Is Su Xun's On Distinguishing Traitors directed at Wang Anshi?

Su Xun's Views on Wang Anshi in On Distinguishing Traitors. Su Xun not only didn't make friends with Wang Anshi himself, but also advised Ouyang Xiu not to make friends with Wang Anshi. Fang Shao's "Bo Zhai Bian" contains: "When Ou Gong was in Hanyuan, he tasted the guests. When the guest went to stay alone with old Su Shao, he said to the public,' Who is suitable to sit with the head and face of a prisoner?' Gong said, "Yes. People who teach by example don't smell it? "Xun said:' From a certain point of view, if this person is different, it will confuse the world, so that the decision to establish a dynasty can be made. Although he is a wise master, he will also be deceived. What do you want to swim with? "This record is consistent with Zhang's record. That is, when they met for the first time, they told Ouyang Xiu that Wang Anshi "will be chaotic in the future." However, Ouyang Xiu persuaded Su Xun to travel with Wang Anshi, which led to Su Xun's criticism of Wang Anshi, which was also different from Zhang's account. Fang Shao's record is that Su Xun first asked, "Who is the prisoner who lost face?" After Ouyang Xiu answered, Su Xun talked about his views on Wang Anshi.

Later, some people questioned this: "There are officials, officials and scholars who share a meal but never say a word. After dinner, why do you ask the person sitting with you? " (Cai Shangxiang's Biography of Wang, page 154) In fact, in interpersonal communication, when eating at the same table for the first time, most of them are people who are familiar with each other, only one person is strange, and the host forgets to introduce them, so it is not convenient to ask strangers during the dinner, and you can ask the host's name after the break.

More likely, Su Xun clearly knew that he was Wang Anshi, but in order to show Ouyang Xiu his opinion of Wang Anshi, he deliberately asked, "Who is the first side of the prisoner?" . Zhang Hefang's records can complement each other.

There are other records about how Su Xun and Wang Anshi met at the dinner table of Ouyang Xiu in the first year of Jiaxu. Gong Yizheng's Notes on Mustard Seed Hidden said:

Gong Jing sat in Ou Gong and sent Pei Ruhui to know Wujiang as the topic, in order to "be ecstatic, but not."

Divide rhyme. When the guest male eight people,,, Pingfu, Lao Su, and Jiao Ye. At that time, Lao Su got the word "Er" and vowed to "learn from poetry". Gong Jing wrote two poems with the word "er" ... which are the most skillful. A gentleman should not be crowded, and both Wang and Su will regret it.

It is true that Su and Wang sent Pei Ruhui and Ouyang Xiu to know Wujiang through a poem on his desk. Although Su Xun's poems can't be seen, Wang Anshi's three poems that sent Pei Ruhui impromptu have been handed down. However, Gong Yizheng said that "the regret of Su and Wang" began with Su Xun's rhyme of "er", and Wang Anshi wrote the rhyme of "er" again, but it was just a speculative word. The contradiction between Su and Wang is so deep that it will never be caused only by poetry. Comparatively speaking, Ye Mengde's Xia Ji is more credible:

Su Mingyun is a good talker, but Yuan Hao rebelled, and the things that the West used for a long time were changed.

Because of his books, Jia Fan came to the capital for the first time and promoted his articles. In order to understand the imperial edict, Wang talked about Confucian classics, but he did not praise the imperial edict alone, but criticized it to the public many times. Therefore, instead of hating Naoto Kan, it is better to allow evil Gong Jing.

There are two points in this record that deserve special attention: (1) All the quoted materials only talk about Su Xun's denigration of Wang Anshi, while Records after Summer Vacation talks about Wang Anshi's repeated denigration of Su Mingyun. Hatred is the same kind, not one side. (2) Su Xun wrote a book, which was famous in Beijing and "pushed his article for a while"; And Wang Anshi is "unique". This shows that their bad relationship is not a trivial matter such as writing poems, but is inseparable from different political views. According to Shao Bo's Record after Listening (volume 10), Wang Anshi thinks that "Su Mingyun has knowledge of the Warring States" and "generally speaking, contingency and machine change are also".

Su Xun's dislike of Wang Anshi began before the first year of Jiaping, while Wang Su's contempt for each other began when they first met in the first year of Jiaping, and then the contradiction between them became more acute. In the third year of Jiaping (1058), both Su and Wang wrote to Renzong. It is interesting to compare these two books about the emperor. Wang Anshi said in the book Renzong's Last Words that the reason for "the world has been restless for a long time" is "suffering from ignorance of statutes" and demanding "changing the law of harm to the world". Su Xun said in the Book of Kings: "Law is not enough to control the world." Of course, this can't be said that Su Xun is refuting Wang Anshi's point of view, because Su Xun said as early as "On Balance": "Those who lose their government are guilty of breaking the law." Yi Fa is one of Su Xun's famous Shi Jing. Wang Anshi obviously read it and disagreed with his point of view. Wang Anshi said in the Book of Shang Renzong: "Since ancient times, governing the world does not think that the world is suffering from financial management." Su Xun said in the "Imperial Classics" that the financial constraints in the Song Dynasty and the heavy burden on the people were precisely caused by "unrestrained spending of money": "wasting money to reward useless soldiers; Once the gift is delivered, it will cost hundreds of millions.

This is why taxes are not light and people are miserable. It can be seen that their views are obviously different: politically, Wang Anshi emphasized political reform and Su Xun emphasized bureaucratic reform; Economically, Wang Anshi emphasized "making money" and Su Xun emphasized throttling.

In the sixth year of Jiaping (106 1), the contradiction between Su Xun and Wang Anshi was further manifested as the contradiction between Wang Anshi and Su Shi. If Su Xun's Book of Shang Emperor is not necessarily to refute Wang Anshi's Book of Renzong Emperor's Words; Then, Su Shi's Jin Ce, written in Oracle bones for six years, is obviously refuting Wang Anshi's "suffering from ignorance". Su Shi said: "I think that although the law is uneasy today, it is an illegal crime for the world to die." The views of the Su Shi brothers were deeply influenced by Su Xun, especially before Su Xun's death, which can represent Su Xun to some extent. Renzong read the article that Su Shi's brothers took the exam and said happily, "I won two prime ministers for my descendants today!" " "("Song Shi Su Shichuan ") But Wang Anshi was greatly dissatisfied with the articles of the Su Shi brothers. Wang Wenzhong's "Su Shi's General Case" said: "Wang Anshi is particularly jealous." ) Wang Anshi once told people that Su Shi's policy is "all kinds of articles on the Warring States Period. If An Shi is the examiner, he will be dismissed "(Shao Bo recorded after listening 14). Wang Anshi was appointed as the imperial edict at that time. Although he had no right to go to Su Shi's brothers, when he was drafting words for the emperor, he vaguely taught Su Shi a lesson and said that he was "unqualified". It is not enough to "talk deeply about world affairs", but also to "show your talents politically"; Strong learning and support words "

Not enough, "know what you want so that you won't violate the Tao"; Wait a minute. ("The Physical Training Department should be well informed and keep Su Shi's Evaluation System of Dali in Fuchang County, Henan Province") Especially Su Zhe was appointed as a military attache in Shangzhou because of his extreme remarks on the gains and losses of state affairs, while Wang Anshi refused to write lyrics, which further deepened the contradiction between Su and Wang. It can be seen that on the eve of the "Traitor Debate" in the eighth year of the Soviet Union (1063), the Soviets and the king almost reached a white-hot level.

Zhang Yue said, "When An Shi's mother died, all the scholars hung up, and Mr. (Su Xun) didn't go alone to write an article on" Distinguishing traitors. " Wang Anshi's mother died in Jia Fan for 8 years (1063), and the theory of distinguishing traitors was written in this year. Other records say it was written in the year of Jia Fanyuan, which is not credible. Zhang and Su Xun were contemporaries, and Zhang was one of the first ministers to recommend Su Xun. Since then, the friendship between Sue and Zhang has been deep. At the same time, although the viewpoints in "On Distinguishing Traitors" were formed as early as the first year of Jia, and were revealed to Ouyang Xiu, it was not until the end of Jia that the contradiction between the Soviet Union and the King became heated up, Wang Anshi's reputation became higher and higher, and all the literati were hanged, and Su Xun was prone to write "On Distinguishing Traitors". This article is written for "scholar-officials"

Can't "distinguish traitors".

The first part of "On Distinguishing Traitors" is a general introduction. Su Xun wrote: "Everything is inevitable and reasonable, but the world is quiet, see it. Everyone knows that the moon is dazzling and the wind is blowing, and the foundation is moist and silent. The passage of personnel, the relationship between reason and emotion, which is difficult to know, which is unpredictable, and which is the yin and yang of heaven and earth? And the sages don't know, why bother? Likes and dislikes, and gains. " Su Xun believes that everything has its inevitability, and as long as we observe it calmly, we can "see the details clearly". People often know little about natural phenomena, but they can't know little about social phenomena, because they can't be "quiet" and are confused by "likes and dislikes" and "interests". When yang hu first met Wang Yan, he said, "If you miss the next generation, it must be this person." When Guo Ziyi first met Qilu, he also said, "This man has achieved something, and my descendants have no class." Su Xun cited these two examples to illustrate that Yang Hucheng and he are good at discerning things, but at the same time, Su Xun thought that Yang and Guo's words were proved to be accidental, and they were "lewd", which made Wang Yan and he show treachery.

The middle part of "On Distinguishing Traitors" is about Wang Anshi's anonymity:

Today, a certain population recites the words of Confucius and Lao Zi, and goes on a trip of (Uncle) Yi and (Uncle) Qi, calling for a good name without success, and making up a private name to think that Yan Yuan and Mencius will return. The insidious thief is dangerous, malicious and different. Yan Wang and Qilu are one person. How can his disaster win words! A man who never forgets to wash his face and clothes is also very affectionate. Today, it's different. I am a servant, I am a dog, I am a prisoner, and I am embarrassed to talk about poetry and books. People who are unkind in everything are rarely villains, and so are upright, elegant and square. In the name of the world, help its intangible suffering, although I am willing to govern the Lord and be virtuous, I still use it. This is a disaster for the world, which is inevitable.

Su Xun talked about three problems in this passage: First, he accused Wang Anshi of duplicity, reciting Confucius' words and comparing himself with Mencius, but in fact he was "insidious and heartless, with different interests from others". The second is to accuse Wang Anshi of being "unkind", not washing his face, not dirty his clothes, and "ashamed to talk about poetry and books". Thirdly, it is believed that Wang Yan and Qilu may not be reused, because they are "ups and downs with things", "no learning and no skills" and "the Lord of darkness". Wang Anshi, on the other hand, is notoriously ill-formed, and even saints will "use it". Therefore, its harm far exceeds that of Rebecca and Qilu.

Su Xun said at the end of On Distinguishing Traitors that he hoped his words would not come true. His words are wrong, people just think he talks too much; Unfortunately, although he will get a name that knows what he said, the world will be cursed by it. The whole article is about "the person who makes mistakes in the world must be this person". The center is to emphasize "distinguishing traitors" and think that Wang Anshi is a "big traitor", hoping that the court will "know from the details" and not "draw inferences from others". No matter how extreme Su Xun's view of Wang Anshi is, no matter how tense the relationship between the Soviet Union and the King is, judging from the overall spirit of On the Traitor, he is not venting his personal anger, but thinking about the world.

No one seems to doubt that Su Xun wrote "On Distinguishing Traitors" from its publication to Gu Li and Cai Shangxiang in Qing Dynasty. Li and Cai asserted that The Theory of Distinguishing Traitors was forged by Shao Bowen in the name of Su Xun, and thought that Zhang's Tomb Table of Mr. Wen 'an and Su Shi's Xie Zhangtaibao's Book of Writing Ancestor's Tomb were also written by Shao Bowen. Since Li and Cai put forward this theory, there have been many believers; In the so-called "forest approval hole"

In the movement, it became a conclusion, and no one opposed it; Even after criticizing Lin and Confucius, there are still people who think with great certainty that "the theory of distinguishing rape was never written by Su Xun" and assert that "it is impossible for Su Xun to write the theory of distinguishing rape" (see Journal of Northeast Normal University, No.3, 198 1, Liu Naichang's Association between Su Shi and Wang Anshi). Therefore, it is necessary to examine their main arguments denying Su Xun's theory of distinguishing traitors and study whether these arguments can be established.

First, from the historical background, it is denied that The Theory of Distinguishing Rape was written by Su Xun. They thought that Wang Anshi was famous in the world at that time, and Su Xun could not "oppose all opinions". Cai Shangxiang said: "(Li Qing) for four years, Ceng Zi firmly called it unusual in ancient and modern times; In the third year of Emperor Wu's reign, Wen Lugong recommended him to abdicate every time. He Zhi saw Ouyang Xiu in the second year, and recommended Wang Anshi and Lv Gongzhu to North Korea the following year, saying that An Shi's articles were widely publicized. ..... That was the year when I was allowed to go to Beijing, and I first learned about An Shi. An You lists its ugliness to this extreme, but it is still often called Nanfeng, Luling and Lu State. If this is true! "

(Textual Research on Chronology of the King (volume 10).

Mr. Liu Naichang also said, "Wang Anshi went to Beijing to handle affairs, and Su Xun didn't have much contact with Wang Anshi. How can he insist that Wang Anshi is a bad person when he meets, and foresee that the world will be' cursed' in a few years. " "Before Wang Anshi came to power, moral articles were valued by literati ... Why did Su Xun stand up and see at a glance that Wang Anshi was a' big traitor'?" This paper discusses the origin and development of the contradiction between Su Xun and Wang Anshi, and partially answers the questions raised by Cai Shangxiang and Liu Naichang. Here, I would like to further explain whether Su Xun's criticism of Wang Anshi is "one against the various theories" or one of the "various theories".

Wang Anshi's statement that "moral articles are valued by scholars" is true. "The Biography of Wang Anshi in Song Dynasty" said: "An Shi is less good at reading and never forgets. His writing is flying, and if he is careless at first, he will eventually achieve something. Anyone who sees it will be impressed. "

In the second year of Li Qing (1042), Wang Anshi was a scholar and signed the Book of the King of Huainan. According to the usual practice, after signing the review post, you can present a paper to try out the library post, but "An is the only one." In the seventh year of Li Qing (1047), Wang Anshi "resumed studying in Yinxian County, built dikes, and broke ponds, so as to benefit the land and water, lend money to the people, and interest at the same time, so that the old and the new can be exchanged, which is convenient for the citizens". As Shao Bowen's Lu Wenjian (volume 1 1) said, Wang Anshi's "Xi Ning came to power at the beginning, and all his actions were based on this". This is a small experiment of Wang Anshi's political reform thought in a county. After three years of Qianlong (105 1), Wang Anshi sentenced Zhou Shu, and the court called him to try out the library post, but he "refused". Ouyang Xiu recommended him as an admonition officer, and the court appointed him as a captain in Jixian County, but he refused to resign. "The life of the pavilion, repeatedly, anshi repeatedly quit. The literati said that he had no heart and hated his face. " Ceng Gong recommended Wang Anshi to Ouyang Xiu in Li Qing for six years (1046) and said:

Gong's friend is Wang Anshi, whose writing is very ancient, so he is called his writing. Although it has obtained a scientific name, few people know Anshi today. He is sincere and self-respecting and doesn't want to know others. However, such people are rare in ancient and modern times, but now they are very anxious. Although there are no ordinary people, it is not harmful. As an ancient history, this must not be lost (also writing with Ouyang Scheeren).

Ceng Gong thinks that Wang Anshi is a person with beautiful writing style and unique style, which is "rare in ancient and modern times". Ouyang Xiu read Wang Anshi's article and appreciated Wang very much. In the seventh year of Qing Dynasty (1047), Ceng Gong said to Wang Anshi, "Ou Gong knows what he writes with his first step, loves to sigh and writes, so he is too diligent." "Ou Gong is eager to see the first step." (The First Book with the King) In the third year of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty (105 1), Wen Yanbo recommended Wang Anshi to the court, saying, "Anshi's self-control is hard to come by." (Cheng Ju's "Lin Tai Story") Sean also recommended to the court: "Those who tried Wang Anshi in Zhou Shu are wise and knowledgeable in ancient studies. Speech and politics have been heard in time. " ("Letter of recommendation to Chen Sheren with Zhejiang Province") It can be seen that Wang Anshi was really famous at that time.

However, everything in the world is a contradictory unity. There are many people who praise Wang Anshi, and people who belittle Wang Anshi also appear. Before Su Xun wrote The Rape Debate, many people vilified Wang Anshi as "treacherous" and "treacherous". Su Xun is just one of them. After you are familiar with the exposition of Wang Anshi by contemporary people, you will feel that the words in "On Distinguishing Traitors" are no strangers. The so-called "the prisoner's face is lost" means that what Han Qi saw was "not as good as washing"; The so-called "different from others' interests" means that everything Zhang said "wants to be different"; The so-called "traitors" and "insidious thieves" are what Renzong called "Wang Anshi deceiving people"; The so-called "reciting Confucius' words, traveling together, ... thinking that Yan Yuan and Monk are coming back", that is, Ceng Gong praised his "ancient writing, saying that his writing is ... uncommon in ancient and modern times"; The so-called "the person who mistakes the world must be this person" and "the person who undoubtedly suffers from the world", that is, the impression that Wu Kui and Wang Anshi got when they led the county grazing: "If you use it, it will be chaotic." It can be seen that, although "On Distinguishing Traitors" was the most incisive speech criticizing Wang Anshi at that time, it was not Su Xun's only opinion, but only a collection of speeches criticizing Wang Anshi at that time.

Not "opposing all opinions", but one of the "all opinions" at that time.

Secondly, judging from the content of The Traitor Discrimination, it is denied that it was written by Su Xun. Cai Shangxiang accused "the theory of distinguishing rape is groundless".

The so-called "fragmentation" means that it is "chaotic" and "not liberal"; The so-called "unfounded" is untrue. Cai Shangxiang said: "Ming Yun measures the ancients, anticipates current events, and is partial and unique, and how solid it is; However, he will be able to speak freely, and he is indeed an eternal writer.

According to the Complete Collection of Jia Jia, chapters that do not distinguish rape are also evil. "

It's hard for anyone who has read "On Distinguishing Traitors" to agree that it is "chaotic and unorganized" and "not literary". The first argument in "On Distinguishing Traitors" is: things must be reasonable, but only those who are quiet can "see the details"; Second, citing historical facts to prove his theory; Then, starting with "there is a man today", he turned to the unnamed criticism of Wang Anshi; Finally, I hope not to "learn the name"

Tie a knot. The full text has distinct viewpoints, prominent center, rigorous structure and fluent writing, which is based on the unique eloquence of Su Xun's prose.

If not the representative work of Su Xun's prose, On Distinguishing Traitors is at least the best work in Jia Wanji. Many anthologies choose it as a model essay. How can it be said that it is "chaotic" and "not artistic"?

The so-called "unfounded" means that the accusation against Wang Anshi in "On the Identification of Traitors" is not established. For example, Coulee said that Wang Anshi was "not good at his skills, but his heart was primitive.". "Why are there traitors? In fact, whether Su Xun's criticism of Wang Anshi is fair is different from the fact that The Traitor's Argument was written by Su Xun, and its authenticity cannot be denied because of its extreme nature. The so-called "groundless" also refers to the mistake of quoting historical facts, that is, mistaking Dan Tao for Yang. However, Su Xun and his son were deeply influenced by strategists in the Warring States period. Their articles not only occasionally quoted mistakes, but also deliberately fabricated historical jokes. Su Shi's "Theory of Loyalty and Punishment of Evil" has the sentence "Say the third kill, Yao says the third kill". Ouyang Xiu once asked Su Shi what he thought of this book, and Su Shi replied "naturally". Is it because of this that he denied that Su Shi wrote The Theory of Criminal Justice?

If we compare Su Xun's other works, especially Guan Zhong's, it is not difficult to find that the viewpoint of this book is consistent with that of Su Xun, and the language used in the book is also the language used by Su Xun. For example, it is indeed reasonable to argue against traitors and say that it is necessary to say something. The moon is dizzy and the wind blows, and the foundation is wet and rainy. Everything has signs; Guanzhong Lun also said, "Success is not a day's work, there must be a reason; If the disaster didn't happen on the day it happened, there must be a reason. " Another example is On Distinguishing Traitors, which says: "People who are unreasonable in everything are rarely big traitors, but they are upright, stubborn, elegant and open-minded.

It is Su Xun's consistent thought to measure people by inhumanity. His theory of six classics embodies his theory of human feelings, while Guan Zhong's theory is similar to that of distinguishing traitors: "It is just right, elegant and open, inhuman and unreachable." For another example, "On Distinguishing Traitors" prides itself on being a prophet, hoping that his words are not correct in case the world suffers from it; At the end of Su Xun's Book of the Kings, there is a similar tone: "There is nothing in the world, and people often talk nonsense and laugh at the world with pedantry; However, I think sometimes it will be without pedantry. …

... but your majesty will not ignore it with a piece of cloth. "The thought and language of" The Theory of Distinguishing Rape "are consistent with other works of Su Xun, which also shows that" The Theory of Distinguishing Rape "was indeed written by Su Xun.

Thirdly, starting with The Traitor Discrimination, I saw what books were written to deny Su Xun. Li Bi said: "Its words first appeared in Shao's Lu Wenjian. Lu Wenjian was written in Shaoxing in the second year, from 65438 to 17. Shen Fei, a professor of Wuzhou traditional Chinese studies, compiled two appendices to the Collected Works of Lao Su, which contained the Tomb Table and Rape Identification written by Zhang, Zhang and Zhang. There is also Dongpo's Epitaph of Xie Zhanggong, which is the preface of Distinguishing Traitors. Stealing these three pieces is a forgery. ..... I suspect that "Table" and "Distinguishing Rape" were both fabricated by Shao afterwards. " (See all the quotations from Li Shouyu in this article. It is obviously untenable to say that The Theory of Distinguishing Traitors began with Shao's Lu Wenjian, because Lu Wenjian was written in Shaoxing in the Southern Song Dynasty for 2 years (1132); In Zhang's Complete Music Volume 39, Mr. Wen 'an's Grave Table, the full text quotes the theory of discriminating rape. So I simply described Zhang's tombstone and Su Shi's as fakes. Coulee's proudest proof that the Tomb Raider Table is a fake is that there is a passage in the Tomb Raider Table: "At the beginning of Jiaping, Wang Anshi became famous, and his party members fell for a while. Its life system says:' born of the people, there are few people.' Artificial language, that several saints. "Coulee retorted:" People who regard Gong Jing as a saint are also gods; The words of nature, Zaixi Ning 2 years; Lao Quan died in Yingzong Zhiping for three years, which was beyond his power. "Cai Shangxiang also echoed:" The strangest person is nothing more than a mixed life. Mingyun died in Zhiping for 3 years; In the third year of Xining, Anshi began to cooperate with Pingzhang. That was when the road was at the same time, and Andrew was wrong! " "Strange" is strange, but this strange phenomenon is not difficult to explain. First, the tomb-robbing table says, "Mr. (Su Xun) hasn't been three years, so an Shi is useful. "It can be seen that the author of Tomb Raider clearly knew that Anshi's" fate "(or" use ") was after Su Xun's death. Secondly, from the perspective of writing, "at the beginning of Jiaping, Wang Anshi's fame was at the beginning, and his party friends were in chaos"; Ouyang xiu has also been good at it, also in the first year of Jiaping; There should be no insertion in the middle of the sentence "its life is related" that has been away from Xining for three years (separated by 13 years). Mr. Zhang believes that "On Distinguishing Traitors" was written by Su Xun, and his explanation for this is: "The word' its life system' is obviously wrong." (See Journal of Fudan University Classical Literature for "Shao Bowen's On Distinguishing Traitors") Actually, there is not necessarily a "fake fish".

Although this passage has been quoted, in order to illustrate the problem, I have to quote the original text again here: "At the beginning of Jiaping, Wang Anshi became famous, and his party members fell for a while. Its life system says:' born of the people, there are few people.' Make a speech, think it is a saint. Ouyang Xiu is also good at this, and advised Mr. to travel with him. Anshi is also willing to pay Yu Xiansheng. Mr. Wang said:' I know that he is also a human being, a man without humanity, and rarely suffers from the world.' An's mother died, and all the men hanged themselves. Mr. An didn't go alone, so he wrote the article "Distinguishing traitors". This passage is the first time to talk about Wang Anshi's influence: from the beginning of Jiaping to the moment of tilting, it is about Wang's influence in the beginning of Jiaping; From "His Destiny" to "Several Saints", it is about the influence of Wang JaeHee's early years. A period should be used instead of a comma in the "tilting moment", and the word "in front of home" is only a time-limited word in the previous sentence, excluding the latter sentence. From Ouyang Xiu to Yi Pian, we talked about the relationship between the Soviet Union and the king. From Ouyang Xiu to Chaos in the World, we talked about the relationship between Jiaping and the Soviet Union and the king. From "Death of An Shi's Mother" to "Yiwen", it is about the relationship between the Soviet Union and King Jiaping for eight years.

The context of the article is clear. The so-called "Andrew's mistakes stop here" is that Cai Shangxiang did not understand the original text. Li and Cai not only asserted that the Tomb Table was forged by Shao Bowen, but also said that Su Shi's Xie Zhang Taibao's Zufen Book was also forged. It is even less convincing to regard everything that is not conducive to his argument as a forgery. For Su Shi's Xie Shu, see Dongpo Collection, Volume 29. Chen's "Zhi Zhai Lu Solving Problems" said that the forty volumes of Dongpo Collection were "Poe was already in the world when he was in public security"; Hu Zai's "Tiaoxi Fishing in Conghua" said: "The Pre-World Collection (that is, Dongpo Collection) was written by Dongpo." When Su Shi died, the Epitaph of Mr. Dongpo written by Su Zhe said that Su Shi "has 40 volumes of Dongpo Collection, 20 volumes of Postscript, Playing Shu 15, Internal System 10, and External System 3 volumes", which also proves that Chen, Kloc-0/0 and External System have three volumes. Cai Shangxiang called almost all articles that were not conducive to his defense of Wang Anshi forgeries. For example, he said: "Su Zizhan wrote Wen Guo's" Towards the Star ",with more than 9,400 words, and half of them belittled An Shi. No matter what this style was in ancient times, it was safe to read like a book. (Wang's "A Brief Survey of the Chronicle") It is too rash to deny the authenticity of an article without any basis.

Fourthly, it denies that The Traitor was written by Su Xun. Li Bi said: "Ma Duanlin's textual research contains fifteen volumes of the Gaby Collection by Su Mingyun, but the secular engraving is not called Gaby. There are as many as 20 volumes with different titles, and they are carved into singles such as Hong Fan and Shi Fa, and appendix 2 is added. Recently, during the reign of Jiajing in Ming Dynasty, the imperial history of Taiyuan Shouzhang boring patrol case was collected in Li Nanwang's home with the same title as the classic text. Among all the theories, the only one who doesn't care about "On Distinguishing Traitors" is considered to be a fake of A Shao. "Here's a question: Is 15 or 20 volumes closer to the true colors of Su Xun's collected works? Ouyang Xiu's "Su Mingyun's Epitaph" said: Su Xun "has twenty volumes of collected works and three volumes of interpretation." Taichang Li was written as 100 volumes, but Yi Zhuan failed.

Ceng Gong's "Su Mingyun's Mourning" said: "Ming Yun's articles have been collected in 20 volumes, and the series" Tai Chang Yin Ge Calendar "100, and the second volume of" Death Law "is kept in our company, but the Book of Changes has not been completed." Zhang's Tomb Table of Mr. Wen 'an says: "Twenty volumes of collected works, three volumes of sacrificial rites, ten volumes of the Book of Changes" and "hundreds of volumes of ceremonies". From these records of Su Xun's contemporaries, we can see that: First, the earliest collection of books in Su Xun is 20 volumes, not 15 volumes. Second, it was not called Jia Fan Collection at that time. If it had been called Jia Fanji at that time, the three of them would not have called it "anthology" in unison. Not all the works in Jia Fanji were written in Jia Fan's time, or even mainly in Jia Fan's time. Several works, such as Power, Balance of Power, Hong Fan and History, were written before Jia Fanyuan. People suspect that Su Xun's Selected Works was written by people in the Southern Song Dynasty, probably because Su Xun was famous for these articles during the reign of Jia Fan and named it Jia Fan. Thirdly, Ouyang, Zeng and Zhang listed Su Xun's single-line works out of the collection, such as Gree and Poetry. Gu Li mistook Hong Fan Lun for a one-line edition and thought it should not be "engraved" into Su Xun's collected works, which also proved that the twenty-volume edition was closer to Su Xun's Selected Works.

As far as I know, except Jia Fan Ji 15, all other editions, including Jia Fan Xin Ji 16 published in Shaoxing in the Southern Song Dynasty and the incomplete edition of The Complete Works of Lao Su in the Song Dynasty, have collected the theory of distinguishing traitors. Fifthly, judging from the spread of "On Distinguishing Traitors", it is denied that it was written by Su Xun. Cai Shangxiang said: "The identification of rape is a private book. It was published for the first time in the world and it is also mysterious. " Comrade Liu Naichang further developed this view. He said: "Since Su Xun is convinced that once Wang Anshi is used,' it will be a great disaster in the world, and there is no doubt about it', why doesn't he disclose his views to his peers in order to nip in the bud and keep them secret? A few years after his death, Wang Anshi's political reform has become a reality, and then others will pass on the article? " To answer this question, it is necessary to read Ye Mengde's record about the spread of the theory of distinguishing traitors: "Ming Yun wrote an article on distinguishing traitors, offering a secret way of peace, comparing Gong Jing with Wang Yan and Qilu, rather than showing European loyalty. After Gong Jing heard about it, he couldn't solve the gap between the two families because he didn't like his son and brother. " Distinguishing traitors cannot be published for a long time. During the Yuanfeng period, the son was set up in Nanjing. Please write for Mingyun Tomb and publish the full text. The Su family did not enter the stone, but spread to the world when they were younger. "

From this record of Ye Mengde, we can see that the spread of the theory of distinguishing traitors has gone through three stages; First, when I first wrote it, I used to "secretly make peace", so it can be seen that Liu Naichang's statement that Su Xun did not disclose his views to colleagues is not true. Didn't he disclose them to Zhang? "It's not for Ou Wenzhong", because although Ouyang Xiu is a countryman of Su Xun in other aspects, he is not a countryman in his view of Wang Anshi, and Ouyang Xiu values Wang Anshi very much. Zhang knew that he had never spoken to Anshi since the emperor paid tribute. Therefore, it is impossible for Wang Anshi to learn Zhang's theory of distinguishing rape. This shows that, besides Zhang, other "fans" in Su Xun have also read "On the Discrimination of Rape". But in general, this stage is a "secret" stage, and not many people know it. This is not difficult to understand, because "On Distinguishing Traitors" has just been written, and even the Su Shi brothers have a sigh of "Xi, it is very embarrassing", which is of course not easy to publish. Secondly, in Yuan Feng Shi, Zhang put it in the tomb of Mr. Wen An, because in Zhang's view, Wang Anshi's political reform practice fully confirmed Su Xun's prediction: "An Shi uses things, and his words are as good as his words.

"But during the Yuanfeng period, although Wang Anshi stopped talking, the immortal who supported the new law was still there. The Su Shi brothers were demoted because they opposed the new law, and the situation was very difficult. Therefore, although they appreciate Zhang's recognition of Su Xun's foresight, they are "not a stone". After the death of Zongshen and Wang Anshi, even Sima Guang warned against "repeated actions" and "vilifying Wang Anshi", emphasizing that Wang Anshi's burial was "particularly appropriate and generous". At this time, of course, the Su Shi brothers will not publicize "On the Argument of Rape". After Zhe Zongzhu was in power, the New Party gained power again, Su Shi's brothers moved to Lingnan, and the Hui Zong Dynasty also constantly attacked party member, Fan Yuan, and banned the destruction of Su San's collected works. Therefore, in the late Northern Song Dynasty, the theory of distinguishing traitors could not be spread. The third is Bi Nian, which is a guide to the early Song Dynasty. At that time, public opinion blamed the demise of the Northern Song Dynasty on Wang Anshi's political reform, and Su Shi's father and son were commended. At this time, the theory of distinguishing traitors began to spread widely. It is completely reasonable to analyze the spread of "On Distinguishing Traitors" in connection with the historical background of each period, and it is not mysterious at all.