疑耀

Yí yào 疑耀

Doubting the Bright

by 張萱 (Zhāng Xuān, 1558–1641; Wàn-lì-period bibliophile; Hùbù lángzhōng 戶部郎中) — formerly mis-attributed to 李贄 (Lǐ Zhì, Zhuówú 卓吾, 1527–1602)

About the work

A 7-juan kǎozhèng miscellany originally published under the name of Lǐ Zhì 李贄 — the famous late-Míng radical intellectual — but identified by the Sìkù editors (following the early Qīng bibliographer Wáng Shìzhēn 王士禎’s Gǔfūyútíng zálù 古夫于亭雜錄) as in fact the work of Zhāng Xuān 張萱, who composed the original preface under Lǐ Zhì’s name. The internal evidence cited by Wáng Shìzhēn and the Sìkù editors is decisive: a Lǐ Zhì who never held the bibliographic and archival offices the book repeatedly references in the first person (校秘閣書, 修玉牒, Tàicháng bóshì, Hùbù lángzhōng) cannot be the author; only Zhāng Xuān, who held all of these positions, fits the internal voice. References to the author’s home town as Huìzhōu 惠州 (in Guǎngdōng) likewise match Zhāng (a Guǎngdōng man) and not Lǐ Zhì (a Fújiàn man). The Sìkù recension accordingly re-titles the authorship under Zhāng Xuān.

The book’s 252 entries (organized in 7 juan, table of contents preserved in the source) are textual-historical and lexical investigations across the classics, dynastic histories, zhūzǐ, geography, art, ritual, Buddhism, and Daoism. The title — taken from Mèngzǐ’s “疑思辨之”-style philosophical idiom — claims for the author the right to interrogate received bright certainties. The work is a substantial late-Wàn-lì evidential compendium catalogued under Zákǎo zhī shǔ of the Zájiā division.

Tiyao

We respectfully submit that Yí yào in seven juan, the old recension carrying the attribution “compiled by Lǐ Zhì of the Míng” (Zhì’s Jiǔ zhèng yì yīn 九正易因 already catalogued). The present recension carries Zhāng Xuān’s preface: “I shouldered my burden and travelled some thousand lǐ to seek admission at his gate; he then drew out a fascicle and showed it to me, charging me with its correction; in wùshēn (1608) I was láng of the Earth-bureau on assignment to Wúhuì, and I had it engraved for transmission” etc.

Now, Zhì relied on talent and was given to absurd statements; he dared use deviant doctrines to mislead the people. In his Cáng shū 藏書 he went so far as to say “do not take Confucius’s right and wrong as right and wrong for me” — and his other works are nothing but frenzied utterances. Yet this book investigates antiquity and precedents methodically, with method; though it occasionally promotes Confucian-Buddhist syncretism, the language is cautious and not extravagant; he even says “the Confucian need not cite the Buddhist, and the Buddhist need not cite the Confucian”; and again “the classics in their present form have been polished by men of the Six Dynasties and are not in their original purity” — which is the opposite of Lǐ Zhì’s discourse, and decidedly does not come from his hand.

Wáng Shìzhēn 王士禎’s Gǔfūyútíng zálù says: “In my home is the Yí yào, in seven juan, said to be by Lǐ Zhì with his disciple Zhāng Xuān as engraver. I once suspected it had been compiled by Xuān himself and merely loaned to Zhì’s name — because among the entries are references to ‘collating books in the Mìgé’ and ‘compiling the Yùdié’; Xuān had once been zhōngshū shěrén and editor of the Wényuāngé shūmù; whereas Zhì never held one office in the inner court.” Now, in this book’s entry on Sīmǎ Wēngōng 司馬溫公, the author says, “Of my native Hǎizhōngjiè 海忠介 [Hǎi Ruì 海瑞, zì Zhōngjiè, a Guǎngdōng man]” — which only confirms it. Following Shìzhēn’s identification, we further note: the entry on fèng cháo qǐng says “I am now almost fifty, and only beginning to be a Shàngshū láng” — this is Xuān when at the Hùbù; Zhì was never at the Six Bureaus. The entry on Lán xiāng says “this method already existed in the Sòng; it begins for me from Guǎngdōng.” The entry on Sū Dōngpō says “Dōngpō stayed in my Huìzhōu the longest.” The entry on Wén Tiānxiáng says “Wén Bì 文璧 had been the prefect of my Huìzhōu, and surrendered the city to the Yuán.” All these are spoken in a Guǎngdōng man’s voice, consonant with Xuān’s place of origin; Zhì was Fú-jiàn-born and could not have spoken thus. Therefore this book is definitively from Xuān’s hand, and Shìzhēn’s argument is correct. In Wànlì when Lǐ Zhì’s name was strongest, Xuān slipped the book in under Zhì’s name to spread it; some of the in-text first-person passages were inadequately purged of Xuān’s voice, and these passages survive as decisive evidence.

[A long list of errors of memory follows. The Sìkù editors itemize numerous places where Zhāng Xuān cites from memory and gets details wrong — e.g. citing a forged Wén Yànbó letter without recognizing that the “Shí Cāngshū affair” came from the Yùzhào xīnzhì 玉照新志; citing the Běn cǎo on the zǎo 螬 grub being able to cure eye-disease as the reason Chén Zhòngzǐ 陳仲子 recovered after eating a grubby lǐ fruit; etc.] Yet his other textual investigations often rest on real foundations, and the older judgment that he should be dismissed because of dislike for Lǐ Zhì is excessive. We now restore Zhāng Xuān’s name as compiler, in accord with the facts.

Respectfully revised and submitted, eighth 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

Zhāng Xuān 張萱 (1558–1641; zì Mèngqí 孟奇, hào Jiǔshāng 九嶂; native of Bóluó 博羅 county, Huìzhōu, Guǎngdōng) was a Wànlì jìnshì (1582) who served as zhōngshū shěrén, edited the imperial Wényuāngé shūmù 文淵閣書目 (an important Míng-court bibliographic register), and rose to Hùbù lángzhōng 戶部郎中 with assignment to Sūzhōu. A major late-Míng bibliophile, his private library Huìyántāng 彙雁堂 was one of the great Wànlì collections.

The book — until the Sìkù re-attribution — circulated under the name of the great late-Míng radical Lǐ Zhì (1527–1602), and the original 1608 imprint by Zhāng Xuān himself carried the attribution “compiled by Lǐ Zhì.” Zhāng’s preface presents himself as merely the editor and engraver. The Sìkù editors’ redactive case for the actual authorship of Zhāng Xuān — built on (a) the bibliographic offices the in-text author claims; (b) the GuǎngdōngHuìzhōu first-person voice; (c) the explicit anti-Lǐ-Zhì doctrinal positions (“the Confucian need not cite the Buddhist,” “the classics in their received form are post-Six-Dynasties polish”) — is overwhelming and has been generally accepted.

Why Zhāng Xuān used Lǐ Zhì’s name is itself interesting: Lǐ Zhì’s books were the central late-Wàn-lì cultural phenomenon (Zhāng’s own preface remarks that the Cáng shū on its 1599 publication caused a near-frenzy of demand among the shìdàfū); to publish under Lǐ Zhì’s name was to assure rapid wide reception. The 1602 imprisonment and suicide of Lǐ Zhì did not stop his works’ circulation, and Zhāng’s Yí yào benefited from the post-mortem cult.

Dating. The book was composed in the late 1590s and printed in Wànlì wùshēn 萬曆戊申 = 1608 (Zhāng Xuān’s preface dating). The notBefore of 1599 reflects internal references to the 1599 Cáng shū publishing event; the notAfter of 1608 the printing year.

The book’s intellectual content is a sustained late-Míng kǎozhèng miscellany, ranging from Confucius’s appearance (entry 1, Kǒngzǐ wú xūméi biàn 孔子無鬚眉辯) through historical anomalies, lexical correctness, technical-objects history (printing, paper, cíqì porcelain, eyeglasses), classical exegesis, Buddhist-Confucian-Daoist negotiations, and personal anecdote. It is one of the more substantial late-Wàn-lì evidential miscellanies, second only to Yáng Shèn’s Dānqiān corpus and Fāng Yǐzhì’s later Tōng yǎ (KR3j0066).

Translations and research

No substantial Western-language secondary literature located. The Yí yào is briefly noted in Wing-tsit Chan and Goodrich/Fang’s Dictionary of Ming Biography (s.v. “Lǐ Zhì” and “Zhāng Xuān”), and is cited intermittently in Chinese-language studies on Lǐ Zhì pseudepigraphy and Wàn-lì bibliography. The standard text is the SKQS recension. Modern reprints in Cóng-shū jí-chéng chū-biān and Quán Míng wén 全明文.

Other points of interest

The Sìkù re-attribution from Lǐ Zhì to Zhāng Xuān is a model of evidential bibliographic-detection method, much-cited in modern Chinese discussions of SKQS editorial practice. The case is also methodologically important: it shows that even at the height of late-Wàn-lì publication, attributions of bǐjì could be deliberately mis-routed for commercial reasons.

Zhāng Xuān’s interest in Hǎi Ruì 海瑞 (the Hǎi Zhōngjiè of the Sīmǎ Wēngōng entry) as a Guǎngdōng compatriot is one of the more striking instances of regional consciousness in late-Míng evidential writing. The book also contains substantial entries on Sū Shì’s exile in Huìzhōu — Zhāng’s home prefecture — and on Wén Tiānxiáng’s brother Wén Bì 文璧, who as Yuánshí prefect of Huìzhōu surrendered the city to the Mongols. These local-history entries are valuable as Wànlì Guǎngdōng prefectural perspectives.

Links

• Sìkù quánshū zǒngmù tíyào 四庫全書總目提要, Zǐbù · Zájiā lèi 2 · Zákǎo zhī shǔ, Yí yào entry.
• Wikidata: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3500237 (Zhāng Xuān).