Thanks to Mr. Gu Hongyi for the manuscript
The original article was published in the Collected Journals of the Chinese Academy of History, Volume 2, 2023 (Volume 8), please indicate the source when citing
▼
A review of the authenticity of the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery".
Text / Gu Hongyi
Institute of Ancient Books, East China Normal University
Abstract: The article "On Distinguishing Adultery" written by Su Xun has been quite controversial since its publication because it alleges that Wang Anshi is a "traitor". At the beginning of the Qing Dynasty, Li Fu and Cai Shangxiang believed that "On Distinguishing Adultery", Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table of Mr. Wen'an", and Su Shi's "Xie Zhang Taibao Wrote the Book of the Tombs of the Ancestors" were all forgeries of Shao Bowentuo in the early Southern Song Dynasty, which had a great influence. In the 80s of the 20th century, some scholars wrote a long article to argue that "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" was indeed written by Su Xun and was not a forgery. Since then, many scholars have written articles to discuss and quote in detail, but due to relevant historical materials, research perspectives and other reasons, as well as due to the misreading, misinterpretation of texts and arbitrary extension in some treatises, it is difficult to reach a conclusion so far. Because the analysis of whether the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" is a hypocrisy, involving the official system, the ritual system and the style of literati in the Song Dynasty, and is closely related to the style, compilation and edition, etc., this article examines in detail the relevant historical materials related to the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery", pointing out that none of the Northern Song Dynasty editions of Su Xun's anthology contain "On Distinguishing Adultery", the 40-volume "Complete Works of Music" that has been handed down today should not be compiled by Su Shi, and the "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu" is not the first Song people's notes to mention "Distinguishing Adultery". The one praised as the "most rare book" by the Song people is the Gusu Jushi publication, and further studies the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and "Tomb Table" There are many explicit or implicit errors in the texts of "Distinguishing Adultery" and "Tomb Table", especially in the "Tomb Table", "At the beginning of Jiayou, Wang Anshi's name was prosperous, and his party friends poured it out for a while", "His fate system said 'Since the birth of the people, there are only a few people'" and other words are seriously contrary to the historical facts at that time, so it is presumed that the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" Zhuwen is a pseudonym, and it is speculated that the author is probably a disciple of Sumen, and it is about to be written in the late period of Hui Zongzheng and the early Xuanhe period.
Keywords: Su Xun, "Discerning Adultery", Authenticity
(Continued above)
7. The origin of Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table" and its relationship with Wang Anshi
In April of the third year of Zhiping, Su Xun died in Beijing, Ouyang Xiuwei wrote "Su Jun's Epitaph in the Master Book of Wen'an County, Bazhou", Zeng Gong wrote "Su Mingyun's Mourning", Yun Erzi Shi, Zhe "to Mingyun's funeral to be buried in Shu, both ask Ouyang Gong to be his inscription, and please give it to mourn, saying: "Ming" will be included in the circle, and "Speech" will be engraved on the mound. [1] Based on this, Li Fu believes that Zeng Gong has made it clear that "in the "Zhi", the "Lamentation" is engraved on the tomb, and there is an "Lamentation", and there should be no "Tomb Table". [2] Cai Shangxiang then gave full play to Li Fuzhi's statement, in response to Ye Mengde's "Summer Retreat Words" said, ""Distinguishing Adultery" has not been out for a long time, Yuan Fengjian, Ziyou from Andao to Nanjing, please be Ming Yun's tomb table, especially full of it." Su Shi is not into the stone, and it is passed down to the world when he is young", pointing out that he said, "It is done by a special class of piercing kilns, and there is no one who can do it." The meaning of the original counterfeiter is that there is no Andao "Tomb Table", which is not enough to be the fruit of "Identification", not Zizhan's "Book of Thanks", not enough to be the fruit of Andao is "Table", and I don't know that all the forgers are the words of one person, and the pen of the moment is also. The cover "Identification" and "Table" must be forged after Yuan You, so it is said that "it is passed on to the world less than the year". [3] Since then, scholars have debated several times on the question of whether Zhang Fangping's Tomb Table is still needed for Ouyang Xiu's "Epitaph" and Zeng Gong's "Lamentation".
In response to Li Fu and Cai Shangxiang's statement, Zhang Peiheng wrote an article pointing out that "the tomb table and the lamentation cannot be confused", quoting Zhiyu's "Essay on Farewell" "The body of lamentation is mainly based on grief, and the reason is the word of sighing", "There is a monument of the temple in ancient times, and the monument is erected in the tomb in later generations, and the inscription contained in it is also "the inscription" and "mourning" of Liu Xian's "Wenxin Carving Dragon" to illustrate the difference between the function of the tomb table and the lamentation, that is, the tomb table is made to commend the merits of the tomb owner, and the tombstone is engraved to show the comer, and the lamentation is generally only used to express mourning, which can prove that the tomb table is more important than the lamentation. The chapter also cites the cloud and lamentation in the "Farewell to the Article" as "the rate is applied to those who die young, not to the end of their lives"; The ancients did not make the inscription lightly, so the chapter believes that "the lamentation is applied to the inferior." However, the Shi and Zhe brothers actually engraved their father's tomb with a lamentation, so how can they be at peace with their hearts? Therefore, the Shi and Zhe brothers must be the begging tomb of their father, and there is absolutely no reason for begging and mourning", and Zeng Gong "gave little permission" and "thought that Su Xun had no merit to be disciplined, so he replaced it with a lamentation." Therefore, "Shi and Zhe brothers, they can't bear to engrave their father's tomb with a lamentation instead of a tomb table, so it is a matter of course for Su Xun to beg for the tomb. [4]
According to Zeng Gong's "Lamentation", Su Shi brothers "asked Ouyang Gong to write for him, and asked him to mourn for his words, saying: 'The inscription will be included in the circle, and the resignation will be engraved on the tomb.'" The rest of the words have no choice but to write "Yunyun", pointing out that (1) what Zeng Gong said has indicated that he wrote "Lamentation" at the request of the Su Shi brothers, and "the words will be engraved on the tomb", so the so-called "Shi and Zhe brothers must be the begging tomb of their father, and there is absolutely no reason for begging and mourning" is groundless. (2) The definitions of lamentations and inscriptions in "Farewell to the Article" and "Wenxin Carving Dragon" are "not equal to the articles issued by the government, and will not play a normative role in future generations of scholars", while Zeng Gong's "Lamentation" praised Su Xun's article as "popular in the world", and Jingshi and Quartet "no one knows his name, and his family has his book", which has been "extremely praised", rather than as Zhang Wen said, "Shi and Zhe brothers, they can't bear to engrave their father's tomb with a lamentation instead of a tomb table, so it is Su Xun's begging tomb table". [5] After that, Deng Guangming reaffirmed himself in his reply to Wang Shuizhao's text, emphasizing that "Zeng Gong's "Lamentation" is useless", and then Su Shi asked Zeng Gong to write the tomb of his grandfather Su Xu in the first year of Xining, and Zeng Gong also wrote the "Epitaph of Su Jun, a Wailang of the Donor", and did not see "any signs of dissatisfaction with the "Lamentation" written by Zeng Gong, so that "I couldn't bear" this "Lamentation" "on the tomb of the tree, and after more than ten years of interval, I asked Zhang Fangping to write what "Epitaph" and put it on the tomb of the tree"; And then he gave an example: "If the Lamentation is discarded, how can Zeng Gong have no reaction?"[6]
So Wang Shuizhao wrote another response article, also illustrating with examples: First, the function of lamentation was originally mainly to express grief, but it was reduced to the Song Dynasty, "there is also a combination of narrative and rhyme, and the scope of application is no longer limited by the 'untimely death of a child'", and "lamentation is generally not engraved on the tomb", so Zeng Gong's "Lamentation" "on the stone is a special case". Second, the reason why the Su Shi brothers did not directly ask Zeng Gong for the tomb table and asked for a mourning speech was that the mourning was originally a mourning and mourning text, and the tomb text praised the tomb owner's meritorious deeds and deeds. Third, in response to the statement that "Zeng Gong's "Lamentation" is absolutely useless", it is pointed out that "there is no material to show that this "Lamentation" was 'discarded' by Su Shi's brothers, and no one has put forward the view that "Lamentation" has been 'disused'"; and because "the stylistic functions of 'Lamentation' and 'Tomb Table' are originally different", the two can go hand in hand, that is, Su Shi's brothers first asked Zeng Gong to write "Lamentation", "and after the tomb was buried for many years, Zhang Fangping was the right person to find a famous 'famous person' to write it." There is a common phenomenon among the Song people, that is, "the time to write the tomb table is often not at the same time as the burial, and it is generally always a few years after the burial, in order to wait for the opportunity, especially waiting for the imperial court to give gifts to the descendants, so that the inscription on the tomb table will be more glorious." At the same time, Deng Wen argues that Zhang Fangping's "Epitaph" was written at the end of Yuanfeng or during the reign of Yuanyou, and that Zeng Gong died in April of the sixth year of Yuanfeng, so it is impossible for him to make any reaction to the "abandonment" of the "Lamentation". [7]
Unlike Deng Wen's belief that Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table" was written in the late Yuanfeng and Yuanyou periods, Wang Shuizhao believes that "Tomb Table" was written in the early years of Yuanfeng. Because, Ye Mengde, who has a close relationship with the descendants of the Su family, recorded in "Summer Retreat": "Mingyun is more evil than hatred." Hui Zhang Andao is also arranged by Jing Gong, the two are good, and Ming Yun wrote an article of "Identifying Adultery", which is secretly dedicated to Andao. ...... "Identifying Adultery" has not been out for a long time, Yuanfengjian, Ziyou from Andao to Nanjing, please be Mingyun's tomb table, especially full of it. [8] According to this, Su Zhe stayed in Nanjing in Xining for ten years, and Zhang Fangping was appointed as the judge of Tianfu. It is November of the same year, "Jiaxu, worship the heaven and the earth in the mound, and forgive the world". December "Jiashen, to the suburbs, civil and military attaché grace". [9] In the first year of Yuanfeng, Su Shi wrote "Sacrifice to the Old Spring and Burning Yellow Text" cloud: "It is the seventh and tenth year of Xining, and there is something to do in the southern suburbs. [10] Therefore, Wang Wen believes that the Song Dynasty worshiped the southern suburbs and granted amnesty to the world, and Su Xun was "tired of giving away the foreign officials of the capital", which may be "the opportunity to promote Su Shi's brothers to ask someone to write the "Tomb Table". [11]
To sum up, it can be seen that, firstly, Zeng Gong's "Lamentation" "Hanging on the stone is a special case", as Wang Wen said, there is no second example of the stone on the stone as a tomb table in the Song Dynasty anthology. However, after examining the literature, the Song people carved the mourning stone as an epitaph, and there are examples, such as Liu Caishao's "Zhou Kunchen's Mourning and Preface" Yun Zhou Kunchen's death "two years after his death, he heard that his affairs were timely, and he wrote lyrics to mourn. Will be his lonely Shang Zhi to ask for a text, to Zhi Zhuzhu, because of the repetition of the person who should be carried, and the book to give it, and said: 'The place and day of burial, I am established, please engrave it in the back from the book. [12] Therefore, Li Fu's statement that "there is already a "Lamentation" should not be followed by a "Tomb Table" is indeed inconclusive.
Second, the chapter believes that "lamentation is inflicted on the inferior." ...... Shi and Zhe brothers must beg for their father's tomb, and there is no reason to beg for lamentation", which is also not true. Because after entering the Song Dynasty, lamentations have both "a combination of narrative and rhyme, and the scope of application is no longer limited by the 'untimely death of children'", and Zeng Gong has made it clear that he wrote "Lamentation" at the request of the Su brothers.
Third, the Su Shi brothers first asked someone to write a mourning speech, and then asked someone to write an epitaph a few years later, which may indeed be related to the ancient custom of waiting for the imperial court to give it "so that the inscription on the tomb table will be more glorious". This should be one of the reasons why Su Shi's brothers asked Zeng Gong to write "Lamentation" at the beginning. According to the Sui system, the bureaucracy's "three products have been erected on the monument,...... The seven products have been erected". [13] The Tang system changed the "three products" to "five products", so the "Tang Law Shu Yi" quoted the "Funeral Order" and said: "The five grades or more listen to the monument, and the seven grades or more stand the pillar." [14] Song Cheng Tang system. [15] According to the official system of the Song Dynasty, Su Xunchu gave the official Guanglu Temple to belong to the Beijing official, and then gave the doctor Taichang from the seventh grade, and the capital official Wailang from the sixth grade,[16] all belonged to the court officials. According to the Song Dynasty's "Funeral Order", Su Xun was already qualified to "stand up" by giving the official Dr. Taichang; after that, Su Xun was given the official official Wailang, and the Su Shi brothers asked Zhang Fangping to write the "Tomb Table" again at the beginning of Yuanfeng, which is also quite reasonable.
Fourth, Wang Shuizhao also said according to Su Shi's "Reply to Uncle Li Fang's Book" that "Li Di (Uncle Fang) wrote to Su Shi, and it seems that he asked for a tomb table for Sun Fu (Zhihan) (Ouyang Xiu has made an epitaph for him), and proposed to put Sun's "Tang Treatise" "Another book and this text into stone" (the same idea as Zhang Fangping's "Mr. Wen'an's Tomb Table" is adopted in the full text of "Distinguishing Adultery")." [17] According to this, if Wang Wen's statement can be established, it can prove that Zhang Fangping's practice of incorporating the full text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Treachery" when he wrote "The Tomb Table" is not as a special case at the time, as people have criticized Yun Qi as a special case at that time. Su Shi's "Answer to Uncle Li Fang's Book" said:
Recording Sun Zhihan's "Tang Treatise", the servant does not know Han, and now when he sees this book, he is awe-inspiring. As for Chu Suiliang's disobedience to Liu Xun, Prince Ying's abolition of Zhang Shuo, Zhang Xun's defeat of Fang Xuan, Li Guangbi's inappropriate history Siming, Xuanzong's small kindness and no one's strategy, all of which are beyond the reach of the old history. There are many people who talk about Yingfa and secretly agree with others. I also read Ouyang Wenzhonggong's "Zhi" article and Sima Junshi's tail, and I was relieved. However, if you want to write this text into the stone, you think that it is the trust of Han immortality, why is it that Zhihan is established in the world, although there is no text of Ouyang Gong, and you want to trust the work of calligraphy and painting in order to trust the future generations, is it not also ugly?
He also said: "There are a lot of words in "Tang Treatise", and it is too troublesome for you to write it. He also said: "The so-called people who have not been famous in the world are those who have not been buried, and they are afraid that they will not be at peace." ...... The ancient gentleman, who had to be buried for some reason, would not be served, and the official would not be adjusted. If he is not buried now, is there a last resort?
Press, (1) This "Tang Treatise" is also known as "Tang History Thesis", "Tang History Essentials", "Zhizhai Shulu Solution" volume 4 records Sun Fu's "Tang History Thesis" three volumes, Yun "Fu to "Tang Book" is redundant and omitted, and many lose the body method, which is repaired as "Tang History" and uses a chronological style. Since the first year of Kangding, the first year of Jiayou, it has become seventy-five volumes, ninety-two songs. As soon as it was not, the imperial court took his book and kept it in the ban, and his son recorded it to leave Duke Wen, and it is rare in the world. Wen Shu has an engraved book, but it has not been obtained, and now only all the arguments exist." [19] The seventh volume of the "Junzhai Reading Journal" recorded ten volumes of "Essentials of Tang History", and the second volume of "Commentary on Tang History" was recorded in the volume of "Reading Supplementary Notes". [20] "History of the Song Dynasty: Art and Literature" recorded 75 volumes of Sun Fu's "Records of the History of the Tang Dynasty" and 2 volumes of "Judgments on the History of the Tang Dynasty". [21] In the three-volume edition of this biography, the "Siku Quanshu General Catalogue" said that "this book is only three volumes, and the cover book is from the "Tang Dynasty" banknotes, not its old book, so the number of volumes is large, and it is divided and combined at will, and there are no two books." [22] The "this article" in "Separate Books and Texts into Stone" obviously does not refer to the "Tang Treatise", so it cannot be compared with Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table" in the full text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery". (2) "Ouyang Wenzhonggong's "Zhi" text" refers to Ouyang Xiu's "Shangshu Criminal Department Langzhong Chong Tianzhang Pavilion to be made and read the Epitaph of Sun Gong, the right counselor", written in the fifth year of Jiayou. [23] "Sima Junshi's tail" refers to Sima Guang's "After the Epitaph of Shusun Zhihan", there is a cloud: "Looking at Ouyang Gong's article, his words have been since the beginning, and he is important to the time with beauty and talent; Whoever is an official and public, does not selfish what he loves, is indifferent, and has internal strength. If you like to talk about Tang affairs, scholars read history all year round, and it is better to hear public opinions all day long. This was all seen and heard by the scholars at that time, and it can be described as a true record and worthy of it. [24] He even praised Sun Fu, so Li Di specially asked Su Shi to "write this text into the stone, thinking that it is the trust of Han's immortality", that is, to write Sima Guang's "After the Epitaph of Sun Zhihan" "into the stone", rather than asking Su Shi to write Sun Fu's epitaph and asking "other books" Sun Fu's "Tang Treatise" to "enter the stone". (3) Su Shi's so-called "only the so-called people who have not been named in the world are not buried, and they are afraid that the ceremony will not be peaceful", is that Li Di asked Su Shi to write the epitaph of his father Li Dian (Zi Xianzhong). Su Shi's "Answer to Uncle Li Fang" said: "Demonstrate, solid knowledge and filial piety." However, he has never been alone and does not write an inscription, but the descendants of the fate want to trace the ancestral examination and the author, but they are not caught off guard. Recently, those who have made deeds and epitaphs with Wen Gong are the only ones who take the public taste as the first tombstone, and they must report it. Nothing else will be done, and those who have resigned will not be allowed to answer orders alone. Presumably, he was swayed by the crime, but Gongdu had no other intentions, and he did everything he could. Youyun: "The table and the epitaph have different names but the same reality, and it is difficult to teach." [25] For this reason, Su Shi specially wrote "Li Xianzhong's Lamentation and Narrative"[26] to thank him, and persuaded Li Liyun to "He has a famous person in the world, and he is buried and his tomb is revealed, so what trouble."
As mentioned above, it is indeed possible that the Su Shi brothers asked Zhang Fangping to write Su Xun's "Tomb Table" at the end of Xining and the beginning of Yuanfeng, but why did Zhang publish the full text of Su Xun's "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" in "Tomb Table"? Moreover, according to Su Shi's "Book of Thanks", "Fu Meng showed his ancestors' 'Tomb Table' again, and specially included an article on "Distinguishing Adultery", which shows that the first draft of his "Tomb Table" did not contain "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery", and Zhang's specially published this article in the revised draft.
Zhang Peiheng According to the beginning of the reign of Shenzong contained in the "History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of Zhang Fangping", Zhang Fangping was a governor of political affairs, "Zeng Gongliang proposed to use Wang Anshi (for the imperial history of Zhongcheng), Fang Ping thought it was impossible", so he thought that Su Shi's "Book of Thanks" "Only Ming Gong saw "Distinguishing Adultery" and thought it was in line with me. Gonggu has already discussed the previous dynasties, and the annals of history "Yunyun", that is, "at that time, Fang Ping was a minister, and the appointment of Cheng in the imperial history was also an important event of the imperial court, and according to the practice of the time, his opinions on this issue should be recorded in the "Actual Records" and other historical records. [27] According to the "History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of Zhang Fangping", Zhang Fangping "guarded the day of the Song Dynasty, and Fu Bi moved from Bo to you, and when he saw it, he said: 'It is difficult to know if people are solid.'" Fang Ping said: "Is it difficult to know that Wang Anshihu is also difficult to know?" Fang Pingqing knew that Huang You's tribute, or called it literature, and opened up the school for examination. After being admitted to the hospital, everything in the hospital is changed. Fang Ping hated his people, and he made a move, but he didn't taste it. 'I'm ashamed. Gai Bi Su is also good at An Shiyun". It is believed that "it remains to be studied whether the matter of knowing the emperor and knowing the tribute is indeed mentioned here,...... But whether it is true or not, his words clearly reveal his dissatisfaction with Fu Bi and others' previous praise of Wang Anshi." [28] Therefore, it is believed that Zhang Fangping's full text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" in the "Epitaph" does not contain any suspicion. According to the above analysis of Wang Shuizhao and others, Zhang Fangping's "Epitaph" and Su Shi's "Book of Thanks" should have been written in the early Yuanfeng period, so the chapter text thinks that "on the first dynasty and the annals of history" refers to Zhang Fangping's opposition to Wang Anshi's appointment as the middle of the imperial history in the early years of Shenzong, which is obviously wrong, and will not be repeated here. Regarding the meeting between Zhang Fangping and Fu Bi mentioned in the "History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of Zhang Fangping", Deng Guangming pointed out that "Fu Bi's decision to sentence Bozhou to the death of the minister to Ruzhou is an internal matter in June of the fourth year of Xining, if Lao Su Guo once wrote "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" in the Jiayou period to refer to Wang Anshi's treachery and evil and was greatly appreciated by Zhang Fangping, and was assessed by him as 'the only person who determines the world', then in this dialogue between Zhang and Fu, Zhang should not only talk about himself and erase Lao Su's foresight, Zhang Fangping only mentioned that he knew the tribute during the reign of Huang You' Evil people, resort, since they have not tasted and spoke', but there is never a word related to "Identifying Adultery", which is not enough to prove that until five years after Lao Su's death, Zhang Fangping did not know that there was an article "Identifying Adultery" in the world. [29]
After that, Fang Jian also believed that Zhang Fangping, as "an opponent of the Xifeng New Law, and Wang Anshi when he was in power, can be called political enemies", but Zhang Fangping died in the Yuan You period, "when the Yuan You Party 'liquidated' the New Party", and his son-in-law Wang Gong's "(Zhang Fangping) Xing" recorded Zhang's life in detail, "It can be said that there are no details, and his interactions with the Three Sus have also been mentioned many times, but there is no mention of his writing of the "Tomb Table" for Lao Su and the public publication of the article "Identification of Adultery". In addition, "after examining all the poems and essays of Zhang Fangping that exist today, except for the "Tomb Table", there is not even a single word of An Shi", so Fang Jian pointed out that although Zhang Fangping "has a difference of political opinion with Wang Anshi, he has no good impression of An Shi himself, and he will not develop to the point of publishing "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" for the first time in the "Tomb Table" to vent his personal anger. [30] Indeed, according to Zhang Lei's soyun, Wang Anshi and Zhang Fangping did not seem to have much contradiction at first: "Wang Jing Gongzhi knew the system, because he read Zhang Gong'andao's old system, see his work "Cao Tong Jian Temperance", one of which is Lianyun: 'The world carries its virtues, there are the old ancestors of Hu Zhao; 'Sigh and wonder what he said. Cai Bian said about this. [31] However, according to Sima Guang's "Diary", the relationship between Zhang Fangping and Wang Anshi was quite unharmonious: "On the fourth day of the first month of September, Zhang Guanwen sentenced Nanjing to stay in Taiwan. An Daosu and Jiefu are not good, Shang (Shenzong) was enthroned at the beginning, and there were many sages who recommended Jiefu, and petitioned Antao, and An Tao said: "It is a person who has a false name, but no practicality, and the king of Jin, Yifu." If it is used, I am afraid that the customs of the world will be defeated. 'Jie Fu heard about it, so An Dao was worried about the governor of the political affairs Ding Father, and he was removed and did not return to his old position, knowing Chenzhou, and he was not at peace inside, so he said that he was sick and left. [32] However, when Zhang Fangping attacked Wang Anshi in the early years of Xining, Wang Anshi had not yet come to power to implement the new law.
According to the "History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of Zhang Fangping", the meeting between Zhang Fangping and Fu Bi is copied from the ninth volume of "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu", cloud:
In the second year of Xining, Fu Gong sentenced Bozhou, and sentenced Ruzhou to raise Chang Ping Zhao Jiyan Gong Frustration Reform Law, Luowu Ning Jiedu and Pingzhangshi, and sentenced Ruzhou to Zuo Servant. After Nanjing, Zhang Gong'an guarded the road, and the column greeted and rode from the court, and Zhang Gong did not come out. Or ask the public, and the public said: "My landlord is also." The rich man came to see him, and the guests under Zhang Gongmen said privately: "The two great men in the world, what is their discussion?" Zhang Gong is also simple and simple, relatively like a mountain. Fu Gong Xu said: "It is difficult to know people." Zhang Gong said: "It is said that Wang Anshi is not difficult to know! Emperor Renzong, a certain Zhigong Academy, or recommended Anshi to have literature, it is advisable to open up a school to take the examination, and let it be followed." Now that the stone is here, everything in the courtyard wants to be changed. A certain evil person came out, and he has never spoken to him since. The rich man bowed his head and was ashamed. Gai Fugong Suxi Wang Anshi, until he got the throne in the chaotic world, he knew his treacherous clouds. [33]
Shao Bowen said that considering the historical facts, it should be a non-existent thing. First, Fu Bi worshiped the prime minister twice, and was an important minister of the court in Xining Chu, and his status was much higher than that of Zhang Fangping, who had only participated in political affairs, so Zhang Fangping should not treat Fu Bi so slowly. Second, according to the records of "History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of Zhang Fangping" and Wang Gong's "(Zhang Fangping) Behavior", Zhang Fangping was sentenced to Shangshu Province in the second year of Xining. According to the "Long Edition", he sentenced Nanjing Yushitai to Wuyin in August of the fourth year of Xining,[34] and sentenced Nanjing Yushitai to be an idle official, not to "guard" (Zhizhou). According to the "Long Edition" volume 224 and volume 226, Fu Bi was sent to the prime minister in June of the fourth year of Xining, and sentenced to Ruzhou with a left servant; Bi to Ruzhou, two months, stubbornly called the disease to return. Listen to it". [35] It can be seen that Fu Bi had already traveled from Bozhou to Ruzhou in mid-July at the latest, and Zhang Fangping had not left Chenzhou for Nanjing until August after receiving a new appointment, so it was impossible for Shi Fubi to visit his minister Zhang Fangping in Nanjing. Third, Zhang Fangping did not know the tribute during the reign of Emperor You. According to the "Song Hui Manuscript Election", in the first month of the sixth year of Qingli, Sun Luquan, a scholar of Hanlin, knew the tribute, and Zhang Fangping and others in the imperial history knew the tribute. [36] Zhang Zhigong was the only one. In the same month, he appointed "Shi Zhongjian, the judge of the three divisions, Zhou Ling, the frontispiece of the seal scroll, Wang Chou, Ge Hong, Shao Bi, Zeng Gongding, Wang Anshi, Wang Shu, Cai Zhen, Shen Kangchong, Wei Yaofu, Meng Kai, Zhang Shiyan, Xu Zun, and Ning Kechong examination officers". [37] According to this, at this time, Wang Anshi was only the official secretary Lang, who was the official who checked the examination papers, and was only an ordinary subordinate member in the Gongyuan, so it was impossible to have the authority of "all the things of the court are changed". Even if the tribute is known, any change in the system, according to the Song story, must also ask for the consent of the imperial court, and there is no such thing as "wanting to change" to "change". And a little test paper officer, if he was raised by Zhigong because of the matter, it was really a sensational event in the Song Dynasty, but there was no mention of it in the historical books at that time, and it was doubtful that this matter was not true. Fourth, according to the "Long Edition" and other records, Wang Anshi was the judge of the third division in October of the third year of Jiayou, and the third secretary was Zhang Fangping, and he served in the third division at the same time. After that, Zhang Fangping was impeached by Cheng Bao Zheng in the imperial history and went to work, and Wang Anshi did not pay tribute to the system until the sixth year of Jiayou, and he left the third division. [38] It can be seen that "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu" "has never tried to speak with it since then", which seems to be inaccurate. "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu" is so fictitious and forged, it is intended to be used to prove that Wang Anshi has not been able to abide by his duty as early as when he was "an official is far away", and he changed the law of the court lightly, and finally suffered from the world. Therefore, according to the available historical data, Zhang Fangping's motive for "publishing the "Theory of Distinguishing Treachery" for the first time in the "Tomb Table" to vent his personal anger is obviously insufficient.
In addition, Wang Gong's "(Zhang Fangping) Behavior" recorded Zhang Fangping's words of attacking Wang Anshi:
The day before, Han Jiang and Shao Kang removed the deputy envoys of the cardinal palace. The next day, Gong (Zhang Fangping) and Zhao Luan were ordered to participate in political affairs. The next day, the inner hall lived, the door was closed, and the two houses were in succession to enter the shift, the class retreated, the door was announced, and the relatives set the class, headed by the public, followed by Jiang, followed by the second, and followed by Kang. The next day of the government, the minister of the Zai discussed with Wang Anshi to make up for the imperial history of Zhongcheng, and the public said: "In the imperial history, Cheng Bingguo is constitutional, and Anshi is in the name of scripture, and he is in a high position, and it is difficult to live in the place of rope inspection." Zhao Gongluan also thought so, and stopped. [39]
However, in September of the fourth year of Zhiping, Xin Chou, Han Qi dismissed the prime minister, Zhang Fangping and Zhao Luan participated in the governor's affairs, Han Jiang and Shao Kang were privy deputy envoys; [40] The next day, Sima Guang was changed to a bachelor of Hanlin, and Teng Fu was replaced by Zhongcheng in the imperial history. It can be seen that Wang Gong's "Lines" has made a lot of mistakes. First, Han Jiang and Shao Kang, Zhang Fangping, and Zhao Pan were appointed to the two governments on the same day, not the day before. Second, according to the Song Dynasty ritual system, the living position of the inner hall is generally based on the order of the governor's political affairs before the privy deputy envoy, and Zhang Fangping is before Zhao Luan, therefore, Zhang Fangping's living position in the inner hall is naturally the first of the four, and it seems that the Son of Heaven does not need to come forward to adjust it. Third, because Sima Guang's impeachment of Zhang Fangping and Teng Fu as the Imperial History Zhongcheng is only one day apart, the discussion of the removal of Sima Guang and the election of Teng Fu seems to be carried out at the same time, the story of the Song Dynasty, the ministers of the two provinces were impeached by the Imperial History Zhongcheng, and they should be treated at home, such as the impeachment of Wang Anshi in the imperial history in May of the second year of Xining, Wang Anshi "begged to resign" in the last chapter of the family, and waited for Shenzong to "seal and return his performance, so that the matter is as before",[41] Fang re-entered the political hall to see the matter. At this time, Zhang Fangping was attacked by Sima Guang in the imperial history, even if he did not stay at home, he should not speak out on the appointment and dismissal of the imperial history, so as to avoid suspicion. Moreover, if Zhang Fangping really attacked Wang Anshi's "treacherous and evil" at that time and would bring disaster to the world, Wang Gong wrote "(Zhang Fangping) Xing" during the Yuan You period when he opposed Xining's government, and he would not have just recorded Zhang Fangping's claim that "Anshi is in the name of scripture, and he is at a high level, and it is difficult to live in the place of rope inspection".
8. Errors in "(Su Xun) Tomb Table".
Later generations questioned and analyzed the authenticity of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and "The Tomb Table", probably starting from (1) whether the style of these two articles is consistent with Su Xun and Zhang Fangping, and (2) whether the content of the two articles is contrary to historical facts. According to the above analysis, it is known that the article "On Distinguishing Adultery" was recorded in full in Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table", and because "Tomb Table" was published and known to the world, the two articles "On Distinguishing Adultery" and "Tomb Table" are discussed together.
First of all, for the two articles "On Distinguishing Adultery" and "Tomb Table", Cai Shangxiang bluntly said that all the statements attacking Wang Anshi in "Distinguishing Adultery" are "fragmented and unwritten", pointing out:
It is rumored that Wang Jiefu is a traitor, and Su Mingyun can see it. Therefore, his work "Distinguishing Adultery" says: "But the quiet of the world can see and know." "Then Gu Jieran is conceited as a quiet person. He also said: "If the sage does not know, he will be confused by likes and dislikes and take away the benefits." "At the beginning of Yu Kaojiayou, Jiefu was very famous, but the power of affairs was not known, and I don't know who the sage was referring to by Mingyun? And the sage did something that "likes and dislikes were chaotic and took away the interests and harms"? Although it was the origin of "Distinguishing Adultery", it was already fragmented and unwritten.
Youyun:
Not only is Wang Yan and Lu Qi more eloquent than Jiefu, but Jia Fenyang and his uncle can know people, and they also say that "the material of the two princes and the two sons are also not necessarily" He is also said to be eloquent, very ugly, and blue, and it is said that "the appearance is not enough to move people", and it is said that "words are not enough to dazzle the world"? Easy teeth to kill children, erect from the palace, open the party to abandon relatives, this is not close to human feelings, and then take advantage of the absurdity of the master to harm the country. If Jiefu's adultery has not been written, and Ming Yun is the first to distinguish it, not only to say that Wang Yan and Lu Qi are one person, but also to say that the ratio of the three sons of Fei Teyiya, Erection Diao, and Kaifang, Ming Yun sees the subtlety, if this is the case?
pointed out that there are many plagiarism and misuse of other people's sentences in his text, and "Ming Yun measures the ancients, estimates current affairs, prejudices and knowledge, and there are many things, but he can speak freely, which is really a literary hero through the ages. Cai Qi thought that he was a genius in the world, and Zi Zhan prefaced his anthology, which is also known as the poetry and poetry, and the reader can imagine it. The most strange thing is that it is not as mixed with the words of fate, Ming Yun died in the third year of Zhiping, and in the third year of Xining, Wang Anshi began to be in the same dynasty, and it was the same as the same dynasty as Andao, and the mistake was so far?"[42]
Since then, it has been determined that "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and "Tomb Table" are pseudo-authors, and most of them believe that the two texts are not similar to the literary style of Su Xun and Zhang Fangping. For example, Wu Xiaoru's "On the <辨奸论>Question of Authenticity and Falsehood" pointed out that "the text of 'On Distinguishing Adultery' is rambling and complicated, and there are traces of piecing together in many places, which does not seem to be written by Su Xun", and "the facts recorded in 'The Tomb Table' and 'Shaw Brothers' Records are mostly similar in tone; and the tone of the writing in 'Xie Shu' and 'Tomb Table' is also very similar, as if it was the hand of one person." [43] Deng Guangming <辨奸论>listed a separate section in his article "The Re-Raising and Re-judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsehood" that "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery is not a good article" and discussed "the particularities of the illogical and fragmented unwritten theory in the Theory of Distinguishing Adultery". [44]
However, it is determined that Su Xun and Zhang Fangping are not pseudo-authors, and it is pointed out that there is no obvious difference between their style and that of Su and Zhang. For example, Zhang Peiheng wrote an article to refute Cai Shangxiang's theory, emphasizing that the text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" is clear and there is no self-contradiction, and Cai Shangxiang's great accusation can only show that he "did not understand "Distinguishing Adultery"; pointed out that the text of "The Tomb Table" "does not have 'words that are not written into sentences, and is chaotic'", and "supplementing the old language" means that "copying or using the sentences of predecessors in the work was also a common phenomenon at that time", and "the Tomb Table" should not be "harshly criticized" for this reason. Although "The Tomb Table" "is not a superior work, and reading other articles in the "Complete Works of Music" is probably the same", it is believed that "the level of the "Tomb Table" is consistent with Zhang Fangping's self-description and his other articles, and there is no trace of forgery at all." [45] Later, Wu Mengfu and Zhan Yayuan's article "A New Exploration of Su Xun's Thought" pointed out from the perspective of text interpretation that "the prose of 'The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery' is handsome and bright, and the style is very similar to Su Xun. [46] Jin Guoyong's "Su Xun" cites "On the Style and Artistic Techniques of Distinguishing Essays" as an example to explain the artistic characteristics and style of Su Xun's works, and believes that "as for the style and structure of the articles, it should be said that they are consistent with Su Xun's other articles", and he is inclined to believe that "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" was written by Su Xun. [47] Li Jianming's "<辨奸论>Analysis of the Truth and Falsehood and the Grievances of King Su" also believes that from the perspective of Su Xun's literary style, the theme of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and the fact that Su and Wang were evil, "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" should be written by Su Xun. [48]
Zeng Zaozhuang also said that "the views and terms of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" are consistent with Su Xun's other works, which also shows that it is indeed 'Su Xun's handwriting'." And on the original text of the "Tomb Table", "At the beginning of Jiayou, Wang Anshi's name was prosperous, and his party friends were overwhelmed for a while, and his fate was systematic: 'Since the birth of the people, there are only a few people. 'To concoct language is to think that it is more than a saint. Ouyang Xiu is also kind to him, persuading Mr. to swim with him, and An Shi is also willing to hand it over to Mr. The gentleman said: 'I know that he is a person who is not close to people, and he is rarely troubled by the world. 'An Shi's mother died, and the scholars and doctors all hung him, and the gentleman did not go alone, and wrote an article on "Distinguishing Adultery" This passage has been repeatedly attacked by those who hold false claims, and the white clouds are debated in detail: from "Jiayou Chu" to "Party Friends for a while" is about Wang Anshi's influence in Jiayou Chu; from "his fate system" to "to think that he is a few saints" is to talk about the influence of Wang in Xining Chu, so "Party friends are inclined for a while" at the place of "not a comma but a full stop, and the three words 'Jiayou Chu' are only time limiting words in the previous sentence, and do not include the latter sentence (from 'its fate' to ' A few more than saints')". From "Ouyang Xiu" to "One Article" is about the relationship between Su and Wang: from "Ouyang Xiu" to "The World is Troubled" is about the relationship between Su and Wang at the beginning of Jiayou; from "The Death of Anshi's Mother" to "One Article" is about the relationship between Su and Wang in the eighth year of Jiayou, so "it can be seen that this text does not have 'Lu Yu's Falsehood', and the text is completely in order and the meaning is clear." [49] Zeng Wen analyzed the structure of the sentences in the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" to prove that "its fate system says" Yunyun does not have "Lu Yu's falsehood", which is indeed a different way of thinking, but this kind of detour Zen-style explanation is very reluctant after all.
In addition, Wang Shuizhao pointed out that the order of the names of the three people mentioned in the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" as "erecting Diao, Yiya, and Kaifang" is "different from the traditional saying, but completely consistent with Su Xun's "Treatise on Guan Zhong", which can be regarded as "Su Xun's personal customary usage". [50] Indeed, as Wang Shui said, the three-person order of "erection, easy teeth, and prescription" can be regarded as Su Xun's unique use case. However, such a use case, in the Northern Song Dynasty, is not only seen in Su Xun, but also in the "Analects" of Chen Xiangdao, an important scholar of "New Studies", has also been used: "Holding Chen Yuantao to paint so that the princes are in the princes, and the pro-erection of Diao, Yi Ya, and the prescription are used to construct the country, and this Qi Huan is also a man." [51] However, there is also such a use case in Su Xun's "Treatise on Guan Zhong", and Su Xun's "Treatise on Guan Zhong" was quite famous at that time, so the "vertical diao, easy teeth, and open prescription" in Chen Xiangdao's book, that is, the ordering of the three people, may be imitating Su Xun's article. The idea of 'prescription' was imitated by many literati in the Southern Song Dynasty and gradually spread." [52]
To sum up, it can be seen that judging whether the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and "The Tomb Table" are forgeries based on the similarities and differences of a person's humanistic style has often been a matter of opinion since ancient times, and it is difficult to conclude with each other. For example, Hong Mai tried to discuss Su Shi's "Ghost Capture Chapter Zhuwen" cloud:
Dongpo wrote "Catching Ghosts and Telling Yongyuling Congratulations" in Hanlin: "If you catch a bird, you must have a trace; if you have a good year, you will know how hard it is? "It means that Shenzong has the ambition of the Ping Clan, as for Yuan You, Naike has success, so the tomb is credited, and Emperor Wu and Xianzong are also operating at the beginning, and the performance lies in the world of Erxuan, and its use is precisely so. Now Su's Meishan Merit Temple carved two large and small copies, and Ji Zhen to the matter engraved in Lin'an, and Jiangzhou Ben, Masha Bookstore "Daquan", are only from the "Yun" sentence, then then pick up "Jing Pi Xirong, the ancient name of the right arm", is the benefit, but to go away, is not a pity? ...... The two episodes are all descendants of their own families, and they are mistaken by vain people, Ji Zhen and Ji Si can't detect their ears. [53]
However, Fei Gon's "Liangxi Manzhi" is cloudy:
Shuzhong stone carved Dongpo text manuscript, its alteration is very much, playful, can send scholars to think. ...... "Obtaining the Ghost Chapter and Telling Yuling Wen" from "who knows the labor of Yun Qi" and descends to the clouds: "The former Han Dynasty military order will be out of the army, and the call Han to come to the court, which is based on nectar; Xianzong exerts fine martial arts, and Hehuang recovers, seen in Dazhong", and then it is all erased and not used; "Qian Pi Xiqiang" is changed to "Jing Pi Xirong"; The so-called right arm" was changed to the "ancient name"; Since "not to the descendants of thieves" and go down to the clouds, "Shi Yu Chongren, sit and guard the calculation, and Dong Yu's minister Ali Gu, the outer service of the king, the evil heart is hidden, and the ghost chapter, the first offender Nanchuan", and then from the "and general" and the twenty-six characters and erased, changed to the cloud, "and the leader of the Xifan Ghost Chapter, the first offender Nanchuan"; "The generals" was changed to "the deuteronomy generals"; unrepaid favors" was changed to "competing for rewards"; The next couplet, Chu Yun "Bao Gu Ji Zhi, far from the same strong man; the shame of Xue Weishui, still ugly and Tang", are also erased, but use these two things, don't make a couplet, Yun "Jieli Cheng captured, there is no shame of Weishui at the beginning; Zhi Zhi conferred the head, talk about the report Gu Ji Zhixuan"; the last sentence "In the service of the near and soft and far away", changed to "come far". [54]
Fei Gon's cloud is probably aimed at Hong Mai. Hong Maike called the early Southern Song Dynasty "generous", but he accused the descendants of the Su family of engraveing Su Shi's anthology and omitting the "benefits" of Su Wen because of "mistaken people", which was actually deleted by Su Shi himself. It is so difficult to read and write. Therefore, the following only discusses the contradictions and errors between the content of Su and Zhang Erwen's articles and historical facts.
Secondly, after comparing and surveying historical books, it can be seen that there are many contradictions in the texts of "On Distinguishing Adultery" and "Tomb Table", which are selected and analyzed as follows.
(1) "Tomb Table" describes Wang Anshi's affairs: "At the beginning of Jiayou, Wang Anshi's name was prosperous, and his party friends poured it for a while. His fate says: 'Since the birth of the people, there have been only a few people. 'To make words is to think that they are more than saints. This passage is very contrary to historical facts, and has become the most controversial content of the "Tomb Table". The following is a breakdown of them.
About "Jiayou Chu, Wang Anshi's name was prosperous, and the party friends poured into it".
Li Fu pointed out that "at the beginning of the examination of Jing Gong Jiayou, it was not used at the time, and the party members were scarce. In the second year of Jiayou, the first to remove the degree of judges, tens of thousands of words, but not implemented. Next year, he ordered to repair the living note, and the eight or nine chapters were written, and he was first informed of the system, picketed in the Beijing prison, and refuted the loss of Feng Yin as the imperial history, and applied for the removal of the text to govern with the court of contention, so he went to his mother's worries, and finally the world of Yingzong was not called. [55] Therefore, the "Tomb Table" says, "mistakes are also very serious". Zhang Peiheng aimed at Cai Shangxiang's Yun Wang Anshi since the second year of Qingli and the first entry, his "virtue articles are recommended by the public", and the people he interacts with "are all called sages for a while, and no one is a person with a good name or a person who has no ambitions." Only Lu Huiqing, later generations thought that Anshi Party, Kao Jiayou for three years, Ouyang Gong and Jiefu Shu, was the beginning of the praise of his sage, it was Jiefu who knew Huiqing very late, and the new law with him, and Mingyun did not see it", and defended: "Kao Wang Anshi in Jiayouyuan, two years, has made a lot of friends", and said that in addition to Cai Shangxiang, there are still such as Fu Bi, Wen Yanbo, Ouyang Xiu, Sima Guang, Lu Gongshu, Han Jiang and others, so it is said that Wang Anshi "has been friends for a while", "I am afraid it is not wronged him"; Moreover, in the view of Zhang Fangping, who opposed the new law, Han Jiang and others who supported and supported the new law were naturally Wang Anshi's "party friends", as for those who did not approve of or opposed Xifeng's new law, such as "Fu Bi, Wen Yanbo, Ouyang Xiu, etc. were all people who promoted Anshi politically, and Sima Guang, Lu Gongshu, etc., were also quite helpful to Anshi in this regard", and "Heng based on the concept of 'party' at that time, this conclusion can also be drawn from Zhang Fangping's words: Those who traveled with Wang Anshi and praised him, including Fu Bi, Wen Yanbo, Ouyang Xiu and others, are all 'having a party'. In other words, these friends of Wang Anshi at that time were all 'party friends'", and Zhang Fangping "scolded Ouyang Xiu and others for forming a party as early as the "Qingli New Deal", and later they were also in a serious antagonistic position with Sima Guang and others", so Zhang denounced them as Wang Anshi's "party friends". [56] Deng Guangming criticized this: Zhang's speculation is almost unreasonable to define these sages as "traitors". [57] Pei Rucheng also pointed out that Zhang Wen's interpretation of "party friends" as "party friends" is too arbitrary, and that the meaning of "party friends" in the "Tomb Table" is similar to that of "party and" in "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu", "both refer to friends", and Zhang Wen "only explains the meaning of 'party', but avoids the meaning of 'party friends' and 'party and'", which is "incomprehensible", and further pointed out that in the Northern Song Dynasty political arena during the Jiayou period, there was no political force composed of Wang Anshi and his party members. [58]
Regarding the "fate system, he said: 'Since the birth of the people, there have been only a few people. ’”
Li Fu pointed out that Wang Anshi's "fate was made in the second year of Xining, and Lao Quan died in the third year of Yingzong's reign, which is not within his reach." [59] Cai Shangxiang Yiyun's "Tomb Table" content: "The most strange thing is that it is not as mixed with the words of fate, Ming Yun died in the third year of Zhiping, and the third year of Xining. and read the "Words and Deeds of Famous Ministers", and also took the "Biography of Su Xun", cloud: "At the beginning of Jiayou, Anshi's name was prosperous, and the party friends poured for a while. In the middle, delete the twenty-four characters of 'its fate system', and then say 'Ouyang Xiu is also good'. If the husband deletes it, it seems that he knows that he is in vain." [60] According to the words, Wang Anshi paid homage to the prime minister in December of the third year of Xining, and was written by Wang Qi adhering to the purpose of God under the order of the Hanlin scholar, and was published in volume 26 of the "Huayang Collection", with the title "Wang Anshi conferred the golden purple Guanglu Dafu Rite Department Shilang Tongzhongshu Menxia Pingzhang Shi supervised the revision of the national history into the Feng Founding Gong and the Shiyi Shifeng Meritorious Hero System",[61] also included in the "Song Dynasty Imperial Decree Collection" volume 56,[62] "Song Zaifu Chronicles" volume 7,[63] There is no "since the birth of the people, only a few people" in the word, which shows that the "Tomb Table" is a big mistake. Therefore, Zhu Xi deleted the following 24 characters of "his fate system", obviously knowing that what he said was contrary to historical facts and wanted to "overturn his evil". However, according to the current historical data, the earliest deletion of these 24 characters was Shao Bowen's "Shaw Clan's Wenjianlu", and then Li Tao's "Long Edition" volume 208 and Zhu Xi's "Words and Deeds of Famous Ministers of the Five Dynasties" volume 10 were all because these 24 characters were seriously inconsistent with historical facts, so they were specially deleted when quoting this paragraph.
Because there are errors in the "Tomb Table" that "his fate system is said" Yunyun was tied to Su Xun during his lifetime, which is obviously contrary to historical facts, and there is no error in the existing Wang Anshi's worship system, such as "since the birth of the people, there are only a few people", Zhang Peiheng explained this: Zhang Fangping clearly said in the "Tomb Table" that Su Xun "has not been three years, and Anshi has done things", obviously he would not think that Wang Anshi "worshiped the prime minister before Su Xun's death", if the "Tomb Table" is indeed a forgery by others, why should he "deliberately leave a loophole so that others can see that it is forgery"? Then with Ouyang Sheren's book, Wang Anshiyun was praised as "such a person is not common in ancient and modern times, and now it is urgent, although there are tens of millions of impermanent people, it is not harmful, and it is not necessary to lose it", among which "ancient and modern times are not common", that is, "it is not often since the birth of the people", which is quite similar to "since the birth of the people, there are only a few people", "only the degree is slightly different"; after that, there is a gap of about ten years from the first year of Jiayou, and the praise of Wang Anshi may also develop into "since the birth of the people, only a few people". Therefore, "the words 'its fate system' in the "Tomb Table" should be false". According to Zhang's "Preface to the Complete Works of Xie Su Zizhan Jile", he said that the "Complete Works of Music" "was copied by Zhang Fangping's two small officials who were slightly familiar with literature and ink according to the drafts of the articles he wrote over the years, and Fang Ping did not reread them after copying", so the four characters "show the falsification of Lu Yu", and the words "should be 'its party and the other'" and the like" sentences, "'their' down,' The two characters under the phase were either altered in the original manuscript, or the handwriting was too sloppy for the officials to read clearly, and Wang Anshi had been the prime minister, of course they knew, so they took it for granted that they copied it as 'his fate system said'." [64] Zhang Wen's explanation of this very abrupt and incomprehensible text in the Tomb Table is obviously too reluctant, and has been criticized by many scholars.
Deng Guangming pointed out that Zhang Fangping's "Preface to the Complete Works of Xie Su Zizhan Jile" said that he "entrusted a 'clerk who was sharp and 'knew a little bit of the style of the article' to compile it so that 'each of them became a class', and then ordered 'three scribes to copy it into a volume.'" During this period, there were errors and omissions, and there was no proofreading and alteration'. Zhang Wen transformed these sentences into "The Complete Works of Music", which was "copied by Zhang Fangping's order of two small officials with a little bit of the same text and ink according to the drafts of the articles he wrote over the years, and Fang Ping did not reread them after copying", so he went on to make the bold assumption that "his fate system" is that the scribe could not read the scribbled handwriting in the original manuscript and took it for granted that there were a few typos." Deng Wen believes that in the 40 volumes of the "Complete Works of Music", why do no other chapters have such a significant copying error, "but only in Lao Su's "Tomb Table"? Such a "taken for granted" that "his fate system" is regarded as a "copy error of his party's minister" "cannot be established." [65] Pei Rucheng also pointed out that Zhang Peiheng's speculation could not be established, because in Su Shi's "Collected Works of Mr. Le Quan", Yun Qi "sought his (Zhang Fangping's) anthology to be corrected by hand and kept it at home", so the scribe may have copied it, and Zhang Fangping may have neglected to "re-read", but Su Shi, who edited and edited Zhang's anthology in order to repay Zhang Fangping's "development achievements", will "correct this obvious mistake at a glance, and will definitely not let it exist." Moreover, "when changing the characters in the school of Israel, there is no doubt that it should conform to the reason, reason, and literary reason, and it is not possible to change the name of 'its destiny system' to 'its party and its party' according to 'things have a cause, rather than making up a fabrication to the wall', so as to connect with 'since the birth of the people, only a few people'"; and "'life' and 'party', 'system' and 'sycophancy', there is no similarity in the shape and pronunciation of the characters, and 'since the birth of the people, only a few people' is 'added and exaggerated',...... Zeng Gong recommended a friend to Ouyang Xiu, with the intention of complimenting him; the author of "The Tomb Table" deliberately discerned treachery and degraded with his intentions, and the two were opposed, and they were very different from each other, so how could he rely on it to reason with the school." Therefore, if the text here is really "his party is talking to each other", the meaning is that Wang Anshi and his party members "praise each other, which contradicts the following 'since the birth of the people, there are only a few people'", it can be seen that such a change makes "this sentence has been difficult to understand, and it still cannot withstand scrutiny, and it still cannot make up for the flaws". In addition, Zhang Fangping had served as a scholar of Hanlin and a bachelor of Hanlin for many years, "naturally he was very familiar with the close relationship between the prime minister's words and the emperor's will, and he dared to steal the words of the life phase system to attack Wang Anshi." [66] Fang Jian also believes that Zhang Fangping, who had studied at Hanlin Bachelor, "was familiar with the drafting norms of the hemp system, but how could he dare to articulate the language, and falsely attack Wang Anshi with the eight characters that did not exist in the system and give people a handle." [67]
Regarding "the language of artificiality, I think it is more than a saint".
Because this sentence echoes the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" in "Today, there are people who recite the words of Confucius and the old, and they are walking in a good way and Qi, and they are recruiting people with good names and people who have no aspirations, and they are making words and private names to think that Yan Yuan and Meng Ke are coming back". In this regard, Li Fu believes that "those who take Jing Gong as a saint are also gods." [68] Cai Shangxiang pointed out that since Wang Anshi entered the imperial examination, all the travelers he had befriended were "all known as sages for a while, and none of them were 'people with good names and undesirable people'", and as for Lu Huiqing, he first met him because of Ouyang Xiu, and Lu Huiqing "practiced the new law with him, and he was beyond the reach of Ming Yun". [69] As to whether Wang Anshi's friends are "sages" or "party friends", it has been mentioned in the above analysis of the so-called "party friends for a while", so I will not repeat it here. Regarding the "saint" Yunyun, Zhang Peiheng believes that "because Yan and Meng are close to the saints, they say 'they think they are more than saints'." Li Fu said that 'the god who takes Jing Gong as a saint' is 'beyond his (Su Xun's) reach', which is a misunderstanding of these two sentences, and he confuses 'saint' with 'a few more saints'." [70] According to the Song Dynasty, the Son of Heaven was generally called a "saint", and sometimes he was also called a minister, such as Wang Dan, the prime minister of the Zhenzong Dynasty, who praised the former prime minister Li Xin (谥文靖) and said: "Li Wenjing is a true saint." Therefore, Li Xin was called "the holy minister" at that time. [71] The praise of Wang Anshi as a "saint" probably began in the early years of Shenzong.
"Zhu Zi's Language" contains: "Shenzong asked Mingdao (Cheng Hao) Yun: 'Is Wang Anshi a saint?' Mingdao said: "Gongsun Shuo's skin, how many are bare. "The saint is like this. Wang Anshi can't be cured yet, what a sage is!'"[72] This record is what Cheng Hao said when he talked to the disciples in the second year of Yuanfeng:
In the past, he saw that it was called Jiefu's learning, and said: "Wang Anshi's learning is not." Shang was stunned and asked, "Why?" and said: "The minister does not dare to lead far, and he will stop at the near thing." The minister tasted and read the "Poem", and said the virtue of the Duke of Zhou, and the clouds: "Gongsun Shuo's skin, a few bare." 'Zhou Gong Shengde described it as such a sheng, like Wang Anshi, whose body is still unable to govern, what is the foot and this!"[73]
At the beginning of Xining's reform, Cheng Hao won Wang Anshi's trust and was given the right to supervise the imperial history. According to the "Actual Record: The Biography of Cheng Zongchenghao", at the beginning of Cheng Hao's reign in the imperial history, "Shenzong knew his name, and on the day of the call, he calmly consulted, and saw it more than three, so it was of great use." [74] It can be seen that Cheng Hao's answer to Shenzong's question was at the beginning of the reform in the second or third year of Xining. This should be the basis for Li Fuyun's "those who regard Jing Gong as a saint are also gods".
However, judging from the question and answer between Shenzong and Cheng Hao, Shenzong actually "consulted" Cheng Hao because he heard about it. However, who was the one who praised Wang Anshi as a "saint" before that? According to the "Long Edition" and other records, it should be Lu Gongshu and others who vigorously opposed Wang Anshi's reform of the law after that. The "Long Edition" records a discussion on the fourth day of April of Zhezong Shaosheng, and Zeng Bu Zhuren: "(Zhangdun) Xu also said: 'Wang Jinggong, he only knew that he was Wang Jiefu, and now he only sees him as Wang Jiefu, but he has never called him a real person, a supreme person, or a saint. (Zeng) Bu said: 'Who regards Wang Jinggong as a true person, a supreme person, and a saint?' and said: "The writings of Lu Gong and others have tasted this saying, and then they are not." [75] When Lü Gong praised Wang Anshi as a "saint" is not explicitly stated in the dialogue between Zhang and Zeng. According to the writings of Lu Gong (Uncle Xuan, Feng Shen Gong), Wang Anshi and others are also "Jiayou Four Friends", from the end of Renzong to the beginning of Shenzong, the two have been very close. According to Shao Bowen: "Wang Jinggong and Lu Shengong are very good, and Jing Gong tasted and said: 'Lu Sixteen is not a good look, and the world is not peaceful. He also said: "Uncle Hao is a face, and my generation can speak well." That's the point. Therefore, Wang Anshi was in power, "recommended Shen Gong as Zhongcheng, and wanted to get his help, so Shen Gong Chu promoted many people from the regulations as Taiwan officials." [76] Zhu Xi also said that "Jing Gong and Shen Gong were very good friends at that time, and the new law was also discussed, so when the new law was implemented, Shen Gong was very much expected to help." [77] At the beginning of Wang Anshi's reign, scholars and scholars at that time also believed that this was the "season of mutation", so they had high expectations for Wang Anshi to preside over the reform. In this atmosphere, it is conceivable that Lu Gong wrote as "helping" Wang Anshi, and praised Wang Anshi as a "saint". Shenzong should have asked Cheng Hao because of the reputation of Lu Gong and others.
What is a "saint"? Wang Anshi said:
The holy is the name, the Tao is the extreme, and the virtue is also. "Don't move, don't speak, don't see, don't listen", this great sage is also. If the sage's thing is like this, it can be said to be prepared, but it is not enough to drill the strength of the saint and look up to the height of the saint. From the perspective of a sage, the Jewish mountains are to Gangling, and the rivers and seas are to Pize. However, the matter of the saints can be seen to be great. ...... The reason why the saint can be greater than others is that he can save the world with his body. If everyone wants to forget the evils of the world for the sake of Confucius's deeds, then the evil is that they are saints?[78]
Youyun: "Mencius said, 'Confucius gathers the great achievements', and the words collect the things of the saints and become the Dharma of all ages. And believed that Confucius was "virtuous in Yao and Shun". [79] Obviously, Wang Anshi's criterion for "sainthood" mainly lies in whether he "can save the world with his body" and "accomplish the law of eternity", that is, he is inclined to meritorious deeds. However, corresponding to it, Zhou Dunyi's "Tongshu" cloud: "Those who are silent and immobile are sincere, those who are moved and are connected are gods, and those who move but are not formed, and there are few people in between." ...... Sincerity, God, several, said saints. [80] Youyun: "Without thinking, this is also; ...... Thoughtless and all are saints. [81] Zhang Zai's "Zhengmeng" cloud: "Reluctantly and clearly, not the purity of the saints; The so-called saints are those who do not think about it. [82] Cheng Yi's "Yan Zi's Treatise on What He Likes" also said: "The sage does not think about it, does not reluctantly, and calmly learns the way." Yanzi must think and then get, and he will be reluctant to win. Therefore, it is said: Yan Zizhi and the saint are separated from each other. [83] It shows that his theory pays more attention to the inner cultivation of virtue. And Cheng Hao's cloud "Gongsun Shuo's skin, a few bare", see "The Book of Songs, Fengfeng, Wolf", saying that the Duke of Zhou was regent for seven years, and he returned to the king. In the past seven years, "the rumors of the four countries are far away, and the king does not know if he is near, and Dr. Zhou does not lose his sainthood." [84] That is, Zhou Gong made great efforts to bring peace to the world in an environment that was difficult both inside and outside, so Dr. Zhou called him a "saint". At the beginning of Wang Anshi's Xining reform, which assisted the Shenzong of the early government, he had a very high reputation and was known as the "sage" of the Zhou formula. However, the history records that Wang Anshi "is not good at temperament, self-dedication to frugality, or clothes are not dirty, and the dirt is not washed",[85] and in traditional Confucianism, there is a saying that "self-cultivation and Qi family rule the country and level the world", and physicists pay more attention to personal conduct and internal cultivation, so Cheng Hao answered Shenzong's question "Wang Anshi is a saint" with "Wang Anshi is not a saint", which is used as a reason why Wang Anshi is not as good as a "saint".
To Zhou Gong Zuo Cheng Wang to compare Wang Anshi, and praised as a "saint", Shenzong obviously agreed, and in the Wang Anshi worship system written by the Hanlin Bachelor, he said: "Wang Anshi has no conscience, virtue is respectful, the best is poor than the saint, and the noble name is thinner than the world." [86] After that, because Wang Anshi and Wang Yan father and son presided over the writing of the "Three Classics of New Righteousness", called "Xinxue", which prevailed in the world, so people at that time because Wang Anshi "father and son are all advancing with scriptures, and most of the people who praise beauty at that time thought that Zhou, Kong, or Confucius and Meng." Fan Bo is too learning, and dedicates a poem: "The article is double Confucius, and the art industry is two weeks old." Gong (Wang Anshi) was overjoyed and said: "This person knows my father and son." And Wang Anshi also used the poem "One day the phoenix bird goes, and the thousand autumns are destroyed by the beams and trees",[87] comparing the beloved son who died early to Confucius without doubt.
However, the act of "praising the saints" was not exclusive to Wang Anshi at that time. Praising others with excessive reputations, or hoping that others praising oneself with excessive reputations, was one of the fashions among scholars and doctors in the middle of the Northern Song Dynasty. For example, Su Xun's "The Second Book of Ouyang Neihan" has clouds:
Since Confucius did not have more than 100 years and Mencius was born; after Mencius, decades to Xun Qingzi; Xun Qingzi is a little farther, more than 200 years and Yang Xiong is known in the world; Yang Xiong's death is not allowed to be succeeded for more than 1,000 years, and then belongs to Han Yu's family; Han Yu's family is not 300 years old, I don't know who will be with the world?...... Zhang Yizhou (Zhang Fangping) saw his (Su Xun) text, thinking that it seemed to be Sima Zichang, Xun was displeased, and resigned.
It can be seen that Su Xun thinks highly of himself, and he actually compares himself with Meng, Xun, Yang, and Han, so when Zhang Fangping praised "his writing is like Sima Zichang", Su Xun was "displeased and resigned". And Ouyang Xiu thought that Su Xun's "Treatise on the Six Classics" was "Xun Qingzi's Text", although Su Xun humbly claimed that he was "among the four" was Ouyang Xiu's "play", but he still couldn't help but ask "I don't know who the world will be". [88]
Shao Yong, who was at the same time as Su Xun and claimed to have acquired innate learning, also said to himself: "Zhong Ni Hou Yu for more than 500 years, and now Zhong Ni will be more than 1,500 years later, although he does not dare to praise Yao, Shun, and Yu compared to his husband Zhong Ni, don't you dare to praise Zhong Nihu than Mencius?"[89] Cheng Hao, who was not allowed to praise Wang Anshi as a "saint" by Shenzong, and his brother Cheng Yi also praised Yun in "The Tomb Table of Mr. Ming Dao": "If Zhou Gong is gone, the way of the sage is not good; If the Tao is not good, there will be no good governance for a hundred generations, and if there is no learning and transmission, there will be no true Confucianism for thousands of years. ...... Mr. (Cheng Hao) was born (Confucius) 1,400 years later, he has to learn from the scriptures without passing it on, and he will aim to be a Taoist and a people. [90] Clearly, Cheng Yi was another sage after Confucius. Although Xiao Cheng and Su Shi, who lived in the same era, have quite similar and different academic ideas, and their views are quite profound, they are quite similar in the point of "praising saints".
Since then, Chen Qian (Yingzhong), who is famous for attacking Wang Anshi's "treacherous evil", also "compares Anshi to Yiyin, and Yiyin is a saint" in the song, and "said that Anshi is the teacher of the divine examination". [91] In addition, Zhang Shangying wrote "Ode to Jiahe" in the early years of Zhezong, comparing Sima Guang, the prime minister who presided over the "Yuan You Change", to the Duke of Zhou. [92] This is similar to the reason why Wang Anshi was known as the "Duke of Zhou".
Regarding such a "saintly" morale, Su Shiwei said in a letter with Li Di:
The foot treats each other very well, and the reputation is excessive, so it is not thick. Recently, the scholars and doctors all have the heart of arrogance and boundlessness, and they often want others to praise themselves with Zhou and Kong, and those below Meng Ke are all dissatisfied. This wind cannot last long. And those who think carefully about the calamity that they receive are all due to the fact that their names are excessive, and the Creator cannot bear them, and those who suffer a thousand bells without merit are guilty of their sins. I don't want to make words and whitewash them in order to benefit his illness. [93]
Judging from the content of this letter written by Su Shi at the end of the first year of Yuan You, it can be seen that, judging from the sentence "the servant thinks carefully and gets the trouble", Su Shi reflected that the important reason for his "Wutai poetry case" was that he was "overfamous", and his friend's "excessive reputation" was "to benefit his illness". Second, at that time, under the drive of "extravagance and boundless heart", scholars and doctors "often wanted others to praise themselves with Zhou and Confucius, and those below Meng Ke were all dissatisfied", which shows that the excessive reputation of "making words and whitewashing" among scholars and doctors at that time was more serious than that in the Xining period. Therefore, Su Shi sighed: "This wind cannot last long." ”
Due to the evil consequences brought about by the intensification of party strife in the late Northern Song Dynasty, and the increasing influence of science that emphasized the internal cultivation of virtue, people gradually opposed the trend of excessive reputation, especially the phenomenon of casually comparing the "sages" Zhou Gong and Confucius, and regarded it as a "great rape". For example, Shao Bo Wenyun: "Chongningzhong, Cai Jing and others cultivated the history of the Zhezong Sect, for the "Biography of Wang Anshi", and Wang Anshi was a saint. [94] To his son Shao Bo, he even reprimanded "Since Shao Sheng, the ministers of power have coerced the successor of the Shenzong as a changer, and they must first blackmail Wang Jinggong." Cai's Zhi Jing Gong is a saint. When the world is talking about derogating Jing Gong, it says: 'If you don't demean Jing Gong, you slander the Divine Sect, and you are not loyal to the succession. 'The righteous argument is completely nullified, the hook party is incomprehensible, and the benevolent gentleman knows that it will be a disaster of the other day, and its fierceness is unstoppable." Therefore, in the "Preface to the Collection of Zun Yao", Chen Qian then respected "Shen Kao, Yao and Shun also, and appointed An Shi, which is only nine years", and on the other hand, attacked Wang Anshi for the crimes of "arrogant incest" and "teaching people to slander", and said: "A saint, the best of humanity, and arrogant incest, how can a saint be a saint? As a result, Shao Bowen's "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu" Sui Yun "(Wang) died, Jing Gong dismissed the prime minister, mourning and not forgetting, there is a poem of 'one day phoenix bird goes, thousands of years of beams and trees are destroyed', and it is better than Confucius." [96] To Shao Bo then played: "Wang Jinggong's son Yan wrote "Praise for the Portrait of Jing Gong", saying: 'The saints and the teachings are uneven, and they are a great achievement, and the light is in Zhongni. 'It is the Holy Father who is more than Confucius. When the bird died, Jing Gong cried in a poem: 'One day the phoenix bird goes, and the beam is destroyed for a thousand years.' 'It is a son who compares to Confucius. Father and son are saints, and they can be described as unscrupulous. ”[97]
Of course, although such remarks attacking Wang Anshi and his son as "saints" reflected the increasingly fierce party struggle between the old and new parties at that time, they were also closely related to the changes in social customs: the over-praise of Wang Anshi as a "saint" by the people of the time was just a common phenomenon of morale at that time, and it was expressed among scholars with different academic views and political opinions. Wang Anshi accepts the reputation of others, which is no different from Su Xun's father and son, Cheng Yi brothers, and Shao Yongzhi's self-promise. However, at the beginning of the Southern Song Dynasty, this social trend had been reversed, so Shao Bowen, Shao Bo and others deliberately ignored the self-promise of the ancestor Shao Yong and the similar written and verbal expressions of the Su family father and son and the Cheng brothers, and used the reputation of the so-called "saint" to attack Wang Anshi and his son. [98] Therefore, in terms of the Song Dynasty's scholars' acceptance and rebuke of the phenomenon of over-reputation as "saints", the accusation that Wang Anshi's "party friends" "artificially used language, to the point that they are more than saints" could not have appeared in the period from Renzong Jiayou to Shenzong Xifeng, nor would it have appeared in the Yuan Dynasty, but it seems that it could only come from the mouths of scholars in the late Northern Song Dynasty and later.
(2) There is a cloud in "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery": "The husband does not forget to wash the dirt on his face, and he does not forget to wash the dirt on his clothes, and this person is also very affectionate." Today, it is not the case, the clothes of the courtiers, the food of the dogs, and the mourning of the prisoners to talk about "poems" and "books", how can this be the same feelings? Those who are not close to human feelings in everything are rarely treacherous. This passage is the basis of the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", but it has also caused a lot of controversy in later generations.
Wang Anshi had no choice in eating and drinking in his daily life, and there were many records in the notes of the Song people. The volume of Fang Spoon's "Bo Zhai Edition" is also called Wang Anshi's "prisoner's head and mourning face". [99] Ye Mengde's "Summer Retreat" volume uploaded: "Jing Gong's nature is simple and simple, but it is said to be the food of dogs and dogs, and the prisoner is not the same". [100] Zhu Ben's "Qu Wei Old News" Volume 10 Yiyun: "Wang Jinggong is simple and straightforward, does not do anything to groom and serve, his clothes are dirty, his diet is evil, and he has no choice, but he has been since he was young. Su Mingyun wrote "Distinguishing Adultery", and his words were about the clothes of the courtiers, the food of dogs, and the mourning of prisoners and talked about "poems" and "books". However, "people see it too much, or they are suspicious of its false clouds." [101] His arguments are all based on the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery". Zhu Xi even cited Lu Zuqian as an example, pointing out that the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" is not: "However, Jing Gong is accustomed to being a corpse, leaving the world, and eating things does not know hunger. Try to memorize a book, carry it in the food, never have any hobbies, but those who are near will be exhausted. Left and right suspect that it is good, and it is easy to use other things tomorrow, and if you put this product far away, you will not eat it. Often in the food does not taste the taste also. ...... In modern times, Lu Bogong is the same, his face is dirty, he seems to be untouched, and he doesn't know how much to eat. If you want it, you can rest assured. "Identifying Adultery" is a traitor with this, I'm afraid it would be otherwise. [102] However, even so, Wang Anshi "does not do anything to groom and serve", "eats without knowing hunger", "eats evilly, and has no choice", and does not seem to be able to criticize "eating dog food". According to the analysis of the text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Treachery", the so-called "eating dog and eating dogs" here should allude to Wang Anshi's "eating bait" recorded in the second volume of "Shaw Brothers' Wenjianlu":
Emperor Renzong Dynasty, Wang Anshi was the knowledge of the system. One day, the flower viewing and fishing feast, the waiter each put a few fish bait and medicine with a golden plate, and the stone was exhausted. Tomorrow, the emperor Zai Fu said: "Wang Anshi deceives people." If you eat the bait by mistake, you will stop eating it, and you will be reluctant to eat it. "The emperor is not happy. [103]
Shi Zairenzong got seriously ill in the early years of Jiayou, but after recovering from the illness, he was not good at words and deeds, and Shao Bowen immediately tasted the record and said: "The emperor has been silent since then." When the minister acts, he can approve it, not shake his head. [104] There were very few outings. Check the "long edition" and so on, Jiayou only six years of spring to taste the flower appreciation and fishing banquet once, "March, fortunate back garden flower fishing, then the banquet Taiqing Building. out of the imperial poem chapter, ordered from the subordinate and to advance". [105] According to the "Poetry of the Western Qing Dynasty": "Jiayou, enjoy the flowers and fish the swallows, and Jiefu pre-sits the last seat with the knowledge system." [106] According to the "History of the Song Dynasty and Renzong Ji", Wang Anshi was informed of the system in June of the sixth year of Jiayou. [107] It was the spring when the flower viewing and fishing banquet was held, and Wang Anshi had not yet known the system. In the time of Zhenzong and Renzong, generally every spring in the back garden to enjoy the flowers and fish feast, the monarch and the minister entertain together, so it is a story. According to the "Long Edition", in March of the third year of the Heavenly Sage, the Son of Heaven "Xinghou Yuan, enjoying flowers and fishing, Sui Yan Taiqing Building, auxiliary ministers, clans, two systems, miscellaneous bachelors, waiting for the system, deputy envoys of the three divisions, knowledge of miscellaneous imperial history, judges of the three divisions, Kaifeng Mansion officials, pavilion officials, and festival envoys to the history of the assassin are all pre-Yan." [108] Thereafter, the range of pre-banquet officials was more or less the same. Among them, the festival degree envoy to the assassin history is the military attaché. Among the civil officials of the pre-banquet, there are many official positions lower than those of the Zhizhi (for the two systems), and the pavilion officials are the palace. In the examination of "History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of Wang Anshi", Wang Anshi was the judge of the three divisions and the Zhiji Xianyuan, which was the official title of "pre-last seat". "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu" and "Western Qing Poems" said that Wang Anshi's official knowledge was wrong.
Flower viewing and fishing banquet, generally divided into two contents of flower viewing and fishing and the same banquet of monarchs and ministers, flower viewing and fishing first, the location is in the back garden, the banquet is in the back, the location is generally in the Taiqing Building. Therefore, before the waiter sent the bait, Wang Anshi did not know that it was the bait and ate it by mistake and "ate it all". According to the taste of "The Chronicles of the Flowing Water", at the beginning of Renzong, when the attendant Peng Cheng pre-fished the banquet, there were many waiters on the left and right. [109] Therefore, it is not reasonable for someone to accidentally eat bait on the spot and many waiters do not point it out and stop it. Moreover, Renzong, who had been ill for a long time, saw Wang Anshi, who was the only one among many officials, "eat all the bait" and did not inform the prime minister until the next day, and its authenticity is also highly questionable. It is also recorded in the flower viewing and fishing banquet, and the monarchs and ministers often write poems and entertainment, "the poems given by the flowers and fishing every year, or prepare, and it is (the eighth year of the heavenly saint) out of surprise, sitting embarrassed, the excellent people think it is a play, and the left and right are laughing." [110] According to the "Poetry of the Western Qing Dynasty", Wang Anshi was also embarrassed by the banquet: "The emperor produces poems, and the ministers are harmonious. At the end of Jiefu, the day is about to set, and the word 'Phi Xiang Palace' is not right. Zheng Yifu Gu said: "It is advisable to deal with the Taiye Pool. Therefore, his poem said: "Leave Zhu Yuan on the Phi Xiang Palace, and send a jade cup by the Taiye Pool." The next day, it was rumored that the king had stolen willow words, and Jiefu was quite famous. [111] These are two sentences in Wang Anshi's poem "Fishing with the Imperial System of Flowers", because the poetry of Wang Shi's poems and the words are the same as Liu Yong's words, and the next day they were spread as jokes in the capital. Therefore, if Wang Anshi had indeed eaten the bait by mistake in front of everyone, wouldn't it have spread all over the world at once? And in the second year of Xining, when Cheng Lu impeached Wang Anshi for the ten evils in the imperial history, he picked up a trivial matter that Wang Anshi did in the Jiayou period as an evil, nitpicking, and tried his best to attack, but did not mention his bait-eating. If Renzong did have a comment that "Wang Anshi deceived people," could Lü Xue not quote it, so as to enhance the strength of his article? This can also prove that Shao Bowen's statement that Wang Anshi eats bait is quite uncredible. [112]
"The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" attacked Wang Anshi's "eating the food of dogs" as a manifestation of "unkindness", and put forward the theory that "those who are not close to human affection in everything are rarely treacherous, and they are also erected, easy to teeth, and prescribed prescriptions". However, Pei Rucheng pointed out that this view is different from that discussed in Su Xun's "Jiayou Collection", Volume 8, "Guan Zhong": "Fu Qi Guo does not suffer from three sons, but suffers from no (Guan) Zhong. If there is a middle, then the three sons are three horses. Otherwise, there will be no less disciples of three sons in the world. ...... (If Guan Zhong was alive) to raise the sages of the world to replace himself, then although Zhong died, and the Qi country was not without Zhong, why should the husband have three sons!"The two views are contrary to each other, that is, Su Xun's "Guan Zhong Treatise" believes that the state has good ministers and virtuous ministers, although there are "unfriendly people" such as those who are erected in the inner court, they cannot harm the country and cause trouble to the world. It can be seen that there is no inevitable connection between "unkindness" and "great treachery". In addition, the saying that "those who are not close to people in everything are rarely treacherous" also conflicts with the statement in Su Xun's "The Second Book of Ouyang Neihan":
Zhang Yizhou (Zhang Fangping) saw his (Su Xun) text, thinking that it seemed to be Sima Zichang, Xun was displeased, and resigned. The husband is clothed, and the prince said that his text is like Sima Qian, and he resigned unhappily, which is not close to people. I am afraid that people all over the world will not believe it, and I am afraid that Zhang Gongzhi will not be able to speak up to his words, and he will be laughed at by the world. [114]
It can be seen that "people who are not close to people" may also have a reason for the incident, not just "great treachery". For example, in the face of Zhang Fangping's praise of his essay as "like Sima Zichang", Su Xunzhi's "displeasure is not close to human feelings", which is an example.
Regarding this passage of "Distinguishing Adultery", Cai Shangxiang analyzed that Wang Anshi was not "a prisoner and a mourner", but Zhang Peiheng said that Cai's distinction was wrong, and he believed that "'dirt is not washed, and dirt is not dirty', he was one of the famous scholars of the Wei and Jin dynasties, and there was no shortage of such performances among the scholars and scholars of later generations." As long as they are not vulgar and snobbish, they will not regard this as the behavior of 'mediocre beggars, poor, hungry and boring people' and the 'evil' of 'just that'. Therefore, Nanfeng, Luling, and Luguo have repeatedly praised Anshi as a sage, which does not prove that Wang Anshi cannot have such a famous demeanor." [115] In this regard, Deng Guangming thought: "The "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" was originally cited as some of Wang Anshi's unsympathetic behaviors, and insisted on taking this as an opportunity to deduce the conclusion that 'those who are not close to human feelings in everything are rarely traitorous, and they are also erected, easy to teeth, and prescribed prescriptions', how can it be compared with Ji Kang and later generations of unkempt literati and scholars, and said that it is a kind of 'celebrity demeanor' of Wang Anshi?" To write some unwarranted details of life and call them impersonal, and to rigidly deduce the conclusion of 'great adultery' from impersonal feelings, is a complete lack of logical reasoning, reflecting the excessive clumsiness of the author's writing!"[116] Indeed, if the original meaning of the accusation of Wang Anshi's words such as "the prisoner's head is mourned" in the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" is one of the manifestations of the demeanor of famous men and scholars in the Wei and Jin dynasties, then his text not only fails to achieve the purpose of distinguishing adultery, but becomes a kind of praise.
(3) There is a cloud in the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery": "In the name of the world, if you help its unseen troubles, although there is a lord who is willing to govern and a good and virtuous person, you will still use it, then it is a problem in the world, and it is inevitable and undoubted." Wang Anshi, who thinks that he is "not close to human feelings" and is "one person" with Wang Yan and Lu Qi, if he can't "use it" by the wise and virtuous ministers, he will only "have a sigh of not encountering" and cannot "be the trouble of the world".
Press, carefully deduce the implicit meaning of this paragraph of the text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Treachery", which should have been written after Wang Anshi took power. Because as "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu" and "Treatise on Adultery" was written at the end of Jiayou, Wang Anshi was only a member of the system, and the official position of the knowledge system was quite far from the ruling of the country, and Wang Anshi was also quite inhibited because of disagreement with Prime Minister Han Qi and other ministers, such as Sima Guang: "He Jiefu knew the system, and most of his words and deeds were frustrated by Han Gong." will be mourned by his mother, and he will be removed, when the Duke of Han is still the country, Jiefu will stay in Jinling, and will not go to court. [117] If, as stated in the "Tomb Table", the "Treatise on Distinguishing Treachery" was written in the first year of Jiayou, then Wang Anshi was only an official Dr. Taichang and a group of pastoral judges, and "the official is far away", let alone anything.
Even in the eighth year of Jiayou, although Wang Anshi was already famous in the government and the opposition, he did not have the certainty that he would be able to worship the ruler of the country in the future. There is no shortage of famous people in the Song Dynasty who did not worship the rulers. As Wei Tai recorded in the "Dongxuan Records":
In Jiayou, all the princes of the forbidden forest entered the two mansions. At that time, Bao Xiaosu Gongzheng was the third envoy, Song Jingwen Gongqi guarded Zhengzhou, and the second public wind was long-lasting, the most popular, but useless. The proverb of the Beijing division says: "Dial the team to participate in politics, and form a group as a deputy center." It was a loss to him to protect the provincial lord and suffocate Song Shangshu. "Next year, Bao will also be the privy councilor, and Song will be called by the order of the Hanlin scholar. [118]
At this time, Wang Anshi's official position and popularity were far lower than those of Song Qi, but Su Xun was able to write "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" six or seven years ago or more than ten years ago to accurately predict that Wang Anshi would not only be able to govern by worshipping the prime minister, but would also bring disaster to the world, "not the ratio of two sons (Wang Yan and Lu Qi)", although "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" boasted that he had the "foresight" of "being able to know the subtleties and see", it was not too godly.
(4) Regarding the violation of the content of the "Tomb Table" and the life deeds of Su Xun and Zhang Fangping.
The first words of the "Tomb Table" are "Emperor Renzong Youzhong, Servant Leader Yibu". However, according to the "Long Edition", Zhang Fangping was informed of Yizhou in July of the first year of Zhihe, and arrived in November;[119] In August of the third year of Zhihe, he was reappointed as the third envoy. [120] According to the law, in March of the sixth year of Emperor You, the yuan was changed to the first year of Zhihe, and in September of the third year of Zhihe, it was changed to the first year of Jiayou. It can be seen that Zhang Fangping's self-description of his "Emperor Youzhong, Servant Leader and Benefit Department" is really wrong, and "Huang Youzhong" is regarded as "Zhihezhong". [121]
"Tomb Table" Yun Su Xun died, and the Su Shi brothers were buried in Shu, and Renchen was buried in Kelongli, Anzhen Township, Pengshan County, Meizhou in August next year. According to the fourth year of Zhiping, Ding Weishuo in August is not a day in the month. Ouyang Xiu's "Epitaph of Su Jun" as "Renshen in October of the fourth year of Zhiping". [122] On the 27th day of October, Renshen was the 27th. According to Ye Mengde's "Summer Record" volume, Zhang Fangping wrote "Tomb Table" for Su Zhe's request, and the burial date should be provided by the children of the Su family, but the "Tomb Table" actually made a mistake with the burial month and date, which is suspicious. [123]
"Tomb Table" said that Su Xun "wrote 20 volumes of essays, 3 volumes of "Confessions", and 10 volumes of "Yi Chuan". However, Ouyang Xiu's "Epitaph of Su Jun" is "a collection of 20 volumes, and 3 volumes of "The Law", also known as "Yi Chuan", and died before it was completed. [124] Zeng Gong's "Su Mingyun's Lamentation" also said that "what was done for "Yi Chuan" was not completed". [125] According to Su Zhe's "Epitaph of the Dead Brother Zhan Duanming" and "The ancestor read "Yi" in his later years, played with his elephants, and obtained his feelings of rigidity and softness, distance and proximity, joy and anger, and rebellion. The work of "Yi Biography" is not finished, the disease is reformed, and the father (Su Shi) is ordered to describe his will. Gong wept and was ordered, and the book was written, and then the whispers of a thousand years can be known." [126] Su Zhou's "Mr. Luancheng's Last Words" Yun Suxun "made "Yi Chuan" unfinished, and the second prince (Su Shi. Su Zhe) recounted his aspirations. Dongpo was ordered to write a book. At the beginning, the two boys both read "Yi" and explained it. Each of the other states, and the eastern slope is unique to the king of Wen, Fuxi transcendent will, the public (Su Zhe) is sent to the Po, and now the "Menggua" is still a public understanding. [127] Therefore, the second volume of the "Siku Quanshu General Catalogue" records the nine volumes of Su Shi's "Dongpo Yi Biography", saying that "this book is actually written by the Su father, son and brothers, and the title is written by Shi, so that it can be heard". [128] Appendix 1 of "Houzhai Yixue" cites "Zhongxing Bibliography" and "Song History, Art and Literature Chronicles, Yi Class", which recorded nine volumes of Su Shi's "Yi Chuan". [129] "Junzhai Reading Journal" volume 1, "Yuhai" volume 36 "Zhou Yi Chuan" recorded Su Shi's "Dongpo Yi Chuan" 11 volumes, [130] "Zhizhai Shulu Problem Solving" volume 1 made 10 volumes. [131] According to Su Shi's "Huangzhou Shangwen Lu Gongshu", he "went to Huangzhou with no intentions, and thought about it in the "Yi" and "Analects", and thought deeply, and if he had gained, he wrote nine volumes of "Yi Chuan" because of the learning of his ancestors, and wrote five volumes of "Analects of Analects". [132] and "With Wang Dingguo" has a cloud: "Since he lived in the country, he has obtained nine volumes of "Yi Chuan" and five volumes of "Analects", and now he has started to write "Shu Biography". Clumsy learning, talking about entertaining the old, and thinking that children and grandchildren hide their ears". [133] This book was written during Su Shi's relegation to Huangzhou, which is nine volumes, and ten or eleven volumes, which were added to and revised during his later years in Hainan. [134] Therefore, if Zhang Fangping was invited to write Su Xun's "Tomb Table" at the beginning of Yuanfeng, when the "Yi Chuan" had not yet been written, it should not be said that "the ten volumes of the Yi Chuan" should not be used. Therefore, it can be inferred from the fact that Su Xun's writings have ten volumes of "Yi Chuan" in the "Tomb Table", and it seems that his writing should not be earlier than the time when Su Shi returned from the north and south of the sea at the beginning of Huizong.
(5) Regarding the relationship between Su Xun and Han Qi as described in the "Tomb Table".
After Yun Suxun entered Beijing, "the name moved the world, and the scholars recited his text, and the text of the time changed, called 'Lao Su'." When Han Gongqi heard the wind and treated him well, he tasted and talked about the world's affairs, and thought that Jia Yi couldn't get by. However, they know their talents and cannot use them". According to the early days of Jiayou in history, Su Xun was recommended by Ouyang Xiu and wrote to the prime minister Fu Bi and the privy envoy Han Qi (Han Qi has been the privy envoy since Jiayou for three years). According to Su Xun's "Privy Secret Book of Shanghan", he said: "Xun has no other strengths in writing, and talks about military affairs, discusses the situation in ancient and modern times, and compares himself to Jia Yi." The dedication of the "Book of Rights", although the ancients have traces of success and failure in the past, Gou knows its meaning, and it is indispensable to apply it to the present. He persuaded Han Qi and other rulers to establish their authority with military punishment, and said, "Therefore, the Son of Heaven should not kill more; [135] That is, Su Xun's "Book of Quan" and "Heng Lun" were "drawn from the use of soldiers",[136] which was quite taboo of the imperial court, so Fu and Han did not treat Su Xun favorably, and of course they did not entrust it as Su Xun expected. For example, Ye Mengde's "Summer Retreat" tastes the clouds:
Han Wei Gong (Han Qi) to Hezhong returned to the court as a privy envoy, when the military and political affairs were relaxed for a long time, the soldiers were arrogant and lazy, and they wanted to be slightly restricted, fearing that their grievances would change, and Fang Yin tried to do it. It will be clear that it will come from Shu, but it is to explore the public will, and it will be a book, showing what it says, and claiming that the public will be beheaded first. The public was shocked, Xie didn't dare to say goodbye, and blamed Ou Wenzhong slightly, and Fu Zheng Gong was not happy when he was in charge, so Ming Yun returned without success for a long time. [137]
And "Daoshan Qinghua" also contains:
When Lao Su first came out of Shu, he saw all the nobles with military books, but he didn't understand it very much. Later, someone said that his name was Yu Fu Han Gong, and the public said: "This king exhorts people to kill in order to establish his authority, how can he be so worthy of an official position!" [138]
After Yun Suxun presented the book in "The History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of Su Xun", "Prime Minister Han Qi saw that his book was good, played it in the court, summoned the house, and resigned from illness, so he removed the secretary of the provincial school." Hui Taichang revised the Book of Rites since Jianlong, which was thought to be the main book of Wen'an County, Bazhou, and the book of rites of the same practice as Yao Kai, the order of Xiangcheng in Chenzhou, for the 100 volumes of "Taichang Because of the Revolution". [139] This passage is quite exaggerated, according to the "Summer Retreat" is Yun Suxun "After many years of calling, he can't resign, and for the book, he is the secretary of the provincial school." When the Duke of Wei was already the prime minister, he re-moved the book Wei Gong, sued the poor and old, and could not be changed from the state and county to the official, such as Yuzhang orange pomelo, not planted by the old man, and said that the officials of the world should not be redundant for a certain reason? Ou Wenzhong also said, so he took the main book of Wen'an County, Bazhou, and edited the "Taichang Because of the Revolution" cloud with Yao Yan. [140] According to the "Annals of Su Shi", Su Xun was called for the test in the third year of Jiayou, and Su Xun "did not resign". In February of the fifth year, Su Xun and his son went to Beijing, and in August, Su Xun was the secretary of the provincial school, and Zhao Luan was recommended by Zhao Luan, who was transferred to Chengdu Fulu. In July of the sixth year, Su Xun was the chief bookkeeper of Wen'an County, Bazhou, and revised "Taichang Yin Ge Li". [141] It can be seen that Su Xun was dissatisfied with the slow treatment of Fu Bi and Han Qi, so he did not go to the Sheren Courtyard to test: "Gou Imperial Court thinks that his words are credible, so what can he try? Gou does not believe in his peaceful residence, and his words are in a hurry, how can he believe in evil?"[142] So because of the recommendation of the official, Su Xun was awarded the title of trial official,[143] and was even more dissatisfied, so he directly wrote to Prime Minister Han Qi to ask for an official:
Xun is old and boring, the family property is destroyed, and he wants to beg for an official position from the prime minister, so he dares to treat the virtuous and handsome as the court, so that he can be a Taoist, but the difference is better than today, and the coarse can maintain the ears of the elderly. Last year, the imperial court awarded Xun a trial school scholar, and he did not dare to be less. Let the court listen to it, and Xun is lucky, but he has a Beijing official, and he can't treat the scholars as much as the Han and Tang dynasties, then the Beijing official and the test title, how much is it in between, but it must be for the other, not for this evil?...... It seems that Xun Xing is not very well known to the public, and Xianggong is particularly interested. As for the officials, those who hesitate repeatedly are tired. How can the officials of the world be redundant and evil?[144]
The imperial court then awarded Su Xun the official master of Wen'an County, Bazhou, thinking that he would be raised. It is known that the clouds of the "Tomb Table" are beautiful decorations, which are quite different from the facts.
(6) The question of the title in the "Tomb Table" and others.
There is also the problem of inconsistent titles in the "Tomb Table of Mr. Wen'an". Li Fu pointed out that there are titles in the "Tomb Table" that do not fit the identity of Zhang Fangping and Su Xun: "Kao Wending Zhen Yizhou, has been a minister, Lao Quan began to see it in cloth, and the age is younger than Wending, and his death is also an official book, and the "Tomb Table" is called "Mr". [145] In this regard, Deng Guangming quoted the words of Yuanren Wang Gou's "Rhetorical Appraisal and Balance": "All articles must be predetermined. For example, Zhang Andao's "Su Mingyun's Tomb Table", or Su Jun, or Mr., or Mingyun, Ouyang Yongshu, or name or character. All cases are not determined in advance, resulting in severity and severity. He pointed out that Wang Gou "was limited by the times and did not dare to easily put forward negative opinions." [146] In fact, this passage has been recorded in volume 34 of Zhang Di's "Shixue Norms" in the Southern Song Dynasty, and the note quotes "Buli Ke Tan". [147] According to "Buli Ke Tan", it was written by Chen Changfang, a man of high and filial piety in the Southern Song Dynasty. It can be seen that the criticism of the "unequal severity" in the "Tomb Table" appeared at the beginning of its writing.
In response to the question of titles in the "Tomb Table", Zhang Peiheng cited the fact that Ouyang Xiu repeatedly called him "master" and "sir" in order to promote the style of Chang Zhi who was inferior to himself, and believed that "the relationship between Ouyang Xiu and Chang Zhi is similar to that of Zhang Fangping to Su Xun", so Ouyang Xiu, who lived at the same time, could call Chang Zhi "master, sir, and elder", and it was not wrong for Zhang Fangping to call Su Xun "sir"; and the traditional Chinese habit is that "the title of the deceased on the tomb table and epitaph is generally more respectful than when he was alive". [148] Indeed, Zhang Fangping's call of Su Xun "sir" out of respect did not contradict the morale of the time, so if the title is questioned as a forgery, the reason is certainly insufficient, but Zhang Fangping was also famous for literature at the time, so he was invited to write Su Xun's "Tomb Table", in which the title is so "unequal", it is indeed suspicious.
According to the problem of "unequal weight" in the "Tomb Table", this article can be roughly divided into three sections, namely: from the beginning of the article "Emperor Renzong Youzhong" to "Knowing his talent and not being able to use it" is the first section, describing Zhang Fangping's acquaintance with his father and son and the reason why Su Xun entered Beijing and became famous. In this section, Zhang Fangping called Su Xun "Su Jun" and "Jun", Ouyang Xiu "Ouyang Yongshu" and "Yongshu", Han Qi "Han Gongqi", and called himself "servant". From "the first monarch will travel to Beijing" to the end of the third section, it talks about Su Xun and his two sons going to Beijing to pay tribute. In this section, Zhang Fangping called Su Xun "Jun" and called himself "servant". In these two sections, its title is decent, and there is no disease of "unequal severity". From the "First Zhaoling" to the "Ten Volumes of Yi Chuan" is the second section, which calls Su Xunzun "Mr.", Han Qi or "Qi", or "Han", Ouyang Xiu calls his name, the so-called "unequal" titles all exist in this section, and most of the controversial texts in later generations also exist in this section, so it is quite suspected that the article "Tomb Table" is a patchwork of several texts, and the second section of the text and the first and third sections do not seem to belong to one article.
Regarding the fallacies in the text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and the content of others, Cai Shangxiang tried to distinguish and analyze the clouds:
"Identifying Adultery" said: "Those who mislead the world will be this person." "This mountain is a huge source language, and "Song Wenjian" and "Words and Deeds of Famous Ministers" are all called Uncle Yang. Examining the "Book of Jin", Wang Yan tasted Hu, and the guests said: "Wang Yifu is in a big position with a good reputation, but this person must also be corrupt and injured." This language is slightly the same as Juyuan. Since he cited the error, and the "Wenjian" and "Records of the Words and Deeds of Famous Ministers" were not noticed, they recorded them from their originals. And those who have been passed on for a long time, and those who know that they are not and change them, then what is passed on in this world is also.
Youyun:
However, "Lu Qi is treacherous and evil, and it will eventually become a big disaster, a thief and a harmful thing, and those who mislead the world will be a person", which can be seen in Lu Xu's "Ten Things". The three sons of Erection, Yiya, and Kaifang are impersonal and cannot be approached, so it is clear that there is "Guan Zhong Theory". "Although there is a lord who wishes to rule, a good and virtuous appearance, he will still use it", and the discipline of the square spoon "makes it aspire to establish a dynasty, although the wise lord will also bewitch it". This is all the hypocrite's clumsy heart, and the origin of the attack is also. [149]
Regarding Cai's criticism, Zhang Peiheng believes that this is just "Su Xun's father and son's composition is deeply infected with the habit of indulgence, and it is not known for its strict citation, and it is not surprising that there are occasional citation errors." As for its similarity with the "Shang Shi Shu", "some sentences are similar, and An Zhi is not influenced by Lu Zhi in "Distinguishing Adultery"?" and "it is a common thing for the ancients to quote the same allusion or mention the same historical event in their different articles", so Su Xun mentioned the matter of the three people in "Guan Zhong's Treatise", why can't it be mentioned again in "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery"? And "even if "Distinguishing Adultery" is a forgery", Fang Lao's "Bo Zhai Edition" clearly stated that Su Xun's "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" "walks in the world", so how can "Distinguishing Adultery" attack the "Bo Zhai Edition" in "Bo Zhai Bian"? [150] Indeed, Cai Shangxiang's claim that the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" attacked the text of "Bo Zhai Bian" is self-contradictory, but Zhang Wen's argument for analyzing the relationship between "Distinguishing Adultery" and Lu Xu's "Shang Shi Shu" and Su Xun's "Guan Zhong Treatise" is not sufficient.
For this reason, Wang Shuizhao wrote an article to discern the clouds: at least "seven surviving kinds" of the texts of the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" in the documents of the Song Dynasty are Ma Shaben's "The Complete Works of Mr. Lao Su in the Category Edition", "The Complete Works of Mr. Wen'an" in Volume 39 "The Tomb Table of Mr. Wen'an", Volume 12 of "Records of the Records of the Shaw Family", Volume 97 of Lu Zuqian's "Imperial Wenjian", Volume 10 (Abridged Edition) of "Words and Deeds of Famous Ministers of the Five Dynasties", Volume 208 (Abridged Edition), Volume 114 of "The Story of the Eastern Capital" "The Biography of Su Xun", etc., and for "The Theory of Identifying Treachery", "Uncle Yang of the Past Sees Wang Yan" In a sentence, among the above seven kinds of literature, except for the "Uncle Yang" in the "Lao Su Anthology" in Mashaben, which is "Shanjuyuan", the other six are all mistakenly named "Uncle Yang", which can show that "its own original text" is not a mistake in citing Shao Bowen when Cai Shangxiang made a forgery, and later generations knew that it was wrong and changed it to "Shanjuyuan", in fact, "the Song Journal Mashaben has already been made as "Shanjuyuan". In addition, "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu" "only get the middle master", Masha is "only the Central Plains", wrong, but it is "not the sound is close, the shape is close, but there is a different reason", that is, the "Imperial Wenjian" and "Five Dynasties Famous Ministers Words and Deeds" do not have the words "only the Lord", it is Lu Zuqian, Zhu Xi "saw the base as 'only the Central Plains', and felt that it was inappropriate and deleted, or the word "middle master" was said by a monarch of medium talent, which was quite abrupt and destroyed, which could not be suspended", but from this "seems to be able to prove that it (Mashaben "Lao Su Ji") received " The Theory of Discrimination and Adultery does not originate from the Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu". [151]
According to Wang Wen's discussion of Mashaben's "Lao Su Ji", "it does not originate from the "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu", it should be credible, but there are other clouds, and there can be supplementary revisions. First, in addition to the above seven types, there are at least Du Daqi's "Famous Ministers' Tablet Biography Wanyan Collection" in Volume 42 "(Su Xun) Tomb Table", Zhu Mu's "Collection of Ancient and Modern Things", Volume 19, Su Xun's "Identification of Adultery" (abridged version), etc. Second, the "Siku Quanshu" is also called "Shan Juyuan"; and in the late Southern Song Dynasty, Wang Tingzhen compiled the "Collection of Ancient Texts" volume 66 quotes Lao Quan's "Distinguishing Treachery", which is roughly quoted from the "Eastern Capital Affairs", and is also called "Shan Juyuan", and the "King James Siku Quanshu Research" volume 91 "Collection of Ancient Texts" cloud: "The publication of 'Shan Juyuan' is falsely accused of 'Uncle Yang', and it is changed according to "Lao Quanji". In the late Southern Song Dynasty, Pan Zimu's "Records of the Yuanhai" volume 43 "The Knower's Peep" quoted Lao Quan's language as "the former Yang Uncle saw Wang Yan said", and the same book volume 52 "The Prophet" quoted Lao Quan's language as "The former mountain Juyuan saw Wang Yan said". It can be shown that there were two versions of "Distinguishing Adultery" in the Southern Song Dynasty as "Shan Juyuan" and "Yang Shuzi", among which the "Shan Juyuan" should have been changed by the people of the time according to the "Book of Jin", and the time of its change does not seem to be earlier than that of Xiaozong.
In addition, Li Fuyun: "The "Tomb Table" has the words "no one in Shu", and Dongpo's "Book of Thanks" is also "no one in Qin", the words are both repetitive, and the tone is similar, so it is also a fake ear of the Shaw family. [152] Zhang Peiheng refuted Li Fuzhi's statement, arguing that the meaning of these two words is different, that is, "no one in Shu" is Zhang Fangping's meaning of calling Su Xun a handsome man in Shu, and "no one in Qin" is Su Shi's commendation of his father for writing "On the Identification of Treachery", which "not only determines the 'people' and 'no people' in Shu, but also determines the 'people' and 'no people' in the whole country". Li Fu's criticism is that he "did not carefully appreciate Su Shi's article". [153] Here, Li Fu argues that the Book of Xie is a forgery on the grounds that "there is no one in Shu" and "no one in Qin", "the words are both repetitive, and the tone is similar", which is indeed easy.
As for "Huang Shudu's indifference, Guo Linzong's words" in the "Book of Xie", so far I think that Yan Zi is "Yunyun", Fang Jian according to the "Later Han Shu Huang Xian Biography", distinguishing and analyzing Huang Xian (the character Shudu) "It is not Guo Linzong who is Yanzi, but Xun Shu", [154] which is also a mistake in quoting. and "Xie Shu" said, "The beginning of "Identifying Adultery" is also, Zi Shi and his younger brother, both have the advice of 'hee and his brother', regardless of others. When Duming Gong saw it, he thought it was the same as me. The so-called "the first dynasty that has been discussed by the public solid, and the historical records contained therein", the predecessors have already said that "the historical facts of this statement are groundless",[155] because there have been arguments in the previous article, so I will not repeat it here.
9. Conclusion: It also refers to the speculation of the author of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery".
The debate on the authenticity of the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" has not yet been determined because it involves various materials such as the age and version of the relevant documents, the style of the discussion, and the atmosphere of the scholars at that time, as well as the comparison of the relevant texts, the analysis of the meanings of the words and sentences, and the lack of some key historical materials. However, after continuous and extensive discussion and analysis by many scholars, great progress has been made in the discussion of the authenticity of the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and the question of its author, and many questions have been answered, but there are still many difficult points that are not easy to answer. Based on the above analysis, it is briefly described as follows.
(1) Su Xun's collection of essays in the Northern Song Dynasty did not contain the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery".
The Southern Song Dynasty Gaozong Dynasty and the previous compilation of Su Xun's anthology have 20 volumes, 15 volumes, and 16 volumes. The fifteen-volume "Jiayou Collection" that has been handed down to the world today does not contain the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", but the sixteen-volume "Jiayou New Collection" published in the 17th year of Wuzhou Prefecture in Shaoxing contains this article. According to common sense, the fifteen-volume "Jiayu Collection" should be first, and the sixteen-volume "Jiayu New Collection" should be followed. And Ouyang Xiu's "Epitaph of Su Jun in the Main Book of Wen'an County, Bazhou", Zeng Gong's "Su Mingyun's Lamentation", etc., said that Su Xun has 20 volumes of essays, "walking in the world". This 20-volume version has not been passed down to later generations, but whether it contains the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" is not clear in history. However, during the two Song Dynasty periods, Shao Bowen's "Shaw Clan's Wenjianlu", Ye Mengde's "Summer Retreat", Hu Zai's "Tiaoxi Yuyin Conghua" and other documents refer to the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", all of them claim that it is based on Zhang Fangping's "Table of the Tomb of Mr. Wen'an", and if the 20-volume collection of Su Xun's essays has indeed included "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", it should not be mentioned by the world except for "Tomb Table" and "Book of Thanks" in the middle and late Northern Song Dynasty, so it can be inferred that this 20-volume collection of Su Xun's anthology did not contain the article "On Distinguishing Adultery".
Although it avoids the words of Qinzong, in view of the layout and font characteristics of this book, it is the same as that of Huang Tingjian's anthology in the Peking University Library, and the large full text of Mr. Huang is published in the Qiandao period, so it is more likely that it belongs to the Southern Song Dynasty Xiaozong.
(2) The forty-volume "Complete Works of Music" that has been handed down to the world today should not have been compiled by Su Shi.
Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table of Mr. Wen'an", which includes the full text of "The Theory of Distinguishing Treachery", is included in the current biography "The Complete Works of Music", volume 39, and it is generally believed that this "Complete Works of Music" originated from the "old version" of the time of Xiaozong, that is, the book compiled by Su Shi in the second year of Yuan You. However, according to the documents of the Song Dynasty, Zhang Fangping's anthology contains the 40 volumes of the "Complete Works of Music" and the "Yutang Collection", which contains "20 volumes of internal and external dictionaries and miscellaneous works", and Liu Zhi tastes the preface to the "Yutang Collection", saying that the texts collected in the "Yutang Collection" are "outside the 40 volumes of the "Complete Works of Music" prefaced by Dongpo", that is, the 40 volumes of the "Complete Works of Music" compiled by Su Shi do not include the "two forbidden word books" contained in the 20 volumes of the "Yutang Collection". However, the 35th volume of the "Complete Works of Music" contains the text of Zhang Fangping's "Words on behalf of the Son of Heaven" when he was a scholar of Hanlin, and the "Sacrifice to Tenglong Illustrated Text" was written in November of the fifth year of Yuan You, later than when Su Shi compiled the "Complete Works of Music". Obviously, this "Filial Piety Periodical" is no longer the "old version" of Zhang Fangping's anthology compiled by Su Shi in the second year of Yuan You.
Because the "Records of the Shaw Brothers", "The Legend of Su Xun in the Eastern Capital", and "The Words and Deeds of Famous Ministers of the Five Dynasties" are all copied from the "Tomb Table", and Zheng Qiao's "Tongzhi Yiwenluo" compiled in Shaoxing in the Southern Song Dynasty did not contain Zhang Fangping's anthology, so it is speculated that Zhang Fangping's anthology in the late Northern Song Dynasty was not widely circulated.
(3) The relationship between Su Shi's self-compiled edition of "Dongpo Collection", the Northern Song Dynasty Hangzhou edition and the Southern Song Dynasty Xiaozong edition.
Due to the lack of historical materials related to the early version of the "Dongpo Collection", the authenticity of the "Xie Zhang Taibao's Writing of the Tomb Book of the Ancestors" contained in the 29th volume of the current edition of the "Dongpo Collection" is disputed, and the argument for the relationship between the "Dongpo Collection" compiled by Su Shi, the Hang edition published in the Northern Song Dynasty and the edition published by Xiaozong in the Southern Song Dynasty is subject to conclusive conclusion. According to the "(Su Shi) Epitaph" written by Su Zhe, Su Shi said that "the names and volumes of the collections listed are the same as those of Hangben", and that Hangben "was already in the world when Po Gong was unharmed", so it was determined that it was "impossible to be a forgery"; and it is also believed that the fragment of the "Dongpo Collection" published during the time of Xiaozong of the Southern Song Dynasty contained the "Book of Xie" in volume 29, so its text is true, so it is true that Su Xun's "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table" have "mutually evidentiary relationships" with Su Shi's "Book of Xie" Nature is not a fake. However, it is affirmed that the present biography and the Dongpo Collection of the Southern Song Dynasty Xiaozong are all Su Shi's works, and the premise of the argument that "it is impossible to be a forgery" does not seem to be valid according to the previous analysis, because according to the examination of the current biography of the Dongpo Qianji and the "Dongpo Collection" published in the Southern Song Dynasty, the "Three Palindromes on the Inscription Brocade Map" contained in the 12th volume of the fragment of the "Dongpo Collection" published by Xiaozong in the Southern Song Dynasty are also recorded in the second volume of the second collection of the "Huaihai Collection" of Qin Guan, but they are actually the works of Kong Pingzhong (the father of the character Yi), which obviously cannot be the "Dongpo hand self-editor" It was received by mistake, and when it was copied in circulation.
In addition, the "Dongpo Collection", which was praised by the Song people as "the most rare book" and published according to "the Shichuan "Qianji" was edited by Dongpo hand, is the Gusu Jushi Yingjia publication published in the early years of the Song Dynasty, and it is not actually a Hangzhou book that is praised as "when Po Gong was unharmed", because the Song people never claimed that the Northern Song Dynasty Hangben "Dongpo Ji" was printed according to the "Dongpo hand editor", and it is impossible to verify whether its "editing" is "out of the meaning of Su's family".
In addition, the title of "Taibao" in "Xie Zhang Taibao's Writing of the Tomb Book of the Ancestors" is inconsistent with Zhang Fangping's official title at that time. In the late Northern Song Dynasty, the party struggle was fierce, especially after Huizong established the "Yuanyou Party Membership Tablet", the "Dongpo Anthology" was repeatedly burned by edicts. Therefore, if Su Shi's self-compiled edition or even the Northern Song Dynasty edition of the "Dongpo Collection" had indeed included the "Book of Thanks" that clearly contained the text attacking Wang Anshi, at that time, those who were extremely nitpicking about Su Shi's writing, which was listed as the main figure of the "Yuanyou Party Membership Tablet", would not have turned a blind eye to it and did not attack it. It is clear that the interpretation of the former issue by those who hold the non-falsity of the "Letter of Acknowledgement" is wrong, and the question of the latter does not seem to have been given sufficient attention.
(4) The three-volume "Bozhai Edition" was written earlier than the "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu".
The book is divided into two systems, a three-volume edition and a ten-volume version, and the three-volume version of the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" is discussed. According to the analysis of the texts contained in it, the three-volume version was compiled and revised first, and it was written at the end of Xuanhe, and "the ten-volume version is actually an expanded version of the three-volume version." According to Shao Bowen's "Shaw Brothers' Wenjianlu Self-Preface" and Shao Bo's "Preface", Zhang Peiheng believes that "Wenjianlu" was first written in the second year of Shaoxing, and was edited and finalized by his son Shao Bo, which was later than the compilation of "Bozhai Compilation". However, Deng Guangming believes that the word "class" in Shao Bowen's "Wenjianlu Self-Preface" is "the meaning of the order", so it is speculated that some of the characters in Shaowen's book were written "seven or eight years ago or even ten years before the second year of Shaoxing", which was actually before the three-volume "Bozhai Edition", and was widely disseminated and publicized in order to expand its influence, "causing Fang Lao to write it in the "Bozhai Edition" immediately after hearing about it", and further proved that "the "Epitaph" and "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" are both Shao Bowen's "pseudo-acts". And Wang Shuizhao thinks that "after the Shaw Brothers forged the "Theory of Identifying Treachery", they first circulated a single article" and "unfortunately have no evidence". According to Deng, it is necessary to assume that the "Treatise on Adultery" and "Tomb Table" (perhaps also including the "Book of Thanks") were written seven or eight years before the "Wenjianlu" in the second year of Shaoxing, and then it is necessary to assume that the text he forged was immediately widely disseminated to the world, and then it is necessary to assume that Fang Lao happened to see this text and wrote it in the book, but this speculation is tortuous and cannot be confirmed, which is obviously reluctant. Therefore, if no new historical materials have been discovered, according to the general situation of the Song people's notes, it is generally concluded that the three-volume "Bo Zhai Compilation" was written before the "Shaw Brothers Wenjianlu", and the "Theory of Distinguishing Treachery" mentioned in it should have a different historical source.
(5) "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" was not written in the early years of Jiayou.
"Tomb Table" said that "On Distinguishing Adultery" was written in the eighth year of Jiayou, Wang Anshi, "When his mother died, all the scholars and doctors hung him, and the gentleman did not go alone, and he wrote "On Distinguishing Adultery". However, in the society of etiquette and law, if someone lives in the mourning of his mother, not only does he not hang himself, but instead attacks him with the article "Distinguishing Adultery", no matter from any point of view, it is a big act of being impersonal, and it is precisely in the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" that emphasizes that "those who are not close to human feelings in everything are rarely traitorous". For this reason, many of the Song people's writings advanced the time of writing "Distinguishing Adultery" to the early years of Jiayou, such as Fang Lao's "Bo Zhai Edition", Shao Bowen's "Shaw Brothers' Hearing and Seeing Records", Ye Mengde's "Summer Vacation Records" and so on. Shao Bowen also deliberately emphasized that Su Xun wrote "On Distinguishing Adultery" "More than ten years later, Jing Gong began to take the throne as a traitor", in order to confirm the year when this article was written. However, according to the above research, Wang Anshi and Su Xun participated in the party singing together several times for the first time in Jiayou, and one of the banquets was at the end of the year. And in the eighth year of Jiayou, Wu Zhong returned to Zhitan Prefecture, Wang Anshi, Su Xun and others all had poems to see them off, and it seems that the two have not broken off their friendship at this time. Therefore, it is quite unreasonable to tie Su Xun's "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" to the first year of Jiayou, when he and Wang Anshi first met.
(6) During the Northern Song Dynasty, the world did not know that there was a "Theory of Distinguishing Treachery".
"Tomb Table" cloud "Distinguishing Adultery" was completed, "At that time, there were many people who saw it, and it was said that 'hee is very serious'". "The Book of Thanks" and "Shaw Brothers Hearing and Seeing Records" are slightly the same. But Shao Bowen and Sima Guang don't seem to see "On Arguments and Treachery". Therefore, Ye Mengde's "Summer Retreat" is called "Ming Yun made a piece of "Distinguishing Adultery", and "Secret Offering An Dao" and "did not come out for a long time", Yuan Fengjian wrote "Tomb Table", "Su Shi is not in the stone, and it is passed on to the world younger than the year", that is, it was known to the world at the end of the Northern Song Dynasty. There is a great contradiction between the two. According to today's literature, Yun's "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" was not accurate at the beginning of its writing, and no one seems to know that there was such a "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" or "Tomb Table" in the late Northern Song Dynasty.
(7) The relationship between Wang Anshi and the Su family did not break down to the extent of bad relations.
Wang Anshi and Su Xun father and son met in the first year of Jiayou. That year, Wang Anshi and Su Xun, who were also in Beijing, attended the party several times and sang together, leaving poems each. Since then, Wang Anshi and Su Xun, Su Shi, and Su Zhe have disagreements with their academic views and political views, but there is no record of bad relations to the point of rupture. It is inferred that Wang and Su are at odds with each other because of the banquet poems, and Su Xun is "a soldier with good words", and Wang Anshi "talks about scriptures, but does not praise it, and repeatedly slanders the public, so it is clear that Jing Gong is more evil than Qiu Yun", which is roughly out of speculation. The so-called Wang Anshi was "unhappy" because he heard that Su Xun had written "The Theory of Distinguishing Treachery", so he did not take Su Shi's essays and did not write Su Zhe's Shangzhou military officials' words, which is also a miscommunication. In that year, Wang Anshi was the examiner of the system. As for the claim that Wang Anshi said that when he was compiling the "Records of Yingzong", "it is said that Su Mingyun has the knowledge of the Warring States Period", and that he said that "it is also true that the military is planning for power and machine changes", which is not true. First, according to the foregoing, the theory that "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" was written in the first year of Jiayou is not valid, so the statement that Yunwang Anshi was angry with Su Shi's brothers because of his "unhappy" Su Xun's "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" is obviously not valid. Second, "Yingzong Shilu", the history says that Wang Anshi and others were the revision officials, but after they participated in the political affairs, they were compiled by Lu Gong and others. Therefore, it is not accurate to think that the Su Xun incident contained in the "Yingzong Record" is from Wang Anshi's "one-handed" statement, or just the speculation of Wang Mingqing and others. Third, the so-called "Xun has the study of the Warring States Period" in the "Records of Yingzong" is also the general view of Su Xun's scholarship at that time, rather than Wang Anshi's words of revenge and resentment. Therefore, Su Shi also praised the "Yingzong Record" as "concise and prepared, ancient and clear, and the crown of the history of the dynasty".
In addition, at the beginning of Wang Anshi's participation in the governor's affairs, Su Shi appointed Su Shi to the palace and the judge of the Zhishi Museum, and the judgment of the Shangshu Ancestral Hall, Su Zhe for the preparation of the three divisions of the regulations of the Department of detailed text, according to the Song system, this is all reused, Su Zhe's "(Su Shi) Epitaph" said that Su Shi "and Jiefu talk about the same, both return to the court, the official court of the court" Yunyun, obviously not true, as for Wang Anshi's move is because of the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" and "unhappy Zizhan brothers", so the rebuke and snub of the statement is just a guess. Later, when Su Shi was caught in the "Wutai Poetry Case", it was said that Wang Anshi had also promised to save the Son of Heaven. Therefore, at the end of the Yuan Dynasty, Wang Anshi and Su Shi met in Jinling, stayed and sang and enjoyed each other, although it was a social nature, and did not eliminate the serious political differences between the two, but it can prove that the Su father and son "evil Jing Gong is more than hatred" is not true.
(8) The time, content, and motive of Zhang Fangping's compilation of The Tomb Table are doubtful.
Questioning the pseudo-author of "Tomb Table", most of them hold that Ouyang Xiu has written "Su Jun's Epitaph" and Zeng Gong has written "Su Mingyun's Lamentation", and Su Shi's brothers do not need to ask someone to write "Tomb Table". However, in addition to the mourning in the Song Dynasty, it is reasonable to ask someone to write a tomb table when the time is right, and the two can go hand in hand.
The motives of Su Xun's full text of "Discerning Adultery" are specially contained in the "Tomb Table", and people mostly focus on the contradictions and conflicts between Zhang Fangping and Wang Anshi. However, the discussion of Wang Anshi when Zhang Fangping and Fu Bi met in Nanjing in the second year of Xining recorded in the "Shaw Brothers' Hearing and Seeing Record" is considered in historical books, which should be a fiction and forgery. Therefore, although Zhang Fangping did have differences with Wang Anshi's political views and lacked good feelings, it is said that Zhang Fangping "first published 'On Distinguishing Adultery' in the "Tomb Table" because of his contradictory political views, and his motives are obviously insufficient.
Many scholars believe that the "Tomb Table" was written at the end of the Yuan Feng Dynasty or the Yuan Yu period, but this theory conflicts with the relevant text content in the "Tomb Table". Wang Shuizhao thought that Song Tingxining was enshrined in November of the tenth year, "civil and military attachés were gracious", and Su Xun was tired of gifting the capital officials to the foreign lang, so he was appointed by Zhang Fangping to sign the book to be the judge of Tianfu, so he asked Zhang Fangping to write the "Tomb Table", which was in the early years of Yuanfeng. According to this, this inference is in line with the provisions of the Song system. However, it is possible that the Su Shi brothers asked Zhang Fangping to write "The Tomb Table" at this time, which does not mean that the "Tomb Table" is true, because there are too many doubts and errors in the text.
In addition, according to Su Shi's "Reply to Uncle Li Fang", Wang Shuizhao said that Li Diao asked Su Shi to make a tomb table for Sun Fu, and proposed to "put Sun's "Tang Treatise" and "separate books and this text into stone", and pointed out that this is the same idea as Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table" "The full text is adopted into the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery". Press, this is really wrong. The three volumes of "Treatise on the Tang Dynasty", also known as "Treatise on Tang History" and "Essentials of Tang History", are a work of historical theory, not an article; Li Diao's request to Su Shi to "write this article into stone" refers to Sima Guang's "After the Epitaph of Shusun Zhihan". Furthermore, Li Diao asked Su Shi to make a tomb table, which actually means that Li Diao asked Su Shi to write the epitaph of his father Li Dian.
(9) "Tomb Table" cloud "At the beginning of Jiayou, Wang Anshi's name was prosperous, and his party friends poured into it" is inconsistent with Wang Anshi's deeds in Jiayouchu.
Regarding whether Wang Anshi in the early years of Jiayou was "a party friend for a while", there is a great controversy between affirmation and denial of the hypocrisy. The affirmers pointed out that Wang Anshi was "not used by the times, and his party friends were scarce", saying that his "party friends were devoted to a while" and "mistakes were also very serious". However, those who affirmed it, such as Zhang Peiheng, counted the people and doctors who had friends with Wang Anshi at that time, so they "weighed the concept of 'party' at that time" and "those who traveled with Wang Anshi and praised him...... are all 'party friends'", so Zhang denounced them as Wang Anshi's "party friends" and "poured out for a while", "I'm afraid it is not wronged against him". This definition of "party members" is obviously too arbitrary and contrary to historical facts, so it has been criticized by scholars such as Deng Guangming.
(10) The statement of "Tomb Table" "its fate system says 'since the birth of the people, there are only a few people'".
"Tomb Table" in this sentence is the most criticized, Xining three years Wang Anshi worship the prime minister system still exists, during which there is no such eight characters, and Su Xun died in Yingzong Zhiping three years, Wang Anshi worship the prime minister or not, "not within his reach", and Zhang Fangping and Wang Anshi are officials in the same dynasty, and the words he wrote "are wrong to this point". In addition, Zhang Fangping has been a bachelor of Hanlin for many years, and he is "familiar with the close relationship between the prime minister's words and the emperor's will, and he dares to steal the words of the prime minister to attack Wang Anshi." For this reason, "Shaw Brothers' Wenjianlu" and Zhu Xi's "Words and Deeds of Famous Ministers of the Five Dynasties" have deleted this passage that is inconsistent with historical facts. However, Zhang Peiheng explained this in detail, believing that Zhang Fangping obviously would not make such a low-level mistake, because Zhang Fangping tried to order two small officials who were slightly familiar with literature and ink to help him compile and transcribe the text, so the words of "his fate system" "obviously have the falsification of Lu Yu", which should be a copy of "his party's obscurity". Zhang's explanation is far-fetched, so it has been criticized by many scholars.
(11) "Tomb Table" accuses Wang Anshi's party members of "making up words, thinking that they are more than saints", which is quite absurd.
In the Song Dynasty, the Son of Heaven was generally called a "saint", and sometimes he was also called a minister, and the praise of Wang Anshi as a "saint" probably began in the early years of Shenzong. According to historical records, the earliest people who called Wang Anshi a "saint" were actually Lu Gongshu and others who strongly opposed Wang Anshi's changes in the law. As Wang Anshi presided over the progress of the new law, there were many people at the time, and they were known as "Duke of Zhou" and "Confucius".
However, the reputation of "praising the saint" is not exclusive to Wang Anshi, at that time, it was one of the fashions among scholars and doctors to praise others with excessive reputations, or to ask others to praise themselves with excessive reputations. In this regard, Su Shi has had a reflection on the "Wutai Poetry Case" after the "Wutai Poetry Case", and believes that "this style cannot be longed". Roughly at the beginning of Huizong, Chen Qiang, who had "compared Anshi to Yiyin", began to explicitly accuse Wang Anshi of "how can he be in the position of a minister in the north, and be willing to accept the name of Ziyan's arrogance", and attacked Wang Anshi for accepting the reputation of "saint" as a "treacherous" trip. In the middle of the Northern Song Dynasty, Wang Anshi, Zhou Dunyi, Zhang Zai, Cheng Yi and others all explained what a "saint" was. In general, Wang Anshi's main criterion for evaluating a "saint" is whether he "can save the world with his body" and "the law of eternity", that is, he tends to do deeds, while the commentary from the physicists focuses more on the inner cultivation of virtue. Due to the intensification of party contention and the increasing influence of science that focuses on the internal cultivation of virtue, after Huizong, people gradually objected to the trend of excessive reputation, especially the phenomenon of casually comparing the "saints" Zhou Gong and Confucius, and regarded it as a "great traitor". Therefore, in terms of the Song people's acceptance and rebuke of the phenomenon of over-reputation as "saints", it seems that the accusation of Wang Anshi's party members of "making language is more than that of saints" does not seem to have appeared before the Shenzong Dynasty.
(12) "On Distinguishing Treachery" attacked Wang Anshi for "the clothes of the ministers and the captives, and the food of the dogs".
There are many records in the notes of the Song people that Wang Anshi has no choice in eating and drinking in his daily life, but "The Theory of Distinguishing Treachery" should refer to the so-called Wang Anshi's "eating bait". "Shaw Brothers Hearing and Seeing Records" records that Wang Anshi attended a flower viewing and fishing banquet, accidentally ate "bait medicine" and "ate it all", and Zhirenzong said to Zai Fu tomorrow that "Wang Anshi deceived people". However, in history, Renzong was seriously ill in the early years of Jiayou, but after recovering from the illness, he was not good at words and deeds, and Jiayou only held a flower-viewing and fishing banquet for six years. And the flower-viewing and fishing banquet, in the back garden to enjoy the flowers and fish first, Taiqing Lou held a banquet in the back, so the waiter sent the bait before fishing, Wang Anshi did not know that this was the bait and ate it by mistake, and the waiter did not dissuade the reason. In addition, Renzong, who had been ill for a long time, was the only one among many officials to see Wang Anshi, who was the "pre-last seat," eat all the bait and inform the prime minister the next day; and at the beginning of the Xining Dynasty, in the imperial history, Cheng Lu Zhi impeached Wang Anshi for ten evils, if Renzong did have a comment that "Wang Anshi deceived people," could Lü Zhi not cite it, so as to enhance the strength of his impeachment? This can also prove that the so-called Wang Anshi eating bait is quite uncredible.
(13) The argument in the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" that "those who are not close to human feelings in everything are rarely traitors" contradicts Su Xun's act of writing "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" in Wang Anshi's mother's worries.
"The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" attacked Wang Anshi's "clothes of ministers and captives, and food of dogs" as a manifestation of "unkindness", and put forward the theory that "those who are not close to human feelings in everything are rarely traitorous, and they are also erected, easy to teeth, and prescribed prescriptions". However, this view is contrary to Su Xun's "Treatise on Guan Zhong", which said that if Guan Zhong "raised the sages of the world to replace himself, then Zhong died, and the Qi country was not without Zhong, and the husband would not have three sons". And the saying that "those who are not close to people in everything are rarely treacherous" is also similar to Su Xun's "The Second Book of Ouyang Neihan" in which Yun Zhang Fangping praised Su Xunwen as "like Sima Zichang, displeased, and resigned." The husband is clothed, and the prince said that his text is like Sima Qian, and he is displeased, but it is not close to human feelings". It can be seen that "those who are not close to people" may also have a reason for the matter, and it is not a "big treacherous". Moreover, when Wang Anshi was worried, it was natural that "the prisoner lost his face", and Su Xun actually wrote "On Distinguishing Adultery" and wantonly attacked Wang Anshi as a "great traitor", obviously Su Xun has called himself "unkind", and his fallacy is obvious.
As for the problems existing in the above-mentioned texts of the "Tomb Table" and the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", many affirmers have distorted explanations, and even given explanations in the style of "detour and Zen", but they are all far-fetched. Therefore, for scholars who affirm that the authors of "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", "The Tomb Table", and "The Book of Thanks" are Su Xun, Zhang Fangping, and Su Shi, how to reasonably explain the most controversial issues in these three texts is really a major difficulty that they cannot avoid.
(14) The content of "Tomb Table" is contrary to the life and deeds of Su Xun and Zhang Fangping.
Zhang Fangping was informed of Yizhou in July of the first year of Zhihe, arrived in November, and was reappointed as the third envoy in August of the third year of Zhihe. However, in the "Tomb Table", it is mistakenly called "Emperor Renzong Youzhong, Servant Lingyi Department".
"Tomb Table" Yun Suxun died, and was buried in Kelongli, Anzhen Township, Pengshan County, Meizhou in August next year. However, there was no Renchen day in August of the fourth year of Zhiping, and Ouyang Xiu's "Epitaph of Su Jun" said that he was buried in "Renshen in October of the fourth year of Zhiping", which should be.
"Tomb Table" said that Su Xun wrote ten volumes of "Yi Biography". However, Ouyang Xiu's "Su Jun's Epitaph" and Zeng Gong's "Su Mingyun's Lamentation" all called Su Xun's "Yi Chuan" unfinished. According to Su Shi and Su Zhe, "Yi Chuan" was written by Su Shi when he lived in Huangzhou, and it was written in nine volumes, and it was added and revised during his later years in Hainan, and it was completed into ten volumes (one work of 11 volumes). It can be seen that when Zhang Fangping wrote "Tomb Table" at the beginning of Yuanfeng, "Yi Chuan" had not yet been written. According to the "Tomb Table", Su Xun inferred from the ten volumes of "Yi Chuan" that his writing seems to be inappropriate earlier than the time when Su Shi returned from Hainan and North at the beginning of Huizong.
(15) The title of the characters in the "Tomb Table" is disordered.
The problem of inconsistent titles and titles that do not match the identities of Zhang Fangping and Su Xun in the "Tomb Table" was pointed out by Chen Changfang as early as the time of Gaozong of the Southern Song Dynasty that Yun "does not determine the precedent of all cases, resulting in different degrees of severity". Later, Li Fu used this as an example to prove that it was not written by Zhang Fangping. In this regard, Zhang Peiheng cited Ouyang Xiu's repeated calls as "master" and "sir", indicating that it was not unreasonable for Zhang Fangping to call Su Xun "sir", and that the Chinese tradition "generally respects the deceased on the tomb table and epitaph than when he was alive." Indeed, the reason for using the issue of title to prove that it was not written by Zhang Fangping is not sufficient, but Zhang Fangping, who was also famous for his literature at that time, was invited to write "The Tomb Table", in which the title is so "unequal" that it is easy to arouse suspicions. Therefore, it is inferred that the article "Tomb Table" was pieced together by later generations.
(16) There are some identical or similar sentences between the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" and "Tomb Table" and other works of the Song Dynasty, and there are also problems such as misuse of allusions, such as mistaking "Shan Juyuan" for "Uncle Yang" and "Xun Shu" for "Guo Linzong". However, Li Fu believes that "no one in Shu" in "Tomb Table" and "no one in Qin" in "Book of Xie" are "repetitive, and the tone is similar, so it is also a fake ear of Shaw's family". Zhang Peiheng pointed out that the semantics of "no one in Shu" and "no one in Qin" are different, and criticized Li Fu for "not carefully appreciating Su Shi's article". It said yes.
To sum up, it can be roughly inferred that there are a large number of doubts, errors and difficult to explain the content of the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", "Tomb Table" and "Book of Thanks", which are the works of later generations.
However, who and when were the "Treatises on Distinguishing Adultery", "Tomb Tables", and "Xie Shu" written? Due to this problem, there is no direct relevant historical evidence to prove it, so the following discerning can only be based on the research and analysis made above, and the relevant historical materials of the Song Dynasty can be inferred.
Holding "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" as a pseudo-author, most people believe that the above three articles were forged by Shao Bowen during the Two Song Dynasty. However, one of the keys to the establishment of this theory is to prove that Fang Lao's "Bo Zhai Edition" mentions the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", which is derived from Shao Bowen; and second, it is necessary to explain why "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery", "Tomb Table" and "Book of Thanks" are all forgeries of Shao Bowen, why they can be included in the anthologies of Su Xun, Zhang Fangping and Su Shi without being questioned by the contemporaries. As to the first point, it has already been discussed above that its argument cannot be established, so I will not repeat it here. The second point is that if the three texts are all from the children of Suman, it seems that the relevant conditions can be satisfied. Because Zhang Fangping had a close relationship with the Su family, and his "Complete Works of Music" was also compiled by Su Shi, and the "Complete Works of Music", "Jiayou Collection", and "Dongpo Collection" were all from Sumen, the three texts "On Distinguishing Adultery", "Tomb Table" and "Book of Thanks" contained in them were naturally easy to be trusted by the world, while the Shaw Brothers or others did not seem to have such conditions. At the same time, Su Xun is quite famous for "Yi", Su Zhe said: "The ancestor read "Yi" in his later years, played with his elephants, and got his hardness and softness, distance and proximity, joy and anger, and rebellion. [156] Therefore, the "Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" was named on Su Xun to show that Su Xun had the "foresight" of "knowing the subtle things" and predicting that Wang Anshi would cause trouble in the world, which was also more natural. In addition, Su Xun Jiayou sought the official Yu Zai to govern Han Qi during the period, but failed to get his way, so he was quite worried, and in the "Tomb Table", Han Qi tasted and Su Xun "talked about the affairs of the world, and thought that Jia Yi could not pass, but he knew his talent and could not use it", and even said that Han Qi was the envoy of Renzong Mountain, "The matter is from its thickness, and the transfer is done, and the state and county are in turmoil. Qi is a change of color, but he cares about the righteousness, and he is a little too much. And Mr. No, Han also hated himself, and cried with poetry, saying: 'Knowing the virtuous and not using it early, I am ashamed not to be ahead of the rest.'" Han Qi's "crying with poetry" Yunyun is the last two sentences of one of Han Qi's "Two Elegies of Su Xun". Han Shi said: "For the unextended Xuan room, the text recommends "Zixu". The book is long, and the foundation has been born. The old country is sad and cloudy, and the British tour is a negative stone canal. Famous Confucianism is promoted to the night, and he is ashamed not to give it first. As far as the whole poem is concerned, Han Qi does not have a high evaluation of Su Xun, and "late promotion" and "ashamed" Yunyun are also general polite expressions that are not obvious to "famous Confucian" as a prime minister, which is quite far from what he wants to express in "Tomb Table". Moreover, as a veteran of the Three Dynasties, Han Qi has a high official rank and outstanding prestige, and is even respected by the world. And the text of "Tomb Table" is so derogatory to Han Qi to praise Su Xun, it seems that it is used by Su Men's children to repay Su Xun's regrets in the past. As for the fact that the details of the three texts such as "The Theory of Distinguishing Adultery" are quite untrue and unreasonable, it may also be due to the fact that the Sumen children have some understanding of the situation of their fathers and grandparents decades ago, but they do not know much about it, so such content is inaccurate and untrue.
According to the foregoing, the lower limit of writing "On Distinguishing Adultery" and other articles should be in the last years of Huizong's Xuanhe, and its upper limit should be no earlier than when Su Shi returned from Hainan and Nanbei in the early years of Huizong, and Chen Qian criticized Wang Anshi as a "saint." Deng Guangming's "<辨奸论>Re-Mention and Re-Judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsehood" records that during the Daguan period, Liu Anshi had "all kinds" of slandering Wang Anshi, "but he did not see the ugliness in the "Theory of Distinguishing Treachery", which can be refuted until this time, and the "Tomb Table" has not yet been fabricated. [157] Deng Guangming's inference is quite probable, so the texts of the "Treatise on Distinguishing Adultery" should have been written in the late Huizong period. In the later period of Huizong, when Su Shi's writing was strictly forbidden, the reason why the three texts of "Distinguishing Adultery", "Epitaph" and "Book of Xie" could be forged was closely related to the changes in the political scene at that time, and related to Liang Shicheng, the eunuch of the Huizong Dynasty.
"History of the Song Dynasty: The Biography of the Eunuch" contains Liang Shicheng to keep the Tao, "Hui Huang learns grammar, knows a little about books", and "gets the honor of the monarch between the government and the peace, and goes to the famous and entered the scholar's book". The power is overwhelming, and the prime minister "Wang Huang's father is in charge, although Cai Jing's father and son are also obsessed, they are all regarded as 'hidden phases', and the number of positions he leads is tens of hundreds". Later, because Liang Shicheng "lived with the neighbors, the emperor was fortunate to be in the first place, seeing its traffic situation, he was angry, and Zhu Mian was angry again, and he should be fed and rolled, because he took advantage of the gap to attack it. The emperor dismissed the prime minister, and the teacher became a beneficiary". Qinzong succeeded to the throne and was killed. [158] "The Story of the Eastern Capital: The Biography of Liang Shicheng" is slightly the same. And "The Biography of Wang Hao" contains, "There is a pillar of Yuzhi production hall, Huizong is fortunate to be the first, and the banquet is viewed." Liang Shicheng and Huang Lian wall, through the door, Huang to his father's business, every fold Jane must be called 'Mr. Enfu'. Huizong passed it, and began to realize its intersection, and it was a little rest, and it was to pull out Bai Shizhong and Li Bangyan to govern together to divide their powers. Six years, ether Fu Zhishi". [159] According to Kaohuizong, in November of the fifth year of Xuanhe, "Bingyin, Xingwang Huangdi Guanzhi", in September of the sixth year, Yihai, Bai Shizhong was Dazai, Li Bangyan was Shaozai, and in November Bingzi, "Wang Huang Zhishi". [160] It can be seen that Liang Shicheng gradually lost the favor of Huizong in the five years of self-proclaim.
"History of the Song Dynasty" also contains "(Liang) Shi Chengshi can't write, and Gao Zibiao, self-said that Su Shi is a son." At that time, the world banned the recitation of Shiwen, and all those who were in the world were destroyed, and Shi Cheng sued the emperor and said: "What is the crime of the ancestors?" [161] According to Yiyun, "The Biography of Liang Shicheng in the Eastern Capital": "At the beginning, Tong Guan claimed to be Han Qi's widow, and Shicheng also thought that Su Shi was a son, so he sued Huizong and said: 'What is the crime of the ancestors?' First the world banned the recitation of Shi articles, and those who were in the world hid it, and then they came back. [162] Volume 32 of the "Three Dynasties and Northern Alliances" also states that Liang Shicheng "tasted his own eyes as Su Shi's son, and worshiped Shi Zhuzi as brothers, and the beggars said: 'What is the crime of the ancestors?'" [163] Regarding Liang Shicheng and Su Shi's "Zhuzi worship as brothers", Zhu Xi also pointed out: "Su Dongpo's son and Fan Chun's son Wen all entered and exited the door of Liang Shicheng, and they took their father's affairs. However, in his father's name, he shall not hold an official position. Shi Cheng calls himself the posthumous son of Dongpo and treats his uncle like a brother. [164] Even Wang Gong (the character Dingguo, Zhang Fangping's son-in-law), who was "especially admired by Po (Su Shi)", also "stepped into the Liang Division" at this time. [165] As a result, in the early period of the Huizong Dynasty, the ban on the writings of the Yuanyou party was very strict, and in the later period of the Zhenghe period, the ban was slightly relaxed, and Su Wen was slightly banned. For example, Chen Yan and Xiao Yun of the Southern Song Dynasty: "Chong, Guanjian, Cai Jing, Cai Bian and other things were detained for party membership, and their (Su Shi) words and ink were banned and destroyed." Between politics and peace, the ban is relaxed, and the ink is very sharp, and people don't know what it is. [166] Xu Du's "But Sweeping Edition" also recorded that Yun:
The eastern slope has fled to the south, and the speaker has re-requested that the text of his actions be removed and the edict will be followed. Therefore, the scholar's house did not dare to come out, and the officials were afraid of disaster, and the stone carvings where they were were often destroyed. Xuzhou Yellow Building, made by Dongpo, and the son is endowed by it, Po from the book. When the defender could not bear to destroy, but cast his stone city in the city, and the name of the building was viewed. In the last years of Xuanhe, the ban was slightly relaxed, and for a while you traveled, in order to store the literature of the eastern slope. The is sold, so the workers are a little bit in the middle of the copy. There are Miao Zhong's ancestors who are suitable for guarding, because of the fate of it, day and night copying. Thousands of copies were obtained, and the subordinates of the Whisperers said: "Su's learning, the law is still forbidden, why does this stone exist alone?" When people heard that the stone was destroyed, the price of ink increased. Zhong Xian's rank was full, and he brought it to Beijing to do his best, and he got a lot of money. [167]
Hu Zai also remembered this incident and was slightly different: Miao Zhongxian, a native of Tongzhou, "guarded Xuzhou, Xu had a stele of the Yellow House on the eastern slope, and Fang Chongning was destroyed when the party was banned, and Xu people cherished it, and Zhusi was in shallow water." At the end of the government and the end of the government, the ban is slightly lower, but it is hooked out and the old place of re-establishment. The monument is beaten, and the sound of the pestle is endless. The building is connected to the county governance, and Zhong Xian is annoying it, so that the abyss of drag cannot come back". [168] It can be seen that the "Xuanhe" in "Xuanhe, in the last years of Xuanhe, the ban was slightly relaxed" in "However Sweeping Edition" should be a falsification of "political peace".
However, in the fifth or sixth year of Xuanhe, Song Tinghu again applied for the ban on the collection of Yuan Yu Party such as Su Shi. On July 13, the fifth year of Xuanhe, the provincial language of the Chinese book said: Kanhui Fujian and other roads have recently printed Su Shi, Sima Guang's anthologies, etc. Edict: 'In the future, people will be taught to study Yuanyou's scholarship, and those who violate the system and print and sell will be guilty of the same crime. See the collection of printing and selling, in Beijing to order Kaifeng Mansion, Sichuan Road, Fujian Road to order the state army to destroy the board. [169] In the sixth year of Xuanhe, "on the afternoon of the winter and October of the year, the edict said: Those who collect and use Su and Huang Zhiwen will be ordered to be burned, and the offenders will be judged as disrespectful." [170] At this time, Liang Shicheng was no longer powerful due to the loss of favor from the Hui Sect, which shows that the reason for the stricter ban was closely related to Liang Shicheng.
According to the above examination, the three texts of "Distinguishing Adultery", "Tomb Table" and "Xie Shu" under the pretense of name should have been written in the middle and late Huizong Dynasty, while Liang Shicheng gained power, Su Wen was slightly banned and the government was slightly banned and the late period to the early Xuanhe period, which was during this period. At that time, some texts boasting about the Su father and son were also published. The above-mentioned three texts under the names of Su Xun, Zhang Fangping, and Su Shi were probably compiled by the children of Su Men at that time, and gradually circulated among scholars, thus causing controversy. Volume 29 of the "Chronicles of the Nine Dynasties" records that Huizong issued a strict edict in the winter of the sixth year of Xuanhe: "I have served since the beginning and abolished Yuanyou academics." Compared with the year, Su Shi and Huang Tingjian are restored. Shi and Ting Jian were convicted of the temple, and they did not wear the sky, and the text was only a word, and they ordered it to be burned and not to be saved, and the violators were judged as disrespectful. [171] The so-called "guilty of the temple, righteous and untouchable", and thus strictly prohibiting Su Shi and other anthologies, is also suspected to be related to the text attacking Wang Anshi and his changes in the texts such as "On Distinguishing Adultery", "Tomb Table" and "Book of Thanks" under the name of Su Shi and others. However, soon after, at the end of the sixth year of Xuanhe, the Jin army invaded the south, and Huizong was located in Qinzong at the beginning of the following year, so the ban on the writings of Su Shi and other Yuanyou party members was abolished. After entering the Southern Song Dynasty, the Song court investigated the cause of the demise of the Northern Song Dynasty, in order to avoid the responsibility of Huizong, so from Cai Jing and other "six thieves" traced back to Wang Anshi, plus the early Southern Song Dynasty monarchs and ministers admired Su Wen, Lu You said that "since the establishment of Yan, Shang Su's articles, scholars have followed it, and Shu Shi is especially prosperous." There is also a saying: 'Su Wen cooked, eat mutton.' Su Wensheng, eat vegetable soup. [172] In this political and cultural context, the articles of the "Theory of Distinguishing Treachery" were broadcast to the population, and although some people sometimes questioned the author and the content of the text, due to various reasons, the more believers became stronger, which became a powerful "evidence" to show that Su Xun "saw the subtleties and knew the works" and attacked Wang Anshi for "treachery" and misleading the country.
Notes
[1] Zeng Gongji, vol. 41, Cai Mingyun's Lamentation, p. 561.
[2] "Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Chronicles", vol. 10, quoted in Li's "Mu Tang's First Draft: After the Book Distinguishes Treachery", pp. 377-378.
[3] The Annals of Wang Jinggong, vol. 10, p. 370.
[4] Zhang Peiheng, "<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong", in Collection of Doubts, pp. 52-53.
[5] Deng Guangming, "The <辨奸论>Re-examination and Re-judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsity", Studies in Chinese Studies, vol. 3, p. 437.
[6] Deng Guangming, "Re-Discussion on 'Distinguishing Adultery' Not Written by Su Xun -- A Reply to Professor Wang Shuizhao", in Academic Collection, vol. 13, pp. 76, 77-79.
[7] Wang Shuizhao, "On the <辨奸论>Dispute of Authenticity Again: Reading Mr. Deng Guangming< Re-Discussing the Theory of Distinguishing Adultery and Not Su Xun's >", in Academic Collection, vol. 15, pp. 237-240. According to Zhang Peiheng, he also thought that "the "Epitaph" was written in the time of Zhezong", and also said that "when Zhi Fangping wrote the "Epitaph", he was already the Taibao, according to the "History of the Song Dynasty: Zhang Fangping's Biography", Fang Ping was the Taibao when he was in Zhezong". See Zhang Peiheng, "<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong", in Collection of Doubts, pp. 38 and 51.
[8] Summer Retreat, vol. 1, p. 247.
[9] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 15, Shenzong Ji II, p. 294. Press, Wang Wen thought that "in October of the tenth year of Xining, the imperial court worshiped the southern suburbs and granted amnesty to the world", a small mistake.
[10] "Su Shi's Collected Works", vol. 63, "Sacrificial Old Spring Burning Yellow Text", p. 7055. Press, "Xianjun Zhongyun", all the books are contained in Su Xun's pawn, given to Guanglu Temple, there is no such thing as Su Xun to give the official prince Zhongyun, it is suspected that there may be a mistake here, to be examined.
[11] Wang Shuizhao, "On the <辨奸论>Dispute of Authenticity Again: Reading Mr. Deng Guangming< Re-Discussing the > of Su Xun's Non-Su Xun", Academic Collection, vol. 15, pp. 241-242.
[12] (Song) Liu Caishao, "The Collection of Scholars of Zhuxi", vol. 12, "Zhou Kunchen's Lamentation and Preface", photocopy of Wenyuan Pavilion Siku Quanshu, vol. 1130, p. 568, Taipei Commercial Press.
[13] (Tang) Wei Zheng et al., "Book of Sui", vol. 8, "Etiquette Zhi III", Zhonghua Book Company, 2019 edition, p. 173.
[14] (Tang) Changsun Wuji et al., (Song) Sun Zheng et al., "Tang Law Shu Yi", vol. 27, "Destroying the Human Monument and the Stone Beast", "Shu Yi", Shanghai Commercial Press, photocopy of the Four Serials, p. 654.
[15] (Song) Sima Guang, "Shuyi", vol. 7, "Inscriptions", photocopied by the Taipei Commercial Press, Wenyuan Pavilion Siku Quanshu, vol. 142, p. 503.
[16] Li Changxian, "A Study on the Restoration of the Song Dynasty's Official Orders and the Composition of the Class", Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, 2013, p.10.
[17] Wang Shuizhao, "On the <辨奸论>Dispute of Authenticity Again: Reading Mr. Deng Guangming< Re-Discussing the Theory of Distinguishing Adultery > Not Su Xun", Academic Collection, vol. 15, p. 239.
[18] "Proofnotes on the Complete Works of Su Shi", vol. 49, "Reply to Li Fangshushu", pp. 5336-5337.
[19] Zhizhai Shulu Solution, vol. 4, Assertions on Tang History, p. 116.
[20] "Junzhai Reading Chronicles Proof", vol. 7, "Essentials of Tang History", "Reading Supplementary Notes", vol. "Arguments on Tang History", pp. 300, 1118.
[21] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 203, Yiwen Zhi II, pp. 5095, 2099.
[22] Siku Quanshu General Catalogue, vol. 88, "Assertions on Tang History", p. 752.
[23] "The Complete Works of Ouyang Xiu", vol. 33, "Shangshu Criminal Department Langzhong Chong Tianzhang Pavilion to be Prepared and Read the Epitaph of Sun Gong, the Right Counselor", pp. 492-496.
[24] (Song) Sima Guang, "Wen Guowen Zheng Sima Gongwen Collection", 79 "After the Epitaph of Shusun Zhihan", Shanghai Commercial Press, Four Serials, pp. 1137-1138.
[25] "Proofnotes on the Complete Works of Su Shi", vol. 53, "Reply to Li Fangshu's Seventeen Songs", No. 8 and No. 9, pp. 5918-5919.
[26] "Proofnotes on the Complete Works of Su Shi", vol. 25, "Li Xianzhong's Lamentation and Narrative", p. 2792.
[27] Zhang Peiheng, "<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong", in Collection of Doubts, p. 65.
[28] Zhang Peiheng, "<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong", in Collection of Doubts, p. 55.
[29] Deng Guangming, "The <辨奸论>Re-examination and Re-judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsity", Studies in Chinese Studies, vol. 3, p. 440.
[30] Fang Jian, "°<辨奸论>Pseudo-Writing and Saying New Evidence: Written in Commemoration of the First Anniversary of Mr. Xu Gui's Return to Daoshan", in Huiyin Yongzhu: Professor Xu Gui's Memorial Collection, pp. 272-273. According to Fang Jian, Zhang Fangping did not know Tianfu in Yuanfeng, and also said that "if Zhang Fangping does have a work of "Tomb Table", it should be within nearly a year and a half from the third year to the fourth year of August in Xining." None of this is true.
[31] (Song) Zhang Lei, Zha Qinghua and Pan Chaoqun, Mingdao Magazine, Elephant Publishing House, 2006, Notes on the Song Dynasty (Second Edition), p. 21.
[32] "Long Edition", vol. 226, August of the fourth year of Xining, Wu Yin, quoted in Sima Guang's Diary, p. 5507.
[33] Shaw Brothers, vol. 9, p. 93.
[34] "Long Edition", vol. 226, 8th August, Xining 4th year, p. 5507.
[35] "Long Edition", vol. 224 Xining 4th year June Jiaxu Article, vol. 226 Xining 4th year September Wuxu Article, pp. 5454, 5514.
[36] "Song Hui Yao Manuscript Election", No. 110, p. 5252.
[37] "Song Hui Yao Manuscript Election", 1911, p. 5626.
[38] "Long Edition", vol. 188 Jiayou 3rd October Jiazitiao, vol. 1933 Jiayou 6th June Wuyin Tiao, pp. 4531, 4677.
[39] Appendix to "The Complete Works of Music" Wang Gong, "Xingzhi", photocopy of Wenyuan Ge Siku Quanshu, Taipei Commercial Press, vol. 1104, p. 532.
[40] (Song) Xu Ziming, edited by Wang Ruilai, Song Zaifu's Chronicles and Proofreading, vol. 7, Zhonghua Book Company, 1986, pp. 367-368.
[41] Taiping Zhizhi Tongyi, vol. 14, Shenzong's courtiers discuss the new law, p. 282.
[42] Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Chronicles, vol. 10, pp. 364-367, 373-374.
[43] Wu Xiaoru, "The <辨奸论>Problem of Truth and Falsehood," Wen Wei Po, March 28, 1957.
[44] Deng Guangming, "The <辨奸论>Re-examination and Re-judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsity", Studies in Chinese Studies, vol. 3, pp. 432-434.
[45] Zhang Peiheng, "<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong", in Collection of Doubts, pp. 40, 59, 60.
[46] Wu Mengfu and Zhan Yayuan, "A New Exploration of Su Xun's Thought", Journal of Anhui University, No. 3, 1982.
[47] Jin Guoyong, "Su Xun", Zhonghua Book Company, 1984, pp. 78-88.
[48] Li Jianming, "Analysis <辨奸论>of the Truth and Falsehood and the Grievances of King Su", Hunan Social Sciences, No. 3, 2019.
[49] Zeng Zaozhuang, "The <辨奸论>Examination of Authenticity and Falsity", Journal of Sichuan University, Series of Classical Literature, Vol. 15.
[50] Wang Shuizhao, "On <辨奸论>the Dispute of Authenticity Again: Reading Mr. Deng Guangming< Re-Discussing the Non-Su Xun's > in "Discerning Adultery", in Academic Collection, vol. 15.
[51] (Song) Chen Xiangdao, "The Complete Interpretation of the Analects", vol. 7, Xianwen 14, photocopy of Wenyuan Ge Siku Quanshu, vol. 196, p. 180, Taipei Commercial Press.
[52] Fang Jian, "°<辨奸论>False Writings and New Evidence: Commemorating the First Anniversary of Mr. Xu Gui's Return to Daoshan", in Huiyin Yongzhu: Professor Xu Gui's Memorial Anthology, p. 282.
[53] Rong Zhai Essays, Wubi, vol. 9, Zhu Wen of the Ghost Capture Chapter, p. 909.
[54] (Song) Fei Gon, Jin Yuandian Proofreading: Liangxi Manzhi, vol. 6, "Shuzhong Stone Carving Dongpo Manuscript", Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, 1985, pp. 60-61.
[55] "Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Chronicles", vol. 10, quoted in Li's "Mu Tang's First Draft: After the Book Discerns Treachery", p. 377.
[56] Zhang Peiheng, "<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong"±, in Collection of Doubts, pp. 53-55.
[57] Deng Guangming, "The <辨奸论>Re-examination and Re-judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsity", Studies in Chinese Studies, vol. 3, p. 433.
[58] Pei Rucheng, "The Complete Works of < Music: The Authenticity of Mr. Su Wen'an's Tomb >", in Bansu Collection, pp. 146-148.
[59] "Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Annals", vol. 10, quoted in Li's "Mu Tang's First Draft: After the Book Distinguishes Treachery", p. 377.
[60] The Annals of Wang Jinggong, vol. 10, p. 374.
[61] (Song) Wang Qi, Huayang Collection, vol. 26, "Wang Anshi Confers Jin Ziguanglu Dafu Rite Department Shilang Tongzhongshu Menxia Pingzhang Shi Jian Xiu Guo Shi Jinfeng Founding Gong Jia Shiyi Shifeng Meritorious Hero System", Shanghai Commercial Press, 1935, pp. 330-331.
[62] (Song) Anonymous: "Song Dynasty Imperial Decree Collection", vol. 56, "Wang Anshi's Prime Minister's System", Zhonghua Book Company, 1962 edition, p. 283.
[63] Song Zaifu's Chronicles and Corrections, vol. 7, pp. 424-425.
[64] Zhang Peiheng, "The <辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgery: On the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong", in Collection of Doubts, pp. 56-58.
[65] Deng Guangming, "The <辨奸论>Re-examination and Re-judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsity", Studies in Chinese Studies, vol. 3, p. 439.
[66] Pei Rucheng, "The Complete Works of < Music: The Authenticity of Mr. Su Wen'an's Tomb >", in Bansu Collection, pp. 137-140.
[67] Fang Jian, "°The <辨奸论>New Evidence of False Writings: Commemorating the First Anniversary of Mr. Xu Gui's Return to Daoshan"±, in Huiyin Yongzhu: Professor Xu Gui's Memorial Essays, pp. 273-274.
[68] "Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Chronicles", vol. 10, quoted in Li's "Mu Tang's First Draft: After the Book Distinguishes Treachery", p. 377.
[69] Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Chronicles, vol. 10, p. 365.
[70] Zhang Peiheng, "<辨奸论>°Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong"±, in Collection of Doubts, p. 58.
[71] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 282, Biography of Li Xin, p. 9539.
[72] Zhu Zi Linguistics, vol. 130, "Ben Chao IV: From Xining to Jingkang Employing People", p. 3097.
[73] (Song) Cheng Hao, Cheng Yi, (Song) Li Liang et al., (Song) Zhu Xi, Yan Zuozhi, "Cheng's Testament", vol. 2, "Yuanfeng Jiweilu and Shudong Jian'er Words", Zhu Jieren, Yan Zuozhi, Liu Yongxiang (eds.), Zhu Ziquanshu External Edition, East China Normal University Press, 2010, pp. 32-33.
[74] "Famous Ministers' Tablet Biography Wan Yan Ji Proof", vol. 21, Shilu Cheng Zongcheng Hao Biography, p. 1295.
[75] "Long Edition", vol. 485, 4th year of Shaosheng, p. 11532.
[76] Shaw Brothers, vol. 12, p. 125.
[77] "Zhu Zi Linguistics", vol. 130, "Ben Chao IV: From Xining to Jingkang Employing People", p. 3097.
[78] Wang Anshi's Collected Works, vol. 64, Three Sages, pp. 1107-1108.
[79] Wang Anshi's Collected Works, vol. 67, "Master Zixian Yu Yao Shun", p. 1164.
[80] (Song) Zhou Dunyi, (Song) Zhu Xi's Note, Lu Jianhua and Liu Yongxiang, eds., "Tongshu Note: The Fourth Sheng", Zhu Jieren, Yan Zuozhi, Liu Yongxiang (eds.), Zhu Ziquanshu, Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, Anhui Education Publishing House, 2002, pp. 101-102.
[81] Tongshu Notes and Reflections IX, p. 106.
[82] (Song) Zhang Zai, Zhang Xichen Dianxiao, Zhang Zaiji, Zhengmeng, Zhongzheng Chapter VIII, Zhonghua Book Company, 1978, p. 28.
[83] (Song) Cheng Hao, Cheng Yi, Wang Xiaoyu Dianxiao, Ercheng Ji Henan Cheng's Anthology, vol. 8 "Mr. Yichuan Wen Si Yan Zi is good at what he learns", Zhonghua Book Company, 1981 edition, p. 578.
[84] (Han) Mao Heng Biography, (Han) Zheng Xuanjian, (Tang) Lu Deming Yinyi, "Mao's Poems", vol. 8 "Feng Feng Wolf Ba", Shanghai Commercial Press, Four Series Preliminary Edition, p. 128.
[85] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 327, Biography of Wang Anshi, p. 10550.
[86] Song Zaifu's Chronicles and Corrections, vol. 7, p. 424.
[87] (Song) Wang Anshi, (Song) Li Bi Note, Gao Keqin Dianxiao: Wang Jingwen Gong Poetry Note Note, vol. 22 "Inscription of the Ancestral Hall" and annotations, Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, 2010, p. 516.
[88] Jiayu Ji Ji
[89] (Song) Shao Yong, Guo Yu, "Shao Yongji: Guanwu Inner Chapter 6", Zhonghua Book Company, 2010, p. 22.
[90] "Ercheng Collection: Henan Cheng's Anthology", vol. 11, "The Tomb of Mr. Yichuan Wenqi and Mr. Mingdao", p. 640.
[91] Shaw Brothers Records after Hearing and Seeing, vol. 23, p. 180.
[92] (Song) Yue Ke, "The History of the Tree", vol. 7 "Jiahe Chapter", Zhonghua Book Company, 1981 edition, p. 82.
[93] "Proofnotes on the Complete Works of Su Shi", vol. 49, "Reply to Li Fangshushu", pp. 5336-5337.
[94] Shaw Brothers, vol. 3, p. 25.
[95] Shaw Brothers Records After Hearing and Seeing, vol. 23, pp. 179-187.
[96] Shaw Brothers, vol. 11, p. 121.
[97] Shaw Brothers Records after Hearing and Seeing, vol. 20, p. 158.
[98] See Pei Rucheng and Gu Hongyi, "Wang Anshi's Reform and the Distinction of "Sage"", in Collected Essays Commemorating the Centenary of Professor Deng Guangming's Birth, Zhonghua Book Company, 2008.
[99] Bozhai (Bozhai Ed.), vol. I, p. 65.
[100] Summer Retreat, vol. I, p. 247.
[101] Qu Wei Old News, vol. 10, p. 231.
[102] Zhu Zi Linguistics, vol. 130, p. 3109.
[103] Shaw Brothers, vol. 2, pp. 13-14.
[104] Shaw Brothers, vol. 2, p. 15.
[105] "Long Edition", vol. 193, March 193, p. 4664.
[106] "Tiaoxi Yuyin Cong Words", vol. 33, "Old Man in the Mid-Mountains", p. 221.
[107] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 12, Renzong Ji IV, p. 247.
[108] Long Edition, vol. 103, 3rd year, 3rd year, p. 2378.
[109] (Song) Sima Guang, Deng Guangming and Zhang Xiqing, "Shushui Jiwen", vol. 3, Zhonghua Book Company, 1989, pp. 54-55.
[110] "Long Edition", vol. 109 Tiansheng 8th year March Renshen Article, p. 2537.
[111] "Tiaoxi Yuyin Cong Words", vol. 33, "Old Man in the Mid-Levels I", p. 221.
[112] See Gu Hongyi, "Some <邵氏闻见录>Historical Materials about Wang Anshi", Journal of Hebei University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), No. 3, 1998.
[113] Pei Rucheng, "The Complete Works of < Music: The Authenticity of Mr. Su Wen'an's Tomb >"±, Bansu Collection, pp. 152-153.
[114] Jiayu Ji Ji
[115] Zhang Peiheng, "°<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong"±, in Collection of Doubts, p. 42.
[116] Deng Guangming, "°The <辨奸论>Re-Raising and Re-Judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsehood"±, Studies in Chinese Studies, vol. 3, p. 434.
[117] Records of the Flowing Water, vol. 16, p. 311.
[118] (Song) Wei Tai, Li Yumin Dianxiao: Dongxuan Records, vol. 11, Zhonghua Book Company, 1983, p. 126.
[119] "Long Edition", vol. 176-7 of the first year, pp. 4267-4268.
[120] "Long Edition", vol. 183, August of the first year of Jiayou, p. 4435.
[121] See Fang Jian, "New <辨奸论>Evidence of False Writings: Commemorating the First Anniversary of Mr. Xu Gui's Return to Daoshan", in Huiyin Yong: Professor Xu Gui's Memorial Essays, p. 274.
[122] "The Complete Works of Ouyang Xiu", vol. 35, "Epitaph of Su Jun in the Main Book of Wen'an County, Gubazhou", p. 514.
[123] See Fang Jian, "New <辨奸论>Evidence of False Writings: Commemorating the First Anniversary of Mr. Xu Gui's Return to Daoshan", in Huiyin Yong: Professor Xu Gui's Memorial Essays, p. 273.
[124] "The Complete Works of Ouyang Xiu", vol. 35, "Epitaph of Su Jun in the Main Book of Wen'an County, Gubazhou", pp. 513, 514.
[125] Zeng Gongji, vol. 41, Su Mingyun's Lamentation, p. 561.
[126] Su Zhe Ji Luan Cheng Hou Ji, vol. 23, Epitaph of the Deceased Brother Zhan Duanming, p. 1127.
[127] (Song) Su Zhou, Zhang Jianguang and Li Xiangzheng, "The Last Words of Mr. Luan Cheng", Elephant Publishing House, 2008, Notes on the Song Dynasty (Part III), p. 151.
[128] Siku Quanshu General Catalogue, vol. 2, Dongpo Yi Chuan, p. 6.
[129] (Song) Feng Yi, "Hou Zhai Yi Xue", Appendix 1, quoted in "Zhongxing Bibliography", photocopy of Wen Yuange's Siku Quanshu by the Commercial Press, Taiwan, vol. 16, p. 829, History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 202, Yiwen Zhi I, p. 5037.
[130] "Junzhai Reading Chronicles", vol. 1, Dongpo Yi Chuan, p. 39, (Song) Wang Yinglin, "Yuhai", vol. 36, "Zhou Yi Chuan", Jiangsu Ancient Books Publishing House, Shanghai Bookstore, 1988, p. 687.
[131] Zhizhai Shulu Problem Solving, vol. 1, Dongpo Yi Chuan, p. 12.
[132] "Su Shi's Complete Works Proofnotes", vol. 48, Huangzhou Shangwen Lu Gongshu, p. 5202.
[133] "Proofnotes on the Complete Works of Su Shi", vol. 52, "With Wang Dingguo", no. 11, p. 5692.
[134] See Su Shi Annals, vol. 20, p. 505, vol. 39, p. 1334.
[135] Jiayu Ji Ji
[136] "Quotations of Mr. Kameyama," vol. 3, "What Yu Hang Heard," p. 70.
[137] Summer Retreat, vol. I, pp. 246-247.
[138] Daoshan Qinghua, p. 98.
[139] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 443, The Biography of Su Xun, p. 13097.
[140] Summer Retreat, vol. I, p. 247.
[141] Su Shi Annals, vol. 3, p. 62, vol. 4, pp. 80, 86, 89.
[142] Jiayu Ji Ji
[143] According to the press that at that time, Su Xun's official was the secretary of the provincial school, and the "Biography of Su Xun in the History of the Song Dynasty" lacked the word "test", which was wrong. The secretary of the provincial school is a test title, and the secretary of the provincial school is a Beijing official.
[144] Jiayu Ji Ji Ji Ji
[145] "Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Emperor Jing Gong", vol. 10, quoted in Li, "After the First Draft of Mu Tang and the Book of Distinguishing Treachery", p. 377.
[146] Deng Guangming, "°On the Theory of Distinguishing Adultery' Not Written by Su Xun -- A Reply to Professor Wang Shuizhao"±, Academic Collection, vol. 13, p. 79.
[147] (Song) Chang Di, "Shixue Norms", vol. 34 "Composition", photocopy of Wen Yuange's Siku Quanshu by the Commercial Press, Taiwan, vol. 875, p. 171. According to the text, the quoted text is not contained in the present biography "Bu Li Ke Tan".
[148] Zhang Peiheng, "°<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Examination of the Annals of Wang Jinggong"±, in Collection of Doubts, p. 51. Press, Zhang Wen Youyun: "According to Su Shi's "Xie Zhang Taibao Wrote the Book of the Tombs of the Ancestors", Zhi Fangping was already Taibao when he wrote "Tomb Table", and according to "Song History: Zhang Fangping's Biography", Fang Ping was Taibao when he was in Zhezong. Zhang Wen said that Zhang Fangping's "Tomb Table" was inaccurate when Zhezong.
[149] Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Chronicles, vol. 10, pp. 366-367.
[150] Zhang Peiheng, "°<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong"±, in Collection of Doubts, pp. 48-49.
[151] Wang Shuizhao, "°On the <辨奸论>Dispute of Authenticity Again: Reading Mr. Deng Guangming< Re-Discussing the > of Su Xun's Non-Su Xun"±, Academic Collection, vol. 15, pp. 235, 253-254.
[152] "Wang Jinggong's Annals of the Chronicles", vol. 10, quoted in Li, "After the First Draft of Mu Tang and the Book of Distinguishing Treachery", p. 378.
[153] Zhang Peiheng, "°<辨奸论>Non-Shao Bowen Forgeries: Also on the Relevant Issues in the Annals of Wang Jinggong"±, in Collection of Doubts, pp. 62-63.
[154] Fang Jian, "New <辨奸论>Evidence of False Writings: Commemorating the First Anniversary of Mr. Xu Gui's Return to Daoshan", in Huiyin Yongzhu: Professor Xu Gui's Memorial Essays, p. 289.
[155] Wu Xiaoru, "°The <辨奸论>Question of Authenticity and Falsehood"±, Wen Wei Po, March 28, 1957.
[156] "Su Zhe Ji Luan Cheng Hou Ji", vol. 23, "Epitaph of the Deceased Brother Zhan Duanming", p. 1127.
[157] Deng Guangming, "°The <辨奸论>Re-Raising and Re-judgment of the Question of Authenticity and Falsity"±, in The Complete Works of Deng Guangming, vol. 9, Hebei Education Press, 2005, p.473. According to the article, there is no such paragraph in the article contained in Volume 3 of the Journal of Chinese Studies.
[158] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 468, Eunuch Biography III: Liang Shicheng, pp. 13662-13663.
[159] "The Story of the Eastern Capital", vol. 106 "The Biography of Wang Huang", photocopy of Wenyuan Ge Siku Quanshu by the Commercial Press, Taipei, vol. 382, p. 685.
[160] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 22, Huizong Ji IV, pp. 413-415.
[161] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 468, Eunuch Biography III: Liang Shicheng, p. 13662.
[162] "The Eastern Capital Affairs", vol. 121 "The Legend of the Eunuchs: Liang Shicheng"±, photocopy of Wenyuan Pavilion Siku Quanshu, Taipei Commercial Press, vol. 382, p. 792.
[163] (Song) Xu Mengxin, "Three Dynasties and Northern Alliances", vol. 32, Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, 1987, p. 242.
[164] "Zhu Zi Language", vol. 130, "Ben Chao IV: From Xining to Jingkang Employing People", p. 3119.
[165] (Song) Luo Dajing, Wang Ruilai Dian Proofreading: Helin Yulu, Volume B, Vol. 1, Wang Dingguo Zhao Delin, Zhonghua Book Company, 1983, p. 122.
[166] (Song) Chen Yanxiao, "Gengxi Poems", vol. 1479, p. 61.
[167] (Song) Xu Du, Zhu Kai and Jiang Hanchun, "But Sweeping Edition", Elephant Publishing House, 2008, Notes on the Song Dynasty (Part III), pp. 156-157.
[168] "Tiaoxi Yuyin Cong Words", vol. 18, Han Officials' Subordinates, p. 120.
[169] "Song Hui Yao Ji
[170] History of the Song Dynasty, vol. 22, Huizong Ji IV, p. 414.
[171] "Nine Dynasties Chronicle Notes", 29, photocopy of Wenyuan Pavilion Siku Quanshu by the Commercial Press, Taipei, vol. 328, p. 799.
[172] (Song) Lu You, edited by Li Jianxiong and Liu Dequan, Notes on Lao Xue'an, vol. 8, Zhonghua Book Company, 1979, p. 100.
▼
1. Song Dynasty History Research Information 1
E-mail: [email protected]