Appendix II. The Discussion of the Classics in the Shih-Ch'ü Pavilion

Emperor Hsüan greatly encouraged the study of the classics and elevated Confucian scholars to the highest positions in his government. He several times ordered that Confucian classical scholars should be summoned to the court and encouraged to teach what they knew. In June, 70 B.C., on the occasion of an earthquake, he had his ministers question widely among the Confucian scholars concerning what should be done (8: 6b). In all probability, many of these Confucians were accordingly brought to the imperial court. In Sept./Oct 65., B.C., he had his highest ministers and Commandery Administrators recommend learned Literary Scholars to the throne (8: 12a).

The manner in which he became interested in the discrepancies between the Classics is rather indirect. HS 88: 23b, 24a, in discussing the Ku-liang and Kung-yang Commentaries on the Spring and Autumn, recounts that because Hsia-ch'iu Chiang-kung, who was the authority on the Ku-liang Commentary, was not as skillful in disputation as Tung Chung-shu, and because Lieutenant Chancellor Kung-sun Hung had been a student of the Kung-yang Commentary, Emperor Wu had honored the latter Commentary and had his Heir-apparent Li study it, so that this Commentary became popular and was studied. The Heir-apparent, however, privately asked about the Ku-liang Commentary and liked it, but he was killed and only two teachers of it remained. When Emperor Hsüan came to the throne, he heard that his great-grandfather, Heir-apparent Li, had loved the Ku-liang Commentary. He was told that Ku-liang came from the state of Lu. Several of the Emperor's officials, Wei Hsien, Hsia-hou Sheng, and Shih Kao, came from Lu, whereas the Kung-yang scholarship came from the state of Ch'i. So Emperor Hsüan revived the study of the Ku-liang Commentary, and selected ten of his Gentlemen to study the book. "Beginning in the [year-period] Yüan-k'ang [65-62 B.C.] to the first year of [the period] Kan-lu, [53 B.C., they studied] consecutively for more than ten years, [until they] understood and were familiar with it all. Then [Emperor Hsüan] summoned the Confucian scholar famous in [all] the Five Classics, the Grand Tutor to the Heir-apparent, Hsiao Wang-chih, and others, [to hold] a great discussion in the [Palace] Hall, to criticize the discrepancies between the Kung-yang and Ku-liang [Commentaries and to determine] the correctness or erroneousness of each, according to the Classics."

Thus in 53 B.C. Emperor Hsüan had these two commentaries on the Spring and Autumn discussed in the Palace Hall. Among his officials there was already then an Erudit for the Kung-yang Commentary and a Gentleman-consultant for the Ku-liang Commentary (88: 24a). The discussions probably continued down to 51 B.C., during which time they were transferred to the Shih-ch'ü Pavilion 石渠閣, which was north of the Great Hall in Wei-yang Palace, according to the San-fu Chiu-shih (prob. iii cent. and later; lost; quoted by Yen Shih-ku in a note to HS 36: 7a).

HHS, Mem. 38: 7a says, "[Emperor] Hsiao-hsüan had the six Classics [perhaps the Books of Changes, of History, of Odes, of Rites, the Spring and Autumn with the Kung-yang Commentary, and the Ku-liang Commentary, but cf. the different list in 6: n. 39.3] discussed in the Shih-ch'ü [Pavilion]." HS 36: 7a says, "It happened that for the first time the Ku-liang [Commentary to] the Spring and Autumn was established [as authoritative], and [Emperor Hsüan] summoned [Liu] keng-sheng [i.e., Liu Hsiang(4a)], to study the Ku-liang [Commentary] and [also] to expound and discuss the Five Classics in the Shih-ch'ü [Pavilion]." HS 73: 8a also says, "At this time . . . [Wei] Hsüan-ch'eng received an imperial edict to discuss miscellaneously in the Shih-ch'ü Pavilion the discrepancies [in the Classics] with the Grand Tutor to the Heir-apparent, Hsiao Wang-chih, and the Confucian scholars of the Five Classics, and memorialize their responses in detail." The "Annals" contains an even more impressive summary (cf. 8: 23a), which indicates that the proceeding took the form of summoning the outstanding scholars from all over the empire and fixing authoritatively, with the imperial decision and by the imperial authority, the correct interpretation of the various classics. Thereupon an Erudit for the Ku-liang Commentary was established, together with three other Erudits for special interpretations of certain classics, to carry on this tradition.

Ch'ien Ta-chao has determined from references in the HS the names of the important scholars who participated in this historic discussion, which thus constitutes a roster of the important exponents of the Classics in the reign of Emperor Hsüan, "At this time those who participated in the discussion at the Shih-ch'ü [Pavilion] were [the following]: authorities on the Book of Changes: the Erudit Shih Ch'ou 施讎 from P'ei [Commandery] and the Gentleman at the Yellow Gate, Liang-ch'iu Lin 梁丘臨 from Tung-lai [Commandery]; authorities on the Book of History: the Erudit Ou-yang Ti-Yü 歐陽地餘 from Ch'ien-ch'eng [Commandery], the Erudit Lin Tsun 林尊 from Chi-nan [Commandery], the Chief of the Bureau of Interpreters, Chou K'an 周堪 from Ch'i [Commandery], the Erudit Chang Shan-fu 張山拊 from [Yu]-fu-feng [Commandery], and the Internuncio Chia Ts'ang 假倉 from Ch'en-liu [Commandery]; authorities on the Book of Odes: the Palace Military Commander of [the kingdom of] Huai-yang, Wei Hsüan-ch'eng 韋幺成 from [the kingdom of] Lu, the Erudit Chang Ch'ang-an 張長安 from Shan-yang [Commandery], and Hsieh Kuang-tê 薛廣德 from P'ei [Commandery]; authorities on the Book of Rites: Tai Sheng 戴聖 from [the kingdom of] Liang and the Member of the Heir-apparent's Suite, Wen-jen T'ung-han 聞人通漢 from P'ei [Commandery]; authorities on the Kung-yang [Commentary]: the Erudit Chuang P'eng-tsu 莊彭祖 and the Gentlemen-in-attendance Shen Wan 申輓, Yi T'ui 伊推, Sung Hsien 宋顯, and Hsü Kuang 許廣; authorities on the Ku-liang [Commentary]: the Gentleman-consultant Yin Keng-shih 尹更始 from Ju-nan [Commandery], the Expectant Appointees Liu Hsiang 劉向, and Chou Ch'ing 周慶 and Ting Hsing 丁姓 from [the kingdom of] Liang, and the Gentleman-of-the Household, Wang Hai 王亥. Those of whom there is evidence [that they participated] numbered altogether twenty-three persons. [He heads his list with the Grand Tutor to the Heir-apparent, Hsiao Wang-chih]." (Cf. his HS Pien-yi 2: 8b, 9a; quoted in the HS Pu-chu 8: 23a) The foregoing list shows that at that time scholarship was confined chiefly to the present Shantung, Honan, and Shensi.

The results of these discussions were embodied in the form of memorials and published; the "Treatise on Arts and Literature" lists five of them: the Memorialized Discussions on the Book of History in 42 chapters (30: 7a), the Memorialized Discussions on the Book of Rites in 38 chapters (30: 12b), the Memorialized Discussion on the Spring and Autumn in 39 chapters (30: 17a), the Memorialized Discussion on the Analects in 18 chapters (30: 20a), and the Miscellaneous Discussion on the Five Classics in 18 chapters (30: 21b). There were probably also Memorialized Discussion on the other two classics, the Book of Changes and the Book of Odes; Ch'ien Ta-chao says that Pan Ku merely failed to record them.

In the development of Confucianism, the discussion in the Shi-ch'ü Pavilion fills a place corresponding to that occupied in the occident by the first General Council of the Christian Church at Nicaea (325 A.D.). In the time of Emperor Hsüan the Tso-chuan had not yet become canonical; the Chou-li was later also added to the canon; these official additions and other changes (made by Wang Mang) necessitated another revision of the Confucian tradition. This discussion was summoned by Emperor Chang on December 23, 79 A.D., and met in the White Tiger Lodge (Po-hu Kuan). Its procedure was modelled upon that in the Shih-ch'ü Pavilion; Emperor Chang similarly attended it and himself decided disputed points. As a result there was composed the Universal Discussions of Virtue at the White Tiger [Lodge] (Po-hu T'ung Tê-lun; cf. n. 9.3 to my translation of HHS, Mem. 30, in the "Introductory Volume" to this series). It is highly probable that the permanently important material in the Memorialized Discussion arising out of the decisions made at the Shih-ch'ü Pavilion were taken up into the Po-hu T'ung, and that the reason these Memorialized Discussion were allowed to perish is merely that they had been superseded. We must thus look to the Po-hu T'ung for the results of the Shih-ch'ü discussions.