Jīnglǐ bǔyì 經禮補逸
Supplementing the Lost Material of the Ritual Classic
by 汪克寬 (撰)
About the work
Wāng Kèkuān’s 汪克寬 (1304–1372) nine-juan late-Yuán-to-early-Míng systematic compilation of ritual material drawn from the Yílǐ (KR1d0025), Zhōulǐ (KR1d0001), DàDài and XiǎoDài Lǐjì (KR1d0076 and KR1d0052), the Chūnqiū three traditions, and other classics, organised under the wǔlǐ 五禮 (Five Rituals) classification: jí (auspicious; 68 entries), xiōng (ill-omened; 57 entries), jūn (military; 25 entries), bīn (guest; 13 entries), jiā (festive; 21 entries), with an appendix on lǐjīng fùshuō 禮經附說. The work follows the editorial framework of Zhū Xī’s Yílǐ jīngzhuàn tōngjiě (KR1d0085) but with an explicitly wǔlǐ-categorical organisation. Composition belongs to Wāng Kèkuān’s later life; the autograph preface and a 1369 (Hóngwǔ 2) preface by Zēng Lǔ 曾魯 of Línjiāng date the completion to before the Míng founding.
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Jīnglǐ bǔyì in nine juan was composed by Wāng Kèkuān of the Yuán. Kèkuān (zì Défǔ, native of Qímén) — jǔrén of the bǐngyín of Tàidìng [1326]; on the Yuán fall did not take office; in the early Míng was summoned to compile the Yuán shǐ but declined on age-and-illness, returning home; died Hóngwǔ 5 [1372] at home. His career is in Míngshǐ Rúlín zhuàn. The book takes the Yílǐ, Zhōuguān, Dà and Xiǎo Dài records, the Chūnqiū three traditions, and other classics’ wording related to ritual, and organises them under the jí, xiōng, jūn, bīn, jiā Five Rituals: jí with 68 entries; xiōng with 57; jūn with 25; bīn with 13; jiā with 21. Concluded by the lǐjīng fùshuō.
Kèkuān gave his attention to dàoxué; on ritual-house counts he had not deeply pursued; on book-composition style he also did not deeply consider. As, “each entry must list its source” — yes; but in the same category, entries linked together, written as one continuous chapter — text follows but argument does not — becomes scattered without thread. Furthermore, this book actually investigates canonical writing, not investigating actual events; yet many Chūnqiū’s ritual-failure events are mixed in with the ancient regulations.
For instance, the cí ritual under: Zhāo 15 “had affair at the Wǔ-temple”; the cháng ritual under: Huán 14 rénshēn “the imperial granary catching fire; jǐhài chángzhēng”; the ritual under: Huán 8 first month and fifth month “zàizhēng”; the dàyuè ritual under: Huán 6 autumn eighth-month “dàyuè”; the cháo ritual under: Chūnqiū’s recorded cháo 36 occurrences; the yù ritual under: Yǐn 4 “the duke and the Sòng duke met at Qīng”; the huì ritual under: Chūnqiū’s recorded huì 95; the cìmìng ritual under: Zhuāng 3 “the king sent Róng Shū to bestow the Huán-duke’s mandate”; the yànxiǎng ritual under: Zhuāng 4 “the lady feasted Qí lord at Zhùqiū” — these still attach some discussions correcting the errors. As to the xiácháng ritual under: Wén 2 “jì Xī Gōng”; further on the lords’ dàxiá ritual also citing this entry; the fùfèng ritual under: Yǐn 1 “Zǎi Xuān returned the fèng of Hùigōng Zhòngzǐ”; year 3 “Wǔshìzǐ came to seek the fù”; the suì ritual under: Xiāng 28 “Chǔrén made the duke himself attend the suì”; the huìzàng ritual under: Xiāng 2 “the various Jiāng zōngfù came to send the burial” — all extreme cases of ritual failure. Yet listing the wording without adding a single word — does this not lead readers to think ancient ritual was like this?
As for the zhài hánshǔ (sacrifice for cold-and-heat) ritual under: rebuking Zhèng Kāngchéng for “merely seeing the mùduó (wood-bell) circuit-decree paragraph matching with the Xià shū first month” thereby identifying first month as Xià-calendar — apparently not having seen the Suí shū Jīngjí zhì recording Kāngchéng’s Shū note as only twenty-nine chapters; the Wángjū míngtáng lǐ held that the Yuèlìng was Hàn-Confucian work, but identified as Lǚ Bùwéi’s composition without knowing on what basis — apparently not having seen the Lǚshì chūnqiū twelve-month record — also rather sparse-and-careless.
Chéng Mǐnzhèng’s Huángdūn jí contains a postface to this book: “Master Huángǔ composed more than ten works; after the master died they were all stolen by one person who appropriated them as his own. The Jīnglǐ bǔyì compilation is particularly precise. He took great pains to recover it; the original had been emended, but had additions only without abrasions, so the marks of true-and-false were unmistakable. The master’s great-grandson Wéndàhuì 文彚 worked hard to print it. He hand-collated it and reproduced the master’s portrait at the head, separately as one juan of appendix.” This book has appendices of guānwén (closing texts) and xíngzhuàng (deathbed-account) types, but no portrait, also no Mǐnzhèng’s postface — perhaps a later person obtained the altered version and printed it. As an old Yuán-text, the discussions still do not lose proper soundness; we provisionally retain it as one school’s account.
Respectfully revised and submitted, tenth month of the forty-sixth year of Qiánlóng [1781].
General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. General Reviser: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.
Abstract
The Jīnglǐ bǔyì is one of the principal late-Yuán Sānlǐ systematic compilations and the major early proximate predecessor of the late-imperial wǔlǐ-categorial ritual encyclopedias. Wāng Kèkuān’s editorial method — gathering all ritual-related material from the canonical corpus into a wǔlǐ (Five Rituals) classification — represents an explicit alternative to the chapter-by-chapter Zhū Xī Yílǐ jīngzhuàn tōngjiě approach. The Sìkù editors flag two specific methodological problems: (1) Wāng’s failure to label Chūnqiū-recorded ritual failures as such, leading to potentially misleading inclusion of failed practice alongside canonical practice; (2) Wāng’s loose use of the categories.
The transmission complication — Wāng’s manuscripts allegedly stolen and altered after his death; Chéng Mǐnzhèng’s recovery of the Jīnglǐ bǔyì still bearing alterations — is also worth noting, though the Sìkù editors retain the work as historically significant despite these issues.
The dating “1340–1369” brackets the most plausible composition window through the 1369 Zēng Lǔ preface (Hóngwǔ 2, a year before the Míng founding stabilised).
Translations and research
No substantial secondary literature located. Treated in surveys of Yuán-Míng Sānlǐ scholarship.
Other points of interest
The Zēng Lǔ 曾魯 preface dated Hóngwǔ 2 jǐyǒu (1369), included at the head of the work, frames the project as a Zhū Xī-school continuation: “Zhūzǐ then took the Zhōulǐ as ritual’s net-rope, the Yílǐ its proper classic, and the Lǐjì its meaning-explanation; thus created entries-and-divisions to gather ritual material — the framework of which Wāngshì of Qímén further expanded.” The preface is one of the more substantive late-Yuán to early-Míng meta-commentaries on the Zhū Xī ritual-classics project.
Links
- Chinaknowledge: http://www.chinaknowledge.de/Literature/Classics/yili.html