All poems

战国战国 · 文 Prose

齐桓晋文之事·版本

The Affairs of Duke Huan of Qi and Duke Wen of Jin (Version)

孟轲

Meng Ke

论辩argumentation 儒家Confucianism 名篇classic masterpiece

齐宣王问曰：齐桓、晋文之事，可得闻乎？
孟子对曰：仲尼之徒无道桓文之事者，是以后世无传焉。

King Xuan of Qi asked: 'May I hear of the affairs of Duke Huan of Qi and Duke Wen of Jin?' Mencius replied: 'The disciples of Zhongni never spoke of the affairs of Huan and Wen, and therefore nothing of them has been handed down to later generations.'

Listen

Meaning

The opening exchange of Mencius's grand dialogue with King Xuan of Qi: the king eagerly asks to hear about the hegemony of Dukes Huan and Wen, and Mencius replies that Confucius's disciples never spoke of such things, so nothing has been handed down. The evasive answer declares at once his school's refusal of power-politics and redirects the conversation toward the kingly way of benevolent government. It is the classic first move of the debate between the kingly way and hegemony.

齐宣王问道：齐桓公、晋文公称霸的事迹，可以讲给我听听吗？孟子回答说：孔子的门徒从不谈论齐桓公、晋文公称霸的事，所以后世没有流传下来。

Appreciation

In two sentences the excerpt achieves a complete dialectical maneuver, avoiding the solid to strike at the void. The king's eager question and Mencius's cool, airtight reply, from never spoke of to therefore not handed down, form a dramatic contrast of hot and cold, while the refusal itself both declares the school's honor and clears the road for the later turn to if you must hear something, let it be kingship. Gentle in tone yet unshakable in stance, it is the textbook demonstration of Mencius's art of retreating in order to advance.

【白话串讲】孟子写《齐桓晋文之事》：齐宣王问齐桓公、晋文公称霸的事，孟子说：“仲尼之徒无道桓文之事者”——孔子门徒不谈霸道。他转而谈王道：“保民而王，莫之能御也”——爱护百姓就能称王天下——他劝宣王行仁政。【意象与手法】语录体对话，以「避实击虚」开局：宣王单刀直入问霸业，孟子以师门立场四两拨千斤，一石三鸟——表明立场、堵住追问、夺过话语权，为后文「无以，则王乎」的转折铺平道路，是「孟子之辩」以退为进的典范。【情感与主旨】见孟子「尊王贱霸」的政治立场与「说大人则藐之」的凛然气度：儒家不传霸道，非不能也，是不屑也，其以仁义王道匡正时君的理想主义，于此初见端倪。【名句点睛】常考「仲尼之徒无道桓文之事者，是以后世无传焉」的论辩艺术——以史实为盾、以师承为旗，因果相衔、滴水不漏，是理解「王霸之辨」的钥匙。

Background

This passage opens the longest and most brilliant debate in the Book of Mencius, in the chapter King Hui of Liang I, recording the famous dialogue between King Xuan of Qi and Mencius on the kingly way versus hegemony. Mencius (c. 372-289 BCE), named Meng Ke, styled Ziyu, of Zou (modern Zoucheng, Shandong), was the great Confucian of the mid-Warring States, a student of Zisi's disciples, honored as the Second Sage. In his time the wars of the lords grew ever fiercer; Qi under King Xuan (r. 319-301 BCE) was strong, the Jixia academy thronged with talent, and the king aspired to hegemony over the central states, hence his very first question to Mencius about the affairs of Huan and Wen. Huan and Wen were the most famed of the five hegemons of the Spring and Autumn period, and their record of revering the king and expelling the barbarians was the envy of Warring States rulers. Mencius, claiming succession to Confucius, held to the ideal of the kingly way, government by benevolence and righteousness and winning obedience by virtue, and opposed the way of force; so he deftly sidestepped the question of hegemony rather than answer it, setting the key for the whole debate on kingly versus hegemonic rule. This opening exchange already shows his burden of rectifying hearts and stopping false doctrines: knowing the king sought hegemony, he would still correct him with the way of duty, the bearing of the Second Sage visible from the first line.

本篇出自《孟子·梁惠王上》，是《孟子》中篇幅最长、论辩最精彩的篇章之一，记录齐宣王与孟子关于「王霸之辨」的著名对话。孟子（约前372—前289），名轲，字子舆，邹（今山东邹城）人，战国中期儒家代表人物，受业于子思之门人，被尊为「亚圣」。战国中期，诸侯争霸愈演愈烈，齐宣王（田辟疆，前319—前301在位）在位时齐国强盛，稷下学宫人才荟萃，宣王颇有称霸中原之志，故一见孟子便问「齐桓、晋文之事」。齐桓公、晋文公是春秋五霸中最著名的两位霸主，其「尊王攘夷」的霸业是战国君主艳羡的对象。孟子以继承孔子自任，坚持「王道」理想，主张以仁义治国、以德服人，反对霸道，故面对宣王的霸业之问，巧妙避开而不予正面回答，为全篇「王霸之辨」的展开定下基调。此节选正是这场著名对话的开端，是理解孟子政治思想与论辩艺术的关键段落。要之，此段以问答开场，已见孟子「正人心、息邪说」的担当：明知宣王所求在霸，而必以道义正之，亚圣风范于此开端已见。

Art

Formally this is pre-Qin dialogue (analects-style) prose, and the excerpt's genius lies wholly in the tactic of avoiding the solid to strike at the void. The king's question is direct: may I hear of the affairs of Huan and Wen, asking after the hegemons' achievements, eager in tone; Mencius's answer evades rather than answers: the disciples of Zhongni never spoke of the affairs of Huan and Wen, so nothing has been handed down, turning the question aside on the ground of school tradition. This looking-askance evasion is in fact the masterstroke: it declares his position, that Confucians deign not to discuss hegemony, drawing the boundary with his first breath; it creates suspense, for if the hegemon's record cannot be heard, what can be, preparing the turn to if you must hear something, let it be kingship and the program of protecting the people and thereby becoming king; and it retreats in order to advance, first closing the topic of hegemony, then leading the king through the gate of the kingly way, turning the dialogue onto his own intended track. In two exchanges, one attacks and one defends, the attacker eager and the defender composed, and Mencius's air of holding the great cheap when he addresses them, together with his dialectical finesse, is already alive on the page. Most subtly, the seeming concession is really the advance: first the road of hegemony is stopped, then the king is led into the gate of the kingly way, a textbook demonstration of the strategy of loosening in order to capture.

文体上属先秦语录体散文（对话体），此节选的妙处全在「避实击虚」的论辩布局。宣王之问单刀直入：「齐桓、晋文之事，可得闻乎？」——问的是霸主功业，态度热切；孟子之答却避而不答：「仲尼之徒无道桓文之事者，是以后世无传焉。」——以师门传统为由，轻巧地把霸业之问挡了回去。这「王顾左右而言他」式的回避，实为论辩的高招：其一，它表明立场——儒家不屑于谈霸道，孟子一开口就划清了王霸界限；其二，它制造悬念——霸业既不可闻，那什么才可闻？为下文「无以，则王乎」的转折、为「保民而王」的王道主张铺平道路；其三，它以退为进——先否了对方的话题，再夺过话语权，把对话引向自己预设的轨道。短短两句问答，一攻一守，攻者热切，守者从容，孟子「说大人则藐之」的气度与以意逆志的论辩机锋已呼之欲出。尤妙者，孟子之答看似退让，实为进攻——先堵死霸道之路，再引宣王入王道之门，是「欲擒故纵」辩术的教科书式示范。

Allusions

The excerpt's allusive background is deep. First, Huan of Qi and Wen of Jin: Duke Huan (Xiaobai) nine times assembled the lords and set the realm to rights, and Duke Wen (Chong'er) held the covenant at Jiantu and ruled the central states, the summits of Spring and Autumn hegemony and the models of Warring States kings, so the king's question mirrors the temper of the age. Second, the disciples of Zhongni never spoke of Huan and Wen is the key to the Confucian distinction of king and hegemon: Confucius rarely mentioned them in the Analects, granting Guan Zhong's benevolence through the duke's nine assemblies without war chariots yet plainly faulting Guan Zhong's smallness of capacity, keeping a reserved attitude toward hegemony; Mencius went further, defining hegemony as borrowing benevolence by force and kingship as practicing benevolence through virtue, so that never spoke of is at once a statement of fact and a judgment of value, the refusal of Confucians to transmit the record of hegemony. Third, the passage quietly sounds the prelude to the debate of righteousness and profit: the king asks of profit, hegemony, and Mencius answers with duty, the kingly way, while the word disciples in the disciples of Zhongni, marking the strictness of the succession, buries the line for the later famous judgment why must Your Majesty speak of profit. Zhu Xi in his Collected Comments specially marks the phrase the disciples of Zhongni, saying that Mencius here takes upon himself the duty of transmitting the Way; later Confucians built the king-hegemon distinction on this very ground.

此节选的典故与思想背景极深。其一，「齐桓、晋文」——齐桓公（小白）九合诸侯、一匡天下，晋文公（重耳）践土之盟、称霸中原，是春秋霸业的最高象征，战国君主无不以桓文为楷模，宣王之问正是时代风气的缩影。其二，「仲尼之徒无道桓文之事者」——此语是理解儒家「王霸之辨」的钥匙：孔子《论语》中极少言及桓文，「桓公九合诸侯不以兵车，管仲之力也」虽许管仲之仁，然孔子明言「管仲之器小哉」，对霸道持保留态度；孟子则更彻底，视霸道为「以力假仁」，王道为「以德行仁」，故「无道」二字既是事实陈述，更是价值判断——儒家学者不屑于传述霸道。其三，此段还暗含「义利之辨」的先声：宣王问霸业（利），孟子引王道（义），「仲尼之徒」的「徒」字见师承之严，为后文「王何必曰利」的著名论断埋线。此节选虽只两句，却是整个儒家政治哲学最凝练的入口。朱熹《集注》于此节特标「仲尼之徒」四字，谓孟子自任传道之责，后世儒者皆本此为「王霸之辨」立说，其源正出于此。

Commentary

The Affairs of Duke Huan and Duke Wen is the programmatic chapter of the Book of Mencius, and this opening exchange fixes the keynote of the whole debate on kingly versus hegemonic rule, with far-reaching consequences in Chinese political thought. First, by claiming succession to Confucius while refusing outright to speak of hegemony, Mencius fixed the Confucian stance of honoring the king and holding the hegemon cheap for the next two thousand years: the kingly way became the name for benevolent government while hegemonic rule coupled with power and stratagem, and the king-hegemon distinction became a core problem of Chinese political philosophy. Second, the argumentative art has been praised by critics of every age: Liu Xizai of the Qing, in his Overview of the Arts, said of Mencius's reasoned prose that it is majestic and unbounded in debate, and this evasion that lays a trap is the miniature of the debate of Mencius. Third, the dramatic contrast between the king's eagerness of may I be told and Mencius's coolness of never spoke of has been read for a millennium as the classic scene of the lord seeking hegemony while the minister advocates the kingly way, treated by Su Shi in his On Mencius and by Zhu Xi in his Collected Comments on the Four Books. Short as it is, the excerpt is the first step into the hall of Mencius's thought; read today, one still feels the fineness of the argument and the firmness of the ideal, never flattering the age, never bending the Way, the millennial echo of the Confucian spirit of serving the ruler by the Way.

《齐桓晋文之事》是《孟子》思想的纲领性篇章，此节选的开端已定下全篇「王霸之辨」的主旋律，在中国政治思想史上意义深远。其一，孟子以「仲尼之徒」自居而绝口不谈霸道，确立了儒家「尊王贱霸」的基本立场，影响此后两千年中国政治理想——「王道」成为仁政的代名词，「霸道」则与权谋武力相连，「王霸之辨」遂成中国政治哲学的核心命题之一。其二，此段论辩艺术为历代文论家所称道，清人刘熙载《艺概》谓孟子「说理之文，雄辩纵横」，此节选避问设伏、以退为进，正是「孟子之辩」的缩影。其三，宣王「可得闻乎」的急切与孟子「无道」的冷淡形成戏剧性对照，千百年来被作为「君求霸业、臣倡王道」的经典场景反复解读，苏轼《孟子论》、朱熹《四书章句集注》皆于此着墨。此节选虽短，却是进入孟子思想殿堂的第一级台阶。今日读之，仍可感其论辩之妙与理想之坚：不阿世、不枉道，正是儒家「以道事君」精神的千年回响。

Prosody

Form Pre-Qin dialogue prose (analects-style disputation)先秦语录体散文（对话体论辩文）

Rhyme As prose it does not rhyme, and speech is recorded in loose clauses. The two exchanges form one unit: the question rises on the final particle hu, and the answer settles on the final particle yan, one rising and one falling, forming the cadence of call and response; disyllables such as Huan-Wen and later ages alternate evenly with the rest, the rhythm unhurried.散文不押韵，以散句记言。两句问答自成一组，问句「可得闻乎」以「乎」字上扬，答句「是以后世无传焉」以「焉」字下抑，一问一答，一扬一抑，形成语气上的对答节奏；「桓文」「后世」等双音词与「仲尼」「无道」等词错落相间，节奏从容。

Tone pattern The record-of-speech mode is led by the verb said: the question is mild and courteous, the answer level and clipped; the disciples of Zhongni never spoke of Huan and Wen pauses once, and therefore nothing has been handed down closes, neither hurried nor slow, the composure of the Second Sage throughout.句式以「曰」字领起的记言体，问句舒缓谦恭，答句平正斩截。「齐宣王问曰」引出长问，语气殷切；「孟子对曰」接以短答，「仲尼之徒无道桓文之事者」一顿，「是以后世无传焉」一收，不疾不徐，尽显亚圣从容。

Reading note Though only two sentences, the excerpt already displays the sound-sense of the Mencius analects style. Built on the verb said, question and answer form a natural rhythm of dialogue: the king's may I be told lifts in tone, eager and unguarded, the restlessness of hegemony-seeking; Mencius's reply comes level and slow with the needle in the silk, the composure of one who holds the Way. The three particles each keep their post: hu interrogative, zhe marking the pause and emphasis, yan the closing sentiment, so that the two lines answer each other like drum and gong. Mencius is famous for majestic debate, but here one sees another form of his art: no fierce words or stern looks, but with a courteous tone, tight causality, and unhurried rhythm, turning aside the king's hegemony question with four ounces moving a thousand pounds. This sound-manner of overcoming the hard with the soft is precisely the line dividing the debate of the Second Sage from the clamor of the strategists.此节选虽仅两句，却已示范《孟子》语录体的声情之美。记言体以「曰」字为骨架，一问一答，天然构成对话的节奏：宣王之问「可得闻乎」，语气上扬、殷切外露，是求霸的躁动；孟子之答「无道桓文之事者，是以后世无传焉」，语气平缓、绵里藏针，是持道的从容。虚词「乎」「者」「焉」三字各安其位——「乎」表疑问，「者」表停顿提顿，「焉」表收束感叹，使两句对答如鼓与锣相和。孟子之文素以「雄辩」著称，而此段见其辩术的另一种形态：不疾言厉色，而以谦逊的口吻、严密的因果、从容的节奏，四两拨千斤地化解宣王的霸业之问。这种「以柔制刚」的声情，正是「亚圣」之辩与纵横家喧嚣之辩的分野。

Line by line

齐宣王问曰：齐桓、晋文之事，可得闻乎？

King Xuan of Qi asked: 'May I hear of the affairs of Duke Huan of Qi and Duke Wen of Jin?'

齐宣王问道：齐桓公、晋文公这两位霸主称霸天下的事迹，可以讲给我听一听吗？

King Xuan of Qi asked: 'May I hear of the deeds of Huan of Qi and Wen of Jin?'

此句是对话的开场，一句问话便画出宣王的政治抱负。「问曰」二字点明君臣问答之体；「齐桓、晋文之事」以春秋两大霸主并举，正是战国君主心向往之的功业模板——宣王不问治国安民，先问霸主故事，其称霸中原的野心跃然纸上；「可得闻乎」的「得」字与「乎」字，语气谦恭而急切，作为一国之君以请教口吻相询，既见其求教之诚，亦见其兴霸之热。然而这一问正撞在孟子思想的禁区上：孟子毕生鼓吹王道，视霸道为「以力假仁」的歧路，宣王越热切，孟子越不能顺水推舟。此问为全篇设下了「王霸冲突」的戏剧性前提，是理解后文孟子一系列迂回论辩的起点。

This line is the dialogue's opening, one question drawing King Xuan's political ambition. The words 'asked' marking the lord-and-minister form; 'the deeds of Huan of Qi and Wen of Jin' naming the two Spring and Autumn hegemons together, the very model of achievement a Warring States ruler longed for - King Xuan asks not of ruling and feeding the people, but of the hegemons' tales, his ambition to dominate the central plain before the eyes; the words 'may I hear' and 'may' the tone humble yet eager, a ruler asking in the tone of a learner, showing both the sincerity of seeking teaching and the heat of seeking hegemony. Yet this question strikes the forbidden ground of Mencius' thought: Mencius preached the kingly way all his life, seeing the way of hegemony as 'borrowing might under the name of benevolence'; the hotter the King, the less Mencius can give way. The question sets the whole's dramatic premise of 'kingly way against hegemony,' the starting point for understanding Mencius' later circuitous argument.

孟子对曰：仲尼之徒无道桓文之事者，是以后世无传焉。

Mencius replied: 'The disciples of Zhongni never spoke of the affairs of Huan and Wen, and therefore nothing of them has been handed down to later ages.'

孟子回答说：孔子的门徒从不谈论齐桓公、晋文公称霸的事，所以后世没有流传下来。

Mencius answered: 'The disciples of Zhongni spoke nothing of the doings of Huan and Wen; therefore later ages have no tradition of them.'

此句是孟子论辩艺术的开幕，四两拨千斤。面对宣王的霸业之问，孟子既不斥其非，也不正面作答，而是以「仲尼之徒」的师门立场轻轻挡回：孔子门徒不讲霸道，所以「无传焉」——不是我不肯说，是根本无此家法、无此材料。「仲尼之徒」四字抬高立场的权威性，「无道」二字点明价值判断（不屑于道），「是以」二字把「不传」归因于「无道」，逻辑自洽、滴水不漏。更妙的是「无传焉」的「焉」字——语带惆怅，仿佛霸业之说不传是件无可奈何的事，实则以此堵死宣王追问的路径，把话题的主动权牢牢握在自己手中。此句一石三鸟：表明立场、堵住追问、铺设后文「无以，则王乎」的转折，孟子「雄辩」之名，于此已见一斑。

This line is the opening of Mencius' art of debate, four taels moving a thousand catties. Facing the King's question of hegemony, Mencius neither condemns it nor answers directly, but lightly parries on the school stance of 'the disciples of Zhongni': Confucius' followers do not speak of hegemony, hence 'no tradition' - not that I will not speak, but that there is simply no such house-rule, no such material. The four words 'disciples of Zhongni' raising the authority of the stance, the words 'spoke nothing' marking the value judgment (disdain to speak), the words 'therefore' attributing 'not handed down' to 'spoke nothing,' the logic self-consistent, no seam. More cunning is the word 'them' in 'no tradition of them' - a tone of regret, as if the loss of hegemony's tales were a thing beyond help, in truth sealing the King's path of further questioning, holding the initiative of the topic firmly in his own hand. The line kills three birds: stating the stance, blocking the追问, priming the later turn 'if you must speak, then of royal rule' - Mencius' fame as debater already showing here.

Study

Word focus

可得闻乎 May I be told is a courteous interrogative whose very humility betrays the king's ardent hunger for the hegemons' record, setting the eager note against which Mencius's refusal will stand out all the more firmly. 「可得闻乎」四字是宣王心理的写真，也是全篇的引信。「可得」即「可以、能够」，以谦卑的问法探询，透出宣王对霸主之事的极度向往——不是随便问问，而是郑重请教；「闻乎」以反诘语气收尾，恭敬中带着期待，仿佛已准备好洗耳恭听。这四个字还暗藏政治学意义：宣王把「闻霸业」当作治国之需，说明在战国语境中，称霸已成君主的普遍梦想，孟子所要扭转的，正是这种「以力服人」的时代风气。作为对话的起点，「可得闻乎」越谦恭，后文孟子「无道」的拒绝就越显立场坚定，一热一冷，戏剧张力自生。古人谓孟子「善说」，此四字正是其论辩对手为孟子搭好的舞台。

仲尼之徒 The disciples of Zhongni is Mencius's banner, four characters carrying the Confucian sense of the transmission of the Way: by claiming succession to Confucius he grounds his every position in the school's highest authority, at once fixing his own lineage and closing the road of hegemony to the conversation. 「仲尼之徒」是孟子论辩的旗帜，四字承载着儒家道统意识。仲尼即孔子，「徒」指门徒、学统，孟子自称「仲尼之徒」，以孔子继承者自居，为自己的一切主张提供最高权威的依据——我不谈霸道，不是我的偏好，而是孔门师训如此。这四字的深意在于：其一，确立「道统」——儒家有明确的师承谱系，「徒」字见其传承之自觉，开后世「道统论」（韩愈、朱熹）的先声；其二，划定「家法」——仲尼之徒不谈霸道，儒家学术自有边界，非其学不谈，是先秦诸子「守先待后」的学术自觉；其三，为后文「王道」主张立根——既然霸道不在孔门学统之内，那么宣王若想有所闻，只能听孟子讲王道。四字之微，道统、家法、论辩机关尽在其中。

是以后世无传焉 Therefore nothing has been handed down to later ages is the logical hinge of the reply, binding cause, never spoke of, to consequence, not transmitted, with airtight causality that stops the king's mouth while implying that what Confucians do transmit is the kingly way. 「是以后世无传焉」是全句的逻辑枢纽，「是以」（因此）与「焉」（于此）两个虚词撑起整段论证。「是以」把「不传」归因于「无道」，因果相衔，滴水不漏——先有仲尼之徒不讲霸道的事实，才有后世无霸业传述的结果，孟子以史实为盾，让宣王无话可驳；句末「焉」字兼有「于之」（在霸道之事上）与语气词双重功能，收得既惆怅又笃定，仿佛对霸业之失传深致惋惜，实则把宣王的提问彻底悬置。更妙的是，此句还暗含一个隐预设：既然霸道「无传」，那么王道自有「传」——孔门所传者正是仁义王道，孟子虽未明言，宣王已隐约可感，为后文「保民而王」的展开作了无声的铺垫。虚词之用，竟有如此绵密的论辩功能。