《史記》是漢朝司馬遷所寫的一本歷史書，司馬遷在寫《史記．伯夷列傳》的時候，寫著伯夷、叔齊的故事表現了他自己的感慨，司馬遷說古人說過這樣的話「天道無親，常與善人」是說上天的道理是沒有親疏的分別的，它對於世界萬物的態度都是公正的，從不偏袒任河一方，這就是「天道無親」的意思，「常與善人」的「與」是幫助的意思。雖然上天「無親」，然而它常常成全幫助那些善良的人。這兩句本來是出於中國古代的一本書《老子》中的，司馬遷在《伯夷列傳》中就引了這兩句，他說伯夷、叔齊都是所謂的善人，他們一個不願做不孝的兒子，一個不願做不義弟弟，他們看到武王伐紂就認為以臣弒君是不應該做的。凡是正當的，凡是不好的事情他們都不去做，他們要保持自己在品格上的一份完美，那麼像伯夷、叔齊這樣的好人，他們最後的結果又怎樣呢？司馬遷說「積仁潔行如此而餓死」，他們積累了那麼多「仁」；「仁」，一般人都以為是所謂的「仁愛」，其實「仁」還表示一種完美的品格。他們要自己的品格完美，不仁的事情、不義的事情、不對的事情，他們從來不做。古人稱這為「潔行」，是說他們的行為很清白、清潔、乾淨的，沒有一步路走錯，沒有一件事做錯。如此「積仁潔行」的兩個「善人」，可結果怎樣呢？結果伯夷、叔齊兩人居然被活活餓死了！因為他們不肯在周朝做官，不肯接受周武王給他們的奉糧，他們只好在首陽山上「採薇而食。」「薇」是一種野菜，他們以這種野菜為食，後來就餓死了。
現在陶淵明就這個問題提出了疑問，他說，「積善云有報，夷叔在西山。」他說，不是說做好事的就有好報嗎？那麼伯夷和叔齊他們難道不是好人？可是為什麼在西山活活地餓死了呢？這裡陶淵明只說「夷叔在西山」，他沒有把西山「餓死」兩個字寫在裏面。那是因為陶淵明所寫的這段故事是《史記》裡面的。而《史記》這本書是中國古代讀書人大家都熟知的。是每個人都讀過的，所以他只要提到伯夷、叔齊兩個人在西山，大家就都會知道伯夷、叔齊是餓死的。《伯夷列傳》是司馬遷寫得非常好的一篇文章，司馬遷一共寫了七十篇列傳，第一篇就是伯夷、叔齊的列傳，這是他最好的一篇傳記。他提出了一個人生最大的問題，就是善惡有沒有報應的問題，在這兩句話的後邊，司馬遷又舉出了一個不善的例子，他說”盜蹠日殺不辜，肝人之肉，竟以壽終。是遵何德哉？”蹠是中古代傳統中非常暴戾，非常殘酷的一個人。他經常濫殺無罪的人，而且”肝人之肉”，他甚至把人的肝臟都剖出來吃了，像這樣的大強盜，他卻享盡了天年，他非但沒餓死，反而生活得很好。他說這樣的人是遵何德哉？他們所遵守的是什麼樣的道德？他根本就沒道德，可為什麼那些有道德，”積仁潔行”的人餓死了，沒有道德的人，殺人的人反而享受了天年？司馬遷還不只是提出了這樣一個問題，不只是舉出古代的伯夷、叔齊這兩個人和盜蹠做一個明顯的對比。他說在我們一般的”里巷之人”，即平常人之中，我們也看到許多為善者生活很貧苦；許多做惡者卻不但自己生活得很好，而且還能令其子孫”富厚累世不絕”，他們也許是貪贓枉法得來的錢財，而他的子孫還能繼承他的遺產，世世代代享樂下去。所以司馬遷最後就提出了一個疑問，他說”倘所謂天道，是耶？非耶？”假如眞是上天有一個明辨是非善惡的道理，那麼這個天道是可信呢？還是不可信呢？是公平的，還是不公平的呢？這是司馬遷在他的《伯夷列傳》中提出的一個問題。
待續 |
|
The Historical Records is a history book written by Sima Qian. In writing "A Biographical Sketch of Boyi," Sima expresses his own lamentation through the story of Boyi and Shuqi. He quotes the words of an ancient philosopher: "Heaven shows no partiality, yet always aids the virtuous." Heaven does not differentiate between those who are close or distant; it treats all the myriad creatures of the world fairly and has no favorites. That's what "Heaven shows no partiality" means. Although Heaven is impartial, it often confers aid upon good and virtuous people.
Sima Qian makes use of this quote from the ancient Chinese text of Lao Zi. He said Boyi and Shuqi were both good people: one of them did not want to be an unfilial son, and the other did not want to be an unrighteous brother. When they saw Ji Fa (the future King Wu) attack King Zhou, they felt it was not right for a minister to be attacking his king. In general, Boyi and Shuqi wanted to avoid being involved in any matter that was not proper or good. They wanted to preserve the integrity of their own character.
Despite their goodness, what happened to Boyi and Shuqi in the end? Sima Qian says, "Although they accumulated so much humaneness and were so pure in conduct, they ended up starving to death." Most people explain humaneness as love, but humaneness actually refers to the perfection of character. Wishing to perfect their character, Boyi and Shuqi avoided doing anything that was inhumane, unrighteous, or wrong. The ancients called that "pure conduct," because their behavior was impeccable. They did not take a single wrong step or make a single mistake.
Those two virtuous men conducted themselves with such humaneness and purity, yet what was their fate? Boyi and Shuqi ended up starving to death. Refusing to serve as officials in the Zhou Dynasty or to accept the emolument given them by King Wu, their only recourse was to flee to Shouyang Mountain, where they picked thorn-ferns for food. They subsisted on thorn-ferns, a type of wild vegetable, and eventually died of starvation.
Now Tao Yuanming brings up a question. He says, "It is said that accumulated good brings a reward, / Yet there were Yi and Shu in the western mountains." "If good deeds are said to bring a good retribution, does that mean that Boyi and Shuqi were not good people? If they were good, why did they starve to death in the western mountains?" Tao does not explicitly say that they "starved to death" in his poem, because the educated people of ancient China were all familiar with that story from the Historical Records. Everyone had read it, so even though Tao only mentioned Boyi and Shuqi as being two men in the western mountains, everyone would know that they had died of starvation.
"A Biographical Sketch of Boyi" is one of Sima Qian's most excellent essays. He wrote seventy biographical sketches in all, and this was the first one. It is also his best biography. He brings up one of the biggest issues of life—whether or not there are consequences for good and evil. In the lines that follow, Sima Qian brings up an example of someone who was not good. He wrote, "The robber Zhi murdered innocent people and devoured their flesh, yet he enjoyed a long life. What morality did he observe?" Zhi was a terribly cruel and violent man in ancient China who regularly killed innocent people and carved out their organs to eat. Yet that notorious robber lived to the end of his natural life. Not only did he not starve, but he lived very comfortably.
Sima asks: What kind of morality did such a man observe? He was basically immoral. Why is it that those who live humanely and purely starve, while murderers with no sense of morality enjoy life to its natural end?
In addition to mentioning Boyi and Shuqi, two men from the distant past, and the robber Zhi, as examples, Sima further pointed out how, among ordinary people, we often witness active charity workers suffer poverty and hardship. We also see numerous evildoers who not only enjoy comfortable lives themselves, but ensure wealth and fortune for their posterity as well. Their wealth may have been obtained illegally, yet their families are able to enjoy it for generations.
And so Sima Qian concludes with a question: "If that is divine justice, is it reliable or not?" If Heaven truly has a principle of distinguishing right from wrong and good from evil, can this principle be trusted or not? Is it just or not? This is the issue put forth by Sima Qian in "A Biographical Sketch of Boyi."
To be continued |
