Book Reviews

Higashi Ajia no Jugaku: Keiten to sono kaishaku （East Asian
Confucianism: The Confucian Classics and Their Interpretation）, by
Huang Chun-chieh. Translated by Fujii Michiaki. Tokyo: Perikan
Sha, 2010.［東アジアの儒学：経典とその解釈／黄俊傑著．東京 ： ぺり
かん社，2010．¥2,800，270 頁］

Huang Chun-chieh, distinguished professor of history and dean of theInstitute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities and Social Sciences at
National Taiwan University, is undoubtedly one of the most prolific scholars
today writing on Confucianism. Over the last decade, Huang has distinguished himself and his work by focusing on Confucianism as more than aChinese intellectual and philosophical force. His writings typically explore
important aspects of the Confucian tradition in a broader perspective, one
grounded in Chinese sources but invariably examining Korean and Japaneseinterpretations, not simply as sideline curiosities but as central expressions ofa living, dynamic tradition of intellectual history. In one of his recent publications, Dong Ya Ruxue （Taipei: Taiwan University Press, 2000）, now
rendered masterfully into Japanese by Fujii Michiaki 藤井倫明 as Higashi Ajiano Jugaku, Huang has again established his dedication to the East Asiandimension of Confucianism, thus rising above the often petty scholarshipconfined to the concerns of a national culture.
The preface of the anthology explains well the methodological approachthat has so distinguished Huang’s recent corpus. Huang emphasizes that thework is not a disparate collection of essays on different texts published inmainland China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, or Vietnam, but rather a related
examination of Confucianism in East Asia, seen as spatially, temporally, andconceptually transcending the borders of China, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam,
yet binding them together by means of Confucian thought, ideals, and values.
As such, East Asian Confucianism represents a cultural dimension that is
spatially larger than Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism, Tokugawa Confucianism,
and Korean Confucianism, even when considered as various independent
units combined. Temporally, East Asian Confucianism is an inherently multifaceted and diverse cultural dimension, not one bound by earlier assumptions

64

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

regarding monism, center and periphery, orthodoxy and heterodoxy. Huang
understands this dimension in relation to Confucian ways of thinking withineach country, as well as their mutually creative, transformative responses anddevelopments within their historical ages. Huang’s perspective does not,however, seek to understand East Asian Confucianism apart from theConfucian traditions of each country, as though it were some kind of definitive, static, and unchanging ideology.
Within such a vast cultural and historical framework, Huang explores themeanings of East Asian Confucianism by focusing on various cultural understandings of such notions as public（kō 公）and private（shi 私）within thecultural arenas of mainland China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam.
Similarities in interpretations of Confucian classics are understood by Huang
primarily in relation to intellectual tendencies associated with “practicallearning” （jitsugaku 実学）, viewed by Huang as “the culturally distinctive
feature of East Asia.” Differences consist in different interpretations of theclassics within the intellectual and cultural contexts （shisō bunkateki
myakuraku 思想文化的脈絡） of East Asia. Huang’s analyses are equallyconcerned with the dialectical relations of “concreteness”（gutaisei 具体性）
and “abstraction”（chūshōsei 抽象性）, “universalism”（fuhensei 普遍性）and“particularity”（tokushusei 特殊性）. If there is a weakness in the volume, it isthat Vietnamese traditions of Confucian interpretation receive short shrift,
while the core regions of East Asia—China, Korea, and Japan—are the mainfoci.
In the opening essay, “How is East Asian Confucianism Possible?”（“ ‘Higashi Ajia Jugaku’ wa ika ni shite kanō ka”「東アジア儒学」はいかにして可能か）, Huang first addresses the profoundly contrary views of the twentieth-century cultural historian Tsuda Sōkichi 津田左右吉（1873–1967）, who
flatly denied the reality of notions such as “East Asian civilization”（Tōyōbunmei 東洋文明）and “the East Asian spirit”（Tōyō seishin 東洋精神）. Huang
explains Tsuda’s claims in relation to Tsuda’s historical circumstances,namely, Tsuda’s admiration for Japan’s achievements in the Meiji period（1868–1912）and his contempt for China’s relative weakness during the same
period. Even Naitō Konan 内藤湖南 （1866–1934）, who acknowledged theexistence of “East Asian history”（Tōyō shi 東洋史）, still harbored, in Huang’sview, contempt for China. In contrast to the “quit Asia” mentality of Tsuda,
which echoed the view earlier voiced by Fukuzawa Yukichi 福澤諭吉（1835–
1901）, others were advocating the revival of East Asia, especially its artistic
and religious traditions.
Huang, however, traces his understanding of East Asian Confucianism
largely to the postwar work of Abe Yoshio 阿部吉雄 （1905–1978）, whose
studies of the influence of Chinese and Korean thinkers on JapaneseBook Reviews

65

Confucianism documented the complex and highly significant interrelationships between these key centers of East Asian thought. While the details of
Huang’s analyses are far too complex to recount here, suffice it to say that hefully appreciates East Asian Confucianism as both a unity and a truly multifaceted, multidimensional set of intellectual traditions, one in which theclaims of national cultures need not be lost in highlighting the importantvalues and concepts that bind the components together along essentially
Confucian lines. To capture these dimensions, Huang introduces two seminal
concepts that pervade the essays that follow: “cultural identity”（bunkateki
aidentitī 文化的アイデンティティー）and “political identity”（seijiteki aidentitī
政治的アイデンティティー）, overlapping yet largely exclusive categories thatprovide for recognition of cultural differences and significant shared terrain. It
is largely by exploring developments in light of these two categories that
Huang defines grounds for the possibility of the study of East Asian
Confucianism. In this he acknowledges the integrity of various cultures andtheir local peculiarities even while providing foundations for examining more
universal trends. Moreover, by providing such analyses, Huang can effectively deny that his proposed study of East Asian Confucianism issues from a“reflexive Orientalism,” a form of cultural “narcissism,” or some sort of“self-assertive” cultural strategy. Though I do not question this claim, there
seems little doubt that the rise of mainland China and the longstanding andmultifaceted successes of Taiwan, especially as juxtaposed to the political andmilitary problems of the Korean peninsula and the economic challenges
facing Japan, make the notion of East Asia as a larger cultural time and space
all the more appealing. This is all the more true since this larger notion of
East Asia is anchored in Chinese traditions, and Confucianism in particular, aclearly resilient philosophical force. Indeed, if there is a weakness in the brilliant opening essay to Higashi Ajia no Jugaku, it is that it provides lesscontext than might be expected, given its admirable emphasis on respecting
the subjectivities of all dimensions of East Asia.
The second essay, “Two Tensions in Traditional Interpretations of the
Confucian Classics”（“Keiten kaishaku no dentō to futatsu no kattō” 経典解釈の伝統と二つの葛藤）, examines various dimensions of two conflicts or
tensions in East Asian interpretations of Confucian classics. One involves thetension between “universal values”（fuhenteki kachi 普遍的価値）found in the
Confucian classics and the more particular circumstances of the interpreter of
the Chinese classics in time and space. Another consists of the tension
between the cultural identity and political identity of the classics interpreter.
In considering these tensions, Huang notes that they were inherent in the
Confucian tradition from the start, especially insofar as Confucians sought tograsp the Confucian way and preserve its integrity, even while also having

66

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

their interpretations serve as a basis for positively reforming their nations.
According to Huang, the interpreter’s purpose never was simply to understand the world. Rather, he invariably sought to transform the world. As aresult, for over two thousand years, interpreters of the classics have served inpractice as scholars of society, economics, and politics, as well as realisticallyminded interpreters of the classical traditions. A full recitation of compellingexamples of these tensions is beyond the scope of this review, but suffice it to
say that some of the more interesting case studies offered in this chapter
relate to the interpretations offered by several of the most learned Tokugawa
Confucians, including Yamaga Sokō 山鹿素行（1622–1685）, Itō Jinsai 伊藤仁斎（1627–1705）, and Ogyū Sorai 荻生徂徠（1666–1728）.
A brief look at the case of Yamaga Sokō is illustrative. In his later years
Sokō praised the Japanese imperial throne and its unbroken line of succession. In interpreting ancient Chinese philosophical history, Sokō’s reverence
for the Japanese throne led him to have considerably less respect for the Zhou
dynasty than one might expect of an advocate of Confucius’s thought.
Moreover, Sokō saw little value in Mencius’s political thought, distinguishedas it was by its readiness to discuss dynastic succession in conditional terms.
In Huang’s view, the peculiar nature of Sokō’s readings of the Confucianclassics results from the extent to which his circumstances in the cultural andhistorical time and space of Tokugawa Japan shaped his view of the more
universal political value judgments of the Mencius. Huang offers a number ofexamples such as this one, showing again and again how East Asian scholars
from mainland China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan have interpreted the classics
differently owing to their varying degrees of subjectivity, which in turn wasshaped by their cultural predicaments. In effect, Huang reveals that even in
addressing the most idealistic and universal concepts and values of the
Confucian classics, interpreters and commentators remained all too historically bound in their thinking.
The third essay, “Two Dilemmas Facing Confucian Expatriates of Former
States” （“Imin Jusha no futatsu no jirenma” 遺民儒者の二つのジレンマ）,
examines the unpleasant alternatives facing expatriate Confucians in theirefforts to come to terms with the Confucian classics as well as the circumstances that doomed their former states （bōkoku 亡国）. Since Huang is a
professor of history at National Taiwan University, it is tempting to interpret
this chapter contextually as issuing from the consciousness of a Taiwan
Confucian scholar who remains in the uncertain circumstances of relations
between Taiwan and mainland China, and the one-China policy generally
accepted in diplomatic circles. No doubt, there is some truth in such acontextualization of this brilliant piece of scholarship. Yet rather than focus on
the predicament of Taiwan Confucians, Huang emphasizes, among otherBook Reviews

67

things, the profound antiquity of the dilemmas that expatriate Confucians
have faced by opening his discussion with the case of Qu Yuan屈原（340–278 BCE）, a Warring States period scholar who was banished from his state
and then later chose to drown himself after his ruler, the king of Chu, who
ignored his Qu Yuan’s strategic advice, was defeated by the Qin. The case of
Qu Yuan proves that the dilemmas Huang highlights are hardly of recent
vintage. Indeed, they reflect the uncompromising integrity and determined
involvement of Confucian scholars and interpreters of the classics.
Simply stated, the two dilemmas that Huang discusses are（1）whether
to serve （shi仕） a ruler who does not necessarily embody the way, or toretreat（in陰）for the sake of maintaining one’s personal integrity unsullied,and （2） whether to attempt to combine one’s cultural identity with one’s
political identity, or distinguish them so as to avoid any compromise of
integrity. Huang examines these dilemmas in relation to Xu Heng 許衡（1209–1281）, a late Song Neo-Confucian who, after the fall of the Song
（960–1279）, decided it was in the best interests of Chinese culture to serve
the new Mongol regime, the Yuan（1279–1368）. He also explores the choicesof two Ming loyalists, Zhu Shunshui 朱舜水（1600–1682）, who ended hisdays in Tokugawa Japan, contributing to Confucian studies there, and Huang
Zongxi 黄宗羲（1610–1695）, a Ming loyalist who remained in Qing China,
devoting himself to completion of major works of Confucian scholarship,such as Ming Ru xuean明儒學案（Studies of Ming Confucians）and Mingyi
daifanglu明夷待訪錄 （translated as Waiting for the Dawn: A Plan for the
Prince）. While touching on the Taiwan situation in the conclusion to thisexceptionally insightful piece, this essay, one of the gems of the anthology, ismore focused on historical examples than their undeniable contemporary
relevance.
In the fourth essay, “Four kinds of ‘Body’ in Confucian Intellectual
Traditions: Patterns and Themes” （“Juka shisō dentō ni okeru shishu no
shintai: ruikei to tēma” 儒家思想伝統における四種の身体：類型とテーマ）,
Huang notes how a considerable amount of twentieth-century scholarship on
Confucian thought has focused on the Wang Yangming tradition of thelearning of the mind（shingaku 心学）. Much of this scholarship was contributed by William Theodore de Bary, of Columbia University. Seeking toaddress a relatively neglected aspect of East Asian Confucianism, Huang’s
essay highlights the significance of four dimensions of the “body”:（1）thebody as manifest in the context of political power and authority （seiji
kenryoku 政治権力）, （2） the body as evident in relation to social norms（shakai kihan 社会規範）, （3） the body as apparent in spiritual cultivation（seishin shūyō 精神修養）, and（4）the body as metaphor（inyu 隠喩）.
In each case, Huang emphasizes three propositions that apply to these68

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

types of “bodies.” First, they are not objective, physical bodies as such.
Rather, they are practical in nature and permeated with cultural value andsignificance, intimately related to concrete social and political circumstances.
They are spatially situated within social and political contexts, and temporally
baptized by historical experience. In this respect, while idealistic in nature,they are also sentient and subjective in perspective. Second, East Asian
Confucian conceptions of the body cast it as incomplete and imperfect innature. Hence, self-cultivation aimed at perfecting the body becomes aprocess geared toward perfection and completion, through the generative
force（ki 気）of the body. Third, the body is always associated with the mind
in relative codependence. Considered in these ways, East Asian Confucianism
can be seen as both physicalizing the spirit, and spirtualizing the physicalbody.
The fifth essay, “The Korean Confucian Chŏng Ta-san’s Interpretationsof the Analects”（“Chōsen Jusha Tei Chazan no Rongo kaishaku” 朝鮮儒者丁茶山の論語解釈）, continues a theme explored in the previous chapter, that ofEast Asian interpretations of the Analects 12.1, where Confucius explains to
his disciple Yan Yuan 顏淵 that “achieving humaneness is a matter of overcoming the self and restoring propriety”（克己復禮為仁）. Here the focus is on
the interpretations of the great Korean Neo-Confucian scholar, Chŏng Ta-san（1762–1836）, as compared with those of Zhu Xi朱熹（1130–1200）in SongChina and Ogyū Sorai in Tokugawa Japan. Ta-san’s thinking was that the self
己（Kor.: gi 己）mentioned in the Analects 12.1 refers primarily to the mind
（sim心）. However, Ta-san additionally interpreted the mind in relation to the
distinction between “the mind of humanity”（insim 人心）and “the mind of theway”（dosim 道心）, the first mind being the one that people must overcome
by means of the second so that people can fully realize the latter mind withembodied humaneness. Ta-san’s thinking thus draws upon the distinction
between the two minds that Zhu Xi emphasized. Qing（1644–1911）scholars,
however, rejected this distinction because they considered the passage in theBook of Documents（Shangshu 尚書）on which Zhu Xi’s interpretations werebased to be a forgery that wrote part of the Xunzi 荀子, a heterodox Confucian
text, into the ancient Confucian classic. While Ta-san’s interpretation of theAnalects passage was close to that of Zhu Xi, it departed by emphasizing
more the practical message of the passage in relation to people’s ethicalbehavior within society, as opposed to the more ontological understandings
advanced by Zhu Xi. Compared with Ogyū Sorai’s very political, rulerfocused interpretations of the passage, Ta-san’s interpretations were moresocially and ethically oriented. Rather than taking sides, declaring one line to
be orthodox and correct, and disregarding other readings as heterodox andmistaken, Huang, by means of these comparisons, illuminates the multifac-

Book Reviews

69

eted discourse of East Asian Confucianism, generously seeking to understandthe contextual forces that shaped and informed scholars’ readings of passages.
By means of its open-minded approach and its sensitivity to historical, social,
and political circumstances and the spatial and temporal dimensions that so
crucially conditioned the subjectivity of interpretations of the Confucian classics, Huang’s anthology masterfully brings to light the very rich and truly
seminal nature of East Asian Confucian thought.
The sixth essay, “The Korean Confucian Scholar Chŏng Che-du’sInterpretations of the Mencius”（“Chōsen Jusha Tei Saito no Mōshi kaishaku”
朝鮮儒者鄭齊斗の孟子解釈）, focuses on the reading of Chŏng Che-du（1649–1736）of the Mencius 2.2, where Mencius discusses “knowing words”（zhiyan知言）and “cultivating the generative force”（yangqi 養氣）. Huang suggeststhat Che-du’s emphasis on the mind as the source of language and its determinacy is consistent with the mind-based learning of Wang Yangming 王陽明（1472–1529）, rather than Zhu Xi’s thinking emphasizing the exhaustive
investigation of principle. He thus establishes Che-du’s perspective as
following the Wang Yangming tradition. While this essay continues Huang’s
project of contextualizing interpretations of the Confucian classics, readers
will notice that, relatively speaking, it lacks the profound breadth so evident
in most of the remainder of the anthology.
The seventh essay, “Early-Modern Confucians and the Public/Private
Distinction, with the Dialogue between Mencius and Tao Ying as a Point of
Departure”（“Kinsei Jusha to ‘kō’ ‘shi’: Mōshi to Tō Ō no taiwa o kiten to「私」：孟子と桃応の対話を起点として）, is by far the mostshite” 近世儒者と「公」
erudite, innovative, and richly documented essay in the anthology. It also
addresses a topic, the public/private distinction in Confucian and East Asian
thinking, that has been explored repeatedly. Nevertheless, the breadth oflearning that Huang brings to his highly original analyses greatly surpasses
virtually all earlier studies that this reviewer is familiar with. Future studies ofthis topic would do well to begin with a very careful reading of the complex
analyses presented here.
After surveying the development of the notions public and private fromthe Western Zhou 西周 period（1045–771 BCE）through the Warring States
period（475–221 BCE）, showing how understandings of these notions transformed from relatively concrete ones to more abstract conceptual categories,
Huang focuses on the Mencius passage discussing whether the sage-ruler Shun
舜would have intervened in the administration of justice had his father, Gu
Sou 瞽瞍, committed a murder. Mencius’s reply is that while Shun would nothave attempted to stop the minister of justice from serving the law as he wasobliged to, he would have thought nothing of abandoning his throne and, in
his private capacity, taking his father with him to a remote seaside location,

70

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

and there happily living out his days with his father beyond the reach of thelaw. Thus, rather than being an abstract examination of the notions of public
and private, Huang’s consideration of this topic takes on fascinating legal andpolitical issues related to matters of civil disobedience and one’s public andprivate obligations therein. Along the way, Huang explains how the discussion of these issues became intertwined with metaphysical issues, especiallyfor the Song Neo-Confucians. Needless to say, a topic such as this offers noeasy or simple conclusion, but Huang does rightly emphasize that the twodimensions of ethics and obligations are inseparable and often exist in an
uneasy tension that precludes any facile appeal to one over the other in everycase. In this regard, he takes a stand contrary to most philosophical discussions, which side with the public dimension over the private. Huang’s focus
on the Mencius passage and interpretations of it clearly reveals that evensages such as Shun, while recognizing the importance of the public sphere,
might well give priority to their personal obligations. Still, Huang’s purpose
is not to side with one approach over the other so much as to reveal, by
laying bare the contexts of East Asian scholarly interpretations, the truly
multifaceted character of the Confucian tradition.
The eighth essay, “The Processes and Methods of Understanding the
Confucian Classics”（“Keiten rikai no tejun to sono hōhōron” 経典理解の手順とその方法論）, addresses the mind-body problem in East Asian
Confucianism. Simply stated, it suggests that the mind（shin 心）and body（shin身）are often two inextricably interwoven dimensions of a unified mindbody（shinshin itai 身心一体）, that of the “body-subject”（shintai shutai 身体
主体）. This approach to understanding the mind, body, and self has given riseto an experientially grounded epistemology, or what Huang calls “bodily
knowing” （taichi 体知） and “the psychosomatic body as one” （shinshin
ichinyo no shintai 心身一如の身体）. Historically, this way of understanding themind and body traces easily from the pre-Qin period through the Ming
dynasty. One consequence of this perspective is that the Confucian classics
are naturally interpreted in more practical than metaphysical and ontologicalterms.
In sum, this volume makes an exceptional contribution to the study ofConfucianism, whether considered in relation to any of the countries
comprising East Asia or in reference to the region as a whole. Although not a
volume for beginners, it is a must-read for those specializing in the intellectual history of any East Asian culture. In affirming the validity of the study ofEast Asian Confucianism, Huang takes a stand contrasting with those ofearlier influential interpreters of Confucianism, especially Tsuda and Naitō.
Huang’s approach, contextualized in relation to Western scholarship on
Confucianism, resembles the breadth and profound insight characteristic ofBook Reviews71

the wide-ranging work of William Theodore de Bary. Like de Bary, Huang
has taken Chinese Confucian thought as his focus, but at every turn he has
equally sought to develop it within a framework larger than any single
national culture, confident that in doing so its full diversity will become moreevident. One challenge facing those engaged in the study of East Asian
Confucianism that Huang perhaps forgot to mention is the profound breadthof historical and philosophical vision needed to produce such seminal studies.
I hope that others working in intellectual history can rise to match theaccomplishments of such a visionary master.
John TUCKER
East Carolina University











Xinjiao Can Tiantai Wutai shan ji（The Record of a Pilgrimage to the
Tiantai and Wutai Mountains, Newly Edited）, by Jōjin, edited by
Wang Liping. Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe, 2009.［新校参天台五台山記／成尋著，王麗萍校點．上海：上海古籍出版社，2009．98
元．892 頁．
］

Wang Liping’s Xinjiao Can Tiantai Wutai shan ji is an invaluable scholarly contribution. It is the first reliable edition of the diary kept by theJapanese monk Jōjin during his travels in China in the years 1072–1073. The
diary is major primary source for the study of the history of the Song dynasty
and its relations with Heian Japan. I would like to use my own experience
with the diary to illustrate the significance of Wang’s new edition.
The focus of my own research is Japanese history, the Heian period inparticular, but I have always been interested in Sino-Japanese cultural relations. Hence, in the 1980s I decided to attempt to translate Jōjin’s diary into
English. Although I knew my skills as a Sinologist were inadequate, theJapanese scholar Hirabayashi Fumio had recently published a variorum
edition of the text,1 and an annotated version by Shimazu Kusako seemed to
1 San Tendai Godai san ki kōhon narabi ni kenkyū（The Record of a Pilgrimage
to the Tiantai and Wutai Mountains: Edited Text and Research）（Tokyo:
Kazama Shobō, 1978）.

72

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

explain the problematic details.2 In addition, an older edition by the distinguished Buddhologist Takakusu Junjirō included some useful commentary.3
With the aid of these various texts, I slowly produced the first draft of an
English translation. In the process, however, I also realized that my translation was totally unacceptable, for the diary contained too many passages that
I was not sure I understood. I was able to produce a few studies based onwhat I had learned from Jōjin’s writings, and they included translations of afew excerpts. My complete draft translation, however, was too uncertain to
publish, and I lacked the skills needed to correct it.
The problems were twofold. The first was my own ignorance. Not beinga Sinologist, I was unable to make sense of many details such as Chinese
official titles, ranks, and bureaucratic vocabulary. Since I am not a
Buddhologist either, Buddhist terms were also a problem, although specialized reference works helped me with many of them. The second problem wasmore fundamental: the lack of a reliable text. As I studied the text, I was soon
finding obvious typographical errors in Hirabayashi’s version and so began torely principally on Takakusu’s very old edition. Shimazu’s annotations andtranslation into Japan were indeed useful, but not nearly so helpful as I had
expected. Many ambiguous or otherwise difficult passages in the original
remained unclear, and I began to spot errors in her version too.
When I began working on Jōjin’s diary, it had received relatively little
scholarly attention. This is demonstrated by the exhaustive bibliography that
Wang included in her edition. It lists 119 items, including both critical studies
and earlier editions. Of them, only 25 were published before 1985. Among
those 25 were important pioneering studies, but also the unreliable editions
that I had been using. Since 1985, however, Jōjin’s diary has begun toreceive more substantial attention, primarily from scholars in Japan but also
several in China—Wang herself being the most prolific—and from two of us
in the Western world, Charlotte von Verschuer in France and myself. AmongJapanese scholars, the distinguished Sinologist Fujiyoshi Masumi has madethe most substantial contributions. In addition to his many critical studies,
which he compiled into a book in 2006,4 he also published the first half of his
2 Jōjin Ajari no haha no shū, San Tendai Godai san ki no kenkyū（Research on
Poems of the Mother of the Acharya Jōjin and The Record of a Pilgrimage to
the Tiantai and Wutai Mountains）（Tokyo: Ōkura Shuppan, 1959）.
3 “San Tendai Godai san ki”（The Record of a Pilgrimage to the Tiantai and
Wutai Mountains）, in Yūhōden sōsho（Travelogue Series）, no. 3, Dai Nihon
Bukkyō zensho（Complete Works of Japanese Buddhism）, no. 115（Tokyo:
Bussho Kankōkai, 1915）.
4 San Tendai Godai san ki no kenkyū（Research on The Record of a Pilgrimage
to the Tiantai and Wutai Mountains）（Suita: Kansai Daigaku Shuppanbu）.

Book Reviews

73

complete annotated translation in 2007.5 Both are works of extraordinary
erudition. Fujiyoshi has solved many of Jōjin’s textual riddles, and those of us
interested in the dairy await the appearance of the second half of his annotated translation.
The one gap in Fujiyoshi’s work is that he provides only an annotatedtranslation, but not a reliable version of the original text. Serious scholars will
want to use Fujiyoshi’s studies in conjunction with a good edition of the text.
Until recently, that would probably have been Takakusu’s version, eventhough it will soon be 100 years old. Fortunately, Wang has filled this scholarly gap by providing a new and reliable critical edition of Jōjin’s original
text. Wang’s version is fully punctuated, with proper nouns clearly indicated.
Her notes indicate textual variations and explain her choices. In addition, sheprovides a useful introduction, a thorough bibliography of scholarship on thediary, and an index. Anyone studying the diary will want to use Wang’s
version as a basic text. The diary is an important source that helps us better
understand many aspects of East Asia in the eleventh century. Now that wehave a reliable edition of the original text, scholars will be able to makebetter use of this diary. With the help of Wang’s new text, I look forward toreturning to my draft translation and hope I can produce an English version
worthy of publication.
Robert Borgen
Professor Emeritus, University of California, Davis











Hongrumong 홍루몽, 6 vols. and a supplement, Korean translation of
Hongloumeng 紅樓夢, translated by Yongchul Choe （Yongch’ŏl
Ch’oe）and Minhee Ko（Minhŭi Ko）. Seoul: Nanam, 2009. Vol. 1,
485 pp. Vol. 2, 495 pp. Vol. 3, 517 pp. Vol. 4, 573 pp. Vol. 5, 487
pp. Vol. 6, 497 pp. Supplement, 190 pp. 14,000 won.

This newly published Korean version of Hongloumeng（Dream of the Red
Chamber）was translated by two Korean scholars of classical Chinese litera5 San Tendai Godai san ki（The Record of a Pilgrimage to the Tiantai and Wutai
Mountains）（Suita: Kansai Daigaku Shuppanbu）.

74

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

ture. Professor Yongchul Choe of Korea University, who translated the first 80
chapters, earned his doctorate at National Taiwan University, and Professor
Minhee Ko of Hallym University, who translated the last 40 chapters,
obtained his doctorate at Korea University. Both studied Hongloumeng fortheir degrees and became prominent scholars of Hongloumeng studies in
Korea. The translators’ backgrounds thus indicates that this translation is themost scholarly of all Korean translations up to the present. The Chinese text
for this translation was Hongloumeng （3 vols.）, annotated by the
Hongloumeng Institute in China and published by Renmin Wenxue
Chubanshe in 1997.
It is known that the first 80 chapters of Hongloumeng were written by
Cao Xueqin, and the last 40 chapters were drafted by Cao Xueqin andrevised and supplemented by Gao E. The English translation titled The Storyof the Stone（5 vols., Penguin Classics, 1973–1986）is another example of atranslation of the entire 120 chapters being divided by two translators, thefirst 80 chapters of this English version being translated by David Hawkes,
and the remaining 40 by John Minford.
The earliest translation of Hongloumeng in Korea was published around1884 in the late Chosŏn Dynasty and was part of the Naksŏnjae Collection. It
was a complete transcription, by hand, of the original Chinese text, with
Korean pronunciations of the Chinese characters indicated. It comprised 120
volumes, each chapter being bound in a single volume （currently 117
volumes exist）. This is the earliest complete translation of Hongloumeng in
the world. Since Korea gained independence in 1945, a number of complete
or abridged translations have been published, most of them being eithertranslations from both the Chinese original and the Japanese translation, ortranslations done by Chinese-Koreans living in China. Hence, the appearanceof this scholarly translation fulfills a long-felt need.
The translation of Hongloumeng by Profs. Choe and Ko consists of six
volumes and includes a supplementary volume titled A Dream of Red
Mansions, which contains a variety of explanations. Hongloumeng is difficult
for beginners to understand because of the length of the novel and thecomplicated relationships of the characters. While the Romance of the Three
Kingdoms 三國志演義 has long been loved by Korean readers, Hongloumeng
has not been widely spread among the people. Taking this into account, thetranslators, after much contemplation, divided the novel into six volumes,
including 20 chapters in each volume and giving each volume a newly coinedname to help new readers understand the flow of the entire story. In addition,
they faithfully translated the couplets serving as chapter titles, and, in parentheses summarized the contents of each chapter with a few keywords. These
are some of the exceptional efforts that the translators made to guide Korean

Book Reviews

75

readers through the novel.
The six volumes have the following titles. The title of volume 1（chaps.
1–20）is The Reincarnation of Baoyu（幻生）. This title stems from chapter 1,
the story of the birth of the main protagonist Jia Baoyu. Volume 2（chaps.
21–40） is Burying Fallen Petals （葬花）. In this volume, the sentimental
heroine Lin Daiyu collects and buries petals fallen on a spring day（chapter
27）. Volume 3（chaps. 41–60）is The Banquet for the First Full Moon（盛宴）.
The wealth and honor of the Jia Family is on display during the joyous feast
for New Year’s Day and again for the day of the first full moon（chapter 53）.
Volumes 1 to 3 constitute the first part of Hongloumeng, the period of wealthand honor of the Jia family. The next part, describing the family’s fall, takes
on a lonely and desolate mood. Volume 4（chaps. 61–80）is The Sound of theAutumn Night Wind（秋聲）. During a memorial service on the Mid-Autumn
Festival, the cold autumn wind is taken to be the sigh of an ancestor’s soul（chapter 75）. Volume 5（chaps. 81–100）is Crossed Destiny and Separation（別殤）. Lin Daiyu vomits blood and dies of heartache from lost love, while
Xue Baochai, wearing the red cloth of a bride, has a wedding ceremony with
Jia Baoyu（chapter 97）. Volume 6（chaps. 101–120）is A Return to the Stone（歸元）. The protagonist Jia Baoyu lets go of his dreamlike life in this world
and returns to the Great Fantasy Mountains and Root of Emotion Peaks, his
original birthplace, and in the end becomes a stone（chapter 120）.
This translation carefully and completely translates the original and adds
helpful annotations for readers. For comparison, the original Chinese characters are included for the two-line couplets serving as chapter titles and forpoems in the text. In addition, an effort was made to reflect the poetic
devices of couplets and rhymes in the original to give readers a feel of its
poetry. Also included were the Hongloumengtu 紅樓夢圖, by the painter Sun
Wen 孫溫 of the Qing dynasty, and the illustrations of the Jinyu yuan 金玉緣
edition, to show the cultural atmosphere of those days.
Scholars of Hongloumeng in China have expressed much interest in thisKorean translation and are pleased that another translation of Hongloumeng
has been published in a foreign country. At the International Hongloumeng
Conference held in Shandong, China, in 2009, scholars from all around theworld viewed the book and valued it highly. Recently, the Asia-PacificPublishers Association has presented its grand prize to this Korean translation. Thus the newly published Korean translation of Hongloumeng is being
highly rated in the publishing world as well as in academia.
ZHAO Dongmei
Associate Professor, Korea University

76

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

Huabei nongcun minjian wenhua yanjiu congshu（Research Series on
North China Rural Folk Culture）. 华北农村民间文化研究丛书．
Included in the series:
Handan diqu minsu jilu （Records on Folk Customs in the Handan
Region）, edited by Daniel L. Overmyer and Fan Lizhu.［邯郸地区民俗辑录／欧大年， 范丽珠主编． 天津 ： 天津古籍出版社， 2006 ．
¥12.00，308 頁］
Gu’an diqu minsu jilu（Records on Folk Customs in the Gu’an Region）,
edited by Daniel L. Overmyer and Fan Lizhu.［固安地区民俗辑录／
欧大年，范丽珠主编．天津：天津古籍出版社，2006．¥16.80，232 頁］
Baoding diqu miaohui wenhua yu minsu jilu （Records on Temple
Festivals and Folk Customs in the Baoding Region）, edited by
Daniel L. Overmyer, Hou Jie, and Fan Lizhu.［保定地区庙会文化与
民俗辑录／欧大年，侯杰，范丽珠主编．天津：天津古籍出版社，2007．
¥20.00，747 頁］
Xianghe miaohui, huahui yu minjian xisu（Temple Festivals, Fairs, andFolk Customs in the Xianghe Region）, edited by Daniel L.
Overmyer and Fan Lizhu.［香河庙会，花会与民间习俗／欧大年，范丽珠主编．天津：天津古籍出版社，2007．¥14.80，257 頁］

This four-volume book series presents temple festivals in rural North
China, covering four areas of Hebei Province: Handan, Gu’an, Baoding, andXianghe. Carried out by Fan Lizhu of Fudan University and Daniel L.
Overmyer of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, thisresearch project lasted from 2000 to 2005 and was supported by funds fromthe Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the
Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation of Taiwan.
The editors’ methodology was first to invite local scholars in these areas
to write reports about the temples, rituals, beliefs, and local customs of theirhome places, then to edit their reports and publish them in book form. Their
model was the research on local cultures in Fujian and Guangdong organized
by John Lagerwey（Lao Gewen）, Yang Yanjie, Fang Xuejia, Tam Wai Lun,and others and published as Kejia chuantong shehui （Traditional Hakka
Society）. A feature of the present series is that all these ethnographic reports
were written by local scholars knowledgeable about their communities.
Though these reports are not academic articles, they are primary sources thatcan be used as a basis for comparison and analysis. These reports discuss
temple rituals and festivals, customs and traditions, in local societies andvillages. They also tell us local history and changes, as well as current
cultural and religious conditions.

Book Reviews

77

The first volume, about the Handan area, consists of fifteen reports, ofwhich eight are about temple rituals and festivals, and seven are about
lineage histories and customs. The authors of all the reports are local scholars
writing about their home communities. As mentioned in the introduction tothis volume, many of the rituals are no longer practiced. The authors madevarious efforts to record local customs and religious rituals, using writtenmaterials and conducting interviews with older people. The second volume ison the Gu’an area. It is unusual in that all of the seventeen detailed reports in
it are written by one author, Zhao Fuxing, an editor with detailed knowledgeof local Gu’an culture. These seventeen reports are arranged in three parts:
temples and rituals, fengshui and divination, and other aspects of local
culture. Next, the third volume is on the Baoding area, focusing on temple
festivals and customs, local performance societies and folk art. The fourth andlast volume is on the Xianghe area and focuses on local customs, traditions,temple festivals, and entertainment troupes.
On religion, the reports of each volume provide us with a historical andgeneral overview of the temples and religious circumstances of the particular
district. For example, in the second volume, on the Gu’an area, Zhao Fuxing
not only surveyed the altars and temples of local communities but also
provided a historical overview of the transformation of temples and rituals
there. According to his research, temples in the Gu’an area have a long
history. There are records of 142 to 159 temples in the Qing period（1644–1911）, with many smaller temples not recorded. Of those recorded in local
histories, approximately 14.5 percent were Confucian temples, 25 percent
Daoist, and 60 percent Buddhist.
However, at present many of them no longer exist, an example being theMedicine King（藥王）temple, which lasted 500 years and is said to have been
the most well-known temple in the Gu’an area. Yet some rituals and festivals
have continued until today with connections to local people’s lives despite thesocial transformations that occurred in China. An case in point is the hail
festival（冰雹会）, which began about 300 years ago as a ritual to prevent hail
but eventually expanded to include avoiding harm and increasing blessingsand family prosperity. The local people believe that it really works; they takeit very seriously and feel that it is sacred. As Zhao Fuxing concluded, “Showreverence to the gods as if they are present. Where there is faith, they exist;
where there is no faith, they do not. The villagers all understand this principle.” Zhao’s reports show us that religious culture as a product of history
serves a distinctive function in society.
Some of the reports look at the context of popular religion and forms of
the belief in the gods in North China as compared with South China. For
example, in the fourth volume on the Xianghe area, “The Temple Festivals of

78

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

Mount Yaji and（the goddness）Wang Er Nainai（王二奶奶）” focuses on thetemples on Mount Yaji and the gods venerated in them, for example,
Taishanglaojun（太上老君）and Yuanshitianzun（原始天尊）. Bixiayuanjun（璧霞元君）, the goddess of Mount Tai, is regarded as the most important goddessof the temple and is a popular religious belief in North China, in contrast to
belief in Guanyin（観音）in South China. Among the many deities worshipedin the temple, there exists a local goddess named Wang Er Nainai（王二奶奶）, who was a woman from the Xianghe area at the end of Ming dynasty（1368–1644）. Wang Er Nainai was adopted as a god by local people in gratitude for her contributions to the temple in the Qing dynasty. This report thus
shows us a case where a newly created deity is adopted into the Daoist
pantheon as a reflection of local religious culture. It also introduces the largescale annual festival associated with the temple, another vigorous aspect of
local temple culture. The annual festival, held until the 1950s, had attracted
so many worshipers and merchants that it was turned into a fair. In 1987,
after a long break, the festival was revived with the support of local government officials, who recognized that it was an expression of folk culture andalso that it stimulated economic activity.
The detailed descriptions in these works draw a historical picture of local
belief and the vitality rooted in it. From these reports we gain an overall
understanding of popular Daoist belief in Hebei Province, its local forms, andthe related social context, down to the present. Though these reports could be
sharpened to bring out ethnographic aspects and historical descriptions could
be presented in clearer form, nevertheless, the works in this series provide us
with plenty of information, valuable local knowledge, and detailed records. I
look forward in the near future to further discussion and analysis based onthese works.
HUANG Yun
Post-doctoral Fellow, Kansai University