道德真經集註釋音

Dàodé zhēn jīng jí zhù shì yīn 道德真經集註釋音

Phonetic Glosses to the Collected Commentaries on the True Scripture of the Way and Its Virtue

compiled by 梁迥 (Liáng Jiǒng, Quán Yīng zhōu jūn shì pàn guān 權英州軍事判官) as editorial apparatus to DZ 706; postface dated 1 October 1098

The short editorial-philological apparatus to the 1098 composite edition of the four Dàodé jīng commentaries (KR5c0093 = DZ 706), consisting of:

1. A brief phonetic-gloss list (shì yīn 釋音) providing fǎnqiè pronunciation notes for difficult characters in the 81 chapters of the Dàodé jīng.
2. A substantial postface (後序) by the editor Liáng Jiǒng 梁迥, dated 1 October 1098.

The work is preserved as a separate textid in Kanseki (KR5c0094) but in terms of textual history it is the editorial apparatus appended to the DZ 706 composite edition.

About the work

Structure

The shì yīn section is short — perhaps 1 folio, giving a sample list of difficult characters with their fǎnqiè readings:

櫰 (ér yáng qiè), 蹷 (jū yuè qiè), 昩 (yīn mèi), 貸 (tǔ dài qiè), 螫 (shī yì qiè), 攫 (jū fù qiè), 懹 (zǐ lěi, yòu zǐ wěi qiè), 嗄 (yī mài qiè), 蔕 (cháng yīn), 難 (nǎi dàn qiè), 脆 (qī suì qiè), 辟 (yīn bì), 繟 (yīn gù), 恢 (kǔ huí qiè), 斵 (zhì jué qiè), 賂 (yīn lù), 愈 (rèn yǔ qiè), 純 (dù běn qiè)…

The shì yīn is a practical pronunciation aid for readers of the composite commentary, listing characters that have uncommon readings or non-standard pronunciations — without the full philological discussion that Lù Démíng’s 陸德明 Jīng diǎn shì wén 經典釋文 provides for the classical canon generally.

Postface by Liáng Jiǒng

The postface is the more substantial section. Liáng Jiǒng articulates the editorial rationale for the DZ 706 composite edition:

“The book of Lǎozǐ has been transmitted in the world for a long time. Its words are subtle, its purport distant, and none can exhaust it. Readers who are not clear-bright and penetrating, who do not exhaust the principles of the Way, Virtue, Nature, and Destiny — these cannot easily fathom its banks and shores. Did Lǎozǐ intend to produce discourse extraordinary merely to confound the world? Rather, the ultimate Way — dim and dark — even a sage cannot name it; and since the arts of the Way have been dispersed, if one does not show its broad outline and reveal its essential points, then later generations of the foolish-without-intelligence will have nothing to turn to and nothing to hold. Not knowing the root and source of the Great Way, they will be upside-down people. Thus, by necessity, words are forced into being, to clarify the Way…

“There were formerly three annotators: Héshàng Gōng, Míng Huáng [Táng Xuánzōng], and Wáng Bì. These three schools, in their differences, have their own strengths; their termini, however, all aim at the root of the Great Way. In recent ages, Wáng Pōu 王雱 [Yuán zé 元澤, 1042–1076] went deeply into the learning of DàoDéXìngMìng. In the commentary on the Lǎozǐ, he trained the purport and illuminated the subtleties, attaining ‘a school of his own’. Through him, the 81 chapters have become more manifest in the world. Yet worldly students take the Lǎozǐ as a text of empty nothingness and useless words, scarcely attending to it — adding their rude opinions, thinking they have understood. They do not know: the root of the Great Way became clear only through Lǎozǐ; and the scripture of Lǎozǐ became known only through several schools — not something common learning can easily grasp.

“Prefect Zhāng 章太守 [the Zhāng-family official who commissioned the printing] is deeply penetrating of the principles of DàoDéXìngMìng. Taking literary composition as his tool and classical learning as his guide for the many students, he has always been concerned that those holding to the scripture should not know the Way. He commanded the students of the Huáng shè 黌舍 [public school] to combine the four discourses [= the four commentaries], without further addition or subtraction, and had the compilation published to spread the teaching abroad — that the students thereafter might know the book of Lǎozǐ is not merely empty-false words; extremely-deep thought and essential refinement all enable one to reach the supreme principle. Applied to self-cultivation, the remainder and leftover are refuse for the world and the state. The student’s gain is more than a small supplement.

“Jiǒng, receiving the teaching in the following wind, has been fortunate to have intimate contact. Therefore I respectfully request permission to sign my preface with date and month, lest the transmission perish.

“Yuán fú yuán nián shí yuè yī rì 元符元年十月一日 [1 October 1098]. Formerly Acting Military Judge of Yīng zhōu, Liáng Jiǒng 梁迥 respectfully prefaces.”

Catalog attribution issue

The Kanseki catalog meta lists Wáng Pōu 王雱 as the author of the work. This is incorrect: the postface is explicitly signed by Liáng Jiǒng, and the shì yīn phonetic glosses are an editorial contribution to the composite edition, not Wáng Pōu’s independent work. The attribution error likely reflects Wáng Pōu’s prominent role as the key late-Northern-Sòng commentator in the DZ 706 collection — but the editorial apparatus itself is Liáng Jiǒng’s.

Abstract

The shì yīn apparatus is a minor but historically valuable document of late-Northern-Sòng Daoist editorial scholarship. Its shì yīn section anticipates the fuller philological apparatus that Péng Sì 彭耜 would produce 130 years later as DZ 708 Dàodé zhēn jīng jí zhù shì wén 道德真經集註釋文 (1229). Its postface is the most substantial surviving document of Liáng Jiǒng’s authorial voice, providing the late-Northern-Sòng official-scholarly perspective on the Daoist classical tradition.

Dating. Postface dated 1 October 1098. Per the project’s dating rule, the frontmatter gives 1098 as the composition date. Dynasty: 宋.

Translations and research

• Schipper, Kristofer, and Franciscus Verellen, eds. The Taoist Canon: A Historical Companion to the Daozang. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004, 2:548–53 (DZ 706 entry includes discussion of the editorial apparatus; this is where KR5c0094 should be understood in context).
• See the main entry at KR5c0093 for the composite edition to which this work serves as apparatus.

Other points of interest

The distinction between shì yīn 釋音 (“phonetic glosses”) and shì wén 釋文 (“textual glosses”) is technical:

• Shì yīn lists only pronunciations (fǎnqiè readings, homophone glosses).
• Shì wén provides full text-critical and philological notes — variant readings, etymological discussions, parallel citations.

Liáng Jiǒng’s 1098 apparatus is a shì yīn only — a brief pronunciation aid. Péng Sì’s later DZ 708 (1229) is a full shì wén — a substantial philological study. The distinction corresponds to a real progression in late-Northern-Sòng / early-Southern-Sòng philological scholarship: where Liáng Jiǒng provided a reader-aid for pronunciation, Péng Sì produced a full critical-edition apparatus.

Links

• Kanseki Repository KR5c0094
• Parent work: KR5c0093 DZ 706 Dàodé zhēn jīng jí zhù.
• Schipper & Verellen, The Taoist Canon (2004), 2:548–53 — DZ 706 entry.