马子莘问：「『修道之教』，旧说谓『圣人品节吾性之固有，以为法于天下，若礼、乐、刑、政之属』，此意如何？」
先生曰：「道即性、即命，本是完完全全，增减不得，不假修饰的，何须要圣人品节？却是不完全的物件。礼、乐、刑、政是治天下之法，固亦可谓之教，但不是子思本旨。若如先儒之说，下面由教入道的，缘何舍了圣人礼、乐、刑、政之教，别说出一段戒慎恐惧工夫？却是圣人之教为虚设矣。」
子莘请问。
先生曰：「子思性、道、教皆从本原上说，天命于人，则命便谓之性；率性而行，则性便谓之道；修道而学，则道便谓之教。率性是诚者事，所谓『自诚明，谓之性』也；修道是诚之者事，所谓『自明诚，谓之教』也。圣人率性而行，即是道。圣人以下，未能率性，于道未免有过、不及，故须修道。修道则贤知者不得而过，愚不肯者不得而不及，都要循著这个道，则道便是个教。此『教』字与『天道至教』、『风雨霜露，无非教也』之『教』同。『修道』字与『修道以仁』同。人能修道，然后能不违于道，以复其性之本体，则亦是圣人率性之道矣。下面『戒慎恐惧』便是修道的工夫，『中和』便是复其性之本体，如《易》所谓『穷理尽性，以至于命』，『中和位育』便是尽性至命。」
马子莘问：「『修道之教』，旧说是『圣人对我们本性中固有的东西加以品评节度，作为天下的法度，如礼、乐、刑、政之类』，这意思如何？」
先生说：「道就是性、就是命，本是完完全全、增减不得、不须修饰的，何须要圣人去品评节度？那倒成了不完全的东西了。礼、乐、刑、政是治理天下的法度，固然也可以叫作教，但不是子思的本旨。若照先儒的说法，后面由教入道的人，为什么抛开圣人礼、乐、刑、政之教，另外讲出一段戒慎恐惧的功夫？那圣人之教岂不成了虚设。」
子莘请教。
先生说：「子思讲性、道、教都是从本原上说的。天命赋予人，这个命便叫作性；循性而行，这个性便叫作道；修道而学，这个道便叫作教。率性是诚者的事，即所谓『自诚明，谓之性』；修道是诚之者的事，即所谓『自明诚，谓之教』。圣人率性而行，就是道。圣人以下未能率性，对道不免有过有不及，所以必须修道。修道，则贤智者不得过头，愚不肯者不得不及，都要遵循这个道，这道便是教。这个『教』字与『天道至教』、『风雨霜露，无非教也』的『教』相同；『修道』二字与『修道以仁』相同。人能修道，然后能不违背道，以恢复性的本体，也就是圣人率性之道了。后面『戒慎恐惧』便是修道的功夫，『中和』便是恢复性的本体。如《易》所谓『穷理尽性，以至于命』，『中和位育』便是尽性至命。」
Ma Zishen asked: 'On cultivation-as-teaching, the old account says the sage gauges and orders what is native to our nature as a standard for the world — rites, music, punishments, government. What of it?'
The Master said: 'The Way is nature, is the Mandate — wholly complete, beyond increase or decrease, needing no adornment: why would it need the sage's gauging? That would make it something incomplete. Rites, music, punishments and government are means of ordering the world and may be called teaching, but they are not Zisi's intent. On the earlier reading, why would those who enter the Way through teaching abandon the sage's rites and statutes to speak instead of vigilance and fear? The sage's teaching would be set up for nothing.'
Zishen begged instruction.
'Zisi speaks of nature, Way and teaching all from the source. Heaven's Mandate conferred on man is called nature; following nature in action, nature is called the Way; cultivating the Way in learning, the Way is called teaching. Following nature is the affair of the sincere — from sincerity to illumination, called nature. Cultivating the Way is the affair of making-sincere — from illumination to sincerity, called teaching. The sage follows nature and acts: that is the Way. Below the sage, unable to follow nature, men err past or short of the Way — hence cultivation. With cultivation the worthy and wise cannot overshoot, the dull and unwilling cannot fall short; all must follow this Way — thus the Way is the teaching. This teaching is as in Heaven's Way is the utmost teaching, and wind, rain, frost and dew are all teaching; this cultivating is as in cultivate the Way through humaneness. Able to cultivate the Way, one no longer departs from it and restores nature's substance — which is the sage's way of following nature. The vigilance and fear that follow are the work of cultivation; equilibrium and harmony are the restoration of nature's substance — as the Changes says exhausting principle and fulfilling nature to arrive at the Mandate: equilibrium, harmony, positioning and nourishing are fulfilling nature and arriving at the Mandate.'