上<漁父>這一課，很難不被漁父的智慧打動：「世人皆濁，何不淈其泥而揚其波？眾人皆醉，何不餔其糟而歠其醨？」尤其當你面臨如屈原般「信而見疑，忠而被謗」以致於「被放」的處境時。
In the lesson on <The Fisherman>, it is hard not to be struck by the fisherman’s wisdom: “Since the world is all impure, why not stir up the mud at the bottom and raise the waves? All people are drunk—why not eat the dregs and drink thin wine, and join them in their inebriation?” This is especially moving when you face a situation like Qu Yuan’s, where being honest leads to suspicion, loyalty results in slander, and you end up exiled.
If a small compromise with the world (stirring the mud, raising waves; eating wine dregs, drinking thin wine) could improve life’s circumstances, why wouldn’t I do it?
我們常會定睛在屈原「被放」的苦楚上：「舉世皆濁我獨清，眾人皆醉我獨醒」，箇中的孤獨與不被理解，太苦。
We often focus on Qu Yuan’s suffering in exile: “The whole world is impure, and only I remain pure; all are drunk and lost, and only I am awake.” The loneliness and lack of understanding within this situation are so bitter.
所以我們想逃，想解脫。而漁父的「智慧」，只需要付出一點點「妥協」的代價就能達到目的，很難不吸引人。
So we want to escape, to be free. And the fisherman’s “wisdom,” requiring only a small price of compromise to achieve the goal, is very tempting.
但是妥協後，我們究竟得到了什麼？付出的代價，真的就只是「一點點」嗎？
But after compromise, what do we really gain? Is the price truly only “a little”?
從屈原的人生看，若執行漁父「妥協」的處世之道，他可以回到朝廷，可以繼續盡忠於楚王，可以回復官職。沒錯，這一切都是屈原想要的，但這一切「想要」必須有一個無可交易的前提：「進不隱賢，必以其道」，否則，免談。
Looking at Qu Yuan’s life, if he had followed the fisherman’s path of “compromise,” he could have returned to the court, continued serving loyally under the King of Chu, and regained his official position. Yes, all of these were what Qu Yuan desired—but these desires must have an uncompromisable premise: “When promoted, do not hide the worthy, and always act according to the right path.” Without this, it is out of the question.
因為一旦接受了「妥協」，重回朝廷的屈原將不再是自己，而會是親秦派小人靳尚、令尹子蘭等的爪牙，他所效忠的與其說是「楚王」，不如說是背後掌控楚王的「親秦派」。
Because once compromise is accepted, Qu Yuan returning to court would no longer be himself, but a pawn of pro-Qin schemers like Jin Shang and Ling Yin Zi Lan. His loyalty would no longer be to the King of Chu, but rather to the pro-Qin faction controlling the king.
這樣重回楚國朝廷有何意義？而屈原賠上的代價，是「自己」。所以「一點點的妥協」，真的是「所得大於所失」嗎？
What meaning would returning to the Chu court have in such a case? The price Qu Yuan would pay is himself. So is “a little compromise” really “gain greater than loss”?
更麻煩的是，這會是一條不歸路，因為你質押出去的人格，你再也取不回來：你將永遠被「質押當下」所認可的「價值規準」所套牢，你會永久失去為自己人格「定價」的權力（如果人格可以定價的話）。
Even worse, this becomes a path of no return, because the character you pawned cannot be reclaimed: you will forever be trapped by the “standards of value” recognized at the time of the pledge, permanently losing the power to set the worth of your own character (if such a thing could be measured).
這樣的屈原，就算帶著「三閭大夫」的頭銜，也許依然會一個人「行吟澤畔」吧！只不過憂思的對象換成了「自己」。
Such a Qu Yuan, even with the title of “Sanlü Dafu,” might still walk and recite alone along the lakes or riverbanks! Only the object of his sorrow would now be himself.
所以，屈原憔悴枯槁、看似頑固的表象下，其實擁有一個自由的靈魂。
Therefore, beneath Qu Yuan’s withered and seemingly stubborn exterior, he actually possesses a free spirit.
真正的自由，不是你「可以做什麼」，而是你「可以不做什麼」。屈原當然懂漁父說的處世之道，但他就是做不到——不是因為能力不足，而是他的信仰價值不允許。所以，拒絕。
True freedom is not what you “can do,” but what you “can choose not to do.” Qu Yuan certainly understood the fisherman’s way of dealing with the world, but he could not follow it—not due to lack of ability, but because his values and convictions would not allow it. Therefore, he refused.
而身為基督徒，我在屈原身上看到主內肢體「分別為聖、渴慕聖潔」該有的形象。真正的基督徒，該擁有、也擁有像屈原一樣的，自由的靈魂。
As a Christian, I see in Qu Yuan an image of what it means for God’s people to be “set apart and longing for holiness.” A true Christian should have—and indeed can have—a free spirit like Qu Yuan’s.
