The "Bamboo Book Chronicle" had some heard earlier: it is said that during the Western Jin Dynasty, tomb robbers in JiXian County, Henan Province, excavated the tombs of the Wei kings during the Warring States period, and unearthed dozens of truckloads of bamboo brief history books. The historical records recorded in it are very different from the relevant records in the Records of History. Therefore, some people use this as evidence to prove the error of the Book of Shang and question the authority of the Book of History. Among them, the most controversial and most influential is the historical fact of Yao Shun's succession to the throne. I am more "superstitious" about the "History", and this rumor should be a rumor, even if Liang Hongda's words are conclusive, I did not pay attention to it.
However, a few days ago, I saw a video in which a beautiful scholar named "Master Li" took out this "stem" again, attracting a crowd of onlookers. The comment area and the barrage were also in an uproar.
The so-called crowd of gold, is the "Book of Shang" and "History" are all wrong, and the "Bamboo Book Chronicle" records the truth?
Let's first look at the differences between the Bamboo Book Chronicle and the History of History about this "history".
First, look at the records in the "History of the Five Emperors":
Starting from the Yellow Emperor, there was only one standard "holy virtue" for succession. The Yellow Emperor had 25 sons, but the Yellow Emperor did not pass the throne to his son, but to his grandson Gao Yang, because "Gao Yang has holy virtue", and Gao Yang was emperor. Instead of passing the throne to his son Poor Cicada, he passed it on to Gao Xin, the son of the clan who was "benevolent and mighty, benevolent and trustworthy, self-cultivation and obedience to the world", and Gao Xin was the emperor. Although the emperor was virtuous, he was somewhat poor in choosing an heir, and he was "not good" to succeed to the throne. However, soon after, zhi "collapsed", and was succeeded by Yao, who had "holy virtue", and the world returned to peace.
Emperor Yao lived a long life, but in his later years he was anxious about the heirs who did not have "holy virtue", and the evaluation of his son Danzhu was "fierce" and "unshao". Yao wants to choose a person who is "filial piety". At one time, he wanted the "Four Mountains" around him to take the throne and be resigned. Yao was helpless and ordered to go to the people to look for it. So a man named "Yu Shun" entered Yao's field of vision.
Shun was a descendant of The Poor Cicada, the son of Emperor Huan, who was an ordinary commoner at the time and was in a very bad situation: "Blind Son." Father stubborn, mother, brother proud. But Yao valued Shun's "Nenghe and Filial Piety", and in a family of four who had three of them let him die, he could still honor his parents and love his brothers. Yao did not hesitate to marry his two daughters to him. Sure enough, Shun treated his two daughters "like a woman", so "Yao Shanzhi". After that, Yao cultivated Shun for up to 20 years:
Try shun five canons and hundreds of officials, all rule.
As a result, Shun successfully graduated, and Yao ceded the World Zen to Shun.
In the twentieth year of Shun, he took the filial piety, Chinese New Year's Eve Yao juzhi, in the fiftieth year of the heavenly son, in the fifty-eighth year of Yao Collapse, and in the year of sixty-one generation Yao Jian ascended the throne.
Later, Shun's son Shang Jun was also difficult to assume the responsibility, and Shun passed the throne to Yu.
Shunzi Shang is also not Xiao, Shun is Yu Yu Tian.
This is the familiar story of Yao Shun Zen Rang.
Look again at the "Bamboo Book Chronicle" about Yao Shun's succession:
In the last year of Yao's reign, he declined and was imprisoned by Shun. Shun imprisoned Yao and restored Sedanju so that he would not see his father.
Shun imprisoned Yao in yao's old age and controlled Danzhu, preventing them from meeting, and successfully usurped the throne in this form.
Zen jean becomes usurper? If that's the case, it's really subversive!
In this way, Liang Hongda called it "shocking and vulgar", and Master Li typed out the title of " Deciphering the Historical Truth of Subverting the Three Views" as follows.
But is this really the historical truth?
Master Li also has corroboration:
Shun forced Yao, Yu forced Shun, Tang Fangjie, Wu Wang, these four kings, people and subjects to kill their kings also.
In fact, the content of What Master Li said Liang Hongda also said:
Don't doubt, what they said is correct, this sentence is indeed said by Han Feizi, recorded in "Han Feizi Say Doubt".
But when the words come out of the mouth, can they prove that it is Han Feizi's point of view? I have a characteristic, when I have doubts, I will go to the root of the matter and understand it myself. Since this statement comes from "Han Feizi • Doubt", then seeking answers from this article has found the root.
"Speaking doubts" puts forward the characteristics of Han Feizi's reasoning and thorough discussion, and advances layer by layer, arguing that the king can distinguish the truth and falsity of "what the subject says", and can distinguish between "the virtuous and the black and white".
The article lists the many types of unusable and usable ministers in history, and then talks about the difference between the "Holy King Mingjun" and the "Chaotic Lord" in terms of rewards and punishments in employing people, and the "terrier" about Yao Shun's succession to the throne appears in this part:
Saint Wang Mingjun is not the case, and he does not avoid relatives in his internal lifting, and he does not avoid revenge on the outside. it is in yan, and thus it is lifted; If you are not in the right place, you will be punished. It is because of the virtuous and virtuous that they will then commit adultery and retreat, so they can obey the princes in one fell swoop.
First of all, he praised the correct employment policy of the "Holy King Mingjun": what is right will be carried forward, and what is wrong will be punished. Further examples:
He wrote: Those whom the five kings have cursed are the relatives of their fathers and brothers, but what about those who have killed and destroyed their families? It harms the country and hurts the people and the law class also.
"It is recorded" means that it is recorded in ancient books.
Yao's son Dan zhu and Shun's son Shang were all killed along with the wuguan, Taijia, and Guan Cai later, because they were people who "harmed the country and hurt the people and defeated the law" and deserved it.
Here, Han Fei had already characterized Danzhu and Shang Jun, and there was no one with the virtue of a king, so how could he say such a thing as "Shun forced Yao, Yu forced Shun"? Here's what really cuts to the center of the problem:
The lord of chaos, on the other hand, does not know the will of his subjects, but allows him to take the country, so the name of the small is cut down, and the big country dies. It is not known to the user.
In contrast to the "Holy King Ming jun", the dim-witted king did not understand the true intentions and deeds of his courtiers, so he commissioned his country to be important, with the result that the small country was weakened, and the large one died and the country was destroyed. The reason was that there had been a mistake in the appointment of courtiers.
Then Han Feizi devoted a large paragraph to discussing the various kinds of traitors who formed parties and engaged in smuggling, while Emperor Xiajun "could not ignore his feelings, because he thought he was a virtuous." "The Lord speaks (pleases) his words and argues his words, so that the wise men of the world are also."
Just by saying nice things to his courtiers, emperors thought he was one of the few wise men in the world.
And the traitors? The high-ranking official Houlu, thus gaining power and more and more henchmen, has the ambition to usurp the throne.
Here Han Fei depicts a scene of how a henchman instigates a traitorous minister to rebel: The henchman says according to the meaning of the traitor:
"The so-called holy kings of the ancients, neither the elder nor the young nor the weak, nor in the order of order; With its formation of the party and the gathering of the alley tribes, forcing the king to kill and seek his profits. "
That is to say, the so-called Saint King Ming in ancient times did not teach the throne in the order of father and son and brother, but relied on internal parties for personal gain, and externally relied on local forces to threaten to kill the king and seize benefits.
The traitor was secretly pleased, and said excitedly, "Why do you say that?" ”
Yin Yue:. The love of the four kings, the greed of the will of the people; The soldiers of the riots also do it. However, the four kings are from Guangcuo, and the world is called Da Yan; Self-evident also, and the world is called Ming yan. Then the power is enough to come to the world, the profit is enough to cover the world, and the world is from it. "
In order to please the master, the henchmen instigated the master to rebel, and talked about Shun, Yu, Shang Tang and King Wu of Zhou, saying that these four kings were all usurpers of the throne, but they were praised by the world. All four kings had ambitions to gain the world and resorted to riotous behavior. They expand their territory, shock the world, and submit the world.
These words were loved by the courtiers, and the henchmen went on to say:
"According to what is heard today, Tian Chengzi took Qi, Sicheng Zihan took Song, Dazai Xin took Zheng, Shan Shi took Zhou, Yi Yazhi took Wei, and the three sons of Han, Wei, and Zhao were divided into Jin, and these six people were also the ones who killed their kings."
This is about the rebellion of the various princely states in the Spring and Autumn Period.
Han Fei said this, describing the expression of a traitorous courtier when he heard this:
When the traitor heard this, he raised his ear and thought it was also true.
"Raise your ears": raise your ears;
"Think it's right": I think this is reasonable, love to listen, and nod my head and say yes.
The relevant content of "Doubt" is analyzed here, because the answer we are looking for has a result.
1. "Shun forced Yao, Yu forced Shun, Tang Fangjie, Wu Wang, these four kings, and the people who killed their kings also." Although it appears in "Han Feizi • Doubts", it does not express Han Feizi's views.
Second, this is Han Feizi's use of this to illustrate that some villains can stitch together historical stories at will in order to please their masters; and the traitors who want to rebel do not care about the authenticity of the story itself, as long as someone says, they will find a reason for rebellion.
Third, the view that Han Feizi supports the succession of Yao Shun in the Bamboo Book Chronicle can be put to rest! The traitor had heard it for a long time before he "raised his ear to think it was right", so why did the experts know that this phrase did not understand the ins and outs of the story, and then nodded their heads and said yes, and spread it as widely as if they had discovered a new continent?
I have not studied the "Bamboo Book Chronicle", but in comparison, I am more willing to believe in Sima Qian's rigorous attitude toward history, and later I will let Sima Qian himself "personally talk" about how to write the "Five Emperors Benji" and defend the dignity and authority of the "History".