Cui Shu's Doubt about Ancient Confucianism

Cui Shuchang accused contemporary sinologists of "but thought that Confucianism was near ancient times, and its words were bound to spread, not fake writers", and also denounced "but according to later exegesis, it was not remembered by people before the exam." (1) In his view, although Confucianism in the Han Dynasty is close to ancient times, its theory is not similar to the meaning of saints, so it is not credible. It is not necessary to obtain evidence from classics through the comments of Han people. His theory of "six arts to test faith" has the meaning of "returning to the root". Although his opinion and the thought of doubting the ancient times caused by it were "higher than those scholars who believed in Sinology at that time" (2), in the view of contemporary sinologists, it was an outsider and was by no means an authentic study of Confucian classics, which made Cui Shuzhi's research unable to enter the mainstream of Qing Dynasty. As the representative of orthodox sinology at that time, the Confucian classics and the Confucian classics continued to hold a negative attitude towards Kao Xin Lu, and some sinologists, such as Zhang Shu, even accused him of being "ignorant of Confucianism" (3).

In the Summary of Textual Research, Cui Shu criticized sinologists in the Qing Dynasty for "using all their talents at the end of the chapter", and in the same book, he also rebuked Ru Song for "being good at empty talk but not at imperial archaeology". For the internal debate of Confucianism in Han and Song Dynasties at that time, he was very disapproving, and said in his "A New Record of Gao Feng Examination":

In this world, sincere people are more obedient to Song Confucianism, and wise people are more eager to learn from Han Confucianism and Song Confucianism. But because they read Song Confucianism for a long time when they were young, they were often tired of hearing new things. In fact, the theory of Song Confucianism did not begin with Song Confucianism; Song Rucuo, Han Ruan? You don't have to take Han and Song's opinions to heart.

Although he was criticized by sinologists in the Qing Dynasty, the acting scholars in the Qing Dynasty who insisted on orthodox Zhu Cheng studies also criticized him. For example, Liu Hongao said, "What a shame!" 4 Xie even said "Don't create different solutions" and "Don't do it for training". (5)

Cui Shu is currently excluded from the academic mainstream and criticized by scholars in Han and Song Dynasties. From the late Qing Dynasty to the early Republic of China, with the suspicion of breaking traditional idols in ancient times, he was gradually paid close attention to by radical intellectuals. For example, Zhao published the academic development of Cui Dongbi in the seventh issue of the second volume of Oriental Magazine 1905, and Liu published it in 1907. During the May 4th New Culture Movement, Hu Shi and Gu Jiegang, who began to explore the authenticity of ancient books and history, complied with the anti-traditional trend of thought at that time and paid more attention to the study of Cui Shuzhi. 1920, after Hu Shi discovered Cui Dongbi's suicide note, it was a "Jifu series", and he deeply felt its value to the movement of doubting the ancient and distinguishing the false, and he felt that it was "too late to hate". In his letter to Gu Jiegang, he praised Cui Shi. "Kao Lu is a wonderful book in the Qing Dynasty ... no one else is bolder and more difficult to deal with than him." (6) As for Gu Jiegang, as early as a teenager, he learned from A Brief History of the State Dynasty that Cui Shu tried to sort out ancient historical facts and published hundreds of absurd stories, but he never had a chance to read Cui Shi's works. It was not until the middle of 192 1 year 65438+ 10 that he read Cui Shu's works through Hu Shi's recommendation. He was very excited and immediately wrote to Hu Shi, saying, "I have read two volumes of the Record of Examining the Heart, which is very fast. Although he [Cui Shu] still believes in classics, it is not satisfactory, but in the end there are few classics and many historical rumors. He has worked hard to teach us the origin of various legends, and it is not difficult to add merit. " (7) Mr. Gu not only spoke highly of Cui Shi's research record, but also said:

19 16, people who deliberately try to discuss the ancient history of China go further than Cui Shu. Cui Shu's textual research record is indeed a great and meticulous work, which is beyond my power. I know I have to study hard for more than ten years before I can catch up with him. (8)

Moreover, he is deeply dissatisfied with the fact that Cui Shi and his studies have not been generally recognized in the contemporary era: "Try to look at the classics of Ruan Yuan (1764- 1849) and Wang Xianqian (1842- 19 17) in the Qing Dynasty, but they are not well received. (9)

Qian Xuantong very much agrees with Hu Shi's meaning of calling Cui Shu "a great ancient skeptic for two thousand years" (10). Not only does he think that he has unique opinions on distinguishing forgeries, but he is also known as the four great masters of the Song Dynasty with Zhu, Yan Yuan and Zhang Xuecheng (1 1). When it comes to Cui Shu, he stressed:

I thought it was Song Ru who pushed down the pedantic absurdity of Han people. Cui Shu is an unreliable fact in biographies since Qin and Han Dynasties. It was Kang Youwei who overthrew the ancient classics forged by Liu Xin. ..... Cui Shu overthrew the biographical essays, but believed the records in Shangshu and Zuozhuan. ( 12)

After reading the Textual Research Record, Qian became more convinced of Cui Shi's suspicion of ancient Confucianism. In order to show his determination to carry out the cause of suspecting the ancient times to the end, he even changed his surname to "suspecting the ancient times". It can be seen that his attention to Cui Shi and others and his knowledge are not under Hu Shi and Gu Jiegang. Indeed, it is precisely because of the encouragement of Mr. Hu, Mr. Gu and Mr. Qian that his learning is widely known. As Qian Mu said in the Preface to Cui Dongbi's suicide note: "Dongbi was an old Confucian a hundred years ago, but his reputation was dim, but he left dozens of works, and he won the praise of the three kings [Hu Shi, Gu Jiegang and Qian] a hundred years later.

Indeed, after Cui Shu was rediscovered, Hu Shi not only actively encouraged Gu Jiegang to compile and publish Cui Shi's posthumous works, but also personally wrote Cui Shu Chronicle (13). Gu Jiegang said in 1933:

Ten years later, scholars praised the East Wall; But most of them have been included in the ancient history (14). According to preliminary statistics, there are about 50 papers published in the 1920s and 1930s to study and evaluate Cui Shu studies, and there are three kinds of chronologies, namely, Cui Shu Chronicle by Hu Shi and Zhao Zhenxin (15), Cui Dongbi Chronicle by Yao (16) and Cui Shu Chronicle by Liu Rulin.

Cui Shu's thought of suspecting the ancient times has aroused widespread concern in academic circles after a hundred years, which is not only due to the personal academic interests of Mr. Hu Shi, Mr. Gu Jiegang and Mr. Qian, but also has important internal relations with the thought of suspecting the ancient times in the late Qing Dynasty, especially the anti-traditional movement with the theme of democracy and science during the May 4th Movement. Since the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China, under the trend of opposing orthodox Confucianism, progressive scholars began to break through the limitations of traditional paradigms. Cui Shu's study was not only rediscovered by academic circles at the right time, but also Gu Jiegang further developed Cui Shu's study and put forward the "view of ancient history", which not only pushed the tradition of doubting the ancient and distinguishing the false in the history of Confucianism in China to the extreme, but also shook and even subverted the concept of ancient history for more than 2,000 years from the deepest point of thought. From 19 17 when Mr. Cai Yuanpei was in charge of Peking University to 1949, "the school of ancient skepticism almost enveloped the history circle in China ... on that day, almost all the forces in the university were dominated by the school of ancient skepticism" (18). This reflects the profound influence of Cui Shu's suspicion of ancient Confucianism on modern history and even China's ideology and culture with Confucianism as the main body from tradition to modern times.

From 65438 to 0950, due to the discovery of a large number of archaeological materials, a new upsurge in the study of ancient history and Confucian classics was triggered, and some scholars even put forward the slogan of "going out of the age of doubt". This has its own academic value. Moreover, from the perspective of academic history, not only Cui Shu has the fallacy of worshipping the sacred faith, but also the modern "ancient history debate movement" led by Mr. Gu Jiegang, who is influenced by Cui Shizhi's study, has the disadvantages of doubting the past and going forward bravely. These can be studied in depth academically. But in any case, whether it is Cui Shu's doubt about the position of ancient Confucianism in the development history of China's Confucianism, or the important role played by the "ancient history discrimination school" in the study of modern history in China, or even in the modernization process of China's ideology and culture, it can not be ignored.