Chapter IV · The Vessels · Section 5: At a contemporary tea table — reading “其火用炭次用劲薪其炭曾经燔炙为膻腻所及及膏木”

Photo: Wikimedia Commons · CC0

Thesis

“其火用炭次用劲薪其炭曾经燔炙为膻腻所及及膏木” still has operational value at a contemporary tea table, provided Tang conditions are not silently universalised.

Text

“For the fire, charcoal is best, and sturdy firewood next. Charcoal that has been used for roasting, stained with fat and rankness, as well as resinous wood and rotten utensils, must not be used.”

Context

劲薪：耐烧的柴。燔炙（fán zhì）：烧烤过。膻腻：腥膻油腻。膏木：有油脂的松柏等木。败器：腐朽的器物。

Evidence

• Collation: 各本一致。吴觉农注：此句讲燃料选择，“膏木”"败器"皆能产生异味与烟气，破坏茶香。
• Existing readings: 吴觉农评此句为"燃料学"：炭火无烟无味最宜煮茶，沾油之炭与松柏膏木皆会串味——陆羽对火候细节的讲究，尽显茶道"洁净"之美。

Analysis

To repeat this section today is not to copy a Tang utensil list. It is to keep its order of judgment: leaf first, then water and fire, then the table.

Conclusion

The section does not give a universal rule. It demonstrates a method: read the text, the annotation and the Tang context together before making a modern claim.

Source: The Classic of Tea, Chapter IV · The Vessels, section 5; the original is in the public domain.

As a new reader, I first took “其火用炭次用劲薪其炭曾经燔炙为膻腻所及及膏木” as a conclusion. Reading the annotation to section 5 again, it is clearly a judgment with conditions attached.

Textually, 各本一致。吴觉农注：此句讲燃料选择，“膏木”"败器"皆能产生异味与烟气，破坏茶香。. The point is that “the original” is not a single stable text; name the edition before making a strong claim.

The vessel is not background. 劲薪：耐烧的柴。燔炙（fán zhì）：烧烤过。膻腻：腥膻油腻。膏木：有油脂的松柏等木。败器：腐朽的器物。 The same leaf in a different bowl, grinder or sieve changes aroma and texture; vessel and tea are defined together.