鐔津文集 15.26

15.26

韓子為處州孔子廟碑。以孔子社稷句龍棄。比而校其祭禮之豐約。謂孔子以德得盛禮之祀。勝於社稷與句龍棄。其詞曰。其位所不屋而壇。豈如孔子用王者事。巍然當座。以門人為配。自天子而下。北面拜跪薦祭。進退誠敬禮如親弟子者云云。夫社稷者。用其達天地之氣正。以不屋而壇為尊。唯喪國之社乃屋。示絕陽而通陰戒之也。故社稷屋之。乃其辱耳。韓子欲以社稷之無屋與孔子校其榮。何其不知經之如此耶。夫孔子者自以其教為儒者之先聖。固當享其釋菜釋奠之禮。烏可以句龍棄等比功德乎。是又韓子其評論之謬甚也。

In his 'Stele for the Temple of Confucius in Chuzhou', Master Han compared and evaluated the abundance and frugality of sacrificial rituals between Confucius and the Gods of the Soil and Grain, Goulong, and Qi. He claimed that Confucius, through his virtue, received the sacrifice of grand rituals, surpassing the Gods of the Soil and Grain, Goulong, and Qi. His words read: 'Their positions are altars without roofs; how could they compare to Confucius employing the rites of a king? Majestically facing the seat, accompanied by his disciples; from the Son of Heaven on down, all face north, bowing, kneeling, and presenting offerings, advancing and retreating with sincere reverence, observing the rites as though they were his own disciples,' and so forth. Now, the Gods of the Soil and Grain are honored precisely because they convey the proper qi of heaven and earth by having an altar without a roof. Only the altar of a ruined state is given a roof, as a warning signifying the severing of yang and the opening of yin. Therefore, for the Gods of the Soil and Grain to be roofed is actually their disgrace. That Master Han wished to use the lack of a roof for the Gods of the Soil and Grain to compare honors with Confucius—how could he be so ignorant of the classics like this? As for Confucius, through his teaching he became the former sage of Confucians, and certainly ought to enjoy the rites of vegetable offerings and animal sacrifices; how could his merit and virtue ever be compared to the likes of Goulong and Qi? This is yet another of Master Han's extreme blunders in criticism.