黄以方问：「『博学于文』为随事学存此天理，然则谓『行有余力，则以学文』，其说似不相合。」
先生曰：「《诗》、《书》、六艺，皆是天理之发见，文字都包在其中。考之《诗》、《书》、六艺，皆所以学存此天理也，不特发见于事为者方为文耳。『余力学文』亦只『博学于文』中事。」
或问「学而不思」二句。
曰：「此亦有为而言，其实思即学也。学有所疑，便须思之。『思而不学』者，盖有此等人，只悬空去思，要想出一想个道理，却不在身心上实用其力，以学存此天理；思与学作两事做，故有『罔』与『殆』之病。其实思只是思其所学，原非两事也。」
先生曰：「先儒解『格物』为格天下之物，天下之物如何格得？且谓一草一木亦皆有理，今如何去格？纵格得草、木来，如何反来诚得自家意？我解『格』作『正』字义，『物』作『事』字义。
《大学》之所谓『身』，即耳、目、口、鼻、四肢是也。欲修身便是要：目，非礼勿视；耳，非礼勿听；口，非礼勿言；四肢，非礼勿动。要修这个身，身上如何用得工夫？心者，身之主宰。目虽视；而所以视者，心也。耳虽听；而所以听者，心也。口与四肢虽言、动；而所以言、动者，心也。故欲修身在于体当自家心体，常令廓然大公，无有些子不正处。主宰一正，则：发窍于目，自无非礼之视；发窍于耳，自无非礼之听；发窍于口与四肢，自无非礼之言、动。此便是修身在正其心。然至善者，心之本体也；心之本体那[1]有不善？
如今要正心，本体上何处用得功？必就心之发动处，才可著力也。心之发动不能无不善，故须就此处著力，便是在『诚意』。如：一念发在好善上，便实实落落去好善；一念发在恶恶上，便实实落落去恶恶。意之所发，既无不诚，则其本体如何有不正的？故欲正其心在诚意。工夫到诚意，始有著落处。
然诚意之本，又在于致知也。所谓『人虽不知，而已所独知者』，此正是吾心良知处。然：知得善，却不依这个良知便做去；知得不善，却不依这个良知便不去做。则这个良知便遮蔽了，是不能致知也。吾心良知既不能扩充到底，则：善虽知好，不能著实好了；恶虽知恶，不能著实恶了。如何得意诚？故致知者，意诚[2]之本也。
然亦不是悬空的致知，致知在实事上格。如：意在于为善，便就这件事上去为；意在于去恶，便就这件事上去不为。去恶固是格不正以归于正；为善则不善正了，亦是格不正以归于正也。
如此，则吾心良知无私欲蔽了，得以致其极；而意之所发，好善去恶，无有不诚矣。诚意工夫实下手处在格物也。若如此格物，人人便做得。人皆可以为尧、舜，正在此也。」
黄以方问：「『博学于文』是随事学习存此天理，那么『行有余力，则以学文』，似乎与此说不合。」
先生说：「《诗》《书》六艺都是天理的发见，文字都包在其中。考求《诗》《书》六艺，都是所以学存此天理，不只见之于行事的才是文。『余力学文』也只是『博学于文』中的事。」
有人问「学而不思则罔」两句。
先生说：「这也是有针对性说的，其实思就是学。学有疑问，便须去思。『思而不学』的人，大概真有这一种：只悬空去想，要凭空想出一个道理来，却不在身心上切实用力，以学存此天理；把思与学当作两件事做，所以有『罔』与『殆』的毛病。其实思只是思其所学，本来不是两件事。」
先生说：「先儒解『格物』为格天下之物，天下之物怎么格得？况且说一草一木也都有理，如今怎么去格？纵然格得了草木，又怎么能反过来诚自家的意？我把『格』解作『正』字义，把『物』解作『事』字义。
《大学》所谓的『身』，就是耳、目、口、鼻、四肢。要修身，就是要眼非礼勿视、耳非礼勿听、口非礼勿言、四肢非礼勿动。要修这个身，身上怎么用得功夫？心是身的主宰。眼虽然看，而使它看的是心；耳虽然听，而使它听的是心；口与四肢虽然言动，而使它言动的是心。所以想要修身，在于体察自家心体，常令廓然大公，没有丝毫不正之处。主宰一正，那么发窍于眼，自然无非礼之视；发窍于耳，自然无非礼之听；发窍于口与四肢，自然无非礼之言动。这便是修身在正其心。
然而至善是心的本体，心的本体哪有不善的？如今要正心，本体上何处用得功夫？必须就心的发动处才可着力。心的发动不能没有不善，所以必须就此处着力，这便是在『诚意』。比如一念发在好善上，便切实去好善；一念发在恶恶上，便切实去恶恶。意之所发既无不诚，那本体怎么会有不正的？所以欲正其心在诚意。功夫到诚意，才有落点。
然而诚意的根本又在于致知。所谓『人虽不知，而己所独知』，这正是我心的良知处。然而知道是善，却不依这良知去做；知道是不善，却不依这良知不去做——这个良知便被遮蔽了，这就是不能致知。我心的良知既不能扩充到底，那么善虽然知道好，却不能切实去好；恶虽然知道恶，却不能切实去恶，怎么能意诚？所以致知是意诚的根本。
然而也不是悬空地致知，致知要在实事上格。比如意在于为善，便就这件事去做；意在于去恶，便就这件事去不做。去恶固然是格不正以归于正；为善则不善正了，也是格不正以归于正。
这样，我心的良知没有私欲遮蔽，得以致到极处；而意之所发，好善去恶，无有不诚。诚意功夫的切实下手处，就在格物。像这样格物，人人都做得到。人皆可以为尧舜，正在于此。」
Huang Yifang asked: 'You take learning culture broadly as learning, affair by affair, to preserve this heavenly principle — then spare strength for the arts after conduct hardly fits.'
The Master said: 'The Odes, Documents and six arts are all the showing-forth of heavenly principle, writing included. To search the Odes and Documents and arts is to learn to preserve this principle — not only what shows in deeds is culture; studying the arts with spare strength is itself part of broad culture.'
Someone asked about learning without thought breeds delusion.
'That too was said to a case: in truth, thought is learning. Doubt in learning calls for thought. As for thinking without learning — such men there truly are: thinking in mid-air, spinning a doctrine out of vacancy, not laying real strength on body and mind to preserve principle; making thought and learning two tasks, hence the delusion and the peril. In truth thought only thinks over what is learned — never two things.'
The Master said: 'The scholars of old glossed ge wu as correcting the things of all the world — how correct them? Even granting every grass and tree has its principle, how set about it? Correct the grasses and trees, and how does that flow back to make one's own intention sincere? I read ge as to correct, wu as affair.
The body of the Great Learning is ear, eye, mouth, nose, limbs. To cultivate the body is: nothing improper seen, heard, said, moved. But where on the body can the work be laid? The mind is the body's master. The eye sees, yet what makes it see is mind; the ear hears — the mind; mouth and limbs speak and move — the mind. So cultivating the body lies in attending to one's own mind-substance, keeping it ever vast and impartial, not a thread of crookedness. The master once set right: issuing through the eye, no improper seeing; the ear, no improper hearing; mouth and limbs, no improper word or movement. That is cultivating the body by rectifying the mind.
Yet the highest good is the mind's substance — how should that be not-good? Rectifying the mind: where on the substance itself could work be laid? Only at the mind's stirring can strength be set. The stirring cannot be free of ill; work there — that is sincerity of intention. A thought stirring to love good, love good in solid earnest; to hate evil, hate it in solid earnest. The intentions stirred, none insincere — how should the substance be unrectified? Hence rectifying the mind lies in sincerity; only at sincerity does the work find its landing.
Yet the root of sincerity is extension of knowledge. What others know not but one alone knows — that is the mind's innate knowledge. Knowing good yet not following this knowledge to do it; knowing evil yet not following it to forbear — the knowledge is veiled: that is failure to extend. Innate knowledge not stretched to the end, good though known as good is not solidly loved, evil not solidly hated — how should intention be sincere? Extension is the root of sincerity.
Nor is extension done in mid-air: it is corrected on actual affairs. Intention set on doing good — do it in that very affair; on removing evil — forbear in that very affair. Removing evil is correcting the crooked back to the straight; doing good, the not-good set right, is also correcting the crooked back to the straight.
So the mind's innate knowledge, unveilled by private desire, is extended to the utmost; the stirred intentions, loving good, removing evil, are all sincere. The hands-on place of sincerity's work is the investigation of things. Done thus, everyone can do it: that every man may become a Yao or a Shun lies just here.'
- 哪
- 「意诚」，闾东本作「诚意」。