Zhàn yuān jìng yǔ 湛淵靜語
Quiet Sayings from the Pellucid Spring
by 白挺 (Bái Tǐng, also written 白珽 Bái Tǐng-yǎn-vars; 1248–1328; zì Tíngyù 廷玉, hào Zhànyuān 湛淵), SòngYuán transition literatus of Qiántáng. (Note: the catalog meta has the graph 挺 throughout; in modern reference works the more frequent form is 珽.)
About the work
A 2-juàn late-Yuán bǐjì by 白挺 (Bái Tǐng / 白珽 Bái Tǐng-yǎn-vars), compiled by his friend Zhōu Jiǎn 周暕 (zì Bóyáng 伯暘) of Hǎilíng in Zhìdà gēngxū (1310), the year Bái was 63. The book takes its name from the Zhàn yuān — a clear-water spring rising from Zhúshān and flowing past Bái’s West Lake gate; jìng yǔ (quiet talk) refers to Bái’s mode of conversation with visitors at the spring-side. The book records kǎozhèng on classical, historical, and literary topics, with Sòng yímín (loyalist) sentiment colouring many entries despite Bái’s longstanding Yuán service. The work also includes a substantial entry on the Biànjīng gùgōng (Northern Sòng Biànjīng palace ruins) — one of the principal Yuán bǐjì witnesses to the lost northern capital. The Sìkù editors flag the Mèng zǐ Lǐ jìng tradition concerning Sīmǎ Guāng’s Yí Mèng as a significant point on which Bái transmits Ní Sī’s argument that the Yí Mèng was provoked by Wáng Ānshí’s elevation of Mèng zǐ — a contribution to the prehistory of the Mèng zǐ canonical-elevation question.
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Zhànyuān jìng yǔ in two juan was compiled by Bái Tǐng of the Yuán. Tǐng’s zì was Tíngyù; a Qiántáng man; his house was at the West Lake; a spring rose from Zhúshān and gathered at his gate; Tǐng named it Zhàn yuān, and so took it as his hào. The book was compiled by his friend Zhōu Jiǎn of Hǎilíng. At the head is Tǐng’s self-preface; and Jiǎn’s preface, dated Zhìdà gēngxū (1310), says Tǐng that year was 63 — so he was born in Sòng Lǐzōng Chúnyòu 8 wùshēn (1248); at the fall of Línān (1276) he was 27. Hence on Sòng affairs the book often has the nèi cí (insider’s word).
But examining: from his Yuán entry onward, by Lǐ Kàn’s recommendation he was Tàipínglù rúxué zhèng; soon jiàoshòu; soon Chángzhōulù jiàoshòu; rose to JiāngZhè děngchù tíjǔ; then Huáidōng yáncāng dàshǐ; again Lánxīzhōu pànguān, and finally retired — so he had eaten the Yuán’s emoluments for long, and yet still composes the speech of a Sòng yímín — this is what is called jìntuì wú jù (without firm ground in either advance or retreat).
This book is his miscellaneous-record. Per the juàn-end Míng-period postface — copied in Jiājìng bǐngwǔ (1546) from the Kūnshān Shěn Yùlín family — and suspecting it not to stop at these two juàn, it is likely a fragmentary recension. Lì È in compiling the Sòng shī jì shì collected most broadly; yet this book’s opening Lǐ-zōng-bestowed-poem to Lín Xīyì entry — Lì did not collect — so this too is a rare bibliographic jí (manuscript).
Within: he says Jiǎorán’s Tóngwǎn lóng yín gē praises Fáng Guǎn’s affair — the poets have not cited it — without knowing that in Lǐ Hè’s Chānggǔ jí there is in fact a Jiǎ Lóng yín gē. He says the Kuāng miù zhèng sú is composed by Yán Zhēnqīng — without knowing it actually comes from Yán Shīgǔ. These cannot avoid being slightly shū chuǎn (sloppily-mistaken).
His refutation of the Wénzhōngzǐ and Lǐ Délín entry — this is in fact Cháo Gōngwǔ’s Dúshū zhì speech; his refutation of Chángyí accounting-for-the-moon entry — this is also Shǐ Shéngzǔ’s Xuézhāi zhānbì discussion — all cannot escape being subliminal cross-borrowings (piāoxí).
He records Ní Sī’s argument on Sīmǎ Guāng’s Yí Mèng — saying Wáng Ānshí invoked Mèng zǐ’s “dà yǒu wéi” doctrine, wishing Shénzōng to honour him; so Sīmǎ composed this book to clarify that the [Mèng] cannot be wholly trusted — this is what others had not reached. By Cháo Gōngwǔ’s Dúshū zhì — Wáng Ānshí loved Mèng zǐ and personally composed an explanation; his son Pāng and disciple Xǔ Yǔnchéng both made annotations; before the Táng, Mèng zǐ was in the Rú jiā; in the Sòng it was elevated as a classic; at the end of Yuánfēng it was retro-enfeoffed as Zōuguógōng, with the building of a temple in Zōuxiàn — also Wáng Ānshí’s doing — so Sīmǎ’s doubting of Mèng was indeed provoked by Wáng Ānshí’s contrary argument — not without ground. If we say only the “dà yǒu wéi” two phrases — this also seems somewhat qiānhé (forced-fit), not a definitive argument.
Yet other of the book’s biàn xī kǎozhèng — the worth-taking is much; his record of Biànjīng’s ancient palace is particularly detailed. Among the Yuán-period shuōbù, it is not unworthy as a good copy.
Respectfully revised and submitted, ninth month of the forty-third year of Qiánlóng (1778).
Abstract
The Zhànyuān jìng yǔ is one of the principal Yuán-period bǐjì of Sòng-loyalist sentiment, complicated (as the Sìkù editors flag) by the author’s longstanding Yuán official service. The book contains substantive kǎozhèng on:
- Sòng intellectual history: transmitting Ní Sī’s argument that Sīmǎ Guāng’s Yí Mèng was provoked by Wáng Ānshí’s elevation of Mèng zǐ — a significant Yuán-period contribution to the prehistory of the Mèng zǐ canonical-elevation question.
- Biànjīng gùgōng (the Northern Sòng palace ruins): one of the principal Yuán bǐjì witnesses to the lost northern capital — zǐkǎo substantial.
- Sòng poetry preservation: the opening entry preserves a Lǐ-zōng-bestowed poem to Lín Xīyì 林希逸 that Lì È did not catch — a small but real addition to the Sòng poetic record.
The Sìkù editors flag some weaknesses: the Jiǎorán Tóngwǎn lóng yín attribution-error (the Lǐ Hè Jiǎ lóng yín gē is the correct source); the Yán Zhēnqīng / Yán Shīgǔ confusion on the Kuāng miù zhèng sú attribution; and several subliminal cross-borrowings (the Wénzhōngzǐ / Lǐ Délín refutation already in Cháo Gōngwǔ’s Dúshū zhì; the Chángyí zhān yuè refutation already in Shǐ Shéngzǔ’s Xuézhāi zhānbì).
Dating. NotBefore 1280 (Bái’s Yuán career-start) / notAfter 1310 (Zhōu Jiǎn’s preface date). The standard text is the SKQS 2-juàn recension; the Míng Jiājìng bǐngwǔ (1546) postface notes that the recension may be incomplete relative to the original.
Translations and research
No complete Western-language translation. The book is cited in modern Chinese-language scholarship on Yuán-period Sòng-loyalist sentiment, on the Mèng zǐ canonical-elevation question, and on the Biàn-jīng palace topography.
Other points of interest
The book’s transmission of Ní Sī’s argument on the SīmǎGuāng Yí Mèng / Wáng Ānshí Mèng-zǐ-elevation connection is one of the earliest substantive analyses of the canonical-elevation question — a question that became central to late-Yuán and Míng Sì shū studies.
Links
- Sìkù quánshū zǒngmù tíyào, Zǐbù · Zájiā lèi 3, Zhànyuān jìng yǔ entry.