huan t'an and yang hsiung on ssu ... - download.xuebalib.com

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

Huan T'an and Yang Hsiung on Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju: Some Desultory Remarks on History and Tradition Author(s): Timoteus Pokora Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 91, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1971), pp. 431-438Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/600263Accessed: 06-01-2016 15:02 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 138.73.1.36 on Wed, 06 Jan 2016 15:02:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/publisher/aos

http://www.jstor.org/stable/600263

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



Brief Communications

Huan T'an and Yang Hsiung on Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju: Some Desultory Remarks on History and Tradition

The poetry of Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju was greatly in vogue during the Han period and later. One of its admirers was the influential philosopher and poet Yang Hsiung, but it is almost unknown that another philosopher of the 1st century A.D., Huan T'an, a close friend of Yang Hsiung, was of the same mind. It is somewhat surprising that none of the surviving fragments of Huan T'an's Hsin lun mentions his interest in Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju, and the philosopher is not mentioned (evidently intentionally) in the well-known collection of anecdotes, Hsi-ching tsa-chi. Reliable information on the subject may be obtained from Liu Hsieh's Wen-hsin tiao-lung and some T'ang encyclopaedias, but it is only in the 16th century that Yang Shen quotes Yang Hsiung's reply to Huan T'an's letter dealing with the evaluation of Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju's poetry. It is shown that the reply was in all probability fabricated, partly by combining information from different sources. This is another example how the Chinese tradition used and misused historical information on important personalities.

It is almost a forbidden game' to analyze the opinions of Huan T'anb (ca. 43 B.C.-28. A.D.) on Ssu-ma Hsiang- juc (179-117 B.C.) since we do not find anything of rele- vance for the present problem in the extant fragments of Huan T'an. Therefore we also have to use some information concerning Yang Hsiungd (53 B.C.-18 A.D.), who had much to say about Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju2 and who was very close in time to his contemporary Huan T'an, only ten years his junior.

However strange that may be, the "earliest" opinion of Yang Hsiung on Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju is already quoted by Ssu-ma Ch'iene [sic!] at the end of Ssu-ma Hsiang- ju's biography in Shih chi 117.3 There are different ex- planations4 of this interpolation,6 one of them being the hypothesis that the text of the Shih chi has been re-

1 This term is used by H. Wilhelm in the introduction to his Notes on Chou Fiction in the commemorative vol- ume for Professor Hsiao Kung-ch'iiana since the material he studies is entirely nonexistent.

2 See Y. Hervouet, Un pokte de cour sous les Han: Sseu-ma Siang-jou (Paris, 1964), pp. 381-383, 412-415.

3 Takigawa Kametaro, Shih chi hui-chu k'ao-chengf (Peking, 1954), chapter 117, p. 105 (4807).

4 Chavannes, Les Memoires Historiques de Se-ma Ts'ien, I, Introduction, p. XLIV (Paris, 1895). For a partial translation see Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou (p. 412 and n. 4), who omits the short statement that Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju galloped among the tunes of Cheng and Wei.z See also the following note and an unpublished Yale dissertation by Elma E. Kopetsky, "A Study of Some Han Fi of Praise, The Fi on Hunts, Sacrifices and Capi- tals" (New Haven, 1967), pp. 64-66. For Yang Hsiung there is another unpublished dissertation by David R. Knechtges, "Yang Shyong, the Fuh and Hann Rhetoric" (Seattle, University of Washington, 1968).

6 For the translation see H. Wilhelm, "The Scholar's Frustration: Notes on a Type of 'Fu'," in J. K. Fairbank (editor), Chinese Thought and Institutions (Chicago, 1957), p. 314 and notes 22, 23 on p. 400.

copied from the Han shu.6 Anyhow, it is of some importance to note that this opinion of Yang Hsiung is not to be found in the present text of his Fa yenh ("Model Words") .7

The first place where Huan T'an is compared with Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju might seemingly be an opinion of Liu Hsiehi (ca. 465-522) in his Wen-hsin tiao-lungj,8 as translated by Vincent C. Y. Shih:

Huan T'an's works have been acclaimed as being as rich as I Tunk, and Sung Hung' compared him to [Ssu- ma] Hsiang-ju in his recommendation. However, judged on the basis of his "Fu on the Palace of Chi- ling"m and other works, he is definitely shallow and lacking in talent. This proves that a writer who excels at satire and parable may not be able to write rhetori- cal pieces. Ching-t'ungn [or Feng Yen0] liked to write.9

Shih is right when pointing to one incongruence: Sung Hung, according to his biography in the Hou Han shu,?' compared Huan T'an to Yang Hsiung and to Liu Hsiangq and his son Hsin,r but not to Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju.11

The incongruence disappears, however, if the text is translated differently:

[The owner of] Huan T'an's works has been acclaimed as being as rich as I Tun, and Sung Hung praised and

Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou, p. 6; Wilhelm's opinion ("The Scholar's Frustration," p. 400, n. 23) is somewhat different.

7 Takigawa, as quoted in note 3 above. See also note 37 below.

8 10, 47, p. 110, 2 of the Ssu-pu pei-yao double-page edition.

9 The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons by Liu Hsieh. A Study of Thought and Pattern in Chinese Litera- ture (New York, 1959), chapter XLVII, "Literary Tal- ents," p. 253.

10 Hou Han shu, 26, p. 956 of the Wang Hsien-ch'ien edition, Hou Han shu chi-chieh in the Wan-yu wen-k'uP collectanea.

11 Shih, The Literary Mind, p. 253, note 27.

431



Journal of the American Oriental Society, 91.3 (1971)

recommended him. But, comparing [Huan T'an's rhyme-prose with that of Ssu-ma] Hsiang-ju and with the other rhyme-prose written in the [Palace of the] Assembled Spirits, it is definitely shallow and lacking in talent. Therefore we know that he excelled in his satirical treatise [i.e. Hsin lun8] but could not come up to [the necessary level of] polite literature.

It follows that there was no comparison by Sung Hung, in A.D. 26, between Huan T'an and Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju and that it was Liu Hsieh who contrasted unfavorably Huan T'an's poetry with that of Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju.

Liu Hsieh's text belongs only partly to him, since he based himself upon the Lun hengl2 of Wang Ch'ungu who compared, first, Emperor Wu'sv liking for Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju with that of Emperor Ch'engw for Yang Hsiung, secondly, Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju, Huan T'an and Yang Hsiung as able officers of the two emperors. Thirdly, Wang Ch'ung greatly admired and compared Yang Hsiung's and Huan T'an's books.13 But the tertium comparationis between the three officer-poets on the part of Wang Ch'ung and Liu Hsieh was different: Wang Ch'ung stressed the importance of their official careers, while Liu Hsieh compared the rhyme-prose of Huan T'an and Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju.

The reliability of Wang Ch'ung or, better, of the Lun heng, was questioned by Ch'i Yen-ming,14 who proposed

12 Chapter "Lost Texts": 20, 61, p. 682. Edition by Huang Hui, Lun-heng chiao-shiht, Tai-pei reprint, 1964.

13 A. Forke, Lun-Heng, Part II, Miscellaneous Essays of Wang Ch'ung (Leipzig, 1911), p. 274. Forke translates as follows: "Hsiao Wu Ti was partial to works of fiction and poetry and therefore invited Sse-Ma Hsiang-Ju, Hsiao Ch'eng Ti delighted in voluminous writings and favoured Yang Tse Yiin. Even at his hunting parties Yang Tse Yiin followed in a carriage. Had Sse-ma Hsiang-ju, Huan Chiin Shan, and Yang Tse Yiin been officers unable to fill up their documents or to connect their words to phrases, how would Wu Ti have liked, or Ch'eng Ti have appreciated them? Therefore I say that to read Yang Tse Yiin's chapters affords a greater pleas- ure than to be an official with a thousand piculs a year, and holding the book of Huan Chiin Shan in one's hands, one is richer than having heaped up treasures." Forke did not recognize the name of I Tun, as pointed out already by P. Pelliot in his review in Journal Asiatique, XX (1912), p. 165. For I Tun, who is mentioned already in the Huai-nan-tzu,x see B. Watson, Records of the Grand Historian of China (New York, 1961), Vol. II, p. 483 (chapter 129 of the Shih chi). It is practically unknown that Wang Ch'ung was also a poet; at least the T'ai- p'ing yi-lan (966.2b) quotes, according to Jen Fang's Shu-i chiy, a few characters of his Kuo fu' ("Rhyme- prose on the Fruit").

14 Huang Huit (see note 12 above) quotes from Ch'i Yen-ming'saa unpublished draft Lun heng cha-chiab. Ch'i

the theory that Huan T'an's name (Huan Chiin-shanad) as found in the third comparison entered the second comparison only by mistake or, in other words, that both the first two comparisons bore only on Yang Hsiung and Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju. Ch'i Yen-ming could perhaps still have stressed that in the second comparison Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju and Yang Hsiung are mentioned only by their respective styles, viz. Ch'ang-ch'ingae and Tzu-yiinf, while Huan T'an is mentioned as Huan Chiin-shan. But in this place Huan Chiin-shan appears for the first time, and it is for this reason that the surname is also given. Nevertheless, in the immediately following third comparison both the philosophers appear again as Yang Tsu- yiin and Huan Chiin-shan respectively, although the sur- names could have been spared. It seems that there is something wrong with the style. Finally, we have to stress that Liu Hsieh was impressed only by Wang Ch'ung's comparison of Huan T'an with I Tun, and that Liu Hsieh's quotation of this passage from the Lun heng does not necessarily corroborate that Huan T'an was originally mentioned by Wang Ch'ung together with Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju and Yang Hsiung. On the other hand, Ch'i Yen-ming's suggestion is only a conjecture.

Based upon one example from the Wen-hsin tiao-lung we may say that Liu Hsieh really knew something concerning Huan T'an's attitude towards Ssu-ma Hsiang- ju's poetry. Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju wrote for Emperor Wu during his visit to the Palace of Righteous Spring,? near which stood the grave of the Second Emperor of the Ch'in, a small rhyme-prose entitled Tiao Erh-shihah ("Pity of the Second Emperor")." Liu Hsieh quotes Huan T'an's opinion on the fu: "Its words are [full of] com- passion and sadness, which may move the reader to heave a sympathetic sigh."'6 The main point of Huan T'an's evaluation was that literary (and musical) production may bring about sadness in the reader or listener.17

Yen-ming was a contemporary of Huang Hui (whose book was written between 1928 and 1935 and published in Ch'ang-sha in 1938), and his commentary was the last known to Huang Hui (born ca. 1903), having been written later than that of Hu Shihac, who also wrote but did not publish his commentaries to the Lun heng.

16 For the translation see Watson, Records, II, pp. 331-332.

16 Wen-hsin tiao-lung, 3, 13, p. 35, 2; Shih, The Literary Mind, chapter XIII, "Lament and Condolence," p. 71. This is fragment 194 in my translation of Huan T'an's Writings, to be published in the future. The text continues (in the translation of Shih): "Its last section is particularly pertinent, for it is concise and capable of evok- ing sad thoughts." I assume that this sentence already belongs to Liu Hsieh. Cf. Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang- jou, p. 418, note 7.

17 Jao Tsung-i, Lu Chi Wen-fu li-lun yii yin-yiieh kuan-hsiai ("The Theory of Lu Chi's Rhymeprose on

432




Yen K'o-chunak (1762-1843) in his Ch'iian Hou Han wenl' (15.5a)18 presents from Ma Tsung's (T'ang) I linn (3.10a) the following quotation from Huan T'an's Hsin lun: "Yang Tzu-yiina worked at fu. Wang Chiin-taa^ 19

practiced with weapons. I wished to follow both the Masters and study [with them. Yang] Tzu-yun said: 'If you can read a thousand fu, then you will be familiar with them'.20 [Wang] Chiin-ta said: 'If you can look at a thousand double-edged swords, then you will understand them'. A proverb says: 'Even all the ingenious gods of Fu Hsi2l do not [dare to] pass the door of those with practice'." A shorter form of this anecdote on the thousandfu without mentioning Wang Chiin-ta and Fu Hsi is quoted in the I-wen lei-chuib (56.18a)22. There is another notice on the troubles encountered by Yang Hsiung after having composed the Rhyme-prose on the Kan-ch'iian Palacebd; the versions are rather numerous23 and only some of them mention the anecdote on the thousand fu.24

Now, the short but well-known book Hsi-ching tsa-

Literature in its Relation with Music"), Chigoku bun- gaku hoaj, 14 (1961), p. 29.

18 A part of his large collection of pre-T'ang fragments, Ch'uan shang-ku San-tai Ch'in Han San-kuo Liu-ch'ao wendl (for which see also note 42 below). See also Sun P'ing-i, Huan-tzu Hsin lunam, 8a, edition Ssu- pu pei-yao. My fragment 140 A (see n. 16 above). Yen K'o-chiin and Sun P'ing-i are further quoted as Yen and Sun respectively.

19 Unknown. 20 This place is evidently alluded to at the end of

Wen-hsin tiao-lung 2,8, p. 24, 1; Shih, The Literary Mind, Chapter VIII, "Elucidation of Fu," p. 49 and note 19.

21 The text has: "Fu Hsi hsiang shen ch'iao cheaq." Instead of hsiar I propose to read some other hsia or hsit, which are used in the name of the legendary emperor Fu Hsi. For the emendation of hsiangau for the graphically similar chungav see the texts of Yang Shenaw or Wang Shih-chenax mentioned below, notes 31, 34, 35. The edition of I lin in the San-shih-san chung ts'ung-shuaY (vol. 66-67) has a gloss which says that the edition in the Tao tsangaz also has Fu hsi hsiang shen; it further proposes that, instead of fuba, another fubb should be read. The meaning would then be as follows: "Those who sub- mitted to (a course of) training, feel themselves like gods.... It seems evident that the text as such is unin- telligible and that one or more characters have to be changed, but even then the general sense would remain the same: the necessity of constant training and the positive effect of it.

22 Yen, 15.5a; Sun, 8a. See note 18 above. 23 See Yen, 14.6a; Sun, 7a-b, 13a (commentary). 24 Li Shan'sbe commentary to Wen hsiianbf, 17.4a and

T'ai-p'ing yu-lanbg, 587.7a. My fragments 80 D and C (see n. 16 above).

chibh, the authorship of which is not known,25 gives the quotation from Huan T'an without mentioning him: "Somebody asked Yang Hsiung how to write fu. [Yang] Hsiung said: 'If you read a thousand fu, then you will be able to write them'."26

The immediate question is why the name of Huan T'an, who discussed the writing of fu with Yang Hsiung, has been dropped. Yii Chia-hsi27 proposed the following hypothesis: if it had to be believed that the author of the Hsi-ching tsa-chi was Liu Hsin, the unknown author or compiler could not have referred to Huan T'an and to his Hsin lun which was written in the Later Han period, i.e. after the death of Liu Hsin in A.D. 23.

Well, this argument might be used against the authorship of Liu Hsin, but this problem is not of interest for us. What is important for our problem is which of the two versions-the "anonymous" version or that with Huan T'an's name-is original. The version in the Hsi-ching tsa-chi corresponds well with Yang Hsiung's use, in the Fa-yen, of the form of anonymous questions followed by Yang Hsiung's answers. But, first, this form of Yang Hsiung was itself an imitation of the Analects and, secondly, it was surely not difficult for anybody to imitate that aspect of Yang Hsiung's style.

Another possibility would be to find out which version was earlier. We have seen 28 that the anecdote on Huan T'an's questioning Yang Hsiung's ars poetica is related in the I-lin, I-wen lei-chu, Li Shan's commentary, and in the T'ai-p'ing yii-lan. Li Shan in his commentary written between 556 and 560 quoted already from the Hsi-ching tsa-chi (as did Hsii Chienbo [659-729] in his Ch'u-hsiieh chib).29 All these sources, including the T'ai-p'ing yii- lan, despite its completion in the first years of the Sung, included quotations from authentic pre-T'ang texts; however, in the case of the T'ai-p'ing yii-lan, they were only taken over from previous encyclopaedias. But, since the text of the Hsin lun undoubtedly still existed during the T'ang, I do not think that the time priority of the second-hand sources can play any role, since the

25 Hsi-ching tsa-chi is generally attributed to Liu Hsinr or to Ko Hungbi; the catalogue Ssu-k'u ch'iian- shu tsung-mu t'i-yaobj, p. 2882 (ed. Wan-yu wen-k'u, further SKTY) attributes it to Wu Chiinbk (469-520). The relevant problems were studied by Lao Kan, Lun Hsi- ching tsa-chi chih tso-che chi ch'eng-shu shih-taibl ("The Authorship and Date of the Hsi-ching tsa-chi"), in Li- shih yii-yen yen-chiu-so chi-k'anbm, 33 (1962), pp. 19-34.

26 Hsi-ching tsa-chi, 2.4a, edition Ssu-pu ts'ung-k'an; Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou, p. 383, n. 1.

27 Yii Chia-hsi (or Yii Chi-yii), Ssu-k'u t'i-yao pien- chengbn, 17, p. 1013 (Peking, 1958). See also the article of Lao Kan (note 25 above), p. 27.

28 See the text above and the notes 22, 24. 29 This is stated in the catalogue SKTY, p. 2884 (see

note 24 above).

433




four texts mentioned clearly quote from Huan T'an's Hsin lun directly. A much more interesting problem which I am unable to explain is why the Hsi-ching tsa- chi, a book pertaining to the time of Liu Hsin and Yang Hsiung, does not mention Huan T'an at all.

There is in the Hsi-ching tsa-chi (3.5a) another in- stance of Yang Hsiung's evaluation of Ssu-ma Hsiang- ju's rhyme-prose. After having stated that everybody praised his rhyme-prose and that even poets were unable to add anything to it, the author of the Hsi-ching tsa-chi quotes Yang Hsiung: "[Ssu-ma] Ch'ang-ch'ing's fu do not originate from [the hands of] men. How could such a divine transformation have been achieved?"30

Now, finally, we may return to Huan T'an. The editor Yen K'o-chiin quotes Yang Hsiung's reply to Huan T'an's letter: "[Ssu-ma] Ch'ang-ch'ing'sfu do not originate from [the hands of] men. How could such a divine transformation have been achieved? If we examine it roughly, [we may say that if] you are able to read a thousandfu, then you would be able to write them. A proverb says: 'Even all the ingenious gods of Fu Hsi do not [dare to] pass the door of those with practice'."31 It is evident that the present text represents a combination of the information from the Hsi-ching tsa-chi and from the Hsin lun as quoted in the I lin.32 The only differences are that there is a short connecting clause ("If we examine it roughly") and the new text is presented as a letter from Yang Hsiung to Huan T'an. The letter indirectly shows that Huan T'an was also interested in Ssu-ma Hsiang- ju's rhyme-prose. This is quite probable for the further reason that Feng Yeno (ca. 10 B.C.-ca. 70 A.D.), who shares a biography with Huan T'an in Hou Han shu 28, imitated Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju's poetry.33

30 Hsi-ching tsa-chi, 3.5a gives yabq as the last char- acter, whereasWangShih-chen (see note 35 below) has the final interrogative particle yehbr and Yen K'o-chiin together with Yang Shen (see notes 31, 34, 40 below) gives hsiehbs, which may be interpreted as an equivalent of the previous yeh. Hervouet's translation (Sse-ma Siang- jou, p. 413, n. 3) somewhat differs from mine.

31 Ch'iian Han wenbt, 52.10a. 32 See notes and the text to notes 20, 21 above. 33 Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou, p. 383; see also note

9 above for Liu Hsieh's text, which mentions both Huan T'an and Feng Yen.0 Nevertheless, Liu Hsieh (ca. 465- 522) was not the first writer to bring together Huan T'an and Feng Yen. Liu Hsieh's contemporary Liu Chinbu (462-521, known also as Liu Hsiao-piaobv, who annotated the Shih-shuo hsin-yiibw) compared in his "Treatise on Destiny" (Pien ming lun) Pien ming lun bx) the unhappy careers of four eminent officials: Chia Iby, Feng T'angbz, Feng Yen and Huan T'an. Of the last two men Liu Chiin said: "Chiinshanad rose in his flight like a wild goose whose feathers were, however, clipped notwithstanding his proper behaviour in the High Cloud [-Terrace].

Yen K'o-chiin gives as his source Yang Shen'saw (1488-1559) book Ch'ih-tu ch'ing-tsai.c 34I have been unable to lay my hand on Yang Shen's book, but it was re- edited and amended by Wang Shih-chenax (1526-1590) under the title [Tseng chi] Ch'ih-tu ch'ing-tsaicm in 1571.35 Yang Shen's "Correct Selection of Collected Cor- respondence" originally included letters from remote antiquity up to the Six Dynasties, which Wang Shih- chen supplemented with material dating from as late as his own time (cf. Wang's second introduction to the book). It is rather surprising to find out that this pecu- liar redaction of two texts concerning Huan T'an's atti-

Ching-t'ungn rose like a phoenix, but was destroyed quickly, his pinions being pierced by the wind. Was their talent insufficient or was there some defect in their conduct?" (Wen hsiian, ed. Liu-ch'en chuca, Ssu-pu ts'ung- k'ancb, 64.16a-b).

Li Shan's commentary refers to a similar metaphor on shooting a bird from high clouds in a letter by Ying Chiie (190-252; Wen hsiianbf, 42.35 a-b). It is more interesting, for us, that Ying Chii mentions a letter by Huan T'an to Pan Ssudf (for which see note 40 below). Ying Chi is well-known because of his ideas on the relative in- dependence of literature (see, e.g., Shih, The Literary Mind, p. 240). It is evidently no chance that one of Ying Chii's works was entitled Hsin lun, i.e. in the same way as the book of Huan T'an (see T'ai-p'ing yi-lan, 265.10b and 739.12a). For Ying Chii's letter see again note 40 below. Liu Chin mentioned Huan T'an again in his "Extension of the Treatise on Breaking of Friendship" (Kuang Chiieh chiao luncd; Wen hsuian, 55.12a-b; fragment 190). Liu Chiin was inspired by Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju's poetry (Hervouet, Sse-ma Siang-jou, p. 396). On Liu Chiin see the article by Ch'en Yuan, Yiin-kang shih-k'u ssu chih i ching yii Liu Hsiao-piao? ("The Work of Liu Hsiao-piao in Translating Buddhist Texts at the Yiin Kang Cave Temples"), in Yen-ching hsiieh-paocf (1929), 1015-1019.

34 Instead of the usual ch'ihch Yen gives another ch'ihci, which is used in the title of Yang Shen's book because both the characters are interchangeable. For this point see the catalogue SKTY, p. 4277 (see note 25 above), which gives accounts both of the original book by Yang Shen and of its amended version by Wang Shih- chen. Ch'ih-tucj was, according to Lao Kanbl (p. 69), a large (therefore ch'ih- foot) board used during the Han period for writing private letters, mostly in the calli- graphic style of ts'ao shu, "grass style." Lao Kan, Han tai ti "shih shu" yii "ch'ih-tu"ck, in Ta-lu tsa-chihcI, XXI (1960), 1, pp. 69-72.

35 Library of the Harvard-Yenching Institute, call number T 5773/1142; p. 6b. For a fine biography of Wang Shih-chen see B. Kraft, "Wang Shih-chen (1526-1590): Abriss seines Lebens," Oriens Extremus, 5 (1958), 169- 201.

434




tude towards Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju occurred sometime during the eight or nine centuries between the T'ang and the Ming. Some missing links between those two periods concerning this particular problem may perhaps still be found.

Both Yang Shen and Wang Shih-chen had real interest in both Yang Hsiung and Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju, possibly also in Huan T'an.36 Yang Shen in one of his numerous glosses pointed to a quotation from Yang Hsiung's Fa yen, a quotation not included in its present text. It presents a comparison between Ch'ii Yiiancs and Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju.37 Wang Shih-chen quoted the anecdote on Yang Hsiung's evaluation of Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju's fu as not coming from men's hands, without reference to the Hsi-ching tsa-chi and without any mention of the form of

36 Chu I-tsun (1629-1709) quotes in his Ching i k'aocn 1, 3, p. 1 (ed. SPPY) Yang Shen's opinion on the two versions of the I chingco-Lien-shancp and Kuei-tsangeq (Yen, 14.8b; Sun, preface, 4a, 7b, 15b, 23a; fragment 90) -as related by Huan T'an. Yang Shen states that according to Huan T'an's information both the books still existed during the Later Han, although they are not mentioned in Han shu 30 (I-wen chiher). Cf. also note 40 below.

37Yang Shen, Sheng-an ch'ian-chict, 52, p. 596 [ed. Wan-yu wen-k'u]. Yang Shen gives, reference only to the commentary to Wen hsuan. The quotation was translated by Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou, p. 413, note 1 in accordance with Li Shan's commentary to Wen hsiian, 50.15b, without reference to Yang Shen. Other information from Yang Shen on Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju (in the book Tan ch'ien tsa-lucu, 8, pp. 73-75, 77; ed. SPTK) was analyzed and translated by Hervouet, Sseu- ma Siang-jou, pp. 421-422; cf. also p. 420. Another text of Yang Hsiung, not to be found in the present text of his Fa yen, was already quoted at the beginning of the present article (see also note 7). It should be stressed that such late quotations, not verifiable in the present text, may be unreliable. Takigawa Kametar5 mentions at the beginning of Shih chi 28 (the Treatise on the Feng and Shan Sacrificescv, p. 2) according to Ma Tuan-lincw (sic! ca. 1250-1325) a text of Chuang-tzucx on those sacrifices. Later on Chou Shou-ch'angcY (1814-1884), in his Han shu chu chiao-puez, 18, pp. 261-262 (of the TSCC edition), quotes a similar text of Chuang-tzu which, however, mentions the theory on the "transfer of mandate to another dynasty" (i hsing ko-mingda). This is evidently the terminology of Tung Chung-shudb and such a late

quotation from Chuang-tzu is clearly not genuine. For this point see again Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou, p. 198, n. 2. On the same problem of the early (and half legendary) development of the feng and shan sacrifices Taki-

gawa in the same place (p. 3) three times quotes the opinion of Yang Shen.

a letter from Yang Hsiung to Huan T'an.38 Wang Shih- chen was critical both of Tung-fang Shuo and Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju for their Bohemian way of life.39 Both Yang Shen and Wang Shih-chen reprinted a letter from Pan Ssudf to Huan T'an on the borrowing of Taoist literature from the rich library of the Pan family.40

By way of conclusion we might propose some observa- tions. Huan T'an, evidently under the decisive influence of Yang Hsiung, was undoubtedly much interested in Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju's rhyme-prose,41 as everybody was at his time. For some unknown reason we owe this information to Liu Hsieh and not to the author of the Hsi-ching tsa-chi. Later on the history and the tradition became amalgamated to such a degree that only from 16th century sources do we learn "properly" about the letters exchanged between Yang Hsiung and Huan T'an in the

38 Wang Shih-chen, I-yuan chih-yendc (Shanghai, 1925), p. 2.9b. According to Wang Shih-chen, both Ssu- ma Hsiang-ju and Tung-fang Shuodd belonged to the ironical critics (ku chide; cf. Shih chi 126). For other information see Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou, pp. 408,423.

39 I-yuan chih-yen, 8.8a. Yang Shen connected both of the unconventional men because they practiced criticism by indirection; cf. Hervouet, Sseu-ma Siang-jou, p. 422 and n. 5.

40 Ch'ih-tu ch'ing tsai, 6b-7a; Pan Ssu, Ta Huan sheng chieh Lao Chuangdg. On p. 6b of this book is given the text of Yang Hsiung's answer to Huan T'an's letter which I have already mentioned. For the letter of Pan Ssu see Han shu 100 A, p. 5819. Huan sheng is undoubtedly Huan T'an. The art of writing letters must have been rather in vogue just in the first century A.D. since Han shu 92, p. 5269 relates of Ch'en Tsundh (d. ca. 26 A.D.), a contemporary and probably an acquaintance of Huan T'an, that he liked to write letters and that his ch'ih-tuci (see note 34 above) were collected by the ruler. For the social standing of Ch'en Tsun see Tatsuo Masa- buchidi, "The Yu-hsiadi and the Social Order in the Han period," in The Annals of the Hitotsubashi Academy, III (1952), I, p. 98. The letters of Ch'en Tsun were admired by Liu Hsieh, as were those of Ying Chiiec (note 33 above), Ssu-ma Ch'ienc and Yang Hsiungd. In fact, there is a special chapter in the Wen-hsin tiao-lung (Shu chidk; 6, 25), translated by Shih under the title "Epistolary Writing" (XXV, pp. 144-154), but it does not mention any letter by Yang Hsiung to Huan T'an. This is another argument against the authenticity of this letter as given by Yang Shen, if only ex silentio. Both Yang Hsiung and Huan T'an are frequently mentioned in the Wen-hsin tiao-lung.

41 The fact that this is not stressed by Hervouet in his excellent book on Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju does not, of course, diminish Hervouet's merit in tracing the history of Ssu- ma Hsiang-ju's place in the later development of Chinese poetry and literature (Ch. 9 of Hervouet's book).

435




first century B.C. or A.D., letters dealing with the evaluation of Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju. We came to know all that thanks to Yen K'o-chiin42 who, despite his customary

42 I know of two studies which point to some de- ficiencies of Yen K'o-chiin's compilation. Chang Yen, YenK'o-chun Ch'uan shang-ku San-tai Ch'in Han San- kuo Liu-ch'ao wen pien-tz'u te-shih p'ing-id', in Ta-lu

tsa-chih1e, 21 (1960), 8-11 (276-279). Liu P'an-sui, Yen T'ieh-ch'iao Ch'ian shang-ku San-tai Ch'in Han wen

pu-mudm, in Pei-p'ing t'u-shu-kuan kuan-ktandn, 5

habit, quoted in the 19th century the 16th century text by Yang Shen as relevant for the Han period. Due to the usual lore the Ming admirers and critics of Ssu-ma

Hsiang-ju knew more about him than did his own con- temporaries and the group of eminent philosophers in the first century A.D.

TIMOTEUS POKORA

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

(1931), 1 (not accessible). It is generally stressed that Yen's collection is by no means ch'?an 'full', as he himself entitled it.

436




ANX,j BtR- C,,-fItP DIWtA E,lFitv FW(J[I

P 3E ? j i^ A 9 A; X QUrIJ [ RUI R S,R

TV,,,fiig Ult Vi-t W~) X*:-+ Yff

i?, t 'L:t Z ~ AA, A.,~ ABt -$Lt AC WA

AD~R-Lt[ AE I11 AF S AG_R( ) AH.-tkL

AI VE 1^ , kiNtE?S ^|t j AJ 41M3'R?

AK RT A M AWA - ̂a- ATfro ANA,?,X, s9

;,t74 AOiT-^ AP3.;k AQJf;W$P' ARX

ASt: ATa AU* AVT AWig AX?.teL. AY-

t-kii AAZ'il BA') BB: BC%M BD-t

W BE B BF Bk BG:kFPT BH i5

BI :;it BJ E A, t',1- BKRi-~ BLi,- i *

jtl^ff^5@WSt BM ^T^FWE ] BN U

(+,-~,p) , 1*$9: BO.,, BPr$S-P BQ~f

BR5I BS R BT~:3C BUiJi BVV4J4M IBWtfrl^,

of BXiJf$.i BYW?" BZ4t, CA.I-g CB ElI S

5J1 CCOi.f CD^M,t CENI?tgS4 W :1i&J

437



Journal of the American Oriental Society, 91.3 (1971) Journal of the American Oriental Society, 91.3 (1971)

41R CFI CG, /~) 41R CFI CG, /~) CHJR CIFji CJ>JI CHJR CIFji CJ>JI

CK-st " '." a" RJR" CL :kM (;t, cRi

t CN &#',P=4 COV,A1 CP^HI CQX? CRu

#@r CSW a FfV CT7JI- CUOrA CV@1

CWFMMU CX'T CYj]7 CZA1I17 DAtt

^i- DBIfTf DCEs DD- DEM DFt

A DGXg:tHt DHG DIt &?| DJ DI

DK-%'A /DL s JNi" ^? h<% ^ ^|: F-L-, 2

~81 zli EI~g0VI~U t t,l/ffii _t_J * DN;4

Similar Thoughts in the Mahabhdrata, The Literature of "Greater India" and in the Christian Gospels*

Wise sayings of India could have influenced the Christian Gospels or vice versa. There are two golden rules and two proverbs which occur in the Mahabharata and other

Sanskrit literary sources, from which they have been included in the literature of "Greater India," and in the Christian Gospels. They are: "and why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye but considerest not the beam that is in thy own eye" and "all things whatsoever ye would that man should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the Prophets," as well as "recompense to no man evil with evil" and "whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."

These sayings are analysed below.

CK-st " '." a" RJR" CL :kM (;t, cRi

t CN &#',P=4 COV,A1 CP^HI CQX? CRu

#@r CSW a FfV CT7JI- CUOrA CV@1

CWFMMU CX'T CYj]7 CZA1I17 DAtt

^i- DBIfTf DCEs DD- DEM DFt

A DGXg:tHt DHG DIt &?| DJ DI

DK-%'A /DL s JNi" ^? h<% ^ ^|: F-L-, 2

~81 zli EI~g0VI~U t t,l/ffii _t_J * DN;4

Similar Thoughts in the Mahabhdrata, The Literature of "Greater India" and in the Christian Gospels*

Wise sayings of India could have influenced the Christian Gospels or vice versa. There are two golden rules and two proverbs which occur in the Mahabharata and other

Sanskrit literary sources, from which they have been included in the literature of "Greater India," and in the Christian Gospels. They are: "and why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye but considerest not the beam that is in thy own eye" and "all things whatsoever ye would that man should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the Prophets," as well as "recompense to no man evil with evil" and "whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."

These sayings are analysed below.

1. Many books and studies were written on Indian influence on Christianity and Christian influences on Indian religions, but it will never be possible to give a conclusive answer to these questions. Were the Christian Gospels influenced by Indian, particularly Buddhist texts, or were the Indian, and particularly the later Buddhist texts, influenced by Christian Gospels? It is even more difficult to give an answer to the question whether a wise saying, a maxim, an aphorism, a proverb

1. Many books and studies were written on Indian influence on Christianity and Christian influences on Indian religions, but it will never be possible to give a conclusive answer to these questions. Were the Christian Gospels influenced by Indian, particularly Buddhist texts, or were the Indian, and particularly the later Buddhist texts, influenced by Christian Gospels? It is even more difficult to give an answer to the question whether a wise saying, a maxim, an aphorism, a proverb

incorporated in the Sanskrit literature and in the Chris- tian Gospels is of Indian or Christian origin. Even if we would know the date of the composition of the Ma- habharata-and this question is still unresolved-we would not know whether a wise saying, a maxim, an aphorism, a proverb included therein is of the same date as the epic, or one of its parvans or whether it originated much earlier and was incorporated later by the compiler of the Mahabharata from the floating mass of oral tradition. The same is also true for the Christian

incorporated in the Sanskrit literature and in the Chris- tian Gospels is of Indian or Christian origin. Even if we would know the date of the composition of the Ma- habharata-and this question is still unresolved-we would not know whether a wise saying, a maxim, an aphorism, a proverb included therein is of the same date as the epic, or one of its parvans or whether it originated much earlier and was incorporated later by the compiler of the Mahabharata from the floating mass of oral tradition. The same is also true for the Christian

* Prepared for the 180th Meeting of the American Gospels. Oriental Society in Baltimore, 1970. 2. A good wise saying, a good maxim, a good aphorism,

* Prepared for the 180th Meeting of the American Gospels. Oriental Society in Baltimore, 1970. 2. A good wise saying, a good maxim, a good aphorism,

438 438



本文献由“学霸图书馆-文献云下载”收集自网络，仅供学习交流使用。

学霸图书馆（www.xuebalib.com）是一个“整合众多图书馆数据库资源，

提供一站式文献检索和下载服务”的24 小时在线不限IP

图书馆。

图书馆致力于便利、促进学习与科研，提供最强文献下载服务。

图书馆导航：

图书馆首页文献云下载图书馆入口外文数据库大全疑难文献辅助工具

http://www.xuebalib.com/cloud/

http://www.xuebalib.com/

http://www.xuebalib.com/cloud/


http://www.xuebalib.com/vip.html

http://www.xuebalib.com/db.php

http://www.xuebalib.com/zixun/2014-08-15/44.html


huan t'an and yang hsiung on ssu ... - download.xuebalib.com

Documents