聞分館君 Ask BunKanKun

節孝語錄

5 min read

Text ID
KR3a0035
Date
1086–1097
Dynasty
宋

Jiéxiào yǔlù 節孝語錄

Recorded Sayings of Master Jié-xiào sayings of 徐積 (Xú Jī, zì Zhòngchē 仲車, 1028–1103, 宋, 撰); compiled by 江端禮 (Jiāng Duānlǐ, 1060–1097, 宋, 編)

About the work

A one-juan yǔlù of Xú Jī, the Northern-Sòng filially-pious classicist of Shānyáng, recorded by his disciple Jiāng Duānlǐ. The substance covers classical exegesis (Lúnyǔ, Lǐjì, Chūnqiū and Shī), historical commentary, and practical-ethical maxim. The SKQS tíyào notes a number of distinctive interpretive moves: the gloss of “Tánglì zhī huá biān qí fǎn ér” 唐棣之華偏其反而 reading 偏 as 徧 (citing the Lǐjì note “二名不偏諱”); the gloss of the Chūnqiū’s rénshēn yùlǐn zāi yǐhài cháng passage; the reading of Lúnyǔ’s “sān xiù” 三嗅 as “sān tàn” 三嘆; and various positions in his historical commentary (preferring Yáng Xióng over Jiǎ Yì, ranking Chén Píng as the first man of post-Qín China, dismissing the contemporary thick-coffin practice as misreading the Lǐjì). The SKQS tíyào judges his interpretations sometimes “chuānzáo” 穿鑿 (forced) and his historical assessments uneven, but praises his gōngxíng and Rújiā devotion.

Tiyao

We respectfully submit that the Jiéxiào yǔlù in one juan was composed by Xú Jī of the Sòng. Jī, zì Zhòngchē, was a man of Shānyáng. He passed the jìnshì; at the beginning of Yuányòu, on recommendation, he was appointed Yángzhōu Sīhù cānjūn and then Chǔzhōu jiàoshòu; he served as Hézhōu Fángyù tuīguān, was changed to Xuāndé láng with the supervisorship of the Zhōngyuè Temple, and died. In Zhènghé 6 (1116) he was given the posthumous title Jiéxiào chùshì. His career is in the Sòng shǐ Zhuóxíng zhuàn. This book was recorded by his disciple Jiāng Duānlǐ. The Wénxiàn tōngkǎo records it in one juan, matching the present text.

The book contains classical-glossing items: like the gloss of “Tánglì zhī huá, biān qí fǎn ér” reading 偏 as 徧, claiming “open all-around and again close”; checking the Lǐjì “two-character name not all-avoid”, the note glosses 偏 as 徧 — so 偏 / 徧 are originally interchangeable. But to use this for “biān qí fǎn ér” is forced.

The gloss of the Chūnqiū “rénshēn the imperial granary blazed, yǐhài there was the cháng sacrifice” — claiming all the commentators say recording the granary fire first is the residue of great disaster, and the cháng recorded as not reverent; in fact the Zēngzǐ wèn says the offerings of the Son of Heaven and the lords meet solar eclipse, fire, mourning — all suspend; now the imperial granary blazed and the cháng could be suspended but was not — this is what makes it “not reverent”. Why should he claim it was after a fire and yet sacrificed? On examination the Zēngzǐ wèn says: “at the time of sacrifice, if there is solar eclipse or the great temple takes fire — then suspend the sacrifice; other fires do not suspend.” Jī generalises that any fire suspends, and so reverses the Gōngyáng and Gǔliáng readings — quite missing the classical sense.

Other items: reading Lúnyǔ’s sān xiù as sān tàn; arguing the Chūnqiū’s “xī shǒu huò lín” 西狩獲麟 with a doubled record of jiàn shǒu 僭狩 against the rite, but no doubled record of huò lín — both forced.

In the historical-commentary discussions: he ranks Yáng Xióng above Jiǎ Yì; even ranks Chén Píng as the first man of post-Qín-Hàn — far from balanced. And the misreading of the Lǐjì’s “burial wishes for quick decay” — taking the modern thick-coffin practice as wrong — is especially astray.

But Jī was earnest in gōngxíng and pure in Confucian arts; the bulk of his discussions runs along these lines.

[Tíyào continues; abbreviated.]

Respectfully revised and submitted, [date].

General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅.

Abstract

The Jiéxiào yǔlù is a useful witness to early-to-middle Northern Sòng popular classical-ethical teaching outside the Dàoxué mainstream proper. The composition window is the period of Xú Jī’s mature lecturing career, after his Yuányòu (1086) appointment and before Jiāng Duānlǐ’s death in 1097. The frontmatter brackets to ca. 1086–1097.

The substantive position — solid Confucian gōngxíng loyalism, with eccentric interpretive moves on specific jīng and shǐ points, and a preference for Yáng Xióng / Chén Píng / Hú Yuàn lines that signals an intellectual genealogy other than Dàoxué — places Xú Jī within the broader Northern-Sòng Confucianism without locating him in any particular school. He is a student of Hú Yuàn and is informally affiliated with the SūShǔ 蘇蜀 line, but does not belong to the Chéng or Zhāng schools.

The bibliographic record: Sòng shǐ yìwén zhì; Wénxiàn tōngkǎo; Zhízhāi shūlù jiětí; SKQS Zǐbù — Rújiā lèi.

Translations and research

  • No substantial English-language secondary literature located.
  • The work is treated within studies of Northern-Sòng yǔ-lù genre and within Hú Yuàn-school scholarship.

Other points of interest

The placement of Xú Jī in Sòng shǐ Zhuóxíng zhuàn rather than Dàoxué zhuàn — despite his Confucian classical credentials — is itself an interesting moment in Yuán-period Sòng historiography: the Jiéxiào honorific celebrates his filial piety as exemplary conduct rather than his classical learning as doctrinal innovation. The SKQS tíyào’s ambivalent position — praising his gōngxíng but criticising his interpretive forcing — reproduces this Yuán-period framing.

Graph View

Backlinks