Daxue and Zhongyong

Reviewed by: Daxue and Zhongyong: Bilingual Edition translator by Ian Johnston and Wang Ping Joseph A. Adler Ian Johnston and Wang Ping, translators and annotators. Daxue and Zhongyong: Bilingual Edition. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 2012. Pp. 567. $80 (hardcover). ISBN 978-962-996-445-0. This is a must-have book for anyone with a serious interest in the two seminal Confucian texts Daxue 大學 and Zhongyong 中庸, usually translated as the Great Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean. It is much more than an annotated translation with introduction. First of all, it includes two versions of each text. The first is the version found in the Liji 禮記 (Record of Ritual), where the Daxue was chapter 42 and the Zhongyong was chapter 31. This is accompanied by the most authoritative commentaries of the Han and Tang dynasties, by Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 (127–200) and Kong Yingda 孔穎達 (574–648), as found in the Shisanjing zhushu 十三經注疏 (The Thirteen Classics with Notes and Commentary), edited by Ruan Yuan 阮元 (1764–1849). Zheng Xuan’s notes are mostly philological and quite brief, while Kong Yingda’s comments are more philosophical and much longer. The second is the text as found in the Sishu zhangju jizhu 四書章句集注 (The Four Books in Chapters and Sentences) by Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130–1200), along with his commentary. Both the texts themselves and the commentaries are given in Chinese and English on facing pages. The notes on Chinese pronunciation are given in the Chinese but are omitted, with ellipses, in the English. In addition, there is a General Introduction (15 pages); an Introduction to each text (22 and 29 pages, respectively); three appendices: “The Origin of the Liji” (3 pages), “Commentaries and Translations” (21 pages), and “Terminology” (28 pages); a classified bibliography; an index of names; and a general index. The “Terminology” appendix is divided into three sections: twelve terms on which there is general agreement (e.g. dao 道, tian 天), four “terms without a satisfactory English equivalent” (cheng 誠, ren 仁, yi 義, and li 禮), and “terms relatively restricted to the two treatises” (ge wu 格物, xie ju zhi dao 絜矩之道, zi qi 自欺, zhong he 中和 and zhong yong 中庸, and guo 過 / bu ji 不及). For the terms without satisfactory English equivalents, a [End Page 349] list of common translations is given, followed by substantial quotations from classical and modern sources in which the terms are defined and/or discussed. For cheng 誠, for example, these quotations are from Mencius, Xun Zi, Li Ao, Zhou Dunyi, Chen Chun, Wang Fuzhi, Legge, and P. J. Ivanhoe (totaling 8 pages). The principle underlying the inclusion of two different translations of each text, with their commentaries, is stated by the authors as follows: The commentaries are of critical importance, both in clarifying the meaning of particular characters and difficult passages and also, especially in Zhu Xi’s case, considering the philosophical implications of the various sections. Indeed, it could be argued that with both the Zhongyong and the Daxue, but particularly with the former, the text itself cannot be read satisfactorily without these commentaries. At the very least, in both cases the significance of these works in Chinese social, cultural and intellectual history cannot be properly understood apart from them (p. 209). This high level of attention to contextual meaning is scrupulously followed by the authors in their translations and annotations. Even the titles of the two texts are translated differently in the Han-Tang and Zhu Xi versions. In fact, the Chinese title of the Daxue is given as Taixue 太學 in the earlier version and translated as “The Highest Learning,” based on Zheng Xuan’s comment that “the old pronunciation of da 大 was tai 泰” (p. 45). In Zhu Xi’s version it is Daxue 大學 “The Greater Learning.” Zhongyong is translated as “Using the Centre” in the Han-Tang and “Central and Constant” in Zhu Xi’s version. The reasoning behind these choices is discussed in some detail, although I think that “Higher Learning” for Daxue would convey more accurately (although less literally) what Zhu Xi meant by “learning for adults.” Another example of significantly different translations based on the respective commentaries is the first sentence of the Taixue/Daxue: 大學之道, 在 明明德, 在親民, 在止於至善. The Taixue (Liji) translation is: “The Way of highest learning lies in displaying enlightened

Philology · Sociology · Chinese history and philosophy · Classics · History · Philosophy