邢唷> 欹%` 餜虋bjbj4虩虩72% zzzz   V8lR$j+:")))))))$,hH/r) )zL8`+C&C&C&^  )C&)C&C&(  )v &/稓枞"2()v+0+(,/%/)/ )pC&))%^+jjjD jjj4HVzzz  A Ritual& without Meat? (枡|v) Teo Heng Ng (臑no) - On  Wuti zhi li (lit. ritual without body)(!q詺KN畒) apropos of the  Min zhi fumu (lit. parents of the people)(lKN6r蚹) chapter in Shanghai Museum s collection of Warring States Chu Bamboo Manuscripts (Shangbo guancang zhanguo chu zhushu)( NZS(櫹0b WZi鵽鴉) I shall begin my discussion with an interesting pseudo-philological observation. Amongst the excavated Chu Bamboo scripts acquired at the fin-de-sicle of the twentieth century, one of the fragmentary chapters  min zhi fumu  has the following line attributed to Confucius: VKNj (g+li)KNJ 橮KN猆 TP[錘dk噕糴)Y N0 Scholars render it into the following: !qrKNj !q詺KN畒 !q gKN猆 TP[錘dk*j糴)Y N0 Apropos of the underlined phrase, note how the second and fourth character is being read. In the Warring States period, it is not uncommon that the character ti is written with the radical rou, though lexicon erstwhile has yet to show li rendered without the radical shi (:y).  Li without the radical signifies the  utensils used in conducting a ritual (li), and it is being used here legitimately as a synecdoche. I agree with such a reading. Nevertheless, one抯 imagination is being provoked by the phrase in it抯 original form: a ritual in the absence of offering or, graphically, without meat. By a close reading of the proposition and an extrapolation of its historical context, one understands the proposition as championing for the king to manifest the supra-formal spirit of the ritual. Yet, a semantic analysis of the concept of ti in the proposition also shows that the ultimate significance lies not so much in doing away with all the formal details than to strike a balance between the ritualistic embellishments and the spirit that underpins it. Let us first situate the proposition in its wider context. 揗in zhi fumu features a vignette of dialogical exchange between Confucius and his disciple Zixia (P[Y) which set forth to discuss how the benign king (7a宍TP[), that is, the parent of the citizens, should rule. Confucius reply is that the ruler should & reach the source of the rites and music, so as to accomplish the  five ultimates , and carry out the  three nothingness , so as to enable the benign rule to reach every corners of the world. lKN 6r蚹V 臺T惣e畒jKN烻 錘髞魜 擭髞 錘L N!q 錘噕*j 糴)Y N The  three nothingness/withouts include: music without tones, ritual without forms, and the act of mourning without the proper attire, as have been listed in my first paragraph. The significance of the text rests on the very fact that similar accounts can be found in the  Kongzi xianju (T[P[憰E\) chapter in Liji (畒), and the  Lun Li (謯畒) chapter in Kongzi jiayu (T[P[禰瀶). Traditionally, classical scholars questioned the pedigree of this particular chapter by charging that it was an intended fabrication by the Confucian scholars in the Han dynasty, reason being that the predilection in using numbers to categorize concepts was a characteristic of these latter age scholars. Thus, that the same account was already in circulation in the Warring States period is a discovery nothing less than momentous. Though it is not a latter-age appurtenance to Liji created by scholars influenced by the ideas of numerology, one cannot avoid noticing the influence of the Laozi s mode of thinking here. The glaring evidence of both the adaptation of the similar saying widely accorded to Laozi - dayin xisheng ('Y髼 ^r) being adapted into wusheng zhiyue  and the categorical significance of 搉othingness would have prompted readers to deem it patently Daoist, almost reflexively. Yet, with the high degree of fluidity amongst different enunciative modes circa the Warring States, thinkers were in the process of constantly becoming, and thus assimilating other modes of thoughts into their own 搒ystem (for a lack of a better word) would not be unimaginable. This why I choose to recognize the proposition as an attempted amalgamation of the Confucian ritual ideal with Laozi抯 thinking. Nevertheless, I am not interested in adjudicating whether it is a Confucian-based scholar predicating rituals on Laozi抯 terms, or a Daoist-prone scholar broadening the inclusivity of Laozi抯 agenda to include rituals and funereal rites. What I am more interested is its significance in the delineation and elaboration of the ideal ruler ship. How then should the king conduct rituals, according to 揅onfucius? The ensuing conversation sees Zixia probing for more details, especially so in requesting the Master to draw inferences from the Book of Odes for each of the  nothingness . For the  ritual without form proposition, Confucius quote is: ZQ鉮鉮 N颯x恄N0 According to Mao s annotation, this line should be understood as  the regal countenance exudes in plenitude, with high mastery, such that it cannot be measured . Confucius furthers his claim by stating that the attainment of non-formal ritual should be  progressively achieved (錯(1\)g鴙(\)) , its effect would pervade everywhere in the jurisdiction of the king (^X糴踁wm) and it would bring harmony to all strata of the society ( N N緔(孴) T). If we understand the way of the king to be such that he should govern  all lands under heaven and  all the people in the land (nf)YKN N 珒^棆sW噑WKN訉 珒^棆s銇), one understands why the ideal king should rule by the two pivotal ideals of rites and music. Though Confucius never got into the details of defining intensionally the source of ritual and music, he contoured numerous aspects of its manifestation. The spirit of the rite shows forth in two aspects: first, an immediate encounter with the regalia is by itself a sublime experience (as the poem implies); second, the efficacy pervades the whole breadth of jurisdiction. Thus, if one understands the source of the rite as beyond any reification, and thus without limitations, by any formalistic details, one can choose to read the 搑itual without forms as the highest attainment by the king who embodies the 憄ure spirit of ritual. Put in another way, the highest manifestation of the ritual comes from returning to its source and displaying itself unmediated in spirit, thereby magnifying the 搈agical quality of the ritual (to borrow Fingarette抯 notion) and eventuating in far-reaching efficacy. (Fingarette : 1972 ) Also, to borrow Micea Eliade抯 notion of the various manifestations of the sacred, the Confucian rex has the power to transform the realm into one distinguished with ritualistic civility. (Eliade : 1996 ) Such a reading of the proposition remains incomplete without an understanding of the historical context in which it was advocated. Though we can choose not to ask whether Confucius really stated them, we cannot avoid the question of why the notion of 揻ormal emptiness of ritual is expounded as regal attainment par excellence. As this chapter resurfaces as a relatively independent text with regards to other acquired excavations (kongzi shilun, lubang dahan, rongcheng shi, etc), the only way in which we can appreciate its historical significance is to situate it within the oeuvre that is Liji and seek for the relevant thematic resonance. Indeed, as a response to the Confucian proposition, other chapters in Liji discourage the overt fuss with ritualistic minutiae: 'Yj臺f 'Y畒臺!| Liji: Liyun) The Grand Music must be kept simple, the Big Ritual must be without unnecessary details. 0畒 0KN1Y iq0(LJ: Chapter 26) The failing of Li is its unnecessary details. As a further corroboration to such an idea, it is also held that 酫畒KN'Y詺 詺)Y0W 誰踁Bf GRp杴 樅N臽 Ee婯N畒 (LJ: Chapter 49) The main substance of ritual, is to embody heaven and earth, follow the way of the four seasons, abide by the principles of yin and yang, go along with human emotions, thus it can be called a ritual. Thus, one infers that at the time such a proposition surfaced in history, the original spirit of rites and rituals was already lost in unnecessary pettiness. An ostentatious staging of any ritual or rite with make-believe significance and pretended sacredness affronted the decency of the scholar(s) who stood out to call for a 搑eturn to its source. Unsurprisingly, the source of ritual, like music, displays itself in full potentiality as not being circumscribed by forms. Hence the call for no 揵ody (ti). Finally, what is interesting comes from the semantic ambivalence of the concept of ti (詺). To juxtapose the proposition together with the call for non-tonal music and non-attire mourning makes one understand ti to be a metaphor for the form, hence allowing for the bipolar tension of form v. spirit, as our reading so far has shown. Exegetically wise, ti does refer to the limbs when the subject is the human body or to the outer form when the subject is non-human. What is intriguing on the other hand is, the concept of li has also been also defined as ti itself: 0畒奮畒hV 0畒_N6s詺_N詺 N橮TP[婯N Nb篘 Liji Liqi chapter: Ritual is like the human body. If the body is not complete, the gentleman deems him as a yet-to-be human. How should we understand this semantic paradox? On the one hand, one voice calls for the attainment of the supra-formal ritual manifestation; yet on the other hand, another voice claims that without the form, a rite will be a human without limbs, and such a person can yet be deemed a complete human. In other words, if we take the chapter as a separate document, the paradox ceases; but if we were to read it within the oeuvre, we have to account for the seeming contradiction between different instances. Furthermore, if Liji was progressively complied since Warring States to Han, there is reason to hypothesize that the ambivalence is not so much a textual anomaly. Rather it reflects a much wider societal/intellectual phenomenon. My reading is to understand the ambivalence of ti as {form, body, to embody, and ritual (li) itself} as enriching the semantic and pragmatic realm of li. Through this, I understand the perfect ritual as accomplishing a dynamic equilibrium between its form and its spirit. After all, an advocacy for supra-formality must not be confused with the call for anti-formality. If another pair of cardinal terms must be raised, then it is the belief that the  middle (-N) is also the  ultimate ui . The ritual mediates between the quotidianus and the sacer, and if its effect is to be omnipresent it must also be presentable in commonplace affairs. In other words, its principle/spirit is universal. The king embodies and manifests the spirit, unbounded by limitations. Yet, it manifests through different entities in the world, it is intra mundo rather than extra mundo. The ethico-religious significance therefore, when read as a keynote address to the king, is the call to maintain the balance between phenomenological manifestations of forms (ti) and the spirit it is supposed to embody (ti). So should we have our meat for the ritual, or should we not? Rather than seeing this as a irreconcilable paradox, I choose to understand it as a call for both transcending formal pettiness and knowing how to incorporate the necessary (manifested) details or forms. For the king, he must first return to the source of this ideal through consistent and conscientious self-effort, and in so doing exudes the pure potency. Think of this as the first period of the Buddha抯 enlightenment, the Avatamsaka stage, in .08:<V\`bhp B J d 筲什殘r坮i^R^C^R^C^7^hEIh~U>*CJPJhEIh~UPJQJnHtHhEIh~U6丆JPJhEIh~UCJPJhEIh~UPJ+hGjh5丆JOJPJQJaJnHtH#hGjh5丆JOJPJQJaJ.hGjhP 5丆JOJPJQJaJnHo(tH.hGjh燺5丆JOJPJQJaJnHo(tH.hGjhN g5丆JOJPJQJaJnHo(tH h螪h~UCJ,PJaJ,nHtHh螪h~UCJ,PJaJ,0:<`bdR T V  @ B 2劆^劆gd~U 勑d`勑gd燺gd~Udgd~U $da$gd~U 勑d`勑gdEI $勑^勑a$gdEI$a$gd$a$gd~U|g苂蕣 8 < N P R T V n   箬勹忻缎敒敒卽gugWgu匜 hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`6>*PJnHtHhEIh`>*PJnHtHhEIh`>*PJQJnHtHhEIh`PJQJnHtHhEIh`6丳JhEIh`PJjhEIh`0JPJUhEIhEIPJnHtHhEIh~UPJnHtHhEIh~UPJhEIh~UPJQJnHtHhEIh~UCJPJhEIh~U6丆JPJ   , > B Zbdflnpt RUhpFNh疋用硬疋⑩⑩⑩⑩戔|猗猗鈢猗猗鈶鈶獠駆鈶hEIh`PJaJ nHo(tH)jhEIh`0JPJUaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`>*PJQJnHtHhEIh`PJQJnHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtH(hptx&'|r""L#`#$$%%%%%%%%%<&D&&&&&&&''((_,镟相相镟相亨亨镟镟相镟蠜啗相相相相浵浵嘞嘞浵泦)jhEIh`0JPJUaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtH)jhEIh`0JPJUaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`>*PJaJ nHtH3s!L#b#,/00001r1t11N2335b::;;>鼵錨鎊劆^劆gd~U $da$gd~U 勑d`勑gd燺dgd~U_,b,...}......///"/#/$/Q/////000000004181t112镟镟蚜蚜蚜蚜驯溋燕屶镟{l{l裑囡嘌{ hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`>*PJaJ nHtH)jhEIh`0JPJUaJ nHtHhEIh`>*PJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtH!22*2N222F3L3V3^3355666677888&9(9*9,999:碥途灳灳弉従灳]Hn綡)jhEIh`0JPJUaJ nHtH hEIh`0JPJaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtHhEIh`>*PJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtH#hEIh`>*PJQJaJ nHtH: :J:N:b:::;==>> ? ?H?J?AA8A>A@ABA咥淎瓵窤鯞CCCC镟镟侠嗬袄犂犂犂徖弞纊[k[k[k[khEIh~U6丳JaJ nHtHhEIh~UPJaJ nHtH(jhEIh`H*PJUaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtHhEIh`>*PJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtH hEIh`PJQJaJ nHtHhEIh`PJaJ nHtHhEIh`6丳JaJ nHtHC薈虲鳦鶦鐴駿鼸\|\\錨鎊骬_:_``歚靈餪a a歛頰騛b渂cc琧躢郼靋nd攄榙eee&e鋏Lf巉鎓襻襻襻襁裎窨湨懄湨憘hEIh~U6丳JhEIh~UPJQJnHtHhEIh~UPJQJhEIh~U>*PJhEIh~UPJhEIh~U>*PJaJ nHtHhEIh~UPJaJ nHtH hEIh~UPJQJaJ nHtHUhEIh~U6丳JaJ nHtHhEIh~UPJaJ nHtH/which His spirit surges forth unmediated, according to Zhiyi (zfW). To proceed from this is to make the august ideal applicable to the world. For if civility can be attained by ritualistic principles, one must allow for such principles to express itself through various reifications of specific rituals, and in specific rituals through specific details. The puissance of a rite lies beyond the meat definitely, yet at the same time, some meat is necessary. Though not too much. Bibliography Ma, Chengyuan. 2001. Vol. 1 Shanghai bowuguan cang zhanguo chu zhushu ( NwmZSir啓蠀b齎Zi鵽fNN ), Shanghai guji chubanshe. 2001 Ma, Chengyuan. 2002. Vol. 2  Shanghai bowuguan cang zhanguo chu zhushu ( NwmZSir啓蠀b齎Zi鵽fN孨 ), Shanghai guji chubanshe. 2001 Zhu, Runqing; Liao, Mingchun ed. 2002 Shangboguan cang zhanguo chu zhushu yanjiu ( NZS啓蠀b齎Zi鵽fNxvz), Shanghai shudian chubanshe, 2002 Zhu, Runqing; Liao, Mingchun ed. 2004 Shangboguan cang zhanguo chu zhushu yanjiu xubian ( NZS啓蠀b齎Zi鵽fNxvz韣), Shanghai shudian chubanshe, 2004 Ma, Ruichen (Qing Dynasty) 1989 ed. Maoshi zhuanjian tongshi (踜i姵P媨愃), Beijing: Zhonghua shuju Chen, Huan (Qing Dynasty) 1984 ed. Shi maoshi zhuanshu (i娵kl砅弖), Beijing: Xinhua shudian Qian, Mu, 2001 ed. Guoxue gailun (齎f[俰簨), Taiwan: Lantai chubanshe, 2001 Fingarette, Herbert. 1972 . Confucius  The Secular as Sacred. Harper Torchbooks Eliade, Mircea. 1996 reprinted. Patterns in Comparative Religions. University of Nebraska Press Tang, Yuhui (on權`) ed. 2001. Zhanguo wenzi bian (0b W噀W[鑮), Fujian renmin chubanshe, 2001     PAGE  PAGE 1  All translations below are my own.  According to the then curator of the Shanghai museum Ma Chengyuan (瑱b恘), there is a claim that the acquired materials are from the same source as the earlier acquired Guodian materials, though evidence remains inconclusive. The only exact claim in dating is the Shanghai manuscripts are part of the sacrificial paraphernalia of tomb sacrifice of an aristocrat of Chu before the state moved its capital to Ying (鈵). Refer to the preface in Vol. 1  Shanghai bowuguan cang zhanguo chu zhushu ( NwmZSir(櫹0b WZi鵽鴉N ), Ma Chengyuan ed. Shanghai guji chubanshe. 2001. The  Min zhi fumu chapter is to be found in Vol. 2, and the philological work is undertaken by Pu Maozuo (頾冩]). Also, the exact dating of the manuscripts render them to be around 261 + 65 years, 鎊骬^`NaPbdc&d赿je f蘤xgzg|gg俫唃坓実巊抔攇╣猤刪]刪gd~U 匄&`#$gd~Ugd}  & Fgd~Udgd~U鎓靎g(g,g6gvgxg|g~g俫刧坓奼巊恎攇杇猤琯竒篻糶緂纆膅苂萭蔳hhhh歨爃LkNk榢蹯忪蹯坌饶饶饶饶捍捍昂春ズ窗臇崅崠崅q俼 hEIh`CJPJQJnHtHhEIh`CJPJhEIh`PJjhEIh`0JPJUh_0JmHnHuh~U h~U0Jjh~U0JUh_jh_Uh} PJnHo(tH h~UPJo(hEIh~U>*PJhEIh~UPJhEIh~UPJQJ(猤纆耮膅苂h4zh|磡0$鷣悇袉爣z|~茒葕蕣虋gd} gd蔳o刪]刪gd~U 匄&`#$gd~U榢阫頺 lHmNm鎚鑝nx鰔y@yByDyFyjypy|y衴詙陏2z4z6z瀦聑膠蝯<{@{L{P{R{V{\{h{秢簕鰗鼂||f|h|j|p|妡恷榺箬阻阻箬砧阻茁阻阻箬阻龚铚枳铚枳嵶嵶峿峿嵶嶈ㄨ滆hEIh`6丆JPJnHtHhEIh`CJPJnHtHhEIh`6丆JPJ!jhEIh`0JCJPJUhEIh`PJ$hEIh`CJPJQJaJnHtHU hEIh`CJPJQJnHtHhEIh`CJPJhEIh`>*CJPJ1which means that they were in circulation circa 255 B.C. Refer to the interview  Ma Chengyuan xiansheng tan shangbojian (瑱b恘HQu菉 NZS!|) collected in Zhu Runqing (1gdon), Liao Mingchun (謂 T%f) ed. Shangboguan cang zhanguo chu zhushu yanjiu ( NZS(櫹0b WZi鵽鴉xvz), Shanghai shudian chubanshe, 2002.  In the  Collectanea of Warring States Characters (Zhanguo wenzi bian/0b W噀W[鑮), two other examples in showing similar renditions of ti are: 驏"Y-錯YN246 韾梌 畓T10; on the other hand, all examples of li are written with the radical shi. Tang Yuhui (on權`) ed. Fujian renmin chubanshe, 2001.  A Shuowen jiezi (獖噀銐W[) definition.  Refer to Hang Shijun (mgN) Xu liji jishuo (寏畒娖柂), quoted by Fang Xudong s (筫韊qg) Shangbo jian  min zhi fumu pian lunxi ( NZS!| 0lKN6r蚹 0莧謯恎), Zhu Runqing (1gdon), Liao Mingchun (謂 T%f) ed. Shangboguan cang zhanguo chu zhushu yanjiu xubian ( NZS(櫹0b WZi鵽鴉xvz寏鑮) (referred henceforth as XB), pp 275, Shanghai shudian chubanshe, 2004.  Pang Pu (悷8j) claimed that the chapter pre-dates the text of Mencius. Refer to his Xidu  Wuzhi sanwu (淯 擭髞 N!q ) in XB.  Refer to Ma Ruichen (瑱^t皬) (Qing Dynasty) Maoshi zhuanjian tongshi (踜i姵P媨愃), Beijing: Zhonghua shuju 1989 and Chen Huan (s朠Y) (Qing Dynasty) Shi maoshi zhuanshu (i娵kl砅弖), Beijing: Xinhua shudian 1984.  xuan (x) is read as  suan (梴).  M榺瞸磡秥竱鋦陓顋 }}}P}V}Z}獇聖鈣鑮 ~~~~剘瀪.02FJ$&(RXz獉畝簚>dhr苼葋騺魜鴣鷣鼇蹯蒽跆趵跆跆趵跆跆跆趵跆蹯条栗栗虪虪踺祯条栗条条栗条条条燧祯hEIh`CJPJnHtH!jhEIh`0JCJPJUhEIh`>*CJPJ hEIh`CJPJQJnHtHjhEIh`0JPJUhEIh`PJhEIh`CJPJ>ore details are to be found in the Fang Xudong s article in footnote 4.  Though one can also read it in the whole context of Kongzi jiayu, my choice is a more convenient one for various reasons of which is the fact that the primary concern of Liji, being ritual, is more suited for us to extrapolate any extra-documental significance from the excavated text.  Book of Odes Xiangshu (鴙 ) Poem,  Human with no four limbs (ti) (篘 鄀詺 according to Mao s annotation)  Book of Odes Xingwei (L坒) Poem,  When it starts to bud, and to form its body (ti) (筫迋筫詺 according to Zheng Xuan s annotation)  One classic example would be found in the Book of Documents  Grand Plan (*m膡) Chapter in which ji is annotated as zhong by Kong Anguo. Other examples can be found in the Book of Odes  Meng (l),  Yuanyoutao (W gCh), Mao s commentary. ,g噀6e?z錯g簆2008t^7g17錯 ,g噀|vHO錯g簆2008t^7g18錯 巹悇拕攧鼊鑵饏魠螁袉覇詥靻4HLPXb爣紘袊試@DLV爤鷪:>dh妷攭鼔&(*JPVx橼轵悟温蜷彬悟狉悟买狉彬悟狉买狉橼轵悟狉买买悟爲驙戲hEIh`CJPJnHtH hEIh`CJPJQJnHtH!jhEIh`0JCJPJUhEIh`6丆JPJhEIh`>*CJPJjhEIh`0JPJUhEIh`PJhEIh`CJPJU6xz~膴茒葕蕣虋蝈谘每h} PJnHo(tHh_h蔳oh蔳oPJnHo(tHhEIh蔳oPJh蔳oPJnHo(tHh蔳oCJPJnHo(tHh`CJPJnHo(tH2:p~UBP靶/ 班=!"#悹$悹%靶靶 愋8@8 ck噀CJPJaJmH sH tH $A@$ 貫祂=刉[SOBi@B nf恏\鑜噀,gG$$*@Q$ `>\鑜_(uH*}  .!"'= %7Qw/e n  ==012)*+B`N2Y2=!!竸!竸!竸!竸!崿! !崿!崿!id!!Y! !崿!8蹳y崿!崿012)*+B` 8@X;g/04 q"" # #%=*".#.0.. //+000.11152627292:2<2=2?2@2B2C2L2M2N2Y2Z2[2\2267799v::;I<<=======0000000000楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00楡0X00怈0X00怈0X00怈0X00X00[X00X00怈0楡0X00X00L楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡0楡000Z  $$$$$' h_,2:C鎓榢榺x虋#&'(*+,-8:AFG鎊猤虋$)79蕣%  '!!晙8@饞0(  養 S  ?!"&+.8<=@AC`dz}~  '  BHIJKMN_@B_bfkmoNW     ! % ' ) 5 8 > @ M S T Y [ _ G K + 0 3 8 9 @ B F [ b c i #.sz >ECH8:;<=?@AVi"V`{(. @IKOQV;U- / !!!!!!D"F"e"g"q""""""%%!&#&K&M&''''((((<)A)T)Y)`)f) * *8*:*(,2,t,y,{,},4.=.W._.`.d.e.l.m.p.q.w.y...................... ////%/,/4/=C=L=Q==========/^`B_ _dVb(0@Wu|;f! "3"4"q""g''**+,m.p...C1I172729292:2:2<2=2?2@2B2C2[2\22$4d4g4766677799Y99u:;H<K<<T=======333333333333332 .".#.+0O000.1m1114272729292:2:2<2=2?2@2B2C2[2\2y7789T===72729292:2:2<2=2?2@2B2C2[2\2= <@_Nh 剺^`剺h圚.h 勬剺^勬`剺h圚.h 劧 凩 ^劧 `凩噃圚.h 剢剺^剢`剺h圚.h 刅剺V^刅`剺h圚.h &凩&^&`凩噃圚.h 匂剺^匂`剺h圚.h 勂剺^勂`剺h圚.h 剸凩^剸`凩噃圚. <@         訸35M剈ON g蔳odvs q}.Gj瓵~UP !`p _螪} EI燺@旈Dmmm m m m mmmm@@@ @!@"@#@'@(=,=-y.y0y1y2y3y5y6y7y8y9y:=@@ @ @@ @@@@@4@@@<@@"@$@&@P@@0@h@@6@8@:@x@@@@@@\@@@`@d@f@h@j@x@z@|@~@@UnknownG噝 Times New Roman5Symbol3& 噝 Arial;媅SOSimSunG5  狖hMS Mincho-3 fg 1鹦h v撉~*[~*[4d22ET 2僎 P?s2A Ritual& Without Meat Teo Heng Ng銼噀W[ 鄥燆鵒h珣+'迟0剦  4 @ LX`hpxA Ritual… Without Meat Teo Heng Ng Normal.dot古文字214Microsoft Office Word@,$Ui@|-==@瘫瑲枞~*GVT$m 馛 &" WMFC <@<`lUT#m EMF<`u "hl   %  Rp@Times New RomanXT Tg 2碩碩<N0%%!醺5U0黎@酞0勌0槔0 霥0糼衝霽G噝 Times ew RomanT0TlN0ldv%  TT,84蓢@梼嘆LP K!" !, TT,4蓢@梼嘆L,P12TT,4蓢@梼嘆L,P K!," "  RpI@Times New Roman@酞0蘱癮 g $攦 攦 (閈该0蘱蘱!醺5U0\@酞0勌0槔0G噝 Times ew Roman@鏫0@鏫lN0X鏫dv%  T5^ )4蓢@梼嘆5L|A Ritual& without Meat?.z33\Q3.33\\\3.QQ3RTT ^ )4蓢@梼嘆 LP J Rp媅SO D閈攦 P g $攦 魝 (閈J0袇q袇q!醺5U0\@酞0勌0槔0蹣0纐犰0璺q8Ss!`犰0n;媅SOSimun@鏫0@鏫lN0X鏫dv% TTE ; 4蓢@梼嘆E LP(;TT ; 4蓢@梼嘆 LP枡uTT ;i 4蓢@梼嘆 LP|vuTTj ; 4蓢@梼嘆j LP)<TT ; 4蓢@梼嘆 LP J TT @ F4蓢@梼嘆 7LP K Ti 4蓢@梼嘆 LhTeo Heng Ng (;;;;;;:;;;;:;T` i 4蓢@梼嘆 LT臑nouuuTT iA 4蓢@梼嘆 LP)<TTB i 4蓢@梼嘆B LP J TT @ u4蓢@梼嘆 fLP K % TT84蓢@梼嘆LP K % TT:v4蓢@梼嘆_LP-!TT;Uv4蓢@梼嘆;_LP Rp@Times New RomanXT蠸g 2碩dT<J0旈D-旈D!醺5U0黎@酞0勌0G噝 Times ew RomanT0TlN0ldv% TdV t4蓢@梼嘆V_LTOn  B.)Rp@Times New Roman@<R%0鏌+V.\+\G噝 Times ew RomanT0TlN0ldv% T t4蓢@梼嘆_ LdWuti zhi liK.$.% T X t4蓢@梼嘆_L (lit. ritual without body)()-(B..-.-.-Rp媅SOXT蠸g 2碩dT<J0旈D旈D!醺5U0黎@酞0勌0;媅SOSimunT0TlN0ldv% TdY  l4蓢@梼嘆Y _LT!q詺KN畒dddc% T lt4蓢@梼嘆 _Lp) apropos of the  )-..-$.-)(% Tk Qt4蓢@梼嘆m_ LdMin zhi fumuL.$--B.% T|R *t4蓢@梼嘆R_L\ (lit. ) % Tj4蓢@梼嘆L|parents of the people)(.))-$..)-).-)% Tdk4蓢@梼嘆kLTlKN6r蚹cddd% T 4蓢@梼嘆 Lh) chapter in ).(.(.% T< 4蓢@梼嘆 (LShanghai Museum s collection of Warring 3.).,.)R.$(.F$).)(..-W(.-'% Ld  6!??% (  % Tw4蓢@梼嘆bLStates Chu Bamboo Manuscripts3))$=..=)F...R)-.#)-$'% Ldlol!??% ( TX w4蓢@梼嘆bLP (% T  w4蓢@梼嘆 b LdShangbo guan...-......-T w4蓢@梼嘆 bL|cang zhanguo chu zhushu)...$......(..$.-$..% TX w4蓢@梼嘆bLP)(% Tl  o4蓢@梼嘆 bLX NZS(櫹0bdcddd % Td4蓢@梼嘆LT WZi鵽鴉dddd% TT4蓢@梼嘆LP)% TT4蓢@梼嘆LP K TT @ s4蓢@梼嘆 \LP K &" WMFC < <`TT u@ 4蓢@梼嘆 LP KRp@Times New Roman`s斶屵"侊w! 溸1耣!4妍s0P|鳥鹲`s溸1耣4@羞暨-0G噝 Times ew Roman樴鱽0&旈D&X0XlN0pdv%  % T Y 4蓢@梼嘆B 6LI shall begin my discussion with an interesting pseudo '3,2-12O02',2''22H2,22,!,'212(,222TT  Y 4蓢@梼嘆 B LP-!T Y 4蓢@梼嘆 B Lphilological observation. 22221-,22',!3,22%  % !% TT  4蓢@梼嘆 LP1"" % T ? 4蓢@梼嘆( 9LAmongst the excavated Chu Bamboo scripts acquired at the HN221'2,,3,,2,,2C22B,N222',!2',,32!,2,2,Rp@Times New Roman燌0D0R%0鏌! p[飛p堟d0!b-斿n燥w!G噝 Times ew RomanT0TlN0ldv% T`q ? 4蓢@梼嘆 ( LTfin2TT ? 4蓢@梼嘆 ( LP-!TX j ? 4蓢@梼嘆( LPde2,TTk ? 4蓢@梼嘆k ( LP-!Tp o? 4蓢@梼嘆 ( LXsicle',,,% Tp ? 4蓢@梼嘆p( Lp of the twentieth 2!2,H,2,2%  % Tx % 4蓢@梼嘆 L\century,,22#1% !% TT ; 4蓢@梼嘆 LP2"" % T< } % 4蓢@梼嘆< "L, one of the fragmentary chapters 22,2!2,!"-1O,2,#0,3,2,!'TT} % 4蓢@梼嘆~  LP 2TT % 4蓢@梼嘆  LP % T` ^ % 4蓢@梼嘆  LTminH2T_ % 4蓢@梼嘆_  L` zhi fumu'22H2% TT % 4蓢@梼嘆  LP TT  % 4蓢@梼嘆  LP 2T % 4蓢@梼嘆  L| has the following line 2,'2,!22H222, T  4蓢@梼嘆 Lattributed to Confucius: ,!22,22C22!2,2'TT  4蓢@梼嘆 LP K % Tl  4蓢@梼嘆 LXVKNj ddddd% TT C 4蓢@梼嘆 LPd% TTD d 4蓢@梼嘆D LP(!% TTe  4蓢@梼嘆e LPgd% TT  4蓢@梼嘆 LP+8% TX 8 4蓢@梼嘆 LPli% TT9 Y 4蓢@梼嘆9 LP)!% TXZ " 4蓢@梼嘆Z LPKNJ宔d' % Ld "  C!??% ( Tp# z 4蓢@梼嘆# LX 橮KN猆 ddddddT{  4蓢@梼嘆{ L`TP[錘dk噕糴)Y N0ddddddddd% TT I 4蓢@梼嘆 LP K T0  4蓢@梼嘆 &LScholars render it into the following:8,22,!'!,23,!222,!22H21TT  4蓢@梼嘆 LP L % TlFw94蓢@梼嘆FLX!qrKNj ddddd% Td:w4蓢@梼嘆:LT!q詺KN畒dddd' % Ld::!??% ( Tpw! 4蓢@梼嘆LX !q gKN猆 ddddddT" w4蓢@梼嘆"  L`TP[錘dk*j糴)Y N0ddddddddd% TTs4蓢@梼嘆LP K TT8\4蓢@梼嘆ELP K Tp^.4蓢@梼嘆[LApropos of the underlined phrase, note how the second and fourth character is being read. H2!222'2!2,222-!2-222!,',22,22H3,'-,222,22!22!2,2,",,-!'2,21!,,2 % TDw4蓢@梼嘆 L`In the Wa 22,_-TxDu 4蓢@梼嘆x;Lrring States period, it is not uncommon that the character !!318,,'2&" WMFC <<`,"22'2222,2NN222,2,,2,",,-!% TXv D 4蓢@梼嘆v LPti% T D4蓢@梼嘆 Lx is written with the 'H!,2H22,%  % T|*4蓢@梼嘆L\radical !,2,,% T`*4蓢@梼嘆LTrou'22% TP*M 4蓢@梼嘆+L, though lexicon erstwhile has yet to show 22312,3,22,!'H2,2,'0,2'32H% TXN * 4蓢@梼嘆N LPli% T *4蓢@梼嘆 L rendered without the radical !,22,",2H2222,!,2-,% Td*4蓢@梼嘆LTshi '2% %  % TT4蓢@梼嘆tLP(!% TTr4蓢@梼嘆tLP:yd% T`s4蓢@梼嘆stLT). !% !% TT U4蓢@梼嘆FLP3"" % TT4蓢@梼嘆tLP % TXU4蓢@梼嘆tLPLi8% TVI4蓢@梼嘆VtJL without the radical signifies the  utensils used in conducting a ritual (H2222,!,2,,'12!,'2,,2,2'(2',22,2222,21,!3,!% TTJf4蓢@梼嘆JtLPlTTf4蓢@梼嘆ftLPi% TX4蓢@梼嘆tLP) !-% !% TT U4蓢@梼嘆FLP4"" % Tp4蓢@梼嘆tLX, and ,22 T@o4蓢@梼嘆mSLit is being used here legitimately as a synecdoche. I agree with such a reading. '2,212',22,",-1N,,0,',)02,,23,2,-1!-,H2'2,2,!,,221 Tdj4蓢@梼嘆SYLNevertheless, one s imagination is being provoked by the phrase in it s original form: a H,2,!2,,''22,!'N-22,22'2,212!2222,3302,23!,',2!'2!22,!2!N, T P4蓢@梼嘆9JLritual in the absence of offering or, graphically, without meat. By a clo!2,22,,2',2-,2!2"!,!312!1",22,,0H222N,,D0,,2TP4蓢@梼嘆9Lpse reading of the (,!-,2212!3, Tt64蓢@梼嘆\Lproposition and an extrapolation of its historical context, one understands the proposition 2!222'22,22,2,3!,22,222!'2'2!,,,22,322,222,!',22'2,2!222'22 Tt 4蓢@梼嘆1Las championing for the king to manifest the supra,',2,N22221!2!2,2212N,2!,'2,'23!,TT  4蓢@梼嘆 LP-"T, 4蓢@梼嘆 %Lformal spirit of the ritual. Yet, a !2!N,'2!2!2,!2,H,,% 666666666666666666666666666666666666 6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6 6666666666666666664&^WMFC<<`66  ^`."System-@Times New Roman-  2 Bb^ / ,^b',F3 2 B3F1/ 2 B3F / ,F3''@Times New Roman- .2 b^A Ritual without Meat?      2 Tb^ / 宋体- 2 b^(/ 2 b^首2 b^發 2 b^)/ 2 b^ /  2 b^ / 2 M b^Teo Heng Ng ( 2 b^黄潮興 2 b^)/ 2 b^ /  2 b^ / - 2 b^ / - 2 b^-/ 2 b^ /@Times New Roman-2 b^On @Times New Roman-2  b^Wuti zhi li -72 b^ (lit. ritual without body)( 宋体-2 b^無體之禮-&2 b^) apropos of the -2 s b^Min zhi fumu  -2 b^ (lit. -.2 *b^parents of the people)(-2 *Bb^民之父母-2 * b^) chapter in -G2 *(b^Shanghai Museum抯 collection of Warring  - @ !,--72 @b^States Chu Bamboo Manuscripts    - @ !B-2 @b^ (-2 @ b^Shangbo guan.2 @b^cang zhanguo chu zhushu-2 @b^)(-2 @ b^上博館藏戰-2 Vb^國楚竹書- 2 Vb^)/- 2 Vb^ /  2 jb^ /  2 ~b^ / @Times New Roman--\2 6b^I shall begin my discussion with an interesting pseudo         2 "b^-/42 'b^philological observation. t     --,^b- 2 1/'-a2 9b^Amongst the excavated Chu Bamboo scripts acquired at the r             @Times New Roman- 2 b^fin 2 1b^-/2 7b^de  2 Gb^-/2 Mb^si鑓le-&2 sb^ of the twentieth   --2 b^century   -,^b- 2 2/'->2 "b^, one of the fragmentary chapters        2 b^/ 2 b^ /- 2 b^min  2  b^ zhi fumu - 2 b^ / 2 b^/ /2 b^ has the following line     12 b^attributed to Confucius:     2 %b^ / -2 / b^亡聖之樂👱‍♂️，-2 /+b^亡- 2 /<b^(/-2 /Ab^月- 2 /Rb^+/ - 2 /\b^li- 2 /eb^)/-2 /kb^之豊- @ !b1+- 2 / b^🈚️，亡備之喪，&2 /b^君子以此皇於天下。- 2 /b^ / D2 Y&b^Scholars render it into the following:        2 Yyb^ / -2  b^無聲之樂，-2 :b^無體之禮- @ !D:- 2 ~ b^，無服之喪，&2 b^君子以此横於天下👨🏻‍🦯。- 2 |b^ /  2 b^ / 2 [b^Apropos of the underlined phrase, note how the second and fourth character is being read.               -2  b^In the Wa d2 ;b^rring States period, it is not uncommon that the character          - 2 Ib^ti-+2 Rb^ is written with the    --2 b^radical  - 2 b^rou -L2 +b^, though lexicon erstwhile has yet to show         - 2 b^li-82 b^ rendered without the radical      - 2 b^shi --- 2 b^(/-2 b^示-2 b^). -,^b- 2 3/'- 2 b^ /- 2 b^Li -z2 Jb^ without the radical signifies the 搖tensils used in conducting a ritual (           - 2 b^l/ 2 b^i/-2 b^)-,^b- 2 4/'-2 b^, and  2 JSb^it is being used here legitimately as a synecdoche. I agree with such a reading.        2 qYb^Nevertheless, one抯 imagination is being provoked by the phrase in it抯 original form: a              z2 Jb^ritual in the absence of offering or, graphically, without meat. By a clo           &2 cb^se reading of the    2 \b^proposition and an extrapolation of its historical context, one understands the proposition                   U2 1b^as championing for the king to manifest the supra          2 b^-/C2 %b^formal spirit of the ritual. Yet, a        -^^bb^^aa^^aa]]aa]]aa]]aa]]aa]]``]]``\\``\\``\\``\\``\\__\\__[[__[[__[[__[[__胀諟.摋+,0 X`| Harvard University[2'   !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`bcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F1稓枞1TableI/WordDocument4SummaryInformation(a磯DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjm  FMicrosoft Office Word 文档 MSWordDocWord.Document.89瞦