A Study On The Monograph Zhilin

The Theory of Kaoju, a Chinese peculiar research which emphasizes proof, reached a peak in Manchu Dyn.,and meanwhile both the masters of elder generation and the key personnel of the period gave many veiled criticism to the academic situation of Ming Dynasty.We find there's only one monograph named A Study on The Theory of Kaoju in Manchu Dyn. written by Lin Qingzhang from Taiwan, that has presented a full-scale exploration to the Theory of Kaoju in Manchu Dyn..The related exploration can also be found in some efforts of academic history , but they are inclined to lay the importance on the Theory of Mind advocated by Lu Jiuyuan and Wang Yangming , or blame the shallow atmosphere of academic circles, while omit an undercurrent: In fact , to change the dissatisfactory condition ,the paractical value of Academy Studies and the Theory of Kaoju have been advocated by many scholars in both middle and later period of Ming Dynasty .We believe the most appropriate estimation given to the Theory of Kaoju in Ming Dynasty should be based on a method of case study.Three demensions have been considered to choose Zhilin for the essay's focus.First ,I have had the pleasure of finding some new documents about Zhouying's life which we haven't known well, they can help me to give a better comprehension to his life. Second, an overwhelming opinion in academic and media circles is that the name of Taiwan"appeared in the Stories of Dongfan of Zhouying for the fist time; While Fang Hao ,a well-known scholar,believes that instead of Zhou that Chendi's the Stories of Dongfan should take the honour, and he advances some baffling problems worthy of further discussion such as :"Did Zhouying wrote ' the Stories of Dongfan'?" "what's the relationship between the two books of the same name? ""Does Zhouying's 'Taiwan'refers to the present whole Taiwan Island?",and etc.In addition, Zhouying wins a great honour in the whole nine notes examing and correcing documents quoted by the section of Zi .General Catalogue for Four Vaults (vol.118),therefore we should discuss what method does Zhouying use for his research and why does he attract so much attention of those great masters: Four Vaults has been always considered as a headquaters of Sinology in China after all.The article covers two sections.In the first section ,a varity of comparative methods have been employed as follows: (1) block-printed editions in Ming Dynasty are compared seriously with those in other periods;(2)the documents quoted by Zhilin are compared with the original works ;(3)different opinions of academic history on the same problem are compared with each other ,through which Zhou's contribution becomes more distinctive .The second section "Zhouying and His Works"extends in four chapters.The first chaper "The Presentation of the problem "outlines the present related studies and focuses on the academic value of the theme and its objects. Thanks to the "Travel Farway"wrriten by Zhouying,a seldom-seem article whose missing hasbeen sighed and regreted by Fanghao ,the second chaper " A Study on Zhouying's Life and His Works" investigates the whereabouts of Zhou and some of his little-known works .The third chaper "the Study ofthe Stories ofDongfan "compares the three books of the same titles" the Stones ofDongfan" written respectively by Zhouying ,Chendi and the authour of A Study on Europe and Japan. .However we find Chen's book appeared before Zhou's and takes a prose form, while Zhou has made a recreation according to both his experience and Chen's discription and takes a rhyme form. A Study on Europe and Japan chooses Chen's dispiction as its chief source .Then Fanghao's suspection therefore should be dissipated : he believes that Zhouying did not write the book ,and has been misunderstood as the author only because his Travel Farway has included the Stories ofDongfan .Taking Zhilin as an example the fourth chapter "A Study on Zhilin" highlights two points : one is about the conception of method ofthe Theory of Kaoju ,the other is about concrete methods ofthe theory, and it finds that Zhou has employed these methods; sometime consciously while sometime unconsciously.At the end of the essay it comes to conclusion that even in late Ming Dynasty scholars has laid eyes on the importance of enough concrete proof and avoiding shallow study .As we have known that the ancients were inclined to rely on their memory ,or be gableable,so it's no wonder in fact that when we examine seriously their study with original material ,the insufficiency of proof inevitably rises. But checking the original materials involved in the book Zhilin, we find that Zhouying is an exception to it. Zhou must have checked all the quotations with original documents ,and to avoid any distortion , he must have even beaten out the sense of those partly refered to.In short,we believe that Zhilin ,the monograph on the Theory of Kaoju ,wrriten in late Ming Dynasty, is an outstanding one which shows us abundant testimony ,serious and surefooted effort;this is why it has been highly praised by Four Vaults and positively affected the whole academic atmosphere of Manchu Dynasty.