天學問答 - Argumentative Text Against Catholicism by Korean Scholar An Chŏngbok 安鼎福 (from 1790 AD) - Part 8
It has been a while... But Part 8 is finally out!
Previous parts of the translation:
或曰若子之言則其說皆妄矣
My interlocutor said: “So, sir, as far as you are concerned, all their ideas are [mere] delusions!”
曰以我中國言之邃古之初所傳言語率多荒怪而聖人出然後皆歸刪黜之科爾
[I] said: “The stories which have been transmitted [to us] from the [very] beginning of our [very old] Chinese language are [also] for the most part frivolously grotesque. The sages who would come later, however, all referred back to [these] materials, with their [useless or harmful] contents expurgated. (…)”
安知西土古初亦豈無荒怪之語乎
“(…) Even though there is no way [for us] to know the earliest periods of the Western scholars, how could they not have had [to deal with their share of] frivolously grotesque chatter [stemming from the earliest times]? (…)”
其言曰開闢以後文字至今皆存謂之聖經而尊信之盖有一種神聖之人作而作爲此等說勸誘人民是亦神道設敎之意也
“(…) They[, the Western scholars,] claim that, since the world’s creation, the [entire body of] texts [in their holy writings] have all been preserved up to the present day. [They] call it the Holy Writ, and believe in it with reverence, because it is supposed to be a work by humans that contains some sort of holiness. By putting forth such ideas they induce folks [to follow their doctrine]. This is also the intended effect of the method of establishing moral teachings through theistic ways [common in ancient Chinese thought].1 (…)”
但不如我中國聖人之出而能正之耳
“(…) But [this] is simply not as good as what our Chinese sages were actually able to do: to rectify them2 in their lifetimes. (…)”
若女媧之鍊石補天后舁之射中九烏皆歸剛正之科3
For example [the story about] Nǚwā (女媧) smelting stones and using them to fill the gaps in heaven, and [the story about the archer] Hòu Yì (后舁) hitting the nine crows as intended are both such texts which have undergone reliable rectification.4
耶蘇之事雖甚奇異亦不過佛氏顯聖顯靈之類耳
“(…) The story of Jesus, extremely bizarre though it is, does not contain anything more than the kinds of ways with which Buddha demonstrated his seemingly divine wisdom and awareness! (…)”
此果是上帝眞天主親來而作此等靈怪之事乎
“(…) Could it be [remotely possible] that it indeed was Shàngdì 上帝, the true Lord of Heaven, Who Himself came [into this world of mortals] and brought about such weird events [attributed by the Western scholars to Jesus]?5 (…)”
其學之原頭决是異端無疑矣
“(…) Their entire teaching, [from its] beginning [to its] end, is definitely heretical. There is no doubt [about that]!”
或曰三仇之說果是妄駭無忌憚之甚也
My conversation partner said: “The [Western scholars’] idea of the Three Adversaries is indeed absurd, [so much so that] it is utterly brazen. (…)”
若以己身爲仇則是身生於父母父子之倫已悖矣
“(…) Suppose one would consider one’s own body as one’s [own] adversary, even though that body is born out of [one’s own] parents, then the proper bonds [one should have as] son with [one’s] father would get twisted. (…)”
以世俗爲仇則聖人行道致澤之功皆歸虛幻而君臣之倫乖矣
“(…) [The idea that one is] to regard the world as [one’s] adversary, in spite of the feats of the sages [brought about] by [their] proper conduct and their generosity in spreading beneficence, is entirely predicated on a delusion, while it impinges on the proper bonds [that should exist between] the ruler and the subject. (…)”
其學以童身爲貴而七克書有禁婚之語則夫婦之倫絶矣
“(…) Their teaching highly values celibacy, while the work On the Seven Cardinal Sins and Virtues6 [even goes so far as to] mention the prohibition of marriage. This constitutes the effective severance of the proper bonds between husband and wife! (…)”
人生此世以此三倫爲貴而皆謂之暫世而無所恤惟以堂獄爲重此佛氏之流也
“(…) [When] someone is born into this world, that person values those three sound relationships,7 while all that talk of an ephemeral world, that there is nothing to be cared about, except that one has to only consider [the question whether one ends up, after death, in] Heaven or Hell important, is [just like what is found in] Buddha’s sect. (…)”
且其魔鬼之說尤爲荒怪非吾儒之所言則吾子之斥去也宜矣
“(…) And then the idea of a Devil is even more grotesque, something that our orthodox scholars has never made mention of. My Sir, you are therefore right to reject it, without a doubt! (…)”
但西士所謂天學工夫如何
“(…) But what is your opinion on the concrete practices in what the Western scholars call Heavenly Teaching?”
曰此已畧言於前後
[I] said: “[I] have already touched upon this throughout [our discussion] in rough terms. (…)”
其言曰每朝目與心偕仰天籲謝天主生我養我
“(…) According to them, we [should] every morning look up to Heaven, both with our eyes and our minds, and entreat the Lord of Heaven to keep us alive and nourished, and thank Him for doing so. (…)”
至敎誨我無量次祈今日祐我
“(…) So much so that [the Western scholars’] teaching instructs us to continuously pray [to Him so that He may] protect us on the current day to no end. (…)”
必踐三誓毋妄念毋妄言毋妄行
“(…) [According to the Western scholars’ teaching] one must abide by three oaths: that one shall have no mendacious thoughts, that one shall utter no mendacious words, and that one shall commit no mendacious acts. (…)”
至夕又俯身投地嚴自察省本日所思所言所動作有妄與否
“(…) In the evening one is to bend down and prostrate oneself, and to take a stern look at oneself: has there been anything that is dishonest in one’s thoughts, speech, or conduct on that very day? (…)”
否則歸功天主叩謝恩祐若有差爽卽自痛悔禱祈天主慈恕宥赦其大體如斯而已
“(…) If there hasn’t been any, then one is to give credit to the Heavenly Lord, and to prostrate oneself in gratitude for the Divine aid [which has enabled one not to sin]. If[, however,] one has committed something wrong, then one is to show personal repentance, and supplicate, by means of prayer, that one be spared the Heavenly Lord’s righteous anger. This, and nothing more, is the gist [of what the Western Scholars’ instruct its adherents to do concretely]. (…)”
此比吾儒誠身之學而今爲此學者等視儒學而謂此爲眞何哉
“(…) [If] one puts this next to the teaching of our orthodox scholars, which is about being truthful to oneself, and [if] one critically compares this [Western] doctrine, our current topic of discussion, with [our] orthodox Confucian teaching, [then] how could one proclaim that the former is the true [teaching]?! (…)”
且其擧措貌樣與吾聖訓同乎異乎
“(…) Furthermore, [I am asking you:] are the aesthetics of their practices in compliance with our sage precepts or at odds with them?”8
或曰西士謂佛氏偸其國之敎自立門戶然乎
“My conversation partner said: “The Western scholars claim that Buddha stole the teaching of their [Western] lands, and founded his own sect [based on what he had stolen]. Is [this claim] true?”
曰佛氏釋迦生於周昭王時天主耶蘓生於漢哀帝時則先後之別不容多卞
[I] replied: “The Śākyamuni Buddha was born at the time of King Zhāo (昭) of Zhōu (周),9 the Heavenly Lord Jesus was born at the time of Emperor Āi (哀帝 Āidì) of Hàn (漢).10 Therefore the chronological difference [between their lives and teachings] does not allow for a lot of contention.”
神道設敎 shéndào shèjiào Is the concept of using theistic or mystical narratives concerning deities such as 上帝 Shàngdì or a Heaven 天 tiān that operates like a powerful god rewarding good deeds and punishing bad deeds.
I would argue that “them” (之) here refers to the Chinese texts that have been preserved from ancient times, which, as explained by the author at the beginning of his answer, used to contain parts that should be expurgated, something which the aforementioned Chinese sages allegedly did.
These characters (as well as the relevant translation) are rendered in italics, as they appear as what may be considered a passing remark in the text. The characters are written smaller than those belonging to the main text, and they appear in two columns in such a way, that these two columns together take up the space that one single column for characters belonging to the main text would.
References to these stories may be found in this article and this article on Wikipedia.
I think this is meant as a rhetorical question, which the author expects both reader and his interlocutor to answer in the negative.
The full Chinese title of the treatise in question is 七克大全 Qī Kè Dàquán, which was authored by the Spanish Jesuit missionary Diego de Pantoja (Chinese names used: 龐迪我 Páng Díwǒ and 龐迪峨 Páng Dí'é, 1571 - 1618), which was first published in Beijing in 1614.
Namely the three proper relationships that should exist between father and son, ruler and subject, and husband and wife, as referred to by the author’s conversation partner previously in this very utterance.
Again here we are dealing with another rhetorical question. This time the reader, as well as the author’s conversation partner, is expected to admit that the aesthetics of the Western scholars’ practices are naturally at odds with the orthodox Confucian rites.
King Zhāo (昭) of Zhōu (周) lived from 1027 to 957 BC, and reigned from 977 BC until his death. This chronological positioning of the historical Buddha appears to be in line with the common idea of when the Buddha lived within the main Buddhist tradition in East Asia.
Emperor Āi (哀帝 Āidì) of Hàn (漢) was emperor of the Western Hàn Dynasty from 7 BC until his death in 1 AD.
