Cognitive misunderstandings in ancient books

The discrimination of ancient books is the study of the authenticity of ancient books and the issue of their books, and is an important part of literature. In fact, the literature has attached great importance to the discrimination of ancient books from the beginning. Liu Xiang and Liu Ye, who were pushed as the originator of literature, had paid attention to the authenticity of ancient books. Liu Xiang's "Yan Zichun Autumn" narrative "cloud:" There are quite inconsistent surgery, it is like Yan Ziyan, and the doubt of the later generations. " 》 The compilation reflects the research results of Liu's father and son. "Hanshu · Yi Wen Zhi" "Zhuzi Lue" records 9 "Wenzi", self -annotated: "Like the dependent ones." Another recorded 22 articles "Limu", self -annotated: . "Another record" Big

》 37 articles, self -annotated: "It is rumored that Yu, it is like a post -life language." All the authors of these ancient books and the era of books were not reliable, and it was the book that was pseudo -ancient people later.

Dialectical look at the predecessor to distinguish the pseudo -false method

Literature scholars after Liu Xiang's father and son also attached great importance to the discrimination of ancient books, forming a long and long history of discrimination. In the Qing Dynasty, the study was prosperous, and the ancient books were pushed to a new height. The discrimination research represented by Yan Ruoyu's "The Ancient Culture of Shang Shu" has an important position in the history of the Qing Dynasty. In the early years of the Republic of China, the "Ancient History" school represented by Gu Jiegang inherited the fake tradition of ancient China on the one hand, on the other hand, absorbing Western academic concepts and methods, and "discerning the history of false books" and then "distinguished the history of pseudo". The "ancient history of the ancient history" "influence is extremely far -reaching.

Driven by the "Ancient History" school, the discrimination of ancient books has become a manifestation. Many scholars have participated in the discernic research and discussion and achieved remarkable results. But there is no idea that under the cover of the doubt of ancient thoughts, some scholars' discrimination research is too light and radical, and there is insufficient evidence of some ancient books and the disadvantages of skeptical evidence. In recent decades, with the advancement of unearthed literature research, scholars have a deeper understanding of the complexity of the pre -Qin ancient books and the complexity of the evolution method. question. In this context, the academic circles gradually emerged as the academic trend of "out of doubt".

The "out of suspicion of the ancients" has its own positive academic value and significance, but some scholars have emphasized "getting out of doubt", and there are also some adverse tendencies that are overkill. Some pseudo -books that have long been concluded, such as the pseudo -"ancient literary book", often have scholars who have made up the case, but they fail to reasonably respond to the evidence of the predecessor's discrimination. Even some scholars have some prejudice on the discrimination of pseudo -study itself, intentionally or unintentionally degraded or even deny the study of false discrimination of ancient books.

For example, regarding the method of discrimination with ancient books, Hu Yinglin in the Ming Dynasty proposed the "False Pseudo -Eight Dharma", Liang Qichao's "Chinese History Research Law" further summarized it as a "twelve cases of falsehood", and in the "Authentic Books and Puppets and its age" The eight methods of "discern from Fangxu", and the five methods of "discern from the content of the text". Some scholars refute this one by one and believe that they cannot be established. Liang Qichao's concluding pseudo -false method has almost included the main methods of identifying scholars in the past. If these false methods cannot be established, it will be tantamount to the legitimacy of the discrimination of ancient books. But in fact, these false methods cannot be established, but they cannot be used in isolation.

Take the first method of Liang Qichao as an example: "If you do not record from the old mind, you will be faked or suspicious." This is evidence that the ancient books have been circulated from the perspective of the catalog. However, there was no record in the early books. Of course, it was suspicious. This is the most basic method of discrimination with ancient books. According to Yu Jiaxi's "Ancient Books", the "History of History and Classics has the Book of Records" to deny this false method. This method of refutation is to beolate and absolutely discriminate this method of distinguishing this method, and then this method is not enough to distinguish. This ignores the combination of comprehensive use of the false method. "Solitary permits" are the creeds of the study. You cannot use a method to identify the pseudo -pseudo of ancient books in isolation. The reason why Liang Qichao added the word "or suspicious" indicates that it has realized that it cannot be absolutely identified by the solitary certificate. After Yu Jiaxi proposed the "Book of History and Classics, there are books that are not recorded": "It is also not defended by all false books ... In addition to the sea ship, the stone room is excavated, and there is no reason for thousands of years. "Ancient Three Graves" and "Zihua Zi" are prominent in Song, Zigong's "Poetry", Shen Pei "Poetry Theory", "Yu Lingzi" and "History of Tianlu Pavilion" are prominent in the brightness. Example. "Yu Jiaxi also acknowledged the rationality of this false method summarized by Liang Qichao. Reflecting the predecessor's way of distinguishing the pseudo -method, pointing out that these methods may exist, it is undoubtedly beneficial, but if it is simply and rudely negating the false method, I am afraid it is not appropriate.

Correctly understand "Ancient Book Tong"

Some scholars like to use the "Ancient Books" summarized by Yu Jiaxi and others to refute pseudo research. It is true that there is a side of the "Ancient Book Tong", but few scholars have noticed that some "Ancient Book Tong" itself is only a summary of the fake results of ancient books. in conclusion.

For example, the "ancient book is not all hands", the earliest discussion and the problem were the Qing people Sun Xingyan and Yan Kejun. Sun Xingyan's "Yan Zi Chun Qiu" preface "said:" (Yan) infant died, his guests were sorrowful, and the guests were stabbed from the history of the country to become a book ... The strange. "Yan Kejun's" Book "Tube" after the clouds: "Those who have edited books in the near future say that the book is more than the funeral of the book, and there are many people who have benefited future generations. Or the guests or descendants do not have to be handed down. "Sun Xingyan, Yan Kejun's discussion was probably posted by the" Supreme Book of Siku ". Prior to the Tang Dynasty, scholars mostly thought that "Guanzi" and "Yan Zi" was written by Guan Zi and Yan Zi. After the Song Dynasty, scholars had more doubts. Based on this, the "Sku Quanshu General" believes that "Yan Zi" is not written by Yan Zi, but the biography of Yan Zi's deeds edited by later generations. The book of the (Guan) Zhongzhi ". Sun Xingyan and Yan Kejun intended to defend the "Yan Zi" and "Guanzi". They believed that although the content of the two books was not Yanzi and Guan Zi, they could still be regarded as Yan Zi and Guanzi. People edited by people, because the ancient books were "not all hands." Sun Xingyan and Yan Ke's "ancient books are not all hands" are indeed consistent with the method of writing of some pre -Qin ancient books, and have academic value. But in terms of specific ancient books, it is not possible to apply this "general case". Even if Sun Xingyan and Yan Kejun thinks that "Yan Zi" and "Guanzi" are written by guests, disciples or descendants, in fact, it is just a guess for reference, and there is no truth. Strictly even applied this general to defend "Xunzi". The "Four Cuple Quanshu" proposes that Xunzi is known as Zhou Wenwang in the 90th year, but the book has Zhou Chengwang asked and Uncle Kang Fengwei, which shows the pseudo -trusted benefit of future generations. Yan Kejun's "Symbol" Syrian "stated:" Covering the "Cover" is not the words of the bears ... The ancient books do not have to be handed, "Xunzi" king Kang, King Zhao Zhou Shichen, or the descendants of the sister -in -law described Pioneer Jiajia In the case, it is the order of the Chu Kingdom. "Yan Kejun believes that" The Skinzi "is written in the Western Zhou Dynasty, and" the sons are the earliest "in" Grasson ". It is obviously untenable. Sun Xingyan's "Yan Danzi" also applied this general to defending "Yan Danzi", thinking that it is an ancient book of the Qin Dynasty, and I am afraid it is also difficult to establish. It can be seen that although "ancient books are not all hands" conform to some pre -Qin ancient books, it cannot be generalized. If "ancient books are not all hands" as a negation of ancient books, all the discrimination research pointed out that the content of the book is inconsistent with the era of its books, and they will use this general case to justify the wrong.

Reasonable use of unearthed documents

Some scholars are overwhelmingly unearthed literatures. Anyone related to ancient books is often believed that unearthed literature can correct the "error" in the discrimination of ancient books in ancient books. But in fact, sometimes this is not the case. For example, the Southern Song Dynasty Ye Shi suspected that Sun Wu had no one. Japanese scholar Saito Human Church's "Sun Wu Du" further believes: "Sun Tzu today's" Sun Tzu "is written by Sun Yan." The "Sun Tzu's Art of Military" and "Sun Ying Military" were unearthed at the same time. Many scholars believed that this could end the suspicion of "Sun Tzu's Art of War". However, from the perspective of literature, the unearthed literature can prove that the first is the ancient book before the Western Han Dynasty, and the other is the two different books: "Sun Tzu's Art of War" and "Sun Ying Military" exist in the Western Han Dynasty. However, scholars suspect that "Sun Tzu's Art of War" is just suspecting that he has become a book in the Warring States and Spring and Autumn. Generally, he does not think that his book is after the Western Han Dynasty. As for the Western Han Dynasty, there are two books, "Sun Tzu's Art of War" and "Sun Ying Military", which has been clearly recorded in "Hanshu · Yi Wen Zhi", and scholars have never doubted denied. "Sun Tzu's Art of Military": "The Xing Zhixing of the past, Yi Zhi is in summer; Zhou Zhixing also, Lu Yin is in Yin." Mowing

The teacher is in the 陉; Yan Zhixing also, Su Qin is Qi Qi. "If Yinque Mountain Hanjian is closer to the original appearance of" Sun Tzu's Art of War ", then it is mentioned that Su Qin in the end of the Warring States Period is obviously inconsistent with Sun Wu in the Spring and Autumn Period. It is not the original appearance of the book, but after all, there is no truth. Generally speaking, it is still slightly conducive to the evidence of "pseudo -trustees". The authenticity of "Sun Tzu's Art of War" and the issue of the age of the book are quite complicated. It is necessary to discuss the in -depth discussion of scholars.

The author's example is not to deny the value of the unearthed literature on correcting the misjudgment of ancient books, but to remind scholars to more objectively and fairly look at the relationship between the unearthed literature and the discrimination of ancient books. Although unearthed literature is important, it may not be able to solve the problem of authenticity of ancient books. It should be acknowledged that some unearthed literatures can indeed correct the misjudgment of the ancient books of ancient books, such as the Song Dynasty "Chongwen General" suspecting that "Yan Zi Chun Qiu" is not the basis of "Hanshu Yi Wen Zhi" In the book of pseudo -trustees, the Qing Dynasty Guan Tong further believed that the Six Dynasties were pseudo -trustees. After the "Yan Zi Spring and Autumn" unearthed from the Han Tomb of Yinque Mountain, of course, these doubts completely overturned. However, there are also some unearthed documents confirmed the predecessor's falsehood, such as Tsinghua Jane's "Fu's Life", which is almost all different from the ancient text "Shang Shu" "Speaking", which is very powerful. The discrimination of the ancient text "Shang Shu". Of course, more situations are that the unearthed literature cannot confirm or deny the predecessor's false. Perhaps some scholars believe that the discrimination of ancient books is a negative and destructive research, and even has some resentment about the discrimination of ancient books. In fact, this attitude is not desirable. The essence of ancient books to identify the study of the authors of ancient books and the era of books, that is, whether the authors of ancient books are consistent with the authors they are advertised, and whether the real book era is the advertisement. same. The purpose of identifying ancient books is not to destroy and negate ancient books, but to place ancient books in appropriate historical coordinates. For example, the discrimination research on "Liezi" is not an ancient book of the Qin Dynasty, but the pseudo -writing of the pre -Qin Dynasty. For the ancient books of the pre -Qin Dynasty, it seems whether it is determined and destructive, resulting in a reducing ancient book. But from another perspective, since "Liezi" is a pseudo -style of the Wei and Jin dynasties, it can naturally be regarded as Wei Jin's work. It can be used to study the ideological and culture of the Wei and Jin dynasties, which is constructive for ancient books in the Wei and Jin dynasties. Therefore, it is undoubtedly constructive only by misjudging the true book as a pseudo -book; it is undoubtedly constructive. Ancient books to distinguish between pseudo and syndrome, which is the two sides of a thing. Any rigorous ancient book identifies pseudo, and in the process of research, it is necessary to consider the two possibilities of true and false, and make a final judgment after weighing the evidence of true and pseudo. Therefore, discerning and syndromes are part of the study of literature and science, and should not be separated and treated differently.

Zhang Zhidong's "Xuan Xuan Yu" stated: "One point is true and false, the ancient books are half." Although the words are exaggerated, there are a large number of pseudo books in ancient books. Some of these pseudo -books have been discovered, some have not been discovered; some have been determined, and some are still controversial. Therefore, in the study of literature, the research of ancient books and pseudo -research is still far away, and literature scholars need to work together for a long time.

(Author Unit: National College of Renmin University of China)

Source: China Social Science Network-Journal of Social Sciences of China

Author: Chen Weiwen

- END -