1

The Multiple Meanings and Their Dialogue in Sanguo Zhi Tongsu Yanyi (The Romance

of the Three Kingdoms)1

By Jianyu Zhou

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Email: jyzhou@cuhk.edu.hk

This paper2 shall discuss how Sanguo zhi tongsu yanyi三國志通俗演義, through its narration

of various characters and events, creates opposing dialogues and contrasting ideologies,

therefore showing the multi-layered meanings and interactive open structure of this novel.

Two representative examples would be the dialogue between Yu Ji于吉 and Sun Ce孫策

and the dialogue between Zuo Ci左慈 and Cao Cao曹操. As we shall examine, these

dialogues possess the characteristics of “Dialogue Theory” as put forth by the Russian scholar

Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975).

1. The Dialogue between Sun Ce and Yu Ji

In chapter six of Sanguo zhi tongsu yan yi, in the part（ze則）“Angry Sun Ce slays the

immortal Yu孫策怒斬于神仙”, the story narrates that after Sun Ce had become lord over

1 This paper was presented to the 17

th Biennial Conference of the Asian Studies Association of Australia in

Melbourne 1-3 July 2008. It has been peer reviewed via a double blind referee process and appears on the Conference Proceedings Website by the permission of the author who retains copyright. This paper may be downloaded for fair use under the Copyright Act (1954), its later amendments and other relevant legislation. 2 The work described in this paper was fully supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. CUHK 4555/06H ). This paper is part of this project.

2

Jiang Dong江東 (the eastern part of the lower reaches of the Yangtze River), he “swore to

take Xu Chang, in order to welcome the Han emperor誓取許昌, 以迎漢帝”, and that he

“was determined to take the Central Plains, in order to manifest his heroism勢取中原, 以彰

英雄”.3 At this moment when Sun Ce was elaborating on his grandiloquent aspirations, the

novel arranges a quite dramatic conflict between him and a Taoist Yu Ji (who was called an

“immortal” by men at that time). This conflict is not seen in Chen Shou’s陳壽 historical

records Sanguo zhi三國志. This book merely mentions that Sun Ce killed Xu Gong許貢, the

Governor of Wu Commandery吳郡太守,4 and that his son and followers, hiding near a river,

took revenge by ambushing Sun Ce while he was riding alone, and that Sun Ce, suffering

heavy casualties, died as a result.5 However, Pei Songzhi’s裴松之 annotation quoting from

Jiangbiao zhuan江表傳, Zhilin志林, Soushen ji搜神記 etc., all record the conflict between

Yu Ji and Sun Ce in detail, each with a slightly different version.6 Luo Guanzhong’s羅貫中

Yanyi is largely based on Pei Songzhi’s annotation, with further modifications and expansion

as it is said:

While they were drinking, various generals suddenly started whispering to one another

and went downstairs. Sun Ce was puzzled at this and asked what was going on. His

attendants replied, “There is this immortal Yu Ji, who has just passed by downstairs.

Therefore all the generals went to worship him.” Sun Ce stood up and looked out,

leaning himself on the balcony. He saw a Taoist man, around 8 foot in height; his hair

and beard was grayish-white, his face was as red as a peach blossom, his body was

covered with “flying-cloud” crane feathers, his hand held a lamb’s-quarters walking stick

藜杖. He stood there in the middle of the road. From the high-ranking generals of Sun

3 Luo Guanzhong羅貫中, Sanguo zhi tongsu yanyi三國志通俗演義, the edition of Xuxiu siku quanshu續修四庫全書 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chuban she, 1995), vol.1789-1791, ch.6, p.54. 4 English translation of this official title is from Charles O. Hucker’s book, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985. p.200. 5 Chen Shou陳壽, Sanguo zhi三國志, with Pei Songzhi’s annotation (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1982), ch.46, p.1109. 6 Ibid., pp.1110-11.

3

Ce, to the lowly common men and women of the city, all lay face down on the ground,

burning incense and worshipping him焚香伏道拜之. Sun Ce cried out in anger, “This

evil man, bring him to me!” But his attendants told him, “This man is a hermit in the

East, he came to the city of Wu and lives in a Taoist temple outside the city. Every night

he meditates and everyday he burns incense and proclaims the Tao. He gives out blessed

water to the common people and cures their myriad diseases, not once was he not

effective. This generation of men call him an immortal, a blessed god of Jiang Dong.

Therefore, we should respect him.” Sun Ce cried out in anger, “Dare you defy my

orders?”, then he reached for his sword. His attendants, with no choice, went downstairs

and brought Yu Ji up to Sun Ce.7

One of the intentions of this episode obviously is to explain the reason for Sun Ce’s death.

Earlier, Sun Ce had hanged Xu Gong, the Governor of Wu Commandery. Xu’s family and

followers took revenge by injuring Sun’s forehead with a poisonous arrow. His doctor warned

him, “you may rest for a hundred days, refrain from reckless action. If your anger wells up,

the wound would be difficult to cure.”8 But Sun Ce did not listen to the doctor’s warning and

lost his temper recklessly, leading to “the metal wound’s rupture, and death unconscious.”9

Literally, this episode of the novel is to illustrate how fatal anger is to a hero. This idea is

often manifest in the Yanyi, for example in the narratives of Liu Bei, Guan Yu and Zhang Fei.

Nevertheless, from the above conflict, we can see two different, even opposing ideologies in

standoff, dialogue and conflict at the same time. As we have seen, Sun Ce “was determined to

take the Central Plains, in order to manifest his heroism”. In the novel, he is described as an

active participant of worldly affairs, a Ruist (儒家) hero who strove to attain honour and glory.

7 Ibid., ch.6, p.55. 8 Ibid., p.54. 9 Ibid., p.61.

4

The reason why he cannot tolerate Yu Ji is because in his ideology, Yu Ji “used black magic

妖術 to perplex people’s minds, leading to his generals’ failure to honor the li (the rite)

between a sovereign and his subjects君臣之禮.10 He was shocked and outraged by his

subjects’ submission to Yu Ji, “treating him as if he was their father and mother” and begging

Sun Ce to pardon him. He reprimanded, “You are all well educated, how can you not fulfill

rite (li)?”11 Here we can see Sun Ce and Yu Ji represent two different symbols, with the

former being a symbol of Ruist philosophy, characterized by attaining honor and

accomplishment. Sun Ce emphasizes that “education” should be for the purpose of attaining li,

and this li is the order and propriety between a sovereign and his subjects. This was Sun Ce’s

vision, and he used this to restrain and unite his subjects. Through military struggle for

supremacy in China, Sun Ce strove to end the chaos brought about by the corrupt warlords

and eunuchs, and to restore the li between a sovereign and his people. When he had killed Yu

Ji and was himself near death being disturbed by the spirit of Yu Ji, he still sighed, “how can I

attain honor and accomplishment now?”12

Contrary to Sun Ce, the latter Yu Ji represented the Taoist symbol, characterized by “burning

incense and proclaiming the truth, the Tao (焚香講道), and offering blessed water.”13 Yu Ji

claimed himself to be “a spokesman for God, and a saviour for the multitude”. The words and

deeds of Sun Ce and Yu Ji respectively represent two different ideologies: The Ruist

“education” and “attainment of li and order”, and the Taoist “burning of incense and

proclaiming of Tao”. These two ideologies are mutually independent, immiscible and

manifest their own value system separately. Viewing Yu Ji’s action as “black magic”, is Sun

Ce’s perspective from a Ruist heroic point of view, which opposes other ideologies. When

10 Ibid., p.56. 11 Ibid., pp.55-56. 12 Ibid., p.61. 13 Ibid., p.56.

5

Sun Ce chastised Yu Ji as “an evil man” who “perplexed the populace” and tried to kill him,

Yu Ji used his powers to pray for rain and ridiculed Sun Ce’s challenge against him. These

two character’s actions and words are mutually opposing and show that two different voices

and ideologies are competing tensely with one another in a standoff, therefore creating tension

in the novel’s narrative. On this point, just as Bakhtin says, “thought is a lively event

performed when two or more ideologies meet in dialogue”14 and this is what Bakhtin calls

the nature of dialogue, “the nature of thought is dialogic”.15 The dialogue between characters

is in fact dialogue between ideologies, that is the dialogic nature of thought. Sun Ce and Yu

Ji’s conflict manifests the different dialogic discourse between Ruist and Taoist philosophy.

There is yet one more characteristic of Bakhtin’s theory, that is the “incompleteness” of

ideological dialogue. This means that when two ideologies engage in dialogue, neither one is

absorbed by the other, nor as arranged by the author, one ideology overcomes or dissolves the

other. Bakhtin believes that concerning the use of words to express thought through dialogue,

“the only feasible form is through incomplete dialogue”,16 that is, the standoff and conflict

between two or more different ideologies ultimately does not follow what Hegel (1770-1831)

outlines as the dialectically logical process of dissolution, that is, through “positive, negative,

combination”.17 Neither side is dissolved by the other, and both stubbornly remain

independent and immiscible with each other.

This “incompleteness” of ideological dialogue can also be seen in the conclusion of the Sun

Ce and Yu Ji episode: When Sun Ce ordered his soldiers to “behead Yu Ji with one strike, a

14 Mikhail Bakhtin, Bahejin quanji巴赫金全集Chinese translation by Bai Chunren & Gu Yaling (Shijiazhuang: Hebei jiaoyu chuban she, 1998）, ch.5, pp.114-15. 15 Ibid., p.115. 16 Ibid., p.387. 17 Encyclopædia Britannica International Chinese Edition. Beijing: Zhongguo dabaike quanshu chubanshe, 2000.

vol.7, p.532.

6

blue mist appeared and drifted to the northeast”.18 This obviously implies that the spirit of Yu

Ji did not die. The humor of this episode is that although Sun Ce had “angrily slayed” Yu Ji,

he ultimately could not “slay” him. On the contrary, he himself lost his life: Yu Ji’s spirit kept

disturbing Sun Ce, leading to the rupture of his metal wound, and he died while

unconscious.19 The hidden meaning behind this narrative is profound: Although Yu Ji’s body

was killed by Sun Ce, this did not imply Sun Ce’s victory, because Sun Ce himself also died

because of him. Corporeally speaking, both were destroyed. Nevertheless, the ideology

represented by both characters remain separately independent, neither ideology succumbed to

the other and was dissolved by the other. Just as Bakhtin said, having the two ideologies

represented by both characters gives the novel a theoretical incompleteness (completeness

implies that only one ideological need is satisfied) and creates a strong expression of thought,

therefore strengthening the novel’s ideological complexity and lively multiplicity.20 The

ideologies of the characters possess an “unending, incomplete, and indefinite characteristic”.21

Both parties of the conflict ultimately cannot overcome the other, neither one can dissolve the

other. The ending of this episode is quite interesting, as it provides an open narrative structure

for readers. The narrator and the author behind this conflict was not biased towards any side

according to his own ideology, but merely presented both ideologies for readers. The ending

is one without a definite ending, an answer without a definite answer. On this point, just as

Bakhtin writes, “the protagonist cannot mix with the author, he cannot become the

mouthpiece of the author. Therefore there is still another term, that is for the protagonist’s

ideology and content to be truly objective, the novel’s protagonist and the author must remain

at a distance.”22 Bakhtin emphasizes again and again the importance of the author keeping a

distance from the characters in the novel. This is a key characteristic of the dialogic nature of

18 Sanguo zhi tongsu yanyi, ch.6, p.58. 19 Ibid., p.61-63. 20 Mikhail Bakhtin, Bahejin quanji, ch.5, p.116. 21 Ibid., p.69. 22 Ibid., p.67.

7

the novel.23

2. The Dialogue between Zuo Ci and Cao Cao

The dialogue between two ideologies can also be seen in the Yanyi chapter fourteen, the part

where “Zuo Ci throws down a cup in the Wei palace魏王宮左慈擲盃”. The story happens in

the twenty first year of Jian An, when Cao Cao was given the title of the Lord of Wei and the

Wei palace was built. Cao Cao orders Sun Quan孫權, the marquis侯 of Eastern Wu to fetch

him mandarins from Wenzhou. At that time, Sun Quan swore his alliance to the Lord of Wei

and ordered his men to choose forty dans擔24of large mandarins and sent them to Cao Cao’s

place, the Commandery of Ye鄴郡 with all speed day and night.25 But when “Cao Cao

himself sliced open the mandarins, there was only skin, but no flesh.”26 It turns out that the

mandarins had been tampered with on the way to Ye, and that the Taoist Zuo Ci had used his

powers to make them hollow. When Zuo Ci came to Ye and visited Cao Cao, he “took the

mandarins and sliced them open, all having flesh and with a great sweet taste. But when Cao

Cao sliced them open, all were hollow.”27 Then Zuo Ci advised Cao Cao, “Your majesty has

already attained the highest rank and honour in the country, why not retire and follow me into

the E Mei mountains to train and seek the true Tao?”28 Cao Cao refused Zuo Ci’s advice and

used all sorts of torture on him, intending to kill him. But Zuo Ci was not only unharmed, but

even used his powers to make fun of Cao Cao, leading to Cao Cao’s illness and eventual

death without remedy.

This conflict between Zuo Ci and Cao Cao is neither recorded in the Sanguo zhi pinghua三國

志評話, nor in official history. The Houhan shu fangshu liezhuan後漢書．方術列傳records 23 Ibid., pp.4-5, 67, 74, 84, 110, 130. 24 One dan is a carrying pole and the load on it. 25 Sanguo zhi tongsu yanyi, ch.14, p.44. 26 Ibid.. 27 Ibid.. 28 Ibid..

8

that Zuo Ci had special powers since youth and once sat with Cao Cao. He also used his

powers to fish a perch鱸魚 out of an empty plate, and instantly collected fresh ginger from

central Shu a thousand li afar.29 Pei Songzhi’s annotation of the Sanguo zhi in its chapter of

Emperor Wu三國志．魏書．武帝紀 quotes from Zhang Hua’s book Bowu zhi博物志that Cao

Cao gathered certain people with special powers and among them were Zuo Ci and Hua Tuo

華佗.30 Pei Songzhi’s annotation of the Sanguo zhi weishu fangji zhuan三國志．魏書．方技

傳also quotes the Eastern Lord (Cao Zhi)’s東阿王曹植 article Biandao lun辯道論 (on

debating truth), where Zuo Ci is mentioned to be “skilled in Taoist sexual techniques善修房

內之術”. There is also chapter one of Soushen ji搜神記which brings up Zuo Ci, and is similar

to the narrative found in the Houhan shu fangshu liezhuan.31 However, none of these

documents record Zuo Ci’s advice for Cao Cao to retire and the incident of hollow mandarins.

More importantly, the Yanyi changed the narrative of the Sanguo zhi where Cao Cao had

already attracted Zuo Ci as one of his followers and set them in opposition from the start with

the incident of “hollow mandarins”, therefore providing the necessary background for

dialogue between the two sides.

Firstly, the interactive relationship between Zuo Ci and Cao Cao represents a dialogue

between two opposing ideologies. Cao Cao’s ordination of the Lord of Wei is the pinnacle

event of his life achievement as a stateman. As he himself had said, “I have roamed the world

for forty years and from the emperor to the commoner, no one has not feared me.”32 Cao Cao

is quite delighted with his achievements, and considers himself a success, often referring to

himself as the historical King Wen of Zhou周文王.33 However, the achievement and glory

that Cao Cao had strove to attain throughout his life is questioned and challenged by Zuo Ci.

29 Fan Ye范曄, Houhan shu後漢書, annotated by Li Xian etc. (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1982 ), ch.82, p.2747. 30 Chen Shou, Sanguo zhi, ch.1, p.54. Similar records can be also found in the same book, ch.29, p.805. 31 Gan Bao干寶, Soushen ji搜神記 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985), ch.1, pp.9-10. 32 Sanguo zhi tongsu yanyi, ch.16, p.35. 33 Ibid., p.40.

9

As noted before, in Zuo Ci’s eyes, these so-called achievements and glory are nothing more

than “superficial skins adorned with gold and jade”金玉其表but hollow from within. What

Zuo Ci calls for as the meaning of life, is exactly what he is doing: “learning the Tao deep

within the E Mei mountains of Xi Chuan Jia Ling於西川嘉陵峨嵋山中學道”34 and training

to acquire the powers of “Heavenly Dun天遁”, “Earthly Dun地遁” and “Humanly Dun人

遁”.35 What Zuo Ci and Cao Cao represent are totally different ideologies. Cao Cao, just like

Sun Ce as mentioned before, represent the ideology of the pursuit of wealth, power and glory,

and view this as the self-actualization of life. Whereas Zuo Ci is similar to Yu Ji. Using the

parable of the hollow mandarins, he disapproves of Cao Cao’s ideology of the pursuit of

power and glory, and at the same time tries to warn those who have similar ideals like Cao

Cao. He urges Cao Cao to give up his power and status and follow him to train amidst the E

Mei mountains. The debate surrounding whether Cao Cao should give up his status and retire

into the mountains is not only relevant to the destiny of Cao Cao himself, but also represents

the dialogue between two different ideologies, and this dialogue therefore has its universality,

representing the clash between two different schools of thought in the turbulent Three

Kingdoms era. Just as Bahktin said, “the thought itself does not belong to anyone. The

protagonist is merely the vehicle of the thought’s self-realization.”36

Secondly, just like Yu Ji and Sun Ce’s dialogue, the dialogue between Zuo Ci and Cao Cao is

also, “interminable, incompletable, and indefinite”.37 Concerning the end of this dialogue, the

narrator used this line of poetry to sum it up, “Zuo Ci uses his magic to enlighten Cao Man,

34 Ibid., p.45. 35 Ibid., p.46. Here Zuo Ci asserts that he acquired the Heavenly Book titled Dunjia tianshu遁甲天書which consists of three chapters. The subtitles of these three chapters are “Heavenly Dun天遁”, “Earthly Dun地遁” and “Humanly Dun人遁” respectively. The power of “Heavenly Dun” enables one to mount the clouds, to ride the winds, and to fly up to the universe騰雲駕風, 飛升太墟, the power of “Earthly Dun” enables one to pass through mountains穿山透石, and the power of “Humanly Dun” enables one to roam the whole world, to behead others by throwing sword, and to hide or change ones body雲游四海, 飛劍擲刀, 取人首級, 藏形變身. 36 Mikhail Bakhtin, Bahejin quanji, ch.5, p.103. 37 Ibid., p.69.

10

but his head does not turn左慈施設神仙術, 點悟曹瞞不點頭.”38 This shows that the

dialogue between Zuo Ci and Cao Cao did not reach an ideological consensus, but rather that

both went different ways and remained independent and immiscible. Cao Cao wanted to kill

Zuo Ci, but did not succeed. Neither Cao Cao nor Zuo Ci were able to persuade the other. In

the clash of ideologies represented by the two characters, both remained independent of each

other. Theoretically speaking, this dialogic “incompleteness” creates an open structure for the

novel which does not progress towards harmony or unity, but forms an unstable state and

indefiniteness. And it is exactly this ambiguity and indefiniteness which creates the tension of

the novel. The conflict between Zuo Ci and Cao Cao, just like the conflict between Yu Ji and

Sun Ce, is a colorfully rendered episode throughout the whole novel, and is a dramatic

chapter for readers.

3. The significance of the two dialogues

As mentioned above, Yu Ji, Sun Ce, Zuo Ci and Cao Cao represent different ideologies. The

interaction between these characters is not only the reaction of different religious realities, but

is related to the manifestations of different ideologies and their dialogues. This combinatory

arrangement of the novel is in fact a dual opposition, rejecting a linear narrative structure.

This arrangement is also very profound, as it (1) allows us to experience the tension between

two competing ideologies. (2) allows us to observe the “tragic flaw” of Sun Ce and Cao Cao:

their blind spot made them fail to take the advice of the two Taoists with ease. They were

unable to remain calm and open to the ideological challenges presented to them. Their blind

spot was that while they were immersed in their pursuit for honor and glory, they were not

able to adopt a balanced attitude in viewing the world. Their stubbornness for honor and glory

dictated that they could not recognize the stance that Yu Ji and Zuo Ci represented.

Nevertheless, they eventually had to face the challenge of this stance, and ultimately face the

38 Sanguo zhi tongsu yanyi, ch.14, p.50.

11

conclusion of their own glory. From these two combinations, we see two symbolic systems

which exist side by side yet at the same time contradict each other and deconstruct each other

in dialogic form with an ensemble of various voices. Two different societal discourses

combined into one discourse is also a defining characteristic of the novel’s dialogic

multiplicity.

In conclusion, from the conflict between Sun Ce and Yu Ji, Zuo Ci and Cao Cao, we can see

that different ideologies are present in the Yanyi. Through their opposing and interactive

dialogue, the multiple meanings of the Yanyi are manifest. The immiscibility and

indissolubility of different ideologies effectively create an open structure for the Yanyi and

presents a richer content for the novel.