Record of Daily Knowledge and Collected Poems and Essays: Selections

Seven of the thirty-two sections of the RZL in the Huang Rucheng edition are devoted to the classics: one each to the Changes, Documents, Odes, Spring and Autumn Annals and its three early commentaries, two to the San Li (Yi Li, Zhou Li, and Li Ji), and one to the Lunyu (Analects) and Mencius. In the Yuanchaoben edition these same essays plus two additional ones are divided into nine sections. There are in all 370 (372) essays. What follows is a summary of each of the seven sections accompanied by one or more essays from that section.

Section 1, the Changes: There are fifty-three essays on the Zhou Yi 周易 (or Yi Jing 易經, Changes). The first five are of a general nature: 1.1 considers the origin of the work; 1.2 is a brief comment on King Wen’s role in its creation; 1.3 is about Zhu Xi’s interpretation in his work Zhou Yi Benyi; 1.4 compares the interpretations of Confucius and the later scholars Xun Shuang and Yu Fan; and 1.5 is about changes in the diagrams. Essays 1.6–37 are essentially comments on specific diagrams. Essays 1.38–44 pertain to the “Great Commentary” (Da Zhuan 大傳 or Xi Ci 繫辭). Essays 1.45–46 are about, respectively, the contrast of opposites in the work and its arrangement and function with specific reference to the term ni shu 逆數. Essays 1.47–49 concern the three “Discussions on the Trigrams”—shuo gua 說卦, xu gua 序卦, and za gua 雜卦. The final four essays are of a more general nature: 1.50 is about Su Shi’s comments on phrases for diagrams 35 and 36; 1.51 is a brief consideration of Confucius’s comments on the work; 1.52 discusses aspects of the arrangement of lines and diagrams; and 1.53 is a long historical discussion of divination using stalks and plants.

Now, the Master [Confucius] did say Bao Xi Shi [Fu Xi]¹ was the first to draw the eight diagrams, but he did not say he wrote the Changes. And he said, “Did the Changes not have its origin in Middle Antiquity?”² He also said, “Did it not arise during the declining years of the Yin and the burgeoning virtue of the Zhou, at the time of the matter between Kings Wen and Zhou?”³ This indicates the words written by King Wen were first given the name Changes. Moreover, the Grand Diviner of the Zhou Guan had charge of the rules for the three Changes: the first was called Lian Shan, the second, Gui Zang, and the third, Zhou Yi. That the Lian Shan and the Gui Zang were not the Changes and yet three Changes were spoken of was because men of later times used the term Changes to name them. It is like the Mozi, which speaks of the Spring and Autumn Annals of Zhou, Yan, Song, and Qi.⁴ That the histories of Zhou, Yan, Song, and Qi were certainly not all Spring and Autumn Annals and yet were called Spring and Autumn Annals was because the name of the Lu history was used to name them.

In the Zuo Zhuan, for the fifteenth year of Duke Xi [644 B.C.E.], it is said that a battle was fought in Han, at which the diviner Tu Fu, using the milfoil, predicted good fortune.5 The diagram found was gu 蠱, which said, “The thousand chariots are thrice put to flight; from what remains of the three flights, seize the brave fox.”⁶ For the sixteenth year of Duke Cheng [574 B.C.E.], it is said that a battle was fought at Yanling, at which the duke consulted the milfoil and the diviner predicted good fortune. The diagram found was fu 復, which said, “The southern kingdom is in distress; its king has been struck in the eye by an arrow.”⁷ These are both instances where the Zhou Yi [the Zhou Changes] was not used and words were quoted from other sources. This is what is referred to as the method of the three Changes. But the Zuo Zhuan does not speak of the Yi [Changes].

At the beginning of the Hongwu reign period [1368–1399], there was promulgation of the study of the Five Classics among the Confucian scholars of the empire, and in the case of the Changes, the combined writings of Cheng Yi and Zhu Xi were used. Also, each of these men himself wrote a work [on the Changes]. During the Yongle reign period [1403–1425], the Daquan was compiled, and the various sections of Zhu Xi’s work were divided up and appended to [the appropriate sections] of Cheng’s commentary.13 In this way the ancient text that Zhu Xi had established was returned to disorder and confusion. “The tuan 彖 were the words [of explanation] added by King Wen.” “The zhuan 傳 were the words Confucius used to explicate the classic. Subsequently, whoever spoke of the zhuan was referring to this.”¹⁴ This, then, properly followed the “Tuan Shangzhuan.” Nowadays, the three characters tuan shang zhuan have been deleted [from here] and added to follow the statement, “Great indeed is the originating power of qian 乾.”¹⁵ “In regard to the images, the two [upper and lower] as well as the six lines of the two images were explanations appended by the Duke of Zhou.”¹⁶ This was an explanation following the section “Xiang Shangzhuan.” Now the three characters xiang shang zhuan 象上傳 have been deleted [from here] and added to follow “Heaven in its motion is full of power.”¹⁷ “This section extends the meaning of the Treatise on the Tuan and the Treatise on the Symbols by bringing together the profundity of the two diagrams, qian 乾 and kun 坤, and the rest of the explanation, because of this, can be inferred from what was said.” This was the interpretation following the wenyan section, but now the two characters wen yan 文言 have been deleted [from here] and the statement added to follow “Originating is the chief quality of goodness.”¹⁸ These “tuan says,” “xiang says,” and “wenyan says” were all absent from Zhu Xi’s original work. They were included on the basis of Cheng Yi’s commentary. Later scholars who disliked Cheng’s commentary were numerous, and they cast it aside without reading it, using only the Benyi. And the Daquan was what the court promulgated, so no one dared to make frequent alterations. Subsequently, with respect to the National University edition of the commentaries and explanations, there was the excision and discarding of Cheng’s commentary, although his sequence was used as Zhu Xi’s sequence. This arrangement was handed down for almost two hundred years. It is indeed unfortunate that the book with Zhu Xi’s established corrections could not be seen in the world. How can this be construed as other than a misfortune with respect to this classic!

Zhu Xi, in his Ji Songshan Chao Shi Guayao Tuanxiang Shuo, says, “The ancient classic was first changed by Fei Shi and finally brought to a state of great confusion by Wang Bi.”¹⁹ This relies on Kong Shi [Kong Yingda], who, in his “Zhengyi” [orthodox interpretations], said, “What the Sage wrote explaining the images originally followed the classical explanations of the six lines. Because of his modest and retiring nature, he did not dare disturb the explanations of the first Sage correcting the classic. Wang Fusi’s [Wang Bi’s] idea was that in considering the images, it was appropriate to bring the original images of the classical text into close proximity so the meaning could be easily understood. Therefore, he separated the explanations of the images of the lines and added each subdivision to follow the appropriate line. This was like Du Yuankai, in his notes on the Zuo Zhuan, dividing the classic into years and appending the commentary to each year.” Therefore, to say that combining a classic with its commentary began with [Wang] Fusi is not to recognize that its true origin was in Kangcheng [Zheng Xuan].

[In the] “Wei Annals” [of the Sanguo Zhi there is],

Gaogui Xianggong made an imperial progress to the National Academy, where he questioned the erudite Chunyu Qi, saying,20 “Confucius prepared the tuan and xiang while Zheng Xuan wrote the annotations. [Although the latter was not the equal of the Sage in worthiness],²¹ nevertheless their explanations of the classic have one and the same purpose. Nowadays the tuan and xiang are not connected with the text of the classic and yet the notes are. Why is this?” Qi replied, “Zheng Xuan’s combining the tuan and xiang with the classic was motivated by the wish to give scholars ease of understanding in their investigation and examination of the work.” The emperor said, “If he joined them to make it truly convenient, why didn’t Confucius join them so scholars could understand?” Qi replied, saying, “Confucius feared he might be confused with King Wen; this is why he didn’t join them. His not doing so is a measure of his humility.” The emperor said, “If the Sage, by not joining [his commentary to the text] is showing his humility, why is Zheng Xuan not humble too?” Qi replied, saying, “The ancient meaning was vast and deep and the Sage’s questions mysterious and far-reaching. It is not something I am able to comprehend completely.”²²

In the “Rulin Zhuan” of the History of the Former Han [Han Shu] [there is], “Fei Zhi brought order to the Changes without paragraphs and sentences [analytical notes], using only the tuan, xiang, xizi, and wenyan to explain the two parts of the classic.”²³ From this it can be concluded that the addition of the commentary [ten wings] to the classic also did not begin with Kangcheng. Zhu Xi, in his Ji Songshan Chao Shi Guayao Tuanxiang Shuo, says, “When disorder first came to the ancient regulations, this was like the qian diagram pertaining to the present.”²⁴ Now, from kun onward, all depend on this, and those of later times also dispersed it to follow each yao writing, preserving only the one diagram, qian, by which we can see the old, original pattern of the interrelationship between text and commentary. I previously inferred from this that, in the present qian diagram, tuan yue is one section and xiang yue is one section. I don’t think this was something Fei Zhi added to the original text. In the kun diagram the xiaoxiang is split up and added to follow each line, with xiang yue occurring eight times and with the remaining diagrams, seven times. Zheng Xuan was responsible for this, and it was this edition Gaogui Xianggong saw.

Although Cheng, in his commentary, used Fusi’s edition, “also” indicates that this was not the ancient Changes. [For the diagram] xian, nine in the third place, the xiang says, “He moves his thighs—he ‘also’ does not want to rest in his place.”²⁵ The commentary says, “Saying ‘also’ indicates that the xiangci was originally not juxtaposed with the text of the Changes but came from another place, therefore all the explanations of the images of the lines were connected.” This says that “also” [yi 亦] refers to the explanation of the yao [line] above.

Qin, through the burning of the books, lost the Five Classics, while our own dynasty, through the selection of scholars, also lost the Five Classics. Nowadays, those scholars who are studying for the official examinations are all thoroughly conversant with the words of the examination essays but are unable to understand and know the great principles. With respect to the Changes and the Spring and Autumn Annals, this reaches a particular level of absurdity. Through the tuanzhuan being joined with the daxiang, the daxiang with the yao, and the yao with the xiaoxiang, the second line is certainly the minister and the fifth line certainly the prince; the yin diagrams certainly speak of the lesser man and the yang diagrams certainly speak of the noble man. As a consequence, this one classic became like spilled water that could not be gathered up, and so the Changes was lost.

With respect to the Spring and Autumn Annals, one or two sentences were selected from Hu Shi’s [Hu Anguo’s]26 commentary as being important, and these were related to similar events recounted in the classic to make a topic. So the commentary became the “host” [major part] and the classic the “guest” [minor part]. There was the use of “that classic” to verify the topic of “this classic” and the use of “that classic” to conceal the topic of “this classic.” As a result, this one classic became a work for use in shefu 射覆,²⁷ and so the Spring and Autumn Annals was lost. Recovering the writings of Cheng and Zhu was how the Changes was preserved. Likewise, the completion of the three commentaries and the writings of Dan, Zhao, and others was how the Spring and Autumn Annals was preserved.²⁸ However, these developments certainly had to await the later rise of men of cultivation.

Section 2, the Documents: There are forty-one essays in this section on the Documents (Shu 書). The great majority of these (2.3–37) are about specific chapters, passages, or terms in the work. Essay 2.1 is a general discussion of the naming of emperors (ming 名 and hao 號) in ancient times, although with particular reference to the Documents, while 2.2 is about the term jiu zu 九族 (nine generations). This appears in the “Canon of Yao,” but Gu’s discussion also covers other works. The final four essays are somewhat different: one considers the historical aspects of the state of Qin (2.38); one is a general discussion of the preservation and transmission of the Documents and touches on the old text–new text issue (2.39); one considers the preface to the Documents (2.40); and one is a discussion of the “false” Shang Shu, attributed to the Ming scholar Feng Xi.

In Han times there were two versions of the Documents [Shang Shu]—the new text and old text versions, with the latter also having two versions itself. The bibliographical chapter of the History of the Former Han [Han Shu, “Yiwen Zhi”], states, “The old text Documents [Shang Shu, guwen jing] had forty-six juan 卷 [rolls, sections] and fifty-seven pian 篇 [chapters].” Yan Shigu said, “Kong Anguo’s preface to the Documents [“Shuxu”] stated, ‘Altogether there are fifty-nine pian making up forty-six juan. I received an order to prepare a commentary with a preface at the head of each section, defining fifty-eight pian.’ Zheng Xuan, in his Xuzan, says, ‘Subsequently one of these sections was lost,’ therefore there were fifty-seven.” It is also said in the Han Shu, “The classic, as recognized by the greater and lesser Xia Hou, had twenty-nine juan, and by Ouyang, thirty-two juan.” Shigu says, “This work in twenty-nine juan was what Fu Sheng handed down.” ²⁹

Thus the new text and old text versions were two [distinct] works. [In the Han Shu] it is also said,

In the “Biographies of Confucian Scholars” [“Rulin Zhuan,” in the Han Shu] it is stated,

The Kong family had the guwen Shang Shu, and Kong Anguo studied it using the new text version. As a result of the lost books that came from the walls of his house, he obtained ten or so chapters, thus increasing the Shang Shu still further. Because of his involvement with witchcraft and sorcery, they were never classified by the education officials. Anguo held the position of grand master of remonstrance. He passed the work on to Duwei Chao, who in turn passed it on to Yong Sheng of Jiaodong. Yong passed it on to Hu Chang of Qinghe, also known as Shao Zi. He also transmitted the Zuo Zhuan. Chang passed it on to Xu Ao of Guo and also transmitted the Mao Odes. It was then transmitted to Wang Huang and Tu Yun of Pingling, who was styled Zichen. The latter then handed it on to Sang Qin of Henan, styled Junchang. At the time of Wang Mang, these scholars were all established. Liu Xin was preceptor of state while Huang, Yun, and the others were all held in high esteem.³²

It is also stated [in the Han Shu], “What was transmitted as the ‘Bailian’ chapter came from Zhang Ba of Donglai, who, by dividing and combining the twenty-nine chapters [pian], created several tens of sections. He also gathered the Zuo Shi Zhuan and the “Shuxu” and made a beginning and end, giving in all 102 chapters. Some of these chapters were on several strips of bamboo and in content were meager and superficial. At the time of Emperor Cheng [32–6 B.C.E.), among those who sought the old text works, Ba considered he was able to verify his 102 chapters, but when these were collated with the writings in the imperial storehouse, this was not so.”33 This indicates that Kong Anguo’s old text version and the Documents of Zhang Ba were two distinct entities.

In the “Biographies of Confucian Scholars” [in the History of the Later Han], it is stated, “Kong Xi was from the kingdom of Lu. From [Kong] Anguo onward, the guwen Shang Shu was transmitted for several generations.”³⁴ It also says, “Du Lin of Fufeng transmitted the guwen Shang Shu. Jia Kui, from the same commandery, wrote his ‘Instructions’ for it, Ma Rong his commentary, and Zheng Xuan his ‘Notes and Explanations.’ For this reason the guwen Shang Shu became distinguished in the world.”³⁵ Further, it says, “In the Jianchu reign period [76–83], there was a proclamation that scholars of high talent should receive the guwen Shang Shu, the Mao Odes, Guliang and Zuo Shi Spring and Autumn Annals and that, although such men were not established among the educational officials, they would, nevertheless, all be promoted as able scholars to be ‘court gentlemen for lecturing’ in close association with the emperor.”³⁶ This being so, what Kong Xi received from [Kong] Anguo was finally not this transmission, so Du Lin, Jia Kui, Ma Rong, and Zheng Xuan did not see Anguo’s commentary but themselves wrote their “Instructions,” “Commentary,” and “Notes and Explanations,” respectively. This means that the scholarship of Kong and Zheng also cannot reliably be verified as being two.

In Liu Tao’s biography [in the Hou Han Shu], it is stated, “Tao understood the Shang Shu [Documents] and the Chunqiu [Spring and Autumn Annals] and prepared exegeses on them. He held in high esteem the Shang Shu of the three scholars [the greater and lesser Xia Hou and Ouyang Heba] and the old text [version]. He made over three hundred corrections to the text and called his work the Zhongwen Shang Shu.”37 In the confusion at the end of the Han era it was not handed down. [Works] like Ma Rong’s notes on the guwen Shang Shu in ten juan and Zheng Xuan’s notes on the same work in ten sections can be seen [listed] in the bibliographical chapter [“Yiwen Zhi”] in the Old Tang History.³⁸ In the Kaiyuan reign period [713–741], these works were still extant and had not yet been lost. In Lu Deming’s Jingdian Shiwen, it is said, “The twenty-nine chapters on which Ma and Zheng made notes were merely the twenty-eight chapters of Fu Sheng and the ‘Great Declaration’ separately found among the people and joined with the other twenty-eight. This latter was not, however, the present-day ‘Great Declaration.’ What were referred to earlier as the further sixteen chapters obtained were not included in this total.”³⁹

In the “Jingji Zhi” of the Sui History, there is the statement, “What Ma Rong and Zheng Xuan handed down consisted of twenty-nine chapters [pian], and there was some admixture with the new text; it was not Confucius’s old Shu [Documents]. Apart from this there was absolutely no discussion. In the Jin period, among what was preserved in the secret repository [palace storehouse], there was the classic text of the guwen Shang Shu, which today has not been handed down. During the confusion of the Yongjia reign period [307–312], the Shang Shu of Ouyang and the greater and lesser Xia Hou were all lost. By the time of the Eastern Jin, the Yuzhang administrator Mei Ze first obtained Anguo’s commentary and presented it.”40 He added a further twenty-five chapters, combining these with the twenty-eight chapters of Fu Sheng, and did away with the false “Great Declaration.” He also divided off the “Canon of Shun” [“Shun Dian”], “Yi and Ji,” “Pan Geng”zhong and xia, and “The Announcement of King Kang” [“Kang Wangzhi Kao”], making each a separate chapter. It is this that constitutes the present-day arrangement of the fifty-eight chapters. As for the lost “Canon of Shun” [“Shun Dian”], he chose Wang Su’s original commentary following [the words] shen hui and connected it. In the fourth year of the Jianwu reign period [497] of Emperor Ming of Qi, there was a certain Yao Fangxing who is said to have found, in a large boat,⁴¹ a volume that had the twenty-eight characters following the words “examining into antiquity Emperor Shun….” He presented this. The court discussed the matter, and everyone took it to be false. By the time of the Jiangling lawlessness, the writings had entered the central plain and scholars were surprised at them. Liu Xuan subsequently arranged the various original sections in order.⁴² So then, the present-day Shang Shu has both old text and new text components in its thirty-three chapters, which are surely a mixture of the texts of Fu Sheng and [Kong] Anguo. And twenty-five chapters came from Mei Ze, while the twenty-eight characters of the “Canon of Shun” that came from Yao Fangxing were also joined to make one book. Mencius said, “It would be better to be without the Documents than to give undue credence to it.”⁴³ In the present times, this is even more apposite.

I doubt that in ancient times there was a “Canon of Yao” [“Yao Dian”] without a “Canon of Shun” [“Shun Dian”], and that there was a Documents of Xia and not a Documents of Yu, or indeed that the “Canon of Yao” was [one of the chapters] of the Documents of Xia. Mencius quotes these words, “After twenty-eight years the highly meritorious one [the emperor] died,”⁴⁴ and speaks of them as being from the “Canon of Yao,” so the preface’s separating [the text] to make the “Canon of Shun” is wrong. There are the following statements in the Zuo Zhuan: For the eighth year of Duke Zhuang, “Gao Tao vigorously sowed his virtue abroad”; for the twenty-fourth year of Duke Xi, “The earth is reduced to order and the influences of Heaven operate with effect”; for the twenty-seventh year [of Duke Xi], “They were appointed by their speech”; for the seventh year of Duke Wen, “Caution them with gentle words”; for the fifth year of Duke Xiang, “When one’s good faith is established, one can accomplish one’s undertakings”; for the twenty-first and twenty-third years [of Duke Xiang], “Think whether this thing can be laid on this man”; for the twenty-sixth year [of Duke Xiang], “Rather than put an innocent person to death, you run the risk of irregularity”; for the sixth year of Duke Ai, “Where sincerity proceeds from, therein is the result”; and for the eighteenth year [of Duke Ai], “The officer of divination, when the mind is made up on a subject…”⁴⁵ In the Guoyu, the Zhou royal secretary, Guo, has this quote: “If the multitude were without their sovereign, whom should they serve? If the sovereign were without the multitude, there would be none with whom to guard the country.”⁴⁶ All these quotes are from the “Xia Documents” [in the Documents], but those of later times who thought there was a Yu Documents were very numerous. Why was this then? Those who recorded these writings certainly came from the historians and officials of Xia, although they transmitted this as being from Tang, and their adornment and composition certainly awaited men of later times. Thus, at the head of the chapter, there are the words “on examining into antiquity.”⁴⁷ The use of the word “antiquity” makes it clear that this was not a contemporary record.

The world still had three sages, but they served the same house. If, through the officials of Xia, there was a retrospective recording of the affairs of the two emperors, how can we not speak of a Xia Documents? Now if it was only by Xia officials that there was retrospective recording of the affairs of the two emperors, then saying Yao can reveal Shun is not as good as the historians of later times establishing an original record for each emperor and afterward making this a complete book.

“The emperor said, ‘Come Yu, you must also have admirable words to bring before me.’ ” These words are a continuation of the statement of Gao Yao made at that time.48 “The king came forth and stood in the space within the fourth gate of the palace” is a continuation from the “princes all went out from the temple gate and waited,” and these are matters occurring at one time.⁴⁹ It is absurd that the preface should divide them into two chapters.

Section 3, the Odes: There are forty-two essays devoted to the Odes (Shi Jing 詩經). The first three are general—3.1 on the distinction between verses with musical accompaniment and those without; 3.2 on the four verse forms nan 南, bin 豳, ya 雅, and song 頌, to which feng 風 (airs) is added; and 3.3 on Confucius’s editing of (or excisions from) the Odes. The next thirty-seven essays are specific and concern particular terms and their meanings and the social implications of individual lines or verses. The final two essays return to general matters: 3.41 is on why the verses of Lu were called song, with a comment on the sequence of Zhou, Lu, and Shang song; 3.42 is a general discussion of the ordering of the work.

The transformation wrought by King Wen was effective in the southern states,50 but he was unable to change the sounds of slaughter in Northern Pi.⁵¹ If these odes are still preserved and are included in the Master’s compilation, there will certainly be preservation of the southern sounds to secure the feng of King Wen and preservation of the northern sounds to secure the feng of Zhou and not allow them to merge into one. This is why both the “Sang Zhong” and the “Qin Wei” were not omitted by the Master, although he considered them to be lewd verses. The “Shu Yu Tian” is in praise of the words of Duan, while the “Yang Zhi Shui” and the “Jiao Liao” follow the talk of Wo.⁵² The Master did not omit them and so displayed the basis of disorder. As for poems on elopement, he included them all without exception, hence the importance of his recording of these feng. If the verses of one state were all lewd and yet among them there were things that could not be changed, then he hastily recorded them. In the “Jiang Zhong Zi” [there is] “fearing the people’s words.”⁵³ In the “Nü Yue Ji Ming” there is an admonition to live a life of diligence.⁵⁴ In the “Chu Qi Dong Men” there is no admiration of beauty,⁵⁵ while in the “Heng Men” there is no wish to leave home.⁵⁶ In choosing these words and comparing their sounds, he set aside what was vexatious and excessive. This is what the Master meant by editing [deleting]. Men of later times who adhered to Confucianism did not attain this excellence. Nevertheless, they said that poems on elopement were not appropriate for inclusion in the Sage’s classic. How is this different from the Tang heir apparent Hong saying that the murder of the sovereign by Shang Chen is not appropriate for inclusion in the Spring and Autumn Annals?⁵⁷

Zhen Xiyuan, in the selection of poems for his Wenzhang Zhengzong,⁵⁸ swept away at a stroke the vulgarity of the ancients and returned to true goodness. Nevertheless, his fault lay in taking li 理 [principle, pattern, coherence] as a teaching and so failing to attract the interest of poets. Moreover, like the Nineteen Old Poems,⁵⁹ although they are not the work of one man, the customs of the Han period are included in this collection. Nowadays, if one takes what Xiyuan deleted and reads it, there is the line, “Is it not better to drink good wine and wear fine white silk?”⁶⁰ How does this differ from the “Shan You Shu” in the Tang odes?⁶¹ Further, the line, “My husband thought of our former joys, he kindly came in his carriage and gave me the forestrap”⁶² has the same meaning as, “The male pheasant flies away” from the “Xiong Ji” in the Bei odes.⁶³ The idea of the herd boy and the weaving girl appears in the “Da Dong,”⁶⁴ while with the dodder and the ivy, the meaning is the same as in the “Che Xia.”⁶⁵ In the Nineteen Old Poems there is not much variation in quality. Certainly, with the purpose of guarding against licentiousness, rectifying vulgarity, and being strict in restraining deletions, even if there was correction of Zhaoming’s⁶⁶ mistake, I fear we would lose the meaning of the feng of the states. The empty vanities of the Six Dynasties should be discarded, but if Xu and Yu⁶⁷ are not regarded as men [i.e., are forgotten] and the Chen and Sui are not recognized as dynasties, would it not be too much? Would this not be the fault of holding too firmly to li 理 [pattern, principle, coherence]?

From the time the world had families, each one treated its family members as family members and its sons as sons. People having what is private was certainly something human feelings could not be free of. Therefore, the former kings did not make it a prohibition. Indeed, not only did they not prohibit it; they accepted and understood it. In establishing the kingdom, they were close to the nobles, conferring lands and granting clan names.⁷⁰ In drawing up the well-field system and demarcating the fields, they joined what was private in the world to perfect what was public. This is why it is considered to have been a kingly administration. When it came to instructing officials, they said to use the public to eliminate the private. Despite the fact that salaries were enough to substitute for farming, and the land was enough to provide for sacrifices, letting them be free of anxiety as to the lamentations of mothers and the reproaches of their families,⁷¹ they were also sympathetic toward the private. But for a long time now this principle has not been clear. The noble men of the age certainly say there is the public and not the private. These are the favored words of later generations but not the perfect teaching of former kings.

Confucius said, “I am old enough to have seen scribes [historians] leave a blank in their texts.”⁷² What the historian omitted, the Sage did not dare to add. Thus, in the Spring and Autumn Annals for the seventeenth year of Duke Huan, there is, “In winter, in the tenth month, on the first day of the moon, the sun was eclipsed.”⁷³ In the Zuo Zhuan [Zuo commentary], there is, “The day of the cycle is not written because the officials had lost it.”⁷⁴ In the fifteenth year of Duke Xi, there is, “In summer, during the fifth month, there was an eclipse of the sun.”⁷⁵ In the Zuo Zhuan, there is, “The first day of the month and the day were not written because the officials had lost the day.”⁷⁶ Given the Sage’s intelligence and the fact that “one can calculate the solstices for a thousand years without leaving one’s seat,”⁷⁷ if the calendar is examined, how difficult can it be to remedy these omissions? And yet the Master did not dare to do so. How much more, then, would he not choose to correct errors in historical writings? How much more, in arranging the affairs of the states, would those things learned of by hearsay not be recorded in historical writings?

The completion of the writing of the Zuo Zhuan was not the work of one man, nor was the record itself of one time. It can be said to be rich in content, and yet the Master did not necessarily see it at that time. If there is something not recorded by the official historian’s chronicles, then even a sage might not know of it. Moreover, the Spring and Autumn Annals is the history of the state of Lu, so if there were many official visits, he would necessarily hear about their government and subsequently could add to the Veritable Records of the 120 states, incorporating them into the records and notes of his own state. If matters such as the death and burial of Duke Hui are not recorded,78 then the old histories have deficiencies. That Cao Dafu, Song Dafu, Sima, and Sicheng are not named represents a deficiency.⁷⁹ That the Earl of Zheng, Kun Wan, the Viscount of Chu, Qun, and the Marquis of Qi, Yang Sheng, were actually murdered,⁸⁰ although the writings state that they died, is an example of hearsay not being superior to the memorandum tablets that, in these cases, follow the old historical writings.

Zuo Shi, continuing on from the capture of the lin, collected an extensive array of material that, in reality, the Master never saw.⁸¹ Nevertheless, later Confucian scholars [Ruists] seemed to say there was already this writing that the Master relied upon and revised. Accordingly, in Zuo Shi’s explanation of the classic, in what doesn’t tally, there are many erroneous explanations. Further, in the discussions of the classic’s origins, scholars subsequently were of the view that what the Sage did not know should be avoided. Hence new theories became increasingly numerous, and the rights and wrongs of a matter were not established. Therefore, the words of present-day scholars who study the Spring and Autumn Annals are all writings of Ying and explanations of Yan and are not things on which the Master can adjudicate. Did the Sage not say, “Hear much and put aside what is dubious; speak cautiously about what remains”?⁸² Why he particularly told Zizhang⁸³ this is because the methods of rectifying the Spring and Autumn Annals don’t go beyond it.

The Spring and Autumn Annals is rectified in accord with the Lu history. The Zuo Zhuan is written as a collection of the histories of all the states. Therefore, what is written of the affairs of Jin, from the time of Duke Wen’s being president of covenants⁸⁴ and the administrative changes within the Middle Kingdom, is recorded in the histories of the various states, and all followed the first month of the Zhou calendar. From Duke Hui and before,⁸⁵ the historical chronicles did not use the first month of the Xia calendar. This did not emerge from the understanding of one man. The statements [in the Spring and Autumn Annals] that the funeral presents of Zhong Zi arrived prior to her death;⁸⁶ that the death of King Ping was announced on gengxu,⁸⁷ and that the death of Bao, the Marquis of Chen, was announced twice⁸⁸ are all matters that must be examined thoroughly so there can be an explanation.

In ancient times, quack doctors killed people. In the present times, such charlatans don’t kill people, but they also don’t save their lives. Rather, they cause them to exist in some intermediate state between life and death, their sickness becoming worse each day until they do finally die. Now, among medicines, there are “princes” and “attendants” and, among people, there are the strong and the weak.⁸⁹ So, because there are “princes” and “attendants” among medicines, much or little can be used; and because there are strong and weak people, the dose can be halved or doubled. If much is used, then it is used alone; and if it is used alone, it is rapidly effective. If a double dose is used, then it is substantial, and if it is substantial, its potency is profound. Nowadays, those who use medicines are, for the most part, confused and careless and don’t prescribe an accurate dose. Since they are not able to see things clearly and also lack courage in their treatments, they cannot cure the illness. Nevertheless, the world still takes not killing people to be a measure of a doctor’s worth. Don’t they know that superior doctors of ancient times could not avoid failure?

In the chapter on doctors in the Rites of Zhou [Zhou Li] [it is written], “At the year’s end, there was examination into the medical affairs of a doctor in order to regulate his livelihood. Those doctors who, out of ten patients, lost none were ranked highest; those who lost one out of ten were next; those who lost two out of ten were next; those who lost three out of ten were next; and those who lost four out of ten were lowest.”90 Even those who lost three or four out of ten were still employed by the ancients. Chunyu Yi, in replying to Xiao Wen [Emperor Wen of Han—r. 179–157 B.C.E.], even said, “From time to time I fail. I cannot claim complete success.”⁹¹ In the Changes it is written, “To view a father’s wrongdoing indulgently will bring regret as one goes forward.”⁹² Why only choose this “viewing wrongdoing indulgently”? It is to deny personal responsibility for someone’s death. Ah, alas! This is why Zhang Yu lost the Han⁹³ and Li Linfu lost the Tang.⁹⁴

In the History of the Tang Dynasty, Xu Yunzong⁹⁵ said,

The leading doctors of ancient times only distinguished the pulse. Once the pulse was accurately analyzed, it was possible to recognize the disease. Then the medicine prescribed for the illness could be correct and appropriate, and it was necessary only to use one agent to overcome the disease. Since the strength of the medicine lay in its purity, the disease was completely cured. In the present times, men are not able to distinguish the pulse and so cannot identify the origin of the disease. They must rely on guesswork, often being content to try one medicine after another. It is like hunting without knowing the hare’s whereabouts. Many men and horses set out, and the empty land is surrounded in the hope that one man will catch the animal. This is a far cry from being an exercise of skill. If one medicine is prescribed that happens to be right for the disease but other concoctions oppose it, then its vital strength is not effective. What is difficult or wrong can be thought to arise from this.⁹⁶

Section 6, the Li Ji: There are fifty-two essays, devoted predominantly to the Li Ji (Record of Rites). In general terms, the essays are about specific passages from the Li Ji, although other works are mentioned in a number of instances. Essays 6.1–35 relate to chapters other than the “Zhongyong” and “Daxue,” while essays 6.36–37 focus mainly on the Xiao Jing 孝經 (Classic of Filial Piety), although the Li Ji is mentioned. The two chapters of the Li Ji that were later extracted from the work by Zhu Xi in his creation of the Four Books (i.e., the “Daxue” 大學 and “Zhongyong” 中庸) have a number of essays devoted specifically to them. Thus, 6.38–42 relate to the former and 6.43–51 to the latter.

“To perfect knowledge is to know where to come to rest.”¹⁰¹ What is “knowing where to come to rest?” “As a ruler, he came to rest in ren [loving-kindness, benevolence]; as a minister, he came to rest in reverence; as a son, he came to rest in filial piety; as a father, he came to rest in compassion; in his dealings with people of the state, he came to rest in trust.”¹⁰² This can be called “to come to rest.” Know where to come to rest, and then one can speak of knowledge being perfected. From the intercourse between ruler and minister, father and son, and state and subjects, right up to the “three hundred rules of ceremony and the three thousand rules of demeanour,”¹⁰³ all can be termed “things.”

The Odes says, “Heaven gave birth to the multitude of people; there were things and there were rules.”104 Mencius said, “Shun clearly understood the myriad things and closely observed the relationships among people.”¹⁰⁵ In former times, King Wu’s enquiring¹⁰⁶ and Ji Zi’s statement,¹⁰⁷ as well as Zengzi’s and Ziyou’s questioning,¹⁰⁸ and Confucius’s replying, were all such things. Therefore, it was said, “The ten thousand things are all complete in oneself.”¹⁰⁹

Only the noble man can be in sympathy with the things of the world. Thus, the Changes says, “The noble man, in his words, encompasses things; in his actions, he displays constancy.”¹¹⁰ In the Li Ji [Record of Rites], it is said, “The man of ren does not go beyond things; the filial son does not go beyond things.”¹¹¹ The investigation of things is more than just becoming well versed in the names of birds and beasts, plants and trees.¹¹² “Those who know truly know; they direct their attention to what is most important.”¹¹³ The hearing of litigation is one aspect of the conduct of relationships with people of the state.¹¹⁴

The greatness of the kingly dao 道 [Way] begins at the doors of the inner apartments. Happy union with one’s wife, harmony with one’s older and younger brothers, and obedience toward one’s parents constitute a dao that is near at hand and simple.115 There are sacrifices and the heavenly spirits are provided for. There are temples and the spirits and ghosts of people are provided for.¹¹⁶ This is a dao that is distant and lofty. “The former kings served their fathers with filial piety, therefore their serving Heaven was manifest. They served their mothers with filial piety, therefore their serving Earth was conscientious.”¹¹⁷ Cultivate this by being constant; manifest it in the conduct of government; base it on Heaven but bring it to fulfillment on Earth. It is given order by ghosts and spirits and extends to funerals, sacrifices, archery, charioteering, the capping ceremony, marriage, formal visits, and invitations. Thus the kingdoms of the world can acquire it and be correct. It resembles what Shun, Kings Wen and Wu, and the Duke of Zhou called “the practice of ordinary virtue”¹¹⁸ and “the apogee of human relationships.”¹¹⁹ Therefore it is said, “The dao of the noble man takes its origin from ordinary men and women; in reaching its perfection it is manifest throughout Heaven and Earth.”¹²⁰

As a man has a father and mother, at cockcrow he must enquire how they spent the night, and being at their side, he must nurture them constantly. How near at hand this is. When it comes to their death and they are neither seen nor heard and cannot be found or met with, some seek them in the yin and some in the yang. Subsequently, “their likenesses may certainly be seen in the sacred tablet.”¹²¹ Afterward, this depends on the able priest to transmit it and on the filial descendants to convey it. Alive, they are father and mother; dead, they are ghosts and spirits. The Master said, “An ancestral temple is built for making sacrifices to ghosts.”¹²² What he said is this: “How widespread they are. They circulate and fill the world. It is as if they are above us and all around us.”¹²³ This brings about obedience to parents and extends it.

The Record of Rites [Li Ji] states,

When King Wen was the heir apparent, he would visit Wang Ji thrice daily. At the first crowing of the cock, he would dress and present himself outside the door of the sleeping chamber. There, through the medium of a young servant, he would ask if the king was at peace today. If the young servant said he was, King Wen was pleased. In the middle of the day, he again presented himself and made a similar enquiry, as he also did in the evening. If things were not satisfactory, the young servant would inform King Wen, who would then assume a melancholy appearance and be unable to follow a straight path when walking. When Wang Ji took his food again, King Wen would regain his composure. Before the meal, he was invariably present to check whether it was of a suitable temperature. After the meal, he enquired as to what was eaten and directed the food steward saying that none [of the dishes] should be served again. On receiving the steward’s assurance, he withdrew.¹²⁴

It is only King Wen who, when his parents were alive, served them with this degree of filiality. When they died, he sacrificed to them so loyally it was as if he were actually seeing his parents. If, when one’s parents are alive, there is not a sincere attempt to carry out their desires, then when they are dead, one will certainly not be influenced by, and comprehend, the principles of right conduct. Therefore, it is said, “Only a filial son is able to care for his parents.”¹²⁶ So the Master informed Zilu, saying, “While you are not able to serve people, how can you serve ghosts?”¹²⁷ Thus, in “the practice of ordinary virtue” is not obedience toward parents of paramount importance? It is, moreover, the ritual practices [li 禮] of the sacrificial altars and the principles of the ancestral sacrifices that are the sources from which this arises. If there is clarity on this point, then the empire and the states can be secure and well governed. Among men in high positions, those who are able to show obedience toward their parents can subsequently serve Heaven and sacrifice to the emperor, while among men in lower positions, those who are able to show obedience toward their parents can subsequently attain higher positions and bring good order to the people.

Master Cheng said, “Ghosts and spirits are the meritorious agents of heaven; they are the traces of creation and change.” Master Zhang said, “Ghosts and spirits are natural manifestations of the two material forces.”¹²⁸ This is used to explain the statement in the Changes, “The spirits are mysterious in the ten thousand things and yet find expression [in the trigrams].”¹²⁹ This single statement is entirely fitting. Like the two Masters said, we look for them but do not see them; we listen for them but do not hear them—these are ghosts and spirits. What can be seen and heard are also spiritual beings. Now, the Master simply said “not seen” and “not heard,” knowing they were what sacrifices were directed to and presenting these to ghosts and spirits without any doubts. This is similar to what is said in the commentary [wen yan] on qian in the Changes: “[The great man is in accord with] ghosts and spirits in his good and bad fortune.”¹³⁰

What the Master taught men were literature, conduct, loyalty, and trustworthiness;¹³¹ nature and the dao [Way] of Heaven fell within this. Therefore, he said, “We cannot get to hear.”¹³² The Master said, “Do you think, my friends, that I am concealing anything from you? I conceal nothing from you. There is nothing I do which I do not share with you, my friends. This is my way.”¹³³ This refers to the Master’s words on nature and the dao of Heaven not being possible to get to hear, thus raising doubt about his claim not to be concealing anything. This is a failure to realize that the Master’s “outward manifestations of conduct” [wen zhang 文章]¹³⁴ are nothing other than his statements on nature and the dao of Heaven. This is why he was able to say, “There is nothing I do which I do not share with you, my friends. This is my way.”

Zigong’s idea was that “outward manifestations of conduct” and “nature and the dao of Heaven” were two different matters. Therefore, he said, “If you, Master, do not speak, what shall we, your disciples, record?” The Master replied, “Does heaven speak? The four seasons follow their courses, the hundred things come into being, and yet does heaven speak?”135 For this reason it is possible to take up office or to retire; it is possible to continue for a long time or to withdraw quickly.¹³⁶ There is not a single thing that is not Heaven[’s dao]. “Simple and unassuming,” “cautious and precise,” “direct and to the point,” “reserved and formal”¹³⁷—not one of these is not Heaven’s dao.

When all movements of the countenance and actions of the body are in accord with li 禮 [propriety, ceremonial practices], this is the highest point of resplendent virtue.¹³⁸ Mencius took these to be matters pertaining to Yao and Shun.¹³⁹ In the Master’s “outward manifestations of conduct,” nothing is greater than the Spring and Autumn Annals. The meaning of the Spring and Autumn Annals is that “to venerate the Heavenly King,” “to punish the barbarians,”¹⁴⁰ and “to put to death rebellious ministers and villainous sons”¹⁴¹ are all aspects of nature and the dao of Heaven. Therefore, Hu Shi took the Spring and Autumn Annals to be literature stemming from the Sage’s decreed nature¹⁴² [and accepted Zigong’s statement]: “If you, Master, do not speak, what shall we, your disciples, record?”¹⁴³

At the present time men still consider the “Xici”¹⁴⁴ to be the Master’s words on nature and the dao of Heaven. I, myself, have read this work three times. [There are] words such as “the crane calling in the shade” for seven lines; “[therefore] he is blessed by Heaven” for one line; “wavering and irresolute” for eleven lines; and “the basis of walking in the path of virtue” for nine diagrams.¹⁴⁵ How he teaches men to study the Changes lies in nothing other than what is in words and actions. Therefore, it is said, “First, if you follow its words and consider its method, then there are constant principles. But if you are not this right man, the dao cannot be followed in actions.”¹⁴⁶

Fan Chi asked about ren 仁 [loving-kindness, humanity, benevolence]. The Master said, “Be reverent in your dwelling, respectful in the conduct of affairs, and loyal in your relationships with others.” Sima Niu asked about ren 仁. The Master said, “The man who is ren 仁 is deliberate.” Following this and carrying it out is “for one day subduing oneself and returning to li 禮 [propriety, ceremonial practices].”147 Is there a difference from the dao 道? Noble men of the present time, in their studies, do not reach the level of Fan Chi and Sima Niu, and yet they wish their theories to be more exalted than the two disciples Yan and Zeng.¹⁴⁸ This is why they spend the whole day talking about human nature and the dao 道 of Heaven without realizing that they, themselves, have fallen to the level of chanxue 禪學 [Chan Buddhism].

Zhu Xi said,¹⁴⁹ “What the Sage teaches men does not go beyond filial piety and fraternal submission, loyalty and trustworthiness, and the careful preservation and scrupulous practice of these. This is the basis of studying things at the lower level. Scholars of the present day regard this as the business of dull spirits incapable of understanding something that is not worthy of their consideration. [Yet] these, and the matters that such latter-day scholars ordinarily discourse on, are nothing other than what Zigong spoke of as ‘cannot get to hear.’ ” Zhu Xi also said, “The malaise of present-day scholars lies in their love of the high-flown. Thus, with regard to the Lunyu, they never ask about ‘studying and constantly practicing’ but only the theory of ‘the one thread.’¹⁵⁰ With regard to the Mencius, they never speak about ‘King Hui of Liang asked about profit’ but only about ‘exerting the mind to the utmost.’¹⁵¹ With regard to the Changes, they never look at the sixty-four diagrams but only read the ‘Xici.’ ” This is the defect of skipping over the basic steps. He also said, “Sages and worthies set up their words and base themselves on the simple and plain. Nowadays [scholars] promote what is exalted and attempt to penetrate what is abstruse.”

The Huangshi Richao states, “The Master compiled the Six Classics; those who followed him devoted themselves to exegetical analysis of the texts. Nor was this harmful. Lian and Luo¹⁵² spoke of daoxue 道學, while their successors borrowed from discussions of Buddhism, and this was profoundly harmful.”¹⁵³ The disciples of Confucius did not go beyond the four branches of study, whereas, from the Song onward, there were five divisions of study for scholars, the fifth being called the branch of “recorded utterances.”¹⁵⁴

The confusion brought to China by the five barbarian tribes [or Liu Yuan and Shi Le] originally arose out of the prevailing calamity of pure talk;155 everyone knows this. But who knows whether the pure talk of the present day is not worse than that of former times? The pure talk of former times concerned Lao and Zhuang, while that of the present day concerns Confucius and Mencius. [Scholars] who have never attained the essential points go ahead and transmit a rough outline; those who have never looked into the basic principles go ahead and speak of the secondary aspects [nonessentials]. They have never studied the writings of the Six Classics, nor have they examined the documents of the “hundred kings.” They do not give due attention to the affairs of their own times but raise the great principles of the Master’s discussions of scholarship and government, and without questioning them at all speak of “the one thread” and of “no words,”¹⁵⁶ using the empty words of pure mind and original nature as a substitute for the true learning of cultivating the self and governing people. This means that the arms and legs grow weak, and yet the ten thousand things are neglected; it means that the talons and teeth are lost and the four kingdoms fall into confusion. The nation itself is unsettled and agitated, and the ancestral temples fall into ruin. Formerly, Wang Yan, who was well versed in profound and abstruse doctrines, compared himself to Zigong.¹⁵⁷ When he was on the point of death at the hands of Shi Le, he turned and said these words: “Ah, alas! Although we are not like the men of old, still if we had not given undue attention to what is insubstantial and empty but had labored together to restore the empire, then it remains possible that affairs would not have reached their present pass.”¹⁵⁸ Among the noble men of today, who could help but feel shame on hearing these words?

“The dao 道 [Way] of learning is nothing other than seeking the lost mind—that is all.”¹⁶⁰ If this is so, in only seeking the lost mind, can this be done without the necessity of recourse to learning? In the words of Confucius, “I have passed a whole day without eating and a whole night without sleeping just to think but it was of no use. It is better to study.”¹⁶¹ Is this not the same concept? On another occasion, Mencius said, “The noble man preserves his mind through ren 仁 [loving-kindness, humanity, benevolence]; he preserves his mind through li 禮 [proper conduct and ceremonial practices].”¹⁶² What he preserves is not an empty mind. In ren 仁 and li 禮 there is nothing that can be made clear without learning. This is Mencius’s purpose in saying that if you are able to seek the lost mind, then subsequently you can learn. Thus, “Suppose Chess Qiu is instructing two men in the art of chess. One of the two gives the matter the sole attention of his mind and will and listens only to Chess Qiu. The other, although he listens, has part of his mind on an approaching flock of geese, thinking to bend his bow, adjust the string, and shoot it. Although the second is learning along with the first, he will not be like him.”¹⁶³ He is a man with a lost mind who does not know how to seek it. Nevertheless, only to know how to seek the lost mind and never to investigate the arrangement of chess pieces on the board or know the pattern of wild geese in flight is also necessary not to be able to follow affairs!

At the time of Emperor Yuan [r. 317–322] of the Eastern Jin [317–419], the chamberlain of ceremonials, He Xun, memorialized, saying, “By imperial edict, one erudite has been established for each classic. Further, because it was a period of great unrest, the Confucian Way was neglected and abandoned, and there were few scholars who could clearly understand the meaning of the classics. Moreover, the three commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals all came from the sages, and yet their meanings and purposes were not the same. So, from former times, there were no Confucian scholars who could understand their merits and failings and study them all. Nowadays, it is appropriate that two erudites be established for the two classics the Rites of Zhou [Zhou Li] and the Book of Etiquette [Yi Li], three erudites for the three commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals, and one erudite for each of the remaining classics [i.e., the Documents, Odes, and Changes], giving a total of eight men.”¹⁶⁵

[Du You’s Tong Dian continues:]

The chamberlain for ceremonials, Xun Song,166 memorialized, saying, “Formerly the number of erudites was nineteen in all. Now, for the Five Classics, there are nine men in all. So, comparing the old with the new, there is not half the number. For the Changes there are Zheng [Xuan’s] notes. His writings probe the depths and can truly be regarded as being of great worth. On the Book of Etiquette [Yi Li], which concerns what might be termed the minutiae of etiquette, Zheng Xuan was particularly clear, with documentary proof in all instances. Formerly, during the decline of Zhou, Confucius wrote the Spring and Autumn Annals; Zuo Qiuming and Zixia received personal transmission from him. When Confucius died, Qiuming collected what he had heard and created a commentary that was comprehensive, subtle, and profound in its purport. This must be carefully studied. Gongyang Gao received personal transmission from Zixia. His work was established in the Han period and contained much that could be used. Guliang Chi was an example of master to pupil transmission; his work contained many new insights. In some instances, there were matters that Zuo Shi and Gongyang did not record, and also there was what required editing and correcting. I consider that, although these three commentaries are the same in being on the Spring and Autumn Annals, they are quite different in their purport and objectives, so it is entirely appropriate that each should have an erudite responsible for the transmission of its learning.”

In Tang times, in the fifth month of the ninth year of the Zhenguan reign period [635], there was an imperial proclamation to the effect that from now on, all candidates for the mingjing [examination], considering the Zhou Li to be like the Yi Li, should reduce their prescription of study by choosing one [of these works only]. In the seventh month of the eighth year of the Kaiyuan reign period [720], the director of studies at the National University, Li Yuancui,¹⁶⁸ memorialized, saying,

The three Li, the three commentaries [on the Spring and Autumn Annals], as well as the Mao Odes, Documents, and Changes, etc., bring together the profound intentions of sages and worthies and are works of instruction for all mortals. Nowadays, what is studied for the mingjing degree169 is about the pursuit of office, and, as all consider the Li Ji to be short, all contend to read it. The Rites of Zhou is the standard for the administration of the kingdom. The Book of Etiquette is the model for gravity and reverence. The Gongyang and the Guliang commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals have been subjects of study through successive generations. Nowadays, in the two educational directorates and in prefectural and district schools, because men study alone, without companions, the transmission of these four classics is in danger of being cut off. So the application of teaching and instruction in serving [the ruler] and assisting [in administration] cannot be continued. May I request that students stop working on one particular classic, and also, that when men presented [as candidates] are preparing for the examinations, they study the Rites of Zhou, the Book of Etiquette, and the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries? Moreover, I would ask that an understanding of five out of ten topics set would allow men to pass the examination, so affording them encouragement. Accordingly, one may hope that men throughout the world would study them all equally and that an understanding of the Nine Classics would be fully realized.

In the Tang History for the twelfth month of the sixteenth year of the Kaiyuan reign period [728], [there is], “Yang Yang, who was chancellor of the directorate of education, memorialized, writing, ‘Nowadays, those candidates for the mingjing degree who study the Zuo Zhuan number less than two or three in ten. Also, the Rites of Zhou, the Book of Etiquette, and the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries have been almost completely done away with. I request that consideration be given to adding encouragement and reward [for studying these works].’ Thereupon, a decree was handed down that those candidates successful in the mingjing degree who studied the Zuo Zhuan as well as the Rites of Zhou and the rest of the four classics referred to above and who entered government service should avoid appointment to a sinecure.”¹⁷⁰ Subsequently, this was written into the statutes. The ancients who were of a mind to preserve the neglected classics and who supported the mind of recondite learning considered it a pressing matter in this way. And yet now, on the contrary, this has all been done away with. It must have been that scholars of the time had difficulty with the study of the four classics, and those officials responsible for educational policy complied with their private wishes, so subsequently the classic works handed down through successive generations were cast aside and not studied.

From Han times on, could anyone not know that there were the Five Classics, that they together preserved a common meaning, and that this did not allow of one classic being studied alone. Therefore, the study of the “Sanjia” [Zuo Zhuan, Gongyang Zhuan, and Guliang Zhuan—i.e., three commentaries] was included with the Spring and Autumn Annals. As for the San Li [the Three Li—i.e., Zhou Li, Yi Li, and Li Ji], each was considered a separate work. Nowadays, however, the classic itself is put aside and the commentary is studied. This is particularly inappropriate. There is nothing worse than this improper use of study for private ends becoming generalized throughout the empire, deceiving the ruler and betraying the kingdom. That the study of the classics daily declines and men of talent daily diminish in number has this as its basis, has it not?

In the History of the Song Dynasty [it is written] that Shen Zong [r. 1068–1086] utilized [Wang] Anshi’s theory that each student should specialize in one classic—the Changes, the Odes, the Documents, the Rites of Zhou, and the Record of Rites—while at the same time studying the Lunyu and the Mencius.171 Zhu Wengong [Zhu Xi], in his Qixiu Sanli Zhazi, wrote,

At the time of the Qin destruction of books, those on Li [Rites] and the Yue [Music] were first destroyed. What were preserved to a slight degree were the three Li [San Li], and that was all. The one work, the Zhou Guan [Zhou Li], was certainly the guiding principle of li, whereas, when it came to the minutiae of ceremonial methods, the Yi Li was the basic classic. The “Jiaotesheng,” the “Guanyi,” and other chapters of the Li Ji provided the explanations of these principles. Before this, there were still the several courses [for examination]—the San Li, the Tong Li, and the Xuejiu—so that although li 禮 [ritual practices, propriety] was not put into practice, scholars, through reading and study, were still able to comprehend its theory. From the Xining reign period [1068–1077] on, Wang Anshi brought change and disorder to the old system, doing away with the Book of Etiquette and preserving only the Record of Rites as a subject, discarding the classic and relying on the commentary. This was tantamount to neglecting what was fundamental and conferring primary authority on what was incidental; this was especially misguided.¹⁷²