Appreciation and Analysis of Wang Anshi's Reply to Sima Jianji's Book

This text is selected from the Wang Linchuan Collection, written by Wang Anshi. Wang Anshi, the word Jiefu, the name of the late Banshan, Linchuan people, was appointed as the Duke of Jing, known as Wang Jing Gong, died posthumously, also known as Wang Wen Gong. He was a famous politician in the Northern Song Dynasty, serving as prime minister twice and insisting on the implementation of the Law Reform, known as the Wang Anshi Law Reform. Lenin called him "China's eleventh-century reformer". Wang Anshi was also a famous writer, one of the Eight Great Poets of the Tang and Song dynasties. He had unique achievements in poetry, lyrics and prose, etc. He advocated that literature should be "useful to the world" and "application-oriented". His works include the Collected Writings of Mr. Linchuan and the Collected Poems and Writings of Wang Jinggong.

Stylistic knowledge:

This article is an epistolary refutation. The whole paper mainly refutes the accusation of the conservative faction represented by Sima Jianji on the new law, so it is a refutation essay. Wang Anshi's reasoning is highly insightful and sharp.

The main idea:

The thesis of the whole text is to respond to Sima Guang's accusation that the new law "encroaches on the government, creates trouble, expropriates profits, refuses to give advice, and creates grievances", and to point out that what the Confucians are fighting for is especially in the name of the reality. The name and reality have been clear, and the world's reasoning is carried out. Thus, the change of law is correct. Sima Guang's attack on the name does not match the reality, all fallacies. The article refutes the fallacies of Ma Shiguang one by one, exposes their conservative and corrupt nature, and expresses the author's determination to insist on the reform and never be moved by the rumors and sayings.

:Hierarchical paragraphs. The whole text is divided into four paragraphs.

The first paragraph is the opening sentence and the first natural paragraph. This paragraph mainly clarifies the reason and purpose of writing the letter. Because there is a disagreement between the two men, the letter is written to state his position and attitude.

The second paragraph is the second natural paragraph. Is the whole refutation of the key part, the author to "the name of the real has been clear, and the world's reason to carry on" as the foothold of the argument, respectively, on the conservative fallacy to refute, indicating that they adhere to the position of the change of law.

The third paragraph is the third natural paragraph, to further clarify their own position and attitude, want me not to do these things from now on, stick to what the previous person did, that is not what I dare to teach.

The fourth paragraph is the fourth natural paragraph, end the whole text, say some ceremonial polite words.

Now a few more highlights of the second paragraph refutation are analyzed.

About the invasion of officials, according to the principle of matching the name with the reality, Wang Anshi clarified that the formulation and implementation of the rules and regulations of the change of law, with the emperor's orders, court officials and ministers to discuss the determination of the implementation of specific officials, step by step, there are evidence, it is not invasion of the officials.

About the trouble, the implementation of the new law, affecting the interests of some large landowners and officials, causing their dissatisfaction, Sima Guang described this as a nuisance to the people, Wang Anshi clarified that the change of the law is to lift the government of the former king, to promote the interests of the elimination of the evils, which can be beneficial to the people to strengthen the rule of the country, is not a nuisance.

On the issue of levying profits, Sima Guang and other conservatives attacked Wang Anshi's change of law as levying profits with the people, but Wang Anshi refuted that it was for the sake of financial management of the whole world, not levying profits, and that the purpose was to rationalize the finances, which would be beneficial to the whole country, and it demonstrated the magnificent tactics of the statesman.

About the refusal of admonition, Sima Guang and others think that Wang Anshi ignored the conservative opinion is refusal of admonition, Wang Anshi righteously, pointed out that he attacked improper reasoning, refuted the ill-intentioned people, confirmed that he is open and honest, insisted on his own change of law should be the attitude.

The so-called world of the problem of slander, Wang Anshi cited historical facts, and analyzed the conservative faction of these people, "used to the mettlesome more than one day, the scholars are not sympathetic to the affairs of the state, with the common people, self-congratulatory to the masses for good," is their old-fashioned style of corruption. Wang Anshi insisted that he could not change his attitude, and politely expressed his opinion of Sima Guang's saying that it is not a certain person who dares to know.

Writing features:

The first feature, as an epistolary thesis is characterized by the first act of simplicity, structural rigor, no branches and tendrils, the whole text, in addition to the beginning and the closing paragraph with a few sentences of the polite language of the payoff, tightly held on the conservatives a few major arguments to refute, only refute the arguments do not involve other things, the structure is very rigorous, refute the key points of their words, so that the article is brief. The first one is about the fact that it is a very short and concise article.

The second feature is the variety of argumentation methods. This article is a refutation of the argument, the method of refutation is varied. The first direct rebuttal, such as for the world's financial management, not for the levy. The second to cite the basis for rebuttal, such as "a certain then to say that the commanded by the Lord, discuss the law and repair in the court, in order to authorize the Secretary, not for the invasion of the official", here on the cited favorable basis, explaining that they are not their own new dictatorship, but by the command of the emperor, is the court discussed the law, pointing out that this is not my personal behavior, but the rationality of the law. . Third, cite historical facts to refute, cite historical facts to refute, such as "Pan Geng's move, Xuxu complained about the people, not just the court officials. Pan Geng not for the complainers, so change its degree, degree of righteousness and then move, is not to see can be regretted, so also. Here in history, there have been how to deal with the fact of how to deal with grievances and slander as an example, said they do not move to gossip, both euphemistically refute the blame of the many grievances and slander, but also expresses their own strong determination to change the law. The whole rebuttal is clear and powerful, simple and concise.

The third feature is that it is majestic, and it is strong in softness. The whole text so have overwhelmed the enemy's vitality is characterized by several aspects, the first based on the rationale, the rationale is enough momentum. Second, good at prose, even with prose refute each other, then the momentum is like cracking bamboo, unstoppable. Third, the use of antithesis, such as the desire to help the upper to resist, the crowd why not surly? Gas Sheng Yiyi, powerful, although the full text of the arrogant gas, indignant outpouring, emphasizing the determination to adhere to the reform is irreversible, but the tone of voice is quite euphemistic, soft and rigid, such as for example, explaining in detail the reasons for doing so, you may be able to forgive me, and then end by saying that you criticized the failure to help His Majesty to make a big difference, then I know the crime, but let me do nothing, stick to the routine on the line, then I dare not learn. Do so on the one hand, take care of the friendship of many years of interaction, on the one hand, adhere to the principle, inch by inch, and fully defend the righteous position of the change of law.