Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

NEW LIGHT ON THE LI JI 禮記: THE LI JI AND THE RELATED WARRING STATES PERIOD GUODIAN BAMBOO MANUSCRIPTS

  • Wen Xing (a1)

Abstract

This article starts by examining how “Li ji” was used as a title in early China. In addition to the Li, Li jing, Shi li, Li yi and Yi li, etc., “Li ji” was used as an alternative title for the Li canon, and the “Li” as a title was used to indicate what we now refer to as the Li ji or the Xiao Dai Li ji as well. By discussing how the Guodian bamboo slip texts are related to the transmitted version of the Li ji, this article argues that the writing styles of the related excavated bamboo manuscripts are the particular Li gujing- or Li guji-styles, that the “Li gujing” or “Li guji” is more a description of those ancient retrieved texts than an actual title, and that many of the Guodian bamboo-slip texts are the Li guji- or Li gujing-style writings. According to the Li guji-style Zi yi text, it is evident that the material in the Li ji comes from creditable pre-Qin textual sources. Although the Li ji text came to its current shape as a result of later editing work, it does not mean that the received Li ji sections have higher textual value than the excavated manuscripts do. On the contrary, the excavated manuscripts could have many valuable early textual sources that the transmitted Li ji has lost.

本文始於考察 “禮記” 之名在古代中國的用法。《禮》、《禮經》、《士禮》、《禮儀》、《儀禮》等名之外,《禮》經也曾以 “禮記” 為名。同時, “禮” 也被用作我們今天所說的《禮記》或《小戴禮記》之名。通過討論郭店簡與今本《禮記》的關聯,本文認為,相關出土簡文的文體,就是 “禮古經” 或 “禮古記” 的文體,而 “禮古經” 或 “禮古記” 更多地是用於描述某些古代文獻,而非古書的實名;若干郭店簡文即為 “禮古記” 或 “禮古經” 的文體。由 “禮古記” 本《緇衣》可見,《禮記》的材料顯然有著可信的先秦文獻來源。雖然《禮記》經後人編輯成書,但這並不意味著今本《禮記》比出土寫本有著更高的文獻價值。相反,出土寫本或有許多有價值的早期材料,今本《禮記》業已失傳。

Copyright

References

Hide All

1. bowuguan, Jingmen shi, ed., Guodian Chu mu zhujian 郭店楚墓竹簡 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1998); Chengyuan, Ma 馬承源, ed., Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (yi) 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書(一) (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2001), as well as the following volumes of the series published in the following years. However, the authenticity of the relevant bamboo-slip manuscripts in the Shanghai Museum collection is to be further examined and determined.

2. Professor Li Xueqin 李學勤 argues that some Guodian bamboo texts, such as Zi yi 緇衣, Wu xing 五行, Cheng zhi wen zhi 成之聞之, Zun de yi 尊德義, Xing zi ming chu 性自命出, and Liu de 六德, belong to the Zisi 子思 (483–402 b.c.e.) School and quite possibly constitute, or are at least related to, the work known as the Zisi 子思 or Zisizi 子思子, listed in the Yiwen zhi” 藝文志 of the Han shu 漢書, ed. Gu, Ban 班固 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1962), 30.1724. See Xueqin, Li, “The Confucian Texts from Guodian Tomb Number One: Their Date and Significance,”in The Guodian Laozi: Proceedings of the International Conference, Dartmouth College, May 1998, ed. Allan, Sarah and Williams, Crispin (Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China and The Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 2000), 107–11; see also Xueqin, Li, “Jingmen Guodian Chu jian zhong de Zisizi” 荊門郭店楚簡中的《子思子》, Wenwu tiandi 文物天地 1998.2, 2830; Xueqin, Li, “Guodian jian yu Rujia jingji” 郭店簡與儒家經籍, Renmin zhengxie bao 人民政協報, August 3, 1998. However, a number of scholars have questioned Li's argument; see Sarah Allan and Crispin Williams, eds., The Guodian Laozi, 179–82. Liu Lexian 劉樂賢 strongly argues for a connection between the Xing zi ming chu and the Zisizi; see his Xing zi ming chu de xuepai xingzhi” 《性自命出》的學派性質, International Research on Bamboo and Silk Documents: Newsletter 國際簡帛研究通訊 3 (2000), 13.

3. In this article, the titles of the texts are italicized if they are considered independent works, and are in quotation marks if they are considered one chapter or section of an independent work. Before I conclude whether or not a title belongs to a particular book, I treat it as an independent work. For example, the bamboo text Zi yi is italicized because I am unable to prove that it is one section of the Zisizi, and the transmitted text “Zi yi” is in quotation marks because it is a section of the Li ji. I use “pericope” for jie 節, “sub-section” for zhang 章, “section” for pian 篇, “chapter” for juan 卷, “volume” for ce 冊, and “book” for shu 書 in this article. See also McDermott, Joseph P., “The Ascendance of the Imprint in China,” in his A Social History of the Chinese Book: Books and Literati Culture in Late Imperial China (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University, 2006), 4381.

4. Representative works include, but are not limited to, Zongyi, Rao 饒宗頤, “Zi yi ling jian” 緇衣零簡, Xueshu jilin 學術集林 9 (1996), 6668; Hao, Peng 彭浩, “Guodian Chu jian Zi yi de fenzhang ji xiangguan wenti” 郭店楚簡《緇衣》的分章及相關問題, Jianbo yanjiu 簡帛研究 3 (1998), 4449; Wen, Xing 邢文, “Chu jian Zi yi yu Xian-Qin lixue” 楚簡《緇衣》與先秦禮學, in Guodian Chu jian guoji xueshu yantaohui lunwen ji 郭店楚簡國際學術研討會論文集, ed. Wuhan daxue Zhongguo wenhua yanjiuyuan (Wuhan: Hubei renmin, 2000), 155–64; Liu Xinfang 劉信芳, “Guodian jian Zi yi jiegu” 郭店簡《緇衣》解詁, in Guodian Chu jian guoji xueshu yantaohui lunwen ji, 165–81; Boltz, William G., “Liijih ‘Tzy I’ and the Guodiann Manuscript Matches,” in Und folge nun dem, was mein Herz begehrt: Festschrift fur Ulrich Unger zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Nagel-Angermann, Monique, Hong, Yu, and Giele, Enno (Hamburg: Hamburg Sinologische Gesellschaft e.V., 2002), 209–21; Wei, Chen 陳偉, “Shangbo Guodian erben Zi yi duidu” 上博郭店二本《緇衣》對讀, in Shangbo guancang Zhanguo Chu zhushu yanjiu 上博館藏戰國楚竹書研究, ed. Mingchun, Liao 廖名春 and Yuanqing, Zhu 朱淵清 (Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 2002), 417–25; Yu Wanli 虞萬里, “Shangbo jian Guodian jian Zi yi chuanben hejiao shiyi” 上博簡郭店簡《緇衣》傳本合校拾遺, in Shangbo guancang Zhanguo Chu zhushu yanjiu, 426–39; Feng Shengjun 馮勝君, “Du Shangbo jian Zi yi zhaji erze” 讀上博簡《緇衣》劄記二則, in Shangbo guancang Zhanguo Chu zhushu yanjiu, 448–55; Hanyi, Xia 夏含夷 (Shaughnessy, Edward L.), “Shilun Zi yi cuojian zhengju jiqi zai Li ji ben Zi yi bianzhuan guocheng zhong de yuanyin he houguo” 試論《緇衣》錯簡證據及其在《禮記》本《緇衣》編纂過程中的原因和後果, in Xin chutu wenxian yu gudai wenming yanjiu 新出土文獻與古代文明研究, ed. Weiyang, Xie 謝維揚 and Yuanqing, Zhu (Shanghai: Shanghai daxue, 2004), 287–96; Xigui, Qiu 裘錫圭, “Zhongguo gudian xue chongjian zhong yinggai zhuyi de wenti” 中國古典學重建中應該注意的問題, in Zhongguo chutu guwenxian shijiang 中國出土古文獻十講 (Shanghai: Fudan daxue, 2004), 116; Kern, Martin, “Quotation and the Confucian Canon in Early Chinese Manuscripts: The Case of ‘Zi Yi’ (Black Robes),” Asiatische Studien LIX.1 (2005), 293332; Shaughnessy, Edward L., “Rewriting the Zi Yi: How One Chinese Classic Came to Read as It Does,” in his Rewriting Early Chinese Texts (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006), 63130; Wanli, Yu, Shangbo guancang Chu zhushu Zi yi zonghe yanjiu 上博館藏楚竹書《緇衣》綜合研究 (Wuhan: Wuhan daxue, 2009); Chan, Shirley, “The Ruler/Ruled Relationship in the Ziyi (Black Robe) Contained in the Newly Excavated Guodian Chu Slip-Texts,” Journal of Asian History 43.1 (2009), 1930; Jiepeng, Shi 史傑鵬, “Cong Guodian he Shangbo jian Zi yi de jitiao jianwen tan jinbeng Zi yi de xingcheng” 從郭店和上博簡《緇衣》的幾條簡文談今本《緇衣》的形成, Chuantong Zhongguo yanjiu jikan 傳統中國研究集刊 9–10 (2012), 160–72; Cook, Scott, The Bamboo Texts of Guodian: A Study and Complete Translation, Volume 1 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 2012), 355418.

5. Ye, Hong 洪業 (Hung, William), “Li ji yinde xu” 禮記引得序, in Index to Li Chi 禮記引得, Harvard-Yenching Institute Sinological Index Series 27 (Taipei: Chinese Materials and Research Aids Service Center, 1966), ixl.

6. William G. Boltz concisely describes the situation as follows: “Even the name Li chi [Li ji] 禮記 in Han texts refers to the Li ching [Li jing], i.e., the I li [Yi li], together with the incorporated chi ‘records’; the term does not refer to what is known today as the Li chi.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, ed. Loewe, Michael (Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China & The Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 1993), 234.

7. With regret, I would like to take this opportunity to announce that my previous publications and scholarship on the bamboo-slip version of the Zi yi collected at Shanghai Museum are no longer valid unless evidence for its authenticity is available. As for my calligraphic approach to disprove the authenticity of forged excavated texts, please refer to my articles such as Chinese Paleography, Calligraphy, and Pattern Recognition: Styles and Scripts in Excavated Ancient Chinese Documents,” Proceedings: 11th International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (Los Alamitos, California, Washington, and Tokyo: IEEE Computer Society, 2011), 951–56; “Zheda cangjian bianwei (shang): Chu jian Zuozhuan” 浙大藏簡辨偽(上)——楚簡《左傳》, Guangming Daily 光明日報 May 28, 2012, 15; “Zheda cangjian bianwei (xia): Zhanguo shufa” 浙大藏簡辨偽(下)——戰國書法, Guangming Daily 光明日報 June 4, 2012, 15; “Zheda cangjian zai bianwei – Wenben fuyuan de guanlianxing yu Zheda weijian zai pipan” 浙大藏簡再辨偽——文本復原的關聯性與浙大偽簡再批判, Guangming Daily 光明日報 June 25, 2012, 15; “Chujian shufa de bifa yu tishi – Da Liu Shaogang xiansheng” 楚簡書法的筆法與體勢——答劉紹剛先生, Guangming Daily 光明日報 July 2, 2012, 15; Qin jiandu shufa de bifa: Qin jiandu shuxie jishu zhenshixing fuyuan” 秦簡牘書法的筆法:秦簡牘書寫技術真實性復原, Jianbo 簡帛 8 (2013), 439–50; “Calligraphic Styles between Authentic and Forgery Bamboo-slip Manuscripts,” Manuscript Cultures, “Lun lishi: Qin Han jianbo lishi de zai kaocha” 论隶势:秦汉简帛隶势的再考察, conference volume of the International Conference on Excavated Manuscripts and Early Chinese Civilization (Shanghai: Zhongxi, 2014), forthcoming.

8. Ma Chengyuan, Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (yi), 54, 59, and 68.

9. The term san Li was coined by Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 (127–200 c.e.). See Xuan, Qian 錢玄, San Li tonglun 三禮通論 (Nanjing: Nanjing shifan daxue, 1996), 55.

10. Qishi zi or the “Seventy Disciples” was used so often in the Chinese textual tradition that it even generated some textual confusion and argument as we will discuss below. In this article, Seventy Disciples is used as a proper noun.

11. According to Lu Deming 陸德明, the Zheng Xuan annotated version of the Li ji was imperially established as one of the officially taught canons in the Eastern Han dynasty. See his Jingdian shiwen xulu” 經典釋文序錄, in Jingdian shiwen huijiao 經典釋文匯校, ed. Zhuo, Huang 黃焯, Yanzu, Huang 黃延祖 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2006), 1.19a. However, I do not see any other supporting evidence for this. But in any case, the Li ji was canonized at the latest in 642 c.e. when Emperor Taizong of Tang 唐太宗 (599–649 c.e.) ordered Kong Yingda 孔穎達 (574–648 c.e.) and Yan Shigu 顏師古 (581–645 c.e.), etc., to edit and publish an official imperial edition of the Li ji with commentaries as a canonized text, even though the annotated canon was published in 653 c.e. after both Taizong of Tang and Kong Yingda passed away. See Ruxue zhuan” 儒學傳 of the Xin Tang shu 新唐書, ed. Xiu, Ouyang 歐陽修 and Qi, Song 宋祁, etc. (Shanghai: Shanghai guji and Shanghai shudian, 1986), 198.602a and Gaozong ji” 高宗紀 of Jiu Tang shu 舊唐書, ed. Xu, Liu 劉昫 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji and Shanghai shudian, 1986), 4.17b. Together with the Zuo zhuan 左傳, the Li ji was ranked as “Large Canon,” dajing 大經. See the “Xuanju zhi” 選舉志 of the Xin Tang shu, 44.128c. As for canonicity or canonization, it has various forms in China depending on the nature of the texts. In the field of the Study of Chinese Classics, if a text either was imperially established as an officially taught canon (li yu xueguan 立於學官), or achieved wide acclaim and recognition in the field, I consider it canonized. Other ideas of canon or canonicity can be found in Davies, Philip R., Scribes and Schools: the Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptures (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998); Harris, Wendell, “Canonicity,” PMLA 106.1 (1991), 110–21; Yu, Pauline, “Poems in Their Place: Collections and Canon in Early Chinese Literature,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 50.1 (1990), 163–96 and Canon Formation in Later Imperial China,” in Culture and State in Chinese History: Conventions, Accommodations, and Critiques, ed. Huters, Theodore, Wong, R. Bin, and Yu, Pauline (Stanford: Stanford University, 1997), 83104, etc. See also Wen, Xing, ed., Rethinking the Study of Chinese Classics, a special issue of Contemporary Chinese Thought 36.4 (summer 2005). As for the counter-canonical vector of literary collections, see the insightful discussion by Fong, Grace S., “Gender and the Failure of Canonization: Anthologizing Women's Poetry in the Late Ming,” Chinese Literature: Essays, Articles, Reviews 26 (2004), 129–49.

12. Han shu, 88.3615.

13. Chong, Wang 王充, Lun heng 論衡 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1990), 127b.

14. Qian, Sima 司馬遷, Shi ji 史記, (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1982), 121.3126.

15. Han shu, 30.1710.

16. Boltz translates “shi” as “a common officer,” who was a low level member of the aristocracy. Early Chinese Texts, 234–35.

17. Liang Yusheng 梁玉繩, Shi ji zhi yi 史記志疑, 35.

18. Li ji zhengyi 禮記正義 (zhushu, Shisanjing 十三經注疏 ed., Beijing: Zhonghua, 1980), 61.453a.

19. Shen Wenzhuo 沈文倬 argues that the “Shi li” in the Shi ji text was originally not a title for the Li classic. Wenzhuo, Shen, Zongzhou liyue wenming kaolun 宗周禮樂文明考論 (Hangzhou: Zhejiang daxue, 1999), 214–19.

20. Xidan, Sun 孫希旦, Li ji jijie 禮記集解 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1989), 1.

21. See Xuan, Zheng's biography, etc. Hou Han shu, ed. Ye, Fan 范曄 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1965), 35.1212.

22. Duan Yucai 段玉裁, “Li shiqi pian biaoti Han wu yi zi shuo” 《禮》十七篇標題漢無 “儀” 字說, Jing yun lou ji 經韻樓集, 2. See Qian Xuan, San Li tonglun, 6–7.

23. Huang Yizhou, Li shu tonggu 禮書通故, see Qian Xuan, San Li tonglun, 7.

24. Qian Xuan, San Li tonglun, 3–7. Shen Wenzhuo, Zongzhou liyue wenming kaolun, 1.

25. Some scholars consider the term “yi li” in the “Xie duan” 謝短 section of the Lun heng the earliest appearance of the title for the Li classic. This does not seem very convincing. The “Xie duan” reads, “Gaozu (Liu Bang 劉邦, r. 202–195 b.c.e.) asked Shusun Tong to create the Yi pin in sixteen sections, (but) where are they? And furthermore to determine the ceremonies and rites (yi li); these can be seen in the sixteen sections.” (高祖詔叔孫通制作《儀品》十六篇,何在?而復定儀禮,見在十六篇。) See Hui, Huang's 黃暉 argument, in his Lun heng jiaoshi 論衡校釋 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1990), 561–62.

26. Sun Xidan, Li ji jijie, 651.

27. See Sun Xidan's references in Li ji jijie, 1.

28. Sun Xidan, Li ji jijie, 2–3. Qian Xuan has the same idea, see San Li tonglun, 5–6.

29. Sun Xidan, Li ji jijie, 3.

30. However, it has been widely accepted that Dai De and Dai Sheng did not edit the two groups of the Li ji at all. See William Hung (Hong Ye), “Li ji yinde xu,” xxv–xxviii. See also Pinzhen, Wang 王聘珍, Da Dai Li ji jiegu 大戴禮記解詁, ed. Wenjin, Wang 王文錦 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1983), 26. This issue merits further examination.

31. Quoted by Kong Yingda in his “Preface to the Li ji zhengyi” (Li ji zhengyi xu 禮記正義敘).

32. Sui shu 隋書, ed. Zheng, Wei 魏徵 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji and Shanghai shudian, 1986), 32.3365b. In this article, I use the title Xiao Dai Li ji to identify the Li ji wherever there might be a possible confusion.

33. It is not difficult to find other examples. For instance, in Lu Zhi's 盧植 (d. 192 c.e.) biography in the Hou Han shu, the work entitled Li ji that he examined in order to correct the stele version of the Li canon is actually the Li canon, i.e., the Yi li, rather than the Xiao Dai Li ji. See Hou Han shu, 64.2116.

34. Shi ji, 47.1935–36.

35. Confucius was identified as the editor of the Li canon in a number of major texts. The “Rulin zhuan” of the Han shu says that Confucius “pieced together the rites of the Zhou” (zhui Zhou zhi li 綴周之禮) (Han shu, 88.3589). The “Za ji” 雜記 section of the Li ji also clearly attributes the “Shi sang li” 士喪禮 to Confucius. Li ji zhengyi, 43.339b.

36. Mao Shi zhengyi 毛詩正義 (Shisanjing zhushu ed., Beijing: Zhonghua, 1980), 1:3.16b.

37. Er ya zhushu 爾雅注疏 (Shisanjing zhushu ed., Beijing: Zhonghua, 1980), 2, 3.15b.

38. Er ya zhushu, 2, 3.15b.

39. It was a somewhat popular practice for ancient Chinese to quote the Commentaries of the Yi 易 as the Yi canon itself. For example, in the “Yiwen zhi” of the Han shu, in many cases where the Commentaries of the Yi were quoted, they were simply presented after “The Yi reads” (Yi yue, 易曰). See Han shu 30.1704, 1706, 1710, 1711, and 1720, etc.

40. Quoted by Li Xian 李賢 (654–84 c.e.), see Hou Han shu, 60b.1990. See also Guowei, Wang 王國維, “Wei shijing kao yi” 魏石經考一, in Guantang jilin 觀堂集林 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959), 955–59. As for the Luoyang ji, Li Xian mentioned Lu Ji's 陸機 (261–303 c.e.) Luoyang ji in the “Guangwu di ji” 光武帝紀 of the Hou Han shu. See Hou Han shu 1a.40. However, Wang Guowei did not think the Luoyang ji with the “Li ji” stela quote was the Luoyang ji by Lu Ji. According to Wang Guowei's examination, the Luoyang ji could be one of the four or five books with the same title. See Guantang jilin, 956.

41. Baoxuan, Wang 王葆玹, Jin gu wen jingxue xinlun 今古文經學新論 (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 1997), 301.

42. See Shen Wenzhuo, Zongzhou liyue wenming kaolun, 32, for a detailed discussion.

43. bowuguan, Gansu sheng and Zhongguo kexuyuan kaogu yanjiusuo, eds., Wuwei Han jian 武威漢簡 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2005), 96100, 116–20, and 133–35.

44. Shen also clarifies that the section marks of □ and ○ were not used to distinguish the text of the canon from the ji writings, either, but were used just to divide sections only. For a summary of this issue, see Huangjun, Zhang 張煥君 and Xiaolong, Diao 刁小龍, Wuwei Han jian Yi li zhengli yu yanjiu 武威漢簡《儀禮》整理與研究 (Wuhan: Wuhan University, 2009), 910. Chen Mengjia has a different observation and interpretation; see Gansu sheng bowuguan, Wuwei Han jian, 29.

45. Han shu, 30.1710.

46. For the translation of jingxue, see my “Guest Editor's Introduction,” Rethinking the Study of Chinese Classics, 3–10.

47. Shen Wenzhuo further argues that the Li ji or the Xiao Dai Li ji was also referred to as the “Li” with the evidence from the “Wen sang” 問喪 section of the Li ji and from the Shiqu yi zou 石渠議奏, or Shiqu lun 石渠論, a collection of memorials debating the differences between the Five Classics, i.e., the Yi 易, Shi 詩, Shu 書, Li 禮, and Chunqiu 春秋, at the Shiqu ge 石渠閣 Meeting chaired by the Emperor Xuandi 宣帝 of Han in 51 b.c.e. See Shen Wenzhuo, Zongzhou liyue wenming kaolun, 33.

48. Zheng Xuan, San Li mulu 三禮目錄, see Li ji zhengyi, 56.425b and 58.437a. When Zheng Xuan said that the two sections were zhengpian (formal sections) of the Li, he perhaps tried to exclude the possibility of considering the “Ben sang” and “Tou hu” sections somehow appendix sections.

49. See also Wen, Xing, “Li guji yu Zisi zhi xue” 《禮》古記與子思之學, Hunan daxue xuebao (Shehui kexue ban) 湖南大學學報(社會科學版) 23.3 (2009), 511.

50. Although in Chinese I prefer “Li gujing” (《禮》古經) to “Li gujing” (《禮古經》), in English I use “Li gujing” and “Li guji” to refer to “Li gujing” and “Li guji” (《禮》古記) because it is less confusing when the whole terms are italicized.

51. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 174.

52. Based on James Legge's 1885 translation, available on line at Internet Sacred Text Archive, with adaptations. http://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki/index.htm and http://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki2/index.htm. For a printed paper version, see the volume with The Lî Kî (The Book of Rites) in Legge, James, The Chinese Classics (Taipei: SMC Publishing, 2000, rpt.), # 4 of “Book XXX. SZE Δ or “The Black Robes [1],” http://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki2/liki230.htm.

53. Li ji zhengyi, 55.419c–420a.

54. Based on James Legge's translation, with adaptations. See # 4 of “Book XXX. SZE Δ or “The Black Robes [1],” http://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki2/liki230.htm.

55. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 174.

56. Li ji zhengyi, 3.21b.

57. Based on James Legge's translation, with adaptations. # 10. 49 of Part IV, Section I, “Book 1. KHÜ LΔ or “Summary of the Rules of Propriety,” http://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki/liki01.htm.

58. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 187.

59. Li ji zhengyi, 26.228c.

60. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 187.

61. Li ji zhengyi, 26.228b.

62. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 181.

63. Li ji zhengyi, 52.401b.

64. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 163. This line was reconstructed by Qiu Xigui, see Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 164 n13.

65. Based on James Legge's translation in # 50 of “BOOK XXIX. PIÂO KΔ or “The Record on Example [1],” http://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki2/liki229.htm.

66. Li ji zhengyi, 54.416a.

67. James Legge's translation in # 50 of “BOOK XXIX. PIÂO KΔ or “The Record on Example [1],” http://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki2/liki229.htm.

68. Lexian, Liu, “Du Guodian Chu jian zhaji san ze” 讀郭店楚簡札記三則, Zhongguo zhexue 中國哲學 20 (1999), 362.

69. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 168.

70. Li ji zhengyi, 51.391b.

71. Han shu, 30.1710.

72. Quoted by Lu Deming, “Jingdian shiwen xulu,” 18a.

73. The “Yiwen zhi” of the Han shu came from Liu Xin's 劉歆 (?53 b.c.e.–23 c.e.) Qi lue 七略, which was based on his father Liu Xiang's Bie lu.

74. Guowei, Wang, Guantang jilin 觀堂集林, 7.324 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959).

75. Xueqin, Li, “Guodian jian yu Li ji,” in Li Xueqin wenji 李學勤文集 (Shanghai: Shanghai cishu, 2005), 434.

76. Han shu, 30.1710.

77. “To the Seventy Disciples” was the original phrase while the editors of this edition took it as “to the seventeen (sections).”

78. Qian Han shu 前漢書 (Dian, Wuying 武英殿 ed., 1739; rpt. ed.; Shanghai: Shanghai guji and Shanghai shudian, 1986), 30.164b.

79. Qian Han shu (Wuying Dian ed.), 30.164b, notes.

80. William G. Boltz, “The Study of Early Chinese Manuscripts: Methodological Preliminaries,” in The Guodian Laozi, eds., Sarah Allan and Crispin Williams, 39–51. The Chinese version is titled, Gudai wenxian zhengli de ruogan jiben yuanze” 古代文獻整理的若干基本原則, in Wen, Xing, ed. and trans., Guodian Laozi: Dong xi fang xuezhe de duihua 郭店《老子》:東西方學者的對話 (Beijing: Xueyuan, 2002), 4458.

81. Sui shu, 32.117b.

82. Han shu, 53.2410.

83. Qishizi zhi tu 七十子之徒 can be read as either the Seventy Disciples or the Seventy Disciples and their followers, depending on how tu 徒 is read.

84. Quoted in Lu Deming's “Jingdian shiwen xulu,” 17b–18a.

85. Xueqin, Li, “Guodian jian yu Li ji” 郭店簡與《禮記》, in his essay collection, Chongxie xueshushi 重寫學術史 (Shijiazhuang: Hebei jiaoyu, 2002), 170–76. Chen Lai 陳來 is convinced that the 14 texts excavated from Guodian are extremely close to the Li ji, thus suggests calling the Guodian texts “Jingmen Li ji” 荊門禮記. Chen Lai, “Guodian jian ke cheng ‘Jingmen Li ji’” 郭店簡可稱“荊門禮記,” Renmin zhengxie bao 人民政協報, August 3, 1998.

86. These passages in question are selected from Xing Wen, “Chu jian Zi yi yu Xian-Qin lixue,” 155–64. However, not all the arguments and discussions are included here. As I announced earlier in this article, the portions related to the Shanghai Museum bamboo-slip version are no longer valid unless the evidence for its authenticity is provided, and I also delete the relevant portions in this article accordingly.

87. For a discussion on the sequences of the Li ji and Guodian versions of the “Zi yi” or Zi yi and their connections with the composition of early texts, see Boltz, William G., “The Composite Nature of Early Chinese Texts,” in Text and Ritual in Early China, ed. Kern, Martin (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2005), 5658.

88. Li ji zhengyi, 55.1650.

89. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 129.

90. Li ji zhengyi, 55.1650.

91. As shown below, shen 身 is written as ti 體 in the Guodian version. Traditionally, shen indicates the upper body below the neck or the body between the neck and the feet, while ti indicates the whole body, i.e., shen is only part of ti. In Group 1.2, in both the Li ji and Guodian cases, both shen and ti are contrasted with xin 心 (heart), thus they can be considered and translated the same, which is body.

92. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 129.

93. Li ji zhengyi, 55.1650.

94. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 129.

95. I follow Qiu Xigui's 裘錫圭 interpretation on fa 法 here. According to Qiu, this character is read fei 廢 and the fa and the fei were interchangeable in early China (er zi gu tong 二字古通). See Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 132n27.

96. Ma Chengyuan, Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (yi), 179–80. In his transcription and translation, Shaughnessy adds the character min 民 “people” before the character wang 亡 “perish” to the Shanghai Museum version, but he provides no justification for this emendation. See Shaughnessy, Rewriting Early Chinese Texts, 100–101. However, this example could provide evidence for the authenticity examination, thus I keep it here.

97. Xing Wen, “Chu jian Zi yi yu Xian-Qin lixue,” 156.

98. Shaughnessy correctly pointed out the ambiguity that lies in the character hao 好, which can be read as either an adjective or a verb according to the modern grammatical category. Shaughnessy, Rewriting Early Chinese Texts, 89. However, I am not convinced by his argument that “a total of something like twelve extra characters” was inserted into the Li ji text in order to resolve the ambiguity. He does not specify which twelve characters should be inserted, but it seems to me they most likely would have been xin zhuang ze ti shu, xin su ze rong jing 心莊則體舒,心肅則容敬 (“If the heart is sober, the body would be relaxed; if the heart is solemn, the appearance would be respectful.”). As I said in “Chu jian Zi yi yu Xian-Qin lixue,” 156, these two phrases clearly explain the preceding metaphor of “heart” and “body,” i.e., “the people take the ruler as their heart, while the ruler takes the people as his body.” In other words, they should be grouped into group 1.1 rather than group 1.2 as he suggests. See Shaughnessy, Rewriting Early Chinese Texts, 89–90.

99. Ma Chengyuan, Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (yi), 55.

100. Li ji zhengyi, 55.421a

101. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 130.

102. Note that 囗 indicates a missing graph. Ma Chengyuan, Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (yi), 186–87.

103. Li ji zhengyi, 55.1649.

104. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 130.

105. Li ji zhengyi, 55.1649.

106. Guodian Chu mu zhujian, 130.

107. Chen Peifeng 陳佩芬, “Zi yi” 緇衣, in Ma Chengyuan, Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhan'guo Chu zhushu (yi), 186.

This article was originally presented at Confucianism Resurrected: The Third International Conference on Excavated Chinese Manuscripts, April 23–25, 2004, Mount Holyoke College, which I co-organized with Dr. Jonathan Lipman and Dr. Calvin Chen. I would like to thank both of them as well as my Mount Holyoke colleagues, in particular, Dr. Don O'Shea, Vice President and Dean of Faculty, for their generous and unfailing support for the project. All abstracts of the conference papers were published in International Research on Bamboo and Silk Documents: Newsletter 4.2–4.3 (2004). Thanks to three scholarly journals, selected conference papers were published in their three special issues. They include seventeen papers in Rethinking Confucianism, a special issue of International Research on Bamboo and Silk Documents: Newsletter (2006), three papers in Jianbo yanjiu 2005 簡帛研究二○○五 (2008), and three papers in the present volume, Early China 37 (2014). I would like to thank Robin D.S. Yates, Wei-ming Tu 杜維明, and Liu Xiaogan 劉笑敢, etc., for their insightful comments on different versions of this paper at different stages. I am grateful to Liu Lexian 劉樂賢 for his prompt help in sending me some bibliographic information that was unavailable in the United States. Special thanks go to Robin D.S. Yates, who actually served as both a reader and an editor of this article for Early China, for his important help with the publication of this article.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

NEW LIGHT ON THE LI JI 禮記: THE LI JI AND THE RELATED WARRING STATES PERIOD GUODIAN BAMBOO MANUSCRIPTS

  • Wen Xing (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.