Hé dìng shān bǔ Dà Yì jí yì cuì yán 合訂刪補大易集義粹言
Combined-and-Edited, Pruned-and-Supplemented Collected-Meanings and Distilled-Words on the Great Yì by 納喇性德 (編)
About the work
A monumental Kāngxī-period imperial-private Yìjīng synthesis-anthology in eighty juàn, attributed to 納喇性德 Nàlǎ Xìngdé (1655–1685, the famous early-Qīng Manchu cí poet) but in fact, on the strong testimony of the Qiánlóng emperor’s own 1785 edict, substantively compiled by 徐乾學 Xú Qiánxué (the Kāngxī court official whose Tōngzhì táng jīngjiě 通志堂經解 was the principal late-seventeenth-century private edition of Sòng-Yuán jīngxué commentaries) — Nàlǎ being the named figurehead-compiler.
The work combines two earlier Sòng-period anthologies: 陳友文 Chén Yǒuwén’s Dà Yì jí yì 大易集義 (originally 64 juàn, gathering doctrines from 18 named commentators plus 2 anonymous houses, with coverage of the upper-and-lower scriptures only) and 曽穜 Zēng Tóng’s Dà Yì cuì yán 大易粹言 (originally 70 juàn, gathering 7 commentators with coverage of the Xìcí through the rest of the Wings). The compiler combines the two: from Chén’s 18 named commentators, the additional 11 not covered by Zēng are extracted and integrated with Zēng’s Cuì yán on the Wings; the merged work is then pruned of duplications and supplemented with omissions, producing the final 80-juàn synthesis. The work was then printed at the end of the Tōngzhì táng jīngjiě under Nàlǎ Xìngdé’s name.
The unusually substantial Qiánlóng-period editorial preface — preserving the imperial 1785 edict — is one of the most pointed exposures of late-Kāngxī court literary patronage politics in the entire Sìkù corpus. The emperor explicitly diagnoses the situation: Nàlǎ at age sixteen was a jìnshì through Xú Qiánxué’s protection (Xú had been his father 明珠 Míngzhū’s client and was the chief examiner who passed Nàlǎ); Xú compiled the Jīngjiě and used Nàlǎ’s name to publish it as a vehicle of reputation-and-favor-currying with the Míngzhū faction; “the personal characters of Xú Qiánxué and [Nàlǎ] Chéngdé are not worthy of being taken — but this book gathers the houses with classical-richness and broad coverage; it is in fact sufficient to manifest the Six Classics. I do not because of person discard the words.” The Qiánlóng court therefore preserved the work but corrected the attribution.
Despite the political-ethical complications, the Sìkù editors’ substantive assessment of the work is positive: “principle and number are jointly displayed, not adhering to one doctrine; the various Sòng Confucians’ minute words and refined meanings are in fact gathered without omission” — 朱彝尊 Zhū Yízūn’s earlier praise (sù qí zé shàn yǔ jīng yān xiáng shù jǐ yǒu dà chún ér wú xiǎo cī 擇言精語焉詳庶幾有大醇而無小疵) is partly excessive but largely sound. The Sìkù editors note that Chén Yǒuwén’s Jí yì is now rare in independent transmission (the Cuì yán still has independent editions), so the Hé dìng shān bǔ is the principal vehicle through which much of the Jí yì survives.
Tiyao
Imperial Edict (Qiánlóng 50.2.29 = 1785, condensed): The Sìkù quánshū office has presented for re-cutting the Tōngzhì táng jīngjiě. I have read [Nàlǎ] Chéngdé’s preface, dated Kāngxī 12 (1673). At that time Chéngdé was only sixteen — how could he have already been thoroughly versed in classical learning? I had long heard that Xú Qiánxué’s cutting of the Jīngjiě was done in Chéngdé’s name. Now I commanded the Grand Council to investigate Chéngdé’s career: he passed the Kāngxī 11 jǔrén and the Kāngxī 12 jìnshì, just sixteen years old. Xú Qiánxué was the assistant chief examiner of the Kāngxī 11 Shùntiān provincial examination, through whom Chéngdé was passed. Now Míngzhū at this period had been wielding power for years, with prestige glaring; he attracted famous men of the time like Xú Qiánxué, who interlinked-and-fused, planted-and-managed factional service. Hence his son Chéngdé, not yet of age, by relational connection took jìnshì status — naturally by influence-trafficking; and cut the Jīngjiě to display his learning’s depth-and-breadth.
The ancients said: hoary-headed-exhaustion in the canon — even penetrating Confucians, if not refined-and-thorough in meaning-and-principle, lifelong-discoursing — still cannot absorb their hearts in elucidating the previous Confucians’ refined treasures. And Chéngdé in young years’ shallow planting could broadly search and gather, distill the canonical learning to its great-completion — is there such a principle? More can be confirmed: it was assembled by Xú Qiánxué, with Chéngdé as the named publisher, so by this market-name and gain-praise to use as a tool for accommodating powerful establishment.
The personal characters of Xú Qiánxué and Chéngdé are not worth taking. Yet this book gathers the houses with classical-richness and broad coverage, in fact sufficient to manifest the Six Classics. I do not because of person discard the words. Hence I command the office officials to take the worn-and-broken plates and re-cut them complete, correct the errors-and-falsities, in order to attain perfection and benefit the Confucian forest. But Xú Qiánxué’s leaning on the powerful gates and Chéngdé’s stealing of literary reputation cannot be left unprobed and unreckoned — to settle the verdict illuminatingly to display to the world and posterity. Record this edict at the head of the book. By edict.
Sìkù tíyào (translated, condensed): The Hé dìng shān bǔ Dà Yì jí yì cuì yán in eighty juàn was edited by Nàlǎ Xìngdé of our [Qīng] dynasty. Xìngdé, zì Róngruò, of the Manchu Plain-Yellow Banner; Kāngxī jìnshì; office reached First-Class Imperial Bodyguard. This book takes the Sòng Chén Yǒuwén’s Dà Yì jí yì and Zēng Tóng’s Dà Yì cuì yán — two books — and combines them.
[Long technical description of the editorial procedure: Chén’s book originally 64 juàn with 18 named authors plus 2 anonymous houses, covering only upper-and-lower scriptures; Zēng’s book originally 70 juàn with 7 authors but covering through Xìcí, Shuōguà, Xùguà, Záguà. By comparison, the Jí yì uniquely contains 11 additional authors. Xìngdé therefore extracted from these 11 the discussions on Xìcí and after that brought out parallel meaning, and combined them with the Cuì yán; the whole was pruned and supplemented to 80 juàn and printed at the end of the Tōngzhì táng jīngjiě.]
The Cuì yán still has transmitted copies; the Jí yì has had quite scarce circulation, and only by virtue of this can its outline be glimpsed. Within it principle and number are jointly displayed, not adhering to one doctrine; the various Sòng Confucians’ minute-words and refined-meanings have in fact been gathered without omission. Zhū Yízūn once said its “selection-of-words is refined and language is detailed; perhaps approaching great-purity without small-flaw” — although the praising is somewhat excessive, the work’s net-and-ranking, and orderly-arrangement is in fact convenient for later students’ reading-and-following. It can stand together with the source books and not be discarded.
Respectfully collated, the second month of the forty-sixth year of Qiánlóng (1781). Editor-in-chief: Jì Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. Chief proofreader: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.
[Editorial note: the original recension’s name uses Nàlán 納蘭 Chéngdé 成德; the Sìkù follows the Eight-Banner Tōngzhì in writing Nàlǎ 納喇 Xìngdé 性德; this distinction is also noted at the head.]
Abstract
Composition is bracketed by the Kāngxī period of the Tōngzhì táng jīngjiě project (1670s onward) and Nàlǎ’s death in 1685; the bracket here adopts a conservative range. The work’s named compilation is dated to Nàlǎ’s preface period (early 1670s) but the actual editorial work was carried out by Xú Qiánxué over a longer span.
The work is one of the principal Kāngxī-period synthetic Sòng-Yìxué anthologies. Its enduring value lies in preserving the substance of Chén Yǒuwén’s Jí yì (otherwise rare) and providing a single integrated SòngYì commentary corpus of 80 juàn covering both scriptures and all Wings. As such, it is one of the principal vehicles through which Sòng commentary on the Yì (especially the doctrines of the 18+11 Chén-anthologized authors) survives in transmissible form.
The Qiánlóng-period imperial edict diagnosing the false attribution is one of the most extraordinary documents in the Sìkù corpus. It illustrates the Qiánlóng court’s willingness to use Sìkù compilation as a vehicle for after-the-fact moral-political reckoning with late-Kāngxī court politics — preserving the work’s substantive content while publicly correcting its attribution and exposing the late-Kāngxī court factionalism (Míngzhū faction, Xú Qiánxué’s role) that had created the false attribution.
The work’s textual transmission has been important for late-Qīng and modern Chinese Yìxué: the Hé dìng shān bǔ is the principal Sòng-anthology baseline that twentieth-century scholars (Zhū Bóhūi, 廖平 Liào Píng) used to reconstruct the Sòng commentary tradition.
Translations and research
For the Tōngzhì táng jīngjiě and the late-Kāngxī court literary patronage politics see ECCP under “Hsü Ch’ien-hsüeh,” “Mingju,” and “Nara Singde”; for Nàlǎ’s poetry see Mclaughlin (trans.), Nara Singde: A Selection of Poems (1980s). For the broader Sòng Yìxué anthology tradition that this work continues see Tang Junyi, Zhōngguó zhéxué yuán lùn: Yuán jiào piān. No major Western-language monograph specifically on the Hé dìng shān bǔ Dà Yì jí yì cuì yán located.
Other points of interest
The Qiánlóng edict at the head of this work is one of the most explicitly political imperial editorial interventions in the Sìkù corpus, and the candor with which the Qīng court acknowledges the problem of false attribution under late-Kāngxī court politics is unusual. The edict’s calibrated formulation — “I do not because of person discard the words” (朕不以人廢言) — became a Qiánlóng-period editorial principle quoted in subsequent Sìkù notices.