Kitay_i_okrestnosti_Mifologia_folklor_literatura

what good repute can [he] still have? Did not Master (sheng) Tung say: 'To strive hard for humanity and righteousness, being constantly afraid of inability to transform common people — this is the ambition of ministers and grandees; to strive hard for wealth and profit, being constantly afraid of poverty and want — this is the business of common people.' Therefore [K'ung-tzu said:] 'Those whose ways are not the same do not take counsel with each other.'91 Now, how can [you], Sir, moreover accuse me basing [yourself] on the institutions [that prescribe proper ways of behaviour for] ministers and grandees?"92

He wants to say Sun Hui-tsung and himself are persons of "different kind"(y/ lei), having different "wills,""intentions" or "ambitions"(c/wA)93 respectively. To adduce a passage from Ssu-ma Ch'ien, of which Yang Yün's words quoted above are somewhat reminiscent, "The Master said, 'Those whose ways are not the same do not take counsel with each other.' This is just to say that each follows his own intention {chih). Thus [he] said, 'If wealth and rank (or: high standing. — J.K.) could be sought, though it were as a knight holding a whip, I too would do it. If they could not be sought, I would follow what I love.'"94 Yün points to three differences between himself and Sun Hui-tsung: that of their social positions, that of objects they are psychologically concentrated on (i. e. of their "wills") and that of "ways" they follow pursuing these objects (types of their behaviour). These differences account for his refusal to take Sun Hui-tsung's advice to behave in such a way that would enable him to recover his high position, since this advice proceeds from the person of a "different kind." But in the end of his letter he fails to refrain from hinting how mean in his opinion the present "intentions" of his friend Hui-tsung are. He points out, that the young people of the barbarous Anting commandery, where Sun Hui-tsung has recently become Grand Administrator, "are greedy and mean" and proceeds, "Is it possible that [local] habits and

answer to the questions posed by the emperor, see Han shu, 56.4019. In Yün's letter the order of sen-

92Han shu, 66.4433—4434.

93See Kroll. "Correlative Thinking,"54.

94 Shih-chi, 61.14. The translation is cited from Grand Scribe's Records. Vol. VII, 4 (cf. ibid., 5,

п. 39). For the last quotation cf. Legge. Confucian Analects. Bk.VII. Ch. XI, 198.

328 Классическая литература

customs change [the original nature of] the people [who have moved there from without, like you]? Now [I clearly] see [your] intentions, Sir." He wishes his friend to strive diligently for fame and merit at the time when the

its date. Two passages in his biography seem to be relevant, i. e.(l) Pan Ku's statement that Sun Hui-tsung sent a letter to Yiin "more than a year" after the latter was demoted (see above) which points to some time later than January/February 54 B.C., and (2) Yang Yün's statement in his letter that he "has been accused of an offence already three years ago" (see pp. 21—22 above).The former statement seems to be an argument in favour of the assumption that Yün wrote his letter ca in spring of 54 B.C. The latter one seems puzzling, unless one admits that "three years" probably is a symbolic number here: the text implies it is a parallel to (and a hint at) the "three years' mourning" for one's father — a space of time actually equivalent under the Han to a period no longer than 25 (and not 36) months.96 If this is correct, then Yang Yün may have had in mind that he was accused in 56 B.C. But even this admission does not deliver one from doubts, since Yang Yün was an important figure in the demotion of Hsiao Wangchih (July-August 56 B.C.) (see above) and therefore in all probability was not yet accused at the time, which leaves but ca 21 months (and not the "necessary" 25) before he was executed (see below).

Sun Hui-tsung's attempt to persuade Yang Yün to strive for recovering the position of a high official was not the only one. His nephew Yang T'an, Marquis (hou) of An-p'ing since 63 B.C., who was Director of Dependent States (tien-shu- kuo) in 54 B.C.,97 told Yün, "Grand Administrator of Hsi-ho [commandery] (Hsiho / 'ai-shou) Marquis (or Noble) Tu (Tu-hou), [a native] of Chien-ping, previously was dismissed [from his post] because of his offences (lit. offences and faults), [but] now was invited to become Grandee Secretary.98 Marquis, [your] offence is light, moreover [you] have merit, in future [you] will be again employed [by the emperor]." Yün responded, "What's the use of having merit? The Son of Heaven (hsien-kuari) is not worth exerting every effort for [him]." Yang T'an re-

95 Han shu, 66. 4434; see p.13, n. 50 above.

96See Watson. Early Chinese Literature, 118, n. 9; Dubs. The History. Vol. Ill, 40—42; Hulsewé. "Fragments of Han law", 227. Cf. p. 21, n. above.

97For Yang T'an see Loewe^4 Biographical Dictionary, 636; for tien-shu-kuo see Bielenstein,

membered the fate of Yün's old friends Ke K'uan-jao and Han Yen-shou and said,'The Son of Heaven is like that indeed. Director of the Retainers Ke (Ke ssuli) and Supporter Han (Hanp'ing-yi) both were officials exerting every effort [for the emperor] and both were executed owing to a case [against each of them]."99

According to Pan Ku, there happened to be an eclipse of the sun, and a petty official by name of Ch'eng, a lowly subordinate of a Groom (tsou) whom he helped with the horses, submitted a memorial to the throne accusing Yang Yün of "being arrogant and extravagant, having not repented for his fault" and claiming

that "the calamity of the sun eclipse was brought about by this man."100 The date of the eclipse is known from the annals of Hsüan-ti, it is May 9, 54 B.C.101 The

memorial was forwarded to the Commandant of Justice, who "had proof brought forward [against Yün]102 and obtained the letter [he] addressed to Hui-tsung. When Hsüan-ti read it, [he] hated (or loathed?) him. Commandant of Justice equated [his crime103 with those qualified as] great refractoriness and impiety, [so he was executed by] being cut in two at the waist. [His] wife and children were banished to Chiu-ch'üan commandery. [Yang] T'an owing to [his] having failed to correct Yün by [his] admonitions, [his] having echoed [Yün's opinion]104 and ventured an utterance [of one who] cherishes a grudge, was dismissed from [his post] and made a commoner. [The emperor] invited and appointed Ch'en as a Gentleman. All those in [important] positions who had been on intimate terms with [Yang] Yün, [such as ] Superintendent of the Guards, Wei-yang [Palace] (Wei-yang wei-wei) Wei Hsüan-ch'eng, Governor of the C&pit&^ching-chao y in) Chang Ch'ang as well as Sun Hui-tsung and others, were all dismissed."106

Thus we know that Yang Yün's execution took place after the sun eclipse of May 9, 54 B.C. Ch'u Shao-sun testifies that in the 4th year of the Wu-feng period (February/March 54 ВС — January/February 53 ВС) Yün "made and uttered a

99 Han shu, 66.4434. For Ke K'uan-jao see pp. 7, 13 above; he held the post of Colonel Director of Retainers [Colonel, Internal Security, in Loewe's translation] {ssu-li hsiao-wei) (see Bielenstein. The Bureaucracy, 84—86; Loewe. A Biographical Dictionary, 116, 762) and committed suicide at the palace gates in 60 B.C. For Han Yen-shou see pp. 7 and 8 and nn. 27, 34 above.

100 Han shu, 66. 4434. For Ch'eng's post see ibid., a note by Ju Shun (= Ch'un) of the 3rd century;

Han shu hsüan-yi, 167 (n. 5),175. Note that Ch'eng was the aid of a Groom from the ministry of the Grand Coachman (see Bielenstein. The Bureaucracy, 35) formerly headed by Tai Ch'ang-lo.

101Han shu, 8. 279; Dubs. The History. Vol. II, 253—254 (and n. 20.8), 276.

102The translation adopted from Hulsewé. Remnants of Han Law. Vol. I, 74.

103Tang, cf. ibid., 80—83, 401(n. 261),403, n. 268.

104In place of cheng ("to correct") Hsün Yüeh reads chih ("to stop"), which is graphically similar;

instead ofying("to echo or to agree") he reads ying-ta ("to respond"), see his Ch Чеп-Нап-chi, 20.5a.

106 Han shu, 66. 4434—4435.The most part of the translation of the last sentence is borrowed from Hulsewé. Remnants of Han Law. Vol. I, 274 (8).

monstrous (or slanderous) speech and [owing to] the crime of great refractoriness was cut in two at the waist; [his] state was abolished."107The date can be corroborated by ascertainingthe dates of punishment of those who were demoted because of him. Yang T'an was dismissed from his post in the 4th year of the Wu-feng pe-

riod.108 Wei Hsüan-ch'eng who became Grand Master of Ceremonies {t'ai-chang) in the 2nd year or Wu-feng period (56 B.C.) was dismissed from this post in 2 year's time (i. e. in 54 B.C.).109 According to Han shu and to Hsün Yüeh's annals Chang Ch'ang became Governor of the Capital in the 1st year of the Shen-chüeh period, i. e.61 B.C.;110 according to Chang Ch'ang's biography he was dismissed from this post in 9 years' time (the 1st year of the Kan-lu period by Wang Hsiench'ien's reckoning, i. e. 53 B.C.), while according to the 19B table of the Han shu he was dismissed from his post in 8 years' time ( i. e. in the 4th year of the Wufeng period=54 B.C.)111. Thus the date of the execution is 54 B.C., though not necessarily May 54 B.C.112

Pan Ku's testimony that Hsüan-ti "hated" or "loathed" Yang Yün after reading his letter to Sun Hui-tsung (see above) made commentators search for proof corroborating the evidence of the historian. This search led to finding two approaches to answering the question what in Yün's letter made the emperor hate him. One of the approaches was used by the commentators of the 3rd century, the other by those of the 17th — 20th centuries.

Both Chang Yen (A.D. 3rd century) and "[Your] servant (or subject) Tsan" (probably Fu Tsan (ca A.D. 285)) evidently believed that Hsüan-ti's hatred and aversion were aroused because Yang Yün's poem is included in the letter. They interpreted the poem as an allegorical one. Their ways of commenting somewhat differ. Chang Yen mainly comments on separate characters or on combinations of

101 Shih-chi, 20. 45.

108See Han shu, 18.1046. Ch'u Shao-sun merely says his uttering "evil words", subsequent imprisonment and death penalty that threatened him followed in 3 years'time after he became Director of Dependent States, see Shih-chi, 20.41.

109See Han shu, 19B. 1262; cf. ibid., 73. 4639. For t'ai-ch'ang see Bielenstein. Bureaucracy, 17—23.

110See Han shu, 19B. 1257—1258; Hsün Yüeh. Ch'ien-Han-chi, 19. la; cf. Han shu, 76. 4760— 4761, commentary by Wang Hsien-ch'ien.

111See Han shu, 76. 4763; 19B.1258.

112Cf. also Ts'ang Hsiu-liang (Editor-in-Chief), Wei Te-liang and Wang Neng-yi (Aids of the Editor-in-Chief). Han shu tz'u-tien (Chinan: Shan-tung chiao-yü ch'u-pan-she, 1996), 800.

2 characters; only once he deals with a line (namely the 2nd one) of 4 characters. "[Your] servant Tsan" operates with larger blocks of the text — those of two lines (=8 characters) each. Chang Yen writes: "'Mountains' are high and situated in the south iyang) — this is a symbol (or image) of the sovereign of men; 'the rank weeds remained unkempt' means the [imperial] court is in [the state of] neglect and desolation (or disorder); 'one ch'ing' [amounts to] a hunred mu, [the poem] metaphorically [points to] the hundred (=many or all) officials thereby; one who speaks about 'beans' [means] persons of truthfulness and uprightness. 113 [Beans that] 'fell [to the ground],' being scattered over the field [surface], metaphorically [convey the idea that he] himself was discarded. The [bean] stalks are crooked and not straight, [which] means that all the ministers (or subjects) at the [imperial] court are flatterers." According to "[Your] servant Tsan," the first two lines of the poem," '[I] cultivated a field in those Southern Mountains, //[But] the rank weeds remained unkempt,' mean that at the court of the king [the poet] encountered disorder [among] the people, "while the second two lines,'"[I] planted beans on [a patch of land measuring] one ch 'ing, II [But they] fell [to the ground] and [only bare] stalks were left'[mean that] though [he] manifested all [his] loyalty and displayed all [his] probity [serving the emperor, he] merely labored, but reaped no crops."114 Probably Yen Shih-ku (581—645) shared Chang Yen's interpretation of the poem; at least he included it in his Han shu commenary.

The Ch'ing scholar Chou Shou-ch'ang (1814—1884) however offered a different solution of the problem. He believed that "Chang Yen made a detailed commentary for the poem (or song) shih" by Yang Yün launching unjust accusations at him by manipulating written law and weaving a story round him that would fill in the blanks in historical knowledge. As Chou pointed out "Mr.Yen (=Yen Shih-ku)'s commentary accepted it. [But I] venture to surmise that [the words] loathed by Hsüan-ti are several sayings in the letter, [which mention] 'a sovereign,' 'a father' and '[those who] perform obsequities to the dead' (see above).Probably when earlier Tai Ch'ang-lo denounced Yün's crimes there were [among them Yün's words that] 'the Emperor Chao passed away' (see above). Now [Hsüan-ti] again [discovered something] like that in his letter. Moreover [there is Yün's] saying that the supreme [ruler] 'in [his] travelling [is sure] not to reach Ho-tung [commandery]', etc. Reading this letter [I] assure myself again of the real [meaning] of his words; [it] is not connected with this poem." It was a

113 The Han shu reading of the text of Chang Yen's commentary gives additional information here. It runs: "...persons of truthfulness and sincerity; [beans] should (or: deserve to...?)be [kept] in granaries" {Han shu, 66.4433), but in other respects it is less detailed than the Wen hsüan reading.

114 Wen hsüan, 41. 911; cf. van Gulik, Sexual Life, 67, n. 1.

(1613—1682) comment on the qualification of Yiin's crime as "great refractoriness and impiety" (see above): "Ku Yen-wu said, '[His crime was qualified like that] since there are sayings in the letter, [which mention]'a sovereign,"a father' and '[those who] perform obsequities to thedead'."115

Let me remind of the sayings in question: "Now, what human emotions fail to repress (or keep down) is that which sages do not prohibit. Therefore [though]a sovereign is the most honourable [of all] and a father is the nearest (or: most beloved) [of all, for those] who perform obsequities to the dead there is a time when [the period of mourning] comes to an end" (above). This is all. To the mind ofthe Ch'ing scholars these words were sufficient for Hsüan-ti to remember that Yün had more than a year and a half ago predicted his death (for which the emperor never executed him at that time), and to regard the passage in his letter quoted above to be a direct continuation of the same trend of thought. But this time Hsüan-ti isn't even hinted at, Yang Yün obviously formulates or reproduces a general rule. Judging by the context all he wants to say is that according with natural human feelings even the mortal grief expires, so that human emotions are no more clouded by it. This accounts for the sages being able to set up the duration of the periods of mourning, the longest of which lasts for three years. It has obviously nothing to do neither with Hsüan-ti personally, nor with Yün's prediction of his death, and the emperor hardly could have interpreted it otherwise. As to Yün's utterance to the effect that the supreme ruler is sure "not to reach Hotung" commandery, it originates from Tai Ch'ang-lo's denunciation, not from Yün's letter.

This turns our attention back to Yang Yün's poem. Let us recapitulate what we know about it. It was sung in the traditionally Ch'in manner by a man (i. e.Yün) functioning as a choir leader, his wife(?) and a group of several male and female slaves to the accompaniment of traditional Ch'in musical instruments, pulsatile (such as earthenware drums — various clay vessels tapped by hand ) and stringed ones (such as a zither or psaltery /lute?/ skilfully plucked by Yün's wife). The singing was done in chorus. Rythm seems to have been of importance in it: tapping on and beating earthenware drums, as well as striking on thigh-bones and

115 See Han shu, 66. 4433, 4434. The Korean author Im Che (1549—1587) in his Susöng chi {Record of the City of Grief) emphasized that Yang Yün perished because he sang a song to the accompaniment of drums while drinking wine, cf. Cherepakhovui sup [The Turtle Soup].Koreyskiye rasskazui

XV— XVIIw. [Koreannovels of the XV— XVIIcenturies].Perevod s koreyskogo[ A translation from

the Korean]. Leningrad: "Khudozhestvennaya literatura [Belles-lettres] "Publishers. Leningrad Divi-

sion, 1970, 205—206. He obviously shared the opinion of the two Chinese commentators of the 3rd century.

crying "Woo! Woo!" indicate that. Such "concerts" took place usually during summer ^w and New Year la festivals; this may point to ritual provenance and perhaps character of such songs. In the kingdom of Ch'in ca. 237 B.C. the music of this kind is said to have been abandoned in favour of musical pieces and stiles of other kingdoms, but probably it points only to the change of taste of a part of the Ch'in elita, not to that of its other part or of commoners. Yün's letter shows the tradition of Ch'in music remained popular even in the 1st century ВС; it seems to be established well enough both in his family originating from Hua-yin and among the lower strata of the Ch'in society. The place-name Nan-shan (=Chung- nan-shan) appearing in the 1st line of the poem seems to be another sign of its connection with the Ch'in territory and tradition (see above).

Yün is said to have been able to perform (=sing) Ch'in songs since he was of Ch'in origin and brought up in its tradition. But evidently he was also the author of the poem he sang or at least he was regarded as such. This is implied by the attempts of two commentators of the 3rd century by means of allegorical interpretations of this song to answer the question why the emperor hated and finally executed him.

Formally the song included in his letter consists of four lines of four words(characters) per line and two concluding lines of five words (characters) per line. The last words of the 2nd, 4th and 6th lines rhyme with each other. These are the words written }д, JE , В$, pronounced d'ldg, g'idg, cTidg in whatBernhard Karlgren called Archaic Chinese116 and chih, ch'i and shih nowadays.

There are at least 2 literary allusions in the poem. One is, of course, the place name Nan-shan, which repeatedly appears in the Shih-ching. It seems worth mentioning that among its Nan-shan poems (in which the place name points to Chung-nan-shan) one can come accross those containingpoliticalcriticism.117

The other is the word combination meaning "weeds, rank weeds" "overgrown with weeds"(ww-wez(or hui?)). It repeatedly occurs in Chyu-tz'u, beginning with Li sao. There the poet (or rather his persona) describes what fragrant flowers he has planted on various patches of land , tells about his hopes to reap the crop when the proper time comes, and ends the stanza with the words, "Even if [fragrant flowers] grow withered and shed [their petals],why [should I] be distressed

116 See Han shu, 66.4433. Cf. Tor Ulving. Dictionary of Old and Middle Chinese.Bernhard Karlgren's Grammata Serica Recensa Alphabetically Arranged. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gotho-

burgensis, 1997, ##1324, 2653,1618. I should like to express my thanks to Professor Serge E. Yakhontov of St. Petersburg State University for a consultation concerning Archaic Chinese phonetics.— J.K

117 E. g. see Bernhard Karlgren. The Book of Odes (Stockholm: the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 1950), 132—134, # 191 (cf. Hanyü ta-tz'u-tien. Vol. I, 884, Nan-shan, the 1stmeaning).

overgrown with weeds (wu-wei(or wu-hui7))"m Earlier in the same poem it is said, "The three sovereigns of old were pure and perfect, // [It is round them] indeed [that] numerous fragrant flowers had their proper place." The traditional commentary explains that the expression "numerous fragrant flowers" metaphorically points to "a crowd of worthies."119 Thus in Li sao we encounter an opposition of "fragrant flowers" and "rank weeds" simbolyzing two groups confronting at the royal court, the former one consisting of "worthies" and the latter one evidently of their antipodes. A similar opposition, that of "rank weeds" and of "beans," appears in Yang Yün's poem. Moreover the allegorical character of the image of beans is corroborated by Chang Yen's commentary: "He who speaks of beans [means] persons of truthfulness and uprightness" (see above). One can stop here and state that Yün's poem is allegorical and metaphorically describes confrontation of two opposing groups at the imperial court. This is also corroborated by the rhetorical question posed by the poet who happens to be the loser in the confrontation: "Till when [has one] to wait for wealth and high standing?" (see above): the words are meaningless in the mouth of one who is a simple tiller devoid of any perspective of official career both now and in the past.

Thus the imagery of the first four lines of Yün's poem manifests certain similarity with that displayed in the stanzas of the 1st part of Li sao — it describes selection and nurturing of a group of worthy aids of the ruler as a process of working the land and sowing cultivated plants by contrast with wild ones, such as "overgrowing (or rank) weeds," which symbolize unworthy opponents of the former; the lines imply that if one fails to cope with "the weeds", to reduce them to order, one's efforts to reform the court and reap a fine crop making a successful career will be of no avail. Both commentaries of the 3rd century testify to that. More detailed of the two is that written by Chang Yen. It can be paraphrased as

ch'u-pan-she, 1957), Li sao, 1.23—26. Cf. David Hawkes. Ch'u Tz'u. TheSongs of the South.An Ancient Chinese Anthology (Oxford: at the Clarendon Press? 1959), 23—24. Hawkes translates the cited text as follows: "Though famine should pinch me, it is small matter; // But I grieve that all my blossoms should waste in rank weeds."

ture, 233, 234. In the Chao hun poem the expression "overgrown with weeds" describes the state, to which the ruler possessing an abundant te power is reduced, when he is bound by widely spread customs of vulgar people of the present age (see Ch 'u-tz'u chi-chu, 9. lb—2a; but cf. Hawkes. Ch 'uTz'u.

The Songsof the South, 103 and n. 1).

follows: I tried to reform my sovereign's court like a tiller cultivates the field, but it remained in the state of neglect and desolation (or disorder); I attempted to implant persons of truthfulness and uprightness among the many officials, but I was discarded. The paraphrase of "[Your] servant Tsan'"s interpretation is shorter: I encountered disorder among the people at the court of the king; I manifested my loyalty and probity serving him, but merely laboured and reaped no crops (see above). Both scholars deem the efforts of a loyal and honest official (or leader of such officials) at the court ended in defeat.

Thus information embodied in the imagery of the former part of the poem can be reduced to the poet's attempt to reform the imperial court and the defeat he suffered. It is critical to the extent that it concerns "overgrowing (or rank) weeds" and the court dominated (to use Chang Yen's words) by flattering ministers. The emperor is criticized mutely, only by indirection for preferring flatterers and abandoning the poet and his like. However in combination with other inquest materials, esp. with Yang Yün's words that "The Son of Heaven is not worth exerting every effort for [him]" (see above), the letter could hardly leave any doubt with Hsüan-ti concerning Yün's appraisal of his sovereign.

If one takes into consideration that the minister Yang Yün probably was the leader (or one of the leaders) of a clique at the imperial court (see above), the possibility that his poem contains an allegorical representation of his activities in this capacity cannot be ruled out.

The last two lines of the poem contain its "message" which seems to follow directly from his experience of a courtier who strove for reforms but in vain: disappointed he abandons his official career and declares, "[so long as] a man is alive [he should] just enjoy himself (hsing /o)" (see above). Thus the poem becomes an apology of a new way of life for one who has decided to give up service to the emperor and pursuit of "wealth and high standing" that can be acquired thereby. Outwardly he seems to conform to the idea once formulated by Confucius; however he accepts it in the wording, in which it was transmitted by Ssu-ma Ch'ien: "If wealth and rank (or high standing. — J.K.)...could not be sought, I would follow what I like" (above).

It seems proper to remind here of a legendary person of the 3rd cenury ВС that seems to have embodied in its way of life the ideal sung of by Yang Yün in his poem. It is Lu Chung-lien who "was fond of out-of-the-way and extraordinary plans, but unwilling to take an official post and bear [its] responsibilities, delighting [only] in holding to [his] lofty integrity;" he rejected offers to enfeoff and ennoble him for his outstanding services and was reported to have said after he "fled into hiding by the seashore": "I would rather be poor and humble, but make light of [the ways of] the world and give full rein to [my] will, than [possess]