歷來治《孟》者大多聚焦討論《孟子》〈知言養氣章〉中哲學概念之內涵，卻未曾著力疏通此章之文理。具體言之，此章開首討論「不動心」，結尾卻論孔子，兩段文字究竟有何關係？不少學者通過重新定義此章之篇幅範圍，強行將結尾一段從〈知言養氣章〉割裂出去，如此解讀方式實不理想。本文通過考察〈知言養氣章〉之修辭，指出此章通篇暗用《論語》〈吾十有五而志於學章〉立論，此即其一貫文脈。根據孟子的詮釋，孔子自四十歲起的精神境界，都與進退出處之抉擇相關。循此入手，並結合相關內證，本文指出〈知言養氣章〉章首「動心否乎」之問，只能解作「孟子去齊之志會否因獲得齊國卿相之位一事而動搖？」，而非趙岐所謂在登上卿相之位後才因畏行道之難而動心。本文同時發現，孟子不因卿相高位而動搖去齊之志的壯舉，已成他身後四百年間士人的共同文化記憶。在趙岐之前，每當士人提及不動心，即將之連系到不因權位而出仕，無一例外。可以說，趙注的流行中斷了戰國末年至東漢時期士人的一種文化記憶，也令此章文脈從此變得隱而不顯。
* * *
Scholars have tended to focus on the implications of such philosophical terms as {\textquotedblleft}flood-like qi{\textquotedblright} 浩然之氣 and {\textquotedblleft}unperturbed mind-heart{\textquotedblright} 不動心 in Mencius 2A:2, but have failed to identify the common thread of this rather long chapter. This article argues that Mencius 2A:2 frequently alludes to Analects 2.4, and that this allusion is precisely the common thread holding 2A:2 together. According to Mencius{\textquoteright}s interpretation, Confucius{\textquoteright}s achievements in different ages as stated in Analects 2.4 are all related to the political consideration of whether one ought to remain in a state and serve as its minister. In light of this, and with the support of other evidence from within the Mencius, it is argued that the question {\textquotedblleft}would your mind-heart be perturbed?{\textquotedblright} at the beginning of the chapter can only mean {\textquotedblleft}would your intention of leaving Qi 齊 be shaken by the fact that you had been appointed as its minister?{\textquotedblright} but not {\textquotedblleft}would your intention of putting the Way into practice be shaken,{\textquotedblright} as suggested by Zhao Qi 趙岐 (?-210). Furthermore, it is shown that after the death of Mencius, his act of valor, namely, leaving Qi despite having already been appointed as a Qi minister, had become a shared cultural memory of early Chinese intellectuals. Whenever mentioning {\textquotedblleft}unperturbed mind-heart{\textquotedblright} in their works, early intellectuals consistently evoked Mencius{\textquoteright}s unmoved determination to reject any inappropriate political appointment even though the position could bring them fame and material comfort. The rise of Zhao Qi{\textquoteright}s misreading in his commentary to Mencius, however, has led to the loss of this cultural memory.
}, year = {2021}, journal = {Chinese Studies 漢學研究 (Taiwan: Center for Chinese Studies)}, volume = {39.2}, pages = {1{\textendash}37}, language = {eng}, }