讀左日鈔

Dú Zuǒ rì chāo 讀左日鈔

Daily Excerpts from Reading the Zuǒ Commentary

by 朱鶴齡 (撰)

About the work

The Dú Zuǒ rì chāo 讀左日鈔 in 12 juǎn (with a 2-juǎn supplement bǔ 補) is the Zuǒzhuàn commentary of Zhū Hèlíng 朱鶴齡 (1606–1683, zì Chángrú 長孺, hào Yúān 愚菴, of Wújiāng 吳江, Sūzhōu prefecture). The title rì chāo 日鈔 (“daily excerpts”) is generic to the late-Míng / early-Qīng note-making tradition; the work supplements and corrects Dù Yù’s 杜預 Chūnqiū jīng zhuàn jí jiě (KR1e0002) by drawing principally on Zhào Fǎng 趙汸 (KR1e0066 etc.), Lù Càn 陸粲 (KR1e0077), Fù Xùn 傅遜 (KR1e0084), Shào Bǎo 邵寳, and Wáng Qiáo 王樵 (KR1e0081) — with significant supplementation in the appended 2-juǎn bǔ from Gù Yánwǔ’s 顧炎武 manuscript notes (sent to Zhū from Huáyīn in 1660). The work is essentially the Sūzhōu Zuǒzhuàn corollary to Gù’s Bǔ zhèng (KR1e0096) — the two were composed roughly contemporaneously, in friendship and exchange, and the bǔ in particular preserves a version of Gù’s evolving notes prior to the completion of his own work.

Tiyao

The Sìkù tíyào may be rendered as follows:

We have respectfully examined the Dú Zuǒ rì chāo in 12 juǎn with the bǔ in 2 juǎn. By Zhū Hèlíng of the present dynasty. Hèlíng has the Shàngshū bì zhuàn 尚書埤傳 (KR1b0051), separately catalogued. This book takes various commentators’ views to supplement and correct the gaps and errors of Dù Yù’s Chūnqiū jīng zhuàn jí jiě, and of Zhào Fǎng, Lù Càn, Fù Xùn, Shào Bǎo, and Wáng Qiáo — the five — adopts the most. Roughly: of those who collect older readings, seven-tenths; of those who put forward independent views, three-tenths — hence the title chāo. The 2-juǎn bǔ uses Gù Yánwǔ’s readings extensively. Yánwǔ’s Dù jiě bǔ zhèng in 3 juǎn is itself complete; this work draws not even a tenth from it. Its fánlì notes that “in the autumn of gēngshēn (1660), Yánwǔ from Huáyīn sent me several dozen Zuǒzhuàn notes” — at the time, his Dù jiě bǔ zhèng had not yet been completed.

Hèlíng condemns Lín Yáosǒu’s 林堯叟 Yīnyì as crude and adopts only three or four of his entries — a sound enough position. As to Kǒng Yǐngdá’s Zhèngyì, every household has read it and it has long been listed in the official curriculum; one cannot, having read the zhù, fail to see the shū. Yet Hèlíng compiles long stretches of citation [from the Zhèngyì] — this is somewhat redundant. As to Xiānggōng year 9’s zhuàn — “the intercalary month should read ménwǔrì 門五日” — this is originally Dù’s zhù, and to cite it as a supplement to Dù is putting a bed atop a bed. Other points: at Dìnggōng year 8 zhuàn he says Gōngshān Bùniǔ’s intent was to extend the gōng power, while Yáng Hǔ’s intent was not to extend the gōng power, only to use the gōng power to control the Three Huán for his own benefit; at Dìnggōng year 12 zhuàn he says Gōngshān Bùniǔ and Shūsūn Zhé and others, occupying Fèi, had already rebelled — those who say it was a rebellion against Jìshì only and not against Lǔ are wrong; they had long observed the Three Huán’s un-subjectness and copied it, on the pretext of “extending the gōng power” — that is, on the same matter, his praise-and-blame turn around. Likewise at Zhuānggōng year 22 zhuàn he cites the Shǐjì zhèngyì on wèi yáng xùn nǚ 未羊巽女 belonging to Jiāng-surname; at Zhāogōng year 9 zhuàn he cites Wāng Wǎn’s 汪琬 reading attacking Zhāng Shǒujié 張守節 for missing Zuǒshì’s purport — that is, on the same matter his selection-and-rejection diverge.

These are unavoidable minor flaws. But: cases like citing Dòu Xīn 鬭辛 to refute Wǔ Yuán’s revenge-as-tiān jīng dì yì (heavenly principle and earthly meaning) — something a thousand years of rú had not pointed out — citing Dìnggōng year 5 and Wéngōng year 17 zhuàn as evidence that Gōngxùchí 公壻池 was not Jìnhóu’s son-in-law; citing the Tán Gōng 檀弓 Yuèrén tiáo Wèi jiāngjūn Wénzǐ event as evidence that the Qín envoys’ giving of the xí shroud to Xīgōng’s mother Chéngfēng (?) was a real gift; citing the Hàn shū Wáng Jiā zhuàn as evidence that “Qū Dǎng shī zhī 屈蕩尸之” should be read “hù zhī 户之” — these too have evidence. Although flaws-and-merits are mixed, gathering the strengths of many and adjudicating with new readings — for the reader of the Zuǒzhuàn, this work is not unhelpful. Respectfully checked and submitted, Qiánlóng 46 (1781), intercalary fifth month. Editors-in-chief Jǐ Yún, Lù Xīxióng, Sūn Shìyì; chief proof-reader Lù Fèichí.

Abstract

Zhū’s Dú Zuǒ rì chāo is the systematic, daily-note synthesis of late-Míng evidential Zuǒzhuàn scholarship that ran in parallel — and in friendly exchange — with Gù Yánwǔ’s Dù jiě bǔ zhèng (KR1e0096). The two works share evidential method, draw from many of the same YuánMíngQīng predecessors (Zhào Fǎng, Lù Càn, Wáng Qiáo, etc.), and were composed in roughly the same decade (Zhū’s fánlì — preserved in the front-matter — is dated xīnyǒu 辛酉 [1681], the bǔ-volume reflects Zhū’s incorporation of the manuscript notes Gù sent him from Huáyīn in 1660). The dating bracket here reflects: lower bound 1661 (the earliest extended consultation of Gù’s notes); upper bound 1683 (Zhū’s death). The fánlì explicitly states that Zhū’s Chūnqiū jí shuō 春秋集說 — to which the Dú Zuǒ rì chāo is the Zuǒzhuàn companion — had been previously composed and is referenced for the broader Chūnqiū exegesis.

The work’s distinctive feature is its synthetic posture: where Gù in the Bǔ zhèng operates surgically — entry-by-entry corrections of Dù — Zhū in the Rì chāo operates synoptically, weaving multiple commentators’ positions into a daily-note running commentary. The Sìkù tíyào is critical of certain inconsistencies (the same person evaluated differently across passages, redundant Zhèngyì citation), but ratifies the work as a useful synthesis “for the reader of the Zuǒzhuàn” (yú dú Zuǒzhuàn zhě yào yì bù wéi wú bǔ 於讀左傳者要亦不為無補).

The fánlì is a small methodological gem: Zhū declares (1) that the Zuǒ is fundamentally a historical narrative cǎo jīng — solving the jīng by the shǐ — but with errors of judgment about persons and events that the Dàn Zhù — Zhào Kuāng — Liú Chàng — Yè Mèngdé — Zhào Fǎng — Lù Càn — Wáng Qiáo line had already detected; (2) that of the jīng not recording what the zhuàn details, and the zhuàn preserving what the jīng omits, one extracts the bǐxuē purport — citing Chén Fùliáng 陳傅良 (KR1e0038) and Zhào Fǎng as authorities for the principle of “interpreting from what is not written”; (3) that Dù Yù gets fundamental help from Kǒng Yǐngdá’s Zhèngyì but the zhuànzhù of Zhèng Xuán, Jiǎ Kuí, Fú Qián, Wáng Sù, Liú Xuàn cannot be wholly discarded — and so are widely cited in adjudication; (4) that Lín Yáosǒu’s Yīnyì is generally cut, since the late-Míng commercial editions (fángkè) have hopelessly intermixed Dù’s zhù with Lín’s gloss (the very practice criticised in the Sìkù notice on the Zuǒzhuàn DùLín hé zhù KR1e0092). The fánlì concludes by acknowledging the Hǎiyú Chénshì (Chén family of Hǎiyú) compilation of Zuǒshì bīngfǎ and pointing forward to a hoped-for future scholar who would integrate Zhū’s notes with a complete Zuǒ annotation.

Translations and research

• Cheng Yuanmin 程元敏, Chūnqiū Zuǒ-shì jīng zhuàn jí jiě xù shù lùn 春秋左氏經傳集解序述論 (Tāiběi: 學海 1991) — substantial coverage of the Qīng Zuǒ-zhuàn tradition.
• Yáng Xiànghuá 楊向華, Qīng-dài Chūnqiū xué shǐ 清代春秋學史 (Bēijīng: Zhōngguó shèhuì kēxué chūbǎnshè 2014).
• Lǐ Wéi-xióng 李偉雄, Zuǒ-zhuàn xué shǐ gǎo 左傳學史稿 (Tāiběi: Wǔ-nán 1995).
• Durrant, Stephen, Wai-yee Li, and David Schaberg, trans. Zuo Tradition / Zuozhuan 左傳 (University of Washington Press 2016) — current standard English translation of the Zuǒzhuàn.

Other points of interest

The fánlì’s frank report — “Yánwǔ in the autumn of gēngshēn sent me several dozen Zuǒzhuàn notes; this work was already half-printed and could not be incorporated; later I drew them together with extracts from the three zhuàn and three rituals’ commentaries into the present bǔ in two juǎn” — is one of the more precise documentary witnesses we have to the production-and-exchange of textual scholarship between two of the most important early-Qīng evidential scholars (Gù Yánwǔ and Zhū Hèlíng). It also documents the Bǔ zhèng (KR1e0096) as a work that grew over Gù’s last two decades — by 1661 it was a body of notes circulated in manuscript among friends, and was completed and circulated only in his last decade.

Links

• Sìkù yǐng yìn Wényuāngé: V175.1, p1.
• CBDB record for 朱鶴齡: id 74329.
• CBDB record for 顧炎武: id 34252.