Argumentation On Doubtful Points In The Annotation On Analects

As a classic of the Confucianists, Analects is a collection of what Confucius and his disciples said and did. There have been in history an immense number of books of annotations, interpretations and reviews on Analects whose opinions differ from each other. As to most of the annotations, Confucian Masters have provided succinct but proper interpretations and analyses. However, there are still some divergences on which they are unable to decide who are right or wrong. As a result, much difficulty is produced for both learners and teachers. There is, therefore, a must to re-examine and re-analyze them. Numerous articles in the modem age constantly emerge to offer new perspectives on the various annotations on Analects and some of them fail to tackle word meanings from the perspective of textual studies and consequently lead to eisegesis and confusion.Analects is a reflection of the great Chinese thinker Confucius' world outlook, ethics, and political and educational ideology. Failure to make accurate annotations for Analects will definitely affect an overall understanding of Confucian ideology. Starting from the principle of textual studies and adopting the judgment criterion of whether they are in violation of sociality, modernity, and objectivity of word meanings, this thesis selects some of the notes in the annotations on Analects where doubtful points exist for re-examination, analyses and argumentations in order to find out their realities. It is hoped that it will be instrumental to the reading and study of this Confucian classic on the basis ofsustainable development in the academic research into Analects.