Synthesized answer
The distinction between "excerpts" and "more complete translations" is crucial because a broad selection of excerpts, as found in surveys like "Sources of Chinese Tradition," may not allow for the full reading and analysis that great philosophers like Han Fei Zi deserve [1]. While excerpts can introduce readers to influential thinkers [1], they may not fully capture the depth and breadth of their work.
Reading a full text might alter one's perspective compared to relying on selected passages by revealing the comprehensive treatment of a subject. For example, the Han Fei Tzu, though considered more allied to technical literature, confines itself rigidly to politics and offers an exhaustive analysis of administrative problems, warning against numerous pitfalls [5]. Additionally, full texts can help clarify authorship and authenticity, as some sections of the Han Fei Tzu might be the work of later writers or even refute Han Fei Zi's teachings [3, 4]. While the provided passages mention partial translations like Arthur Waley's [2], they do not explicitly detail how reading a full text specifically alters one's perspective compared to relying on excerpts, beyond suggesting that…
Synthesized from the book passages below. Chat with the book on Feynman for follow-up.
From the book
Han Fei Tzu: Basic Writings is one of a group of publica- tions, the Translations from the Oriental Classics, through which the Committee on Oriental Studies has sought to trans- mit to Western readers representative works of the Oriental traditions in thought and literature. In its volumes of source readings forming the “Introduction to Oriental Civilizations,” the Committee has provided a broad selection of excerpts from influential thinkers in India, China, and Japan, discussing the great problems of their times. Excerpts from Han Fei Tzu are thus included in Sources of Chinese…
My translation is based on the Han Fei Tz chi-shih by Ch’en Ch'i-yu (2 vols., Shanghai, 1958). In his exhaustive Introduction 15 notes, Ch’en has drawn upon all the important studies and commentaries of earlier Chinese and Japanese scholars Chis lilllography lists 89 titles), adding his own suggestions for emendation and interpretation. I have also consulted the Han fxu chilen-chich by Liang Ch’ihsiung (2 vols. Peking, tye); the Japanese translation by Uno Tetsuto in the Koku- yohu kanbun caisel series (1921), and that by Takeuchi Teruo (youl, | only, Tokyo, 1960); the English…
it illustrates the linulnens of the Legalists for elucidating their pronouncements lhy concrete examples from history. Two sections in my selec- ton, sections 5 and 8, employ typical Taoist terminology, and we couched in an extremely terse, balanced style, with fre- ajuent use of rhymes, that is not typical of the work as a whole, ‘Two other sections, not translated here, are actually vant in the form of commentaries upon passages from Lao ‘Van's ‘Tao te-ching. They give the Taoist classic a purely political interpretation, Legalist with Confucian borrowings, and are probably the…
'I'reatise on Literature” of the History of the Former Han, und other early bibliographies, it is listed under the title Han Tzu; the word Fei was added to the title much later to distinguish it from the writings of the T’ang Confucian wholar Han Yi (786-824). Most of the sections are short, conelse essays on some aspect of Legalist thought, fitted with titlex, und closely resembling the essays of earlier works such ww the Mo Tzu, Hsiin Tzu, or Book of Lord Shang. Nearly ull the twelve sections in my selection are of this type. Some of the sections consist of anecdotes drawn from the…
scholars as to just which sections are the work of Han Fei Tzu himself, I see no reason, with the exception mentioned above, to doubt the authenticity of the sections I have translated. “The fourth and third centuries p.c. saw the appearance of a body of technical literature in Chinese—treatises on divina- tion, medicine, agriculture, logic, military science, and so forth. The Han Fei Tzu is actually more closely allied to this genre than to the broader philosophical works of the period. Han Fei Tzu’s teacher, Hsiin Tzu, wrote on such widely varied subjects as politics, warfare,…
More questions about this book
- Given the stated aim to provide "wider circulation in the home and classroom" for these "Basic Writings," how would you explain the significance of making classical Chinese philosophy affordable and accessible to someone unfamiliar with academic publishing or East Asian studies?
- The foreword notes that translator Burton Watson might have found it "personally more gratifying" to translate an "untouched subject." What does his decision to translate "basic works" like Han Fei Zi reveal about the role of a scholar in bridging cultural understanding, and what impact might this choice have on new students encountering this philosophy?
- Based solely on the chapter titles like "The Way of the Ruler," "The Two Handles," and "The Five Vermin," what can you infer about Han Fei Zi's core philosophical concerns or practical approaches to governance? How do these titles help you anticipate the central arguments within the text?
- Considering the joint effort by the Columbia University Committee on Oriental Studies and UNESCO to publish this work, what does this institutional backing communicate about the perceived global importance and enduring relevance of Han Fei Zi's ideas in the mid-20th century?