古之学者必有师。师者，所以传道受业解惑也。人非生而知之者，孰能无惑？惑而不从师，其为惑也，终不解矣。生乎吾前，其闻道也，固先乎吾，吾从而师之；生乎吾后，其闻道也，亦先乎吾，吾从而师之。吾师道也，夫庸知其年之先后生于吾乎？是故无贵无贱，无长无少，道之所存，师之所存也。

嗟乎！师道之不传也久矣，欲人之无惑也难矣。古之圣人，其出人也远矣，犹且从师而问焉；今之众人，其下圣人也亦远矣，而耻学于师。是故圣益圣，愚益愚。圣人之所以为圣，愚人之所以为愚，其皆出于此乎？爱其子，择师而教之；于其身也，则耻师焉，惑矣。彼童子之师，授之书而习其句读者，非吾所谓传其道、解其惑者也。句读之不知，惑之不解，或师焉，或不焉，小学而大遗，吾未见其明也。巫医、乐师、百工之人，不耻相师。士大夫之族，曰“师”曰“弟子”云者，则群聚而笑之。问之，则曰：彼与彼年相若也，道相似也， 位卑则足羞，官盛则近谀。呜呼！师道之不复，可知矣。 巫医、乐师、百工之人，君子不齿，今其智乃反不能及，其可怪也欤！

圣人无常师。孔子师郯子、苌弘、师襄、老聃。郯子之徒，其贤不及孔子。孔子曰“三人行，则必有我师。”是故弟子不必不如师，师不必贤于弟子。闻道有先后，术业有专攻，如是而已。

李氏子蟠，年十七，好古文，六艺经传皆通习之，不拘于时，学于余。余嘉其能行古道，作《师说》以贻之。

In ancient times those who wanted to learn would seek out a teacher, one who could propagate the doctrine1, impart professional knowledge, and resolve doubts. Since no one is born omniscient, who can claim to have no doubts? If one has doubts and is not willing to learn from a teacher, his doubts will never be resolved. Anyone who was born before me and learned the doctrine before me is my teacher. Anyone who was born after me and learned the doctrine before me is also my teacher. Since what I desire to learn is the doctrine, why should I care whether he was born before or after me? Therefore, it does not matter whether a person is high or low in position, young or old in age. Where there is the doctrine, there is my teacher.