| | 帝王諡號... : |
|
| |
|
| | 帝王諡號... : |
黃帝之號。按白虎通云：「先黃後帝者，古者質，生死之稱各特行，合而言之，美者在上。黃帝始制法度，得道之中，萬代不易，後代雖盛，莫能與同。後代德與天同，亦得稱帝；不能制作，故不得復稱黃也。」 |
| | The title of Huangdi. According to Baihu Tong: "The reason for putting 'Huang' before 'Di' is that in ancient times, when things were simple and unadorned, the terms for life and death each had their own distinct usage. When combined, the more beautiful term was placed above." Huangdi first established laws and regulations; he attained the Dao's central principle, which remained unchanged for ten thousand generations. Although later dynasties were prosperous, none could match him. Later rulers whose virtue was equal to Heaven also deserved the title of Di; "but since they could not establish systems and regulations, they were no longer able to be called 'Huang' as well."
|
| | 帝王諡號... : |
顓頊。按五經通義曰：「顓頊者，顓猶專，頊猶愉。幼少而王，以致太平，常自愉儉，嗛約自小之意，故兩字為諡。」 |
| | Zhuanyu. According to Wujing Tongyi: "Zhuanyu means 'Zhuan' is similar to 'zhuan,' meaning exclusive, and 'Yu' is similar to 'yu,' meaning pleasure. He became king at a young age and thus brought about peace and stability; He often practiced pleasure in frugality, 'qian' , meaning modesty and self-restraint from a young age. Therefore, the two characters were used as his posthumous title."
|
| | 帝王諡號... : |
帝堯、帝舜，先號後諡也。帝者德盛，與天同，號諡雖美，終不過天也，故如其次道之。 |
| | Emperor Yao and Emperor Shun had titles first and received posthumous names later. A Di was a ruler whose virtue was so great that it equaled Heaven; although the title and posthumous name were beautiful, they could never surpass Heaven itself. Therefore, one followed this order accordingly.
|
| | 帝王諡號... : |
周制，春官太師掌大喪，帥瞽而廞作柩諡。文王、武王，先諡後號。 |
| | In the Zhou system, the Spring Official Tai Shi was in charge of major funerals and led the blind musicians to perform mourning rites and compose posthumous titles for the coffin. Wen Wang and Wu Wang received posthumous names first, then titles later.
|
| | 帝王諡號... : |
說曰：按大戴禮云：「諡者行之跡也，號者功之表也。」樂記曰：「聞其諡，知其行。」白虎通曰：「號，法天也，法日也，日未出而明。諡，法地也，法月也，月已入有餘光。是以大行受大名，細行受小名。行生於己，名生於人。」五經通義曰：「號者亦所以表功德號令天下也。諡之言列，陳列所行。善行有善諡，惡行有惡諡，以為勸戒也。問曰：天子有天下大號，諸侯寧有國大號乎？答曰：天子居無上之位，下無所屈，故立大號以勸勉子孫。諸侯有爵祿之賞，削絀之義，鈇鉞之誅，故無所有國之號也。」趙商問鄭志曰：「曲禮云：『已孤暴貴，不為父作諡』，而武王即位，追王太王、王季、文王，改諡爵，何也？」答曰：「周道之業，興於二王，功德由之，王跡初焉。凡為人父，豈能盡賢乎？若夏禹、殷湯則不追諡矣。」郊特牲云：「死而諡之今也，古者生無爵，死無諡。」質家兩言為諡，成湯是也。文者一言為諡，文、武是也。號無質文，諡有質文。或以名配者，德薄因名配諡，祖甲是也。質家不連號諡，文家連號。桀、紂先號後諡者，別誅絕不嫌也。禮記曰：「唯天子稱天以誄之。」又白虎通云：「天子崩，大臣至南郊諡之。以為臣子莫不欲褒稱其君，掩惡揚美者，故於郊，明不得欺天也。」 |
| | It is said: According to Daidai Li: "A posthumous name reflects one's conduct, while a title represents the manifestation of one's achievements." らい Yue Ji says: "Hearing his posthumous name, one knows his conduct." Baihu Tong says: "A title follows the pattern of Heaven and follows the sun; even before the sun rises, it is already bright. "A posthumous name follows the pattern of Earth and follows the moon; even after the moon has set, there remains some residual light." Therefore, great deeds receive a grand posthumous name, while minor deeds receive a lesser one. "Deeds arise from oneself, but names are bestowed by others." Wujing Tongyi says: "A title is also used to demonstrate virtue and merit, as well as to issue commands throughout the world. "The term 'shi' means listing; it lists what was done." Virtuous deeds receive a virtuous posthumous name, and wicked deeds receive an evil one; this is to serve as encouragement or warning. Question: If the Son of Heaven has a grand title for ruling all under heaven, can feudal lords have grand titles for their own states? Answer: The Son of Heaven occupies the supreme position, with no one beneath him to bow or submit; therefore, a grand title is established to encourage and inspire his descendants. Feudal lords have rewards of rank and emoluments, the possibility of being stripped of their titles or reduced in status, as well as punishment by execution with axes and halberds; therefore, they do not possess grand state titles." Zhao Shang asked Zheng Zhi: "Qu Li says, 'If one suddenly becomes noble after being an orphan, he should not create a posthumous name for his father.' Yet when King Wu ascended the throne, he posthumously honored Taiwang, Wang Ji, and Wen Wang as kings and changed their posthumous names and ranks. Why was this so?" Answer: "The Zhou dynasty's cause arose from the two kings; virtue and merit originated with them, marking the beginning of royal achievements. Can any father possibly be entirely virtuous? "If it were Xia Yu or Yin Tang, they would not have needed posthumous names bestowed retroactively." Jiaote Sheng says: "Giving a posthumous name after death is a practice of today; in ancient times, people had no rank when alive and no posthumous name upon death." In the simple system, two characters were used for a posthumous name; Cheng Tang is an example. For those of greater refinement, one character was sufficient as a posthumous name—Wen and Wu are examples. Titles have neither simplicity nor sophistication; posthumous names do possess both. Those who were honored with a name combined with their posthumous title did so because of lesser virtue, using the original name to complement the title—Zu Jia is an example. In the simple system, titles and posthumous names were not combined; In the refined system, titles were combined with posthumous names. Jie and Zhou had titles first and then received posthumous names; this distinction was made to emphasize their condemnation without any hesitation. The Rites of Zhou says: "Only the Son of Heaven is entitled to be eulogized by invoking Heaven." Baihu Tong also says: "When a Son of Heaven passes away, high-ranking ministers go to the southern suburbs to bestow his posthumous name. This is because no subject or child does not wish to praise their ruler, concealing evil and highlighting virtue. Therefore, this takes place at the suburbs, making it clear that one cannot deceive Heaven."
|
| | 帝王諡號... : |
大唐元陵諡冊文：「維某年月日，哀子嗣皇帝臣諱，伏以聖德之大，上與天合，人道近暱，鮮克究知，敢盡其所見，注以敘財成之業。伏惟大行皇帝，紹休七聖，臨照八極，以至道御群有，以至化懷遠方，登假於上，敷聞在下。肇加元服，頃昇儲闈，生知之敏，動與神契。承順玄宗也，齊栗之容著；奉養肅宗也，愛敬之禮深。履蒸蒸，躬翼翼，不絕馳道，日朝寢門，此則首冠百王，大舜、周文之孝也。其於崇儒尚齒，尊道貴德，窮理盡性之學，經天緯地之文，包荒含垢之量，迪哲允龔之善，斯又睿聖不測，同符乎三五，無得而稱也。當祿山叛亂，陷覆二京，以天人之重，授元戎之律，師之所及，狂寇殲夷，復宗社之阽危，拯生靈於焚燎，則乾維重搆，宸極以安。及史盜閒釁，三河屢梗，在撫軍之際，思明隕命，乘踐祚之初，朝義授首，則梁陳底定，朔易從風。其或屈強於大梁，背誕於南越，莫不朝為梟鏡，夕為鯨鯢，此高光之功，神武之略也。自是肅勿群后，賓延萬靈，洿瀦鬱沒之刑寢，焚瘞懸沉之禮備。衣冠有淪於囱從者，釋而靡問；靈祇有闕於禋祀者，秩而致享。堲讒說，求讜言，扇以祥風，浸以膏澤，九譯奉貢，四夷將賓，丕冒出日，罔不率俾。猶復嚴恭寅畏，顧省闕遺，兢兢業業，日昃不暇，故得玄功廣運，協氣旁流，靈契畢發，元符洊至，則瑞璧出於泗，清瀾變於河。其餘見祉鱗羽、呈祥草木者，不可殫記。方議櫜弓偃伯，臻於太和，告禪於石閭，鏤功於金版，遽承憑几之命，奄遘綴衣之酷，號天叩地，罔所依歸。今龍攢就啟，蜃輅將駕，釆鴻儒碩生之議，考公卿百辟之請，僉以盛德大業，匪號諡莫宣，是用虔奉古訓，發揚茂實，謹遣攝太尉某奉冊上尊諡曰：睿文孝武皇帝，廟曰代宗。伏惟明靈降格，膺茲典禮，誕錫純嘏，貽宴後昆。嗚呼哀哉！」 |
| | The posthumous name edict for the Yuanling Mausoleum of Datang: "On a certain year, month, and day, the grieving son and successor emperor, Minister Hui, respectfully submits that your great virtue was in harmony with Heaven above. Human affairs are close at hand, yet few can fully comprehend it. I dare to present my observations and record them to narrate the achievements of wisdom and accomplishment. I humbly reflect that the late emperor inherited the virtue of seven sage rulers, illuminated all eight directions, governed all things with ultimate Dao, and extended his transformative influence to distant lands. He ascended above, while his fame spread below. From the beginning of assuming adult status through the capping ceremony to ascending as heir apparent in a short time, his innate wisdom was evident; every action harmonized with divine will. In upholding and following the Xuanzong dynasty, his solemn and respectful demeanor stood out; In serving and honoring Suzong, his love and reverence were profound. With diligence in filial devotion, he walked with reverence and humility, never ceasing to travel the imperial road, paying daily homage at his parents' chamber doors. This was a model for all kings—this was the filial virtue of Emperor Shun and King Wen of Zhou. His promotion of Confucianism and respect for the elderly, his reverence for Dao and virtue, his pursuit of knowledge in exploring principles and human nature, his mastery of texts that govern Heaven and Earth, his magnanimity to tolerate faults and endure grievances, and his wisdom in guiding people toward righteousness—these were all manifestations of his unmatched sage-like wisdom. These virtues aligned with those of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors, beyond words to describe. When An Lushan rebelled and captured the two capitals, he bore the great responsibility of Heaven and humanity. He was entrusted with military authority; wherever his troops went, the rebellious bandits were annihilated. He restored the dynasty from peril and rescued the people from destruction by fire. Thus, the pillars of Heaven were rebuilt, and imperial stability was secured once more. When Shi Chaodi took advantage of the situation, and frequent disruptions occurred in the Three Rivers region, during the period of military governance, An Sisheng lost his life. At the beginning of his reign, Chao Yi surrendered to execution; thus, the regions of Liang and Chen were pacified, and northern areas followed suit like the wind. Those who resisted in Dalu or rebelled in Nanyue were no more than those who became examples of punishment by morning and perished like leviathans by night. This was the achievement of Gao Guang, a feat of divine martial strategy. From then on, he solemnly honored all spirits and welcomed myriad deities. Punishments for those who had been submerged in filth were abolished, while rites of burning, burying, or suspending the dead were fully prepared. Those whose official attire and status had been lost to chaos were released without further inquiry; Deities who had been neglected in ritual offerings were honored with proper ceremonies. He rejected slander and sought truthful counsel, spreading auspicious winds and nourishing the people with abundant blessings. Tributes arrived from distant lands, and all four barbarian regions became subjects; great achievements emerged like the rising sun, and none failed to follow his guidance. Yet he remained reverent and cautious, constantly reviewing his shortcomings with diligence. He worked tirelessly without rest until the sun set each day; thus, great achievements spread widely, harmonious energies flowed broadly, divine omens manifested fully, and auspicious signs arrived repeatedly. As a result, jade discs emerged from Si Prefecture, and clear waves transformed in the Yellow River. Other auspicious signs—such as dragons appearing on water, phoenixes in the sky, or miraculous plants and trees—were too numerous to record exhaustively. Just as plans were being made to store weapons and end warfare, achieving supreme harmony, the emperor was about to perform a ritual of abdication at Shilu and have his achievements engraved on golden tablets. Suddenly, he received the command to rest from his duties and passed away unexpectedly in great sorrow; weeping toward Heaven and pounding the earth, there is nowhere left to turn for comfort or guidance. Now, with the dragon's entourage about to depart and the ghostly chariot ready to carry him away, we have consulted learned scholars and gathered the requests of high-ranking officials. All agree that his great virtue and achievements cannot be adequately expressed without a title and posthumous name. Therefore, in reverence for ancient teachings and to honor his noble deeds, I respectfully dispatch the Acting Taiwei [name] with this edict to bestow the honored posthumous title: Ruizhen Xiaowu Huangdi (睿文孝武皇帝), whose temple will be known as Daizong. We humbly hope that your enlightened spirit descends to accept this ceremony, and may you receive pure blessings, granting peace and prosperity for future generations. Alas! How sorrowful!
|
| | 諸侯卿大... : |
|
| |
|
| | 諸侯卿大... : |
周制，諸侯薨，臣子跡累其行以赴告王，王遣大夫會其葬，因諡之。春秋魯桓公七年，葬蔡桓侯。然得桓諡者，明諡天子所加，非獨臣子也。又太史掌小喪賜諡，小史掌卿大夫之喪賜諡讀誄。曲禮曰：「既葬言諡曰類。」又曰：「公叔文子卒，其子戍請諡於君曰：『日月有時，將葬矣，請所以易其名者。』君曰：『昔者衛國凶饑，夫子為粥與國之餓者，是不亦惠乎！昔者衛國有難，夫子以其死衛寡人，不亦貞乎！夫子聽衛國之政，修其班制，以與四鄰交，衛國之社稷不辱，不亦文乎！』故諡貞惠文子。」白虎通曰：「卿大夫老歸有諡者，別尊卑、章有德也。大夫歸，無過，猶有祿位，故有諡也。士冠禮『生無爵，死無諡』。卿大夫有爵故有諡，士無爵故無諡。」 |
| | In the Zhou system, when a feudal lord died, his ministers and sons would trace and compile an account of his conduct to report to the king. The king would then send a high-ranking official to attend the funeral and bestow a posthumous title accordingly. In the seventh year of Duke Huan of Lu during the Spring and Autumn period, the Marquis Huan of Cai was buried. However, receiving the posthumous title "Huan" indicates that such a title was bestowed by the Son of Heaven (the emperor), not solely by ministers and sons. The Grand Historian also presided over granting posthumous titles for minor funerals, The junior historian presided over granting posthumous names and reading eulogies at the funerals of high-ranking officials and nobles. The Rites of Zhou states: "After burial, when mentioning the title, one should say 'lei.'" It also says: "Gongshu Wenzǐ died," His son Shu requested a posthumous title from the ruler. He said, "Days and months have passed; the burial is about to take place," "Please grant us what will change his name." The ruler said: "In the past, during a time of famine in Wei State, Master prepared porridge for those who were starving in the state. Was this not an act of kindness!" "In the past, when Wei State faced a crisis, Master sacrificed his life to protect me, the lonely ruler. Was this not loyalty!" "Master administered the government of Wei State, reformed its official ranks and systems, and maintained relations with neighboring states. The state's ancestral sacrifices were not disgraced—was this not a mark of culture and virtue!"' Therefore, he was given the posthumous title Zhenhuwenzi." The Baihu Tong says: "When high-ranking officials and nobles who have retired receive posthumous titles, it is to distinguish ranks of respect and honor those with virtue. When a noble retires without having committed any serious faults, he still retains his salary and rank; therefore, he may also receive a posthumous title. The Rites of the Crown for Scholars state: "In life they hold no rank, in death they receive no posthumous name." High-ranking officials and nobles have ranks; therefore, they may receive posthumous names. Scholars hold no rank; thus, they do not receive posthumous names."
|
| | 諸侯卿大... : |
魏劉輔等啟論賜諡云：「古者存有號則沒有諡，必考行跡、論功業而為之制。漢不修古禮，大臣有寵乃賜之諡。今國家因用未革。臣以為今諸侯薨於位者可有諡，主者宜作得諡者秩品之限。」尚書衛覬奏：「舊制，諸王及列侯薨，無少長皆賜諡。古之有諡，隨行美惡，非所以優之。又次以明識昭穆，使不錯亂也。臣以為諸侯王及王子諸公侯薨，可隨行跡賜諡；其列侯始有功勞，可一切賜諡；至於襲封者則不賜諡。」尚書趙咨又奏云：「其諸襲爵守嗣無殊才異勳於國及未冠成人，皆不應賜諡。」黃門侍郎荀俁議以為：「古之諡，紀功懲惡也，故有桓文靈厲之諡。今侯始封，其以功美受爵土者，雖無官位，宜皆賜諡以紀其功，且旌奉法能全爵祿者也。其斬將搴旗，以功受爵，而身在本位，類皆比列侯。自關內侯以下及名號賜爵附庸，非諡所及，皆可闕之。若列侯襲有官位，比大夫以上；其不贋官理事，則當宿衛忠勤，或身死王事，皆宜加諡。其襲餘爵，既無功勞，官小善微，皆不足錄。」八座議以為：「太尉荀顗所撰定體統，通敘五等列侯以上，嘗為郡國太守、內史、郡尉、牙門將、騎督以上薨者，皆賜諡。」 |
| | In the Wei dynasty, Liu Fu and others proposed a discussion on granting posthumous titles: "In ancient times, those who were alive had titles; upon death, they received posthumous names. It was necessary to examine their conduct and achievements before establishing such a title. The Han dynasty did not follow the ancient rites; only high-ranking ministers who were favored received posthumous titles. Now, the state continues this practice without reforming it. I believe that those feudal lords who die in office may be granted posthumous titles; the authorities should establish rank and status criteria for those eligible to receive such names." Shangshu Wei Ji presented a memorial: "According to the old system, when kings and marquises died, posthumous titles were granted regardless of their age. In ancient times, posthumous names were given according to the goodness or wickedness of one's conduct; they were not merely a means of showing favor. Furthermore, this practice was followed in order to clearly identify and distinguish generations, so as to avoid confusion. I believe that when feudal kings and the sons of kings, as well as marquises and dukes, die, posthumous titles may be granted according to their conduct; those marquises who have just begun to show meritorious service should all receive posthumous names; as for those who inherit their titles, they should not be granted posthumous names." Shangshu Zhao Zi also presented a memorial stating: "Those who inherit titles and maintain their line without exceptional talent or remarkable contributions to the state, as well as those who have not yet reached adulthood (i.e., not yet passed the capping ceremony), should all be ineligible for posthumous names." Huangmen Shilang Xun Yi argued: "In ancient times, posthumous titles served to record achievements and punish evil; thus there were titles such as Huan, Wen, Ling, and Li. Now, when a marquis is first enfeoffed, if he receives his title and fief due to meritorious conduct, even though he may hold no official position, posthumous names should still be granted to record his achievements; this also serves as an honor for those who uphold the law and preserve their titles and ranks. Those who have cut down enemy generals, captured banners, received ranks due to their achievements, and remain in their original positions are all comparable to marquises. Those below the rank of Guannei Hou and those who received titles or names as vassals are beyond the scope of posthumous names, and may be omitted. If a marquis inherits his title and holds an official position comparable to that of a high-ranking noble or above; if he does not hold an actual office but is responsible for affairs, then he should have been loyal and diligent in guarding the court or died while serving the king; such individuals are all suitable to be granted posthumous names. Those who inherit only a minor title, having neither achievements nor significant virtue in their low-ranking positions, are all unworthy of being recorded." The Eight Ministers deliberated and concluded: "Grand Marshal Xun Yi's established regulations state that all individuals of the five ranks above marquis, who have previously served as governors of commanderies or states, Neishi (internal historians), Juwei (commandery marshals), Yamen Jiang (gate generals), Qidu (cavalry commanders) and above, upon their death should be granted posthumous names."
|
| | 諸侯卿大... : |
東晉元帝大興三年詔：「古者皆諡，名實相稱。頃來有爵乃諡，非聖賢本意。通議之。」有司表云：「劉毅宜諡，以申毅忠允匪躬。贈右光祿大夫、儀同三司，斯誠聖朝考績以著勳之美事也。按諡者行之跡，而號者功之表。今毅功德並立，而有號無諡，於義不體。竊以春秋之事求之，諡主於行而不繫爵。然漢魏相承，爵非列侯，則皆沒其高行而不加之諡，至使三事之賢臣，不如野戰之將士。臣願聖代舉春秋之遠制，改近代之舊服。」 |
| | In the third year of Daxing reign period under Emperor Yuan of the Eastern Jin dynasty, an edict was issued: "In ancient times, all received posthumous names; their titles matched their actual conduct. Recently, the practice has been to grant a title before granting a posthumous name—this is not in accordance with the original intent of sages and virtuous men. This matter should be discussed thoroughly." The official in charge submitted a memorial stating: "Liu Yi should receive a posthumous name to commend his loyalty, integrity, and selfless service. He was posthumously awarded the title of You Guanglu Dafu, and granted the same ceremonial status as a Three Excellencies official; this is indeed an admirable act by Your Majesty's court to recognize achievements and merit. A posthumous name reflects one's conduct, while a title represents one's achievements. Now, Liu Yi has both virtue and merit; yet he holds a title but no posthumous name—this does not conform to propriety. I secretly believe that according to the principles of the Spring and Autumn Annals, posthumous names are based on conduct rather than being tied to rank. Yet, since the Han and Wei dynasties passed this practice down, those without the rank of marquis had their noble conduct overlooked and were denied posthumous names—thus making virtuous ministers in official positions less honored than soldiers who fought on the battlefield. I humbly request that Your Majesty's enlightened reign revive the distant regulations of the Spring and Autumn era, and reform the outdated customs of recent times."
|
| | 單複諡議: |
|
| |
|
| | 單複諡議: |
東晉時，太常蔡司空諡議云：「博士曹耽等議曰：謨可謂善始令終者矣。按諡法布德執義曰穆。」司空左長史孔嚴與王彪之書云：「博士引禮之義，以通高尚之事。穆，誠是美諡。然蔡公德業既重，又是先帝師傅，居總錄之任，則是參貳宰相。考行定名，義存實錄，不可不詳。」彪之答：「按諡法布德執義曰穆，謂此名目殊為不輕。泰始初張皇后、太寧庾太后，並諡曰穆。魏司空陳泰、王昶、賀循，皆名士也，並諡曰穆。此與蔡公名體相應。中朝複諡亦不勝單，安平獻王孚、齊獻王攸並單諡。自頃複諡者，非大晉舊典必重複諡也，蓋是近來儒官相承近意耳，皆顧命重勳，或居分陝，或處阿衡。蔡公存謙素之懷，不當此任，於今詠之。所以不複諡，欲令異於數公，所以標沖虛述德美也。又中朝及中興曾居師傅及錄臺事者，亦皆不複諡。山、李二司徒，吾族父安豐侯，近賀司空、荀太尉顗、周光祿顗，或曾師傅，或曾總錄，並不複諡。吾謂此諡弘美，不應翻改。按諡法條有限，而應諡者無限，亦何得令名德必皆齊同。遠準周之文武，則後代不應復得通用此名；近校晉朝舊比，山濤、荀顗、周顗諡康，羊祜、荀勖同諡成。此例甚眾，不可悉載。近朱伯高諡簡，時尚書符卻已不應與和嶠同諡。蔡為太常，據上論可同，理甚有義，遂便施行。蔡家固當有此故事。準例如此，復無所為疑。」 |
| | During the Eastern Jin dynasty, Tai Chang Cai Sikong said in his posthumous evaluation: "The doctors Cao Dan and others argued that Mo could be called a man who began well and ended well." According to the rules for posthumous titles, one who spreads virtue and upholds righteousness is given the title "Mu." Zuo Changshi Kong Yan of Sikong wrote to Wang Biao zhi: "The doctors cited the meaning of rites in order to clarify lofty and noble matters." "Mu," indeed, is a beautiful posthumous title. However, since Lord Cai's virtue and achievements were so great, and he was also a teacher to the late emperor, holding an important position overseeing overall affairs, his status was equivalent to that of a vice premier. When examining conduct and determining a title, it is essential to preserve the truth in historical records; therefore, one cannot be too careful." Biao zhi replied: "According to the rules for posthumous names, one who spreads virtue and adheres to righteousness is called 'Mu.' This title is particularly significant." In the early Taishi period, Empress Zhang and Tai Ning's Empress Dowager Yu, were both posthumously honored with the title "Mu." Wei dynasty Sikong Chen Tai, Wang Chang, and He Xun were all distinguished scholars, and they were also posthumously honored with the name "Mu." This corresponds to Lord Cai's name and character. In the central dynasty, double posthumous titles were also not more honorable than single ones; Prince Anping Xianwang Fu and Prince Qi Xianwang You both received only single posthumous names. In recent times, those who received double posthumous names were not necessarily following the old traditions of the great Jin dynasty or receiving repeated titles; it was merely a practice adopted by Confucian officials in recent years. These individuals were all entrusted with important responsibilities and significant achievements, either governing regions like Fenxia or holding high advisory positions. Lord Cai cherished humility and simplicity in his heart; he was not suited for such a position, which is worth reflecting upon today. Therefore, the decision to grant only a single posthumous name was made in order to distinguish him from those several officials; this choice highlights his modesty and virtue. Moreover, during the central dynasty and the Zhongxing period, those who had once held positions as teachers or advisors to emperors or served in important government offices also did not receive double posthumous names. Sui and Li, the two Siku, my uncle Duke Anfeng, as well as recent Sikong He, Taiwei Xun Yi, and Zhou Guanglu Yi—some of them had once been teachers or advisors to the emperor, others held overall administrative responsibilities—but none received double posthumous titles. I believe this title is grand and beautiful; it should not be changed. According to the rules of posthumous titles, there are limited categories, but those who deserve such titles are countless; therefore, it is impossible for all names and virtues to be exactly alike. If we look far back to the Zhou dynasty's Wen and Wu titles, then later generations should not have been allowed to commonly use these names; Recently, comparing with the old precedents of the Jin dynasty, Shan Tao and Xun Yi were posthumously honored as "Kang," while Yang Hu and Xun Xu shared the same title "Cheng." There are many such examples; they cannot all be recorded in detail. Recently, Zhu Bo gao was posthumously honored as "Jian," and at that time, Shangshu Fu Que should not have shared the same title with He Qiao. Cai was Tai Chang; according to the above discussion, he can be similarly honored—this reasoning is well founded and thus should be implemented. The Cai family certainly deserves this historical precedent. Following examples like these, there is no room for doubt."
|
| | 單複諡議: |
大唐之制，太常博士掌凡王公以下擬諡，皆跡其功德而為之褒貶。無爵稱子。養德丘園，聲實明著，則諡曰先生。大行則大名，小行則小名。告贈諡於柩，如開元禮。武德以來，通太常所諡有異議者，略件如後。 |
| | The system of the Great Tang stipulated that Tai Chang doctors were in charge of proposing posthumous titles for all princes and officials below them, evaluating their deeds and merits to determine whether they should be praised or criticized. Those without titles were referred to as "zi." Those who cultivated virtue in seclusion, whose reputation and achievements were clearly renowned, would be posthumously honored as "Xiansheng." Great deeds lead to great titles; small deeds result in minor titles. The posthumous title and bestowal were announced at the coffin, following the rites of Kaiyuan. Since Wude, any posthumous titles proposed by Tai Chang that were subject to controversy are briefly listed below.
|
| | 單複諡議: |
咸通三年，太常博士袁思古諡贈揚州大都督、高陽郡公許敬宗曰繆，議曰：「敬宗位以才昇，歷居清級，棄長子於荒徼，嫁少女於夷落。聞詩聞禮，事絕於趨庭；納采問名，唯聞於黷貨。白珪斯玷，有累清塵，易名之典，須憑實行。」敬宗孫、太子舍人彥伯訴屈。戶部尚書戴至德問博士王福畤其故，答曰：「昔晉司空何曾，既忠且孝，徒以日食萬錢，所以貶為繆醜。況敬宗忠孝不逮於曾，飲食男女之累過之，而定諡為繆，無負於許氏矣。」詔令尚書省集五品以上重議。禮部尚書楊思敬議稱：按諡法既過能改曰恭，請諡為恭。 |
| | In the third year of Xiantong, Tai Chang doctor Yuan Sigu proposed the posthumous title "Miu" for Xu Jingzong, who was posthumously awarded the position of Yangzhou Dandudu and Gaoyang Jun Gong. The discussion stated: "Jingzong rose to his position through talent, holding many prestigious posts; yet he abandoned his eldest son in a remote border region and married his youngest daughter into an ethnic minority group." He claimed to know poetry and rites, but in reality, he had no connection with the teachings of the family. Regarding marriage negotiations such as presenting betrothal gifts and asking for a name, it was only known that he engaged in corrupt dealings. His white jade was stained; his actions brought disgrace to the clean reputation. The tradition of renaming must be based on actual conduct." Jingzong's grandson, Tai Zi She Ren Yanbo, appealed against this injustice. Minister of Revenue Dai Zhide asked the doctor Wang Fuzhi about the reason, who replied: "In ancient times, Jin dynasty Sikong He Ceng was both loyal and filial; yet he was merely criticized as 'Miu Chou' because his daily expenses amounted to ten thousand coins." "Moreover, Jingzong's loyalty and filial piety were not as great as He Ceng's, yet his faults in matters of food, drink, and relationships with women exceeded those of He. Therefore, determining the title 'Miu' for him is by no means unjust to the Xu family." An imperial decree ordered the Ministry of Rites to gather officials of fifth rank and above for a re-evaluation. Minister of Rites Yang Sijing argued: "According to the rules for posthumous honors, one who has made mistakes but repented is called 'Gong.' I request that he be given the title 'Gong.'"
|
| | 單複諡議: |
景雲元年，太常諡贈荊州大都督舒國公韋巨原曰昭，戶部員外郎李邕駮曰：「三思引之為相，阿韋託之為親，無功而封，無德而祿，同族則醜正安石，佗人則附邪楚客。諡之曰昭，良恐未當。」博士李處直請依前定。 |
| | In the first year of Jingyun, Tai Chang proposed the posthumous title "Zhao" for Wei Juyuan, who was awarded the position of Jingzhou Dandudu and Shu Guo Gong. Liu Yilang, an official in the Ministry of Revenue, objected: "San Si appointed him as a prime minister; he falsely claimed kinship with Lady Wei. He received titles without merit and benefits without virtue. Within his own family, he was disgraceful to Zheng Anshi; toward others, he aligned himself with the wicked Chu Ke." "To bestow on him the title 'Zhao' is truly inappropriate." Doctor Li Chuzhi requested that the original decision be upheld.
|
| | 單複諡議: |
開元七年，太常博士張星諡贈工部尚書宋慶禮曰專，議曰：「慶禮太剛則折，至察無徒。有事東北，所亡萬計，所謂害於家，凶於國。按諡法，好功自是曰專。」禮部員外郎張九齡駮之曰：「營州鎮彼戎夷，扼喉斷臂，逆則制其死命，順則為其主人。是稱樂都，其來尚矣。尋罷海運，克廣歲儲，邊庭晏然，河朔無擾。與夫興師之費，轉輸之勞，較其優劣，孰為利害？而云所亡萬計，一何謬哉！安有踐其跡以制實，貶其諡以徇虛，釆慮始之謗聲，忘經遠之權利，義非得所，孰謂其可。請以所議，更下太常。」乃諡曰敬。 |
| | In the seventh year of Kaiyuan, Tai Chang doctor Zhang Xing proposed the posthumous title "Zhuan" for Song Qingli, who was awarded as Minister of Works. The discussion stated: "Qingli's excessive rigidity led to his downfall; his extreme scrutiny left him without followers." His actions in the northeast caused the loss of countless lives, which can be described as harmful to the family and disastrous for the state. According to the rules on posthumous titles, someone who is overly ambitious and self-centered is given the title "Zhuan." Lü Buwai Lang Zhang Jiuling objected, saying: "Ying Zhou was a stronghold guarding against the Rong and Yi tribes; it controlled a vital pass like cutting off an arm. If they rebelled, we could control their fate; if they submitted, we became their masters." It was known as Le Du, and this name has a long history. Later, the maritime transport system was abolished; annual reserves were increased, the frontier remained peaceful, and the He Shuo region experienced no disturbances. Compared to the costs of raising an army and the labor of transporting supplies, which option is more advantageous or disadvantageous? To say that countless lives were lost is how very mistaken! How can one follow the facts in determining a title yet condemn it for false reasons, heed the initial criticisms while forgetting long-term benefits? This is unjust and cannot be considered acceptable. I request that this discussion be submitted again to Tai Chang." He was then posthumously honored with the title "Jing."
|
| | 單複諡議: |
十八年，太常寺諡贈太師燕國公張說為文貞，左司郎中楊伯成駮曰：「諡者德之表，行之跡，將以激勵風俗，檢束名教，固無虛稱，是存實錄。準張說罷相制云，『不肅細微之人，頗乖周順之旨』。又致仕制云，『行虧半古，防闕周身，未免瓜李之嫌，而喧眾多之口』。且玉之有瑕，尚可磨也；人之斯玷，焉得逭諸。諡曰文貞，何成勸沮。請下太常，更據行事定諡。」工部侍郎張九齡又立議請依太常為定，未決。玄宗為製碑文，賜諡曰文貞。 |
| | In the eighteenth year, Tai Chang Temple proposed the posthumous title "Wen Zhen" for Zhang Yue, who was awarded as Taishi and Yan Guo Gong. Zuo Si Langzhong Yang Bocheng objected: "A posthumous title is a symbol of virtue and a record of conduct; it serves to inspire customs and restrain moral teachings. Therefore, there must be no false titles—only the truth should be preserved." According to the imperial decree dismissing Zhang Yue from his position as prime minister, it stated: "He did not take small matters seriously and somewhat deviated from the principle of order and harmony." Another imperial decree regarding his retirement stated: "His conduct fell short of the standards of ancient sages; he lacked sufficient caution to protect himself, and could not avoid suspicion, thus drawing criticism from many people." Moreover, a flaw in jade can still be polished away; a stain on a person's character—how could it possibly be avoided? To bestow the title "Wen Zhen" upon him, how can this serve as encouragement or warning? I request that Tai Chang be instructed to reevaluate and determine a posthumous title based on his actual conduct." Shilang of the Ministry of Works Zhang Jiuling submitted another proposal requesting that Tai Chang's decision be followed, but no final resolution was reached. Emperor Xuanzong composed an inscription for his stele and bestowed the posthumous title "Wen Zhen."
|
| | 單複諡議: |
永泰中，太常博士獨孤及諡贈涼州都督、太原郡公郭知運曰威，右司員外郎崔匇駮之曰：「郭知運承恩詔葬，向五十餘年，今請易名，竊謂非禮。謹按：禮經云『禮，時為大』。又曰『過時不及為，禮也』。昔衛公叔文子卒，將葬，其子戍請諡於君曰：『日月有時，將葬矣，請所以易其名者。』蓋時不可踰也。節度既沒，名不浮行，數紀之前，門生故吏，已合謀諡。今乃申請，竊將有為而作。嗣子英乂，頃屬多故，屢制方隅。朝廷冊勳位，表端揆。附從者竊不中之禮，會無妄之求。況今裂土者接軫，專征者百輩，若率而行之，誰曰無請。不唯有司疲於簡牘，抑恐名器等於草芥。雖欲曲全，竊將不可。又禮經云『已孤暴貴，不為父作諡』。若知運合諡而不以其時，則嗣子廢先君之德。若不合諡而苟遂其志，則先君因嗣子而見尊。以僕射而言，恐貽越禮之讓；以國家而言，又殊旌善之體。請下太常寺重議。」及答曰：「禮，時為大，順次之。將葬易名，時也。有故闕禮，追遠請諡，順也。公叔戍請諡，適當葬前。謹按三百禮經，三千威儀，曾不言已葬則不追諡，況三王殊途，不相沿禮。新禮則死必有諡，不云日月有時。今請易名者五家，無非葬後。苗太師一年矣，呂諲四年矣，盧奕五年矣，顏杲卿八年矣，並荷褒寵，無異同之論。獨知運不幸，遂以過時見抑。苟必以已葬為節制，則八年與五十年，其緩一也。而與奪殊制，無乃不可乎！議云『已孤暴貴，不為父作諡』，此謂其父無位而子居貴位，不當以子之貴，加榮於父。若知運者，處方面重寄，列位九卿，茂勳崇名與衛霍侔，飾終之禮，宜加於他將一等，豈待因嗣子之德然後作諡？今之征鎮者，率多起屠販皁隸之中，雖逢風雲化為侯王，而其閒有祖父爵位與知運等當請諡者有幾何？乃懼名器等於草芥，以是廢禮。竊謂近誣。竊考載籍，徵諸舊章，易名之禮，請如前議。」 |
| | During the Yongtai period, Tai Chang doctor Dugu Ji proposed the posthumous title "Wei" for Guo Zhiyun, who was awarded as Liangzhou Dudu and Taiyuan Jun Gong. You Si Yuanwailang Cui Tong objected: "Guo Zhiyun received an imperial decree granting him a state funeral over fifty years ago; now to request a name change is secretly considered disrespectful." Carefully examining the matter: The Rites Classic says, "In rites, timeliness is of great importance." It also states, "To act too late or not at all is in accordance with the rites." In ancient times, when Wei Gong Shu Wuzi died and was about to be buried, his son Shu requested a posthumous title from the ruler: "The time for burial is set by the sun and moon; we are preparing for it. Please grant us a name that may replace his current one." This was because the timing could not be delayed. After a jiedu (military governor) passed away, his name should not remain without recognition; many years ago, his former students and subordinates had already planned to propose a posthumous title for him. To make the request now is secretly an act of seeking personal gain. His son Yingyi, in recent times due to many incidents, has frequently been assigned to various regions. The imperial court recorded his meritorious service and honored him with a title, demonstrating the standard of governance. Those who followed him secretly violated proper rites and pursued unreasonable requests. Moreover, today there are many regional warlords vying for territory, and hundreds of commanders who exercise independent military authority; if this were to become a common practice, who would say no to such requests? This would not only exhaust the officials responsible for handling documents but also risk treating titles and honors as mere weeds. Although one might wish to bend the rules in order to be lenient, I secretly believe this is not acceptable. Moreover, the Rites Classic states: "If one suddenly attains great honor without a father to bestow a posthumous title, he should not create such a title for his father." If Zhiyun was worthy of a posthumous title but one was not given at the appropriate time, then his son would be neglecting the virtue of his late father. If a posthumous title were wrongly granted merely to satisfy one's wishes, then the late father would be unjustly honored through his son. Speaking as an imperial minister, I fear this may lead to accusations of violating rites; speaking for the state, it also deviates from the proper way to honor virtue. I request that this matter be submitted once again to Tai Chang Temple for reconsideration." Ji replied: "In rites, timeliness is the most important; following proper order comes next. Changing a name before burial is in accordance with timing. If there was an omission due to special circumstances and the title is requested later for remembrance, this follows proper order. When Gongshu Shu requested a posthumous name, it was at precisely the right time before burial. Carefully examining the 300 rites and 3,000 ceremonial practices, there is no mention that a posthumous title cannot be granted after burial; moreover, the three kings had different ways, and their rituals were not passed down in unison. In new rites, it is required that every deceased person must have a posthumous title; there is no mention of time constraints such as days or months. Now, among the five families requesting name changes, none were made before burial. Miao Taishi has been honored for one year, Lü Yin for four years, Lu Yi for five years, and Yan Gaoqing for eight years; all have received commendation and favor without any differing opinions. Only Zhiyun was unfortunate to be suppressed due to the delay in timing. If we strictly require that a title must not be granted after burial, then whether it is eight years or fifty years later, the delay remains essentially the same. Yet to apply different standards in granting and withholding titles would surely not be acceptable! The discussion states, "If one suddenly attains honor without a father to confer a posthumous title upon him, he should not bestow such a title on his father." This refers to the situation where a father had no official position while the son holds an honored rank; it is inappropriate for the son's status to bring honor to the father. In the case of Zhiyun, who was entrusted with a significant regional responsibility and held one of the Nine Ministers' ranks, his distinguished achievements and lofty reputation are comparable to those of Wei and Huo. The rites for honoring him at death should be elevated by one rank above other generals; how could it possibly depend on the virtue of his son before bestowing a posthumous title? Among the current generals and commanders, many have risen from among butchers, vendors, and common laborers; although they may seize opportunity to become marquises or kings, how many of them actually have ancestors with noble titles comparable to Zhiyun who would be eligible for a posthumous title request? Yet they fear that official titles and honors are as worthless as weeds, thus abandoning the rites. I secretly believe this to be a recent misrepresentation. After secretly examining historical records and consulting past regulations, the rites for changing names should proceed as previously discussed."
|
| | 單複諡議: |
獨孤及又諡贈吏部尚書呂諲曰肅。度支員外郎嚴郢駁曰：「今所議荊南之政詳矣。而曰在台司齷齪，無匪躬之能者，乃抉瑕掩德，非中道之言也。國家故事，宰臣之諡皆有二字，以彰善旌德焉。夫以呂公，文能無害，武能禁暴，貞則幹事，忠則利人，盛烈宏規，不可備舉。傳敘八元之德，曰忠肅恭懿。若以美諡擬於形容，請諡呂公曰忠肅。」及重議曰：「謹按舊儀，凡沒者之故吏，得以行狀請諡於尚書省，而考行定諡，則有司存；朝廷辨可否，宜存眾議。今駁議撰諡，異同之說，並故吏專之，伏恐亂庖人尸祝之分，違公器不私之誡，且非唐虞師錫僉曰之道。諡法在懲惡勸善，不在字多。必稱其大而略其細，故言文不言武，言武不言文。三代以下，朴散禮壞，乃有二字之諡，非古也。其源生於衰周。漢興，蕭何、張良、霍去病、霍光俱以文武大略，佐漢致太平，其事業不一，謂一文不足以紀其善，於是有文終、文成、景桓、宣成之諡。雖黷禮甚矣，然猶褒不失人。唐興，參用周秦之制，以魏徵為文貞，蕭瑀為貞褊。其杜如晦、封德彝、陳叔達、溫彥博、岑文本、唐休璟、魏知古、崔日用並當時赫赫以功名居宰相者，諡不過一字，不聞子孫佐吏有以字少稱屈者，由此言之，二字不必為褒，一字不必為貶。若褒貶果在字數，則是堯舜禹湯文武成康不如周威烈、慎靚也，齊桓、晉文不如趙武靈、魏安釐也，杜如晦、王珪以下或成，或明，或懿，或憲，不如蕭瑀之貞褊也。然肅者，以諲之從政，威能閑邪，德可濟眾，故以肅易名而忠在其中矣。亦猶隨會、甯俞之不稱文，豈必因而重之然後為美。魏晉以賈詡之籌算，賈逵之忠壯，張既之政能，程昱之智勇，顧雍之密重，王渾之器量，劉惔之鑒裁，庾翼之智略，彼八君子者，方之東平，宜無慚德，死之日並諡曰肅，當代不以為貶，何嘗徵一字二字之降乎！上稽前典，下據甲令，參之禮經，而究其往事，請依前定。」 |
| | Du Guji also posthumously bestowed the title of "Su" on Lü Yin, who was granted the honorary position of Minister of Personnel. Yan Ying, an official in the Department of Revenue, objected and said: "The current discussion on the administration of Jingnan is already detailed. Yet to say that those in high office are petty and lack personal virtue is to point out flaws while concealing virtues, which is not a balanced or impartial statement. According to the old customs of our state, posthumous titles for chancellors always consist of two characters, in order to highlight virtue and honor merit. As for Lord Lü, in literature he was harmless and upright; in military affairs, he could restrain violence. In integrity, he managed affairs diligently; in loyalty, he benefited the people. His great achievements and grand principles are too numerous to list fully. The tradition recounts the virtues of the Eight Yuans as "zhong," "su," "gong," and "yi." If a beautiful posthumous title is to be used as an adjective, then I propose the title for Lord Lü should be Zhongsu." Du Guji re-examined and said: "Carefully following the old procedures, any former subordinate of a deceased official may submit a biographical summary to the Ministry of Personnel in order to request a posthumous title. The evaluation of conduct and determination of the title are then handled by the appropriate officials; The imperial court should determine approval or rejection, but it is advisable to consider public opinion. Now, if the rejection of a proposal and the composition of posthumous titles are left entirely to former subordinates, I fear this will confuse the roles of cooks and priests at sacrifices, violate the warning that public honors should not be privately controlled, and deviate from the principles established by Tang Shu and Yu's advisors who reached consensus. The system of posthumous titles is meant to punish evil and encourage virtue, not to rely on the number of characters used. It must emphasize major virtues while omitting minor details; therefore, if one is praised for literary virtue, military virtue is omitted, and vice versa. Since the Three Dynasties, simplicity has faded and rites have deteriorated; it was then that two-character posthumous titles emerged, which are not in accordance with ancient practices. Its origin traces back to the declining Zhou dynasty. When the Han dynasty rose to power, Xiao He, Zhang Liang, Huo Qubing, and Huo Guang all assisted in bringing peace and prosperity through their great strategies in both civil and military affairs. Since their achievements were diverse, it was considered insufficient to describe their virtues with just one character for "literary" merit; thus, posthumous titles such as Wenzhong, Wencheng, Jinghuan, and Xuancheng were bestowed upon them. Although this was a great violation of ritual propriety, it still ensured that commendation did not fail to reach the worthy. When the Tang dynasty rose, it adopted a system combining elements from both the Zhou and Qin dynasties; for example, Wei Zheng was given the title Wen 贞 (Wen Zhen), while Xiao Yu received Zhēnbiǎn. Du Ruhui, Feng Deyi, Chen Shuda, Wen Yanbo,岑 Textbook (Cen Wenshu), Tang Huijing, Wei Zhigu, and Cui Riyong were all prominent officials who achieved great fame through their accomplishments as chancellors during that time. Yet their posthumous titles consisted of no more than one character; there are no records of their descendants or subordinates complaining about being wronged due to the brevity of these titles. From this, it is clear that a two-character title does not necessarily indicate greater praise, nor does a single-character title imply criticism. If commendation or censure truly depended on the number of characters in a posthumous title, then Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, Wen, Wu, Cheng, and Kang would be considered inferior to Zhou Weilie and Shen Jing. Similarly, Duke Huan of Qi and Duke Wen of Jin would be deemed less worthy than King Wuling of Zhao and Marquis Anxi of Wei. Even Du Ruhui and Wang Gui, who received titles such as "Cheng," "Ming," "Yi," or "Xian," would still be considered inferior to Xiao Yu's title of Zhēnbiǎn (贞褊). However, the title "Su" was chosen because Lü Yin's governance demonstrated authority to deter wrongdoing and virtue sufficient to benefit many people. Thus, by bestowing the name "Su," his loyalty is implicitly included within it. This is similar to Sui Hui and Ning Yu, who were not given the title "Wen" (literary virtue), yet their virtues are still considered admirable without needing additional emphasis. During the Wei and Jin dynasties, figures such as Jia Xu with his strategic calculations, Jia Kui for his loyalty and valor, Zhang Ji for his administrative ability, Cheng Yu for his wisdom and bravery, Gu Yong for his prudence and weightiness, Wang Hun for his breadth of character, Liu Tan for his discernment and judgment, and Yu Yi for his intelligence and strategy—these eight virtuous men, when compared to Dongping, should feel no shame in their virtue. On the day of their deaths, they were all posthumously honored with the title "Su," yet contemporaries did not regard this as a demerit; how could there ever have been any consideration that one character was lower than two! By examining the precedents of earlier records, referring to current imperial edicts, consulting ritual classics, and investigating past events, I respectfully request that we follow the previous decision."
|
| | 單複諡議: |
大曆十三年，太常諡贈司徒楊綰曰文貞。比部郎中蘇端駁曰：「夫道德博聞曰文，清白守節曰貞。且元載與司徒友敬殊深，推為長者，首舉清要，人莫與京。及司徒寵望漸高，載畏其偪。旋又知載隳壞綱紀，心貳於君，既懼其疑，因為疏簡。有口皆知載惡，而獨曾無一言。或有發載之惡，證告未明，抱誠坐法者，司徒時居上列，奏達非難，不能因此披衷正詞，全志士之命，露凶狡之私，而乃宴安自泰，優游過日，使元載禍大滅身，竟勞聖上防伺之慮，豈守節不隱邪？豈懷道無毒邪？非謂文貞明矣。洎元載嗇恩於下，招怨於上，使北塞人勞，有過時之戍；西郊虜入，無弔災之惠；磁邢堅義之士，將死復生；梁宋傷夷之人，或寒或餒。搜訪旌恤，中外所急，載皆絕之，使王澤不及於下，為行路所嗟。而楊公當聖上惟新之時，居天下得賢之望，誠宜不俟終日，造次速言，乃寂寥啟悟，噤閉謀猷，貪食萬錢之賜，虛承一心之顧，豈慈惠愛人乎？既曰不慈不惠，何以謂之文！有隱有毒，何以謂之貞乎！古者諸侯有國，卿大夫有家，上以報祖宗，下以處子孫之義也。楊公歷處厚俸，人謂儒宗，曾不立家，又無私廟，寧使人老闕敬祖之禮，位極亡祭禰之宮，凡在衣冠，誰不歎恨，又乖大義克就愍仁接禮之義矣。曰文與貞，曷可以議！聖人立諡，盡公而無私之謂也。所以周宣不敢私於父，諡曰厲；漢宣不敢私於祖，諡曰戾。百王明制，歷聖通則。昔公叔文子有死衛之節，脩班制之勤，社稷不辱，方居此諡。爰及太宗初，魏公徵有匡救公直之忠，中宗末，蘇公瑰有保安不奪之節，所以諸賢甚眾，諡文貞者不過數公。至於燕國公張說，先朝輸能，名節昭著，省司尚謂不可，至今人故稱之。由是言之，焉可比德。請牒太常，更詳他諡，以守彝章。庶乎青史之筆，不乖於周漢；黃泉之魂，免慚於蘇魏。」別敕諡為文簡。 |
| | In the thirteenth year of Dali (778 AD), the Ministry of Rites posthumously bestowed the title "Wenzhen" on Yang Wan, who had been honored with the position of Sikou. Su Duan, a Langzhong in the Bi Bu (Department of Justice), objected and said: "One who is called 'Wen' possesses broad knowledge and moral virtue; one who is called 'Zhen' maintains purity and upholds integrity. Moreover, Yu Zai had a particularly close relationship with Sikou Youjing; he recommended him as an elder statesman and first appointed him to a prestigious and important post, for which no one could rival him. When Sikou Youjing's favor and prestige gradually increased, Yu Zai became fearful of being overshadowed by him. Soon afterward, Sikou Youjing learned that Yu Zai was undermining the state's order and showed disloyalty to the emperor. Fearing suspicion from him, he consequently became more reserved in his dealings with Yu Zai. Everyone knew of Yu Zai's wickedness, yet Sikou Youjing never uttered a single word against him. When someone exposed Yu Zai's crimes, but the accusations were not yet clear and those who spoke truthfully suffered punishment under the law, Sikou Youjing was then in a high position. It would have been no great difficulty for him to report these matters to the throne and express his sincere views; he could have saved the lives of loyal men, exposed the private schemes of villains, and yet he chose instead to indulge in ease and comfort, idly passing each day. This allowed Yu Zai's evil deeds to grow until they led to his downfall, ultimately burdening His Majesty with concerns about vigilance—how can this be considered upholding integrity without concealment? How could it be said that he upheld virtue without malice? It is clearly not appropriate to call him "Wenzhen." When Yu Zai withheld favors from his subordinates and incurred resentment from above, he caused hardship for the people in the northern frontier regions, leading to prolonged military service beyond its due time; When enemies invaded the western suburbs, there was no compassion or relief provided to those suffering from disasters; The loyal and righteous men of Ci and Xing were on the verge of death but miraculously survived; Among the wounded and afflicted people in Liang and Song, some suffered from cold while others went hungry. Investigating and honoring those in need of recognition or relief was an urgent matter for both the court and the people, yet Yu Zai completely ignored it. As a result, imperial benevolence failed to reach the common people, drawing sighs from passersby on the roads. Yet, when Minister Yang was in an era of the emperor's renewal and held the people's hopes for a virtuous official, he truly should have acted without delay, speaking out promptly. Instead, he remained silent and inactive, suppressing plans and strategies, greedily accepting generous rewards, and passively receiving imperial trust—how could this be considered kindness or concern for others? If he was neither kind nor benevolent, how can he possibly be called "Wen"! If he concealed malice and harbored ill intent, how could he possibly be considered "Zhen"! In ancient times, feudal lords had their states and high-ranking officials had their families; this was to honor ancestors above and provide for descendants below, fulfilling the moral duty of filial piety. Minister Yang received generous official salaries throughout his career, and people regarded him as a leader among Confucian scholars. Yet he never established a family estate or built a private ancestral temple; thus, he allowed people to grow old without the rites of ancestor worship, and even in death, there was no place for mourning rituals at his ancestral shrine. Among all those with official rank and scholarly status, who would not feel sorrow and regret? This also violates the great moral principle of fulfilling filial piety through compassion and proper ritual observance. To call him "Wen" or "Zhen"—how can such titles be justified! The sage established the system of posthumous names to ensure complete impartiality and fairness. This is why King Xuan of Zhou did not dare to show favoritism toward his father, and thus posthumously named him "Li"; Emperor Xuan of Han similarly refrained from showing partiality toward his grandfather, and so he was given the title "Li." This is a clear regulation for all past rulers and an established principle followed by successive sage kings. In the past, Gongshu Wenzǐ demonstrated loyalty in his death for Wei and diligence in upholding proper conduct; he did not bring disgrace to the state, thus earning this posthumous title. Later, during the early reign of Emperor Taizong, Lord Wei Zheng demonstrated loyal and upright efforts to correct state affairs; at the end of Emperor Zhongzong's rule, Lord Su Gui showed steadfast integrity by safeguarding stability without yielding. Thus, although many virtuous men existed, only a few were granted the title "Wenzhen." As for Duke Yanguo Zhang Yue, who contributed his abilities to the previous dynasty and was renowned for his distinguished name and virtue, even the relevant officials still considered it inappropriate [to bestow a title], yet people today continue to honor him. From this, how can one compare their virtues? I respectfully request that the Ministry of Rites be informed to reconsider and propose a different posthumous title in accordance with established rites. This would ensure that the records in history, like ink on green bamboo slips, remain consistent with the standards of Zhou and Han dynasties; and that the souls beneath the yellow springs would not feel ashamed when compared to Su Gui or Wei Zheng." A separate imperial decree posthumously bestowed on him the title "Wenjian."
|
| | 單複諡議: |
贈司空陳國公竇抗諡曰博。贈左衛大將軍宇文士及初諡為恭，黃門侍郎劉洎駁之曰：「士及居家侈縱，不宜為恭。」竟諡為縱。工部尚書楊昉諡曰恪。定州刺史定襄郡公于匡濟諡曰果。廣州都督謝方叔諡曰勤。 |
| | The honorary position of Sikong and Duke of Chen was granted to Dou Kang, who was posthumously given the title "Bo." Yuwen Shiji, who was posthumously granted the honorary title of Left Wei Grand General, was initially given the posthumous name "Gong." Huangmen Shilang Liu Ji objected and said: "Shiji indulged in extravagance at home; it is not appropriate to call him 'Gong.'" He was ultimately posthumously named "Zong." Yang Fang, Minister of Works, was posthumously bestowed the name "Ke." Yu Kuangji, Tingtai Prefect and Duke of Dingxiang Jun, was posthumously named "Guo." Xie Fangshu, military governor of Guangzhou, was posthumously given the name "Qin."
|
| | 卒哭後諱... : |
|
| |
|
| | 卒哭後諱... : |
周制，左傳云：「周人以諱事神，名終將諱之。」曲禮曰：「卒哭乃諱。禮不諱嫌名。二名不偏諱。逮事父母則諱王父母，不逮事父母則不諱王父母。君所無私諱，大夫之所有公諱。詩書不諱，教學臨文不諱。廟中不諱。大功小功不諱。入門而問諱。」檀弓曰：「卒哭而諱，生事畢而鬼事始已。既卒哭，宰夫執木鐸，以命於宮曰：『舍故而諱新。』自寢門至於庫門。」雜記曰：「王父母兄弟伯父叔父姑姊妹，子與父同諱。」 |
| | According to Zhou system, the Zuo Zhuan says: "The people of Zhou used taboo when addressing deities; once a person died, his name would be subject to taboo." The Qu Li states: "Taboo is observed only after the final mourning rites for crying have concluded. The rites do not require avoiding names that are merely similar. Two-character names do not require partial taboos. If one has personally served one's parents, then the names of one's grandparents should be tabooed; if one did not serve them in person, then their names need not be tabooed. There are no private taboos for a ruler; High officials have public taboos to observe. The Book of Songs and the Book of Documents do not require taboos, nor does teaching or reading texts in class. Taboos are not observed in ancestral temples. Names are not avoided for those in mourning of major or minor degrees. Upon entering a household, one should inquire about the taboos to be observed. The Tanchong says: "Taboos are observed after the final mourning rites; this marks the completion of matters concerning the living and the beginning of those concerning the dead. After the final mourning rites, the steward holds a wooden clapper; to announce in the palace. It says: "Cease the old taboo and observe a new one. From the Chamber Gate to the Warehouse Gate. Za Ji says: "Grandparents, uncles, aunts, sisters and brothers, if one's father shares the same name as another family member, then taboos must be observed for all."
|
| | 卒哭後諱... : |
晉孫毓七廟諱字議：「乙丑詔書班下尊諱，唯從宣皇帝以來；京兆府君以上，皆不別著。按禮，士立二廟，則諱王父以下，天子諸侯皆諱群祖，親盡廟遷，乃舍故而諱新。尊者統遠，卑者統近，貴者得申，賤者轉降，蓋所以殊名位之數，禮上下之序也。先代創業之主，唯周追王，夏殷以前，未有聞焉。顯考以下謂之親廟，親廟月祭，屬近禮崇。周武王時，諸盩為顯考廟。周人以諱事神，固不以追王所不及而闕正廟之諱也。禮，大夫所有公諱。又曰『子與父同諱』。明君父之諱，臣子不可以不諱也。范獻子聘於魯，問具敖之山，魯人以其鄉對，曰『先君獻武之諱也』。此時獻武已為遠祖，鄰國大夫猶以犯諱為失，歸而作戒，著於春秋。大晉龍興，弘崇遠制，損益因改，思臻其極。以為京兆府君以上，雖不追王列在正廟，臣下應諱，禮有明義。宜班下諱字，使咸知所避，上崇寅嚴之典，下防僭同之謬。」 |
| | Jin Sun Yu's discussion on taboo characters in the seven ancestral temples: "The edict issued on the Yichou day ordered that respect for taboos be observed, but only from Emperor Xuan onward; for those above the Marquis of Jingzhao, no special distinction was made. According to the rites, a scholar-official establishes two ancestral temples; thus he observes taboos for his grandfather and below. The Son of Heaven and feudal lords all observe taboos for all their ancestors. When the temple is moved due to the expiration of filial piety, one ceases the old taboo and begins observing a new one. Those of higher status oversee distant ancestors, while those of lower rank oversee closer relatives; the noble may express their taboos freely, whereas the lowly must gradually descend in observance. This is how distinctions are made between names and ranks, establishing the order of rites for superiors and inferiors. The founding rulers of previous dynasties were honored as kings only in Zhou; before the Xia and Shang, there is no record of such practice. The temple for one's illustrious late father and below are called "temples of close relatives," which receive monthly sacrifices, as they belong to the more intimate rites of veneration. During King Wu of Zhou's time, the various Zhou were honored in the temple for his illustrious late father. The people of Zhou observed name taboos when venerating deities, and thus did not omit the proper ancestral temple taboos merely because certain rulers were not posthumously honored as kings. According to rites, high officials must observe public taboos. It also says: "A son and father may share the same taboo." Clarifying the taboos of one's ruler or father, subjects and children cannot fail to observe them. Fan Xianzi was sent as an envoy to Lu, and he asked about Juao Mountain. The people of Lu answered by referring to it as a place name in their region, saying: "It is the tabooed name of our late ruler, King Xianwu." At that time, Xianwu had already become a distant ancestor; yet the envoy from a neighboring state still considered it an error to mention his name. Upon returning, he composed a warning, which was recorded in the Spring and Autumn Annals. The great Jin dynasty rose to power, promoting reverence for distant ancestral systems; it reformed and adjusted these traditions as needed, seeking the highest perfection. It was considered that for those above the Marquis ofjingzhao, even if they were not posthumously honored and enshrined in the main ancestral temple, their names should still be avoided by subordinates; this is a clear principle in the rites. It is appropriate to issue taboo characters for public knowledge, so that all may know what to avoid; this upholds the dignity of ancestral rites above and prevents errors in overstepping or misusing names below.
|
| | 卒哭後諱... : |
束皙不得避諱議云：「元康七年詔書稱，咸寧元年詔下尊諱，風伯雨師，皆為詁訓。又公官文書吏人上事，稱引經書者，復多迴避，使大義不明。諸經傳咸言天神星宿，帝王稱號，皆不得變易本文，但省事言語，臨時訓避而已。」 |
| | Shu Xi's discussion on the inability to avoid taboos states: "In the seventh year of Yuankang, an imperial edict cited that in the first year of Xinning, a decree was issued ordering respect for taboos; even gods such as Fengbo and Yushi were given interpretations. Moreover, in official documents submitted by government clerks citing classical texts, many instances of avoidance occurred, causing the great principles to become unclear. All classical texts and commentaries mention heavenly deities, constellations, and imperial titles; these must not be altered from the original text. One may only briefly explain or adjust wording temporarily for clarity.
|
| | 卒哭後諱... : |
太常博士華簡言：「按周禮大宗伯職云：『●燎祀司中、司命、風師、雨師。』此禮文正稱，應如丙辰詔書，不改其名。」事下五府博議。賊曹屬束皙議：「按風伯之名，所由來遠，其在漢魏，固已有之，非晉氏避諱始造此號也。若以異於周禮，宜當變改，則今國家行事，神物稱號，多因近代，不皆率古，蓋亦簡易以從仍舊，隨時之制，不足悉變。唯雨師之名，實由避諱，宜如舊稱。」 |
| | Taisang Bo Shi Hua Jian said: "According to the Zhou Li, in the duties of the Da Zongbo it is stated: 'Offer sacrifices with torches and incense to Sizhong, Siming, Fengshi, Yushi.' These are the proper names in ritual texts; they should be treated as per the edict of Bingchen day and their original names preserved without alteration." The matter was referred to five government offices for extensive discussion. Zai Cao Shu Shu Xi argued: "The name Fengbo has a long history; it was already in use during the Han and Wei dynasties, so it is not a title first created by the Jin dynasty to avoid taboos. If one argues that because it differs from the Zhou Li, it should be changed, then many of the current state's practices and titles for deities are based on recent conventions rather than strictly following ancient rites. This is done to simplify matters by continuing established customs; such adaptations are flexible responses to changing times and do not require complete revision. Only the name Yushi was actually altered due to taboos, so it should be restored to its original designation."
|
| | 卒哭後諱... : |
大唐武德九年六月，太宗居春宮總萬機，下令曰：「依禮，二名義不偏諱。尼父達聖，非無前旨。近代以來，曲為節制，兩字兼避，廢闕以多，率意而行，有違經誥。今其官號人名及公私文籍，有『世』及『民』兩字不連讀者，並不須諱避。」 |
| | In the sixth month of the ninth year of Wude in the Great Tang, Crown Prince Taizong, overseeing all state affairs, issued an order: "According to rites, for two-character names, one should not avoid each character individually. Confucius, the sage of great virtue, was not without precedent in this matter. Since recent times, people have arbitrarily imposed restrictions, avoiding both characters of a two-character name. This has led to excessive omissions and arbitrary actions that contradict the classics and imperial decrees. Therefore, in official titles, personal names, and public or private documents, if the characters 'Shi' and 'Min' do not form a compound word when read together, there is no need to avoid them."
|
| | 卒哭後諱... : |
顯慶五年正月詔：「孔宣設教，正名為首；戴聖貽範，嫌名不諱。比見鈔寫古典，至於朕名，或闕其點畫，或隨便改換，恐六籍雅言，會意多爽，九流通義，指事全違。誠非立書之本。自今以後，繕寫舊典文書，並宜使成，不須隨義改易。」 |
| | In the first month of the fifth year of Xianqing, an edict was issued: "Confucius established his teachings; proper naming is most important; Dai Sheng left a model for us; names that are similar but not exact need not be avoided. Recently, I have seen copies of classical texts where my name appears; some omit strokes or dots arbitrarily, while others change the characters at will. This may distort the meanings in the six canonical texts and violate the intended meanings in the Nine Classics. This is indeed not in accordance with the original purpose of writing books. From now on, when copying classical texts and documents, they should be completed as they are; there is no need to arbitrarily alter them for convenience."
|
| | 上書犯帝... : |
|
| |
|
| | 上書犯帝... : |
晉博士孔晁上書犯帝諱，後自上又觸諱，而引詩書不諱，臨文不諱。有司奏以慢論。詔曰：「晁自理，頃所稱引，雖不與今相值，然情有所由，其特原之。然則自今以後，三帝諱情亦瞿然，長吏以上，足閑禮法，可如舊科。其餘散官以下，但用謬語者，不可具責。又古者內諱不出宮，但勿聽以為名字。至於吾名，但在見避過禮，其或過謬，皆勿卻問以煩簡書也。」 |
| | A Jin dynasty scholar-official Kong Chao submitted a memorial that violated the emperor's taboo name. Later, he himself also touched upon the forbidden name, citing passages from the "Shi" and "Shu" which did not avoid taboos, as well as the principle of not avoiding taboos when writing official documents. The relevant officials submitted a report recommending that he be punished for showing disrespect. The imperial edict stated: "Chao has explained his own situation. The references he recently cited, although not directly relevant to the current matter, have their reasons behind them. Therefore, grant him a special pardon." However, from now on, the taboo names of the three emperors should still be treated with caution. Officials at or above the rank of chief magistrates, who are well-versed in rites and laws, may follow the previous regulations as before. As for other officials below the rank of titular posts, those who merely use incorrect terms should not be held fully accountable. Moreover, in ancient times, taboo names within the palace were not to be mentioned outside of it; one need only refrain from using them as personal names. "As for my own name, merely avoid it when appropriate according to ritual conventions. If there are occasional mistakes or excesses in avoidance, do not trouble yourselves by recording them in official documents."
|
| | 上書犯帝... : |
又都官曹奏，以吳興郡上事有「春」字，犯會稽鄭太妃諱，下制書推之。王彪之謂：「今皇太后臨朝，奏事詣太后，為故應復犯會稽太妃諱不？」都官郎傅讓、尚書王劭議，並謂不應復諱。尚書陸納等並謂故應諱。王尚書謂：「朝臣所諱，君之母妻，諱者以是小君故耳。君之所生，非小君也，亦不上諱榜，非群下所應諱。且瑯琊夏侯太妃、章郡恭惠君章皇太妃諱並不頒下令天下同諱。宜更詳之。」右丞戴謐議云：「朝臣所諱，君之母妻，施於小君，非君之所生。所生之諱，不上諱榜，非群下所宜諱也。竊謂如此則不唯奏事太后不應諱而已，恐門號縣名作，不宜改頒於天下。而闔朝之臣，陳事不避，悠悠人吏，犯者不問，官號獨易，餘莫之諱，將於大體有不通邪？父之所諱，子無不諱，君之所諱，臣其不乎？諱施小君，誠有其文，母以子貴，亦有明義。若以事經至尊應諱，但奏御太后不諱，一朝之事，諱不並行，復是所疑。」眾官皆從尚書令王彪之議：「凡訓體憲章經典無文者，則當準已行之舊令。議者所從。是右丞議也。按右丞議云：『門縣改名，既頒天下，則朝臣不得不諱』。意以為門縣名以犯先帝所生之諱，故先帝時改之，與明穆皇后臨朝除光祿勳字義體同爾，並皆頒下者，令知官名之改，非頒下令人皆諱之也。謂上書奏事詣先帝令上書為諱耳。太后及朝臣並應諱之義。今者奏事詣太后，何諱之有，而乃稱太后制書遠推之乎！議又喻以父之所諱。竊以父子天性，君臣異族，君之所諱，何必盡同。元、明、哀三帝之朝，無以所生之諱頒于天下，令人皆同諱，則臣不同子之一隅也。明臣之所諱君之母妻諱者，諱小君之諱耳。且四海之人，皆小君之臣妾，非所生之臣妾也。以小君之諱列於諱榜，故天下同諱；所生之諱不列諱榜，故天下不同諱。於時主相賢明，朝多雋彥，今所應準，而議云『非今所議』，竊所未達。又云『母以子貴』，三帝之母，不以子貴邪！議又云『章皇太妃之喻，殆非今嫌』。既不解哀帝所生，何以獨非今嫌！又今上即位，所生李淑妃諱，何以不頒下天下，與簡文皇帝順皇后諱率土同諱之乎？中興有八帝，迄今上五帝有所生，豈可四帝所生普天下不諱，而簡文帝所生獨率土同諱乎？謂王尚書、傅郎議為允。」 |
| | The Office of Judicial Affairs also submitted a report, stating that an official document from Wuxing Commandery contained the character "chun," which violated the taboo name of Zheng Taifei of Kuaiji. The imperial decree was then issued to investigate the matter. Wang Biao zhi said: "Now that the empress dowager is presiding over court affairs, when officials submit reports to her, should they still avoid using the taboo name of the Kuaiji Taifei?" Luguan Lang Fu Rang and Shangshu Wang Shao, in their deliberations, both argued that the taboo should no longer be observed. Shangshu Lu Na and others all maintained that the taboo name should still be avoided. łoż Wang Shangshu said: "The taboos observed by court officials concern the emperor's mother and wife. The reason for observing these taboos is because they are considered as the lesser ruler (xiao jun)." The emperor's biological mother, however, is not a "lesser ruler," and her name has never been posted on the official list of taboos; therefore, it should not be avoided by officials below. Moreover, the taboo names of Langya Xiahou Taifei and Zhang Jun Gonghuijun Zhang Huangtaifei were never issued as decrees for all under heaven to observe. The matter should be examined more carefully." Yuzheng Dai Mi argued: "The taboos observed by officials in court concern the emperor's mother and wives, but these apply only to those considered as 'lesser rulers,' not to the emperor's biological mother. The taboo name of the emperor's birth mother has never been listed on the official taboos, and thus should not be observed by those below." I secretly believe that if this is the case, it would not only mean that officials should no longer avoid using the name when addressing the empress dowager, but also that place names and county titles should not be changed or issued to all under heaven. Yet if all the officials in court submit reports without avoiding the name, and common clerks who violate it are not questioned, while only official titles are changed and others remain unaltered, will this not create inconsistency with the broader principles? If a son must avoid his father's taboo name, how can an official fail to avoid the emperor's forbidden name? It is indeed recorded in documents that taboos apply only to "lesser rulers," and there is clear meaning in the saying that a mother gains honor through her son. If something is considered taboo because it involves the supreme ruler, yet it is not avoided when submitting reports to the empress dowager—this inconsistency within a single court session, where taboos are not uniformly observed, raises further doubts." All the officials followed Shangshu Ling Wang Biao zhi's opinion: "In all cases where there is no textual basis in the teachings, constitutional principles, or classical texts, one should follow the existing precedents and previous regulations." This was the view accepted by those who deliberated. This was the opinion of Yuzheng (Right Chancellor). According to the Right Chancellor's argument: "If gate names and county titles are changed, and these changes are issued throughout the empire, then court officials cannot help but avoid using those names." The intention was that if a gate or county name violated the taboo of the previous emperor's birth mother, it would be changed during the reign of that emperor. This is similar to how the character "Guangluxun" (Min Mu Empress Dowager) was removed when she presided over court affairs; in both cases, these changes were issued for people to know about the alteration of official names, not to compel everyone to observe a taboo on those names. It was merely required that when submitting memorials or reports to the previous emperor, one should avoid using his forbidden name. This does not imply that the empress dowager and court officials are also required to observe the taboo. Now, when submitting reports to the Empress Dowager, what taboo is there to avoid? Why then cite an imperial decree from her to investigate this matter so far back! The deliberation also used as a metaphor the principle that one must avoid the name of one's father. I secretly believe that although parent-child relationships are natural, ruler and subject belong to different categories; the taboos of a sovereign need not be entirely the same as those in a family. During the reigns of the Yuan, Ming, and Ai emperors, there was no decree issued to all under heaven forbidding the use of their birth mothers' names; thus, officials did not have to observe such taboos in the same way as sons do. This shows that subjects are not required to follow the same rules as children in this regard. The taboos observed by ministers of the Ming emperor regarding his mother and wife refer only to the taboo names of those considered "lesser rulers." Moreover, all people throughout the empire are subjects and servants of the lesser ruler, not subjects and servants of her who gave birth to the emperor. Because the taboo name of a "lesser ruler" is listed on the official taboo list, all under heaven observe it together; the taboo name of the birth mother is not included in the official list, so people throughout the empire do not share a common taboo. At that time, the sovereign and his ministers were wise and virtuous, with many outstanding talents in court. These are precedents we should follow; yet the deliberation says "this is not an issue for today's discussion," which I secretly find difficult to understand. It also says, "a mother gains honor through her son"—then why are the mothers of these three emperors not considered honored because of their sons! The deliberation further states, "the example of Empress Dowager Zhang Huangtaifei is probably not relevant to today's concerns." If the birth mother of Emperor Ai cannot be understood, why should this example alone not be considered relevant now! Moreover, since the current emperor ascended the throne, why has his birth mother Empress Dowager Li Shufei's taboo name not been issued to all under heaven for universal avoidance, just as was done with the taboo names of Emperor Jianwen and Empress Dowager Shun? Since the restoration, there have been eight emperors. Of these, five emperors up to now had birth mothers—how can it be that the birth mothers of four emperors are universally not avoided in name taboos, while the birth mother of Emperor Jianwen alone is made a taboo throughout all under heaven? "This means that the opinions of Shangshu Wang and Lang Fu are acceptable."
|
