Mèngzǐ zhuàn 孟子傳
Tradition on the Mencius
張九成 (Zhāng Jiǔchéng, zì Zǐsháo, 1092–1159)
About the work
A 29-juàn continuous Mèngzǐ commentary by Zhāng Jiǔchéng — composed during his fourteen-year exile to Nánānjūn 南安軍 (1141–1155) under the Qín Huì 秦檜 administration. Each Mèngzǐ chapter is treated as a single argumentative essay (rather than glossed line-by-line), and the doctrinal aim is to defend Mencius against the contemporary “anti-Mencian” current of Northern-Sòng yìshū — Féng Xiū 馮休’s Shān Mèngzǐ 删孟子, Lǐ Gòu’s 李覯 Chángyǔ 常語, Sīmǎ Guāng’s 司馬光 Yí Mèng 疑孟, Cháo Shuōzhī’s 晁說之 Dǐ Mèng 詆孟, and Zhèng Hòushū’s 鄭厚叔 Yìpǔ zhézhōng 藝圃折衷 — to which KR1h0014, by Yú Yǔnwén, is the parallel response. The SBCK reprint preserves a Sòng cutting under the title Zhāng zhuàngyuán Mèngzǐ zhuàn 張狀元孟子傳.
Tiyao
(From the Kyoto Zinbun digital Sìkù tíyào — the WYG copy in the KRP source tree lacks an _000.txt file.)
We respectfully submit: Mèngzǐ zhuàn in 29 juàn — by Zhāng Jiǔchéng 張九成 of the Sòng. Jiǔchéng, zì Zǐsháo 子韶, self-styled Wúgòu jūshì 無垢居士. His ancestors were of Kāifēng; the family relocated to Qiántáng. He took the jìnshì first place in Shàoxīng 2 (1132); appointed Zhèndōngjūn qiānpàn 鎮東軍僉判, then served through Zōngzhèng shǎoqīng 宗正少卿 兼 shìjiǎng 侍講 to Quán xíngbù shìláng 權刑部侍郎. He offended Qín Huì, was falsely charged with slander, and was demoted to dwell in Nánānjūn. After Qín Huì’s death he was recalled as governor of Wēnzhōu, then retired with a temple-fief; on his death he was post. ennobled Tàishī Chóngguógōng 太師崇國公 with posthumous title Wénzhōng 文忠; biography in Sòngshǐ.
The Sòngshǐ yìwénzhì records his Mèngzǐ shíyí 孟子拾遺 in 1 juàn, now appended to the Héngpǔ jí. The Wénxiàn tōngkǎo records his Mèngzǐ jiě in 14 juàn; Zhū Yízūn’s Jīngyì kǎo notes “unseen”. The present text is from a Southern-Sòng old cutting, and is in fact called Mèngzǐ zhuàn, not Mèngzǐ jiě; moreover, the Jìnxīn piān is missing, but with the Gàozǐ chapters it already runs to 29 juàn — far beyond 14. The Tōngkǎo report is likely a transmission error.
Jiǔchéng’s learning came from Yáng Shí 楊時 [the Sòng Dàoxué southern transmitter]; but he was also fond of conversation with the Chán monk Zōnggǎo 大慧宗杲, and so was not free of admixture of Buddhism. The Xīn zhuàn 心傳 and Rìxīn liǎng lù 日新兩錄 he composed largely use Chán-機 to gloss Confucian lǐ; hence Zhū Xī’s Záxué biàn 雜學辨 has many objections to him.
But in this commentary he speaks at the right moment: at his time Féng Xiū 馮休 wrote Shān Mèngzǐ, Lǐ Gòu 李覯 Chángyǔ, Sīmǎ Guāng Yí Mèng, Cháo Shuōzhī Dǐ Mèng, Zhèng Hòushū Yìpǔ zhézhōng — all set themselves to push Mencius down. He therefore singles out the discrimination of yì and lì, of jīng (the constant) and quán (the contingent), and argues that Mencius’s “honouring the [legitimate] king and discountenancing the hegemons” did great service, that his “putting down disorder and reverting to the right” had great utility. Each zhāng is treated as one essay, focused on bringing out the broad import, not the philological glossing of phrases — hence the writing is ductile and long-running, much like a lùn 論 essay. There is much discussion of methods of governance, less of methods of mind — and so the language is close to actual affairs, with no occasion for slipping into Buddhist kōngjì 空寂 vacancy. Of all of Jiǔchéng’s writings, this is the most disciplined.
On “cǎojiè kòuchóu 草芥寇讎” (Mèngzǐ 4B.3 — “the prince treats the people as grass and weeds, and the people treat the prince as a foe and an enemy”) he says: the ruler must understand this principle, but the minister must not entertain such a thought. On “guān qí móuzǐ 觀其眸子” (Mèngzǐ 4A.15) he says: the discrimination of bright pupil and clouded pupil is the discrimination of upright and crooked, not merely of clear and obscure; and one must have Mencius’s own learning before one can sort the upright from the crooked — a sense beyond the literal text.
Wáng Ruòxū 王若虛’s Húnán lǎorén jí 滹南老人集 contains a Mèngzǐ biànhuò 孟子辨惑 in 1 juàn. Wáng’s autobiographical preface says: the Mèngzǐ teaches as the occasion arises and does not insist on routine — only to lead people to the good. Sīmǎ Jūnshí [Sīmǎ Guāng]‘s Yí Mèng of more than ten piān is shallow and not worth discussion. Sū Shì’s Lúnyǔ shuō opposes the Mèngzǐ in eight places — these arguments are slightly better, but on close examination also miss the original sense. Zhāng Jiǔchéng is reckoned the most learned, and yet here too there are points where he cannot fully reach: as on “practising rén-government and so kinging it” — where the king does not arise — Wáng complains that Jiǔchéng twists the gloss, refusing to speak plainly, and merely says “kingship is the king’s Way”. This is yet of the manner of Zhèng Hòushū. As on the Qí Xuān questioning TāngWǔ, the discrimination of “rénrén”, of food and sex — Jiǔchéng leaves these aside without taking up the question, etc. — Wáng acknowledges Jiǔchéng above all others, but still has points unsatisfied.
But “xíng rénzhèng ér wáng” — Jiǔchéng knew the plain sense of the words: he was not unable to gloss; rather, Mencius’s intent was to staunch the warfare of his own day, while Jiǔchéng’s intent was to forestall later usurpation and disorder. Even though the gloss is “Yǐngshū Yānshuō 郢書燕說” [a tendentious reading], it is not without service to the world’s way. As to TāngWǔ fàngfá 湯武放伐 [Mencius 1B.8 on the regicide] and rénrén (the discrimination of right relation in food and sex), where he lets the doubt stand — that precisely shows how non-frivolous his argument is. These are not Jiǔchéng’s faults.
(Zhènběn — palace-archive copy.)
Abstract
The Mèngzǐ zhuàn is the most considered single statement of Zhāng Jiǔchéng’s Lǐxué — composed during his Nánān exile, in deliberate response to the anti-Mencian wave that had crested in late Northern-Sòng intellectual life: Lǐ Gòu’s Chángyǔ, Sīmǎ Guāng’s Yí Mèng, Cháo Shuōzhī’s Dǐ Mèng, and Zhèng Hòushū’s Yìpǔ zhézhōng (compare the parallel response of Yú Yǔnwén in KR1h0014). Where the anti-Mencians questioned the yìlì 義利 distinction and the legitimacy of regicide-by-righteous-revolt (TāngWǔ fàngfá), Zhāng’s strategy is to stand the Mèngzǐ on its honouring of the [legitimate] king (zūnwáng 尊王) and to read each chapter as a self-standing lùn-essay. The 29-juàn structure — much greater than the 14 juàn of the lost Mèngzǐ jiě recorded in Wénxiàn tōngkǎo — confirms that the zhuàn is a separate, more elaborated work than the early jiě; and the lost Jìnxīn chapter (Sìkù note: missing in the transmitted text) means that the work as we have it covers only the first six chapters.
Despite the Sìkù editors’ praise, Zhū Xī attacked Zhāng Jiǔchéng’s general philosophical position vigorously in his Záxué biàn 雜學辨. Yet in respect of this particular work — the disciplined rebuttal of the anti-Mencian critics — even the orthodox Cheng-Zhu transmission was forced to acknowledge a certain debt.
The work was first cut for print in the Southern Sòng, in the Wú 吳 region (probably under Zhāng Jiǔchéng’s son’s auspices); the SBCK reprint of the surviving Sòng dàzì běn preserves the original 29-juàn configuration and the Wú-cutting attribution. The WYG-line text is a YuánMíng manuscript transmission.
Translations and research
No English translation. Modern critical edition: 楊天宇 Mèngzǐ zhuàn jiàoshì 孟子傳校釋 (Wén-shǐ-zhé 2006). Studies: Cài Fāng-lù 蔡方鹿, Sòng-dài Sì-shū xué yánjiū, ch. 5 on Zhāng Jiǔchéng; Sòng Mào-rán 宋茂然, Zhāng Jiǔchéng Mèngzǐ-xué yánjiū (Tái-běi 2002). Western: brief notice in surveys of Sòng Neo-Confucian Sì-shū hermeneutics; no monograph.
Other points of interest
The work is striking for its essayistic rather than glossatorial method — each chapter is a self-standing lùn 論. This anticipates Wáng Yángmíng’s Chuánxí lù 傳習錄 conception of Lǐxué commentary as discursive thinking-through rather than line-by-line gloss, and stands in marked contrast to the philological-method of Zhū Xī’s contemporary Mèngzǐ jízhù in KR1h0015.
Links
- Sòngshǐ 374 (Zhāng Jiǔchéng biography).
- 全國漢籍データベース 四庫提要
- Cài Fānglù 蔡方鹿, Sòngdài Sìshū xué yánjiū.