聞分館君 Ask BunKanKun

書集傳纂疏

8 min read

Text ID
KR1b0027
Date
1314–1334
Dynasty
元

Shū jízhuàn zuǎnshū 書集傳纂疏

Compiled Subcommentary on the “Collected Commentary on the Documents” by 陳櫟 (zhuàn 撰)

About the work

A 6-juǎn Yuán-period subcommentary (shū 疏) on Cài Shěn’s Shū jízhuàn 書集傳 (KR1b0017), compiled by Chén Lì 陳櫟 (Dìngyǔ 定宇, 1252–1334) of Xīn’ān 新安 — i.e., the figure cited throughout YuánMíng Shàngshū literature as “Mr Chén of Xīn’ān” (新安陳氏). The title’s two technical terms encode the work’s procedure: zuǎn 纂 (to compile) refers to the gathering of relevant earlier commentaries’ explanations, and shū 疏 (subcommentary) to the elucidation of Cài Shěn’s jízhuàn. The first juǎn singles out the passages explicitly redacted by Zhū Xī himself (the “two Diǎn” and parts of the “three Mó”); under each entry Chén Lì leads with Zhū Xī’s reading, follows with the other YuánSòng commentators, and where he ventures his own gloss labels it “yú wèi” 愚謂 (“I, the foolish one, say”). The work is a foundational text of the Yuán Yánȳòu 延祐 (1314+) examination-system orthodoxy: Chén Lì wrote it after the curriculum reform that canonized the Cài zhuàn as the Shàngshū standard, and the tíyào notes a deliberate retreat from his earlier (now lost) Shū shuō zhézhōng 書說折衷, where he had been more willing to weigh Cài Shěn against rival readings.

Tiyao

Imperially Authorized Sìkù Quánshū. [Classics, division 2.] Shàngshū jízhuàn zuǎnshū. [Books-class.]

Précis. Your servants etc. respectfully submit: the Shàngshū jízhuàn zuǎnshū in six juǎn is by Chén Lì of the Yuán. Lì, zì Shòuwēng, hào Dìngyǔ, was a man of Xiūníng. After the fall of the Sòng he lived in retreat for thirty-eight years; in Yánȳòu jiǎyín (1314), aged sixty-three, he again came forth to sit the examinations, passing the Zhèjiāng provincial examination, but illness prevented him from reaching the metropolitan exam. Two years later he sent up a memorial of policy advice to the chief executives and received no reply. He thereupon ended his days at home, aged eighty-three. His record is fully given in the Yuánshǐ Rúxué zhuàn. The “Mr Chén of Xīn’ān” cited in 董鼎’s Shū zhuàn zuǎnzhù is this same person.

The present compilation is named shū because it elucidates the meaning of the Cài commentary, and zuǎn because it gathers and arrays the explanations of the various schools. Further: because the Cài zhuàn was originally founded on Master Zhū’s transmitted-instruction, the first juǎn especially marks out the items which Master Zhū had vetted; and beneath each entry he places Master Zhū’s own explanation at the head, before the other schools’. Where he occasionally ventures his own opinion, he labels it “yú wèi” to distinguish it.

On investigation: Lì had a separate Shū shuō zhézhōng completed before the present book; that work is now scattered and lost, and only its preface still appears in his Dìngyǔ jí, which says: “Master Zhū, in his discussion of the Shū, comprehended what was comprehensible and did not force what was difficult — but Mr Cài, in the difficult, rarely left a lacuna; the masters who venerate his explanation are indeed many, but those who differ from it are also not few. As I was instructing my son, I therefore extracted Master Zhū’s chief points and the various schools’ best apprehensions of the canonical sense, glossed them passage by passage below the text; the convergent and divergent readings I set in dropped-down characters and arbitrated among them.” So Lì in his earlier Shū-discourse did not slavishly hold to the Cài zhuàn. But the present book, when it engages the Cài zhuàn, only supplements it and never refutes it — sharply differing from his earlier writing. The autograph preface says: “Now that the imperial Court has set up the examinations and made all the canons and the Four Books one in venerating Master Zhū, the Shū’s veneration of the Cài zhuàn is therefore as it should be” — clearly, after Yánȳòu instituted the examination system, the regulations had this content, and so [Chén Lì] dared not introduce divergences. Respectfully submitted, Qiánlóng 44 / 1779, sixth month.

— Director-General, Jì Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. — Director of Final Collation, Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.

Abstract

The Shū jízhuàn zuǎnshū is the foundational subcommentary on Cài Shěn’s Shū jízhuàn in the Yuán imperial-examination tradition. Chén Lì 陳櫟 (1252–1334) — Xīn’ān 新安 native, Sòng loyalist, Yuán Yánȳòu-era examination reentrant — composed it after the Yuán court’s 1313 / Yánȳòu 1 (1314) decree canonizing Zhū Xī commentary as the basis of the new examination system, and after his own brief 1314 reentry into the examination process aged 63. Its central technical move — leading every passage with Zhū Xī’s own reading, then the other commentators, then Chén’s own gloss only when truly distinctive — is in fact the standard form of zuǎn + shū gloss-compilation that became the dominant YuánMíng commentarial layout.

The Sìkì compilers’ acute reading of the work focuses on the disjunction between Chén Lì’s earlier critical Shū shuō zhézhōng and the present Zuǎnshū. The earlier work — preserved only in its preface in Chén’s Dìngyǔ jí 定宇集 — had explicitly criticized Cài Shěn for departing from Zhū Xī’s “comprehend the comprehensible, leave a lacuna for the unintelligible” rule by glossing even the most opaque Yīn pán / Zhōu gào passages; the Zuǎnshū abandons this criticism and treats Cài’s commentary as institutionally definitive, supplementing without refuting (yǒu suǒ zēng bǔ wú suǒ bó zhèng 有所増補無所駁正). The compilers identify the cause precisely: the Yuán Yánȳòu examination reform had made deviation from the ZhūCài line “regulationally” inadvisable. The autograph preface, with its formula “Now that all the canons and the Four Books are one in venerating Master Zhū…” is read by the Sìkù compilers as a deliberate framing of the work as Yuán-orthodox, and the zuǎnshū method as a way of executing that orthodoxy with as much breadth and learning as could fit inside it.

The composition window is bracketed at the front by the 1313–1314 examination reform and Chén Lì’s reentry into examinations, and at the back by his death in 1334. The frontmatter window 1314–1334 covers this defensibly. The Sìkù’s submission was Qiánlóng 44 / 1779.

The work is one of the most-cited SòngYuán Shàngshū commentaries by name in YuánMíng Shū-literature: Dǒng Dǐng’s 董鼎 Shū zhuàn zuǎnzhù 書傳纂注 cites Chén Lì repeatedly as “Xīn’ān Chénshì” 新安陳氏, and the layout of subsequent Càizhuàn sub-glosses (Hú Yīguì 胡一桂’s lost Shū jízhuàn fù lù zuǎnshū 書集傳附錄纂疏, the Míng Shū zhuàn dàquán 書傳大全) traces back to Chén Lì’s zuǎnshū model.

Translations and research

No substantial Western-language translation of the Shū jízhuàn zuǎnshū is known. For Chén Lì’s place in the late-Sòng / Yuán Wùzhōu-Xīn’ān Zhū-Xué network see Sòng-Yuán xué àn 宋元學案 juǎn 70 Cǎolú xué àn 草廬學案 (which treats Chén Lì in the orbit of Wú Chéng’s school) and juǎn 89 Jiè xuān xué àn 介軒學案 (the Xīn’ān-school context). For the institutional-curricular context of the Yánȳòu reform see Benjamin A. Elman, A Cultural History of Civil Examinations in Late Imperial China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000).

Other points of interest

The work is one of the cleanest documentary cases of an author’s institutional self-revision under examination-system pressure: we possess (a) the preface to Chén Lì’s earlier critical Shū shuō zhézhōng, (b) the autograph preface to the present accommodating Zuǎnshū, and (c) the Sìkù compilers’ explicit comparison of the two — making the Yuán curricular co-optation of independent classical scholarship visible in a way that is unusual in SòngYuán Shàngshū literature.

The Wú Chéng / Chén Lì pairing — both Yuán Yánȳòu-era figures, both intimately involved in the 1313 examination reform’s classics curriculum — gives an interesting picture of the institutional cross-currents: where Wú Chéng (KR1b0026) used his curriculum-architect position to canonize Cài Shěn while privately writing a jīnwén-only commentary that implicitly rejected the gǔwén basis of Cài’s reading, Chén Lì used his subcommentarial position to produce a Cài-orthodox Zuǎnshū while quietly suppressing his earlier critical Shū shuō zhézhōng. Both responses to the same political-curricular pressure, but in opposite directions.

Graph View

Backlinks