The so-called "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism'" is permeated in books on the history of modern and modern Chinese thought and philosophy, as well as in university classrooms and related textbooks. To this day, this situation has not fundamentally changed. One only has to look at the timetable of the numerous lectures on "Chinese Studies", including those of the leading universities, to see at a glance. However, after the research of relevant experts, and the search of Dong Zhongshu's works and related historical materials and documents that have been seen so far, there is no so-called "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism'". The author of this statement was Yi Baisha (1886-1921), a famous thinker in the late Qing Dynasty and early Republic of China. In 1916, he published "Confucius's Peaceful Discussion" in the magazine "New Youth", mentioning that since Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, he "deposed a hundred schools, respected Confucianism alone, and used Confucius as a puppet to monopolize the world's ideas and make them lose their freedom." "The great secret of China's 2,000-year-old respect for Confucius" lies in the fact that the ruling class of successive dynasties "used Confucius as a puppet to monopolize the world's ideas and lose their freedom." (Pang Pu, Ma Yong, Liu Yiqun, "Pre-Qin Confucian Studies: 20th Century Chinese Academic Archives", Hubei Education Publishing House, 2003). His contemporary, Liang Qichao (1873-1929), the "master of Chinese studies", did not use this term. The so-called "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism'" was perfunctory from Yi Baisha's statement and gradually spread widely.

In the past 20 years, the so-called "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the Confucianism of a hundred schools'" has been talked about by the academic circles, filled with university forums and related academic works, and has almost become a foregone conclusion. For example, Mr. Sun Jingtan in Nanjing Social Sciences, No. 6, 1993. published the article "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty "Deposed the Hundred Schools of Thought and Respected Confucianism" Nothing", arguing that Dong Zhongshu did not put forward such a suggestion, and from Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty and even the entire Han Dynasty, there was no fact of "deposing the Hundred Schools of Confucianism and respecting Confucianism".

Many people in the academic circles oppose Mr. Sun Jingtan's above-mentioned views, but they cannot come up with reliable documents and historical materials to refute them, while some scholars, such as Professor Song Dingguo, have relied on reliable historical materials and documents to affirm Sun Jingtan's bold questioning spirit on the basis of affirming Sun Jingtan's bold questioning spirit, and then proceeded to make reasonable and well-founded examinations. In "Sinology Perspective" (Capital Normal University, January 2013 edition), he wrote: First of all, we should affirm: First, Mr. Sun is not superstitious about ancient and modern authority. Dare to rely on the literature. The spirit of seeking and questioning when discovering flaws is commendable and worthy of advocacy. About Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty "deposed a hundred schools of thought and respected Confucianism". Challenges raised. It is indeed worthy of serious examination and redetermination. For example, the account of Dong Zhongshu that he questioned is the "most different one" in the history of Ban Gu and Sima Qian. Ban Gu separated the "Biography of Dong Zhongshu" from the "Historical Records: The Biography of Confucianism". Stand-alone. In addition to copying Sima Qian, the content adds Dong Zhongshu's countermeasures in the early days of Emperor Wu, and appendices the "Three Strategies of Heaven and Man", which is indeed worth exploring and verifying.

Professor Song Dingguo commented that Sima Qian was not only at the same time as Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, but also moved to the capital with his family at the age of 19 in 127 BC (the second year of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty). When Dong Zhongshu died in 104 BC, Sima Qian was 42 years old. It was in this year that Sima Qian initiated and was ordered by Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty to formulate the "Taichu Calendar" with the Shangdafu Husui and others, and began to write the "Historical Records", "Never know the guests, forget the business of the family, think day and night about their unscrupulous resources, and devote themselves to their work." Before that, when he was 24 years old, he served as Langzhong for many years, and served Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty many times. At the age of 35 in 111 BC (the sixth year of Yuan Ding), he was also appointed as a lieutenant general of Lang, and as the emperor's envoy, he was sent to the west to conquer the south of Bashu, and arrived at Qiong (now Xichang, Sichuan), Di (now Hanyuan, Sichuan), Kunming (now Qujing, Yunnan), pacified the ethnic minorities in the southwest, and set up five counties. By the age of 47 in 99 BC (the second year of the Tianhan Dynasty), he was also the Taishi Ling, and in March, he accompanied Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty to Hedong to worship Houtu. In November, Li Ling was defeated and captured by the Xiongnu, and Sima Qian was sentenced to death for defending Li Ling. The following year, Li Ling was exterminated. Sima Qian asked for palace punishment for the work of historical records, endured humiliation and lived hard, and was pardoned and released from prison at the age of 49 in 97 BC (the fourth year of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty), and was appointed as the secretary of the order, and wrote a monograph on the historical records of anger, which was finally completed at the age of 55 in 91 BC (the second year of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty). He died about the following year. The reason why I elaborate on Sima Qian's resume is to show that Sima Qian traveled many times with Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty after he was in his 20s, and participated in the formulation of the "Taichu Calendar", and also served as the emperor's special envoy to the west to conquer the south of Bashu, which shows that he had a close relationship with Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, and had a teacher-student friendship with Dong Zhongshu, so for what happened between Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty and Dong Zhongshu, especially the so-called "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu to 'depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism' Moreover, Sima Qian began to write the "Records of the Historians" when he was in the prime of life and energetic in his middle-aged age of 42, and he would never have neglected the major events that took place in the current dynasty! In addition, Sima Qian should have paid special attention to and understood Dong Zhongshu, who had taught him and was famous at that time, just like his teacher made a statement to Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty about the "Three Strategies" If such a great event really exists, it is impossible for him not to know the way, and if he knows the way, it is impossible for him not to remember it. By comparing the "Historical Records of Confucianism" with the "Hanshu Biography of Dong Zhongshu", I think Sima Qian's record of Dong Zhongshu's life is more reasonable: "Dong Zhongshu is also from Guangchuan. In order to govern the Spring and Autumn Period, Xiaojing was a doctor. Under the curtain to recite, the disciples passed on to a long time to receive karma, or do not see their faces, cover three years Dong Zhongshu does not look at the garden, its essence is so. Advance and retreat are tolerated, indecent is not okay, and all bachelors are respected by teachers. Now he is on the throne and is the prime minister of the river. With the change of spring and autumn disasters to push the yin and yang, so the wrong line, so ask for the rain to close the yang, longitudinal yin, and the rain is the opposite. If you go to a country, you can't do what you want. In the waste for the middle doctor, the house. The Chronicle of the Disaster. At that time, the high temple disaster in Liaodong, the main father was sick, and the son of heaven who took his book to play. The Son of Heaven summoned all beings to show his book, and there was a thorn in it. Dong Zhongshu's disciple Lu Bushu didn't know his teacher's book and thought he was stupid. So he ordered Dong Zhongshu to die, and he was pardoned. So Dong Zhongshu didn't dare to say anything about the disaster. Dong Zhongshu is honest and honest. It is the time to go out and fight the four Yi, Gongsun Hongzhi is not as good as Dong Zhongshu in the Spring and Autumn Period, and Hongxi is in the world, and he is the minister. Dong Zhongshu takes Hong as his obedience. Sickness. Nai Yan said: 'Du Dong Zhongshu can make the king of Xiang Miaoxi. 'Jiaoxi Wang has heard that Dong Zhongshu has a line. Be kind to them. Dong Zhongshu is afraid that he will be convicted for a long time and will be spared at home. When he died, he would eventually lose his industry, and he would study and write books. Therefore, Hanxing is idle for the fifth generation. Only Dong Zhongshu's name is Ming Yu Chunqiu. It is also passed down to the Ram clan. "About Dong Zhongshu's resume. The entanglement between Dong Zhongshu and Gongsun Hong, as well as how Dong Zhongshu became the Jiaoxi Minister, and how to "stay at home". Specializing in "studying and writing", Sima Qiandu explained very clearly, and came to the conclusion that Dong Zhongshu's doctrine was "named Ming in the Spring and Autumn Period" since the fifth Han Dynasty, and its transmission was also the Ram clan. However, there was no mention of Dong Zhongshu's "Three Strategies" to Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty. In contrast, Ban Gu's "Biography of Dong Zhongshu" does have many loopholes and contradictions, especially the praise of Dong Zhongshu as a "Confucian sect", which is even more contrary to Sima Qian's conclusion, which cannot but be confusing and suspicious. One of the biggest differences between "The Biography of Dong Zhongshu" and "Historical Records" in terms of records is that "Historical Records: The Biography of Confucianism" contains: "And now on the throne, Zhao Juan and Wang Zangzhi belong to Ming Confucianism, and Shang is also a village, so he recruits Fangzheng virtuous literary scholars." Since then, Yan and Shi have been Shen Peigong in Lu, Yuan Gusheng in Qi, and Han Taifu in Yan. Yan Shangshu is from Jinan Fusheng. Words and courtesies from Lu Gaotang. It is easy to say that it is self-evident and Kawada is born. Yan Chunqiu is born in Qilu from Hu Wusheng, and Yu Zhao is from Dong Zhongshu. and Empress Dowager Dou collapsed, Wu'an Hou Tian Wei was the prime minister, Huang Lao, the words of a hundred schools of law, hundreds of Confucian scholars, and Gongsun Hong took the Spring and Autumn White clothes as the third prince of the Son of Heaven, and was named the Marquis of Pingjin. The bachelors of the world are in the countryside. Obviously, although Sima Qian also listed Dong Zhongshu as a "Confucian", the "Confucianism" he spoke of was obviously not "Confucianism" in the strict sense, because judging from the list he listed, these people were all people who ruled "Poems", "Books", "Rites", "Yi" and "Spring and Autumn". This can also be seen from the fact that the "Historical Records" called the "pit Confucian" as the "pit warlock". In "The Biography of Dong Zhongshu", Ban Gu called Dong Zhongshu a "great Confucian", and said, "Since the beginning of Emperor Wu, Wei Qi and Wu'an Hou have been Confucian." and Zhong Shu against the book, pushing the Kong family, and suppressing the hundred schools. Liu Xiang and Liu Xin's father and son's evaluation of Dong Zhongshu was also cited, although Liu Xin was not as high as his father's evaluation of Dong Zhongshu, he still called him "the head of the group of Confucianism". The "Confucianism" in his mind has been associated with "Tui Ming Kong", which is obviously much narrower than Sima Qian. The "Confucianism" in Ban Gu's mind can be said to be associated with the "Confucianism" or "Confucianism" represented by Confucius. However, Mr. Sun's bold inference seems to be debatable: First, there are obvious omissions in Sima Qian's record in the "Biography of Confucianism" that Dong Zhongshu "ascended the throne today and is the prime minister of Jiangdu": that is, the reason why Dong Zhongshu was appointed as "Jiangdu Minister" is not explained, and Dong Zhongshu will not become "Jiangdu Minister" for no reason, right? And it was in this place that Sima Qian neglected that Ban Gu supplemented Dong Zhongshu's "Three Strategies of Heaven and Man" with Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, explaining the origin of Dong Zhongshu's becoming the "Jiangdu Minister". However, this possibility can be said to be no, because according to the "Historical Records": Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty ascended the throne, Zhao Juan, Wang Zang was forced to commit suicide because he "wanted to establish a Ming Hall to court the princes", because he was angry with the Empress Dowager Dou, who was a good scholar of Huang Laozhi, so when the Empress Dowager Dou was alive, how could Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty take measures with virtue? The initiator of this theory is Ban Gu, and the basis for this is that Ban Gu forged the "Three Strategies". I think that just because there is no record of the relevant "Three Policies" in the "Historical Records" and other books, and the "Hanshu Biography of Dong Zhongshu" is the only one, it is abrupt to assert that Ban Gu is a "forgery", because it is not uncommon for different historical books to record a person or something differently (whether there is or not, detail, contradiction, etc.), and the "Historical Records" is not without omissions and errors, and there is no "deposing the Confucianism of a hundred schools" in the "Three Strategies", so even if the "Three Strategies" is a "forgery" of Ban Gu, it cannot prove that Ban Gu is "the Han Wu Emperor adopted Dong Zhongshu" Third, he said that "Sima Guang was the official brewer of the theory that Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the Confucianism of the Hundred Schools of Confucianism'", and the reason was even more insufficient. Mr. Sun cites a large number of testimonies in the Zizhi Tongjian Volume 17, i.e., the Han Ji IX, but this does not mean that his assertions are accurate. The Zizhi Tongjian does quote the content of the "Three Strategies" almost in its entirety in the "Han Ji IX". However, in terms of the text and its arrangement, there are discrepancies with the "Hanshu - The Biography of Dong Zhongshu", and in the quoted "Examination of Differences", it frankly points out the contradictions in the relevant records in Bangu's "Hanshu", as Mr. Sun said. Please see, "Examination of Differences" cloud: ""Hanshu Wuji": "In May of the first year of Yuanguang, the edict was virtuous, and Dong Zhongshu and Gongsun Hong came out. "The Biography of Zhong Shu" said: "Zhong Shu is on the book, pushing the Kong family, and suppressing the hundred schools." Officials of the school. The state and county are full of talents, filial piety and honesty. It's all from Zhong Shu. 'Today's filial piety is in November of the first year of Yuanguang, and if the countermeasures are in the next May, it will not be allowed to be sent from Zhongshu to cover the "Wuji" mistake. Ran Zhongshu countermeasures. I don't know when the fruit was, before the first year of Yuanguang. Only this year's virtuous and virtuous can be seen in the "Chronicle". Three years. Minyue and Dongou attacked each other, and Zhuang Zhu was already a doctor, so they were all written here. "The Biography of Zhong Shu" is another cloud: "Liaodong High Temple, Changling High Garden disaster. Zhong Shu said what he meant, and the master father stole his book and played it. Zhong Shu was offended. According to the two disasters in the sixth year of the founding of the Yuan Dynasty, the "Biography of the Lord Father" was summoned in the first year of Yuanguang. Gai Zhongshu recounted the two disasters and wrote a book, or he did not write a book, and he saw his grass and weed later. It can be seen from the "Examination of Differences" that the "Zizhi Tongjian Volume 17", that is, the "Han Ji IX", not only did not hide the contradictions in the content and chronology of Dong Zhongshu's "Countermeasures" in Ban Gu's "Book of Han", but also specifically explained it. Therefore, the adjustment of the chronology of the "Countermeasures" in the "Han Ji Jiu" and the content of the countermeasures between Dong Zhongshu and Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty and the revision of the relevant text in Ban Gu's "The Biography of Dong Zhongshu" are obviously out of an attempt to resolve the contradictions existing in the "Biography of Dong Zhongshu", and by no means have the purpose of doing so, as Mr. Sun said. Reading between the lines, it shows the rigorous attitude of Sima Guang and other compilers of "Zizhi Tongjian" in governing history. Rigorous management of history is the most basic character of a historian. Judging from the overall view of the "Zizhi Tongjian" and the "Book of Han", Sima Guang and his group of compilers, whether they are Ban Gu, are all historians who have and abide by such a character. As for some of the problems in his writings (omissions, contradictions, inaccuracies, etc.), they are caused by a variety of reasons, and other historical books also exist to varying degrees, so I don't think it is appropriate to make inferences such as "forgery" and "fabrication" lightly. Because this involves the most important issues of literature and character for historians. If Sima Guang and Ban Gu really "falsified" and "concocted" historical materials as they wished, as Mr. Sun asserted, then their character and literary qualities as historians would be very problematic! Are the "Book of Han" and "Zizhi Tongjian" compiled by them still worth seeing? But the most important thing is that none of the relevant texts of Ban Gu and Sima Guang cited by Mr. Sun said that "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's theory of 'deposing the Confucianism of a hundred schools of thought.'" Ban Gu said in "Emperor Wu Ji Zan" that "filial piety and martial arts were established at the beginning, Zhuoran deposed the hundred schools, and the chapter "Six Classics". And in "The Biography of Dong Zhongshu", it is said that "since the beginning of Emperor Wu, Wei Qi and Wu Anhou have been prosperous and Confucian." and Zhongshu countermeasures, pushing the Kong family, and suppressing the hundred schools. Although there are theories about "deposing the hundred schools of thought" and "suppressing the hundred schools of thought," there is no such thing as "respecting Confucianism alone"; it is very inappropriate and even absurd to infer or summarize "Confucianism" as "Confucianism"! Because even if "Confucius" is regarded as synonymous with "Confucianism," the meanings of "Long" and "Tuiming" and "Confucianism" are far apart! As for the "Six Classics," it is even more 108,000 miles away from "Confucianism"! As for Sima Guang, in the " Zizhi Tongjian Volume 17, that is, Han Ji IX or other volumes, does not say at all that "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the Confucianism of the Hundred Schools'", although Mr. Sun quoted him as "I love Dong Zhongshu, and I am poor and keep the secluded scriptures." Although there is a garden where he lives, he does not visit for three years. The heresy is far away, the holy words are full, and the plan is ascended to the Han court, and the hundred schools of thought are subdued" (see Volume 12 of the "Sima Wen Official Document Collection") and "Poems of the Paradise of the Paradise" as circumstantial evidence, although there are five characters of "the beginning of a hundred schools of thought", it cannot be proved that Sima Guang concocted the saying that "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism'". of.

Professor Song Dingguo pointed out in the "Vertical and Horizontal of Chinese Studies" that the so-called Dong Zhongshu, who had long been almost conclusive, suggested to Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty to "depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism", which was based on the next paragraph in the third policy of "Raising Virtuous and Good Measures": "The unifier of the Spring and Autumn Period is the common scripture of heaven and earth, and the friendship between ancient and modern. This teacher is different. People have different opinions, hundreds of schools of thought, and different meanings, that is, the above is to die in order to maintain unity; the legal system is changing, and the lower ones do not know what to observe. I think that those who are not in the six arts of Confucius's sorcerers are all out of the way, and do not make progress. The heretical doctrine will be extinguished, and then the discipline can be unified and the law can be understood, and the people will know what to follow. Among them, "those who are not in the six arts, Confucius's arts, are all out of the way." Don't go the other way". Gai is the origin of the so-called "Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose a hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism alone'". If so, this inference is not inconsistent with the original meaning of the sentence. To illustrate, let's simply translate this passage into the vernacular: "Spring and Autumn" attaches great importance to unification. This is the unchanging principle between heaven and earth. A common truth in ancient and modern times. Nowadays, teachers speak differently from each other. People's discussions are also different from each other, and the solutions provided by hundreds of schools of thought are very different, and the purpose is also different. Therefore, it is difficult for the upper authorities to grasp the unified norms, and the legal system has changed several times, and the lower ones do not know what should be followed. In my opinion, all subjects that do not belong to the Six Arts and Confucius's scholarship are forbidden, and they are not allowed to go hand in hand. When the deceitful doctrines are extinguished, then a unified standard can be established and the law can be revealed, and the people will know what they should follow. The basis for this statement is that "the teachings of the teachers are different from each other, the people's arguments are also different from each other, and the plans and purposes of the hundred schools of thought are very different, so it is difficult for the upper authorities to grasp a unified standard; The purpose of the argument was that "all subjects that do not belong to the Six Arts and the scholarship of Confucius are forbidden, and they are not allowed to go hand in hand." When the depraved doctrine dies away, then a uniform standard can be established and the law can be revealed, and the people will know what the Tao should follow. ”

To sum it up simply, what we are talking about here is the principle of "unity of speech, unity of law, and unity of action". From the point of view of maintaining a unified country, this makes sense, even now. But the crux of the matter lies in how to understand the sentence "All those who are not in the six arts of Confucius's sorcerers are all out of their own way, and do not make them go together". Among them, the phrase "those who are not in the six arts of Confucius", that is, "all subjects that do not belong to the six arts and Confucius's academics", originally included two aspects: one is "the science of the six arts" and the other is "the art of Confucius". However, people seem to have either ignored the former, or they have attributed the former to "the art of Confucius," and then to "the art of Confucius" to "Confucianism"! This is a great misunderstanding that has been passed down for a long time! And the so-called "overthrow a hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism alone" is precisely related to this. Because of the misunderstanding of this phrase, it has led to the misunderstanding of the whole understanding of the sentence "All those who are not in the six arts of Confucius, all of them are in the same way, do not make it go together". In my opinion, the "Six Arts" and the "Art of Confucius" are not the same thing. "Six Arts" is the "Six Classics" that Ban Gu said in "Emperor Wu Ji Zan". The "subjects of the six arts" are "subjects covered by the Six Classics", which cover a wide range of subjects. The so-called "Six Classics" (i.e., "Six Arts") of Confucianism is a classic that is known to be the source of Chinese academic culture so far, and it is by no means just a "Confucian classic". Treating the Six Classics as a "Confucian classic" not only violates historical facts, but also invisibly pushes back the history of Chinese scholarship by artificially and greatly. Because the hundred schools of thought, including Confucianism, were born in the Warring States Period, and the germination and maturity of Chinese scholarship was much earlier than this. When people talk about Chinese academics, they always start with the "Hundred Schools of Thought" during the Warring States Period, and ignore the source of the living water on which the "Hundred Schools of Thought" depend. In this way, in fact, the hundred schools of thought are regarded as water without a source and a tree without roots. As far as we can see, the classical literature that has been handed down to the time of Confucius is mainly the Six Classics. Therefore, the Six Classics should be listed as the main classic of Chinese academic sources. According to the chronological order of the book, its order should be "Yi", "Shu", "Poem", "Li", "Music" and "Spring and Autumn". In the past, they were arranged according to "Poems", "Books", "Rites", "Music", "Yi", and "Spring and Autumn", and it was Confucianism who regarded them as Confucian classics; because Confucianism wrote "Ten Wings", that is, "Yi Chuan", and explained them, "Yi" was placed before the "Spring and Autumn" that Confucius focused on revising. Of the hundreds of schools of thought in the pre-Qin period, it can be said that none of them has nothing to do with the "Six Classics", that is, the "Six Arts". Therefore, in a sense, all the sons and hundreds of schools of thought can belong to the "Six Arts". The "Hundred Schools" mentioned in the "Three Strategies" obviously do not mainly refer to the "Hundred Schools of Thought" handed down from the pre-Qin Dynasty. As for the "art of Confucius", it can naturally be understood as "Confucianism", but strictly speaking, "the art of Confucius" and "Confucianism" cannot be equated. Moreover, the word "Confucianism" is not used in the "Three Strategies". So. The "Hundred Schools" mentioned in the "Three Strategies" mainly refer to those "heretical theories" that do not belong to the scope of the "Six Arts" and "Confucius's Techniques".

Anyone who is familiar with the history of ancient Chinese academic culture knows that because the rulers of the early Han Dynasty admired the "study of Huang Lao" and promulgated laws and regulations to collect various books and organize folklore, the cultural confinement caused by the Qin Dynasty was thawed. The so-called "100 different schools of thought, with different meanings" in the "Three Strategies" are just a general term for many theories, including various heretical theories. It is a pity that the original meaning of this passage in the "Three Strategies" has been misread and misinterpreted for a long time. It was measured, perfunctory and summarized into nothing, "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism'". Of course. If we equate "Confucius's art" with "Confucianism", and reduce this passage to "depose the first Confucianism of a hundred schools", or "depose a hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism" (Yang Rongguo and others hold this view), it is barely reasonable. Because there is a qualitative difference between "first" and "honored" and "exalted". But after all, it has lost the meaning of "the science of the six arts" in the original sentence. It can't be considered rigorous. According to the historical materials I have consulted, I have not found the text of Dong Zhongshu's proposal to Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, so I do not believe that "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the Confucianism of the Hundred Schools'" is valid. Judging from the various documents that have been seen so far. In the era of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, even though there was a saying of "deposing a hundred schools", there was no fact of "deposing a hundred schools", and as for "respecting Confucianism", there was neither a saying nor a reality. Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty never respected Confucianism in his employment and administration. If it was controlled by the Empress Dowager Dou in the early stage, then after the death of the Empress Dowager Dou, the situation is still not only with people who are Confucian. On the contrary, those who learned from the punishment name, Huang Lao, etc., are still reused, such as Zhang Tang, Master Father Yan and Dongfang Shuo. Even for those who do not respect Confucianism and even have quite ridiculed them, such as Sima Tan and Sima Qian's father and son, who are "quite wrong to the sage", not only did not add the crime (Sima Qian was later convicted because he defended Li Ling, who surrendered to the Xiongnu), but also reused, so that his father and son successively became Taishi Ling. And Dong Zhongshu's has never been reused by Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, which is even more proof of the best of the best. Most scholars today recognize this historical fact, but they still retain and talk extravagantly about "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopting Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the Hundred Schools of Thought and Confucianism'." This is really inconceivable! As for the end of the argument that "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the Hundred Schools of Confucianism'" when and by whom? Judging from the relevant materials, most of them believe that it took place in the era of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, but judging from the fact that Dong Zhongshu's "Spring and Autumn Dew" has not yet called the "Six Arts" the "Six Classics", there are obviously two obvious problems: First, when Dong Zhongshu was alive, he had the "Six Classics" The Six Classics or the Five Classics, but he did not agree with them and did not adopt them; first, Dong Zhongshu did not have the "Six Classics" or the "Five Classics" when he was in the air. Whichever of these two is true, it means a rejection of the theory that "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the Confucianism of a hundred schools'". From a logical point of view, the so-called "Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty adopted Dong Zhongshu's suggestion to 'depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism'" must be related to the fact that the "Six Arts" are regarded as "Confucian classics"; because the "Six Arts" are regarded as "Confucian classics", then "the science of the six arts and the art of Confucius" can be naturally attributed to "Confucianism", so it can also be said that "all those who are not in the science of the six arts and the art of Confucius are all in their own way, and do not let them go together" perfunctory into "depose the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism alone". However, although Ban Gu said in the Book of Han that he would "depose the hundred schools of thought" and "suppress the hundred schools", he did not have the theory of "respecting Confucianism alone"; although there were words such as "Emperor Wu established a doctor of the Five Classics, opened disciples, set up a department and shot strategies, and persuaded officials to do so" ("Hanshu Confucianism") and "The Six Classics of the Table", "Longru" and "Confucianism", but there was no saying of "respecting Confucianism alone". So, from Bangu, we can't find the answer either. Therefore, it is foolish to think that if Dong Zhongshu's "Three Strategies" is true, it is Ban Gu who is the first to misunderstand and attribute Dong Zhongshu's "Six Arts and Confucius's Arts" in "Those who are not in the Six Arts and Confucius's Techniques are all in their own way, and do not make them go together", and then "Those who are not in the Six Arts and Confucius's Techniques are all in their own way, and do not make them go together", one-sidedly misunderstood and attributed it to "depose the hundred schools" and "Push the Confucian Family", and later generations misunderstood it according to Ban Gu's statement. Perfunctory has become "deposing a hundred schools of thought and respecting Confucianism alone". After review, Yi Baisha (1886-1921), a famous thinker in the late Qing Dynasty and early Republic of China, published "Confucius's Peaceful Discussions" in the magazine "New Youth" in 1916, mentioning that since Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, "he deposed a hundred schools, respected Confucianism alone, and used Confucius as a puppet to monopolize the world's ideas and make them lose their freedom." "The great secret of China's 2,000-year-old respect for Confucius" lies in the fact that the ruling class of successive dynasties "used Confucius as a puppet to monopolize the world's ideas and lose their freedom." (Pang Pu, Ma Yong, Liu Yiqun, "Pre-Qin Confucian Studies: 20th Century Chinese Academic Archives", Hubei Education Publishing House, 2003). This is the earliest text I have seen that proposes to "overthrow the hundred schools of thought and respect Confucianism alone". Liang Qichao, who was his contemporary, did not use this term, but it became widely popular later. As for academic culture such as mathematics, under the influence of celestial induction and superstition, it has achieved greater development. According to the "Historical Records of the Japanese Scholars", there were the Five Elements Family, the Kanyu Family, the Jianzhu Family, the Congchen Family, the Li Family, the Heavenly Family, the Taiyi Family, and the Xingfa Family (Physiognomic Warlocks) and so on. It shows that the mathematics of the Han Dynasty has a large scope. In short, during the more than 300 years of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty and the Han Dynasty that followed, both heresies including immortal magic and various academic studies focused on practicality have achieved tremendous development, and in many fields, the achievements are ahead of the world at that time. This historical fact shows that the so-called "dethronement of Confucianism by a hundred schools" did not exist in the entire Han Dynasty. From the perspective of the development of academic culture, the Han Dynasty was relatively relaxed, and there was neither the "book burning and pit Confucianism" of Qin Shi Huang, nor the "literary prison" full of blood for later generations. 】:(To be continued......)