Version classiqueVersion mobile

All about the Rites

 | 
Anne Cheng
, 
Stéphane Feuillas

The world of ritual

Coping with ambiguity: seventeenth-century intercultural interpretations of “as if” rituals in the Liji

Nicolas Standaert

Texte intégral

1When Chinese offer sacrifices to their ancestors, are the spirits of these ancestors really present at the sacrifice and do they consume the food offerings? Based on the fear of performing idolatrous rituals, this was a major question with which the European missionaries were confronted in the 17th century. The answer to this question was of primary importance to determine their attitude towards these rites. If indeed the ancestors were present, consumed the offerings and even granted blessings, these rituals should be considered idolatry and rejected; if not, they could be tolerated. In order to solve these questions, the missionaries had recourse to Chinese scholars who led them to Chinese texts, among which the Liji 禮記 (Book of Rites). The question of whether the spirit of the ancestors were really present at the sacrifices, however, was not the main focus of discussions in the Liji, nor in later texts, and throughout Chinese textual tradition such questions were not discussed as extensively as similar topics in Europe (such as theological discussions about the transubstantiation or the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist).

2This paper focuses on the interpretation of the Liji by the late 17th century Chinese Christian scholar Yan Mo 嚴謨 (c. 1640s–after 1718). His interpretations are meaningful in two regards. First, they were produced in an intercultural context, as a result of an encounter with scholars belonging to another culture than his own. Thus, his interpretation of the Liji may shed some light on how Chinese scholars reread their own classical texts from the perspective of new questions raised through such encounters. Second, scholars such as Yan Mo were not high-level officials but low-level literati. Their interpretations thus provide some insight into the acquaintance of these literati with the Liji.

3Moreover, in this paper, Yan Mo’s interpretation of the Liji will be linked to recent interpretations of ritual, more precisely those that consider rituals as creation of a shared “as if” world. This involves questions such as: are the ancestral rituals in the Liji and the way in which they were put in practice in the 17th century rituals that create an “as if” world? And is this “as if” world contrasted with the “real” world? Does the Liji describe the ancestors “as if” they were present, or does it consider them really present, or is its description of this topic ambiguous? And if so, how to cope with such ambiguity?

Background and context of the texts by Yan Mo

  • 1 The author thanks Carine Defoort for her suggestions on the earlier version of this paper, and Anne (...)
  • 2 There is a short anonymous description entitled “Le Li ki, cinquième Livre Canonique du premier Ord (...)
  • 3 Similar questions were raised regarding the sacrifice to Confucius, but will not be discussed here (...)

4In the first hundred years of the Christian mission in China since the late 16th century, missionaries did not pay particular attention to the Liji. The first published translation of Confucian classics admittedly contained a translation of the Zhongyong 中庸 (Doctrine of the Mean) and Daxue 大學 (Great Learning) chapters, but they were translated as part of the Four Books, not of the Liji.1 In fact, except for some selected translated quotations in manuscript texts from the late 17th century (see below) and some descriptions and selected translations in printed texts from the 18th century,2 one has to wait for the late 19th century for the first full translation of the Liji in European languages. Yet, the interest in the Liji had already changed with the development of the rites controversy in the late 17th century, the 1680s and 1690s: the Jesuit missionaries were searching for proofs for their argument that the sacrifices offered to the ancestors were not superstitious or idolatrous but merely political or civil rites.3 In this search, they could benefit from the help of Chinese scholars who pointed them at passages in the classics, and especially the Liji, which could support their claim.

The background

5Before contextualising the texts from the 1680s and 1690s that are analysed in this paper, it is helpful to move back eighty to a hundred years earlier in order to understand the initial question concerning the ancestors that would lead to the rites controversy. Since their arrival in China, the Jesuit missionaries were confronted with the ancestral sacrifices. Although Matteo Ricci (1552–1610) himself did not give much systematic evaluation of the Chinese ancestral or funeral rites, his few insights played a major role in the policies that would be adopted later. In one key passage of his chapter on the Chinese sects in his Christian Expedition to China, he described the offering of food, incense, and silk or paper to the dead ancestors and, quoting the “Zhongyong” 中庸 chapter from the Liji, went on to explain:

  • 4 Ricci 1942–1949, vol. 1, 117–118; translation Rule 1986, 49 (slightly adapted).

The reason they give for this observance on behalf of their ancestors is this, “to serve the dead as if they were living” (servirgli morti come se fossero vivi). Nor do they think that the dead come to eat these things, or have need of them; but they say they do it because they know of no other way of showing the love and gratitude they have for them. Some say that this ceremony was instituted more for the living than the dead, that is to teach children and the ignorant to know and serve their parents while alive by showing them that important people perform for [their parents] after their death the services they were accustomed to perform when [their parents] were alive. And since they neither recognise any divinity in these dead, nor ask anything of them, nor hope for anything for them, the practice is completely free from any idolatry (idolatria), and perhaps could even be said to involve no superstition (superstitione). Nevertheless, it would be better to replace this custom with giving alms to the poor for the souls of these dead, when they become Christians.4

  • 5 For a larger discussion of these terms, as well as the terms “civil” and “political,” and this quot (...)
  • 6 Ex more (sinico): Ricci 1942–1949, vol. 2, 565, 628; conforme ao custume da China: vol. 2, 499.

6Ricci thus adopted the view that in these rituals the Chinese serve the dead “as if” they were living and concluded that the Chinese did not believe that the dead are actually present, or that they are divine. The practice was certainly not idolatrous, a label used for offerings to wrong deities who, to the missionaries, were mere creatures, and they were perhaps not superstitious, which usually meant the improper worship of the true God.5 But because of the danger of superstition, it would be better to aim at eventually replacing such customs. Actually, the missionaries only gradually accepted certain Chinese funeral rites. They were mainly those embedded in the Confucian tradition of the Jiali 家禮 (Family Rituals) and referred to as “Chinese custom” (ex more sinico, conforme ao custume da China).6 They were regarded as “civil” and “political” rites and were thus acceptable for the Church.

  • 7 For this background, see among others, Standaert 1995, chap. 1; and Standaert 2000.
  • 8 E.g. “Explicaçam de 37 Textos Sinicos, e reposta aos Apontamtos feitos sobre elles, com os quaes se (...)

7In fact, during the first fifty years of their stay in China, Jesuits had expressed among themselves very different opinions about the rites.7 The beginning of the controversy outside the circle of China Jesuits is usually associated with the initiatives taken by the arrival of the first Dominicans in China in 1633 and the subsequent submission to Rome of questions attacking the Jesuit approach to the Chinese rites. In 1645, a first papal decree prohibiting the practices was issued. It was then followed by a more favourable one in 1656. After the exile of the missionaries to Canton (1666–1669), they returned to the inland and the controversy gradually resumed in the 1680s and 1690s. For instance, the Dominican Francisco Varo (Wan Jiguo 萬濟國, 1627–1687) wrote a text entitled Bianji 辯祭 [Arguments against Sacrifices]. In reaction to it, the Jesuit Simão Rodrigues (Li Ximan 李西滿, 1645–1704) invited several Chinese to write a criticism of the ideas expressed in it. Another very active Jesuit at that time was Francesco Saverio Filippucci (1632–1692). He not only accumulated the texts compiled by these Chinese scholars, but also acquired the primary sources they used, including annotated versions of the Liji such as Chen Hao’s 陳澔 (1261–1341) Liji jishuo 禮記集說 [Compiled Statements about the Liji]. He provided his own analysis of them in order to show that the ancestral rites were “political” rites. As such, he was probably the first missionary to have ever seriously studied the Liji. However most of his texts remained manuscripts.8

8The conflict between the two visions intensified when Charles Maigrot M. E. P. (1652–1730), Vicar Apostolic of Fujian, framed an indictment of the rites in his Mandate of 26 March 1693, a document that stirred up reactions from Chinese scholars. The text by Maigrot, which mainly relied on Varo’s explanations, contains seven articles, one of which is worth quoting in order to better understand the context in which the texts under investigation below were produced:

  • 9 See Noll 1992, 9.

“Art.4. On no account are missionaries to allow Christians to preside at, to serve, or to be present at the solemn sacrifices or oblations that they are in the habit of offering to Confucius and their ancestors several times a year. We say these offerings are tainted with superstition.” 9

  • 10 See Standaert 2012, 23, 47ff.
  • 11 The ARSI collection has four ancient editions of the Liji: (Minjia sanding) Liji jishuo (閔家三訂) 禮記集說(...)
  • 12 For an overview of these quotes, see Standaert 2012, 69ff. The quotes from Yan Mo can be found in S (...)

9From that time on, the Holy See became involved in a juridical process of extraordinary complexity. Two Jesuits, François Noël (1651–1729) and Kasper Castner (1665–1709), were sent to Rome to defend the Jesuit position. To do so, they took with them a significant number of sources originating from Canton-Macao, especially a collection of books and texts acquired by Filippucci.10 This explains why these texts, among which one finds the Liji and the texts by Yan Mo, are now preserved in Rome.11 Moreover, Noël and Castner used them in defence of their position, as they are referred to in the documents prepared for the papal commission. As a result quotations from Chinese (Christians), among whom Yan Mo, and quotations from the Liji were translated into Latin and printed in Summarium Nouorum Autenticorum Testimoniorum Europæorum, quam Sinensium nouissimè è China allatorum (Summary of new authentic testimonies, both of Europeans and Chinese, very recently brought from China) (Rome, 1703).12 The deliberations of a commission of cardinals in Rome, however, resulted in the decree Cum Deus optimus of 20 November 1704. Among other items, it forbade Christians to take part in sacrifices to the ancestors and proscribed ancestral tablets that displayed the characters “throne” [(ling)zuo ()] or “seat of the spirit” (shenwei 神位) referring to the deceased. Tablets bearing merely the name of the dead were nevertheless allowed.

The author

  • 13 On his life and publications, see Standaert 1995, chap. 1.
  • 14 Longxi xianzhi 龍溪縣志 [1762 (Qianlong 27), 1879 (Guangxu 5)], (Zhongguo fangzhi congshu 中國方志叢書 90), 1 (...)
  • 15 Yan Mo, Lishi tiaowen: first line: 閩漳嚴保琭謨定猷氏集答父嚴盎博削贊化思參氏鑒訂.
  • 16 Longxi xianzhi (1762 (Qianlong 27), 1879 (Guangxu 5)), (Zhongguo fangzhi congshu 90), 173 (juan 14, (...)
  • 17 Zürcher 2007, 13, 62.

10One scholar who specialised in accumulating and commenting quotations from the Liji and whose commentaries are analysed in this paper is Yan Mo 嚴謨 (zi: Dingyou 定猷; Christian name: Paulus 保琭 or 保祿) (possibly born in the mid-1640s, died after 1718). Very few elements are known about Yan Mo’s life.13 He was a native of Zhangzhou 漳州 in the Fujian province. The only reference in official Chinese sources relates to his becoming a Tribute Student (gongsheng 貢生, sui ) in 1709 (Kangxi 48).14 From his Christian texts, we know that he was the son of Yan Zanhua 嚴贊化 (zi: Sican 思參; Christian name Ambrosius 盎博削).15 Yan Zanhua, himself a Tribute Student by Grace of the year 1651 (gongsheng, fuxue’en 府學恩)16 was a fervent Christian who belonged to the Fujian community. He was a disciple and collaborator of Giulio Aleni S. J. (Ai Rulüe艾儒略, 1582–1649). He participated in the correction (dingzheng 訂正) of the Kouduo richao 口鐸日抄 [Daily Record of Oral Preaching] (1630–1640) and the Lixiu yijian 勵脩一鑑 [Mirror for Encouragement of Cultivation] (1639), two of the most important texts describing Aleni’s activities and the Fujian Christian community at the end of the Ming. By the end of the 17th century, however, the organisation of this community had changed quite drastically. The Fujian province had become the centre of the Dominican missions in China, while the Jesuits had considerably reduced their activities there. It seems that the Yan family belonged to the lower literati class, that is, the class of humble bachelors, school teachers, and clerks. As Erik Zürcher pointed out, these scholars were not jinshi 進士 degree holders closely linked to the court who had to deal with the centre of power, but low-level literati deeply rooted in Chinese society. They formed, especially in the Fujian province, the basis of the Christian community in the 17th century.17

The texts

  • 18 See CCT-Database.
  • 19 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 41/1a; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 5-28. See CCT-Database and Chan 2002, 62–63.
  • 20 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/2; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 115–216. See CCT-Database and Chan 2002, 45–46. (...)

11Around 17 texts are known to be authored by Yan Mo. They are all manuscripts, some preserved in several copies.18 This paper focuses on two of them related to the Liji. They were most probably written in the 1680s or early 1690s: the Jizukao 祭祖考 [Investigation into Ancestral Worship]19 and the Lishi tiaowen 李師條問 [Successive Questions of Father Li] also known as Tiaowen jida 條問集答 [Collected Answers to the Successive Questions].20

12Jizukao is a relatively short text (12 fols.) that provides a research into the ancestral worship: with quotation from original texts, it treats subsequently the original meaning of the offerings, the ritual during the period of the Three Dynasties, the Family Rituals of the Song Confucians, the invocation texts of later generations and the heterodoxy of ordinary offerings. All these elements are then followed by a discussion by Yan Mo. The Lishi tiaowen is a much longer text (50 fols.) which answers some 28 questions. For each question, Yan Mo first quotes the related classical texts and then gives his commentary. The two texts are interconnected since Jizukao is almost completely and literally integrated under the corresponding questions of Lishi tiaowen. Therefore, this paper will mostly refer to the Lishi tiaowen.

  • 21 In ARSI, Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 41/1; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 1–46: these two works are bound together with (...)
  • 22 Mentioned at the end of both versions of the Bianji (CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 46, 59) it was written prio (...)
  • 23 A collective letter seeking José Monteiro S. J. (Mu Ruose 穆若瑟, 1646–1720)’s help by six Christians, (...)
  • 24 Caogao (chaobai) 草稿 (抄白); CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 97.

13Though undated, both texts were most probably written on the occasion of the conflict related to rites mentioned above. It is known that Yan Mo’s Bianji 辨祭 [Discerning Sacrifices] was a reaction to Varo’s Bianji 辯祭 [Arguments against Sacrifices]. Yan Mo wrote his text at the request of Rodrigues, possibly in the early 1680s. Jizukao together with Muzhukao 木主考 [Investigation into the Ancestral Tablet]21 and probably also the Kaoyi 考疑 [Investigation into Doubts]22 most probably date from the same period. Lishi tiaowen may also belong to the same period because Father Li to which the text is addressed may well be Simão Rodrigues. Yet it may also date from the early 1690s, and thus reuse the material originally produced for the Jizukao. There exist several letters written by Yan Mo and others on the occasion of the decree by Maigrot. One of them is dated from 1695.23 Another of these letters has attached corrections to the Lishi tiaowen, which is mentioned as being written “the previous year” (qian nian 前年).24 It seems that as a result of Maigrot’s edict, Jesuits had resumed asking for additional reference material from the Chinese Christians. The Lishi tiaowen, which is based on the questions raised earlier by Rodrigues, may have been the result of it.

14In fact, there are four other texts dealing with nearly all the same 28 questions as those discussed in Lishi tiaowen:

  • 25 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 42/2; CCT ARSI, vol. 9, 21–50; on all these texts, see CCT database and C (...)

Lisu mingbian 禮俗明辨 [Distinguishing Clearly between Rituals and Ordinary Customs)25 by Li Jiugong 李九功 (?-1681; also from Fujian province)

  • 26 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/9.b; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 257-268.

Chu yan 芻言 [My Opinions]26 by He xianggong [He, the catechist] 何相公 (probably He Ruling 何如笭 [juren 1663] also from Fujian)

  • 27 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/7.b; CCT ARSI, vol. 10, 115–144.
  • 28 Xia Dachang 夏大常 (Mathias) is the compiler of several other texts which accumulate Liji quotes and t (...)

[Liyi dawen 禮儀答問] [Questions and Answers on Rituals]27 by Xia Dachang (Mathias) 夏大常 (from Ganzhou 贛州 (Jiangxi)28

  • 29 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42); CCT ARSI, vol. 10, 459–478.
  • 30 These and other texts by Chinese Christians on the ancestral rites, 28 in total originating from th (...)

[Liyi wenda 禮儀問答] [Answers to Questions on Rituals],29 anonymous text (probably by a scholar from Shaanxi)30

15Since Li Jiugong died in 1681, his text may have been written shortly after receiving the questions by Rodrigues. The others may date from the same period (between 1680 and 1683) or several years later (between 1689 and 1692) because a note on these texts mentioned that they were given to the vice-provincial Giandomenico Gabiani (1623–1694), who was vice-provincial twice (1680-1683 and 1689-1692). Given the reference in the letter to Monteiro, Yan Mo’s answers possibly date from this later period.

  • 31 For a good overview of these different orders, see Wang 2018, 98–99. There is also a difference in (...)

16There are around 28 questions in total, though not each text answers all of them or in the same order.31 This wide variety of questions reflects the anxiety of the missionaries regarding the Chinese rites. These questions mainly concern the meaning and not the actual performance of the rituals. For instance:

“What about the rituals performed at the occasion of solar or lunar eclipse?”
(日蝕月蝕行禮何如?)

“What about the libation of liquor on the ground at the funeral rites?”
(喪禮奠酒於地何如?)

“What is the meaning of choosing a [burial] place?”
(擇地何義?)

“What is the meaning of the local official paying respects to the city god?”
(官長敬城隍何義?)

“What is the meaning of the spring and autumn sacrifices in the Confucius temple?”
(孔子廟中春秋二祭何義?)

“What is the meaning of kowtowing to Heaven and Earth at the wedding ritual?”
(婚禮拜天地何義?)

17There are two questions in answer to which the Liji is significantly more abundantly quoted:

  • 32 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 129–139.

“What is the meaning in the Chinese sacrificial rites of the nine offerings by the Son of Heaven, the seven offerings by the lords and the three offerings by the high officials?”
(來問中國祭禮天子九獻諸侯七獻大夫士三獻其義何歟)32

  • 33 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 141–147.

“In the sacrifices for the ancestors, does one seek blessings or not?”
(來問祭祖宗求福不求福)33

18While most authors usually give short answers in their own words, Yan Mo proceeds in a systematic way: he starts by quoting classical texts, in the case of the last two questions, mainly from the Liji. This is why the answers from the Lishi tiaowen (partly copied from Jizukao) will be analysed here.

Discussion of the Liji in the Lishi tiaowen34

  • 34 The text is not punctuated; we mainly follow the punctuation as it was adopted in the Scripta sinic (...)
  • 35 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 117–119.
  • 36 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 117: 秦漢諸儒集錄虞夏啇周典禮六經之一.
  • 37 祭義檀弓祭統禮噐郊特牲曲禮文王世子玉藻鄉飲酒義月令.
  • 38 Chen Hao’s commentary was widely used because it was concise and easy to understand for students. T (...)

19At the beginning of the Lishi tiaowen,35 Yan Mo gives a list and description of the texts that he consulted: the Shangshu 尚書 (Book of Documents), the Shijing 詩經 (Book of Odes), the Liji 禮記, the Chunqiu 春秋 (Spring and Autumn Annals), the Zhouli 周禮 (Rites of Zhou), the Yili 儀禮 (Etiquette and Rites), the Lunyu 論語 (Analects), the Zhongyong 中庸, the Baihutong 白虎通 (White Tiger Discussions), the Kaiyuan li 開元禮 (Rituals of the Kaiyuan era [of the Great Tang Dynasty], with reference to Du You’s 杜佑 Tong dian 通典 (Comprehensive Institutions) (801)), Ma Duanlin’s 馬端臨 (ca. 1250-1325) Wenxian tongkao 文獻通考 (Comprehensive Examination of Documents) (including various historical commentaries), Zhu Xi’s 朱熹 Jiali 家禮, and the Da Ming jili 大明集禮 (Collected Rituals of the Great Ming). He also adds a list of the mainly pre-Song commentators. The Liji is presented as “the canonical rituals from Yu and the Xia, Shang and Zhou, collected and compiled by various scholars from the Qin and Han dynasties, one of the six classics.”36 Subsequently Yan Mo gives a list of the chapters that are quoted37 and the references to the two main commentaries that he used: the Han and Tang commentaries collected in the [Shisanjing] zhushu [十三經] 註疏 [Commentaries and Sub-Commentaries to the Thirteen Classics] and the widely used Yuan commentary Liji jishuo 禮記集說 [Compiled Statements about the Liji] (1322) by Chen Hao 陳澔 (1261–1341), also called Liji jizhu 禮記集註 [Compiled Annotations to the Liji] or Liji daquan 禮記大全 [Complete Collection of the Liji].38

  • 39 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 129-132; compare with Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 7ff.

20The way Yan Mo proceeds is the following: immediately after the question under discussion he lists a number of quotations; he clearly indicates their origin (i.e. book and/or chapter), and sometimes adds interlinear notes, that usually reproduce elements from the official commentaries. At the end of the citation, he gives his own commentary (yu an 愚按). Thus, the paragraph on “What is the meaning in the Chinese sacrificial rites of the nine offerings by the Son of Heaven, the seven offerings by the lords and the three offerings by the high officials?” (來問中國祭禮天子九獻諸侯七獻大夫士三獻其義何歟) starts with the following quotation39:

  • 40 It is not clear to what extent Yan Mo adopts a classical interpretation and adds his own commentary (...)
  • 41 In this paper the numbers of the chapters and paragraphs of the Liji have been adopted from Liji zh (...)

《禮記》〈祭義〉曰:唯聖人為能饗帝上帝,孝子為能饗親.饗者,鄉也.鄉之,然後能饗焉.是故孝子臨尸註:尸主也.古人祭必於孫行中取一人,代祖宗居位飲食,謂之尸.自漢以後至今不用.40 而不怍,君牽牲,夫人奠盎酒也,君獻尸,夫人薦豆木噐,卿大夫相君,命婦相夫人.齊齊乎其敬也!愉愉乎其忠也!勿勿諸其欲其饗之也!(“Jiyi”, 25.6)41

  • 42 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 212; C-text, No. 5. In this paper the translation by Legge is adopted, sometim (...)

The “Jiyi” (Meaning of the Sacrifices) chapter of the Liji says: It is only the sage who can sacrifice to God, and the filial son who can sacrifice to his parents. Sacrificing means directing one’s self to; only when he directs himself [to his parents], he is sacrificing. Hence the filial son approaches the personator of the departed without having occasion to blush; the ruler leads the victim forward, while his wife puts down the bowls; the ruler presents the offerings to the personator, while his wife sets forth the various dishes; his ministers and great officers assist the ruler, while their acknowledged wives assist his wife. How well sustained was their reverence! How complete was the expression of their loyal devotion! How earnest was their wish that the departed should enjoy the service!42

Annotation: The personator of the deceased is the principal mourner. When ancient people sacrificed, they had to select among the grandchildren one person to take the place of the ancestor and to eat and drink, and he was called “personator.” It has not been used since the Han.

  • 43 Liji has instead of .
  • 44 Liji jishuo daquan, juan 22, 19b; the original text has a question mark: 主人之自盡亦豈知神之所饗必在於此[]。且以表其 (...)

〈檀弓〉曰:祭祀之禮,主人自盡焉耳.43 豈知神之所饗.亦以主人有齊敬之心也.註:主人之自盡,亦豈知神之所饗,必在於此.且以表其心而已矣.44 (“Xiagong xia”, 4.15)

  • 45 Legge 1885, vol. 27, 169; C-text, No. 141.

The “Tangong” chapter says: In the sacrifices [subsequent to the interment] the principal mourner simply does his utmost. Does he know what the spirit enjoys? He is guided only by his pure and reverent heart.45

Annotation: The principal mourner doing his utmost, does he know that what the spirit enjoys is necessarily located in this [ritual]? Herewith he only expresses his heart, and nothing more.

〈祭統〉曰:孝子之事親也,有三道焉.生則飬,沒則喪,喪畢則祭.養則觀其順也,喪則觀其哀也,祭則觀其敬而時也.盡此三道者,孝子之行也.(“Jitong”, 26.3)

  • 46 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 237–238; C-text No. 3.

The “Jitong” (Summary Account of the Sacrifices) chapter says: Therefore in three ways is a filial son’s service of his parents shown –while they are alive, by nourishing them; when they are dead, by mourning; and when the mourning is over by sacrificing to them. In his nourishing them, we see his obedience; in his funeral rites, we see his sorrow; in his sacrifices we see his reverence and observance of the [proper] seasons. Fully implementing these three ways is the behaviour of a filial son.46

  • 47 Furthermore there are two additional quotes from “Jitong” [“Jitong”, 26.6 (Legge 1885, vol. 28, 240 (...)
  • 48 Liji jishuo daquan, juan 22, 19b: 主人之自盡亦豈知神之所饗必在於此[]。且以表其心而已矣。In Jizukao: 註。主人自盡。亦豈知神之所饗必在於此。亦以表 (...)

21These quotations are taken from three different chapters of Liji.47 Just like most that follow, they are rather descriptive in nature. At first sight, they do not seem to be related to the rites controversy nor do they reveal a lot about Yan Mo’s position. The explanations, including di being interpreted as Shangdi 上帝 in the first quotation, are taken from conventional commentaries. This is for instance the case for the Liji jishuo daquan 禮記集說大全 [Complete Collection of Compiled Statements about the Liji] edited by Hu Guang 胡廣 and others, which quotes Shilin Ye shi 石林葉氏, i.e. Ye Mengde 葉夢得 (1077–1148)48. The second quotation taken from the “Tangong” chapter is not devoid of uncertainty or ambiguity: by stating that the principal mourner does not know whether the spirit enjoys the offerings, it mostly puts stress on the intention of his heart. This ambiguity cannot be resolved unless we know Yan Mo’s opinion. The third quotation mainly puts emphasis on the practice or behaviour (xing ) of the filial son.

  • 49 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 132-139. For a partial Latin translation of his commentaries, based on Jizukao ((...)

22In the following commentaries to these quotations, Yan Mo clearly expresses his view.49 Firstly, he explains why the sacrifices were instituted by the ancient kings:

故古先王因人心,制為祭祀之禮,建之廟以貌之,立之主用木題名其上謂之木主以象之,設其裳衣,陳其時食以思之,始死朝夕奠哭,既葬四時獻享。此皆欲藉有形以寓無形,使之如有所慿依,長如在目前.

Therefore, taking into consideration the human heart, the ancient kings instituted the sacrificial rites, built temples to make them appear, put up tablets in wood, with their names on it, called “wooden master,” to make them manifest, inaugurated ceremonial clothing and displayed seasonal dishes to commemorate them; when someone just died, they offer and wail every morning and evening, and after the burial they make offerings every season. In all these cases, they rely on material things in order to provide home to the immaterial, making them such as if they have something to rely on and be enduring as if they are right before us.

  • 50 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 132; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 21.

23By providing an interpretation in which the material (which is shaped) provides home for the immaterial (which is shapeless), Yan Mo seems to adopt a peculiar view on ritual action: he considers that the true essence of the referent of meaning resides beyond the ritual itself. He does so by pointing twice at the “as if” situations created by the material elements of the ritual. Such a conception of ritual converges with recent scholarship that regard rituals as means to create an “as if” world –a point that will be discussed later on in this paper. Yet, for now, it is worth noting that Yan Mo immediately and explicitly develops his statement by explaining these rituals with three core “as if” sentences taken from the classics.50

《論語》所謂祭如在,〈祭義〉所謂如將見之,《中庸》所謂事死如事生事亡如事存,孝之至也.

This is what the Lunyu calls “to offer as if they were present,” what the “Jiyi” chapter [of the Liji] calls: “as if he were seeing the departed” and what the Zhongyong calls: “to serve the dead as if they were living, to serve the deceased as if they were present –the perfection of filial piety.”

  • 51 祭如在祭神如神在。子曰:「吾不與祭,如不祭。」Translation: Legge 1991, vol. 1, 159. Compare with Ames & Rosemont 1998, 99 (...)
  • 52雨露既濡君子履之必有怵惕之心如將見之。(“Jiyi”, 25.1); Legge 1885, vol. 28, 210; C-text. No. 1
  • 53 It is also quoted in the chapter on rituals (“Lilun” 禮論) in Xunzi 荀子 19.
  • 54 For other examples, see e.g. Standaert 2008, 144; and the many examples in letters from Chinese (Ch (...)
  • 55 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 142–143; see also Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 11.

24Ji ru zai 祭如在: “He sacrificed [to the dead], as if they were present” is quoted from Lunyu 3.12, where it is also followed by the sentence 祭神如神在 “He sacrificed to the spirits, as if the spirits were present.”51 The second passage comes from the “Jiyi” 祭義 chapter of the Liji, which explains the meaning of filial piety (xiao ) and reverence (jing ) as expressed through the performance of sacrifices. This passage comes from an explanation where it is stated that sacrifices should not be too frequent nor infrequent, ideally only in spring and autumn: “In spring, when [the superior man] treads on the ground, wet with the rains and dews that have fallen heavily, he cannot avoid being moved by a feeling as if he were seeing the departed.”52 The large quotation from Zhongyong 19 (Liji, 32.13)53 appears in Yan Mo’s response to the question, “In the sacrifices for the ancestors, does one seek blessings or not?” (來問祭祖宗求福不求福). It is a sentence often quoted in texts debating the rites controversy. It was already present in Matteo Ricci’s comment evoked at the beginning of this paper, when he stated that food offerings to the dead were made “as if” they were alive.54 A similar sentence from “Jiyi” is quoted by Yan Mo under the same subsequent question on the blessings:55

文王之祭也:事死者如事生,思死者如不欲生,忌日必哀,稱諱如見親。祀之忠也,如見親之所愛,如欲色然;其文王與?(“Jiyi”, 25.7)

  • 56 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 212–213; C-text, No. 6

King Wen, in sacrificing, served the dead as if he were serving the living. He thought of the dead as if he did not wish to live [any longer himself]. On the recurrence of their death day, he inevitably was sad; in calling his father by the name elsewhere forbidden, he looked as if he saw him. So sincere was he in sacrificing that he looked as if he saw the things which his father loved, and the pleased expression of his face: —such was King Wen!56

  • 57 For a more detailed discussion, see Standaert 2008, 89–90.
  • 58 Plaks 2003, 37: “To serve the dead as one serves the living, to serve the departed just as one serv (...)
  • 59 是故仁人之事親也如事天事天如事親。(“Aigong wen” 哀公問, 28.7); Legge 1885, vol. 28, 269; C-text, No. 13. This quotati (...)
  • 60 婦事舅姑如事父母(“Neize” 內則, 12.3); Legge 1885, vol. 27, 450; C-text, No. 3
  • 61 Compare with the translation by Legge 1991, vol. 1, 403: “Thus they served the dead as they would h (...)
  • 62 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 135: 論語祭如在夫以為如在則不在可知矣cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol., 11, 23.

25In fact, due to the conciseness and the polysemy of the words used, these sentences can be interpreted in different ways.57 The Zhongyong quotation, for instance, can be comprehend as a comparison between serving the dead and the living: “To serve the dead as one serves the living, to serve the departed just as one serves those still in this world.”58 One finds this comparative use in other sentences from the Liji related to “serving”: “Therefore a son of all-comprehensive virtue serves his parents as he serves Heaven, and serves Heaven as he serves his parents.”59 “(Sons’) wives should serve their parents-in-law as they served their own.”60 But 如事生 and 如事存 can also be interpreted as a supposition (subjunctive): “To serve the dead as if they were living, to serve the deceased as if they were present.”61 Even with such a translation there can be several interpretations. The sentence could mean that one presumes the dead are still living (even if one does not know it for sure), thus maintaining a space of ambiguity regarding the question of whether they are there or not. But the supposition could also be counterfactual, that means based on the fact that they are certainly no longer there. It is this last interpretation that Yan Mo adheres to. Further in his commentary he comes explicitly to this conclusion: “When the Lunyu says: ‘Offer as if they were present,’ as a general principle, if one considers it ‘as if they were present’, then one can know that they were not present.”62 As such, for Yan Mo, these rituals were only “as if” subjunctive rituals. In other words, one should not believe that the deceased are present.

26Yan Mo develops this “as if” aspect in several subtopics related to sacrifices: the spirits do not really eat or drink the sacrifices; their spirit is not present in the tablet; and one does not see or hear the spirits when one offers sacrifices, this is only a product of human mind; finally, one does not seek blessings from them. These statements are argued on the basis of the Liji and its commentaries, as well as other classics and commentaries or historical sources.

  • 63 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 133–134: 以為【誤謂】鬼神亦湏飲食如佛教所云者; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 22.
  • 64 不知徧考之六經中古人之制祭禮未嘗有說鬼神湏飲食者.
  • 65 CCT ARSI, vol.  11, 141. And also as the first quote in Jizukao: CCT ARSI, vol.  11, 7 (with the ex (...)
  • 66 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 134: 檀弓明說未有見其饗之者(= “Tangong, xia”, 4.27) 表孝子之心而已矣; Legge 1885, vol. 27, 177; C- (...)
  • 67 使謂祭為神飲食而設則一年止得四祭天子止祭七代庶民止祭一代祖宗不幾於盡餓斃乎.
  • 68 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 134: 庶幾其饗鄉之非必之之詞也愛而期之之詞也; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 22.

27Concerning the “wrong statement” of those who say that the ghosts and spirits necessarily should drink and eat [the sacrifices] “as the Buddhist teachings claim,”63 Yan Mo points out that “they do not know that the whole search for it in the six classics, [reveals that] the ancient people who instituted the sacrificial rites, never said that the ghosts and spirits necessarily need to drink and eat it.”64 Hereto he refers to a passage of “Tangong, xia” which is also fully quoted under the next question about the blessings:65 “The “Tangong” chapter clearly says that ‘[the dead] have never been seen to partake of these things;’ it only expresses the mind and heart of a filial son and nothing else.”66 Yan Mo adds to this a rhetorical question: if one says that sacrifices have been installed for the spirits to eat and drink them, then “are the ancestors not almost at the point of dying from hunger?”67 since in one year there are only four sacrifices, and the Son of Heaven only sacrifices until the seventh generation, and the common people only during one generation? Even the expression shang xiang 尚饗 (I beg you to partake of this sacrifice) in the invocation means: “‘May you almost be directed towards partaking;’ this is not a statement to oblige them [to do so], but a statement [expressing] that one cares for them and expects them.”68

  • 69 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 134-135: 人遂誤認謂神在廟在主不知古人雖立廟設主未嘗謂神在是; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 22-23.
  • 70 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 135: 明明說主在廟神在天; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 23.

28A second issue related to the ancestral sacrifices is that some people “wrongly recognise that the spirit is in the tablet in the temple, and they do not know that although ancient people built temples and put up tablets, they never said that the spirit was there.”69 Yan Mo uses two quotations from Shijing with their commentaries to emphasise that “it is clearly said that the tablet is in the temple and that the spirit is in Heaven:”70

《詩經.文王》篇曰:文王在上於昭于天,文王陟降在帝左右,註曰:文王既歿而神在上,昭明于天,一升一降,無時不在上帝之左右.

  • 71 Ode 235; Legge 1991, vol. 4, 427-428.
  • 72 Shijizhuan 詩集傳 juan 6; Shijizhuan (2011), 233–234. The quotation and annotation are also analysed i (...)

The “Wen Wang Ode” in the Shijing says: “King Wen is on high. Oh! bright is he in Heaven. […] King Wen ascends and descends, he is on the left and the right of the Lord.”71 The note [by Zhu Xi] says: “When King Wen had died, his spirit was on high, and was bright in Heaven, in his movements of ascending and descending it never happened that he was not on the left and the right of the high Lord.”72

〈清廟〉篇祭文王詩曰:對越在天,駿奔走在廟,註曰:既對越其在天之神而又駿奔走其在廟之主.豊城朱氏曰:文王之神雖在天而文王之主則在廟.對越其在天之神,即所以事其在廟之主也.駿奔走其在廟之主,即所以事其在天之神也.

  • 73 Ode 266; Legge 1991, vol. 4, 569.
  • 74 Shijizhuan, juan 8; Shijizhuan (2011), 298.
  • 75 Zhu Shan 朱善 Shi jie yi 詩解頤, juan 4, 1b, SKQS, vol. 78, 289.

And the “Qingmiao Ode” (on the sacrifice to Wen Wang) says: “In response to him in Heaven, grandly they hurried about in the temple.”73 The note [by Zhu Xi] says: “Since they were responding to the spirit in Heaven, they grandly hurried to the tablet in the temple.”74 [The commentary of] Mr. Zhu [Shan ] from Fengcheng75 says: “Although the spirit of King Wen was in Heaven, the tablet of King Wen was in the temple. To respond to the spirit in Heaven: this was precisely the way by which they were serving to the tablet in the temple. And to hurry to the tablet in the temple: this was precisely the way by which they were serving the spirit in Heaven.”

29These citations are concluded by the above-mentioned explanation of the Lunyu sentence: “When the Lunyu says: ‘Offer as if they were present,’ as a general principle, if one considers it ‘as if they were present’ then one can know that they were not present.”

  • 76 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 136; see also Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 12, 24.

30Regarding the third issue –concerning the fact that seeing or hearing spirits is but a creation of our thoughts– Yan Mo starts with a quotation from the Shijing, which is explained with the help of two passages from the “Jiyi” chapter in the Liji:76

  • 77 The full sentence reads: 齊之日思其居處思其笑語思其志意思其所樂思其所嗜。齊三日,乃見其所為齊者。See “Jiyi” 25.2.
  • 78 The full sentence reads: 祭之日:入室,僾然必有見乎其位,周還出戶,肅然必有聞乎其容聲,出戶而聽,愾然必有聞乎其嘆息之聲。See “Jiyi”, 25.3. It is fu (...)

詩〈啇頌.那〉祭湯之詩之篇曰:湯孫奏假奏樂而格于祖考綏我思成.鄭氏註曰:安我以所思而成之,人謂神明來格也.此即禮記所謂:齊之日:思其居處,【思其】笑語,【思其】所欲所嗜,至如見所為齊者.77 及祭之日,僾然如見,肅然如聞,至愾然如聞歎息之聲.78 此之謂思成。蘓氏曰:其所見聞,本非有也,生於思耳.朱子曰:齊而思之,祭而如有見聞,則成此人矣.觀此言,則古人間有云:來格來享者皆成於思有耳,非謂真也。惟為其無在,是以故意立一二着實字目以維繫之,而其無在之意.嘗不已明明說出也.

  • 79 Ode 301; Legge 1991, vol. 4, 631.
  • 80 It is unclear whether this is Zheng Xuan or another scholar.
  • 81 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 211; C-text, no. 2.
  • 82 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 211; C-text, no. 3.
  • 83 See Su Zhe 蘓轍, Shijizhuan 詩集傳, juan 19, 17a, SKQS, vol. 70, 529: 此皆非有也而生於其思。
  • 84 The whole preceding section including the commentary by Zheng, the Liji quote (under a slightly dif (...)

The “Na Ode” from the “Eulogies of Shang” in the Shijing (an ode on the sacrifice to Tang), says: “The descendant of Tang invites him with this music (he plays music and goes to the ancestor), that he may soothe us with the realisation of our thoughts.”79 The note by Mr. Zheng80 says: “[Regarding the phrase] ‘that he soothes us with what we think and realise them,’ people say that the spirit clearly has come.” This is precisely what is said in [the “Jiyi” chapter of] the Liji: “During the days of such vigil, the mourner thinks of his departed, how and where they sat, how they smiled and spoke, what they delighted in, and what things they desired and enjoyed. [On the third day of such exercise] he sees those for whom it is employed.”81 “On the day of sacrifice, [when he enters the apartment [of the temple]], he seems to see [the deceased] in the place [where his spirit tablet is]. [After he has moved about [and performed his operations], and is leaving at the door,] he seems to be arrested by hearing the sound of his movements, and sighs as he seems to hear the sound of his sighing.”82 This is what is called “the thoughts are realised.” Mr. Su83 [Zhe 蘇轍, 1039-1112] says: “What he sees and hears is fundamentally not there, it is what comes forth from thoughts.” Master Zhu says: “Thinking about him during the vigil and offering as if one sees and hears makes him to become this person.”84 As seen from these statements, some among the ancient people said that those [spirits of the ancestors] coming to and enjoying [the sacrifices] were only created in thoughts and it is not that one can call it true. Only to make that “they are not there,” therefore one purposely added one or two full words to hold it together and have the meaning of “not being there.” Why endlessly having to express this so clearly?

  • 85 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 142; see also Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 10.

31The second quotation from the “Jiyi” chapter in the Liji also appears with other previously mentioned and additional quotations in the subsequent section on seeking blessing from the ancestors. It adds additional arguments to the “as if” interpretation.85

  • 86 There are three more quotes from “Jiyi” and two more from “Jitong”: “Jiyi”, 25.10 (Legge 1885, vol. (...)

32The fourth and final subtopic arguing for an “as if” interpretation concerns the question of whether one seeks blessings from the ancestors when conducting sacrifices. As this is the subject of a separate question, it starts, as in the other cases, with a number of quotations from the Liji. Most of these excerpts were already adduced in the previous subtopics.86 Among the new ones, some stress the importance of the heart (xin ) of the filial son. They provide an interpretation of blessings that insist on the fact that they are not sought for:

  • 87 This quotation is also analysed in Filippucci, “Explicaçam de 37 Textos Sinicos”, fols. 6r-v (Texto (...)

賢者之祭也,必受其福.非世所謂福也.福者,備也;備者,百順之名也.無所不順者,謂之備.言:內盡於己,而外順於道也.忠臣以事其君,孝子以事其親,其本一也.上則順於鬼神,外則順於君長,內則以孝於親.如此之謂備.唯賢者能備,能備然後能祭.是故,賢者之祭也:致其誠信與其忠敬,奉之以物,道之以禮,安之以樂,參之以時.明薦之而已矣.不求其為.此孝子之心也.(“Jitong”, 26.2)87

  • 88 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 236–237; C-text No. 2.

The sacrifices of worthies must have their own blessing; –not indeed what the world calls blessing. Blessing here means perfection; –it is the name given to the complete and natural discharge of all duties. When nothing is left incomplete or improperly discharged; –this is what we call perfection, implying the doing everything that should be done in one’s internal self, and externally the performance of everything according to the proper method. There is a fundamental agreement between a loyal subject in his service of his ruler and a filial son in his service of his parents. In the supernal sphere there is a compliance with [what is due to] the repose and expansion of the energies of nature; in the external sphere, a compliance with [what is due] to rulers and elders; in the internal sphere, the filial service of parents; –all this constitutes what is called perfection. It is only the able and virtuous man who can attain to this perfection; and can sacrifice when he has attained to it. Hence in the sacrifices of such a man he brings into exercise all sincerity and good faith, with all right-heartedness and reverence; he offers the [proper] things; accompanies them with the [proper] rites; employs the soothing of music; does everything suitably to the season. Thus intelligently does he offer his sacrifices, without seeking that they will do anything for them: –such is the heart and mind of a filial son.88

  • 89 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 146–147; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 25-26.

33Next comes Yan Mo’s own interpretation of these quotations:89

禮祭祖宗止是思念死者之意,非有求福也,禮經明據可考.後代祝文現在,自唐迄今,上至天子,下至士庶之家,祝文一然,並未嘗有一毫涉求福之詞.

The ritual of sacrificing to the ancestors only has the meaning of remembering the dead, and it is not that there is any seeking of blessings; the ritual scriptures are very clear and reliable in this regard. Moreover, the invocations of later generations still exist today, the texts of the invocation from the Tang till now, and from the Son of Heaven to the common families are all uniform: they never had the slightest word that involves the seeking of blessings.

34Subsequently, he quotes a passage from the Yili 儀禮, in the “Shaolao” 少牢 chapter (16) –a passage which could indicate the contrary. The quotation addresses the topic of an exchange of wine and a toast between the principal mourner and the personator of the departed.

  • 90 Selection from: Yili, “Shaolao”, 16. Yan Mo does not quote the text literally.

唯《儀禮》〈少牢〉有曰:主人酳尸,尸酢主人,佐食,取黍授尸,尸執以命祝,祝受嘏主人曰:皇尸命工祝,承致多福於汝孝孫,來汝孝孫,使汝受祿於天,冝稼於田,眉壽永年,勿替引之,之語.90

  • 91 Cf. Couvreur 1928, 603-604.

Only the “Shaolao” chapter of the Yili says: “The principal mourner toasts wine to the personator of the departed, and the personator of the departed toasts to the principal mourner; the servant at the meal takes millet and gives it to the personator of the departed who, while holding it in his hands, addresses the invocator; the invocator having received [his words] transmits the words of prosperity to the principal mourner, saying: ‘The august personator of the departed commands to [me] the invocator officer to transmit and deliver multiple blessings to you filial grandchildren. Come along filial grandchildren, so that he allows you to receive prosperity from Heaven, prosperous harvests in the fields, an old age and ten thousand years, and guide you without interruption.’”91

  • 92 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 146: 不知者因此或疑祭有言福之事其實非也; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 27.
  • 93 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 146–147.

35Yan Mo concludes from it: “The ignorant will on the basis of this probably suspect that it is a matter of talking about blessings, but in fact this is not the case.”92 In order to underscore that these words are only an “as if” ritual, he compares them to the ritual of people greeting each other or toasting to each other. In these daily enactments of civility and politeness the persons involved do not seek blessings.93

  • 94 Cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 27 (there is still an extra passage before it, giving classical exa (...)

盖古人每相見,或飲酒不論尊卑平等皆互相祝願曰:萬壽無彊,眉壽永年云云今於祭時,主人獻尸,尸酢主人,互相稱願,於禮猶然,非有求福也.且其詞曰:受祿於天,【既以祿𡚖天。】94 何嘗敢言祖宗福之也.

In fact, people in the past, when they met each other or while drinking wine, no matter which status they were would mutually exchange toasts and wishes saying: “Wish you ten thousand years and a long life,” etc. In a sacrifice when the principal mourner and personator of the deceased exchange toasts they also mutually exchange wishes, it is still part of the ritual, it is not that they seek blessings. And regarding the words “receive prosperity from Heaven,” [since one does lead the blessings back to Heaven] how does one dare to say that the ancestors would grant them blessings?

  • 95 CCT ARSI, vol. 11. 147: 稍有識者無不鄙笑其非禮.
  • 96 Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 27-28.

36In Yan Mo’s eyes, there are still some ignorant men and women who mutter some personal invocations at the moment of the sacrifices, just like they do in their prayers for the Buddha. Yet, “all those who have a bit of understanding, all jeer at this lack of ritual.”95 In the Jizukao Yan Mo concludes:96

總之:祭祀者止是沿習古禮,敬思親之心耳,非有魔鬼之說.行之,無碍於 聖教信德之事;不行之,人未觧更有 聖教深微之禮,但見其外靣,必相誣以不認祖先,大不道,非人類矣.

In conclusion: offering sacrifices only means following the custom of ancient rites, it is nothing more than an attitude of revering and remembering one’s parents, it cannot be explained by the existence of ghosts and spirits. If one practises it, it will not harm the virtue of belief of the Holy Teaching; if one does not practise it, people will not necessarily be able to explain that there are more profound rituals in the Holy Teaching, but seen from the outside, one necessarily will be accused that by not recognising one’s ancestors one stands in great opposition to the Way and does not belong to humankind at all.

  • 97 Zürcher 1994, 40ff.

37With this conclusion Yan Mo balances what does not harm the Christian belief and what could be in opposition to the Way. He thus succinctly points at what Erik Zürcher has called the “cultural imperative,”97 i.e., the obligation to conform to what was considered zheng in the religious, ritual, social and political senses. This imperative also finds its original expression in the Liji.

Coping with “as if” rituals

  • 98 Berling 1987; Watson 1988, 10; Bell 1997, 191–197; Seligman et al. 2008, 4.

38The reading of the Liji texts by Yan Mo sheds new light not only on the way in which the participants in the rites controversy dealt with the rituals but also on the way in which the Liji could be read by Chinese scholars from the low-literati class. This (re)reading was the result of an intercultural interaction with European missionaries, who had raised questions about the Chinese ancestral rites in such a manner that it motivated scholars such as Yan Mo to take under consideration rarely raised interrogations. It led to a somewhat new reading that did not violate the classical tradition. Canonical Chinese texts indeed rarely explain the meaning of rituals, while archetypal commentaries often fail to provide the reason for the rituals. Thus they hardly ever discuss in detail ritual questions such as whether the spirit of the ancestors is really present at the moment of the sacrifice or not. As several modern authors have pointed out, the stress is put on doing and on the correct performance (orthopraxis),98 not on the reason behind the performance.

39As could be seen in the quotations by Yan Mo, the Liji itself is rather discrete on the topic of the presence of the ancestors. It merely uses some expressions that can be interpreted as subjunctive “as if” sentences. Such “as if” sentences occur rather frequently in Liji. Here are some additional examples related to descriptions of sacrifices and other rituals:

始死,充充如有窮;既殯,瞿瞿如有求而弗得;既葬,皇皇如有望而弗至.練而慨然,祥而廓然.
(“Tangong, shang” 檀弓上, 3.19)

  • 99 Legge 1885, vol. 27, 129; C-text No. 19.

When [a father] has just died, [the son] should appear quite overcome, and as if he were at his wits’ end; when the corpse has been put into the coffin, he should cast quick and sorrowful glances around, as if he were seeking for something and could not find it; when the interment has taken place, he should look alarmed and restless, as if he were looking for someone who does not arrive; at the end of the first year’s mourning, he should look sad and disappointed; and at the end of the second year, he should have a vague and unreliant look.99

凡祭,容貌顏色,如見所祭者.
(“Yuzao” 玉藻, 13.32)

  • 100 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 26; C-text No. 54.

In general at sacrifices, the bearing and appearance [of the worshippers] made it appear as if they saw those to whom they were sacrificing.100

盛服奉承而進之,洞洞乎,屬屬乎,如弗勝,如將失之,其孝敬之心至也與!
(“Jiyi,” 25.10)

  • 101 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 214; C-text No. 8. This passage is also quoted by Yan Mo under the question re (...)

In coming in with the things which they carry, how grave and still are they! How absorbed in what they do! As if they were not able to sustain their weight, as if they would let them fall: —is not theirs the highest filial reverence?101

孝子之祭也,盡其愨而愨焉,盡其信而信焉,盡其敬而敬焉,盡其禮而不過失焉。進退必敬,如親聽命,則或使之也.
(“Jiyi,” 25.12)

  • 102 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 214–215; C-text No. 9.

The filial son, in sacrificing, is never able to exhaust his earnest purpose, his sincerity, and reverence. He observes every rule, without transgression or shortcoming. His reverence appears in his movements of advancing and retiring, as if he were hearing the orders [of his parents], or as if they were perhaps directing him.102

孝子如執玉,如奉盈,洞洞屬屬然,如弗勝,如將失之.(“Jiyi,” 25.14)

  • 103 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 216; C-text No. 11.

A filial son moves as if he were carrying a jade symbol, or bearing a full vessel. Still and grave, absorbed in what he is doing, he seems as if he were unable to sustain the burden, and in danger of letting it fall.103

及祭之日,顏色必溫,行必恐,如懼不及愛然.其奠之也,容貌必溫,身必詘,如語焉而未之然.宿者皆出,其立卑靜以正,如將弗見然.及祭之後,陶陶遂遂,如將復入然.
(“Jiyi,” 25.47)

  • 104 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 234; C-text No. 41.

When the day of sacrifice arrived, the rule was that his countenance should be mild, and his movements show an anxious dread, as if he feared his love were not sufficient. When he put down his offerings, it was required that his demeanour should be mild, and his body bent, as if [his parents] would speak [to him] and had not yet done so; when the officers assisting had all gone out, he stood lowly and still, though correct and straight, as if he were about to lose the sight [of his parents]. After the sacrifice, he looked pleased and expectant, as if they would again enter.104

孔子在衛,有送葬者,而夫子觀之,曰:「善哉為喪乎!足以為法矣,小子識之.」子貢曰:「夫子何善爾也?」曰:「其往也如慕,其反也如疑.」子貢曰:「豈若速反而虞乎?」子曰:「小子識之,我未之能行也.」
(“Tangong, shang” 檀弓上, 3.19)

  • 105 Legge 1885, vol. 27, 136–137; C-text No. 46.

When Confucius was in Wei, there was [a son] following his [father’s] coffin to the grave. After Confucius had looked at him, he said, “How admirably did he manage this mourning rite! He is fit to be a pattern. Remember it, my little children.” Zigong said, “What did you, Master, see in him so admirable?” “He went,” was the reply, “as if he were full of eager affection. He came back [looking] as if he were in doubt.” “Would it not have been better, if he had come back hastily, to present the offering of repose?” The Master said, “Remember it, my children. I have not been able to perform it.”105

其往送也,望望然、汲汲然如有追而弗及也;其反哭也,皇皇然若有求而弗得也.故其往送也如慕,其反也如疑.求而無所得之也,入門而弗見也,上堂又弗見也,入室又弗見也.亡矣喪矣!不可復見矣!笔哭泣辟踴,盡哀而止矣.心悵焉愴焉、惚焉愾焉,心絕志悲而已矣.
(“Wen sang” 問喪, 36)

  • 106 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 376; C-text No. 3.

When [the mourners] went, accompanying the coffin [to the grave], they looked forward, with an expression of eagerness, as if they were following someone, and unable to get up to him. When returning to wail, they looked disconcerted, as if they were seeking someone whom they could not find. Hence, when escorting [the coffin], they appeared full of affectionate desire; when returning, they appeared full of perplexity. They had sought the [deceased], and could not find him; they entered the gate, and did not see him; they went up to the hall, and still did not see him; they entered his chamber, and still did not see him; he was gone; he was dead; they should see him again nevermore. Therefore they wailed, wept, beat their breasts, and leapt, giving full vent to their sorrow, before they ceased. Their minds were disappointed, pained, fluttered, and indignant. They could do nothing more with their wills; they could do nothing but continue sad.106

  • 107 Watson 1988, 9-10.

40These “as if” pertain to the emotions (such as affection and doubt) and the gestures (when carrying objects, searching, following) used by the mourners, but also in general to their relationship to the presence of the deceased (as if hearing them; as if seeing those to whom they were sacrificing). They seem to confirm that in China all rituals associated with death are performed “as if” there were a continued relationship between the living and the dead, as pointed out by James Watson. It is irrelevant whether or not participants actually believe that the spirit survives or that the presentation of the offerings has an effect on the deceased. What matters is that the rites are performed according to the accepted procedure.107

  • 108 Seligman et al. 2008, 8, 11, 20, 117, etc.

41These “as if” sentences can also be connected to the recent interpretation of ritual in general as presented by Adam B. Seligman, Robert P. Weller, Michael J. Puett and Bennett Simon. These authors argue that ritual creates a subjunctive, an “as if” or “could be” universe. It is this very creative act that makes our shared social world possible. Creating a shared subjunctive, they argue, recognises the inherent ambiguity built into social life and its relationships –including our relations with the natural world. They contrast the ritual views with what they call the “sincere” views on the world. The latter are not focused on an “as if,” but on an “as is” vision of what often becomes a totalistic, unambiguous vision of reality “as it really is.” The tropes of sincerity are present in our overwhelming concern with “authenticity,” with individual choice, with the belief that we can get at the unalterable heart of what we “really” feel and think. Sincerity seems by its very definition to exclude ambiguity.108

  • 109 Compare with Michael Puett’s interpretation of Lunyu 3.12: 祭神如神在 “He sacrificed to the spirits, as (...)
  • 110 For very few scattered references of denial in other classical texts, selected by François Noël, an (...)
  • 111 Ing 2012, 209.
  • 112 Ing 2012, 209.

42As pointed out before, the “as if” sentences quoted from the Liji by Yan Mo leave open a certain ambiguity. In no case is it explicitly mentioned that ancestors are not present at the sacrifice or that they actually drink and eat the offerings, or to the contrary that they do not do so.109 The commentaries sometimes give some hindsight. They are more explicit and sometimes question their presence. But they do not so in a systematic way, and they most often leave open a space of ambiguity. Even the more explicit phrase of the “Tangong” chapter, “[the dead] have never been seen to partake of these things” (未有見其饗之), which seems to deny their partaking, is not conclusive. The most critical readings are those by Song scholars such as Su Zhe and Zhu Xi who claimed that what the performer sees and hears is the creation of this own thought.110 Thus the Liji, “as a text about ritual theory”111 seems to confirm that these rituals create an “as if” or shared subjunctive world, where performers temporarily live and act “as if” there were living in a world of order, facing a moment of chaos and disruption created by the death of a person. Yet one of the questions, already pointed out by Michael Ing, is whether this ritual world is understood as an illusionary world distinct from the real world, or rather as the real world in the sense that the ritual performers aspire for the dysfunctional and chaotic world to be ordered by ritual.112

  • 113 E.g. CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 133, 134. See other examples: 168, 170, 176, 181, 182, 191, 198, 201.
  • 114 E.g. the last sentence of the section on the sacrifices: CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 139. Other examples: 14 (...)
  • 115 E.g. the last sentence of the section on the sacrifices: CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 139. Other examples of (...)

43There are indeed different ways in which Yan Mo deals with the ambiguity related to the “as if” world. In the first place, his anxiety is not related to the correct performance of the ritual, on the doing, as it is often the primary concern of Chinese ritual texts as the Liji. He pays attention to the correct belief associated to the ritual. The underlying assumption is that if there is a wrong belief –namely that the spirits of the ancestors are in the tablet, that they eat and grant blessings–, this would not only be wrong (wu , miu )113 but even heterodox (xie ).114 To Yan, it is clearly the case with (the Buddhist practice of) burning money, which is contrary to the correct rituals (zheng li 正禮).115 How to cope with this anxiety? Yan Mo’s endeavour consists in taking away the inherent ambiguity present in the Liji texts. His interpretation, sustained by classical authors, strongly affirms that the spirits do not eat or drink the offerings, that they are not in the tablets, and that they do not grant blessings. He affirms through several means: by strong statements (e.g. 不在可知矣 “one can know that they were not present”), by strong negations (e.g. 非有求福也 “it is not that there is any seeking of blessing”; 其實非也 “[the matter of talking about blessings] in fact is not the case”) or by claiming that such assertions were never expressed or were never heard (e.g. 未嘗有說鬼神湏飲食者 “[ancient people] never said that the ghosts and spirits necessarily need to drink and eat it”; 未嘗謂神在是 “they never said that the spirit was there”: 未嘗有一毫涉求福之詞 “they never had the slightest word that involved the seeking of blessings”). Yan Mo’s own position leaves little room for ambiguity in interpretation. He comes to this conclusion by evoking traditional or less traditional commentaries (by Chen Hao, Zhu Xi, Su Zhe and Zhu Shan), by using other classical texts and their commentaries (cf. King Wen being in Heaven from the Shijing), by mentioning other texts (such as the invocation texts from the Tang to his own time) and by speaking about everyday rituals (such as greeting or toasting).

44With his statements Yan Mo does not put the sincerity of the rituals into question nor does he adopt an antiritualistic attitude. He rather takes away the ambiguity by insisting on these rituals being merely done “as if.” Yan thus inserts a new sincerity into the ritual, namely by proposing what according to him “really” happens at the ritual. In his eyes, the performers are rational agents who know that the ancestors are not in the tablet. In order to save rituals as rituals, the alternative being the complete rejection of ancestral rites as heterodox rites, he takes the “as if” as the “real.” He resolves the ambiguity to forge a pure individual consciousness, by insisting that it is merely an “as if” situation. This “authentic” belief makes it for him permissible to continue performing the ritual as a rite that expresses filial piety. It is not opposed to the “virtue of belief” extolled by Christianity. In fact, to him, it is because of this pure belief that the ritual really works.

  • 116 Puett & Gross-Loh 2016, 32.
  • 117 Puett 2013, 98.
  • 118 Ing 2012, 206–209.

45In this way, Yan Mo, on the one hand, puts himself into the “as if” tradition. But, on the other hand, he also gives a novel interpretation to it. For Yan Mo, “family members,” as pointed out by Michael Puett, “needed to make the sacrifices because acting as if the ancestors were there brought about change within themselves.”116 In this regard, Yan Mo followed the tradition. However, Puett has also noted that in this tradition: “The concern is not with belief but rather with creating a ritual space wherein one can act as if a certain situation were the case. But, and this is the key point, the ritual itself serves to underline this ‘as if’ quality. The ritual operates precisely by emphasising the disjunction between the world being created by the ritual space and the world that exists outside that of the ritual space.”117 Yan Mo gives a different interpretation: the concern is with belief; because affirming that the ancestors are not there creates the ritual space. It is only because one believes that the ancestors are not there, and that one only acts as if they were there that they are allowed to be practised and can bring about (the correct) change within themselves. Thus, as suggested by Michael Ing, the ritual is not opposed to the real world but is the real world as it acts on ordinary life.118 Just like quotidian enactments of civility and politeness enable the maintenance of the shared social world without anyone believing that blessings are exchanged, sacrifices for the ancestors are allowed to be performed for the shared world with the ancestors, without believing that they grant any blessings.

46In order to underscore the characteristic of Yan Mo’s approach, one may compare it to his likely attitude towards the Eucharist. One may assume that Chinese Christians, such as Yan Mo, did not consider the Eucharist (which being called Sheng ji 聖祭 is also a ji ) an “as if” ritual, but believed that Christ was “really” present in the host; at the same time, Yan Mo believed that the ancestors were certainly not present in the ancestral tablet, and thus considered these sacrifices as merely “as if” rituals. But in both cases the rituals were to be performed. As such he showed that for him there was no opposition between the ritual and real world. Interestingly enough, his vision underlines that it is not necessary to “believe” in a ritual in order to perform it, but that the inner state of belief will determine whether one is allowed to perform it. In the case of the Eucharist the authentic belief of the real (and not just an “as if”) presence of Christ is the reason to perform it or to participate in it. In the case of ancestral sacrifices, the belief in the mere “as if” presence of the spirit of the ancestors allows them to be performed; the contrary would not be permissible.

47To conclude, Yan Mo read the Liji from a new perspective. The questions he raised to the Liji were inspired by interrogations formulated by the European missionaries. His understanding is certainly not the only reading one can have of the Liji, but it hopefully sheds some new light on the “as if” characteristic of this text and how to cope with its ambiguity.

Bibliographie

Databases

CCT-Database: Ad Dudink & Nicolas Standaert, Chinese Christian Texts Database (http://www.arts.kuleuven.be/sinology/cct).

Scripta Sinica 漢籍電子文獻資料庫, Academia Sinica, Taipei.

C-texts: 中國哲學書電子化計劃: 耶穌會文獻匯編: http://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&res=804348

***

Ames, Roger T., Henry Rosemont (trans.), 1998, The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation. New York: Ballantine.

Bell, Catherine, 1997, Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Berling, Judith A., 1987, “Orthopraxy,” In The Encyclopedia of Religion, edited by Mircea Eliade, vol. 11, 129–132. New York: Macmillan.

Battaglini, Marina, 1996, “The Jesuit Manuscripts on China Preserved in the Biblioteca Nazionale in Rome,” in Western Humanistic Culture Presented to China by Jesuit Missionaries (xvii-xviii centuries), edited by F. Masini, 11-110. Rome: Institutum Historicum S. I..

Chan, Albert, 2002, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome: A Descriptive Catalogue: Japonica-Sinica I-IV. New York: M. E. Sharpe.

Chen Wenning 陳文寧, 2017, Lun Ming Qing Zhongguo shiren xintu dui jizuli de tansuo: yi Yesuhui Luomaguan cang Ming Qing shiren xintu jili wenxian 28 pian wei kaocha fanwei 論明清中國士人信徒對祭祖禮的探討:以耶穌會羅馬館藏明清士人信徒祭禮文獻28篇為考察範圍 (An Analysis of Ming and Qing Dynasties Chinese Scholar-Believers’ Studies on Ancestral Offering Ritual: Based on 28 Documents, Collected by the Society of Jesus Roman Archives, Written by Ming and Qing Dynasties Chinese Scholar-Believers on the Offering Ritual). Hong Kong: Xianggang qingsen wenhua.

Couvreur, Séraphin (trans.), 1928, Cérémonial. Sien-hsien: Impr. de la mission catholique.

Du Halde, Jean-Baptiste (ed.), 1736, Description géographique, historique, chronologique, politique, et physique de l’empire de la Chine et de la Tartarie chinoise, 4 vols. Paris: Mercier, 1735 ; La Haye: Henri Scheurleer.

Ing, Michael D., 2012, The Dysfunction of Ritual in Early Confucianism. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Jizukao 祭祖考 [Investigation into Ancestral Worship], by Yan Mo 嚴謨, ARSI, Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 41/1a; CCT ARSI vol. 11: 5–28.

Lau, D. C., (trans.), 1979, Confucius, The Analects (Lun yü). Harmondsworth: Penguin books.

Legge, James (trans.), 1885, The Lî Kî, in The Sacred Books of the East, edited by F. Max Müller, vols. 27 and 28. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Legge, James (trans.), 1991, The Chinese Classics, 5 vols., repr. Taibei: SMC Publishing.

Liji jishuo daquan 禮記集說大全 [Complete Collection of Compiled Statements about the Liji] (1+30 juan), edited by Hu Guang 胡廣, Chen Hao 陳澔, et al., 1605, (Harvard-Yenching Rare Book T 110 1247b (36-53))

Liji zhuzi suoyin 禮記逐字索引 (A Concordance to the Liji), (The ICS Ancient Chinese Text Concordance Series), 1993. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press.

Lishi tiaowen 李師條問 [Successive Questions of Father Li], by Yan Mo 嚴謨, ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/2; CCT ARSI vol. 11: 115–216.

Lin Jinshui 林金水, 1993/2, Ming Qing zhi ji shidafu yu Zhongxi liyi zhi zheng 明清之际士大夫与中西礼仪之争 (Chinese Rites vs. Western Rites: Debates among Traditional Scholars of the Ming-Qing Transitional Period), Lishi yanjiu 历史研究: 20-35.

Mémoires concernant l’histoire, les sciences, les arts, les mœurs, les usages, &c. des Chinois, par les missionnaires de Pékin, 1776-1814, 17 vols. Paris: Pierre Le-Mur – Treuttel et Würtz.

Noll, Ray R. (ed.), 1992, 100 Roman Documents Concerning the Chinese Rites Controversy (1645–1941), translated by Donald F., St. Sure. San Francisco: Ricci Institute.

Plaks, Andrew (trans.), 2003, Ta Hsueh and Chung Yung: The Highest Order of Cultivation and On the Practice of the Mean. Harmondsworth: Penguin books.

Puett, Michael, 2013, “Critical Approaches to Religion in China,” Critical Research on Religion 1: 95–101.

Puett, Michael, 2015, “Ritual and Ritual Obligations: Perspectives on Normativity from Classical China,” The Journal of Value Inquiry 49:4: 543–550.

Puett, Michael, Gross-Loh, Christine, 2016, The Path: What Chinese Philosophers Can Teach Us About the Good Life. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Ricci, Matteo, 1942-1949, Fonti Ricciane, 3 vols., edited by Pasquale M. d’Elia. Roma: La Libreria dello Stato.

Rule, Paul, 1986, K’ung-tzu or Confucius? The Jesuit Interpretation of Confucianism. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Shi jie yi 詩解頤 [Odes Breaking into a Smile] (4 juan), Zhu Shan 朱善 (Ming), SKQS vol. 78: 191-306.

Shizhuan pangtong 詩傳旁通 [Extensive Knowledge of the Comments on the Odes] (15 juan), ed. Liang Yi 梁益 (Yuan) SKQS, vol. 76: 789–986.

Shijizhuan 詩集傳 [Collected Comments on the Odes] (20 juan), anon. Su Zhe 蘓轍 (Song), SKQS vol. 70: 311-533.

Shijizhuan 詩集傳 [Collected Comments on the Odes], anon. Zhu Xi 朱熹, 2011. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.

Seligman, Adam B., Robert P. Weller, Michael J. Puett and Bennett Simon, 2008, Ritual and Its Consequences: An Essay on the Limits of Sincerity. Oxford: Oxford University Univ. Press.

Standaert, Nicolas, 1995, The Fascinating God: A Challenge to Modern Chinese Theology Presented by a Text on the Name of God Written by a 17th Century Chinese Student of Theology. Roma: Pontificia Universita Gregoriana.

Standaert, Nicolas, 2000, “4.1.6. Rites Controversy,” in Handbook of Christianity in China: Volume One (635-1800), edited by N. Standaert, 680–688. Leiden: Brill.

Standaert, Nicolas, 2008, The Interweaving of Rituals: Funerals in the Cultural Exchange between China and Europe. Seattle: Univ. of Washington Press.

Standaert, Nicolas, 2012, Chinese voices in the rites controversy: travelling books, community networks, intercultural arguments. Roma: Institutum Historicum SOcietatis Iesu.

Standaert, Nicolas, 2020, (Zhong Mingdan 钟鸣旦), “Yingdui mohuxing: Liji zhi ‘niru’ liyi zai shiqi shiji de wenhuajian quanshi” 应对模糊性:《礼记》之“拟如”礼仪在十七世纪的文化间诠释 (Coping with Ambiguity: Seventeenth-Century Intercultural Interpretations of ‘as if’ Rituals in the Liji), trans. Wang Qi 王琦, corr. Chen Yanrong 陈妍蓉, in Xixue dongjian yanjiu di jiu qi: Ming Qing shiqi luojixue yu ziran kexue de dongjian 《西学东渐研究》第九辑:《明清时期逻辑学与自然科学的东渐》, edited by Zhongshan daxue xixue dongjian wenxianguan 中山大学西学东渐文献馆, 266-294. Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan.

Summarium Nouorum Autenticorum Testimoniorum tam Europæorum, quam Sinensium nouissimè è China allatorum, circa veritatem, & subsistentiam facti, cui innititur Decretum sa: me: Alexandri VII. Editum die 23 Martij 1656, et permissiuum Rituum Sinensium; Itemque circa usum vocum Tien, & Xam tj ac Tabellæ Kim Tien Sanctissimo Domino Nostro Clementi Papæ XI. Oblatum a PP. Francisco Noel, & Casparo Castner S.I. Procuratoribus Illmorum, & Rmorum Episcoporum Macaensis, Nankinensis, Ascalonensis, & Electi Andreuillensis, Et pro Missionibus S.I. in Imperio Chinæ, & adiacentibus Regnis, 1703. Rome.

Wang Ding’an 王定安, 2018, “Tianru sangjili zaoyu zhi bian zhong bian: Rujiao ‘zong jiaoxing’ de bijiao quanshi” 天儒喪祭禮遭遇之辯中辨:儒家“宗教性”的比較詮釋 (Chinese Catholics’ Textual Research, Analysis and Defense on Rites in Mid Qing: Comparative Research on the “Religiosity” of Confucian Rites), Hanyu jidujiao xueshu lunping 漢語基督教學術論評 (Sino-Christian Studies: An International Journal of Bible, Theology & Philosophy) 25: 93–128.

Watson, James L., 1988, “The Structure of Chinese Funerary Rites: Elementary Forms, Ritual Sequence, and the Primacy of Performance,” in Death Ritual in Late Imperial and Modern China edited by James L. Watson and Evelyn S. Rawski, 3-19. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Yili zhuzi suoyin 儀禮逐字索引 (A Concordance to the Yili), (The ICS Ancient Chinese Text Concordance Series), 1992. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press.

Zürcher, Erik, 1994, “Jesuit Accommodation and the Chinese Cultural Imperative”, in The Chinese Rites Controversy (Monumenta Serica Monograph Series 33), edited by David E. Mungello, 31–64. Nettetal: Steyler Verlag.

Zürcher, Erik, 2007, Kouduo richao, Li Jiubiao’s Diary of Oral Admonitions: A Late Ming Christian Journal. Translated, with Introduction and Notes by Erik Zürcher, (Monumenta Serica Monograph Series LVI/1-2), 2 vols. Nettetal: Steyler Verlag.

Annexes

Abbreviations

ARSI, Jap. Sin.: Archivum Romanum Societatis Iesu, Japonica-Sinica Collection, 2002. Rome. See also: Albert Chan, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome: A Descriptive Catalogue: Japonica-Sinica I-IV. New York: M. E. Sharpe.

BAV: Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, 1995. Rome. See also: Paul Pelliot, Inventaire sommaire des manuscrits et imprimés chinois de la Bibliothèque Vaticane, revised and edited by Takata Tokio. Kyoto: Istituto Italiano di Cultura.

BNC.VE: Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale Vittorio Emanuele II. National Library, Rome.

CCT ARSI: Yesuhui Luoma dang’anguan Ming Qing tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 (Chinese Christian Texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus), 2002, 12 vols., edited by Nicolas Standaert (鐘鳴旦) and Ad Dudink (杜鼎克). Taibei: Ricci Institute.

HCC: Handbook of Christianity in China: Volume One (635-1800), 2001, edited by Nicolas Standaert. Leiden: Brill.

SKQS: (Wenyuange) Siku quanshu (文淵閣) 四庫全書 (Complete Books in the Four Treasuries (Wenyuan Pavilion Edition)), 1500 vols, 1983–1986. Taibei: Commercial Press (see also electronic version).

Notes

1 The author thanks Carine Defoort for her suggestions on the earlier version of this paper, and Anne Cheng, Michael Ing and Michael Puett for the suggestions made at the Liji Conference, Paris, June 2018. Michele Ruggieri (1543–1607) was the first (in 1593) to publish a translation of a Confucian classic into a European language, but this was a very fragmentary treatment of the shortest classic (Daxue), published in Antonio Possevino’s (1559–1611) Bibliotheca selecta. He also made a manuscript translation into Spanish of the Daxue, the Zhonggyong, and parts of the Lunyu 論語 in 1590, but this text was only published in Spain in 1921. Matteo Ricci (1552–1610) is said to have translated the Daxue, the Zhonggyong, and the Lunyu, but this text has not been found yet and was never published. In 1662, the Jesuits published in Sapientia Sinica a full Latin translation of the Daxue (in Jianchang, Jiangxi). The Jesuit translation of the Zhongyong was entitled Sinarum scientia politico-moralis; the first part was printed in Canton in 1667; the remainder in Goa in 1669. Confucius Sinarum Philosophus, sive Scientia sinensis latine exposita, was published in Paris (D. Horthemels), 1686–1687. For references and modern translations, see CCT-Database under Mungello (1982), Lühmann (2003), Meynard (2011), Lo Sardo (2016) and Meynard & Villasante (2018).

2 There is a short anonymous description entitled “Le Li ki, cinquième Livre Canonique du premier Ordre” in Du Halde 1735, vol. 2, 318-319; & Du Halde 1736, 381-382. Referring to Chinese commentators it contains a relatively negative appreciation of the Liji: the text is regarded as corrupted; it contains customs that are no longer practised; it should therefore be read with much circumspection. Volume 2 of Mémoires concernant… les Chinois (1777) is entirely devoted to “L’Antiquité des Chinois prouvée par les monuments” by Joseph-Marie Amiot, S. J. (1718–1793): it contains a “Table chronologique des auteurs qui ont écrit sur le Li-ki,” with a description of 43 commentators on the Liji (210-219). Volume 4 of Mémoires concernant… les Chinois (1779) contains a long article on “Doctrine ancienne et nouvelle des Chinois sur la piété filiale” (1-298) by Pierre-Martial Cibot, S. J. (1727-1780): it includes a translation of selected passages on filial piety from the Liji: “Extraits du Li-Ki sur la piété filiale” (6-28).

3 Similar questions were raised regarding the sacrifice to Confucius, but will not be discussed here since they are not directly the object of the Liji.

4 Ricci 1942–1949, vol. 1, 117–118; translation Rule 1986, 49 (slightly adapted).

5 For a larger discussion of these terms, as well as the terms “civil” and “political,” and this quotation, see Standaert 2008, 88–90.

6 Ex more (sinico): Ricci 1942–1949, vol. 2, 565, 628; conforme ao custume da China: vol. 2, 499.

7 For this background, see among others, Standaert 1995, chap. 1; and Standaert 2000.

8 E.g. “Explicaçam de 37 Textos Sinicos, e reposta aos Apontamtos feitos sobre elles, com os quaes se pretende provar, que os Chinas ex vide suas Doutrinas e Ritos antigos, pedem merces à seus defuntos esperao nelles e crem que decem as Taboinas e seus miaos ou Aulas destinadas pera seu culto” [Explanation of 37 Chinese Texts, and response to the points made on them, with which some pretend to prove, that the Chinese as can be seen from their Doctrines and ancient Rites, ask favours from their deceased ones, putting hope in for them and they believe that they descend in the tablets, and their miaos [=temples] or halls destined for the cult of them] (BNC.VE, Ges. 1248/1; 1250/1 (in Latin), 1383/11 (in Latin)). It discusses direct Chinese quotations from Liji (and others) with the annotations. See also his “Tractatus P.is Francisci Philippucci de Ritibus Sinicis quem in suo praeludio promittit” (BVE Ges. 1248/3), which among others includes an extensive discussion of ji , with many quotes from the Liji. Filippucci also redacted a short text “Notae super Lyky (BNC.VE, Ges. 1249/9, cc.497r-510r). See Battaglini 1996, 38–40.

9 See Noll 1992, 9.

10 See Standaert 2012, 23, 47ff.

11 The ARSI collection has four ancient editions of the Liji: (Minjia sanding) Liji jishuo (閔家三訂) 禮記集說 (1630) (Jap. Sin. II, 103–104) and a revised edition of the same (1633) (Jap. Sin. II, 111–112); Liji zhushu 禮記註疏 (1639) (Jap. Sin II, 105-108), and Zhang hanlin jiaozheng Liji daquan 張翰林校正禮記大全 (n.d.) (Jap. Sin. II, 109–110); see Chan 2002, 414 – 418. Chen Hao 陳澔 Liji jishuo 禮記集說 (1633) (ARSI, Jap. Sin. II, 111–112; Chan 2002, 418) has on the cover the handwriting of François Noël; several texts by Yan Mo (e.g. Tiaowen jida 條問集答 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/2; Chan 2002, 45) have the (classification) notes by Kasper Castner.

12 For an overview of these quotes, see Standaert 2012, 69ff. The quotes from Yan Mo can be found in Summarium Nouorum Autenticorum Testimoniorum, 66–69; the Liji quote from Liji jishuo in Summarium Nouorum Autenticorum Testimoniorum, 73 – 74 (see Standaert 2012, 63–64).

13 On his life and publications, see Standaert 1995, chap. 1.

14 Longxi xianzhi 龍溪縣志 [1762 (Qianlong 27), 1879 (Guangxu 5)], (Zhongguo fangzhi congshu 中國方志叢書 90), 174 (juan 14, 28b); also in Chongzuan Fujian tongzhi 重纂福建通志, juan 166: see Lin Jinshui 1993, 25 n. 4.

15 Yan Mo, Lishi tiaowen: first line: 閩漳嚴保琭謨定猷氏集答父嚴盎博削贊化思參氏鑒訂.

16 Longxi xianzhi (1762 (Qianlong 27), 1879 (Guangxu 5)), (Zhongguo fangzhi congshu 90), 173 (juan 14, 25b).

17 Zürcher 2007, 13, 62.

18 See CCT-Database.

19 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 41/1a; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 5-28. See CCT-Database and Chan 2002, 62–63.

20 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/2; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 115–216. See CCT-Database and Chan 2002, 45–46. See also BAV, Borgia Cinese 316.10; The two versions have the same contents, but there is a different arrangement of the questions.

21 In ARSI, Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 41/1; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 1–46: these two works are bound together with Bianji 辨祭. The cover, written by K. Castner, bears an inscription in Latin: “Libellus de examine/oblationis rite orationes illarum/quae colen fieri in oblatio/nibus, item tabulae quae defunctis/ponitur rite discursus de litera çi/contra Pe. Varro ordinis Praedica/factus a Jen Paulo litterato Christ./a FuKien.” At the end of the other version of Bianji (Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 40/6a; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 59) reference is made to Muzhukao.

22 Mentioned at the end of both versions of the Bianji (CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 46, 59) it was written prior to Bianji.

23 A collective letter seeking José Monteiro S. J. (Mu Ruose 穆若瑟, 1646–1720)’s help by six Christians, including Yan Mo, dates from this period. See Caogao 草稿 [A Rough Draft]: ARSI, Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 41/2a, CCT ARSI, vol. 63-65. To this letter is added the Bianji houzhi 辯祭後誌 [Post-scriptum to the Arguments against Sacrifices], which is dated autumn 1695. See Jap.Sin.I [38/42] 41/2b, CCT ARSI, vol. 67-72. There was also a further letter to Monteiro and a letter to a certain Father Li (probably S. Rodrigues), in which it said that the Christians were refused confession for one year. These most probably date from the same period. See Caogao (chaobai) 草稿 (抄白) [A Rough Draft (copy)] ARSI, Jap. Sin. I [38/42] 41/4; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 91-92, 97. Attached to it is a table of contents of the Lishi tiaowen (93-95) and a revised version of two chapters of the same work (99-113). See also Chan 2002, 64-67.

24 Caogao (chaobai) 草稿 (抄白); CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 97.

25 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 42/2; CCT ARSI, vol. 9, 21–50; on all these texts, see CCT database and Chan2002.

26 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/9.b; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 257-268.

27 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/7.b; CCT ARSI, vol. 10, 115–144.

28 Xia Dachang 夏大常 (Mathias) is the compiler of several other texts which accumulate Liji quotes and the corresponding commentaries, e.g. Liji jili paozhi 禮記祭禮泡製 (ARSI, Jap. Sin. I, 39.4; CCT ARSI, vol. 10, 79-104) or Liji jizhi cuoyan 禮記祭制撮言 (1688) (ARSI, Jap. Sin. I, 39.4; CCT ARSI, vol. 10, 105-114).

29 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42); CCT ARSI, vol. 10, 459–478.

30 These and other texts by Chinese Christians on the ancestral rites, 28 in total originating from the ARSI, Jap. Sin. I collection, are also discussed in Chen 2017.

31 For a good overview of these different orders, see Wang 2018, 98–99. There is also a difference in the order of the questions between the two versions of Lishi tiaowen: ARSI, Jap. Sin. I (38/42) 40/2; CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 115–216 and BAV, Borgia Cinese 316.10, and also with the table of contents included in Caogao (chaobai) 草稿 (抄白), CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 93–95.

32 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 129–139.

33 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 141–147.

34 The text is not punctuated; we mainly follow the punctuation as it was adopted in the Scripta sinica database for Jizukao (which is punctuated).

35 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 117–119.

36 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 117: 秦漢諸儒集錄虞夏啇周典禮六經之一.

37 祭義檀弓祭統禮噐郊特牲曲禮文王世子玉藻鄉飲酒義月令.

38 Chen Hao’s commentary was widely used because it was concise and easy to understand for students. The third revised edition appeared in 1633 (ARSI, Jap. Sin. II, 111). Chan 2002, 414–415. The work served as basis for the Liji commentary included in the Ming textbook for the preparation of the state examinations, Wujing daquan 五經大全 [Complete Collection of the Five Classics] (1413), edited by Hu Guang 胡廣 (1369–1418).

39 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 129-132; compare with Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 7ff.

40 It is not clear to what extent Yan Mo adopts a classical interpretation and adds his own commentary in this annotation. The explanation of 主也 can be found in several annotations of Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 to Liji and Yili. In Liang Yi 梁益 (Yuan), Shizhuan pangtong 詩傳旁通 [Extensive Knowledge of the Comments on the Odes], juan 6, 11a-b, SKQS, vol. 76, 860 one finds the following similar explanation: 古者祭祀必有尸尸主也。筮擇一人使坐以象神謂之尸.

41 In this paper the numbers of the chapters and paragraphs of the Liji have been adopted from Liji zhuzi suoyin (1993).

42 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 212; C-text, No. 5. In this paper the translation by Legge is adopted, sometimes with slight changes.

43 Liji has instead of .

44 Liji jishuo daquan, juan 22, 19b; the original text has a question mark: 主人之自盡亦豈知神之所饗必在於此[]。且以表其心而已矣。Compare also with Jizukao: 註。主人自盡。亦豈知神之所饗必在於此。亦以表其心而已矣。(CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 7).

45 Legge 1885, vol. 27, 169; C-text, No. 141.

46 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 237–238; C-text No. 3.

47 Furthermore there are two additional quotes from “Jitong” [“Jitong”, 26.6 (Legge 1885, vol. 28, 240-241; C-text no. 8); “Jitong”, 26.15 (Legge 1885, vol. 28, 246; C-text no. 19)] and one from “Liqi” 禮器 [“Liqi”, 10.33 (Legge 1885, vol. 27, 412; C-text no. 31)]. 一獻質三獻文五獻察七獻神。Compare also with the versions (with annotations) in Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 7ff.

48 Liji jishuo daquan, juan 22, 19b: 主人之自盡亦豈知神之所饗必在於此[]。且以表其心而已矣。In Jizukao: 註。主人自盡。亦豈知神之所饗必在於此。亦以表其心而已矣。(CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 7).

49 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 132-139. For a partial Latin translation of his commentaries, based on Jizukao (CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 21-28) see Summarium Nouorum Autenticorum Testimoniorum, 67–68.

50 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 132; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 21.

51 祭如在祭神如神在。子曰:「吾不與祭,如不祭。」Translation: Legge 1991, vol. 1, 159. Compare with Ames & Rosemont 1998, 99: “The expression ’sacrifice as though present’ is taken to mean ‘sacrifice to the spirits as though the spirits are present.’ But the Master said: ‘If I myself do not participate in the sacrifice, it is as though I have not sacrificed at all.’’ D. C. Lau 1979, 69: “‘Sacrifice as if present’ is taken to mean ‘sacrifice to the gods as if the gods were present.’ The Master, however, said, ‘Unless I take part in a sacrifice, it is as if I did not sacrifice.’”

52雨露既濡君子履之必有怵惕之心如將見之。(“Jiyi”, 25.1); Legge 1885, vol. 28, 210; C-text. No. 1

53 It is also quoted in the chapter on rituals (“Lilun” 禮論) in Xunzi 荀子 19.

54 For other examples, see e.g. Standaert 2008, 144; and the many examples in letters from Chinese (Christians) sent to Rome, see Standaert 2012, 233, n. 43. The quotation is also analysed in Filippucci, “Explicaçam de 37 Textos Sinicos”, fols. 9v-11r (Texto 19).

55 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 142–143; see also Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 11.

56 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 212–213; C-text, No. 6

57 For a more detailed discussion, see Standaert 2008, 89–90.

58 Plaks 2003, 37: “To serve the dead as one serves the living, to serve the departed just as one serves those still in this world: this is the perfect fulfilment of one’s filial obligations.”

59 是故仁人之事親也如事天事天如事親。(“Aigong wen” 哀公問, 28.7); Legge 1885, vol. 28, 269; C-text, No. 13. This quotation is also analysed in Filippucci, “Explicaçam de 37 Textos Sinicos”, fols. 7r-v (Texto 15) (as quoted from [Kongzi] jiayuDahun jie [孔子] 家語大婚解.; also quoted in Li Jiugong 李九功, Zhengli chuyi 證禮蒭議抄本): 仁人事天如事親 ARSI, Jap. Sin. I, 42.2c, 13b; CCT ARSI, vol. 9, 88.

60 婦事舅姑如事父母(“Neize” 內則, 12.3); Legge 1885, vol. 27, 450; C-text, No. 3

61 Compare with the translation by Legge 1991, vol. 1, 403: “Thus they served the dead as they would have served them alive; they served the departed as they would have served them had they been continued among them –the height of filial piety”.

62 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 135: 論語祭如在夫以為如在則不在可知矣cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol., 11, 23.

63 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 133–134: 以為【誤謂】鬼神亦湏飲食如佛教所云者; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 22.

64 不知徧考之六經中古人之制祭禮未嘗有說鬼神湏飲食者.

65 CCT ARSI, vol.  11, 141. And also as the first quote in Jizukao: CCT ARSI, vol.  11, 7 (with the explanation by Chen Hao).

66 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 134: 檀弓明說未有見其饗之者(= “Tangong, xia”, 4.27) 表孝子之心而已矣; Legge 1885, vol. 27, 177; C-text, No. 164. CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 22. This sentence was the subject of a discussion involving F. S. Filippucci concerning its inclusion in a Chinese Christian funerary guideline. See Standaert 2008, 170ff.

67 使謂祭為神飲食而設則一年止得四祭天子止祭七代庶民止祭一代祖宗不幾於盡餓斃乎.

68 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 134: 庶幾其饗鄉之非必之之詞也愛而期之之詞也; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 22.

69 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 134-135: 人遂誤認謂神在廟在主不知古人雖立廟設主未嘗謂神在是; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 22-23.

70 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 135: 明明說主在廟神在天; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 23.

71 Ode 235; Legge 1991, vol. 4, 427-428.

72 Shijizhuan 詩集傳 juan 6; Shijizhuan (2011), 233–234. The quotation and annotation are also analysed in Filippucci, “Explicaçam de 37 Textos Sinicos”, fols. 2r-v (Texto 2o).

73 Ode 266; Legge 1991, vol. 4, 569.

74 Shijizhuan, juan 8; Shijizhuan (2011), 298.

75 Zhu Shan 朱善 Shi jie yi 詩解頤, juan 4, 1b, SKQS, vol. 78, 289.

76 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 136; see also Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 12, 24.

77 The full sentence reads: 齊之日思其居處思其笑語思其志意思其所樂思其所嗜。齊三日,乃見其所為齊者。See “Jiyi” 25.2.

78 The full sentence reads: 祭之日:入室,僾然必有見乎其位,周還出戶,肅然必有聞乎其容聲,出戶而聽,愾然必有聞乎其嘆息之聲。See “Jiyi”, 25.3. It is fully quoted under the next question about the blessings.

79 Ode 301; Legge 1991, vol. 4, 631.

80 It is unclear whether this is Zheng Xuan or another scholar.

81 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 211; C-text, no. 2.

82 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 211; C-text, no. 3.

83 See Su Zhe 蘓轍, Shijizhuan 詩集傳, juan 19, 17a, SKQS, vol. 70, 529: 此皆非有也而生於其思。

84 The whole preceding section including the commentary by Zheng, the Liji quote (under a slightly different form), the commentary by Su and the final commentary by Zhu Xi belong to Shijizhuan, juan 8; Shijizhuan (2011), 324–325.

85 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 142; see also Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 10.

86 There are three more quotes from “Jiyi” and two more from “Jitong”: “Jiyi”, 25.10 (Legge 1885, vol. 28, 214; C-text no. 8); “Jiyi”, 25.4 (Legge 1885, vol. 28, 211; C-text no. 4); “Jiyi”, 25.5 (Legge 1885, vol. 28,214; C-text no. 4); “Jitong”, 26.11 (Legge 1885, vol. 28, 236; C-text no. 1); “Jitong”, 25.2 (Legge 1885, vol. 28, 237; C-text no. 3).

87 This quotation is also analysed in Filippucci, “Explicaçam de 37 Textos Sinicos”, fols. 6r-v (Texto 12).

88 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 236–237; C-text No. 2.

89 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 146–147; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 25-26.

90 Selection from: Yili, “Shaolao”, 16. Yan Mo does not quote the text literally.

91 Cf. Couvreur 1928, 603-604.

92 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 146: 不知者因此或疑祭有言福之事其實非也; cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 27.

93 CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 146–147.

94 Cf. Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 27 (there is still an extra passage before it, giving classical examples of similar expressions).

95 CCT ARSI, vol. 11. 147: 稍有識者無不鄙笑其非禮.

96 Jizukao, CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 27-28.

97 Zürcher 1994, 40ff.

98 Berling 1987; Watson 1988, 10; Bell 1997, 191–197; Seligman et al. 2008, 4.

99 Legge 1885, vol. 27, 129; C-text No. 19.

100 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 26; C-text No. 54.

101 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 214; C-text No. 8. This passage is also quoted by Yan Mo under the question regarding blessings.

102 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 214–215; C-text No. 9.

103 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 216; C-text No. 11.

104 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 234; C-text No. 41.

105 Legge 1885, vol. 27, 136–137; C-text No. 46.

106 Legge 1885, vol. 28, 376; C-text No. 3.

107 Watson 1988, 9-10.

108 Seligman et al. 2008, 8, 11, 20, 117, etc.

109 Compare with Michael Puett’s interpretation of Lunyu 3.12: 祭神如神在 “He sacrificed to the spirits, as if the spirits were present”, which leaves open a space of ambiguity: “In the Analects, Confucius is asked about ancestor worship. He says that the ritual is absolutely necessary but that it makes no difference whether the spirits are participating or not: ‘We sacrifice to them,’ he said, ‘as if they are there.’ What matters is participating in the ritual fully: ‘If I do not participate in the sacrifice, it is as if I did not sacrifice.’” (Puett & Gross-Loh 2016, 31). See also Puett 2015, 547–548: “But whether the spirits are actually present or not is irrelevant. The ritual rather serves as a space within which one acts ‘as if’ they are present.” Notice that some commentators, such as in the Kangxi teaching records on the same passage, clearly deny the presence of the spirits: 夫鬼神無形無聲非真有在 “Now, the spirits have no form or voice, it is not so that they really exist or are present.” This is a quote from Sishu rijiang 四書日講 [Daily Instructions on the Four Books] (also entitled Fengzhi banxing rijiang sishu jieyi 奉旨頒行日講四書解義 (1677); ARSI, Jap. Sin. I, 13, juan 4, fol. 49b; it was used in Summarium Nouorum Autenticorum Testimoniorum, 71 (see Standaert 2012, 61).

110 For very few scattered references of denial in other classical texts, selected by François Noël, and printed in Summarium Nouorum Autenticorum Testimoniorum, see Standaert 2012, 58ff.

111 Ing 2012, 209.

112 Ing 2012, 209.

113 E.g. CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 133, 134. See other examples: 168, 170, 176, 181, 182, 191, 198, 201.

114 E.g. the last sentence of the section on the sacrifices: CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 139. Other examples: 149, 170, 176, 181, 182, 201.

115 E.g. the last sentence of the section on the sacrifices: CCT ARSI, vol. 11, 139. Other examples of zheng: 201.

116 Puett & Gross-Loh 2016, 32.

117 Puett 2013, 98.

118 Ing 2012, 206–209.

Auteur

Katholieke Universiteit, Leuven

Le texte et les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont sous Licence OpenEdition Books, sauf mention contraire.

Lire

Open access

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search