吾富可待矣。」人有枯梧樹者，其鄰父言枯梧之樹不祥，其鄰人遽而伐之。鄰人父因請以為薪。其人乃不悅，曰：「鄰人之父徒欲為薪而教吾伐之也。與我鄰，若此其險，豈可哉？」人有亡鈇者，意其鄰之子，視其行步、竊鈇也，顏色、竊鈇也，言語、竊鈇也；動作態度无為而不竊鈇也。俄而抇其谷而得其鈇，他日復見其鄰人之子，動作態度无似竊鈇者。白公勝慮亂，罷朝而立，倒杖策，錣上貫頤，血流至地而弗知也。鄭人聞之曰：「頤之忘，將何不忘哉？」意之所屬箸，其行足躓株埳，頭抵植木，而不自知也。

**Interpretation**

Someone in the city mocked a beggar, saying: "You follow the horse doctor (veterinarian) for meals—aren't you ashamed?" The beggar replied: "The most shameful thing under heaven is begging. If I feel no shame in begging, what disgrace is there in eating with a horse doctor?"

In the state of Song, a man idling on the road picked up a lost contract (IOU) someone had dropped. He took it home and secretly hid it, carefully counting the notches on the document. Proudly, he told his neighbor: "My days of wealth are not far off."

A family had a withered phoenix tree in their yard. An old neighbor remarked that dead phoenix trees bring bad luck, so the family hastily chopped it down. Later, when the old neighbor came asking for firewood, the homeowner suddenly realized: "So this old man tricked me into cutting the tree just to get firewood! For a neighbor to be so deceitful—how can this be tolerated?"

A man lost his axe and suspected his neighbor's son had stolen it. To his eyes, the boy walked like a thief, looked like a thief, spoke like a thief—every movement seemed guilty. Later, when he found the axe in a valley, he looked at the neighbor's son again and saw nothing resembling a thief.

Bai Gong Sheng (a noble of Chu) spent his days plotting rebellion. Once, after court, he stood blankly, holding his cane upside-down until its tip pierced his own chin. Blood flowed to the ground unnoticed. When people of Zheng heard this, they remarked: "If he forgets even his own chin, what wouldn't he forget?" When one becomes excessively fixated, they may trip over tree stumps or bump their head against trunks without realizing it.

昔齊人有欲金者，清旦被衣冠而之市，適鬻金者因之所，攫其金而去。吏捕得之，問曰：「人皆在焉，子攫人之金何？」對曰：「取金之時，不見人，徒見金。

**Interpretation**

In the state of Qi, there was a man utterly obsessed with gold. One morning, he dressed formally in his hat and robes and went to the marketplace. Spotting a gold vendor, he immediately grabbed some gold and fled. When the constables caught him, they demanded: "With so many people present, how dare you openly steal gold?" The man replied: "When I took the gold, my eyes saw no people—only gold."

(This parable employs hyperbole to satirize those blinded by greed. Like the modern saying "profit confounds wisdom," when people become excessively fixated on something, they lose rational judgment and even fail to perceive obvious dangers. The "gold" in the story symbolizes all external attachments that consume one's awareness—precisely the kind of grasping mind Daoist cultivation teaches practitioners to transcend.)

」

---

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/8/