Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1There remains the title of a commentary on the Hsidéo King by this marquis Wan ; and the book was existing in the time of 3hai Yung (A. D. 133-192), who gives a short extract from it in one of his treatises. 4. The recovery of our classic after the fires of Ain will be related in the next chapter. Assuming here that it was recovered, we look into it, and find a con- The contents of : the classic, and Versation, or memoranda, perhaps, of several by whom it conversations, between Confucius and his diswas written. : : ciple 34ng-;ze. The latter, however, is little more than a listener, to whom the sage delivers his views on Filial Piety in its various relations. There are two recensions of the text ;—one in eighteen chapters, and the other in twenty-two. As edited in eighteen chapters, each of them has a very brief descriptive heading. I have given this in the subjoined translation, but the headings cannot be traced back beyond the commentary of the emperor Hsiian. The saying attributed by Ho HsiQ and others to Confucius would seem to indicate that he had himself composed the work, but the reader of it sees at once that it could not have proceeded from him. Nor do the style and method of the treatise suggest a view which has had many advocates,—that it was written by 34ng-3ze, under the direction of the master. There is no reason, however, why we should not accept the still more common account,—that the Hsiao came from the school of 3ang-jze. To use the words of Hd Yin, an author of the first half of our twelfth century :—‘The Classic of Filial Piety was not made by 3ang-3ze himself. When he retired from his conversation (or conversations) with AKung-ni on the subject of Filial Piety, he repeated to the disciples of his own school what (the master) had said, and they classified the sayings, and formed the treatise.’ Gg2 452 THE HSIAO KING. CHAPTER II. THE RECOVERY OF THE Hs1A0 KING UNDER THE HAN DYNASTY, AND ITS PRESERVATION DOWN TO THE PUBLICATION OF THE COMMENTARY OF THE THANG EMPEROR HSUAN 3UNG. 1. The Hsiao King suffered, like all the other Confucian books except the Yi, from the fires of KAin. Its subsequent recovery was very like that of the Sha, described on pp. 7, 8. We have in each case a shorter and a longer copy, a modern text and an ancient text. In the Catalogue of the Imperial Library, prepared by Lid Hin immediately before the commencement of our Recovery of the Christian era, there are two copies of the
27, 8. We have in each case a shorter and a longer copy, a modern text and an ancient text. In the Catalogue of the Imperial Library, prepared by Lid Hin immediately before the commencement of our Recovery of the Christian era, there are two copies of the Hsido King. Hsi4o:—‘the old text of the Khung family,’ which was in twenty-two chapters, according to a note by Pan Ka (died A.D. 92), the compiler of the documents in the records of the western Han; and another copy, which was, according to the same authority, in eighteen chapters, and was subsequently styled ‘the modern text.’ Immediately following the entry of these two copies, we find ‘ Expositions of the Hsiao by four scholars,—whose surnames were Kang-sun, Kiang, Yi, and Hau. ‘They all,’ says Pan K4, ‘had laboured on the shorter text.’ The copy in eighteen chapters therefore, we must pre- The shorter or sume, had been the first recovered; but of modem text. how this came about we have no account till we come to the records of the Sui dynasty. There it is said that, when the KAin edict for the destruction of the books was issued, his copy of the Hsi4do was hidden by a scholar called Yen Kih, a member, doubtless, of the Yen family to which Confucius’ favourite disciple Yen Hui had belonged. When the edict was abrogated in a few years, Kan, a son of Xih, brought the copy from its hidingplace. This must have been in the second century B.C., and the copy, transcribed, probably by Xan, in the form of the characters then used, would pass into the charge of the board of ‘great scholars’ appointed to preserve the INTRODUCTION. 453 ancient books, in the reigns of the emperors Wan and King, B.C. 179-141. The copy in the ancient text was derived from the tablets found in the wall of the Confucian house in the The oldor time of the emperor Wd (B.C. 140-87), and longer text. is commonly said to have been deciphered, _as in the case of the tablets of the Sha, by Khung An-kwo. An-kwo wrote a commentary himself on the Hsiao, which does not appear in Hin’s Catalogue, just as no mention is made there of his commentary on the Sha. We find it entered, however, among the books in the Sui Library with the following note :—‘ The work of An-kwo disappeared during the troubles of the Liang dynasty (A. D. 502-556), and continued unknown till the time of Sui, when a copy was found in the capital, and came into the possession of a scholar called Lia Hsiian.’ Hsiian made his treasure public, and ere long it was acknowledged by the court, while many scholars contended that it was a forgery of his own, and ascribed by him to An-kwo. Whatever opinion we may form on this matter, the discovery of the old text, and the production of a commentary on it by Khung An-kwo, can hardly be called in question.
3Whatever opinion we may form on this matter, the discovery of the old text, and the production of a commentary on it by Khung An-kwo, can hardly be called in question. It might be argued, indeed, that another copy in the old text was found in the first century B.c. In a memorial addressed about the Shwo WaAn dictionary to the emperor An, in A.D. 121, by Hsii Kung, a son of the author, he says Was another that the Hsiao King which his father used was copy in the old a copy of that presented, by ‘a very old man text discovered? Of TQ? to the emperor Kao (B.C. 86-74)}. Many Chinese critics, and especially Wang Ying-lin 1 The language of the memorial is: —‘The Hsiao King’ (used by my father in the composition of his dictionary) ‘was what San lfo of LQ presented in the time of the emperor Kao.’ The San !4o most readily suggests to the reader the idea of ‘three old men ;’ but the characters may also mean, in harmony with Chinese idiom, ‘the three classes of old men,’ or ‘an individual from those three classes.’ The classical passage to explain the phrase is par. 18 in the first section of the sixth Book in the Lt Xi, where it is said that king Wan feasted the San 140 and WQ kang, ‘the three classes of old men and five classes of men of experience,’ in his royal college. The three classes of old men were such as were over 80, 90, and 100 years respectively. It was from a man of one of these classes that the emperor received the Hsiao in the old 454 THE WSIAO KING. (better known as Wang Po-hu, A. D. 1223-1296), say that this is a different account of the recovery of the old text from that with which the name of Khung An-kwo is connected. It is difficult to reconcile the two statements, as will be seen on a reference to the note below!; and yet it text. According to the account given in the next note this man was Khung $ze-hui; and in the Books of Sui that is given as the name of the individual of the Khung family, who had hidden the tablets on the appearance of the Khin edict for the destruction of all the old books.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1There remains the title of a commentary on the Hsidéo King by this marquis Wan ; and the book was existing in the time of 3hai Yung (A. D. 133-192), who gives a short extract from it in one of his treatises. 4. The recovery of our classic after the fires of Ain will be related in the next chapter. Assuming here that it was recovered, we look into it, and find a con- The contents of : the classic, and Versation, or memoranda, perhaps, of several by whom it conversations, between Confucius and his diswas written. : : ciple 34ng-;ze. The latter, however, is little more than a listener, to whom the sage delivers his views on Filial Piety in its various relations. There are two recensions of the text ;—one in eighteen chapters, and the other in twenty-two. As edited in eighteen chapters, each of them has a very brief descriptive heading. I have given this in the subjoined translation, but the headings cannot be traced back beyond the commentary of the emperor Hsiian. The saying attributed by Ho HsiQ and others to Confucius would seem to indicate that he had himself composed the work, but the reader of it sees at once that it could not have proceeded from him. Nor do the style and method of the treatise suggest a view which has had many advocates,—that it was written by 34ng-3ze, under the direction of the master. There is no reason, however, why we should not accept the still more common account,—that the Hsiao came from the school of 3ang-jze. To use the words of Hd Yin, an author of the first half of our twelfth century :—‘The Classic of Filial Piety was not made by 3ang-3ze himself. When he retired from his conversation (or conversations) with AKung-ni on the subject of Filial Piety, he repeated to the disciples of his own school what (the master) had said, and they classified the sayings, and formed the treatise.’ Gg2 452 THE HSIAO KING. CHAPTER II. THE RECOVERY OF THE Hs1A0 KING UNDER THE HAN DYNASTY, AND ITS PRESERVATION DOWN TO THE PUBLICATION OF THE COMMENTARY OF THE THANG EMPEROR HSUAN 3UNG. 1. The Hsiao King suffered, like all the other Confucian books except the Yi, from the fires of KAin. Its subsequent recovery was very like that of the Sha, described on pp. 7, 8. We have in each case a shorter and a longer copy, a modern text and an ancient text. In the Catalogue of the Imperial Library, prepared by Lid Hin immediately before the commencement of our Recovery of the Christian era, there are two copies of the
27, 8. We have in each case a shorter and a longer copy, a modern text and an ancient text. In the Catalogue of the Imperial Library, prepared by Lid Hin immediately before the commencement of our Recovery of the Christian era, there are two copies of the Hsido King. Hsi4o:—‘the old text of the Khung family,’ which was in twenty-two chapters, according to a note by Pan Ka (died A.D. 92), the compiler of the documents in the records of the western Han; and another copy, which was, according to the same authority, in eighteen chapters, and was subsequently styled ‘the modern text.’ Immediately following the entry of these two copies, we find ‘ Expositions of the Hsiao by four scholars,—whose surnames were Kang-sun, Kiang, Yi, and Hau. ‘They all,’ says Pan K4, ‘had laboured on the shorter text.’ The copy in eighteen chapters therefore, we must pre- The shorter or sume, had been the first recovered; but of modem text. how this came about we have no account till we come to the records of the Sui dynasty. There it is said that, when the KAin edict for the destruction of the books was issued, his copy of the Hsi4do was hidden by a scholar called Yen Kih, a member, doubtless, of the Yen family to which Confucius’ favourite disciple Yen Hui had belonged. When the edict was abrogated in a few years, Kan, a son of Xih, brought the copy from its hidingplace. This must have been in the second century B.C., and the copy, transcribed, probably by Xan, in the form of the characters then used, would pass into the charge of the board of ‘great scholars’ appointed to preserve the INTRODUCTION. 453 ancient books, in the reigns of the emperors Wan and King, B.C. 179-141. The copy in the ancient text was derived from the tablets found in the wall of the Confucian house in the The oldor time of the emperor Wd (B.C. 140-87), and longer text. is commonly said to have been deciphered, _as in the case of the tablets of the Sha, by Khung An-kwo. An-kwo wrote a commentary himself on the Hsiao, which does not appear in Hin’s Catalogue, just as no mention is made there of his commentary on the Sha. We find it entered, however, among the books in the Sui Library with the following note :—‘ The work of An-kwo disappeared during the troubles of the Liang dynasty (A. D. 502-556), and continued unknown till the time of Sui, when a copy was found in the capital, and came into the possession of a scholar called Lia Hsiian.’ Hsiian made his treasure public, and ere long it was acknowledged by the court, while many scholars contended that it was a forgery of his own, and ascribed by him to An-kwo. Whatever opinion we may form on this matter, the discovery of the old text, and the production of a commentary on it by Khung An-kwo, can hardly be called in question.
3Whatever opinion we may form on this matter, the discovery of the old text, and the production of a commentary on it by Khung An-kwo, can hardly be called in question. It might be argued, indeed, that another copy in the old text was found in the first century B.c. In a memorial addressed about the Shwo WaAn dictionary to the emperor An, in A.D. 121, by Hsii Kung, a son of the author, he says Was another that the Hsiao King which his father used was copy in the old a copy of that presented, by ‘a very old man text discovered? Of TQ? to the emperor Kao (B.C. 86-74)}. Many Chinese critics, and especially Wang Ying-lin 1 The language of the memorial is: —‘The Hsiao King’ (used by my father in the composition of his dictionary) ‘was what San lfo of LQ presented in the time of the emperor Kao.’ The San !4o most readily suggests to the reader the idea of ‘three old men ;’ but the characters may also mean, in harmony with Chinese idiom, ‘the three classes of old men,’ or ‘an individual from those three classes.’ The classical passage to explain the phrase is par. 18 in the first section of the sixth Book in the Lt Xi, where it is said that king Wan feasted the San 140 and WQ kang, ‘the three classes of old men and five classes of men of experience,’ in his royal college. The three classes of old men were such as were over 80, 90, and 100 years respectively. It was from a man of one of these classes that the emperor received the Hsiao in the old 454 THE WSIAO KING. (better known as Wang Po-hu, A. D. 1223-1296), say that this is a different account of the recovery of the old text from that with which the name of Khung An-kwo is connected. It is difficult to reconcile the two statements, as will be seen on a reference to the note below!; and yet it text. According to the account given in the next note this man was Khung $ze-hui; and in the Books of Sui that is given as the name of the individual of the Khung family, who had hidden the tablets on the appearance of the Khin edict for the destruction of all the old books.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.