Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 27.djvu/27

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

CH. I.

INTRODUCTION.

7

Kâu Lî, 199 phien of Lî treatises. The résumé appended to the Lî books in the Catalogue of the Sui Dynasty, omitting works mentioned by Hsin, and inserting two others, says that Hsiang had in his hands altogether 214 phien. What was to be done with this mass of tablets, or the written copies made from them?

Hău Зhang and
the two Tâis.

The most distinguished of the Lî scholars in the time of the emperors Hsüan and Khăng was a Hău Зhang, the author of the compilation called in Hsin's Catalogue Khü Tâi Kî; and two of his disciples, Tâi Teh and Tăi Shăng, cousins^[1], the name of the latter of whom has already been mentioned as a member of the council of B.C. 51, were also celebrated for their ability. Teh, the older of the two, and commonly called Tâ Tâi, or "the Greater Tâi," while Hsiang was yet alive, digested the mass of phien, and in doing so reduced their number to 85. The younger, called Hsiâo Tâi, or "the Lesser Tâi," doing the same for his cousin's work, reduced it to 46 treatises. This second condensation of the Lî documents met with general acceptance, and was styled the Lî Kî. Shăng himself wrote a work in twelve chapters, called "A Discussion of the Doubts of Scholars about the Lî Kî," which, though now lost, was existing in the time of Sui.

Mâ Yung and
Kang Hsüan.

Through Khâo Zăn and others, scholars of renown in their day, the redaction passed on to the well-known Mâ Yung (A.D. 79-166), who added to Shăng's books the Yüeh Ling, the Ming

↑ Sinologists, without exception I believe, have called Shăng a "nephew" of Teh, overlooking the way in which the relationship between them is expressed in Chinese. Shăng is always Teh's 從〬兄之子, and not simply 兄之子. Foreign students have overlooked the force of the phrase 從〬兄 and, more fully, 從父兄. Teh and Shăng's father had the same grandfather, and were themselves the sons of brothers. They were therefore what we call first cousins, and Teh and Shăng were second cousins. The point is unimportant, but it is well to be correct even in small matters. Not unimportant, however, is the error of Callery (Introduction, p. 6), who says, "Le neveu, homme dépravé, beaucoup plus adonné aux plaisirs, qu'à l'étude, retrancha encore davantage et fixa le nombre des chapitres à 46." No such stigma rests on the character of Tâi Shăng, and I am sure translators have reason to be grateful to him for condensing, as he did, the result of his cousin's labours.

[1] Sinologists, without exception I believe, have called Shăng a "nephew" of Teh, overlooking the way in which the relationship between them is expressed in Chinese. Shăng is always Teh's 從〬兄之子, and not simply 兄之子. Foreign students have overlooked the force of the phrase 從〬兄 and, more fully, 從父兄. Teh and Shăng's father had the same grandfather, and were themselves the sons of brothers. They were therefore what we call first cousins, and Teh and Shăng were second cousins. The point is unimportant, but it is well to be correct even in small matters. Not unimportant, however, is the error of Callery (Introduction, p. 6), who says, "Le neveu, homme dépravé, beaucoup plus adonné aux plaisirs, qu'à l'étude, retrancha encore davantage et fixa le nombre des chapitres à 46." No such stigma rests on the character of Tâi Shăng, and I am sure translators have reason to be grateful to him for condensing, as he did, the result of his cousin's labours.

[1]