JapSin I, (38/42) 40/5
Bianji canping 辯祭參評.
Communicated orally by Li Ximan (Simão Rodrigues, 1645–1707) 李西滿授 and written down by Li Liangjue 李良爵述.
Manuscript, sixty-nine folios (eleven chapters). One volume, Chinese bamboo paper. There are remarks in blue ink on the top margins of the folios and in the manuscript itself.

The cover gives the title 辨祭參評. Below the title we find the inscription: “Communicated orally by the Franciscan Li Andang” (Antonio S. M. Caballero). This inscription has been blotted out with ink. The Latin inscription reads: “Pien Çi, discursus de littera Çi [祭], auctore P. Antonio à S. Maria [“Antonio à S. Maria” is blotted out and replaced by “Varo”] cum annotationibus Li Kieu cum [‘Kieu cum’ is blotted out] seu Leantio petitis a P^a Li si muon. N.B. Li Leantius fuit Siam cum seu Amanuensis et domesticus ac cathechista Ill^mi D. Maygrot.”

This chapter is quite right. But we must take into consideration that the Catholic faith is not yet flourishing in China, while the veneration of ancestors and of Confucius have been practised for a long time. The people all know that this is Confucianism and therefore they should not disobey; furthermore, this veneration comes from an imperial order. It is necessary to find a way of reconciliation. Whether or not the practice is a transgression of God’s commandment, we have to leave to the judgement of learned theologians of the West. Let us hope for the best.

How are we going to preach the Gospel in China when we have already made ourselves enemies of Buddhism and Daoism and now we are beginning to be hostile to Confucianism. Beyond doubt we are looking for trouble!

Reprint of the 1701 ed. published in Peking : "Limited to two hundred copies." Original printed from wood blocks on double leaves of rice paper.
Dated: Pekini, 29 Julij anni 1701. Signed: Antoine Thomas, Filippo Grimaldi, Thomay Pereyra, Joannes Francs Gerbillion, Josephus Suares, Joachimus Bouvet, Kilianus Stumpf, J. Baptista Regis, Ludovicus Pernon, Dominicus Parrenin.

"A very important work composed and sent by the Peking Jesuits in 1701 from China to Rome. The book contains and explains the Kangxi Emperor's declaration about the Chinese terms for God and the non-religious nature of the Chinese Rites venerating ancestors and Confucius. This view, which was also that of the Jesuits, is also supported by quotations from the Chinese Classics and from statements by leaned Chinese of the time."--note inserted "From the collections of the Institute for Chinese-Western Cultural History"

Full title: Brevis relatio eoru[m], quae spectant ad declarationem Sinaru[m] imperatoris Kam Hi circa caeli, Cumfucii et avoru[m] cultu[m], datam anno 1700. Accedunt primatu[m], doctissimoru[m]q[ue] viroru[m], et antiquissimae traditionis testimonia. Opera PP. Societ. Jesu Pekini pro Evangelii propagatione laborantium.

Original printed from wood blocks on double leaves of rice paper.
Dated: Pekini, 29 Julij anni 1701. Signed: Antoine Thomas, Filippo Grimaldi, Thomay Pereyra, Joannes Francs Gerbillion, Josephus Suares, Joachimus Bouvet, Kilianus Stumpf, J. Baptista Regis, Ludovicus Pernon, Dominicus Parrenin.

Reprint of the 1701 ed. published in Peking : "Limited to two hundred copies."
61 double leaves ; 23 cm ; bound and boxed in Chinese fashion.
Series: Classica Japonica: facsimile series in the Tenri Central Library : Section 11 : Varia III ; 4

"A very important work composed and sent by the Peking Jesuits in 1701 from China to Rome. The book contains and explains the Kangxi Emperor's declaration about the Chinese terms for God and the non-religious nature of the Chinese Rites venerating ancestors and Confucius. This view, which was also that of the Jesuits, is also supported by quotations from the Chinese Classics and from statements by leaned Chinese of the time."--note inserted in Ricci Institute edition.

Brevis Relatio eorum, | quae spectant ad Declaratio~ | nem Sinarum Imperatoris | Kam Hi | circa caeli, Cumfucii, et Avorum | cultum, datam anno 1700. | Accedunt Primatum, Doctissimo~ | rumque virorum, et antiquissimae tra~ | ditionis testmonia. | Opera PP. Societ. Jesu Pekini pro | Evangelii propagatione laborantium.

White Chinese bamboo paper in one volume, bound in Chinese style. Sixty-one + three folios. The number of the folio is given below the fish-tail in the middle of each folio. Arabic numbers are also given at the bottom of each folio.
Folios 1v–5v contain declarations and ff. 6v–10v text in Manchu (cf. Jap-Sin 157: Sinensis anno 1700, supplex libellus oblatus Imp^re | circa nonnullos Ritus sinenses | decretum Imp^ris de iisdem. | Simile decretum, et supplex libellus missi sunt ad Sum. Pontificem.). Folios 11v–14v contain an account in Latin of a memorial to the Kangxi emperor in Manchu and of the reply of the emperor sent to the provinces; folios 15–16 give the translation into Chinese. Folios 17–61 give the views of eminent ministers at the imperial court on the question of Tianzhu 天主, the veneration given to Confucius and ancestor worship. Toward the end Chinese Classics are cited to confirm the points discussed. Ten ministers are quoted in this document, namely:

1. The younger brother of the Kangxi Emperor, Changning 常寧 (1657–1703).
2. So san lao ye [Suo san laoye 索三老爺, i.e., Songgotu 索額圖 (hao 愚庵, d. 1703?). He was an uncle to the empress and had great influence at the court. In 1688 he was appointed head of a commission to negotiate with the Russians about the border conflicts in Manchuria. Both Jean-François Gerbillon and Tomé Pereira were on the staff and he became a good friend of the Jesuits. The document mentions him especially for the efforts he made to secure liberty for the preaching of the Gospel in China: “. . . qui anno praecedentis saeculi 92° missus est ab Imperatore ad Tribunal Rituum, ac deinde Colaorum, ut suâ eloquentia persuaderet dandam Libertatem Edicto Publico, Legi christianae, ad quam ille bene affectus strenue id praestitit, et efficaciter est consecutus” (f. 23v).
3. Mim lao-ye [Ming laoye 明老爺, i.e., Mingzhu 明珠 (zi 端範, 1635–1708). His grandfather, Gintaisi, was one of the rulers of the Yehe nation, which was conquered by the founder of the Qing dynasty. The family then served under the Manchu Plain Yellow Banner. They followed the Manchus to Beijing in 1644 and became nobles of the new dynasty. The document states that Mingzhu served as Grand Secretary (Primus Colaus) for fifteen years; in fact he was in this office only for twelve years (1677–1688). He, too, is said to have shown love to the Divine Law of the Christians (f. 25v).
4. Isanghâ [Yinsanga 尹桑阿] (1638–1703), Manchu of the Plain Yellow Banner. He was Grand Secretary from 1688 to 1701. The emperor had a high esteem for him as a talented minister.
5. Kong Yuqi 孔 毓圻 (zi 鍾在, 1657–1723). He was native of Qufu 曲阜 (Shandong) and a descendant of Confucius. He came to the capital in 1702 for the birthday greeting to the emperor, and was asked by the Jesuits for his opinion on the question of the Chinese Rites (f. 29v, 30r).
6. Vam Hi (Wang Xi 王熙, ziu 子雍, 胥庭; hao 慕齋, 1612–1701). He was a native of Wanping in Beijing. He held the office of Grand Secretary from 1682 to 1701. The document mentions him as: “viri toto Imperio, ob eruditionis, ac prudentiae famam celeberrimi” (f. 30r).
7. Cham Yim (Zhang Ying 張英, zi 敦復, hao 樂圃, 1638–1708). He was a native of Tongcheng (Anhui). In 1677 Chang, then an expositor at the Hanlin Academy, was selected by the emperor to serve in the newly created office known as Nan Shufang 南書坊 (Imperial Study). Only very talented members of the Hanlin Academy were selected for the Nan Shufang and the choice was often made by the emperor personally. He was Grand Secretary from 1699 to 1701.
8. Han Tan 韓菼 (zi 元少, hao 慕盧, 1637–1704). The document says that “insuper Praesidem agit supremi Tribunalis Rituum” (f. 31v); Han Tan was President of the Ministry of Rites from 1700 to 1704. Earlier, in 1703, he wrote a preface to the work Tianxue benyi 天學本義 attributed to Joachim Bouvet, which shows that he was a friend of the missioners (cf. ECCP 1:275).
9. Sun Zhimi 孫致彌 (zi 愷似, hao 松坪, 1642–1709). He was the grandson of Ignatius Sun Yuanhua 孫元化 (cf. Jap-Sin I, 62). Sun Zhimi, “a jinshi of 1678, attracted notice in 1678 because—though he was then only a student in the Imperial Academy—he was specially selected as one of the envoys sent on a mission to Korea to collect poetry there. He achieved some note also as a poet and a calligrapher” (ECCP 2:686).
10. Li Kai 李鎧. His name does not appear in any of the official books. We derive our information only from our document, which says that he was an old man, not distinguished by his official position but highly respected by both the Chinese and Manchus for his great erudition. For more than thirty years he was employed by the emperor in writing books now in Chinese, now in Manchu. He is said to have translated European books on science into the Chinese and Manchu languages. The Tianzhu shiyi by Ricci was translated by him (f. 32r). The same old man is said to have translated Aleni’s book Wanwu zhenyuan 萬物真原 from Chinese into Manchu (f. 33v).

A copy of seven of these ten testimonies can be found in Jap-Sin 160, no. 3, which consists of nine testimonies (cf. SF 8:751–752, n. 133). The first three Manchu dignitaries do not appear in that text and instead two Chinese take their place: Lin Wenying 林文英 of Fujian (閩中) and Wu Sheng 吳晟 of Huaiyin 淮陰 (Jiangsu). Lin Wenying we have met already as the author of a preface (1697) to a reprint of the Da ke wen 答客問 (see Jap-Sin I, 146). Wu Sheng (zi 麗正, hao 梅原) was a native of Quanjiao 全椒 (Anhui) and he lived from 1635 to 1694. See “Epitaph of Wu Sheng” in Chu Xin 儲欣 (fl. 1770), Zailu caotang wenji 在陸草堂文集, juan 6.

The statements of these ten scholars praised unanimously the Jesuits’ correct understanding of the Chinese Rites. They had all read the treatise, which most of them attributed to Min Xiansheng 閔先生 (i.e., Claudio Filippo Grimaldi), although others attributed it to the Jesuits as a group (西洋諸先生).
The document was signed by the following members of the Society of Jesus in Peking on 29 July 1701: Antoine Thomas, vice-provincial of China, Claudio Filippo Grimaldi, rector in Beijing, Tomé Pereira, Jean-François Gerbillon, José Soares, Joachim Bouvet, Kilian Stumpf, Jean-Baptiste Régis, Louis de Pernon, Dominique Parrenin.

Folio 30 (recto) has the following original handwritten statements (cf. Jap-Sin 160, no. 3):

Aliqua Testimonia Doctorum Imperii ac Magnatum Latine edita in relatione an. 1701, pag. 30 [b].
alia indicata pag. 22 eiusdem relationis. omnia numero novem.

Testor hoc exemplar esse legitimum Pekini 3 oct. 1702.
Antonius Thomas, Vice~Prov^lis Soc^tis Jesu, Vice~Prov^ae Sinensis (With a red seal of the Society of Jesus).

Ego Episcopus Macaensis testor | hanc esse veram Copiam ori | ginalis. Macai 20 Januarii | an. 1703. Jes. de Cazal Ep^us Ma | caonensis.

Ego Notarius Episcopalis Macaensis | fidem facio hunc supra testificationem | esse propriam Ill^mi Dⁿⁱ Joannis de Cazal Episcopi Macaensis — Messi | 20 Januarii an. 1703. B^ac Acunha. Recognita ut in fide separata, Joseph Zambecchinus, Dominicus do Blanchis.

1. Ego infrascriptus, Vice~Prov^lis Soc^tis Jesu Vice~Prov^ae Sinensis testor me accepisse testimonium fratris natu minoris Imperatoris Tartaro~Sinici supra relatum folio 21º in cuius fidem, manu propria subscribo: Pekini 30a Septembris 1701.
Antonius Thomas.

2. Nos infra scripti Sacerdotes Societatis Jesu testamur nos accepisse d^tta testimonia duorum magnatum So San Lao ye & Mim Lao ye, nec non Isangha Imperii primi ministri a folio 22º ad 28º supra relata. In quorum fidem subscribimus. Pekini die 30a Septembris 1701.

Joannes Franciscus Gerbillon.
Superior Patrum Gallorum.
Joachim Bouvet.

3. Ego infra subscriptus Soc^tis Jesu Collegii Pekinesis Rector testor me accepisse testmonia quatuor quae fol. 29, 30, 31 et 32 continent^r in quorum fidem hic subscribo, die 30 septembris 1702.

Philippus Grimaldi.

4. Ego infra scriptus Sacerdos Societatis Jesu, testor me accepisse duo inter decem ultima testimonia supra relata a folio 32º usque ad 33ⁱⁿ. In quorum fidem subscribo. Pekini die 30^a Septembris anni 1702.

Joachim Bouvet.

5. Ego infra subscriptus vice~Prov^lis Soc^tis Jesu Vice~Prov^ae Sinensis testor hoc exemplar Brevis Relationis etc., habens folia impressa 61 esse legitimum, uti et subscriptiones hic positas. In quorum fidem, Libellum in prima pagina et ultima, proprio officii Sigillo munivi, atque hic subscribo.

Pekini 26 Oct. 1701.
Antonius Thomas.
(with a red seal of the Society of Jesus).

Libellus quo PP. Societatis suam agendi rationem in Regno Sinarum defendunt, ac de ritum erga Confucium, Coelum, Terram ac parentes cultu rationes assignant, easque coeremonias mere Politicas, cogestis testimoniis sapientum sinarum, esse propug’t.
Hoc exemplar est originale a PP. Pekini Societatis suscriptum, rarissimum ideo, ac praetiosissimum esse nemini dubium est.

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206a
Brevis Relatio.

The cover bears a Latin inscription: “Exemplar testimoniorum impressum Pekini.”

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206b
Brevis Relatio.

The cover bears a Latin inscription: “Hic liber secundum originale Pekinense impressus fuit Cantone in Cina anno 1701.”

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206c
Brevis Relatio.

The cover bears a Latin inscription: “Revdo Patri Thyrso Gonzalez | Generali Preposito Soctis Jesu | Carolus Turcottus.”

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206d
Brevis Relatio.

Another copy of the Cantonese edition; sixty-one folios without a list of corrigenda.

Jesuit Archives (RSI) JapSin I, 206e
Brevis Relatio.

The same as Jap-Sin I, 206c.

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206f
Brevis Relatio.

The folios 15, 16 and 28–61 are missing.

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206g
Brevis Relatio.

This is a copy in handwriting on bamboo paper; it does not reproduce the Manchu text: the Chinese text after folio 23 is followed immediately by folio 31. The text, however, is complete, although the pagination might suggest that it is incomplete.

第一章章.　《天主實錄》及《天主實義》-- 第二章. 耶穌會傳教士對中國佛教的早期研究 -- 第三章. 理論哲學和修辭哲學的兩種不同對話模式 -- 第四章. 靈魂論的傳入 -- 第五章. 孔子土地上的亞里士多德倫理學 -- 第六章. 晚明中國的文藝復興教育 -- 第七章. 作為政治倫理學榜樣的賢王 -- 第八章. 倫理學的其他兩個榜樣：朋友及丈夫 -- 第九章. 儒家經典的解讀 -- 第十章. 耶穌會的《論語》 -- 第十一章. 耶穌會的“孔子傳” -- 第十二章. 耶穌會的《中庸》 -- 第十三章. 耶穌會的歷史考證 -- 第十四章. 神秘的中國 -- 第十五章. 在中西之間“宗教”概念的形成 -- 第十六章. 關於利瑪竇思想遺產最近的爭論.

明清之際耶穌會士赴華, 帶來了西方的亞里士多德主義學術體系, 他們很重要的一個工作便是將亞里士多德的著作翻譯成漢文並且進行了富有創意的詮釋. 與此同時, 他們學習, 吸收儒家經典, 並且嘗試以亞里士多德主義為理論依據, 發起了對儒家經典的新詮釋, 增加了新的內涵. 他們不僅使儒家經典在西文中獲得生命力,而且在中國儒家詮釋學中留下了一些影響. 在耶穌會士及其中國同仁的努力之下, 儒家經典可以從外來文化中獲得一些新的發揮, 這對中國和西方都有影響. 反過來, 耶穌會士用儒家術語寫成亞里士多德主義的著作, 使亞里士多德思想本身獲得新的發揮, 呈現出新的可能性. 如此, 在這種經典的交織過程中, 東,西文化在相互闡釋的過程中, 獲得了更加豐富的詮釋和內涵.

---------------------------------

後記:
中西文化交流已有四百多年的歷史，兩個文化傳統互相學習、逐漸尊重、互相豐富。儘管今天我們有非常多的交流渠道，然而文化交流經常停留在比較表面的層次，不夠深入，對他種文化不夠開放、理解不夠深入，並且對自己的文化缺乏自我省思。此種現狀造成的結果，便是文化之間的互動難以產生更深刻的創見。

在這本書裡，我把明清之際1582—1687年間的中西文化交流作為我們今天的典範。從羅明堅和利瑪竇來華開始，耶穌會士意識到他們必須學習四書五經，才能更深入地理解當時的中國文化及社會。我們將要陳述他們在這方面的努力。當時，他們跟士大夫學習、研究儒家詮釋傳統，並在這個過程當中逐漸消化了儒家傳統，從自己的學術背景——亞里士多德主義和經院哲學（scholasticism）——的視角，去理解四書五經的重要概念及其意義。他們很激動地發現，兩種截然不同的文化竟然分享了很多共同的觀念，因此很樂意地接納了中國文化。耶穌會士把它們所理解的儒家式中國帶回了歐洲，這形成了有深刻影響的“中學西漸”。

耶穌會士在中國第一個必備的工作就是學習中文，從而可以理解中國社會和文化，而他們的最終任務就是傳播福音。但是，他們很快發現，直接傳播福音沒有很大效果，特別是無法吸引大部分的士大夫。這使他們決定用西方文化、科學、技術（所謂“西學”）作為媒介來傳教。其中，他們傳播的哲學、文學作品起了基礎性作用，也使他們後來在這個基礎上得以建立漢語神學。如此，耶穌會士把亞里士多德的許多著作“翻譯”或“改寫”成中文。這樣一來，以亞里士多德主義為核心的“西學”傳到了中國。這形成了有同樣深刻影響的“西學東漸”。

大部分學者把“西學東漸”與“中學西漸”分開進行研究。確實，在明清時期，“西學東漸”的主要著作是用中文寫的，而“中學西漸”則主要用拉丁文。在兩者之間，語言不同，讀者對像不同，作者目的也不同。然而，我認為有必要把這種兩種“漸”放在一起研究。首先，在兩“漸”的過程中扮演主要角色的是耶穌會士，他們跟其他合作者撰寫拉丁文及中文著作。第二，雖然耶穌會士之間存在分歧、甚至爭論，不過，他們受到同樣的耶穌會的學術訓練，並且，這兩種“漸”在思想方面有很強的一致性：他們以亞里士多德主義去理解儒家，並且用儒家去傳播亞里士多德主義。這是因為他們相信在儒家與亞里士多德主義之間並不存在根本性矛盾，兩者可以發生哲學對話，甚至可以互補。在這種哲學基礎上，他們開啟了中西文化的交流，讓中國學習亞里士多德，讓西方學習孔子。

“西”／“東”／“中”概念 東、南、西、北、中都是相對的地理概念。中國曾經把印度作為西方，使第一批來華的耶穌會士自稱從“太西”而來，而後來他們變成了西方人。無論如何，明清時期的中國人沒有把自己放在東方，因為他們當時把中國作為世界中心。利瑪竇在肇慶印刷了中國第一幅世界地圖（《坤輿萬國全圖》），挑戰了中國傳統的世界觀。他沒有把歐洲或中國放在地圖的中心，而是把太平洋放在中間。事實上，在圖注裡，利瑪竇標明地球是一個球體。復旦大學葛兆光教授指出，那個時代的楊廷筠（1562—1627），對這個巨大轉變的表徵，做了比很多人都好的結論：既然地球是球體，所以它“無起止，無中邊”。換句話說，問題不再是把一個國家放在世界中心，因為沒有任何國家能夠是地球的地理中心。確實，利瑪竇地圖的新奇之處，就在於指明了一個喪失任何中心的世界。

如果這樣，中國的“中”是什麼意思呢？加拿大多倫多大學沈清松教授有一個很深刻的觀點，他認為，在中國傳統的世界觀中，中國的“中”就是中庸的“中”，即“未發之中”，這是“心理學、形而上學和宗教的意義”，或者說“超越心理學所謂自我的核心所在”。在這種意義上，就沒有必要去競爭站在中心，因為我們每個人站在自己獨特的位置，並且可以朝向自我之上的超越性，而這種超越性沒有東南西北中之分。因此，我認識到，中國哲學與西方哲學都站在自己的位置上，當它們進行橫向交流時，可以朝向某種超越性。

跨文化哲學的方法明清耶穌會士進行中西哲學對話時，他們經常使用比較的方法，把儒家的某種概念跟亞里士多德的概念進行比較。他們也經常使用儒家概念來表達亞里士多德的思想。不同於沿襲固有的詮釋，他們會給這些概念賦予新的意義和內涵。對耶穌會士而言，亞里士多德的思想幾乎是絕對真理。儘管儒家在很多方面都接近真理，不過，他們還是要用亞里士多德的思想來考量儒家思想，甚至修正儒家思想的不足之處。我們能夠很容易發現，耶穌會士用一個絕對的標準（亞里士多德的思想）去判斷儒家思想。

我自己的研究放棄了這種比較哲學的方法，而試圖運用一種跨文化哲學的方法。首先，這種方法不站在某種文化哲學體系（儒家或亞里士多德主義）之上，而是試圖肯定文化的獨特性與完整性，進而在它們的差異性中尋找某種超越性。

另外，這種跨文化哲學方法不把某種哲學體系本質化（好像它永遠不變），而是更強調文化哲學體系之間的互動性，使每個體係可以保留自己的獨特性，又受到一些外來的影響。因此，在這個意義上，我完全接納多元化。不過，這並不代表我們滿足於簡單的相對主義，相反我們要在跨文化哲學的對話中追求互動性，並且尋找某種超越性。這種學術工作具有關鍵性的作用，使我可以比較客觀地去分析這些歷史材料。我努力試圖超越某種具體的文化傳統，從普遍理性的角度去分析耶穌會士與士大夫的思想處境、他們的思想來源等，並指出他們在哪些方面存在誤會等等。

不過，在進行了比較嚴謹的學術工作之後，還要回到這樣一個問題——這些文本對我們有什麼意義？這就是最後環節，即要回歸於自己。這個過程包括反省中西之間在歷史上的碰撞。在這種碰撞裡，也會發現暴力的影子。可以說，在中國歷史上發生過兩次西學東漸的思潮：明清時期和清末民初以來（後者至今仍未結束）。我們可以簡略比較兩者的異同。第一，明清時期的中國人必須經過傳教士才能得到西學；而清末民初的中國人被允許出國留學，主動尋找新知識。第二，傳教士作為必要的媒介，他們選擇了自認為中國所需要的、並且他們自己所贊同的西學；而清末民初的中國人按照他們自覺的需要去尋找新知識。第三，明清的西學還是建立在平等關係上的，而清末民初的西學是在殖民制度的壓迫之下被迫開展的。第四，除了在自己建立的教堂之外，很多明清時期的耶穌會士都在政府機構（如皇宮、欽天監、禮部、工部）工作；而清末民初時的洋人則成立自己的機構（如學校、醫院）去傳播西學。

確實，明清時期與清末民初的西學東漸，在上述這四個方面有著巨大的差異。不過，我認為最重要的差異顯現在思想和語言上。明清西學必須用中國文化的本土語言和儒家概念來闡述西學，而從晚清開始用西化的語言和西方概念來闡述新知識。雖然在影響的實力與寬度方面，明清時期的西學跟清末民初時期的西學無法相比，不過，第一個“西學潮”借助中國傳統文化來表達，似乎更尊重中國文化，並且它試圖把西學跟儒家結合起來，這是我們今天仍然非常佩服的一點，也是值得我們學習的地方。關於這種歷史的回顧，在結論裡我試圖表達我個人的一些想法。

（本文節選自《從邂逅到相識：孔子與亞里士多德相遇在明清》，題目為編者所擬。）

1. To "Become Chinese": Nestorian Christians of the T'ang (Tang)--Mongol missions of the 13th and 14th centuries--Syncretism and assimilation--European knowledge of Chinese religion before the Jesuits--Jesuit missionary experience--Alessandro Valignano and the accomodation method.
2. Matteo Ricci and the Jesuit interpretation of Confucianism: Michele Ruggieri and the establishment of the mission--Matteo Ricci and the discovery of Confucianism--Ricci's interpretation of Confucianism--Matteo Ricci and the Chinese Rites question--Ricci and Confucianism: syncretism, accomodation, encounter?
3. Confucian interpretation of the Jesuits: Late Ming Confucianism--Christian Confucians--the Buddhist reaction--the Confucian reaction--Alleged Jesuit influence on late Ming-early Ch'ing thought.
4. A point of fact: the debate over terms and rites (1610-1688): Jesuit debate over terms--Arrival of the friars and the beginning of the debate over Chinese Rites--Legitimate prejudices?--Lull in the storm--Confucius Sinarum Philosophus.
5. Son of Heaven and Vicar of Christ: the Chinese Rites Controversy (1688-1742): Ching t'ien (Jing Tian 敬天) "Adore Heaven"--Louis Le Comte vs. the Sorbonne--Papal legates--Aftermath of the Rites.
6. Moses or China? the Jesuit Figurists: The Sources of Figurism--Figurists and their critics--Joachim Bouvet and the prophecies of the I-ching (Yijing 易經)--Jean-François Foucquet and the symbolism of the Chinese classics--Joseph de Prémare and the theory of "vestiges"
7. The Jesuits and the beginning of scientific sinology: Jean Baptiste du Halde--Antoine Gaubil--Alexandre de la Charme and the Hsing-li chen-ch'uan (Xingli zhenquan 性理真詮)--Memoires concernant l'histoire...etc. des chinois.

Local access dig.pdf. [Rule-Kung-tzu or Confucius.pdf]

1. To "Become Chinese": Nestorian Christians of the T'ang (Tang)--Mongol missions of the 13th and 14th centuries--Syncretism and assimilation--European knowledge of Chinese religion before the Jesuits--Jesuit missionary experience--Alessandro Valignano and the accomodation method.
2. Matteo Ricci and the Jesuit interpretation of Confucianism: Michele Ruggieri and the establishment of the mission--Matteo Ricci and the discovery of Confucianism--Ricci's interpretation of Confucianism--Matteo Ricci and the Chinese Rites question--Ricci and Confucianism: syncretism, accomodation, encounter?
3. Confucian interpretation of the Jesuits: Late Ming Confucianism--Christian Confucians--the Buddhist reaction--the Confucian reaction--Alleged Jesuit influence on late Ming-early Ch'ing thought
4. A point of fact: the debate over terms and rites (1610-1688): Jesuit debate over terms--Arrival of the friars and the beginning of the debate over Chinese Rites--Legitimate prejudices?--Lull in the storm--Confucius Sinarum Philosophus.
5. Son of Heaven and Vicar of Christ: the Chinese Rites Controversy (1688-1742): Ching t'ien (Jing Tian 敬天) "Adore Heaven"--Louis Le Comte vs. the Sorbonne--Papal legates--Aftermath of the Rites.
6. Moses or China? the Jesuit Figurists: The Sources of Figurism--Figurists and their critics--Joachim Bouvet and the prophecies of the I-ching (Yijing 易經)--Jean-François Foucquet and the symbolism of the Chinese classics--Joseph de Prémare and the theory of "vestiges"
7. The Jesuits and the beginning of scientific sinology: Jean Baptiste du Halde--Antoine Gaubil--Alexandre de la Charme and the Hsing-li chen-ch'uan (Xingli zhenquan 性理真詮)--Memoires concernant l'histoire...etc. des chinois.

An agenda (for further research): p. 495
Local access dig.pdf. [Rule-K'ung-tzu or Confucius Diss.pdf]

Leibniz and Confucianism, the search for accord / David E. Mungello.
Includes glossary of Chinese terms, bibliography (pp.[179]-185) and index (pp.[187]-200).
Keywords: Yijing 易經, figurism, Discourse on the natural philosphy of the Chinese, Monadology, Western humanism, liyi 禮儀, Chinese rites controversy, Neo-Confucianism.

In the closing years of the seventeenth century, one of the most brilliant of modern European philosophers became actively involved in the search for intellectual and spiritual accord between Europe and China. In his search, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz entered the “Rites Controversy” on the side of the Jesuits, who had achieved positions of remarkable proximity to the Chinese throne. Yet less than forty years later, the optimism of their cause had dummed. Leibniz died in isolation in Hanover, the papacy ruled against the Jesuits at Rome, and in China there was a growing distrust of the Christian missionaries by the monarchy. In contrast to past neglect of this subject as an intriguing but peripheral area of Leibniz’ philosophy, Leibniz and Confucianism: THe Search for Accord elevates Leibniz’ interest in China to a more central concern of Leibnizian Ism. Leibniz was deeply committed to an ecumenism that included not only the reunion of Roman and Protestant Christendom, but an ecumenism with which the spiritual and intellectual beliefs and practices of non-Westerners, especially the Chinese, could be reconciled. As an investigation into how that commitment was pursued and into some of the reasons why it failed, this book seeks to present Leibniz’ experience a both historical record and contemporary guide. Drawing upon unpublished material in the Leibniz archives in Hanover, Mungello traces the influences upon Leibniz through the Jesuit translators to the Chinese sources. In the process, we have the opportunity to observe the first historical instance of a major Western philosopher interpreting and reacting to Chinese (largely Neo-Confucian) philosophic notions and concepts. The author concludes by explaining how he believes Leibniz' search for accord can assist our own contemporary search for accord.

Available for download at University of Hawai'i Press Scholar Space

"...Apologetic text (in the form of a dialogue between anonymous people: a missionary or convert and a Confucian scholar) dealing with the folowing subjects: the nature of spirits, the soul and the body (pp. 405-413); the soul's independence of the body (415-419); animals have no soul (421-425); the immortality of the soul (427-434); the Great Ulimate is not the Creator (435-441); xingming, life (443-444); orthodox and heterodox spirits (444-454); man is directed toward the Upper Lord, shangzhu (455-463); retribution of good and evil after death (465-473); true religion is not restricted to the right morality (475-479); the need for true religion, i.e. that of the Lord of Heaven (481-485)...."
Source: Ad Dudink & Nicolas Standaert, Chinese Christian Texts Database (CCT-Database).

Introduction: Confucius, Kongzi and the modern imagination.
Part One. The Manufacture of Confucius and Confucianism:
The Jesuits, Confucius, and the Chinese -- There and back again: the Jesuits and their texts in China and Europe -- Interlude: the meaning and end of Confucianism: a meditation on conceptual dependence.
Part Two. Making sense of Ru and making up Kongzi:
Ancient texts, modern narratives: nationalism, archaism, and the reinvention of Ru -- Particular is universal: Hu Shi, Ru, and the Chinese transcendence of nationalism.
Epilogue: At century’s end: ecumenical nativism and the economy of delight.

JapSin I, (38/42) 40/3
Minzhong Jiangle Xian Qiu xiansheng zhi zhuwei shenfu shu 閩中將樂縣丘先生致諸位神父書.
By Qiu Sheng 丘晟.
Manuscript, six folios. One volume, Chinese bamboo paper, with red ink punctuation. 24 x 14 cm.

The cover bears the title: Shuzha 書札 (letter) and a Latin inscription: “Epistola unius Kiu gin [舉人] Christiani dicti Kieu Chim de Fo Kien, praemissa suo libro circa has controversias sinicas.”
The same epistle is given separately in one and one-half sheet (56 x 24 and 14 x 24 cm). At the end there are two lines of an inscription in Latin: “Epistola unius litterati Christiani in Fo Kien dicti Kieu Chim praemissa libello a se facto.”

Qiu Sheng felt aversion toward those who tried to belittle the teaching of Confucius. He pointed out that the Chinese respected Confucius as a great master because he recognized that there is a God to be served and that there are commandments to be kept, and because his writings exhorted people to do good. In one word, what Confucius teaches all agrees with the Catholic doctrine. For this reason Chinese boys study his books at the age of six or seven.
Finally, Qiu Sheng admitted that he embraced the Catholic faith because he saw that the teaching of the Catholic Church agreed with the teaching of Confucius. Now, if the missioners began to revile Confucius as superstitious, the Chinese scholars will no doubt answer back and cast against the Catholic Church the same accusation. He warns that if one inveighs against the veneration of ancestors and the respect paid to Confucius, one would be closing the door of the church to Chinese scholars. In conclusion, he says, “Your Reverences who study our Chinese books ought to know when to change and adapt (to the Chinese custom). It is not expedient to stick to a word or to a phrase so woodenly to the detriment of the welfare of the mission.” At the end he mentions his book, the Shuwen pian 書文篇 (cf. Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/4), which he wrote with the intention of helping the propagation of the Catholic faith.

Qiu Sheng (zi 振新) was a native of Jiangle (Fujian). The family seems to have settled down in Changshu 常熟 (Jiangsu). In Jap-Sin 134, the annual letter of 1663, we read that there was a church of Our Saviour and Our Lady in the town of Changshu in the province of Nanjing. François de Rougement (Lu Riman 魯日滿) was superior of the house and there were more than ten thousand Catholics (folio 345v). In Jap-Sin 112 there is a biography of Qiu Sheng’s father written by Qiu Sheng himself (folios 160–161). This was done at the request of de Rougement. According to this biography Qiu Sheng’s father’s zi was Shuliang 叔良 and his hao was Tianran 天然. From the preface he wrote for Brancati’s Shengjiao sigui 生教四規 (cf. Jap-Sin I, 106) we know that his ming was Yuezhi 曰知. He was baptized in 1638 (Chongzhen 11) by Francesco Sambiasi (Bi Jinliang 畢今梁) and took the name Augustine. For twenty-six years he lived an exemplary life. In 1662 (Kangxi 1) some ungrateful person laid hold of his property and robbed him of his possessions. It seems that this injustice was the result of hatred for the Christian religion. We are told that de Rougement exhorted him to forgive his enemy for God’s sake. This good man took his advice with great resignation. However, the blow was too heavy: overcome by grief he died in the following year (1663). De Rougement himself gave an account of this (see Jap-Sin 112). The Latin inscription on folio 160v informs us that Augustine Qiu was a xiucai 秀才: “Christitiana mors et vita Augustini jîu Xo Leam [Qiu Shuliang] baccalaurei Ecclesiae Cham Xo conscripta meo jussu ab eius filio item Baccalaureo.” About the life of Qiu Sheng himself we have far less information, except that he owed his religion to his father and the missioners (cf. Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/4).
Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 46-48.

本書據法囯囯家圖書館藏抄本排印.
明末淸初耶稣会思想文献汇编 = An expository collection of the Christian philosophical works between the end of the Ming dynasty and the beginning of the Qing dynasty in China ; 第45册.

See Ad Dudink & Nicolas Standaert, Chinese Christian Texts Database (CCT-Database) for more information.

Local access dig.pdf. in folder: [Andrew Chung Series].

"...the final version of this pamphlet was by the hand of Li Zubai, a Christian official in the Astronomical Bureau (baptised by Schall in 1622). It gave a clear testimony of the Jesuit interpretation of Confucianism and stated (rather for the first time) that the Chinese are descendants of Adam and Eve."-- Cf. Standaert, Handbook of Christianity in China, vol. 1, p. 514.

Cover illustration: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. Rac. Gen. Or. III-213 (12)
本书据许之渐1664年序本排印.
明末淸初耶稣会思想文献汇编 = An expository collection of the Christian philosophical works between the end of the Ming dynasty and the beginning of the Qing dynasty in China ; 第39册.

Local access dig.pdf. in folder: [Andrew Chung Series].

Connect to resource abstract page.
Connect to PDF document.
Dig.pdf. local access [Odor-UndoingBinaries.pdf]

JapSin I, (38/42) 42/1
Yishu 易書.
By an anonymous author.
Manuscript, nine folios plus unnumbered cover page. Chinese bamboo paper, one volume. 19.2 x 12.6 cm.

The cover bears the title and a Portuguese inscription: “suma dos textos sinicos | contra | citados do R.P. Fr. Fr^co Varo nos seus papeis; nos mandou o P. | Simão Rodrigues, de Fo cheu.”

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 67-68.