陆龟蒙《野庙碑》英译

碑者，悲也。古者悬而窆，用木。后人书之以表其功德，因留之不忍去，碑之名由是而得。自秦汉以降，生而有功德政事者，亦碑之，而又易之以石，失其称矣。余之碑野庙也，非有政事功德可纪，直悲夫甿竭其力，以奉无名之土木而已矣!

瓯、越间好事鬼，山椒水滨多淫祀。其庙貌有雄而毅、黝而硕者，则曰将军;有温而愿、晰而少者，则曰某郎;有媪而尊严者，则曰姥;有妇而容艳者，则曰姑。其居处则敞之以庭堂，峻之以陛级。左右老木，攒植森拱，萝茑翳于上，鸱鸮室其间。车马徒隶，丛杂怪状。甿作之，甿怖之，走畏恐后。大者椎牛;次者击豕，小不下犬鸡鱼菽之荐。牲酒之奠，缺于家可也，缺于神不可也。不朝懈怠，祸亦随作，耋孺畜牧栗栗然。疾病死丧，甿不曰适丁其时耶!而自惑其生，悉归之于神。

虽然，若以古言之，则戾;以今言之，则庶乎神之不足过也。何者?岂不以生能御大灾，捍大患，其死也则血良于生人。无名之土木不当与御灾捍患者为比，是戾于古也明矣。今之雄毅而硕者有之，温愿而少者有之，升阶级，坐堂筵，耳弦匏，口粱肉，载车马，拥徒隶者皆是也。解民之悬，清民之暍，未尝怵于胸中。民之当奉者，一日懈怠，则发悍吏，肆淫刑，驱之以就事，较神之祸福，孰为轻重哉?平居无事，指为贤良，一旦有大夫之忧，当报国之日，则恇侥脆怯，颠踬窜踣，乞为囚虏之不暇。此乃缨弁言语之土木尔，又何责其真土木耶?故曰:以今言之，则庶乎神之不足过也。

既而为诗，以纪其末:土木其形，窃吾民之酒牲，固无以名;土木其智，窃吾君之禄位，如何可仪!禄位颀颀，酒牲甚微，神之享也，孰云其非!视吾之碑，知斯文之孔悲!

David Pollard 译

A Monument to Rustic Temples

Lu Guimeng

The word for “monument” (bei) comes from ‘mourning’ (bei). In olden days a wooden post was used in wincing the coffin down into the grave pit; later on, inscriptions were written on these posts to make known the deeds and virtues of the deceased, so they came to be preserved for their sentimental value. This is also the origin of the name bei.

From Qin and Han times monuments were also erected to honour the living for their deeds and virtues and services to the state, and stone replaced wood as the material, hence the derivation was obscured. In my erecting a monument now for rustic temples, it is not that there are any public services or private virtues to be recorded: my intention is simply to ‘mourn’ the way out our country cousins waste their substance in the worship of nameless idols of wood and clay.

Along the course of the River Ou, in the region of Wenzhou, they are given to worshipping spirits and goblins. On the tops of mountains and banks of rivers many irregular services are held. In the temples there are idols called Generals which are martial and stern, black in colour and massive in proportion; others that are soft and gentle, young and pale of cast, and these are called such-and-such a Young Sir; dignified old ladies, who are known as Matron; and attractive females, yclept Missy.

Their place of abode is extended with courtyards and pavilions, elevated by means of steps, and surrounded by old trees that are densely planted and thick in girth; creepers form arches overhead, and owls nest in the branches. Models of coaches and horses and spirit attendants are strewn about grotesquely.

Our country cousins made these idols, and our country cousins fear them. For the major ones they slay an ox, for the next in rank they kill a pig, and even the minor ones rate a dog or hen. Failure to offer fish and pulse, or make sacrifices of animals and libations of wine to one’s ancestors may be condoned, but not any neglect to these spirits. If ever there is slackness in their regard, calamity is bound to follow. Young and old go about their herding and husbandry in fear and trembling, for our country cousins, rather than looking on sickness and death as coming each in their due time, delude themselves as to the course of life, attributing everything to the agency of the gods.

All the same, while we may regard these practices as perverse in former times, in the present day the gods can hardly be blamed. For what reason? Because, while it is proper that those who in their lifetime fended off disasters and protected against calamities should after their death enjoy the sacrifices of the people, these anonymous artifacts of wood and clay should not be similarly entitled. Hence the perversity of the practice when measured against the standards of former times is clear to see. In the present day, however, the martial and stern and massive in bulk do indeed exist; the soft and youthful also do indeed exist; they are the kind who mount raised platforms, take their place in high halls, fill their ears with sweet music, dine off the best fare, ride in carriages and on horses, and possess servitors. Yet the obligation to save the people from peril, to relieve the people in their extremity, never enters their head. If the people are remiss in offering their tribute, they dispatch cruel lictors to inflict wanton punishment and press them into labour gangs. Compared with the good and ill that the gods bring, which is the lighter, which the heavier?

When everything is quiet and peaceful, they pretend to be sage and good, but should the safety of the nation be threatened and the time come when they should do their duty to the state, then they lose their wits and cower in fear, collapse in a heap or flee blindly; they cannot wait to supplicate to be taken prisoner. Such being the idols who wear bonnets and are gifted with speech, what cause do we have to disparage the real idols of wood and clay? Hence our conclusion: in the present day the gods can hardly be blamed.

I append a poem as an envoi:

Of wood and clay their form and shaping,

Our peasants’ wine and meat their sinful taking;

Yet we cannot give their crime a name.

Of wood and clay their worthless brains,

Our sovereign’s pay their unearned gains;

On them we pass what judgement, lay what blame?

The pay and rank are huge and lofty,

The wine and meat are scant and paltry.

What the gods enjoy, who would trouble to denounce?

This monument’s erection does my true mourning pronounce.