Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1The third Collection, more voluminous than either of the others, was made also under the Han dynasty. In the first century B.C., it was an immense compilation of 214 books arranged in five divisions. The 214 were reduced PREFACE. . xix to eighty-five by Tai Teh, a scholar of the time, and his eighty-five again to forty-six by a cousin, called T4i Kang. Three other books were added to these towards the end of the Han period, forming forty-nine in all, which have come down to us under the title of Li Ai, or ‘the Record of Rites,’ and have long constituted by imperial authority one of the five King. An abridgment of this work was translated by M. J. M. Callery, at Turin, in 1853, with the title.—‘ Li Ki, ou Memorial des Rites, traduit pour la premiére fois du Chinois, et accompagné de notes, de commentaires, et du texte original.’ Callery’s work, however, contains only thirty-six of the forty-nine books of the Li Ki, and most of those thirty-six in a condensed form. Whether it will be possible to give in these Sacred Books of the East translations of the whole of these Rituals ; and if that be not possible, by what principles to be guided in the selection of portions of them :—these are questions to be determined after further deliberation. Many passages contain more of the mind of Confucius himself on the sacrificial worship of his country, and the ideas underlying it, than we find elsewhere. But it must not be forgotten that these ritual books do not throw so valuable a light on the ancient religion of China as the older ShQ and Shih. They belong to the period of the K4u dynasty, and do not go back as contemporaneous records to the dynasties beyond it and the still remoter age of Yao and Shun. The views of Confucius, moreover, as given in them, do not come to us at first hand. They were gathered up by the Han scholars five and six centuries after his death, nor can we be sure that these did not sometimes put ideas of their own into the mouth of the sage, and make additions to the writings which were supposed, correctly or incorrectly, to have come from his immediate disciples. We owe the fifth and last of the Kings of China to Confucius himself. It is what he called Khun KAid, or ‘the Spring and Autumn,’ a very brief chronicle compiled by him of the annals of his native state of Lf for 242 years, from B.C, 722 to 481. But there is not much to ke b 2 XX PREFACE. gleaned from it for the Sacred Texts; and if we were to launch out into the three supplements to it of 30 KAiming, Kung-yang, and K(-liang, the result would not repay the labour. A translation of the whole of 30’s supplement, much the most important, is given in my work on the Khun Xhid, published at Hong Kong in 1872.
2A translation of the whole of 30’s supplement, much the most important, is given in my work on the Khun Xhid, published at Hong Kong in 1872. There is another short treatise attributed to Confucius,— the Hsiao King, or ‘Classic of Filial Piety. Though not like one of the five great works that have been described, it was the first to receive the denomination of a King,— and that from the lips of the sage himself,—if the account which we have received of the matter is to be relied on. This little work does not come to us, like the KAun KX Aid, as directly from the pencil of Confucius, but in the shape of conversations between him and his disciple 34ng-3ze, put on record in the first place, probably, by some members of Sang’s school. No portion of the ancient literature has more exercised the minds and engaged the attention of many of the emperors of successive dynasties. The Hsido seems to me an attempt to construct a religion on the basis of the cardinal virtue of Filial Piety, and is open to criticism in many respects. A translation of it is given in the present volume. The classical books are often spoken of as being ‘the five King’ and ‘the four Sh.’ The King have all been separately referred to above; the four Sha is an abbreviation for the Sh or Books of the four Philosophers. The first is the Lun Yii, or ‘Discourses and Conversations,’ occupied chiefly with sayings of Confucius and conversations ketween him and many of his disciples. The second is the Works of Mencius, perhaps the greatest thinker and writer of the Confucian school after the Master. I hope to be able to give both these works. The third of the ShQ is the T4 Hsio, or ‘Great Learning,’ ascribed, like the Hsiao, to Sang-3ze. The fourth is the Kung Yung, or ‘ Doctrine of the Mean,’ the production of 3ze-sze, the sage’s grandson. Both of these treatises, however, are taken from the Li Xt. The whole of the Four Books were translated and published by me in 1861. PREFACE. XXxi III. The third Religion in China is what is called Taoism. It was, like Confucianism, of native origin, and its acknowledged founder was Li &, called also Li Po-yang, and, after his death, Li Tan. More commonly he is designated L4o- 3ze, translated by some ‘the Old Philosopher,’ and by others ‘the Old Boy’ from a fabulous story that his mother carried him in her womb for seventy-two years, so that when he was at length cut out of it, his hair was already white. His birth is referred to the year 604 B.C., so that he was between fifty and sixty years older than Confucius. There are accounts, hardly reliable, of interviews and discussions between the two men.
3His birth is referred to the year 604 B.C., so that he was between fifty and sixty years older than Confucius. There are accounts, hardly reliable, of interviews and discussions between the two men. LAo-3ze’s system often goes with English writers by the name of Rationalism; but if that name be retained, the term must be taken in quite a peculiar sense. His doctrine was that of the T4o, but it is not easy to determine what English term will best express the meaning of the Chinese character. The only record which we have of L4o-3ze’s views is the T4o-teh King, or ‘Classic of Tao and Virtue,’ a treatise of no great length. It was published at Paris in 1842, with a translation in French, by the late Stanislas Julien, under the title of ‘Le Livre de la Voie et de la Vertu.’ Appealing to the views of Kwang-jze and other writers of the Taoist school, M. Julien says that ‘Le T4o est dépourvu d’action, de pensée, de jugement, d’intelligence,’ and adds that ‘it appears impossible therefore to take it for the primordial reason, the Sublime Intelligence, which created and rules the world.’ A translation in English was published, in 1868, by the Rev. Dr. Chalmers of Canton, under the title of ‘the Speculations in Metaphysics, Polity, and Morality, of “the Old Philosopher.”’ Dr. Chalmers retains the term T4o in his English Text, and says, ‘I have thought it better to leave the word T4o untranslated, both because it has given the name to the sect,—the TAoists—and because no English word is its exact equivalent. Three terms suggest themselves,—the Way, Reason, and the Word; but they are all liable to objection. Were we guided by etymology, “the Way” would come nearest to the original, and in one XXii PREFACE. or two passages the idea of a Way seems to be in the term ; but this is too materialistic to serve the purpose of a translation. Reason again seems to be more like a quality or attribute of some conscious Being than TAo is. I would translate it by the Word in the sense of the Logos, but this would be like settling the question which I wish to leave open, viz. what amount of resemblance there is between the Logos of the New Testament and this Tao, which is its nearest representative in Chinese.’
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.
1The third Collection, more voluminous than either of the others, was made also under the Han dynasty. In the first century B.C., it was an immense compilation of 214 books arranged in five divisions. The 214 were reduced PREFACE. . xix to eighty-five by Tai Teh, a scholar of the time, and his eighty-five again to forty-six by a cousin, called T4i Kang. Three other books were added to these towards the end of the Han period, forming forty-nine in all, which have come down to us under the title of Li Ai, or ‘the Record of Rites,’ and have long constituted by imperial authority one of the five King. An abridgment of this work was translated by M. J. M. Callery, at Turin, in 1853, with the title.—‘ Li Ki, ou Memorial des Rites, traduit pour la premiére fois du Chinois, et accompagné de notes, de commentaires, et du texte original.’ Callery’s work, however, contains only thirty-six of the forty-nine books of the Li Ki, and most of those thirty-six in a condensed form. Whether it will be possible to give in these Sacred Books of the East translations of the whole of these Rituals ; and if that be not possible, by what principles to be guided in the selection of portions of them :—these are questions to be determined after further deliberation. Many passages contain more of the mind of Confucius himself on the sacrificial worship of his country, and the ideas underlying it, than we find elsewhere. But it must not be forgotten that these ritual books do not throw so valuable a light on the ancient religion of China as the older ShQ and Shih. They belong to the period of the K4u dynasty, and do not go back as contemporaneous records to the dynasties beyond it and the still remoter age of Yao and Shun. The views of Confucius, moreover, as given in them, do not come to us at first hand. They were gathered up by the Han scholars five and six centuries after his death, nor can we be sure that these did not sometimes put ideas of their own into the mouth of the sage, and make additions to the writings which were supposed, correctly or incorrectly, to have come from his immediate disciples. We owe the fifth and last of the Kings of China to Confucius himself. It is what he called Khun KAid, or ‘the Spring and Autumn,’ a very brief chronicle compiled by him of the annals of his native state of Lf for 242 years, from B.C, 722 to 481. But there is not much to ke b 2 XX PREFACE. gleaned from it for the Sacred Texts; and if we were to launch out into the three supplements to it of 30 KAiming, Kung-yang, and K(-liang, the result would not repay the labour. A translation of the whole of 30’s supplement, much the most important, is given in my work on the Khun Xhid, published at Hong Kong in 1872.
2A translation of the whole of 30’s supplement, much the most important, is given in my work on the Khun Xhid, published at Hong Kong in 1872. There is another short treatise attributed to Confucius,— the Hsiao King, or ‘Classic of Filial Piety. Though not like one of the five great works that have been described, it was the first to receive the denomination of a King,— and that from the lips of the sage himself,—if the account which we have received of the matter is to be relied on. This little work does not come to us, like the KAun KX Aid, as directly from the pencil of Confucius, but in the shape of conversations between him and his disciple 34ng-3ze, put on record in the first place, probably, by some members of Sang’s school. No portion of the ancient literature has more exercised the minds and engaged the attention of many of the emperors of successive dynasties. The Hsido seems to me an attempt to construct a religion on the basis of the cardinal virtue of Filial Piety, and is open to criticism in many respects. A translation of it is given in the present volume. The classical books are often spoken of as being ‘the five King’ and ‘the four Sh.’ The King have all been separately referred to above; the four Sha is an abbreviation for the Sh or Books of the four Philosophers. The first is the Lun Yii, or ‘Discourses and Conversations,’ occupied chiefly with sayings of Confucius and conversations ketween him and many of his disciples. The second is the Works of Mencius, perhaps the greatest thinker and writer of the Confucian school after the Master. I hope to be able to give both these works. The third of the ShQ is the T4 Hsio, or ‘Great Learning,’ ascribed, like the Hsiao, to Sang-3ze. The fourth is the Kung Yung, or ‘ Doctrine of the Mean,’ the production of 3ze-sze, the sage’s grandson. Both of these treatises, however, are taken from the Li Xt. The whole of the Four Books were translated and published by me in 1861. PREFACE. XXxi III. The third Religion in China is what is called Taoism. It was, like Confucianism, of native origin, and its acknowledged founder was Li &, called also Li Po-yang, and, after his death, Li Tan. More commonly he is designated L4o- 3ze, translated by some ‘the Old Philosopher,’ and by others ‘the Old Boy’ from a fabulous story that his mother carried him in her womb for seventy-two years, so that when he was at length cut out of it, his hair was already white. His birth is referred to the year 604 B.C., so that he was between fifty and sixty years older than Confucius. There are accounts, hardly reliable, of interviews and discussions between the two men.
3His birth is referred to the year 604 B.C., so that he was between fifty and sixty years older than Confucius. There are accounts, hardly reliable, of interviews and discussions between the two men. LAo-3ze’s system often goes with English writers by the name of Rationalism; but if that name be retained, the term must be taken in quite a peculiar sense. His doctrine was that of the T4o, but it is not easy to determine what English term will best express the meaning of the Chinese character. The only record which we have of L4o-3ze’s views is the T4o-teh King, or ‘Classic of Tao and Virtue,’ a treatise of no great length. It was published at Paris in 1842, with a translation in French, by the late Stanislas Julien, under the title of ‘Le Livre de la Voie et de la Vertu.’ Appealing to the views of Kwang-jze and other writers of the Taoist school, M. Julien says that ‘Le T4o est dépourvu d’action, de pensée, de jugement, d’intelligence,’ and adds that ‘it appears impossible therefore to take it for the primordial reason, the Sublime Intelligence, which created and rules the world.’ A translation in English was published, in 1868, by the Rev. Dr. Chalmers of Canton, under the title of ‘the Speculations in Metaphysics, Polity, and Morality, of “the Old Philosopher.”’ Dr. Chalmers retains the term T4o in his English Text, and says, ‘I have thought it better to leave the word T4o untranslated, both because it has given the name to the sect,—the TAoists—and because no English word is its exact equivalent. Three terms suggest themselves,—the Way, Reason, and the Word; but they are all liable to objection. Were we guided by etymology, “the Way” would come nearest to the original, and in one XXii PREFACE. or two passages the idea of a Way seems to be in the term ; but this is too materialistic to serve the purpose of a translation. Reason again seems to be more like a quality or attribute of some conscious Being than TAo is. I would translate it by the Word in the sense of the Logos, but this would be like settling the question which I wish to leave open, viz. what amount of resemblance there is between the Logos of the New Testament and this Tao, which is its nearest representative in Chinese.’
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.