聞分館君 Ask BunKanKun

上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書‧孔子詩論

6 min read

Text ID
KR2p0159
Date
-450–-300
Dynasty
周

Shànghǎi Bówùguǎn Cáng Zhànguó Chǔ Zhúshū‧Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書‧孔子詩論

Warring States Chu Bamboo Texts at the Shanghai Museum — Confucius’s Discourse on the Odes (孔子詩論 Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn)

(attributed to 孔子 Kǒngzǐ as speaker; anonymous scribe)

About the work

The Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn 孔子詩論 is a 29-slip Warring States manuscript from the Shanghai Museum’s collection of Chu bamboo texts (上博楚竹書 Shàngbó Chǔ Zhúshū), published in Volume 1 (2001) of the nine-volume series Shànghǎi Bówùguǎn Cáng Zhànguó Chǔ Zhúshū 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書 edited by 馬承源. The text preserves a series of evaluative remarks attributed to Confucius 孔子 on individual Odes (Shī 詩), assigning each a moral and emotional quality using the formula “《X》之…” (“The quality of Ode X is…”). It is the earliest known Chinese critical commentary on the Shī, predating by centuries the scholastic exegetical tradition that culminated in the received Máo 毛 commentary and its prefaces (Máo shī xù 毛詩序).

Abstract

Provenance. The Shanghai Museum purchased 1,437 Warring States Chu bamboo slips from a Hong Kong dealer in 1994; the slips originally came from Jiangling 江陵, Hubei Province. The full corpus comprises approximately 35,000 characters across 80-odd texts, published in nine volumes between 2001 and 2012. The Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn appeared in Volume 1 (2001), along with the KR2p0160 Zīyī 緇衣 and Xìngqíng lùn 性情論. The slips are written in the Chu script of the late Warring States period, datable paleographically to c. 300 BCE or slightly earlier. The point of origin — Jiangling, the ancient Chu capital region — and the Chu paleographic features are uncontested; the specific tomb has not been identified.

Content. The Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn opens with fragmentary discussion of the role of poetry in giving expression to will (zhì 志) and emotion (qíng 情): “Poetry leaves no residue of will (shī wú lìn zhì 詩亡吝志), music leaves no residue of emotion (yuè wú lìn qíng 樂亡吝情), written language leaves no residue of words…” Confucius is then introduced as direct speaker (“孔子曰”). His commentary proceeds through specific poems from the Guófēng 國風 and Dàyǎ 大雅 / Xiǎoyǎ 小雅 sections: 《杕杜》 is glossed in terms of longing and emotional expression; 《木瓜》 (Mùguā) is linked to reciprocal gift-giving and the ineradicability of social bonds; 《關雎》 (Guānjū) is characterized by “emotional reformation” (gǎi 改) that redirects desire through ritual; 《樛木》 (Jiūmù) points to the blessings accruing to a worthy husband; 《漢廣》 (Hànguǎng) illustrates knowing the limits of what is attainable; 《鵲巢》 (Quècháo) speaks of the parting characteristic of marriage; 《甘棠》 (Gāntáng) praises Duke Shào 邵公 through reverence for the tree under which he sat; 《綠衣》 (Lǜyī) expresses longing for one now gone; 《燕燕》 (Yānyān) speaks of solitary grief. The text also contains evaluations of 《蟋蟀》, 《北風》, 《卷耳》, 《牆有茨》, 《小弁》, 《雨無正》, 《節南山》, 《黃鳥》, 《菁菁者莪》, 《鹿鳴》, and several dà and xiǎo ya pieces. Confucius then singles out six pieces — 《宛丘》, 《猗嗟》, 《鳲鳩》, 《文王》, 《清廟》, 《烈文》 — with brief evaluations, and finally discusses the Sòng 訟 (i.e. Zhōu Sòng 周頌), Dà Xià 大夏, Xiǎo Xià 小夏, and Bāng Fēng 邦風 (= Guó Fēng) in terms of mood and function.

Dating. The manuscript is dateable on paleographic grounds to c. 350–300 BCE. The underlying discourse it preserves may represent an early Confucian tradition of Odes exegesis, possibly from the mid- to late Warring States period (roughly 400–250 BCE). notBefore -450 and notAfter -300 provide a defensible bracket.

Relationship to received texts. The Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn has no exact counterpart in received literature, though it overlaps in approach with the received Máo prefaces and with discussions in Lǐjì 禮記 chapters such as 《孔子閒居》. The characterizations of individual odes sometimes diverge strikingly from the received Máo shī 毛詩 interpretive tradition. A closely related version of the same tradition is visible in the 《孔子閒居》 chapter. The identification of the speaker as Confucius (“孔子曰”) is a common feature of late Warring States Confucian literature; whether genuine Confucian tradition is transmitted here or whether this is an early Confucian composition attributed to the Master is debated.

Significance. Wilkinson (Chinese History: A New Manual, §58.4) notes that the Shanghai Museum slips “include a text of the Yi that predates the one found at Mawangdui by 100 years and a hitherto unknown commentary (by Confucius?) on the Shi,” directly referring to this text. The Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn is among the most discussed texts from the Shanghai Museum collection, prompting extensive debate about the early history of Odes hermeneutics.

Translations and research

  • 馬承源主編. 《上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書》第一冊. 上海古籍出版社, 2001. (editio princeps, with transcription and commentary by Zhū Fènghan 朱鳳瀚 et al.)
  • 俞紹宏、張青松主編. 《上海博物館藏戰國楚簡集釋》第一冊. 社會科學文獻出版社, 2020.
  • Shaughnessy, Edward L. Rewriting Early Chinese Texts. SUNY Press, 2006. Ch. 1: “The Editing of Archaeologically Recovered Manuscripts and Its Implications for the Study of Received Texts.” Includes discussion of the Shanghai Museum corpus.
  • Kern, Martin. “The Odes in Excavated Manuscripts.” In Martin Kern, ed., Text and Ritual in Early China. University of Washington Press, 2005, pp. 149–193. Comprehensive treatment of the Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn in comparison with received Odes scholarship.
  • Kern, Martin. “Kongzi and the ‘Odes’: On the Occasion of the Publication of the Kongzi Shilun.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 125.1 (2005): 47–65.
  • van Zoeren, Steven. Poetry and Personality: Reading, Exegesis, and Hermeneutics in Traditional China. Stanford UP, 1991. (Background; predates the discovery but still valuable for context.)
  • Meyer, Dirk. Philosophy on Bamboo: Text and the Production of Meaning in Early China. Brill, 2011. (Methodological context for early Chinese manuscripts.)

Other points of interest

The text raises the question of whether Confucius had a distinctive interpretive approach to the Odes that diverged from the moralizing allegorism of the received Máo tradition. Several scholars (notably Kern and Shaughnessy) have argued that the Kǒngzǐ Shīlùn preserves a significantly earlier and more affectively direct mode of Odes reading. The slip ordering and the attribution of individual evaluations have been extensively debated, as the text is fragmentary and the slip sequence is not unambiguous.

Graph View

Backlinks