战国 战国 · 文 Prose
学弈
Xueyi: Learning to Play Weiqi
弈秋,通国之善弈者也。
使弈秋诲二人弈,其一人专心致志,惟弈秋之为听;
一人虽听之,一心以为有鸿鹄将至,思援弓缴而射之。
虽与之俱学,弗若之矣。
Though he studied with the other, he did not match him.
Meaning
The passage is a fable about attention. Two boys learn the same game from the same master, one of whom governs his mind entirely by his teacher while the other is watching for a bird he could shoot. They study together and the second does not come near the first. The lesson is not about talent or instruction: it is that the outcome of learning is decided by where the heart is. Because the passage is a short, self-contained story with a plain ending, it became the classical model for the Chinese essay that teaches by comparing two people who were otherwise alike.
弈秋,是全国最善于下棋的人。让弈秋教两个人下棋,其中一个人专心致志,只听弈秋的教导;另一个人虽然也在听,心里却总以为有天鹅将要飞来,想着拿起弓箭去射它。虽然他和专心的人一同学习,却比不上人家了。
Appreciation
[Plain Paraphrase] A famous player teaches two pupils. The first attends to nothing but his teacher; the second half-listens, and half of his mind is on a flying goose he wants to shoot. They learn together, and the second is worse.[Structure] Three sentences of growing length, then one short verdict that undoes them: introduction, the two pupils side by side, and the conclusion 'though he studied with the other, he did not match him.'[Imagery] The only image is the wild goose, and it is an image of distraction — the bird the second pupil never shoots, which signals that his attention has already left the game.[Sentiment] Nothing is scolded and nothing is comforted. The verdict 'he did not match him' isflat; no blame is attached, and the brevity of the ending is what makes the point land. The story is memorable precisely because the two boys differ in one only thing, while everything else — master, game, board, hours — is identical.
【白话串讲】 孟子写《学弈》:弈秋教两个人下棋。一个人“专心致志,惟弈秋之为听”。另一个人“一心以为有鸿鹄将至,思援弓缴而射之”——想着射天鹅。“虽与之俱学,弗若之矣”——“为是其智弗若与?曰:非然也”——不是智力问题,是专心不专心。 【意象与手法】 这是以寓言说理的典范:以小见大,借下棋的小事讲「专心致志」的大道理;对比手法贯穿全篇,一专一分,同师异果,不着一字褒贬而褒贬自明;语言简练,叙议结合,全章不足百字,却完整而深刻。 【情感与主旨】 孟子借此说明学习成败的关键不在天资与师承,而在用心是否专一——「不专心致志,则不得也」,既劝学,也寓「求其放心」的修养之道。 【名句点睛】 「专心致志」由此篇凝为成语,「一心以为有鸿鹄将至」更成为形容人浮气躁、心不在焉的经典表达。
Background
The Mengzi, the book of the philosopher Mencius (c. 372–289 BC), is a dialogue record rather than a treatise, and the book it belongs to, the 'Gaozi' section, is where the master's arguments about the heart and about what the mind must be kept are set out. This short piece is one of the handful of narrative fables in the book, and it is the source of the Chinese idiom for studying with divided attention. It has been a school text for more than two thousand years, and it is among the passages most frequently quoted in essays on effort.
《学弈》选自《孟子·告子上》,作者是战国时期的思想家孟子(约前372—前289),名轲,邹国(今山东邹城)人,儒家学派的代表人物,被后世尊为「亚圣」。孟子生活在战国中后期,诸侯争霸、百家争鸣,他继承并发展了孔子的学说,主张「仁政」「王道」,提出「性善论」,认为人性本善,人人都有恻隐、羞恶、辞让、是非「四端」,关键在于后天的存养扩充。《告子上》一篇集中讨论人性问题,孟子在与告子的反复论辩中阐发性善之说,《学弈》即此篇中一个著名的比喻性例证。当时诸侯国君多贪图功利、暴虐不仁,孟子周游列国,屡屡进谏而不被采纳,遂退而著书立说,与弟子万章、公孙丑等整理《孟子》七篇。文中弈秋是传说中当时全国最善于下棋的人,孟子借「弈秋诲弈」的小故事说明「专心致志」的重要性,进而论证学习与为善的关键在于用心专一——「今夫弈之为数,小数也;不专心致志,则不得也」。本文所录为《学弈》全章的主体,故事完整,寓意深远。
Art
The whole passage turns on a pair of sentences of different lengths. The pupil who does well is described in four characters and then six — he is concentrated and he listens only to the teacher — while the pupil who fails gets a sentence that nearly doubles in length: he listens, and yet his mind is on a goose, and he wants to take his bow. The lengthening itself dramatises the wandering mind, and the reader feels the slackness before any argument is made. Two other devices help: the use of 虽 ('though') so that the failing pupil's attendance is granted and then discounted, and the closing clause, four characters, which cuts against everything before it. The final sentence obeys what the fable preaches, since it is, like the good pupil's mind, entirely on the subject.
《学弈》是先秦诸子散文中以寓言说理的典范,全文不过百字,却完整地讲述了一个小故事并寄寓深刻的道理,其艺术特色有三。其一,寓言说理、以小见大。孟子不讲抽象的道理,而是用一个日常可见的下棋故事来说明「专心致志」的重要性:同样跟随名师弈秋学棋,一个专心,一个分心,结果天差地别。从下棋这样的小事入手,推论出学习、为政、修身的大道理,正是先秦儒家「能近取譬」的说理艺术。其二,对比手法贯穿全篇。二人学弈,一专心一不专,形成鲜明对照:专心者「惟弈秋之为听」,唯老师之命是听;不专者「虽听之,一心以为有鸿鹄将至」,身在课堂而心在天空。同一老师、同一教材、同一环境,结果「弗若之矣」,差异只在用心与否,对比之下,道理不言自明。其三,语言简练、叙议结合。全文以叙事为主,兼有简洁的议论(「虽与之俱学,弗若之矣」),叙事为议论张本,议论为叙事点睛,不着一字说教而教训自在其中,正见孟子「言近而旨远」的文章风格。
Allusions
Yi Qiu is the legendary weiqi master of the state of Qi, so good that his name became a byword for the game itself. The wild goose (鸿鹄) is the swan, which in Chinese usage is the bird of high ambition — Chen She asks 'how would a swallow know the ambition of a swan' — so the story quietly mocks a pupil whose ambition has taken him out of the room. The 弓缴, the bow with a weighted cord, is the weapon of the archer rather than the game; the pupil's distraction is described in the vocabulary of war. The ending word 弗若之矣, 'he did not match him,' is a flat assessment with no judgment attached, and it is that refusal to moralise that made the passage a favourite with later essayists.
《学弈》虽是一则短小的寓言,其人物与意象却承载着深厚的文化内涵。弈秋之「秋」,一说以其善弈而名之,古人常以技艺称人,如「庖丁」「轮扁」;「弈」即围棋,相传始于尧舜时代,春秋战国时期已相当普及,是「琴棋书画」四艺之一,被视为修养心性的雅事,故以学弈喻求学,正是取围棋所需的高度专注与智力,恰合「专心致志」的主旨。「鸿鹄」即天鹅,是中国文化中高远志向的象征,《史记·陈涉世家》载陈涉「燕雀安知鸿鹄之志哉」,以鸿鹄喻远大抱负;而《学弈》中的鸿鹄却是使学棋者分心的诱惑——这恰恰说明:志向虽高远,若不能脚踏实地、心无旁骛,则一切皆空,与「一心以为有鸿鹄将至」的讽喻形成意味深长的对照。「弓缴」之「缴」指系在箭上的丝绳,射鸟所用,细节真实,可见战国人的生活场景。这一寓言在后世影响深远,「专心致志」「一心以为有鸿鹄将至」皆成常用成语,与《学记》《劝学》等一同成为蒙学与教育中劝学励志的经典文本。
Commentary
Readers have understood the fable in two ways. The straightforward reading is the moral one — single-minded attention is the condition of all learning — and it is the reading that has made this the most quoted passage of the book in schools. The more subtle reading, which Mencius' own discussion of the mind elsewhere in the Mengzi supports, is that the story is also about where the heart finds its home: the good pupil's heart has gone out to nothing else, and therefore nothing else can compete. Later writers, from the Tang essayists to the Qing note-takers, borrowed the frame — two people, one capacity, one divided heart — and the idiom 一心以为鸿鹄将至 survives as a way of saying that a person's body is present and his mind is elsewhere.
《学弈》是《孟子》中最脍炙人口的篇章之一,千百年来作为劝学名篇广为传诵,其影响远超文本本身。在教育思想上,孟子借学弈说明「专心致志」是学习成败的关键,与《礼记·学记》「善学者,师逸而功倍」的思想相通,也与荀子《劝学》「锲而不舍,金石可镂」的坚持论相呼应,共同构成中国古代劝学传统的核心话语;「专心致志」一词更由这个故事凝结而成,至今仍是汉语中形容用心专一的最常用成语。在文学上,这则寓言是先秦诸子「以譬喻说理」的典范,其「小故事、大道理」的写法,上承《论语》的语录与《庄子》的寓言,下启韩非子、柳宗元、苏轼等人的寓言与杂说,是古代说理文学的经典范式。在当代,此章仍入选中小学语文教材,是学生接触先秦散文与文言文的入门篇目;由故事引申出的「学习贵在专心」的教导,更成为一代代中国人的常识。一篇不足百字的寓言,能跨越两千余年而常读常新,正是其「言近旨远」生命力的最好证明。
Prosody
Line by line
弈秋,通国之善弈者也。
Yi Qiu was the best weiqi player in the whole state.
弈秋,是举国上下最善于下棋的人,棋艺冠绝全国、无人能及。
Yi Qiu was the finest chess-player in the whole kingdom.
开篇一句,寥寥九字,交代人物与身份,是全文叙事的起点。「弈秋」是传说中全国棋艺最高的人,在战国时期声名远播,是「善弈」的代名词;「通国」即全国,「通国之善弈者」以「者」字结构构成判断句,肯定而简洁,把弈秋的棋艺推到全国第一的位置。这一句看似平实,作用却极关键:它为主人公设置了一个无可争议的高起点——教棋的既是全国第一高手,那么学生学不好,就绝不是老师不行,只能归结于学生自身用心与否。这样一来,下文二人学弈的悬殊结果便具有了极大的说服力,论点的根基在开篇已然立稳。同时,「善弈」之「善」字也暗含儒家「学以致用」的价值取向。全句句式整饬、语气笃定,正是先秦散文「简而有力」的典型笔法。
The opening line, a bare nine characters, naming person and identity, the narrative's start. 'Yi Qiu' the legendary best player in the state, famed in the Warring States, the very byword for 'skilled at chess'; 'the whole state' the whole country, 'the best chess-player in the whole state' a judgment sentence in the 'the one who' construction, assured and brief, placing Yi Qiu's skill first in the land. The line seems plain, yet its role crucial: it sets the protagonist an uncontested high start - if the teacher is the state's best, then a pupil's failure is never the teacher's fault, but the pupil's own attention. Thus the later gulf between the two pupils gains its great force, the argument's foundation laid at the opening. At the same time, the word 'skilled' in 'skilled at chess' holds the Confucian value of 'learning applied.' The whole line's order even, the tone assured, the pre-Qin model of 'brief and forceful.'
其一人专心致志,惟弈秋之为听;一人虽听之,一心以为有鸿鹄将至,思援弓缴而射之。
One of them concentrates his heart and will, and listens only to Yi Qiu; the other, though he listens, has his whole mind on a wild goose about to come, and wishes to take his bow and arrow and shoot it.
其中一个人专心致志,只听弈秋的教导;另一个人虽然也在听,心里却总以为有天鹅将要飞来,想着拿起弓箭去射它。
One of them concentrated his whole mind, listening only to Yi Qiu; the other, though he sat at the lessons, kept thinking a swan would fly by, and longed to seize bow and string to shoot it.
这是全文的核心对比,两句写尽专心与分心的天壤之别。前一人「专心致志」,以「惟弈秋之为听」强调其专注之纯——「惟……之为……」是宾语前置的强调句式,把「弈秋」提到动词前,突出他只听老师教诲、别无二心的状态,一个「惟」字写尽全神贯注。后一人「虽听之」三字极妙:他并非不听,而是「身在曹营心在汉」,「一心以为有鸿鹄将至」的「一心」与前面「专心」构成尖锐对照——专心者用心于棋,分心者用心于鸿鹄,同是「一心」,所向迥异;「思援弓缴而射之」更以具体的动作想象(拿起弓箭去射天鹅)把分心的程度写得活灵活现。孟子不下一字褒贬,而褒贬自在对比之中:两个学棋者的形象如漫画般鲜明,道理的倾向不言而喻,这正是「能近取譬」说理艺术的神髓。
This is the whole's central contrast, two lines writing the sky-and-earth difference between attention and distraction. The first, 'gave his whole mind to chess,' stressing the purity of his focus by 'listening only to Yi Qiu' - 'only...' the fronted object construction, putting 'Yi Qiu' before the verb, marking that he hears only the master's teaching, no other thought; the one word 'only' writing the whole-hearted attention. The second, 'though he listened,' three words most cunning: he does not not listen, but 'body in the camp, mind elsewhere'; the 'was always thinking' in 'was always thinking a swan was about to come' set in sharp contrast with the 'whole mind' before - the attentive one's mind on chess, the distracted one's on the swan, both 'whole mind,' yet aiming at different things; 'longed to take bow and string and shoot it' further writing the distraction's degree through concrete imagined action. Mencius adds no word of praise or blame, yet praise and blame lie in the contrast: the two pupils' images as clear as a cartoon, the tendency self-evident - this is the very marrow of 'drawing the lesson from what is near.'
虽与之俱学,弗若之矣。
Though he studied with the other, he did not match him.
虽然他和那位专心致志的人一同学习、一同听讲,棋艺却远远比不上人家了。
Though he studied with the same teacher, he could not match the other.
结尾两句,收束叙事,点出结果,是全章画龙点睛之笔。「虽与之俱学」先退一步:二人明明同拜一位老师、同在一处学习、学的还是同一种棋艺,条件完全相同;「弗若之矣」再进一层:结果却相差悬殊。一退一进之间,把「结果差异」与「条件相同」的矛盾推到读者面前,迫使读者追问:既然条件一样,为什么结果不同?答案呼之欲出——只因用心有别。「弗若之矣」四字语气平淡,几乎是结论性的陈述,不含一丝夸张,然而正是在这种平实之中,道理的锋芒尽显:学习成败的关键不在天资、不在师承、不在环境,而在是否「专心致志」。孟子以两句话完成故事的收束,随即引出「今夫弈之为数,小数也;不专心致志,则不得也」的议论,叙议衔接如行云流水,寓言的说理功能至此圆满实现。
The closing two lines, gathering the narrative, naming the result, the chapter's finishing stroke. 'Though he learned with the other' first yielding: the two plainly shared one master, one place, one chess; the conditions identical. 'He could not equal him' then advancing: yet the result poles apart. Between the yield and the advance, the contradiction of 'different results' and 'same conditions' is set before the reader, forcing the question: if the conditions are the same, why the result differs? The answer at the lips - only the attention differs. The four words 'he could not equal him' in a flat tone, almost a conclusive statement, not a touch of exaggeration, yet precisely in this plainness the argument's edge shows: the key to learning's success is not native gift, not teacher, not environment, but whether one 'gives his whole mind.' Mencius, in two lines, closes the story, then leads into the discussion of 'chess is a small craft; without whole attention, one cannot master it,' narrative and argument flowing like running water, the fable's persuasive function complete.
Study
Word focus
Related Reading
Both passages come from the 'Gaozi' section of the Mengzi and both teach by setting two things beside each other. 'The Fish I Want' compares fish and bear's paw, declares that both cannot be had, and concludes 'give up life and choose righteousness' — a contrast of two things that cannot be possessed together. This passage compares two pupils who cannot be improved on, and concludes with a flat assessment. The one treats a moral choice, the other a matter of concentration; the likeness is in the method. Together they show what Mencian argument looks like at its two extremes — the grand refusal of a life that is not right, and the small, quiet correction of a mind that has wandered — and the 'heart,' which is the book's real subject, is the principle in both.
《鱼我所欲也》与《学弈》同出《孟子·告子上》,同是孟子以比喻和对比说理的经典,堪称姊妹篇。《鱼我所欲也》以「鱼与熊掌」不可兼得喻「生与义」的取舍,提出「舍生取义」的价值观,用的是「两难抉择」的设喻;《学弈》以二人学弈的成败喻「专心致志」的重要,用的是「同师异果」的对比。一论大节(义利之辨),一论小节(用心之道),而说理方式一脉相承:都从日常经验入手,以小喻大;都用鲜明的对比展开,以差异见理;都语言简练,点到即止。合观二文,可见孟子说理的完整面貌:既有宏大处「舍生取义」的刚健,也有精微处「专心致志」的恳切,而「心」的修养(存心、求放心)始终是其理论枢纽,恰与孟子「性善论」的核心主张一以贯之。
劝学 Quan Xue: On Learning 荀子 · 同为先秦劝学名篇,一主专一一行持久 Two canonical texts on learning that disagree on whether concentration or accumulation is the cause of successXunzi's 'On Learning' is the great儒家 statement of the和学习 as a long accumulation: 'the blue drawn from the indigo is bluer,' 'piling earth makes a mountain,' 'chipping without stopping can cut through metal and stone.' Mencius' fable is about the unity of the mind in a single lesson. Xunzi's argument is that even a slow, plodding process will arrive if it never stops; Mencius' is that nothing will arrive if the mind is elsewhere. Read as a pair they are more than complementary: concentration is the start, accumulation is the road, and an education that has one without the other is half an education. Their styles make the same point — Xunzi piles up parallel images and rhymes; Mencius tells a story and stops.
荀子《劝学》与孟子《学弈》同为先秦劝学名篇,却代表儒门两大宗师不同的学习论。孟子重「心」,强调学习的成败系于用心是否专一,故《学弈》以「专心致志」立说;荀子重「积」,强调学习在于日积月累的功夫,故《劝学》以「积土成山,风雨兴焉」「锲而不舍,金石可镂」立论。一以「专」字立骨,一以「积」字立骨,恰成互补:专心是学习的起点,积累是学习的路径,合起来才是完整的为学之道。文体上,《学弈》是短小寓言,以故事说理,亲切而含蓄;《劝学》是长篇论说,以比喻排比说理(青出于蓝、冰寒于水、登高而招、顺风而呼),雄辩而富丽。二文并读,可见先秦儒家对「如何学习」的深入思考,也可见孟荀同宗孔子而风格迥异的文学气象。
两小儿辩日 Two Boys Disputing the Sun 列子 · 同为先秦寓言名篇,一喻用心一喻见识 Two Warring States fables of about a hundred characters each, one on concentration and one on the limits of knowingThe 'Two Boys Disputing the Sun' comes from the 'Tang Wen' section of the Liezi: two children argue about whether the sun is nearer at dawn or at noon, and Confucius cannot settle it, which the fable offers as a lesson that knowledge has no end and that one must not pretend to what one does not know. This passage is about attention; that one is about cognition. The two share the method — a small scene, no argument offered, a conclusion left standing — and they share a source, since the Liezi is itself full of the anecdotes that the Mengzi uses in argument. Read together, they map the two directions in which Chinese fable could grow: inward, to the discipline of the mind, or outward, to the humility of the knower.
《列子·汤问》中的《两小儿辩日》与《学弈》同为先秦寓言名篇,都以小儿或学艺故事寄寓道理,却指向不同的主题。《两小儿辩日》写两个小孩争辩太阳早晨与中午的远近,连孔子也无法决断,寄寓「知也无涯」「不能强不知以为知」的哲理,重在「见识」;《学弈》写二人学棋一专一分、成败悬殊,寄寓「专心致志」的劝诫,重在「用心」。一者是认知论的寓言(世界无穷,人不能尽知),一者是学习论的寓言(学业成败,全在用心),合观可见先秦寓言主题的丰富。写法上,《两小儿辩日》以对话展开,活泼诙谐;《学弈》以对比展开,庄重恳切。二文都善于从儿童与日常生活的平凡小事中提炼大道理,以小见大、言近旨远,这正是先秦寓言历两千余年而生命力不衰的共同奥秘。