Xu Ai asked about Wang Tong (Wenzhongzi) and Han Yu.
The Master said: "Han Yu was merely the hero of men of letters; Wenzhongzi was a worthy Confucian. Later ages exalt Han Yu for his literary brilliance alone; in truth he falls far short of Wenzhongzi."
Xu Ai asked: "Then why was Wenzhongzi faulted for imitating the classics?"
The Master said: "Imitating the classics can hardly be condemned wholesale. Tell me: how does the intent of later scholars' writings differ from imitating the classics?"
Xu Ai said: "Common scholars write partly for fame, yet hope to illuminate the Way. Imitating the classics seems purely for fame."
The Master said: "Writing to illuminate the Way — after whose model?"
"Confucius edited and transmitted the Six Classics to illuminate the Way."
"Then is imitating the classics not precisely modeling oneself on Confucius?"
Xu Ai said: "Writings can shed new light on the Way; imitating the classics copies the outward traces and probably adds nothing to the Way."
The Master said: "Do you think one who illuminates the Way seeks to return the age to simplicity and substance, shown in actual deeds — or to embellish words and clamor before the world? The world's great disorder comes from empty words flourishing while real practice decays. Were the Way bright in the world, the Six Classics need not have been produced; Confucius edited them out of necessity. From Fuxi's trigrams to King Wen and the Duke of Zhou, writings on the Changes — like the Lianshan and Guicang — were countless and chaotic, and the way of the Changes was in confusion. Seeing the world's growing love of ornament and knowing these doctrines would multiply without end, Confucius took up the accounts of King Wen and the Duke of Zhou and illuminated them, holding these alone as the true lineage; the welter of theories was discarded, and discourse on the Changes became one. So too with the Documents, the Odes, the Rites, the Music, the Spring and Autumn. After the canonical chapters of the Documents, after the Odes of the two souths, pieces like the Nine Hills and Eight Cords — licentious, wandering songs beyond counting; the names and measures of Rites and Music had become inexhaustible. Confucius pruned and corrected them all, and only then did those accounts pass away. In the Documents, Odes, Rites and Music, when did Confucius add a single phrase? Today's Record of Rites is largely later scholars' piecing together, no longer Confucius's old text. As for the Spring and Autumn, though said to be Confucius's composition, it is all the old text of Lu's chronicle: 'writing' meant recording what was there; 'pruning' meant cutting the excess — subtraction, never addition. Confucius transmitted the Six Classics fearing that ornate writing would disorder the world, wishing to simplify where he could not abolish, wanting people to strip away words and seek substance — not teaching by means of words. After the Spring and Autumn, ornament flourished further and the world grew more disordered. The First Emperor sinned in burning the books out of private motive, and wrongly included the Six Classics; had his aim been to illumine the Way, burning all doctrines that reversed the classics and betrayed principle would have silently accorded with Confucius's intent in editing. Since Qin and Han, writings have daily multiplied; they cannot all be removed. One should only follow Confucius: record and honor what is nearly right, and the absurd theories will gradually die of themselves. I do not know Wenzhongzi's precise intent in imitating the classics, but I deeply approve his deed — were a sage to rise again, he would not change it. The world is ungoverned because words flourish while substance decays: each airs his own view, competing in novelty to dazzle the age and win repute, beclouding the world's intelligence and stopping its ears and eyes, till all race to polish phrases for fame and no longer know the conduct that honors the root and reveres the real, returning to simplicity — the writers started all this."
Xu Ai said: "Some writings are indispensable — the Spring and Autumn without the Zuo Commentary would be hard to understand."
The Master said: "If the classic needs the commentary to be understood, it is a riddle; why would the sage write so obscurely? The Zuo Tradition is mostly old Lu chronicle; if the classic needed it, why would Confucius have pruned?"
Xu Ai said: "Cheng Yi too said: 'The commentary is the case file; the classic is the verdict.' Writing 'regicide of such-a-lord' or 'attack on such-a-state' — without knowing the affair, how to judge?"
The Master said: "That too probably follows common scholars' talk and misses the sage's intent in making the classics. Writing 'regicide' — regicide is itself the crime; why ask the details? Punitive expeditions should issue from the Son of Heaven; writing 'attacked a state' — the attack is itself the crime; why ask the details? The sage transmitted the classics only to rectify hearts, to preserve heavenly principle and remove human desire; of matters serving that end he often spoke, answering each according to his capacity, yet unwilling to say much — fearing people would seek the Way only in words; hence 'I wish to be wordless.' As for deeds abetting desire and extinguishing principle, how could he detail them for all? That would breed disorder and lead the wicked. Hence Mencius: 'In Zhongni's school no one spoke of the affairs of Duke Huan and Duke Wen, and so they were not handed down.' That is the family rule of Confucius's school. Common scholars teach only the learning of hegemons, needing to know all the schemes and stratagems — a heart of pure utility, directly contrary to the sage's intent in the classics; how could they ever think it through?" He sighed: "None but one who reaches Heaven's virtue can easily be told this!"
He added: "Confucius said, 'I still caught the time when the historians left gaps.' Mencius said, 'To trust the Documents entirely is worse than having no Documents; from the Wucheng I accept only two or three strips.' In editing the Documents, Confucius kept only a few pieces for the four or five centuries of Yao, Shun and Xia — were there really no other events? That he recorded only this shows the sage's intent. The sage wished to cut away excess words; later scholars only wish to add."
Xu Ai said: "The sage made the classics to remove human desire and preserve heavenly principle — that he did not detail the affairs of the Five Hegemons is clear. But why are affairs before Yao and Shun also so sparse?"
The Master said: "In the ages of Fuxi and the Yellow Emperor, affairs were simple and few have come down; one can imagine — an air wholly simple, plain and unadorned: that was the government of high antiquity, beyond the reach of later ages."
Xu Ai said: "But works like the Three Mounds were transmitted; why did Confucius cut them?"
The Master said: "Even had they survived, with the world changing they gradually lost their fitness. As customs opened and ornament daily prevailed, by the end of Zhou even a return to Xia and Shang ways was impossible, let alone Yao and Shun, let alone Fuxi and the Yellow Emperor. Yet though their governments differed, the Way was one. Confucius transmitted Yao and Shun and took as statute Wen and Wu: the institutions of Wen and Wu are the Way of Yao and Shun, only adapting to their time. Even Xia and Shang measures applied to Zhou would partly not fit — hence 'the Duke of Zhou wished to combine the three dynasties' ways, and where they did not fit, looked up and pondered, night into day.' How much less could high antiquity's rule be practiced! This is rightly what the sage could omit."
He added: "To insist on non-action, unable like the three kings to govern according to the times, and force the customs of high antiquity on the world — that is Buddhist and Daoist learning. To govern by the times but not root everything in the Way, acting with a utilitarian heart — that is the enterprise of hegemons and below. Later scholars, for all their lecturing, lecture only the arts of hegemony."