近思錄集註

Jìnsī lù jízhù 近思錄集註

Collected Commentary on the Jìnsī lù by 茅星來 (Máo Xīnglái, 1678–1748, 清)

About the work

A fourteen-juan early-Qīng commentary on the Jìnsī lù (KR3a0042), composed by Máo Xīnglái as a replacement for Yè Cǎi’s Sòng-period jíjiě, which Máo found “rough and superficial — glossing what need not be glossed and leaving the genuinely difficult passages without comment, with much textual disorder, sentence error and corruption.” The work first appeared in Kāngxī xīnchǒu (1721, with a self-preface), and was supplemented by a hòuxù dated Qiánlóng bǐngchén (1736) — fifteen years later — making it Máo’s lifelong project. The work also includes a fùshuō 附說 prefacing the four Northern-Sòng masters’ biographical materials (drawn from the YīLuò yuānyuán lù 伊洛淵源錄). Máo’s editorial method follows Zhū Xī’s Lúnyǔ / Mèngzǐ “chóngchū cuòjiǎn” 重出錯簡 model — preserving the textual order while supplying corrections beneath the line. Substantively the work is grounded in the four Northern-Sòng masters’ complete works (Tàijí tú shuō, Tōng shū, Xī míng, Zhèng méng, Jīngxué lǐkū, ÈrChéng yíshū, Yì zhuàn) and SòngYuán Jìnsī lù recensions.

Tiyao

We respectfully submit that the Jìnsī lù jízhù in fourteen juan was composed under the present dynasty by Máo Xīnglái. The Sòng-period commentators on Zhūzǐ’s Jìnsī lù are several; only Yè Cǎi’s jíjiě is in current popular use. Xīnglái found it rough and superficial, glossing what need not be glossed and leaving the disputed places blank, and full of textual disorder and corruption. He took the complete works of Zhōu, Zhāng, and the Two Chéng, and the Sòng and Yuán Jìnsī lù printings, collated their variants, and wherever the recent printings were corrupt followed Zhūzǐ’s “chóngchū cuòjiǎn” example by inserting corrections under each item. He then gathered the various commentary, added his own view, and divided and analysed throughout. On míngwù xùngǔ (terminology and gloss) and on kǎozhèng he is especially full. Further, he took the records of the Four Masters’ lives in the YīLuò yuānyuán lù, made annotated explanations, and prefixed them as fùshuō. The book was completed in Kāngxī xīnchǒu (1721), with Xīnglái’s own preface; it has a hòuxù of Qiánlóng bǐngchén (1736), fifteen years after the original — the lifework of a single mind.

His hòuxù says: “Since the Sòng shǐ divided Dàoxué and Rúlín into two, those who speak of the learning of Chéng and Zhū only seek it in shēn xīn xìng mìng and no longer make the tōng jīng xué gǔ their business. Let me make my own argument: Mǎ [Róng], Zhèng [Xuán], Jiǎ [Yì], Kǒng [Yǐngdá]‘s exegesis of the classics is like the gathering of a hundred goods; the exegesis of Chéng and Zhū is like holding the scale-and-measure to balance their weight and length. Without the scale-and-measure, the weight and length of the goods cannot be seen; but without a hundred goods gathered, even with scale-and-measure there is nothing to use them on. So those who would seek Chéng and Zhū’s learning must begin from MǎZhèng’s commentaries. In this work I set out the HànTáng commentaries to show that Chéng and Zhū’s learning has its sources, so that the empty and unlearned have nothing to lean on by way of pretext.”

His arguments are clear and broad-minded, free of partisan attack, name-seeking and contention — truly able to rectify his own xīnshù (heart-mind technique).

Respectfully revised and submitted, seventh month of the forty-sixth year of Qiánlóng [1781].

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

Abstract

The Máo Xīnglái Jìnsī lù jízhù is the first comprehensive Qīng-period commentary on the Jìnsī lù, completed three centuries after Yè Cǎi’s jíjiě (1257) and intended specifically as a replacement. The composition window is bracketed by Máo’s working life — the body of the work in Kāngxī xīnchǒu (1721, age 43), the hòuxù in Qiánlóng bǐngchén (1736, age 58). The frontmatter brackets to ca. 1700–1736.

The substantive position has two layers: (i) a textual / kǎozhèng layer, restoring corrupted passages and supplying full references; (ii) a methodological position — the classical-philological kǎozhèng tradition (Mǎ Róng, Zhèng Xuán, etc.) and the Lǐxué tradition (ChéngZhū) are mutually necessary, neither dispensable. This second position is one of the cleanest early-Qīng statements integrating the kǎozhèng turn with the surviving Lǐxué mainstream.

The Sòng shǐ’s separation of Dàoxué and Rúlín into two zhuàn — Máo’s specific complaint — is the institutional genealogy he is arguing against; the SKQS tíyào’s endorsement of his position is methodologically aligned with the broader SKQS kǎozhèng turn under Jǐ Yún.

The bibliographic record: SKQS Zǐbù — Rújiā lèi. The work is preserved alongside the parallel Jiāng Yǒng commentary (KR3a0044), and modern Jìnsī lù scholarship typically integrates both.

Translations and research

• Wing-tsit Chan, Reflections on Things at Hand (1967) — uses Máo Xīnglái as one of its principal commentary sources.
• Wing-tsit Chan, Jìn-sī lù xiáng zhù jí píng 近思錄詳註集評 (1992) — full integration of Sòng-Yuán-Míng-Qīng commentary including Máo.
• No substantial English-language secondary literature specifically on Máo Xīnglái; Chinese-language work concentrated in studies of Qīng Lǐxué.

Other points of interest

The Máo Xīnglái methodological position — that Lǐxué requires the HànTáng kǎozhèng tradition as its evidential ground — anticipates by a generation the explicit Hànxué / Sòngxué synthesis of Jiāo Xún 焦循 and the late-Qīng Tōngrú tradition. Máo is therefore an interesting transitional figure between Lǐ Guāngdì-style early-Qīng Lǐxué loyalism and the mature Hànxué tradition.

Links

• Jìnsī lù 近思錄 (KR3a0042 — the parent text).
• Yè Cǎi, Jìnsī lù jíjiě (preserved in KR3a0042 as the Sòng-period precedent).
• Kyoto Zinbun, Sìkù quánshū zǒngmù tíyào
• Wikidata