The Seal of the Unity of the Three — Vol. 2 - The Golden Elixir

4. The Ancient Text and Its Commentaries 187
—————————————————————————————————————————
cannot be deemed to be a “forgery” in the common sense of the term.
Not only does the text, despite the different arrangement, include
virtually the whole Cantong qi, with the omission of only a few verses
and without any addition; but no one without a solid knowledge of
the standard version of the Cantong qi, and of its doctrinal principles,
could have fabricated a work of this nature. In the arrangement of the
Ancient Text, the four- and five-character verses are not reproduced in
the same sequence as in the standard version; while this is the only
major difference at the textual level, in the new arrangement the
discourse of Cantong qi, its threefold set of subjects, and its “mirrored”
portions reveal a much clearer pattern.
The account of the composition of the Ancient Text includes all
three authors traditionally deemed to have been involved in the creation
of the standard version—and this is the main reason why several
commentators, for whom Wei Boyang could only be the single author
of the Cantong qi, rejected the Ancient Text as a whole. 7 According to
the new version, Wei Boyang wrote the “Canon”; Xu Congshi 徐 從 事
(whom the Ancient Text exegetes regularly identify as Xu Jingxiu 徐
景 休 , as Yu Yan had already indicated) contributed a “Commentary”;
and Chunyu Shutong 淳 于 叔 通 added a final section, entitled “Three
Categories” (again following Yu Yan’s suggestion). 8 The format of the
text is, on the other hand, entirely different, with each of the three
authors being attributed one of its main parts:
1. “Canon” (“Jingwen” 經 文 ), in verses of four characters, deemed
Ancient Text, this time mainly to point out that it originated with Du Yicheng
and not with Yang Shen, who did nothing beyond republishing it under his
own name. Two other essays in the Xu Wei ji are concerned with the Cantong
qi, respectively found in 16.471–72 and 16.473–78.
7
Despite their criticism, the Ancient Text inspired the new, inventive
formats of the standard version of the Cantong qi contained in the commentaries
by Xu Wei (ca. 1570), Li Guangdi (ca. 1700), and Li Shixu (1823).
Moreover, the views of Zhu Yuanyu (1669) and Dong Dening (1787) on the
three main subjects of the Cantong qi are also clearly inspired by those of the
Ancient Text. On these commentaries see the previou chapter.
8
The earliest extant source that records the name Xu Jingxiu appears to
be the Danlun juezhi xinjian (CT 935), 8a, an alchemical text related to the
Cantong qi dating from ca. 900 (the same passage is also found in the Huandan
zhouhou jue, CT 915, 2.4a, composed in the tenth or the eleventh
century). Yu Yan mentions Xu Jingxiu in Zhouyi cantong qi fahui, 9.16a. For
his views on the “Three Categories,” see below, p. 209.
Visit the Web page on this book • www.goldenelixir.com