The second juan of the Array of the Five Talismans (Taishang lingbao wufuxu 太上靈寶五符序 DZ 388; hereafter Array), consisting of dozens of medicinal recipes, presents us with numerous textual problems. This chapter will only be able to touch upon a few issues. In her 2011 study of the second juan of the Array, Ikehira Noriko 池平紀子 primarily used Dunhuang manuscript S.2438, the Yunji qiqian 雲笈七籤 DZ 1032 (hereafter YJQQ), and Methods for Abstaining from Grains from the Scripture of Great Purity (Taiqingjing duangu fa 太清經斷穀法 DZ 846) to compare textual variants of recipes. While she examines multiple sources and variants, Ikehira’s stimulating discussion centers on Buddho-Daoist interaction. This essay builds upon her work.

The discussion of textual variants is not merely a philological exercise to determine the correct, or best, reading of a text. The very existence of different textual recensions forces us to recognize the materiality of texts in medieval China as hand copied manuscripts circulated among initiates and within lineages of practitioners, and only sometimes available to more public view. Single recipes, or collections of recipes, circulated independently of the texts in which we find them today, and were often copied and reformulated within different compilations.

A. The Basic Textual Sources

I begin my examination with textual criticism in order to obtain a definitive version of the Array. The first step in this process is to ascertain the correct words of the text. These two tasks are very difficult. While the Zhonghua daozang edition has only one instance of emended textual criticism of the Array, I believe there are several tens of instances where textual criticism is needed, but I am currently unable to fully emend the entire text. While I still have doubts about certain passages, I have no evidentiary basis for emending them.

Recorded 16 April 2010

Translated and annotated by Kim Hunter Gordon

Lecturer

Cai Zhengren 蔡正仁 (b. 1941) of the Shanghai Troupe [Appendix I] is arguably the best-known active sheng 生, famed especially for his portrayal of daguansheng 大官 生 roles, such as the emperor in The Palace of Lasting Life (Changsheng dian 長生殿) as well as for qiongsheng 窮生 parts. A student of Yu Zhenfei 俞振飛 [Appendix H], and former leader of the Shanghai Troupe, he was awarded the Plum Blossom Prize (Meihua jiang 梅花獎) in 1986.

Synopsis

For the general background to The Palace of Lasting Life see Lecture 5. In this scene, the emperor, still in exile in Sichuan, continues to be tortured by grief and regret following the death of Precious Consort Yang Guifei 楊貴妃. He has commissioned a sculpture of her likeness which is now ready to be instated.

Role Types

The role of the emperor, Tang Minghuang 唐明皇, belongs to the broad category of sheng 生 or xiaosheng 小生, the narrower category of guansheng 官生 and, most narrowly, daguansheng 大官生, which is reserved for high officials as well as the emperor. Although bearded and in this case elderly, the singing register remains partially falsetto like that of most sheng rather than the purely modal voice used by other bearded roles. In the lecture, Cai Zhengren specifically warns against the risk of giving the appearance of low status when adopting a more elderly gait, since the gravitas of the role means that movements must have a certain amplitude, which he also contrasts with the smaller movements of the comic xiaohualian 小花臉 or chou 丑, who features in this scene in the person of the palace eunuch Gao Lishi 高力士. Given the emperor's miserable frame of mind, however, he does borrow some movements from the qiongsheng 窮生 role type, which is used to depict sheng fallen on hard times.

Performance

Cai Zhengren's performance is available in a 1992 recording, collected in the first volume of Kunju Collection (Kunju xuanji 崑劇選輯), published in Taiwan.

As several essays in this volume demonstrate, the intertwined relationship of medieval literary writing and religious practice can be perceived throughout the textual archive of the early medieval and Tang eras. But thanks largely to post-medieval habits of preservation, codification, and transmission that tended to separate writing deemed as “religious” from “literary” corpora, our view of that relationship has long been obscured. Scholars of medieval religion and literature have significantly expanded our understanding of Buddhism’s influence on elite belletristic writing (wenzhang 文章) in recent decades, spurred by evidence in the Dunhuang manuscript corpus as well as by new questions of transmitted texts, but much remains to be understood about the role of Daoist topics and themes in medieval literature that survived in individual literary collections (wenji 文集) and anthologies. Scholars such as Edward Schafer, Stephen Bokenkamp, Paul Kroll, and Franciscus Verellen have challenged traditional literary critical views and historical narratives that tend to ignore Daoism’s impact on Tang poetry and prose. Much of this scholarship has been recuperative, intended to reveal the footprint of Daoist concepts and practices in the corpora of specific writers such as Li Bai 李白, Cao Tang 曹唐, and Wu Yun 吳筠.

Beyond rediscovering Daoism in individual collections, however, we must also investigate the structural forces that necessitate this recuperative work: how did post-Tang literary collection and transmission practices occlude or marginalize writing concerned with Daoism? What kinds of formal or topical categories did Song and later readers use to define, contain, or otherwise explicate Tang writers’ interest in Daoism? Considering anthologies, for example, allows us to step away from the thorny—and often undecidable—question of Tang authors’ religious convictions and move towards more precise questions of representation and hermeneutics.