聞分館君 Ask BunKanKun

十三經義疑

4 min read

Text ID
KR1g0023
Date
1730–1745
Dynasty
清

Shí sān jīng yì yí 十三經義疑

Doubts on the Doctrines of the Thirteen Classics by 吳浩 (撰)

About the work

A 12-juàn mid-Qing compendium of textual and doctrinal doubts on the Shísān jīng zhùshū, by the Sōngjiāng scholar Wú Hào (Yǎngzhāi). The work covers cruxes across the Thirteen Classics, marshalling the HànTáng zhùshū tradition together with later commentators (SòngYuánMíng) and adjudicating in the author’s own opinion. The Sìkù compilers rate it as a work of solid evidential foundation though falling short of the great early-Qing achievements (Gù, Yán, Hú).

Tiyao

Your servants having respectfully examined: the Shí sān jīng yì yí in 12 juàn was composed by Wú Hào of our reigning dynasty. Hào’s style name was Yǎngzhāi; he was a man of Huátíng. This book takes the zhù (annotations) and jiān (footnotes) of the various Classics and collates them with considerable diligence. As, on the Dú lǐ yí tú of Jì Běn 季本, who treats the “ten-thousand men” of Zhōulǐ as one jūn (army), Hào follows him: on the Shī’s Gōng chē qiān shèng, gōng tú sān wàn 公車千乘,公徒三萬, he does not follow Zhèng’s jiān — that the round number is a stylistic flourish — and instead cites the Sī mǎ fǎ text: “one chariot totals 30 men”, to fix that 1,000 chariots = 30,000 men. He thus suspects that Jiǎ Gōngyàn’s subcommentary’s interpretation of this fǎ (rule) as the metropolitan-area institution is forced.

[The tíyào enumerates a number of his readings, both correct and incorrect, organized as: (a) successful philological points — e.g. citing the Shuōwén on dàifū with stone for tomb-spirit, citing the Gǔliáng yáng shū on fù zuò (re-presented sacrifice), etc.; (b) less convincing readings — e.g. confusing the zōng rén of the qīngdàifū and the zōng rén of the tiānzǐ zhūhóu into one figure.]

The general impression: in zhùshū studies he has not fully assimilated the body of doctrine, but his investigative work and citation has solid foundations. Compared with the verbal-pirates and empty-bellied classical preachers who lecture on the Classics from second-hand yǔlù alone, his work is far superior. Respectfully collated and submitted in the ninth month of the forty-fifth year of Qiánlóng (1780). — Editors-in-chief: your servants Jǐ Yún, Lù Xīxióng, Sūn Shìyì. — Chief proof-reader: your servant Lù Fèichí.

Abstract

The Shí sān jīng yì yí is a competent if not foundational mid-Qing Shí sān jīng compendium. Three points of distinction:

(1) The systematic structure. The work runs through the Thirteen Classics in canonical order with a distinct yí yí 疑義 (doubt-resolution) framework: each entry identifies a textual or doctrinal crux, presents the principal commentaries, weighs them, and gives Wú’s own resolution. The format anticipates Ruǎn Yuán’s much more comprehensive Shísān jīng zhùshū jiào kān jì (1815) but at a rougher level of execution.

(2) The Sìkù verdict’s level. The Sìkù compilers’ assessment — Wú as “not yet thoroughly assimilating the zhùshū” but with “solid foundations” — is the standard view. Wú is a workmanlike Yōngzhèng-era classical scholar, neither a major innovator nor a mere copyist.

(3) The dating bracket. The self-preface gives no date; Wú’s lifedates are unknown. Internal evidence (the citation of Yōngzhèng-era publications) places the composition in the 1730s; the work was incorporated into the Sìkù in 1780. The bracket here (1730–1745) reflects the most defensible compositional window.

Translations and research

  • Sōngjiāng fǔ zhì 松江府志 — local gazetteer with a brief biographical entry on Wú Hào.
  • Elman, Benjamin A. From Philosophy to Philology. HUP, 1984. Background on the Yōngzhèng-era kǎo-zhèng generation between Gù-Yán-Hú and Wáng-Duàn.

Other points of interest

The work is a useful test-case for the broader Yōngzhèng-era pattern of competent, regionally-rooted classical scholarship being preserved in the Sìkù despite not breaking new methodological ground — a real strength of the Sìkù project.

Graph View

Backlinks