癸巳論語解

Guǐsì Lúnyǔ jiě 癸巳論語解

The Guisi-Year Glosses on the Analects

張栻 (Zhāng Shì, zì Jìngfū, 1133–1180)

About the work

A 10-juàn Lúnyǔ commentary by Zhāng Shì — completed in guǐsì (Qiándào 9, 1173), hence the title. Substantively important because Zhū Xī corresponded extensively with Zhāng Shì while the commentary was still in manuscript: the Zhūzǐ dàquánjí preserves Zhū Xī’s letters identifying 118 specific points where he disagreed with Zhāng’s readings, plus 2 textual emendations. Of these 118 disagreements, Zhāng Shì accepted only 23 in his final published text — the rest he kept against Zhū Xī’s protest. The two scholars’ continuing engagement on these points is one of the most thoroughly documented intellectual collaborations of the Southern Sòng.

Tiyao

We respectfully submit: Guǐsì Lúnyǔ jiě in 10 juàn — by Zhāng Shì 張栻 of the Sòng. The book was completed in Qiándào 9, guǐsì, hence its name. Examination of Zhūzǐ’s Dàquánjí preserves the words of his discussion-correspondence with Zhāng Shì on this book: he picks out 118 flaws and emends 2 character-errors. Collation of the present text against this list shows that Zhāng followed Zhū’s emendations on only 23 places, the rest standing as in the old draft — appearing somewhat stubborn and unyielding.

Yet on the chapter “fù zài, guān qí zhì 父在, 觀其志” (1.11), Zhūzǐ argues that the old reading [Zhāng’s two-fold gloss] should be replaced by the simpler one — going back and forth in over 200 words of discussion — yet when he composes the Lúnyǔ jízhù, he finally adopts Hé Yàn’s jíjiě citation of Kǒng Ānguó’s yì, agreeing precisely with Zhāng’s reading. This is the way of jiǎngxué houses: on a single character or phrase’s yìtóng, one must press to the limit, neither yielding nor temporising; in the give-and-take of pen-and-tongue, sometimes the wish to win-the-point overrides; but as one’s learning gradually matures and the temper levels, one comes to call right what is right and wrong what is wrong, no longer defending one’s earlier position. The depth of one’s zàoyì 造詣 differs by month and by year. So these 118 disagreements were merely the things each said at the time of mutual discussion — they should not be made grounds of reproach against Zhāng. And on the 23 points Zhāng did revise, he revised; on the rest both parties allowed the matter to stand, as if it had melted clear of itself, beginning in disagreement and ending in agreement. We need not now invoke the old draft of the Wénjí to use Zhū’s argument against Zhāng. — Respectfully revised, tenth month of the 41st year of Qiánlóng [1776].

General Compilers: Jǐ Yún, Lù Xīxióng, Sūn Shìyì. General Reviser: Lù Fèichí.

Abstract

The Guǐsì Lúnyǔ jiě and the parallel Guǐsì Mèngzǐ shuō (KR1h0022) are the two principal mature Sìshū commentaries by Zhāng Shì, completed in Qiándào 9 (1173), four years before he was forced from office by the conservative restoration. The 1173 date is the terminus ad quem (and effectively a quo) for the published text; revisions during the years thereafter are minor.

The 118-point Zhū Xī correspondence is the most striking feature of the work. Zhū Xī and Zhāng Shì had been close intellectual collaborators since Zhāng’s father Zhāng Jùn 張浚 (1097–1164) served as Zhū Xī’s senior patron at the Lóngxìng court; their correspondence on the Lǐxué doctrines of jìng 敬, zhōng 中, hóng 宏 was foundational for the Cheng-Zhu synthesis. The Sìkù editors are unusually penetrating in their reading of the disagreement: they distinguish between passing points of disagreement in the act of mutual discussion (which neither party intended as a permanent doctrinal break) and substantive doctrinal divergence (which would call for revision in the published text). On only 23 of the 118 points did Zhāng Shì agree retrospectively that Zhū Xī had a substantive case; the remaining 95 he treated as questions of genuine interpretive judgment where reasonable scholars might differ. Zhū Xī’s eventual acceptance of Zhāng Shì’s reading of Lúnyǔ 1.11 — even after pressing 200+ words of objection — is, the Sìkù editors argue, evidence of how this kind of slow mutual revision worked. The Sìkù verdict is that one cannot now use the early ZhūZhāng correspondence as a straightforward critique of the published Guǐsì Lúnyǔ jiě.

The work was first cut for print in Húnán (Zhāng Shì’s home region), under the auspices of the Yuèlù Academy 嶽麓書院 of which Zhāng Shì was the most influential head; the Sìkù WYG copy descends through Yuán manuscript transmission.

Translations and research

No standalone English translation. Modern Chinese: 楊世文 Zhāng Nán-xuān xiān-shēng wén-jí 張南軒先生文集 (Wén-shǐ-zhé 2010), with the Guǐsì Lúnyǔ jiě text. Studies: Cài Fāng-lù 蔡方鹿, Sòng-dài Sì-shū xué yánjiū, ch. 6 on Zhāng Shì; Tian Hao [Hoyt Tillman], Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi’s Ascendancy (UHP, 1992), ch. 3 on the Zhū-Zhāng-Lǚ Húnán-Mín conversation; Zhū-zǐ wén-jí letters 30–33 (the principal Zhāng Shì correspondence). Wilkinson §28.7.3.

Other points of interest

The 118-point Zhū Xī correspondence is one of the most thoroughly documented examples of pre-modern Chinese commentarial dialogue: a working scholar’s working notebook, preserved in the Wénjí of his interlocutor, against the published commentary of the original. Reading the Guǐsì Lúnyǔ jiě in parallel with Zhūzǐ wénjí letters 30–33 gives access to a moving target of late-12th-century Lǐxué exegetical method.

Links

• Wilkinson, Chinese History: A New Manual §28.7.3.
• Sòngshǐ 429 (Zhāng Shì biography).
• 全國漢籍データベース 四庫提要