| Author | Rodrigues, Simão 李西滿, 1645-1704 |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第10冊, Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 10 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 10 |
| Description | v. 10, pp. 363-438 ; 22 cm. |
| Note | Bianji canping 辨祭參評 / Li Ximan zhu 李西滿著. Title varies slightly ("Bian"). Cover title: 辨祭參評 ; caption and running title: 辯祭參評. No est. auth. for Li Liangjue 李良爵, pref. Li Yifen 李奕芬 (Leontiius), ca. 1635->1706. Cf. Standaert, Handbook of Christianity in China, v. 1., p. 401, 423.
JapSin I, (38/42) 40/5 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 Pa Li si muon. N.B. Li Leantius fuit Siam cum seu Amanuensis et domesticus ac cathechista Illmi D. Maygrot.”At the beginning of the book there is an introduction: 辯 (not 辨 as given on the cover) 祭參評引, dated Kangxi 20 (1681). It states that this book was a discussion between the missioners and the scholars of Fu’an 福安 (Fujian), designed to clarify the meaning of sacrifice. The introduction goes on to say that in the autumn of 1681 the missioner found among his books a manuscript entitled Bianji 辯祭, which, though orthodox in its views, had left out some minor points. Therefore it was necessary to clarify the meaning of sacrifice in order to make declarations. “I therefore committed my explanations orally to Master Li Liangjue. At the end of each question and answer I added one remark; hence the title Bianji canping. Presently I hope to present this book to our Vice-Provincial Father Bi Jia 畢嘉 (Bi Jia refers to Giandomenico Gabiani, zi 鐸民, 1623–1696, Vice-Provincial from May 1680 to June 1683 and from June 1689 to June 1692). Li Liangjue (Li Leontius), according to the Latin inscription, was administrator, secretary and catechist of Mgr. Charles Maigrot (Yan Jiale 嚴加樂, or Yan Dang 嚴當, 1652–1730), Vicar Apostolic of Fujian. For the principal author of this book, Simão Rodrigues, see Jap-Sin I, (38/42) 40/2. The book Bianji was written by Francisco Varo, O.P. (Wan Jiguo 萬濟國, 1627–1687), who came to China in 1649 (cf. Jap-Sin I, 116). It is a refutation of the respect paid to Confucius and the veneration of ancestors. According to Varo true sacrifice can be offered only to God. It would be an usurpation if this sacrifice were offered to any creature. In one of the marginal remarks of the Bianji canping we read: 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.We can see that Simão Rodrigues is cautious in his attitude toward the traditional practice of the Chinese, while Francisco Varo simply weighed the problem from a theologian’s viewpoint and condemned the Chinese practice as superstitious. Hence he argued vehemently against the Liji 禮記 and the interpretation of Zhu Xi 朱熹. Rodrigues in the marginal remarks points out the serious consequences that might result from this antagonism: 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!He proposed that missionaries should go slowly in criticizing; rather they should show their own reasonableness and let the Chinese compare and see their own errors and so be led to the truth (pp. 53–55). There is a summary of the manuscript at the end of this treatise on pages 36 and 37. It was directed against the Bianji of Francisco Varo. Some of the matter in this treatise is taken from the Lishi tiaowen of Yan Mo (Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/2; e.g. pp. 20, 21 and 99). Treatises against Francisco Varo’s Bianji were also written by Yan Mo, see Jap-Sin I, (38/42) 40/6a and 41/1. Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 50-51. |
| Multimedia |  |
| Author | Yan Mo 嚴謨, b.1640? |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 11, Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第11冊 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 11 |
| Description | pp. 67-72 ; 22 cm. |
| Note | Bianji houzhi 辯祭後誌 / [Yan Mo zhu 嚴謨著].
JapSin I, (38/42) 41/2b Below the title (at the top of the first column on the first folio) there is the following note (in smaller characters): “Previously there was a volume Bian bo ji 辨駁祭 written by Master Wan (i.e., Francisco Varo) and a volume Fen bian ji 分辨祭 written by myself. Now that Michael in his turn has clarified master Wan’s ideas, I in my turn will select a number of sections [from Michael’s essay] and explain them.” 前萬師有辨駁祭一冊予有分辨祭一冊今默覺再伸萬師之意予復擇數條明之.The main text consists of five paragraphs, in which Yan Mo explains and refutes ideas found in the sections 1-2, 5-8, 9, 12 and 13 of Michael’s essay, which covered more than twenty sections as mentioned in the preceding document (41/2a). Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, p. 65. |
| Multimedia | |
| Author | Yan Mo 嚴謨, b.1640? |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 11, Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第11冊 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 11 |
| Description | pp.47-60 ; 22 cm. |
| Note | Bianji 辨祭 : [jinqi chaoben 近期抄本] / [Yan Mo zhu 嚴謨著].
JapSin I, (38/42) 40/6a The cover bears the title Sidian 祀典 (cf. 40/7a) and a Portuguese inscription: “Refutação do Trattado do P’ien Çi do R.P.Fr. Franco Varo. 3o M.S. Sinico.”The beginning of folio 1 gives the title Bianji 辨祭, with two lines in small characters: 此辨字別也非原辯字駁也 (Here the character 辨 has the meaning “to distinguish,” not 辯, as is found in the original [of Varo’s work], which means “to find fault with”). Below it there is the inscription: “Exposed by Paul Yan Mo, native of Zhangzhou and a disciple of the holy [Catholic] religion.” The first paragraph of the manuscript serves as a preface in which the author explains why the book was written. He criticized the Bianji of Varo, while recognizing it as a book full of zeal and of good intentions. He laments that the author did not fully understand Chinese tradition and says that this is the source of his mistakes. “When one wishes to discuss the word sacrifice one must first make distinction about what sacrifice means 愈謂欲辯祭先當辨祭 (pp.1–2). The manuscript gives in great detail the meaning of the character ji 祭 (sacrifice). There is a wide sense of the word sacrifice and a strict sense. Sacrifice in the strict sense comes from the interior of the soul and is expressed by external rites; even this can be divided into different categories. He then makes clear that in offering sacrifice to God one employs the proper ritual that is due to God, such as we see in the sacrifice of the Mass which can be performed only by the priests. Again in the old days the jiaotian 郊天 (sacrifice to Heaven) was offered only by the emperor. There is also the sacrifice made to the ancestors. This is a ceremony directed to one’s own ancestors, as we see them done nowadays. These are quite different from one another. In the case of the last it is sufficient to know that the veneration for ancestors comes from filial piety and has nothing to do with praying for blessings - which would be an usurpation indeed. There is no need to worry excessively or to give wrong interpretations. It was the common opinion of the Christian scholars of the time that a number of the European missioners neglected the study of Chinese writings, and that this had led to wrong interpretations of Chinese usages. Yan Mo was only one of these scholars. Here is what he had to say on Francisco Varo: He does not base his argument on the original meaning of the word sacrifice, nor has he made a study of the Zhuwen 祝文 (the forms of invocation) written throughout the centuries. He has only picked out one or two ambiguous phrases from the Classics knowing nothing of the original meaning and not trying to arrive at an intelligent understanding of its context, but simply weaving together what he finds into a plot. For him the thing seems to be too easy!Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 51-52. |
| Multimedia | |
| Author | Yan Mo 嚴謨, b.1640? |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 11, Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第11冊 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 11 |
| Description | pp. 37-46 ; 22 cm. |
| Note | Bianji 辨祭 / [Yan Mo zhu 嚴謨著].
JapSin I, (38/42) 41/1c An inscription on the margin reads: Pien-çi.This manuscript is the same as Jap-Sin I, (38/42) 40/6a. The wording here and there is not quite the same. Some of the words have been changed, others were added or suppressed. It is necessary to go carefully through it in order to see the differences. At the end of the book there is a note in five lines: P.S. The Kaoyi 考疑 (Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/6b) in one volume was written after the writing of Master Wan (萬老師 i.e., Francisco Varo, O.P.), who had taken more than ten quotations from the Liji and Shijing to prove that the veneration of ancestors implies personal participation of the dead in the banquet and supplication for happiness on the part of the living. I have studied the original [and found that] there is nothing there pertaining to supplication for happiness nor is there any real presence or participation of the dead. Unfortunately my original draft is no longer to be found and for this reason I am unable to make you a copy. However, this book is with [Master] Luo (i.e., 羅肋山 Ciceri) and Li (i.e., 李西滿 Simão Rodrigues), who are now in Beijing. If you think it is acceptable, kindly let me know at your convenience. You can have a copy made from them and if you succeed in doing so, I should be very grateful for receiving a copy myself.We do not know to whom this note was written. If we compare this Bianji with that in Jap-Sin I, (38/42) 40/6a, it seems that the former is a copy of the latter and that this is the original. At the end of the Kaoyi 考疑 (Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/6b, see above) Yan Mo states that the Kaoyi had been presented to Masters Luo and Ou. He then says that he is presenting the original copy to the person to whom he is then writing, probably Gabiani. Here ([38/42] 41/1c) Yan Mo seems to have forgotten that he had given away his original copy of the Kaoyi. From the two postscripts it seems the three priests Luo (Ciceri), Ou (?) and Li (Rodrigues) were living in Peking at this period. Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 63-64. |
| Multimedia | |
| Author | Yan Mo 嚴謨, b.1640? |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 11, Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第11冊 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 11 |
| Description | p. 217-234 ; 22 cm |
| Note | Kaoyi 考疑 / [Yan Mo zhu 嚴謨著]. Table of contents incorrectly uses "擬", as does the OCLC record.
JapSin I, (38/42) 40/6b On folio 13 there are two lines in Latin: “Declaratio textuum, quae opponuntur sententiae cultus politici defunctorum etc.”Yan Mo wrote this treatise trying to disprove the errors in the Bianji 辨祭of Francisco Varo (cf. [38/42] 40/5). On folio 15, after the title Kaoyi, the treatise begins: According to the paragraphs cited, the author has been overshadowed by doubts and suspects that the veneration of ancestors is connected with prayer for prosperity, and that the deceased ancestors will participate in the foods offered to them. Accordingly, we now wish to make an investigation.Authorities are cited from the Liji 禮記, the Shijing 詩經 and diverse commentators to prove that the veneration of ancestors has nothing to do with prayer for prosperity and that the terms laijia 來假 (to show one’s presence) and laixiang 來饗 (to come to participate) have not the literal sense; they are used in the metaphoric sense only, namely one remembers one’s ancestors as if they were present and wishes they could participate at the banquet. He goes on to say that our senses cannot grasp what is spiritual and we often have to depend on images to represent what is invisible. He then goes on to say that the Book of Odes contains many metaphors which should be understood rightly. Furthermore, one has to remember that commentators of later periods often made comments that do not necessarily agree with the ancient writers. At the end of the manuscript there is the following statement that says: This book has been presented to the Masters Luo 羅 and Ou 歐. They have accepted it and copies of the same have been sent to Fathers Wan 萬 and Xia 夏. Now I am presenting to you the original copy and hope that you will make good use of it.Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, p. 53. |
| Multimedia | |
