鐔津文集 16.18

16.18

The Tang dynasty author Yu Zhigu, in a letter discussing literature with Master Ouyang, stated that when Master Han of recent times wrote *Yuandao*, he modeled it on Cui Bao's letter answering Niu Xiang; when he wrote *Huiban* (Debate on Taboo Names), it was Zhang Zhao's treatise on old names; when he wrote the *Biography of Mao Ying*, it was Yuan Shu's *Nine Bestowals of Prince Dalan*; when he wrote the *Essay on Sending Away Poverty*, it was Yang Xiong's *Rhapsody on Driving Away Poverty*; when he wrote the *Memorial on the Buddha Relic*, it was Liu Zhou's remonstrance to the King of Qi. Although he relied on earlier texts like this, I have not yet evaluated their merits and faults. However, Yu's discussion is not worth examining for its correctness. The *Essay on Sending Away Poverty* claims that poverty has a ghost; the ghost of poverty was merely an unverified colloquial fabrication of the back alleys. When Master Han composed literature, even if one took it as actually witnessing such a ghostly form, how strange it is! Han thereupon relied on this to express himself; what an ominous thing to draw an analogy from! If Master Han's wisdom and literary learning relied on ghosts for their composition, could Master Han have considered himself a sincere and illuminated man? The words of a gentleman are standard words; only if they can instruct people will a gentleman speak them. If they cannot instruct people, a gentleman does not speak them. Therefore Confucius said: 'A great man does not initiate idle words.' Being like this, how could Master Han instruct people? The *Analects* says: 'The gentleman stands firm in poverty; the petty man, when impoverished, gives way to excess.' If Han was indeed impoverished, he should especially have held firm as a gentleman; how could he casually seize upon the vulgar banter of humble alleys and make literature of it for amusement?