Lǐjì xùnyì zéyán 禮記訓義擇言
Selected Sayings on the Training-and-Meaning of the Book of Rites
by 江永 (撰)
About the work
A mid-Qián-lóng period selective Lǐjì commentary in 8 juàn by Jiāng Yǒng 江永 (1681–1762), covering chapters from Tángōng through Zájì (i.e., the principal mid-canonical chapters where ritual-detail problems are most acute). For each disputed passage, Jiāng Yǒng systematically lays out the divergent readings of the principal commentators and selects (zé 擇) what he judges the correct one — a methodologically distinctive approach that contrasts with the standard jíshuō (collected expositions) format. The work represents one of Jiāng Yǒng’s principal Sānlǐ contributions, alongside his much larger KR1d0086 Lǐshū gāngmù (85 juan covering all Sānlǐ) and his short Yílǐ shìgōng zēngzhù KR1d0047 and Shēnyī kǎowù KR1d0075 monographs.
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Lǐjì xùnyì zéyán in eight juan was composed by Jiāng Yǒng of the present dynasty. [Jiāng] Yǒng has Zhōulǐ yíyì jǔyào, already catalogued. This book — from Tángōng to Zájì — for the annotation-houses’ variant-readings selects the correct one, making decisions; with Chén Hào’s annotation [it] has considerable disagreement. Yet [his] discussions are mostly precise-and-tight.
[E.g. at Tángōng’s Yīn liàn ér fù, Zhōu zúkū ér fù]: Lǚshì 呂氏 says: fùjì (joining-sacrifice) — namely takes its tablet fù and stores it in the ancestral temple; once mourning ceremony is removed, then transfers to the new temple. [Jiāng] Yǒng — basing on the Zuǒshì zhuàn “tè jì yú zhǔ; zhēng cháng dí yú miào” — says: after fù the tablet is returned to the bìngōng (mortuary palace); on the completion of mourning [the spirit] then transfers to the new temple. Citing the DàDài Lǐ Zhūhóu qiānmiào lǐ “carrying the clothing-and-regalia from the miào and transferring to the new miào” — this miào is in fact the bìngōng. Now examining the Gùmìng “the various lords exit the miào-gate, awaiting” — the Kǒng zhuàn says “where the bìn is placed is called miào”. Further the Yílǐ Shìsānglǐ says: “the wū (shaman) stops at the miào-gate outside” — the annotation says “wherever in the palace there are spirits-and-gods is called miào”; Jiǎ’s shū says: “miào-gate — when the shì dies in the shìshì, because spirits-and-gods are present, [it] is called miào — therefore naming the shìqǐn as miào”. Then what the DàDài Lǐ says about “from the miào” — is in fact “from the bìngōng”, not “from the ancestral temple”. [Jiāng] Yǒng’s exposition has basis; can resolve the disputes among Chéng [Yí], Zhāng [Zǎi] and other Confucians.
[At Yùzǎo’s xí qiú bù rù gōngmén: detailed text-critical analysis siding with Jiāng Yǒng’s reading against Kǒng Yǐngdá’s shū — which Jiāng correctly identifies as misreading the canonical Yùzǎo on the question of whether the xíyī contains a zhōngyī.]
[At Zájì’s rú sānnián zhī sāng zé jì qǐ, qí liàn xiáng jiē xíng: argues that the canonical phrase jì-character is the key to the correct interpretation; cites the upper section yǒu fù zhī sāng etc.]
In general, in the Lǐjì’s difficult-and-doubtful places, [Jiāng] Yǒng’s selections in this book — most can be inscribed-into-stone. Therefore [we] catalogue and preserve [it].
Respectfully revised and submitted, [date].
General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅.
Abstract
Jiāng Yǒng’s Lǐjì xùnyì zéyán is one of the most authoritative kǎozhèng contributions to Lǐjì scholarship in the high-Qīng period — and the Sìkù tíyào’s endorsement is among the strongest given to any work in the entire Lǐjì sub-class: “in the Lǐjì’s difficult-and-doubtful places, [Jiāng] Yǒng’s selections in this book — most can be inscribed-into-stone.” The work’s editorial method — gather variant readings, evaluate them through evidential cross-citation across the Sānlǐ and the canonical-commentarial corpus, then select the correct one with explicit argumentation — embodies the high-Qīng Wǎnpài 皖派 evidential-school methodology at its mature form, and the work served as a model for the subsequent Qīng-evidential Lǐjì tradition culminating in Sūn Xīdàn 孫希旦’s Lǐjì jíjiě.
The dating bracket 1720–1762 reflects Jiāng Yǒng’s adult scholarly career; the work cannot be tied to a precise year. Jiāng Yǒng was unusually long-lived (1681–1762) and his Sānlǐ corpus was composed across decades.
The tíyào’s detailed examples — the bìngōng / miào identification, the xíqiú / zhōngyī layered-clothing question, the fù-after-sānnián sacrifice question — show the working method: each disputed passage is anchored by cross-citations to the Yílǐ Shìsānglǐ, the Zuǒ zhuàn, the Shū jīng Gùmìng, the DàDài Lǐ, the Hànshū official-vehicle treatise, the Shìmíng and other primary materials. Jiāng’s evidential method is both broader (covering more primary sources) and more discriminating (distinguishing genuine canonical witness from later commentary) than Lǐ Guāngpō’s KR1d0071 or Fāng Bāo’s KR1d0072 parallel commentaries.
Translations and research
- Benjamin A. Elman, From Philosophy to Philology (Harvard, 1984; rev. 2001) — situates Jiāng Yǒng in the Wǎn-pài evidential-school tradition.
- Qīng shǐ gǎo 清史稿 j. 481 (biography of Jiāng Yǒng).
- Pèng Lín 彭林, Sānlǐ yánjiū rùmén 三禮研究入門 (Fùdàn dàxué chūbǎnshè, 2012) — covers Jiāng Yǒng’s Sānlǐ corpus.
- Sūn Xīdàn 孫希旦, Lǐjì jíjiě 禮記集解 (Zhōnghuá shūjú, 1989) — draws extensively on Jiāng Yǒng’s selections.
Other points of interest
The Sìkù tíyào identifies Jiāng Yǒng as the most reliable single Qīng-evidential authority on disputed Lǐjì readings — a verdict that holds in modern Chinese classical scholarship as well: most modern punctuated editions of the Lǐjì (Wáng Wénjǐn et al., Bēijīng dàxué chūbǎnshè 1999; Yáng Tiānyǔ, Shànghǎi gǔjí 1997) cite Jiāng Yǒng’s textual selections at the points where they engage with classical-textual disputes.