Sima Tan (traditional Chinese: 司馬談; simplified Chinese: 司马谈; pinyin: Sīmǎ Tán; Wade–Giles: Ssu-ma T'an; c. 165–110 BCE) was a Chinese astrologist, astronomer, and historian during the Western Han dynasty. His work Records of the Grand Historian was completed by his son Sima Qian, who is considered the founder of Chinese historiography.
Sima Tan | |
|---|---|
| 司馬談 | |
| Born | 165 BCE |
| Died | 110 BCE (aged 55) |
| Occupation(s) | Astrologist, astronomer, historian |
| Relatives | Sima Xi (father) Sima Qian (son) |
Education & career
editSima Tan studied astronomy with Tang Du, the I Ching under Yang He, and Daoism under Master Huang.
He was appointed to the office of Court Astronomer (Chinese: 太史令; pinyin: tài shǐ lìng) at age 25 in 140 BCE, a position which he held until his death. Although Sima Tan began writing the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji), he died before it was finished; it was completed by his son, Sima Qian. The year of Sima Tan's death (110 BCE) was the year of the great imperial sacrifice fengshan (zh:封禅) by Emperor Han Wudi, for which the emperor appointed another person to the rank of fangshi, bypassing Sima, probably causing him much consternation.
Six schools
editAn essay by Sima Tan has survived within the Records of the Grand Historian. The essay is the last of the Shiji, called Yaozhi or Essential Points. It discusses the strengths and weakness of six kinds of governance. Using the concept of 'Jia', which can mean "expert" but likely meant "family", the essay coined the categories of Yin-Yangjia, Fajia, Mingjia and Daojia. Ideas like Yin-Yang existed, but all Han dynasty thought involves yin-yang thinking, even the military has it. Primarily an argument for the Daojia, it did not necessarily occur to Tan that anyone would later use them as historical categories, or put people under them. As new categories, Tan's contemporaries probably considered his Jia novel.
- Confucianism (儒家 Rú jiā)
- Daoism (道家 Dào jiā)
- Legalism (法家 Fǎ jiā)
- Mohism (墨家 Mò jiā)
- School of Names (名家 Míng jiā)
- School of Naturalists (陰陽家/阴阳家 Yīnyáng jiā) (central figure Zou Yan)
Together with Mohism and Confucianism, he compares their purported strengths and weaknesses in promotion of what he dubs the Daojia, taking the essential points of the others. Tan's descriptions of the Jia are all flawed, orbiting his characteristically 'empty' Daojia, which then includes a description of a court of ministers with a Wu wei semi-inactive ruler. It's description, and the Shiji more generally, would suggest the Simas prefer a court with a wu wei semi-inactive ruler in a time when the central government was expanding.
Despite a contrary statement by A.C. Graham, neither Tan nor Sima Qian name anyone under them. Although it might have involved some unknown historians or debates, likely popular by their time, imperial archivists Liu Xiang (77–6BCE) and Liu Xin named the 'schools' relevant texts, using the categories in the imperial library a hundred years after Sima Qians death. They connect them with purported ancient Zhou dynasty departments. Daojia comes to mean something like Daoism around the same time. They become categories of texts in book catalogues, namely the Han states' own Book of Han under Ban Gu.
Those later termed Daoists likely did not early know each other. While the later part of the Zhuangzi would seem familiar with the Daodejing, the earlier first part does not demonstrate familiarity with it. Although disconnected, as later used the Mingjia school of names would at least seem to represent an actual social category interacted with by the Mohists, earlier referred to by the Zhuangzi as debaters. Taken as having a common interest in disputative theories of language, they otherwise have different philosophies.
Connected with a department of prisons, Fajia comes to mean something like Legalism, which contains Shang Yang and figures Sima Qian had described as Huang-Lao, as an early form of what would termed be Daoism. Fa standards would seem a major element of their philosophy, and by his own words, Sima Qian does most favour Laozi over Shen Buhai or Han Fei. But it would be questionable if Sima Qian himself believed or intended that Shen Buhai, Shen Dao and Han Fei should go under Fajia, or he might have either used his father's categories, or at least discussed them alongside Shang Yang rather than Laozi and Zhuang Zhou. Giving Shang Yang his own individual chapter, he was probably opposed to their combination.
Although a modern Sinologist might consider a historical usage of the categories revisionist, to it's credit, the Book of Han only presents their groupings as theoretical; Feng Youlan chose to take it as a legitimate attempt at historical theory. Emphasizing philosophical differences with the Confucians, Sinologist Herrlee G. Creel argued that it might have been intentionally misleading to list Shen Buhai together with Shang Yang under Fajia. But Creel himself quotes Liu Xiang, who readily recounts that, unlike Shang Yang, Shen Buhai vacilitated against punishments. If the Confucians attempted to obfuscate Shen Buhai categorically, they wouldn't seem to attempt to obfuscate him individually. With a combination of the two more common after the Han Feizi, Shen Buhai's administrative ideas were at least relevant for penal practice to the extent that it's recorder keepers were named after them.[1][2][3]
See also
editReferences
edit- Creel, Herrlee Glessner (1970). What Is Taoism?: And Other Studies in Chinese Cultural History. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-12047-8.
- Graham, A.C. (1989). The Disputers of the Tao. La Salle, IL: Open Court.
- Sima Qian (1993). Records of the Grand Historian of China – Qin Dynasty. The Research Centre for Translation. Translated by Watson, Burton (hbk ed.). Hong Kong, ZH; New York, NY: The Chinese University of Hong Kong; Columbia University Press. ISBN 0-231-08168-5. ISBN 0-231-08169-3 (pbk ed.)
- de Bary, W.T.; Bloom, I. (1999). Sources of Chinese Tradition. Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). New York, NY.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - Smith, Kidder (2003). "Sima Tan and the Invention of Daoism, "Legalism," et cetera". The Journal of Asian Studies. 62 (1): 129–156. doi:10.2307/3096138. JSTOR 3096138.
- Goldin, Paul R. (2011). "Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese "Legalism"". Journal of Chinese Philosophy. 38 (1): 88–104.
- Jiang, Tao (2021). Origins of Moral-political Philosophy in Early China. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-760347-5.
- Fraser, Chris (2024). "School of Names". In Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2024 ed.). Retrieved 31 July 2024.
- Hansen, Chad (2024). "Zhuangzi". In Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 3. Competing Interpretive Narratives (Summer 2024 ed.). Retrieved 19 February 2024.
- ^ Smith 2003, p. 129,138-139,147,149,152; Goldin 2011, p. 88,101,103(1,13,15); Hansen 2024; Jiang 2021, p. 234; Graham 1989, p. 377.
- ^ Fraser 2024.
- ^ Creel 1970, p. 10.