Chapter 8: 駢拇

駢拇枝指，出乎性哉！而侈於德。附贅縣疣，出乎形哉！而侈於性。多方乎仁義而用之者，列於五藏哉！而非道德之正也。是故駢於足者，連無用之肉也；枝於手者，樹無用之指也；多方駢枝於五藏之情者，淫僻於仁義之行，而多方於聰明之用也。是故駢於明者，亂五色，淫文章，青黃黼黻之煌煌非乎？而離朱是已。多於聰者，亂五聲，淫六律，金石、絲竹，黃鐘、大呂之聲非乎？而師曠是已。枝於仁者，擢德塞性以收名聲，使天下簧鼓以奉不及之法非乎？而曾、史是已。駢於辯者，纍瓦結繩竄句，遊心於堅白同異之間，而敝跬譽無用之言非乎？而楊、墨是已。故此皆多駢旁枝之道，非天下之至正也。彼正正者，不失其性命之情。故合者不為駢，而枝者不為跂；長者不為有餘，短者不為不足。是故鳧脛雖短，續之則憂；鶴脛雖長，斷之則悲。故性長非所斷，性短非所續，無所去憂也。意仁義其非人情乎！彼仁人何其多憂也？且夫駢於拇者，決之則泣；枝於手者，齕之則啼。二者或有餘於數，或不足於數，其於憂一也。今世之仁人，蒿目而憂世之患；不仁之人，決性命之情而饕富貴。故意仁義其非人情乎！自三代以下者，天下何其囂囂也？

A ligament uniting the big toe with the other toes and an extra finger may be natural growths, but they are more than is good for use. Excrescences on the person and hanging tumours are growths from the body, but they are unnatural additions to it. There are many arts of benevolence and righteousness, and the exercise of them is distributed among the five viscera; but this is not the correct method according to the characteristics of the Dao. Thus it is that the addition to the foot is but the attachment to it of so much useless flesh, and the addition to the hand is but the planting on it of a useless finger. (So it is that) the connecting (the virtues) with the five viscera renders, by excess or restraint, the action of benevolence and righteousness bad, and leads to many arts as in the employment of (great) powers of hearing or of vision. Therefore an extraordinary power of vision leads to the confusion of the five colours and an excessive use of ornament. (Its possessor), in the resplendence of his green and yellow, white and black, black and green, will not stop till he has become a Li Zhu. An extraordinary power of hearing leads to a confusion of the five notes, and an excessive use of the six musical accords. (Its possessor), in bringing out the tones from the instruments of metal, stone, silk, and bamboo, aided by the Huang-zhong and Da-lu (tubes), will not stop till he has become a Shi Kuang. (So), excessive benevolence eagerly brings out virtues and restrains its (proper) nature, that (its possessor) may acquire a famous reputation, and cause all the organs and drums in the world to celebrate an unattainable condition; and he will not stop till he has become a Zeng (Shen) or a Shi (Qiu). An extraordinary faculty in debating leads to the piling up of arguments like a builder with his bricks, or a netmaker with his string. (Its possessor) cunningly contrives his sentences and enjoys himself in discussing what hardness is and what whiteness is, where views agree and where they differ, and pressing on, though weary, with short steps, with (a multitude of) useless words to make good his opinion; nor will he stop till he has become a Yang (Zhu) or Mo (Di). But in all these cases the parties, with their redundant and divergent methods, do not proceed by that which is the correct path for all under the sky. That which is the perfectly correct path is not to lose the real character of the nature with which we are endowed. Hence the union (of parts) should not be considered redundance, nor their divergence superfluity; what is long should not be considered too long, nor what is short too short. A duck's legs, for instance, are short, but if we try to lengthen them, it occasions pain; and a crane's legs are long, but if we try to cut off a portion of them, it produces grief. Where a part is by nature long, we are not to amputate, or where it is by nature short, we are not to lengthen it. There is no occasion to try to remove any trouble that it may cause. The presumption is that benevolence and righteousness are not constituents of humanity; for to how much anxiety does the exercise of them give rise! Moreover when another toe is united to the great toe, to divide the membrane makes you weep; and when there is an extra finger, to gnaw it off makes you cry out. In the one case there is a member too many, and in the other a member too few; but the anxiety and pain which they cause is the same. The benevolent men of the present age look at the evils of the world, as with eyes full of dust, and are filled with sorrow by them, while those who are not benevolent, having violently altered the character of their proper nature, greedily pursue after riches and honours. The presumption therefore is that benevolence and righteousness are contrary to the nature of man - how full of trouble and contention has the world been ever since the three dynasties began!

且夫待鉤繩規矩而正者，是削其性；待繩約膠漆而固者，是侵其德也；屈折禮樂，呴俞仁義，以慰天下之心者，此失其常然也。天下有常然。常然者，曲者不以鉤，直者不以繩，圓者不以規，方者不以矩，附離不以膠漆，約束不以纆索。故天下誘然皆生，而不知其所以生；同焉皆得，而不知其所以得。故古今不二，不可虧也。則仁義又奚連連如膠漆纆索，而遊乎道德之間為哉？使天下惑也！夫小惑易方，大惑易性。何以知其然邪？自虞氏招仁義以撓天下也，天下莫不奔命於仁義，是非以仁義易其性與？

And moreover, in employing the hook and line, the compass and square, to give things their correct form you must cut away portions of what naturally belongs to them; in employing strings and fastenings, glue and varnish to make things firm, you must violently interfere with their qualities. The bendings and stoppings in ceremonies and music, and the factitious expression in the countenance of benevolence and righteousness, in order to comfort the minds of men - these all show a failure in observing the regular principles (of the human constitution). All men are furnished with such regular principles; and according to them what is bent is not made so by the hook, nor what is straight by the line, nor what is round by the compass, nor what is square by the carpenter's square. Nor is adhesion effected by the use of glue and varnish, nor are things bound together by means of strings and bands. Thus it is that all in the world are produced what they are by a certain guidance, while they do not know how they are produced so; and they equally attain their several ends while they do not know how it is that they do so. Anciently it was so, and it is so now; and this constitution of things should not be made of none effect. Why then should benevolence and righteousness be employed as connecting (links), or as glue and varnish, strings and bands, and the enjoyment arising from the Dao and its characteristics be attributed to them? It is a deception practised upon the world. Where the deception is small, there will be a change in the direction (of the objects pursued); where it is great, there will be a change of the nature itself. How do I know that it is so? Since he of the line of Yu called in his benevolence and righteousness to distort and vex the world, the world has not ceased to hurry about to execute their commands - has not this been by means of benevolence and righteousness to change (men's views) of their nature?

故嘗試論之，自三代以下者，天下莫不以物易其性矣。小人則以身殉利，士則以身殉名，大夫則以身殉家，聖人則以身殉天下。故此數子者，事業不同，名聲異號，其於傷性以身為殉，一也。臧與穀，二人相與牧羊，而俱亡其羊。問臧奚事，則挾筴讀書；問穀奚事，則博塞以遊。二人者，事業不同，其於亡羊均也。伯夷死名於首陽之下，盜跖死利於東陵之上。二人者，所死不同，其於殘生傷性均也，奚必伯夷之是而盜跖之非乎？天下盡殉也。彼其所殉仁義也，則俗謂之君子；其所殉貨財也，則俗謂之小人。其殉一也，則有君子焉，有小人焉；若其殘生損性，則盜跖亦伯夷已，又惡取君子小人於其間哉？且夫屬其性乎仁義者，雖通如曾、史，非吾所謂臧也；屬其性於五味，雖通如俞兒，非吾所謂臧也；屬其性乎五聲，雖通如師曠，非吾所謂聰也；屬其性乎五色，雖通如離朱，非吾所謂明也。吾所謂臧者，非仁義之謂也，臧於其德而已矣；吾所謂臧者，非所謂仁義之謂也，任其性命之情而已矣；吾所謂聰者，非謂其聞彼也，自聞而已矣；吾所謂明者，非謂其見彼也，自見而已矣。夫不自見而見彼，不自得而得彼者，是得人之得而不自得其得者也，適人之適而不自適其適者也。夫適人之適而不自適其適，雖盜跖與伯夷，是同為淫僻也。余愧乎道德，是以上不敢為仁義之操，而下不敢為淫僻之行也。

I will therefore try and discuss this matter. From the commencement of the three dynasties downwards, nowhere has there been a man who has not under (the influence of external) things altered (the course of) his nature. Small men for the sake of gain have sacrificed their persons; scholars for the sake of fame have done so; great officers, for the sake of their families; and sagely men, for the sake of the kingdom. These several classes, with different occupations, and different reputations, have agreed in doing injury to their nature and sacrificing their persons. Take the case of a male and female slave; they have to feed the sheep together, but they both lose their sheep. Ask the one what he was doing, and you will find that he was holding his bamboo tablets and reading. Ask the other, and you will find that she was amusing herself with some game. They were differently occupied, but they equally lose their sheep. (So), Bo-yi died at the foot of Shou-yang to maintain his fame, and the robber Zhi died on the top of Dong-ling in his eagerness for gain. Their deaths were occasioned by different causes, but they equally shortened their lives and did violence to their nature; why must we approve of Bo-yi, and condemn the robber Zhi? In cases of such sacrifice all over the world, when one makes it for the sake of benevolence and righteousness, the common people style him 'a superior man,' but when another does it for the sake of goods and riches, they style him 'a small man.' The action of sacrificing is the same, and yet we have 'the superior man' and 'the small man!' In the matter of destroying his life, and doing injury to his nature, the robber Zhi simply did the same as Bo-yi - why must we make the distinction of 'superior man' and 'small man' between them? Moreover, those who devote their nature to (the pursuit) of benevolence and righteousness, though they should attain to be like Zeng (Shen) and Shi (Qiu), I do not pronounce to be good; those who devote it to (the study of) the five flavours, though they attain to be like Shu-er, I do not pronounce to be good; those who devote it to the (discrimination of the) five notes, though they attain to be like Shi Kuang, I do not pronounce to be quick of hearing; those who devote it to the (appreciation of the) five colours, though they attain to be like Li Zhu, I do not pronounce to be clear of vision. When I pronounce men to be good, I am not speaking of their benevolence and righteousness; the goodness is simply (their possession of) the qualities (of the Dao). When I pronounce them to be good, I am not speaking of what are called benevolence and righteousness; but simply of their allowing the nature with which they are endowed to have its free course. When I pronounce men to be quick of hearing, I do not mean that they hearken to anything else, but that they hearken to themselves; when I pronounce them to be clear of vision, I do not mean that they look to anything else, but that they look to themselves. Now those who do not see themselves but see other things, who do not get possession of themselves but get possession of other things, get possession of what belongs to others, and not of what is their own; and they reach forth to what attracts others, and not to that in themselves which should attract them. But thus reaching forth to what attracts others and not to what should attract them in themselves, be they like the robber Zhi or like Bo-yi, they equally err in the way of excess or of perversity. What I am ashamed of is erring in the characteristics of the Dao, and therefore, in the higher sphere, I do not dare to insist on the practice of benevolence and righteousness, and, in the lower, I do not dare to allow myself either in the exercise of excess or perversity.

— — —

Translated by James Legge

Notes from Chinese Text Project (https://ctext.org/)

https://ctext.org/zhuangzi/outer-chapters