Lǐjì shùzhù 禮記述註
A Restated Annotation of the Book of Rites
by 李光坡 (撰)
About the work
A mid-Kāngxī period summative Lǐjì commentary in 28 juàn by Lǐ Guāngpō 李光坡 (1651–1723), completed in Kāngxī wùzǐ 戊子 (Kāngxī 47 = 1708). The work is the Lǐjì member of Lǐ Guāngpō’s parallel Sānlǐ shùzhù commentary set, with companion volumes on the Zhōulǐ KR1d0019 and the Yílǐ KR1d0040. It departs editorially from both the standard HànTáng zhùshū line (Zhèng Xuán + Kǒng Yǐngdá) and from Chén Hào’s KR1d0059 examination commentary, taking a middle position drawn from systematic restatement of the zhùshū condensed for clarity, with SòngYuánMíng yìlǐ commentary added selectively. The Sìkù tíyào — the third tíyào in this series of three — is mixed: Lǐ Guāngpō has the gōngxīn (public mind) of refusing partisanship, but his criticism of Zhèng Xuán is over-stated, and the work, while clearer than Chén Hào, is less broad-and-prepared than the HànTáng zhùshū.
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Lǐjì shùzhù in twenty-eight juan was composed by Lǐ Guāngpō of the present dynasty. [Lǐ] Guāngpō has Zhōulǐ shùzhù, already catalogued. This compilation was completed in Kāngxī wùzǐ [1708]. The earlier preface says: “Beginning to read Mr Chén’s Jíshuō — I doubted it had not been thorough; reaching to read the zhùshū — further [I] doubted it was not sincere.” As [Lǐ Guāngpō’s] preface internally states: “the Zhèng school takes the chènwěi as base; the Kǒng [school] only follows the Zhèng — not setting forth other sayings — taking [it] as regrettable.” The Zhèng school’s basing on chènwěi is none more than the Jiāotèshēng’s jiāosì, the Jìfǎ’s dìzǔzōng; yet the Kǒng zhèngyì in every case takes the Wáng [Sù] and Zhèng [Xuán] two schools, each separately enumerating-and-listing. The other [matters] from the great affairs of the Wǔlǐ down to the small-text and single-graph [details] are in every case full of various-glosses; in the various canons’ zhùshū it is the most detailed-and-precise. How [is this] absurd-condemnation? Further the Lǐqì piān condemnation of later-generation fēngshàn (sealing-and-praying-at-Mount-Tài) [as something] that the Zhèng [school’s] basing on chènwěi opened up [for] the Qín emperor and Hàn Wǔ — [these were] several hundred years before [Zhèng] — was [Zhèng]‘s annotation what opened it up?
Further [Lǐ Guāngpō’s work] mostly reduces the zhùshū into completed [form]; rarely with new ideas — yet [he] indicates the zhùshū as the “old saying”. Whatever in this category — affronting the previous men, deceiving-and-betraying the later-generation [students]: how to display sincerity? Further [he] derides the HànTáng Confucians’ speaking lǐ (principle) as if dreaming — that this is [the case where the] ChéngZhū [school] advanced-men through zhīběn (knowing-the-base): “we are not of their portion.” Now on the Lǐyùn [chapter] [he] lightly takes [it] that it comes from Lǎoshì; [on] the Yuèjì [he] reduces its speaking-of-lǐ-without-reaching-shù (numerical-measurement). Other [places he] mostly indicates as Hàn-Confucian fùhuì (forced-fitting). Each section [he] does not back-and-forth its text-and-meaning; chapter-and-paragraph he does not interconnect their màiluò (vein-network). And in glossing the Lǐyùn’s běn rén yǐ jù (basing-on-rén to gather), [he] also says “ten-thousand differences one base, one base ten-thousand differences”; [glossing] the Zhòngní yánjū’s rén guǐ shén, rén zhāo mù — [he] also says “able to remove one’s-own private-ness so as to complete the heart’s virtue.” Wishing thus to be alongside surpassing the previous men — [I] fear [he is] unable to make them step back-and-yield etc. etc.
His discussion may be called holding-the-public-mind of right-and-wrong, sweeping-away the private-views of school-faction. Although [his] meaning takes simplicity-and-clarity as goal, not reaching the comprehensiveness of the Zhèng [Xuán] and Kǒng [Yǐngdá]; as for its essence, [it is] also broadly preserved here. Ultimately surpasses Chén Hào’s narrow-and-mean.
Respectfully revised and submitted, third 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 Lǐjì shùzhù completes Lǐ Guāngpō’s Sānlǐ shùzhù set (KR1d0019 Zhōulǐ shùzhù, KR1d0040 Yílǐ shùzhù, KR1d0071 this work), composed across more than a decade and presented as a coherent mid-Kāngxī alternative to both the zhùshū (regarded by Lǐ as too prolix and partisan to Zhèng Xuán’s chènwěi-influenced positions) and to Chén Hào (regarded as too narrow and superficial). The central editorial claim is zhōngpài (centrist) — a methodological stance that the Sìkù editors recognise as having “the public-mind of right-and-wrong, sweeping-away the private-views of school-faction” — and the tíyào’s overall verdict places the work above Chén Hào but below the HànTáng zhùshū.
The Sìkù editors’ detailed criticism is interesting on two counts: (i) they defend the HànTáng zhùshū tradition against Lǐ Guāngpō’s accusation of chènwěi contamination — explicitly noting that even where the Zhèng school’s annotations on jiāosì and dìzǔzōng draw on chènwěi sources, the Kǒng zhèngyì enumerates both the Wáng Sù and Zhèng Xuán schools side-by-side rather than committing partisanly to Zhèng — and (ii) they take Lǐ Guāngpō’s editorial gesture of citing the zhùshū as “the old saying” without explicit attribution as “deceiving-and-betraying the later students”. This is a significant editorial principle in the Sìkù tíyào tradition: explicit attribution of citations is a de facto test of scholarly integrity, and Lǐ Guāngpō is faulted for the same opacity that the tíyào faulted Chén Lì 陳櫟 (in KR1d0057) for in his treatment of Wèi Shí.
The dating is precise: the author’s preface gives Kāngxī wùzǐ (Kāngxī 47 = 1708) as completion.
Translations and research
- Qīng shǐ gǎo 清史稿 j. 480 (biographical material on Lǐ Guāng-pō and his family — younger brother of 李光地 Lǐ Guāng-dì, the senior Kāngxī-period minister and Cheng-Zhu philosopher).
- Benjamin A. Elman, From Philosophy to Philology (Harvard, 1984; rev. 2001) — situates the early-Qīng critique of Chén Hào and the rise of kǎo-zhèng method.
- Pèng Lín 彭林, Sānlǐ yánjiū rùmén 三禮研究入門 (Fùdàn dàxué chūbǎnshè, 2012) — covers Lǐ Guāng-pō’s Sānlǐ set.
Other points of interest
Lǐ Guāngpō’s Sānlǐ shùzhù set should be read alongside his elder brother Lǐ Guāngdì’s 李光地 (1642–1718) more famous classical-philosophical works, including the Zhūzǐ lǐzuǎn KR1d0091. The two brothers represent two different early-Qīng court-Confucian engagements with the Sānlǐ: Lǐ Guāngdì’s via Zhū Xī’s editorial framework, Lǐ Guāngpō’s via direct restatement of the canonical-commentarial tradition.
Links
- Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Guangpo
- Chinaknowledge: http://www.chinaknowledge.de/Literature/Classics/liji.html