A FEW THINGS COMBINED TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE CONCLUSION OF POT NO:249……………………………….

The scholars and experts say Chen Ming Yuan is acknowledged as possibly the finest of the Qing Yixing Potters. We can agree with this statement.

The scholars and experts also say Chen Ming’s works included not only pieces of utilitarian usage, but many whimsical pieces of naturalistic and archaic inspiration, including figures of snails, mushrooms, beans, peppers, bamboo shoots and one of his best works, peanuts. His teapots exhibit his amazing artistic range from the very plain to the very detailed depictions of tree sections often with attached animal figures. This we cannot agree and have proofs it is nonsensical to claim Chen Ming Yuan made so, so many shapes and styles of Pots, not to mention there are more than a hundred Chen Ming Yuan Pots in the museums and hundreds of Chen Ming Yuan Pots in the market. It is not possible for two reasons: one is Chen Ming Yuan’s short working lifespan and second Ren Fu Collection’s archaeological proofs of Chen Ming Yuan do not support such wild and far-fetching imaginations or guess works by the scholars or writers or experts.

Lastly but not the least, the scholars and experts say the dates of Chen Ming Yuan’s working period are not firmly established. It is believed that he was first listed in the Yixing County Gazetteer in the year 1686, the 25th Year of Kangxi’s Reign, where he was listed in spite of his “relatively young age”. This, with a slight correction, we can agree but more than agree, in that we can prove Chen Ming Yuan’s birth and death periods within scientific and archaeological parameters.

Some experts claim Chen Ming Yuan was a Kangxi to Yongzheng Potter and some experts claim Chen Ming Yuan made Pots in Early Kangxi. How they come to these conclusions we do not know because these are usually guess works which is a prevalent weakness in the Old Zisha Hu eco-system suffering an extreme lack of archaeological materials or facts.(before Ren Fu Collection appeared).

Ren Fu Collection has a policy of dating an excavated Pot. If we have overwhelming proofs of the date, we will exact-date the Pot like for example take the Qian Long 8th Year Reign Meng Chen Zhuni Pots and Qian Long 13rd Year Reign Meng Chen Zhuni Hus, if the Pot has no obvious or 100% date indicator, then we used our vast experience and knowledge of Pots to date the Pot like for example the Ball-shaped Zhuni Pots, Low Lantern-shaped Zhuni Pots or the Pear-shaped Zhuni Pots, to give a few examples, which we are very, very knowledgeable in but if the Pot is extremely rare or the rarest “only one” and our knowledge and experience fail us, then we will play safe and not risk our reputation of “Honesty and Truth” by dating the Pot from the date or Niande the original owner died which was engraved or inscribed on the gravestone/tombstone epitaph or if failing that, no epitaph, using our vast experience and knowledge of Pre-Daoguang graves/tombs and the artefacts found in the grave/tomb to date the Pot like for example take the Pot No:50 which some experts claim is a real Late Ming Shi DaBin but we safely date the Pot as Shunzhi because we have proofs the original owner died at least Shunzhi or earlier. In this way, nobody can accuse Ren Fu Collection of lying, deceiving or misleading them. Telling the truth and honesty is a hall-mark Ren Fu Collection. People can call Ren Fu Collection tomb raiders, thieves, robbers or hate us by calling Ren Fu Collection all kinds of dirty, bad names under the Sun but as long as the good, honest people know Ren Fu Collection is honest and truthful, we can live with the verbal abuses thrown at Ren Fu Collection by all the thousands of organized fraudsters, small-time fraudsters selling Fake Pots in the market.

Ren Fu Collection needs this heroic name of “Bravery, Honesty and Truthfulness” in order to save Old Zisha Hu. This hall mark name of Ren Fu Collection is like the Great Wall of China. It is our Great Wall and we must protect it to use it to fight organized fraudsters, small-time fraudsters, Fake Pots and Fake facts in order to save Old Zisha Hu.

Yes, Ladies and Gentlemen, Ren Fu Collection’s name is hard-earned and we must protect it because only when good, honest people trust Ren Fu Collection half our battle is won and the rest is to seek out the organized fraudsters and small-time fraudsters’ Fake Pots and display them in Ren Fu Collection’s Black-List of Fake Purple-Sand Clay Teapots in its new website. Time is on Ren Fu Collection’s side and the organized fraudsters can run but they cannot hide their Fake Pots.

Examples of our hard earned good name that people trust is the fact that Ren Fu Collection will not simply without any archaeological proof claim any of its Pot is a real Old Famous Potter’s or Old Master Potter’s unlike many dubious Pots in books, private collections and even museums that claimed to be Old Famous Potter’s or Old Master Potter’s without any tiny shred of archaeological proofs except the guessworks or worst Fake Pots that were converted into Old Pots in “ Conversion Books” written by corrupted and fraudulent scholars like for example Huang Qian Liang and his wife Huang I Jia and PengQingFu.

Ren Fu Collection has quite a lot of top grade Pan-Hus, top grade SiTing Hus, top grade HuiYiGong Pots, top grade Chen Ming Yuan Pots, top grade HuiMeng Chen and even top grade Shi DaBin Pots but we do not and cannot simply claim those are Old Famous Potters’ or Old Master Potters’. For example not many people know Ren Fu Collection has nine Pan-Hus and Ren Fu Collection only recognized one of them as the genuine Pan-Hu and the rest 8 of them Ren Fu Collection do not recognized as the real Pan-Hus because Ren Fu Collection’s archaeological proofs do not allow us to simply make claims as when and where we want. So for the sake of Ren Fu Collection’s good and trusted name, and in the name of truth we have to “killed” the 8 Pan-Hus and which we could easily claim are real Pan-Hus.

Similarly, for Pot No :249 which is the only Pot Ren Fu Collection can claim with utmost confidence that the Pot is a real Chen Ming Yuan because of a few archaeological proofs:

Tomb of husband and grave of wife: Tomb from which Pot No:248 was excavated had a tombstone epitaph stating death of man owner surname Zheng in the 28th Year Reign of Emperor Kangxi but grave from which Pot No:249 was excavated did not have a gravestone epitaph was a disintegrated and collapsed grave indicating the wife died earlier. How early? From our vast experience and knowledge, at least 6 years earlier by conservative estimate or 10 years earlier is not unreasonable estimate. And do not forget during the Transition Period of Late Chongzhen to Shunzhi, Early Kangxi deceased Han Chinese had no gravestone/tombstone epitaphs on their graves or tombs as a sign of Han protest against Manchu rule. Furthermore the Pot:249 looks used when excavated, so considering the Pot was used for how long and then being transported to the Nanyang, which both took a lot of time, we calculate the Pot No:249 was made in Early Kangxi between Kangxi 10th Year Reign and Kangxi 16th Year Reign which is the latest using mathematical calculation based on our vast experience and knowledge of excavating thousands of graves/tombs making the Pot No:249 very likely one of the earliest Pots Chen Ming Yuan ever made.( the good condition of the Pot indicated the Chen Ming Yuan Pot was used sparingly ,maybe as a status symbol to impress guests,etc..)
John Ng’s ingenious Theory of the Evolution of the Shi DaBin High Lantern-shaped Zisha Hu mentions the Tianqi 7th Year Reign HuiMeng Chen High Lantern-shaped Pot in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London and Ren Fu Collection’s Pot No:249( Chen Ming Yuan High Lantern-shaped Pot) among others indicated an interesting correlation between the two Old Master Potters, namely HuiMeng Chen and Chen Ming Yuan, who both copied Shi DaBin’s High Lantern-shaped Pot. Now if we take Kangxi 10 th Year Reign which the Pot No 249 was made, then the Pot will no doubt be a real Chen Ming Yuan by using the Time Lapse Method between being an unknown and Fame which say nobody would copy an unknown Chen Ming Yuan when he made his earliest Pots. But for check and balances, let’s say we take Kangxi 18th Year Reign which means Chen Ming Yuan was still a young unknown Potter and if you look at Pot No:249 which if you remember we stated that it is believed that Chen Ming Yuan was first listed in the Yixing County Gazetteer in the year 1686(the 25th Year of Kangxi Reign) where Chen Ming Yuan was listed in spite of his “relatively young age”…….and of course to be more scientific and sensible if we apply John Ng’s Theory of the Evolution of the Shi DaBin High Lantern-shaped Pot on Chen Ming Yuan’s High Lantern-shaped Pot(Pot No:249) which he made when he was very young and unknown which coincidently HuiMeng Chen also made a High Lantern-shaped Pot in Tianqi 7th Year Reign when he was very young( proven by Ren Fu Collection’s Pot No:387 and Zhou GaoQi). In fact little do people know John Ng’s “brilliant but uncanny” Theory of the Evolution of the Shi DaBin High Lantern-shaped Zisha Hu is a masterpiece of the perception of Art through the timelines of history which somehow intellectually dictates the form, shape and style of Pot for aspiring Potters to copy Old Master Potters as if a pre-condition was set foray Potter who wants to achieve fame. In fact, not just in HuiMeng Chen and Chen Ming Yuan’s works, the evolution of Shi DaBin’s High Lantern-shaped Pot is found and witnessed in HuiYiGong’s works, Shao DaHern’s works and even the contemporary works of Gu Zing Zhou.
And if we take a magnifying glass and analyze Pot No:249, you could go back in time and imagine a young unknown Potter making a Pot. Lacking confidence like all new Potters, the new Potter signed his name in two big words Ming Yuan which indicated a young unknown Potter wanting to make his name felt and heard loudly. Chen Ming Yuan then took inspiration from Shi DaBin which at that time was still the biggest name in Potting even though Chen Ming Yuan is Early Kangxi and copied Shi DaBin’s High Lantern-shaped Pot which was made in Wanli 35th Year Reign(1607). And later of course he became famous and as a confident, more matured Potter he made many, many Pots of his own creation.

There is something very special and powerful about Ren Fu Collection because of its thousands of teapots and tea wares from which we found in its first One Thousand Pots(1190: 705 Zisha Hus and 485 SantohZhuni Hus) nine(9) top grade Chen Ming Yuan Pots from Early Kangxi to Yongzheng to Qian Long period. Only the Early Kangxi we can prove is the real Chen Ming Yuan Pot and the rest, eight, we believe are Old Copies. Now we read in books and on-line discourses that some scholars and experts believe Chen Ming Yuan was active in Early Kangxi and Ren Fu Collection’s Pot No:249 proves they are correct. But we also learned that all the scholars and experts do not know when Chen Ming Yuan started Potting and when he stopped Potting. We can help here using the Time Lapse between an Unknown and Fame which according to Ren Fu Collection’s excavated Chen Ming Yuan Pots it is very simple, unlike HuiMeng Chen’s discovery which needed a lot of archaeological proofs and other reliable sources of proofs, Chen Ming Yuan we know was very active in Early Kangxi and with Ren Fu Collection’s huge archaeological materials and records and our vast experience and knowledge in Pre-Daoguang Pots, we can confirmed its correct and more what the Yixing County Gazetteer said of the young Potter Chen Ming Yuan or rather Chen Ming Yuan became well-known or famous in the 25th Year of Kangxi Reign1686 by appearing in the Yixing Gazetteer. Chen Ming Yuan copies started appearing in Yongzheng and Qian Long. Chen Ming Yuan must be born in Shunzhi because by the time he made Ren Fu Collection’s Pot No:249 and appeared in the Yixing County Gazetteer, Chen Ming Yuan was a young man of age between 20 and 30 years old

And when Chen Ming Yuan copied Shi DaBin High Lantern-shaped Pot, which is Ren Fu Collection’s earliest Chen Ming Yuan Pot No:249, in his early age going by John Ng’s Theory of the Evolution of the Shi DaBin High Lantern-shaped Pot, it was meant to be a compliment and respect for Shi DaBin, just like HuiMeng Chen’s High Lantern-shaped Pot, but sometimes Potters copied Old Master Potter’s Zisha Hus not for these lofty reasons but for fraudulent reason of greed. The next and final part tells you how organized fraudsters made hundreds of Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots and successfully “sneaked” most of these Forgeries into museums and reputable private collections. Before we embark on the next story, please note that we live in a Zisha Hu world where everything is honest, truthful and correct whereas you all live in a Zisha Hu world where most facts and Pots are fakes and stories incorrect.

几件事情相结合，可以提供壶号249 陈鸣远的准确结论…………

学者和专家说，陈鸣远被公认为可能是清代宜兴陶艺中最好的，我们可以同意这个说法。

学者和专家还表示，陈鸣远的作品不仅包括功利用途的作品，还包括许多异想天开的自然主义和古老的灵感，包括蜗牛、蘑菇、豆类、辣椒、竹笋和他最好的作品之一花生的形象。他的茶壶展示了他惊人的艺术范围，从非常朴素的到非常详细的树木部分描绘，通常附有动物形象。这一点我们不能同意，也有证据说陈鸣远如此制作，这么多造型和款式的壶是荒谬的，更何况博物馆里有一百多个陈鸣远壶和数百件陈鸣远壶。市场不可能的原因有二：一是陈鸣远的工作寿命较短，二是任富收藏的陈鸣远的考古证据不支持学者、作家或专家如此狂野而牵强的想象或猜测。

最后但并非最不重要的一点是，学者和专家表示，陈鸣远的工作时间并不确定。相传于1686年康熙二十五年（1686年）首次列入《宜兴县志》，尽管他“年纪尚小”，但仍被列入《宜兴县志》。这一点，稍加修正，我们可以同意但不仅仅是同意，因为我们可以在科学和考古参数范围内证明陈鸣远的出生和死亡时期。

有专家称陈鸣远是康熙至雍正的陶器，也有专家称陈鸣远是康熙初制陶器。他们是如何得出这些结论的，我们不得而知，因为这些通常都是猜测性的，这是古代紫砂壶生态系统中普遍存在的一个缺陷，考古材料或事实极度缺乏。（在任富藏品出现之前）。

任富收藏有一项与出土壶年代的政策。如果我们有压倒性的年代证明，我们将准确标注壶的年代，例如乾隆八年孟臣朱泥壶和乾隆十三年孟臣朱泥壶，如果壶没有明显的或100%日期指示器，然后我们利用我们对壶的丰富经验和知识来确定壶的年代，例如球形朱泥壶、低灯笼形朱泥壶或梨形朱泥壶，举几个例子，我们是非常，非常了解，但如果壶极其稀有或最稀有的“唯一”，并且我们的知识和经验让我们失望，那么我们将安全行事，不会通过从年代看壶来假冒“诚实和真实”的声誉或年代的主人去世，在墓碑上雕刻或铭刻，如果没有，则没有墓志铭，利用我们对道光前墓中发现的文物的丰富经验和知识以壶号50 为例的壶专家声称是真正的晚明时大彬，但我们可以放心地将壶定为清顺治时期，因为我们有证据证明原主人至少在顺治或更早的时候就已经去世了。这样，谁也不能指责任富藏说谎、欺骗或误导他们。说实话和诚实是任富收藏的标志。人们可以称任富收藏盗墓贼、盗贼、强盗或憎恨我们，称任富收藏为天底下各种肮脏、坏的名字，但只要善良、诚实的人知道任富收藏是诚实和真实的，我们就可以忍受成千上万有组织的骗子，在市场上销售假壶的小骗子在任富收藏中的谩骂。

任富收藏需要这个“勇敢、诚实、事实”的英雄名号，才能拯救老紫砂壶。任富收藏的这个名称就像中国的长城。它是我们的长城，我们必须保护它，用它来打击有组织的骗子、小骗子、假老壶和假事实，以拯救老紫砂壶。

是的，女士们，先生们，任富收藏的名字来之不易，我们必须保护它，因为只有善良诚实的人信任任富收藏，我们的战斗就赢了一半，剩下的就是找出有组织的骗子和小骗子，假壶并在其新网站的任富收藏的假老紫砂壶黑名单中展示。时间站在任富收藏这一边，有组织的骗子可以逃跑，但他们无法隐藏他们的假老壶。

人们信任我们来之不易的好名誉的例子是，任富藏品不会简单地在没有任何考古证据的情况下声称它的任何陶罐是真正的老著名陶艺家或陶艺大师的，与书籍、私人收藏甚至是许多可疑的陶罐不同。声称是老陶艺大师的博物馆，但没有任何除了黄健亮和他的妻子黄怡嘉和彭清福等腐败和欺诈的学者撰写的“转换书”中的猜测或最坏的假壶被转换成旧壶外，几乎没有任何考古证据。

任富收藏有不少上等潘壶、上等思亭壶、上等惠逸公壶、上等的惠孟臣，甚至上等的时大彬朱泥壶作品，但我们没有也不能只需声称那些是著名的老陶艺家或老陶艺大师。例如，没有多少人知道任富收藏有九个潘壶，任富收藏只认出其中一个是真正的潘壶，其余8个都不认得是真正的潘壶，因为任富收藏的考古证据不允许我们简单地根据我们想要的时间和地点做出声明。所以，为了任富收藏的好名声，为了真理，我们必须“杀死”8个潘壶，我们可以轻松地声称他们是真正的潘壶。

同样地，对于壶号：249，这是任富收藏唯一一把壶，可以非常自信地声称这壶是真正的陈鸣远真迹，因为一些考古证据：

1）丈夫墓和妻子墓：出土248号壶的墓有康熙二十八年郑姓男主之死的墓志铭，但出土249号壶的墓没有有一个墓碑墓志铭是一个瓦解和倒塌的坟墓，表明妻子较早去世。有多早？根据我们丰富的经验和知识，保守估计至少提前 6 年或提前 10 年都不是不合理的估计。不要忘记在明崇祯晚期到清顺治的过渡时期，康熙早期的汉人在他们的坟墓或墓葬上没有墓碑/墓碑墓志铭，作为汉族抗议满族统治的标志。此外，249号壶出土时看起来还用过，所以考虑到用了多久，然后运到南洋，都花了很多时间，我们推算出249号壶是康熙10年间制作的康熙初年和康熙十六年这是最新的使用数学计算基于我们挖掘数千个坟墓的丰富经验和知识，使第 249 号壶很可能是陈鸣远制作的最早的壶之一。（好壶的状况表明陈鸣远壶很少使用，可能作为身份象征来打动客人等。）

2) 老手John Ng的《时大彬紫砂壶演化论》中提到了天启七年惠孟臣高灯壶，伦敦维多利亚和阿尔伯特博物馆和任富收藏的壶号：249（陈鸣远高灯壶）等表明了两位陶艺大师惠孟臣和陈鸣远之间的有趣关联，他们都复制了时大彬的高灯壶。现在如果拿康熙十年制作的249号壶来说，那么这个壶无疑是一个真正的陈鸣远，通过在无名和成名之间使用延时方法，即没有人会复制一个无名的陈鸣远初始制作陶罐。但是为了制衡，假设我们取康熙十八年，这意味着陈鸣远仍然是一个年轻的不知名的陶艺家，如果你看看第 249 号壶，如果你记得我们说过，相信陈鸣远是第一个1686年（康熙二十五年）的《宜兴县志》，陈鸣远虽然“年纪比较小”，但还是被列入了……当然，如果用JOHN NG的说法，就更科学、更明智了陈鸣远年少不为人知的高灯笼壶（壶号：249）上时大彬高灯笼的演变理论年幼时的天启七年壶（任富收藏《壶号：387》和周高启为证）。事实上，很少有人知道John Ng的《时大彬高灯紫砂壶演化论》是一部通过历史时间轴感知艺术的杰作，它以某种方式理智地决定了壶的形式、形状和风格。为有抱负的陶艺大师复制老陶艺大师，好像一个先决条件是为想要成名的陶艺家设定的。事实上，不仅在惠孟臣和陈鸣远的作品中，在惠逸公的作品、邵大亨的作品，甚至顾景舟的当代作品中，都发现并见证了时大彬高灯笼壶的演变。

3) 如果我们拿放大镜分析壶号249，你可以回到过去，想象一个年轻的不知名的 Potter 正在制作一把壶。像所有新陶艺家一样缺乏自信，新陶艺家用两个大字“鸣远”签下了自己的名字，表示一个年轻的不知名的陶艺家想要让自己的名字响亮地被感知和听到。陈鸣远从当时虽为康熙初年的时大彬身上汲取灵感，仿制万历三十五年（1607年）制作的时大彬高灯笼壶。当然，后来他成名了，作为一个自信、更成熟的陶艺家，他自己创造了很多很多壶样式。

任富收藏有一些非常特别和强大的东西，因为它有成千上万的茶壶和茶具，我们在它的第一个千壶（1190：705紫砂壶和485个汕头朱泥壶）九个上品陈鸣远中发现康熙初至雍正至乾隆时期的壶。只有康熙初我们可以证明是真正的陈鸣远壶，其余八件，我们相信是老仿品。现在我们在书籍和网络上看到一些学者和专家认为陈鸣远活跃于康熙初年，任富收藏壶号：249证明他们是正确的。但是我们也了解到，所有的学者和专家都不知道陈鸣远是什么时候开始做壶，什么时候停止做壶的。我们可以在这里帮助使用未知与成名之间的时间流逝，根据任富藏品出土的陈鸣远朱泥壶，它非常简单，不像陈鸣远的发现需要大量考古证据和其他可靠的证据来源，陈鸣远我们所知道的在康熙初年非常活跃，以任富收藏的大量考古资料和记录，以及我们在道光前陶器方面的丰富经验和知识，可以证实它的正确性，更多的是《宜兴县志》对年轻的陶艺家陈鸣远所说的元或陈明元在康熙二十五年1686年因登上宜兴地名而声名鹊起。雍正、乾隆开始出现陈鸣远款的老仿壶。陈鸣远一定是顺治出生的，因为当他制作“任富珍藏第249号壶”，出现在《宜兴县志》的时候，陈鸣远已经是一个20到30岁的年轻人了。

而当陈鸣远早年仿制时大彬高灯笼壶，即任富藏品最早的陈鸣远壶号249，早年根据John Ng的《时大彬高灯笼壶演化论》，本来是对时大彬的恭维和尊重，就像惠孟臣的高灯笼壶一样，但有时陶艺家抄袭老陶艺家的紫砂壶不是出于这些崇高的理由，而是出于贪婪的欺诈目的。下一部分也是最后一部分将告诉您有组织的骗子如何制作数百个假陈鸣远壶，并成功地将这些赝品中的大部分“潜入”博物馆和有信誉的私人收藏。在我们开始下一个故事之前，请注意我们生活在一个一切都是诚实、真实和正确的老紫砂壶世界，而你们都生活在一个大多数事实和壶都是假的、故事不正确的老紫砂壶世界。

THE MOTHERS OF ALL WAVES OF FORGERIES:A CASE STUDY OF FAKE CHEN MING YUAN POTS, THE MOTHERS OF ALL FORGERIES INCLUDING A SHOCKING REPLY FROM A RENOWN SCHOLAR………………………………

The curator of the Hong Kong Museum, Li Shu Yi, said in 2007 in the book titled, “

2007 Nianzishayantaohuilunwenji”,(page161) :The over a hundred Chen Ming Yuan Pots exhibited by the few museums, I do not know which are the real Chen Ming Yuan Pots and which are Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots. And the curator also said, “ We have seven archaeologically excavated Shi DaBin Pots but not one archaeologically excavated Chen Ming Yuan Pot”.

Now we know what you all are going to say!: one, why bother to hold exhibition when you do not know whether the Chen Ming Yuan Pots are genuine or Fakes because people are going to learn the wrong things and be confused. The second is, if there are so many Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots in the museums, can you imagined the Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots in the market?

And now these are some comments from people who saw the exhibition of Chen Ming Yuan Pots most of which they think are Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots: “The exhibition looked like a flea market”. Another commented,” No, it’s not a flea market, it’s worst because the flea market does not have so many Fake Pots”. But a serious, no-nonsense Taiwanese friend commented, “ Ren Fu Collection should authenticate all the hundred over Chen Ming Yuan Pots to see which are real Chen Ming Yuan Pots because they know what are genuine Chen Ming Yuan Pots”.

Thank you, but to be fair at least the woman curator of the Hong Kong Museum, Li Shu Yi, is honest and truthful unlike the corrupted and dishonest scholars like for example Huang Qian Liang who would write Fake preview or Fake stories about a Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pot for a handsome financial reward especially in an auction. In fact almost all are Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots we heard honest experts say though we have not been given the opportunity to view the exhibition.

Now firstly one reason all of us know why by now-why there are so, so many Fake Pots in the market and that Old Zisha Hu cannot be scientifically dated or authenticated.

Secondly, because Old Zisha Hus cannot be scientifically authenticated, to learn to see Old Zisha Hus or spot a Fake Chen Ming Yuan for that matter, you need a lot of archaeologically excavated Pots to provide benchmarks and as for the hundred over Chen Ming Yuan Pots in the exhibition mentioned that some experts claim hardly one is a genuine Chen Ming Yuan Pot, the Pots in the exhibition was held before Ren Fu Collection appeared on the scene.

Now another thing about the crazy exhibition that should not have taken place because it confused people more than it taught people, in fact truth be told it taught people all the wrong things about Chen Ming Yuan’s Pots because almost all the Pots are Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots. Yes, do you know the crazy Pots in the exhibition have crazy shapes, styles and forms from all kinds of whimsical Potting? And yes, you said it: how can Chen Ming Yuan make so many hundred over Pots in his short active Potting life?( not to mention there are hundreds more Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots in the market). Do you know for a Potter to make different shapes, different styles or forms of Pots, he/she needs time and energy and inspiration to even conceive a new idea? Look at the seven archaeologically excavated Shi DaBin Pots found in mainland China? Shi DaBin could only do a few shapes and styles even though Shi DaBin was known for creativity.( you cannot study the lots and lots of Shi DaBin Pots with many, many different shapes and styles in the market because they are not proven genuine). Making different shapes and styles of Pots was so tedious and painstaking that Old Famous Potters like SiTing or Junde or Liu Pei Suan or Pan-Hu chose to make just one shape and one style of Pots.

Therefore even a child can understand that it is not possible for Chen Ming Yuan during Early Kangxi to make so, so many types and fashions of Pots that are contained in the exhibition mentioned or even impossible for the hundreds of Chen Ming Yuan Pots found in the market. Now we were told from books mostly that the monks at Jinshe Temple during Zhengde’s reign were the first to make Zisha Pots followed by Gong Chun and then Shi DaBin and others to HuiMeng Chen and to Chen Ming Yuan and so on until today. Today as you can imagined Yixing Potters have thousands of shapes and styles of Pots to copy from or to create their own in their limited working life span. Compare that with the monks at Jinshe Temple who made the first Zisha Pots and then compare with the contemporary Potters like Gu Zing Zhou and others? And to make it easier for you to draw the line just imagine in Middle Ming Dynasty Zhengde period, Potters used only their bare hands and primitive tools to make Pots unlike contemporary Potters who have not only their hands and Potting tools but also computers or 3-D printing or AI to help them.(see our Pyramid Chart of the Chronological Increase of the Variety of the Styles and Shapes of Pots for better illustration).

Yes, we know you are going to say that it is ridiculous and frightening to see the market flooded with Fake Pots especially in this case Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots. So what can be done to stop or expose these huge numbers of Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots before the forgeries destroy Chen Ming Yuan’s legacy?

Yes, in the book the curator of the Hong Kong Museum said that if there are archaeologically excavated Chen Ming Yuan Pots like there are archaeologically excavated Shi DaBin Pots, we can expose Fake Chen Ming Yuan Pots.

What then are we to do?

No problem, you have Ren Fu Collection now and we not only have exact date and answers to Chen Ming Yuan Pots but Ren Fu Collection also have exact dates and answers to 36 other Old Famous and Old Master Potters’ Zisha Hus.

What’s more Ren Fu Collection will send a copy of our book titled, “ Saving Old Purple-Sand Clay Teapots” to Li Shu Yi, the curator of the Hong Kong Museum. In fact, the curator of the Hong Kong Museum will not be the only one Ren Fu Collection send its book to. Ren Fu Collection will send 100 books, 50 to the top echelon of the Art world and 50 to prominent people of the Zisha Hu and Tea Art eco-system. Reputable Art personalities like Ma WeDu, RenZhi Hong, Teresa Tze Bartholomew, Rose Kerr, to name a few. And powerful global newspapers like The New York Times, The Times, China Youth Daily and other media will be send a copy of the book:Saving Old Purple-Sand Clay Teapots. The purpose is to let them know first, Old Zisha Hu is dying because of Fake Pots, Fake facts and the dysfunctional Zisha Hu eco-system influenced by organized fraudsters mainly from Taiwan and to make the book impactful we also attach with every book a Petition to Remove Huang Qian Liang from the Palace Museum of Taiwan with emphasis on the first person to sign is DatoAzmil M. Zabidi, the Malaysian Ambassador to the United States of America.

Finally to add to the good news is the coming out of Ren Fu Collection’s new website, a fighting website that some friends said looks like an on-line “Aircraft Carrier” ready for battle. In the combat website we will teach you how to spot Fake Pots, we will expose Fake Pots in the Black-List of Fake Zisha Hus and we will let you sell, buy and exchange 100% genuine Old Pots.

Before we end this story we let you share a shocking dialogue between Tony Ren and Huang Qian Liang many years ago in Taipei, in Huang Qian Liang’s business center.

After selling some Pots to Huang Qian Liang who could not believe someone has so many of these Nande or rare Early Qing Zhuni Hus, Tony Ren stop to ask the most important question in the Zisha Hu world:

Tony Ren: I would like to inform you, teacher Huang , that Ren Fu Collection has a lot of archaeological materials, records, proofs and discoveries connected to all our excavated Pots, would you be interested in them because you write stories about Old Zisha Hus based on truths and proofs?

Huang Qian Liang: I am not interested in archaeological materials or discoveries or proofs but I am very interested in what more Pots you want to sell me?

From that moment on, Tony Ren know that Old Zisha Hu is in big trouble and great danger and something must be done to save Old Zisha Hu. Tony Ren went back to his hotel and phone his boss in London. After the shocking conversation and shocking truth was revealed to the boss, the boss said, “ Go ahead and destroy these imposters and fraudsters because they are destroying Old Zisha Hu starting with this corrupted, fraudulent scholar who should be protecting and not harming Old Zisha Hu”.

Enjoy Ren Fu Collection’s historical “One Belt, One Road” archaeological posting.

P/s…..The new website is coming containing 1190(705 Zisha Hus and 485 SantohZhuni Hus) and besides the deadly weaponized Black-List of Fake Pots and teaching you how to spot a Fake Pot, the website also allows people to sell their Old Pots or looking to buy Old Pots in a special “Buy, Sell and Exchange” page in Ren Fu Collection’s new website and you be assured any Fake Pots will be thrown out and prevented from entering Ren Fu Collection new website. And Ren Fu Collection, being the fighter for truth and honesty, will give good, honest people the power to expose Fake Pots in our very well-known website for the world to see, to protect good, innocent people from being cheated of their hard earned money and teaching people the truthful, honest stories about genuine Old Pots. Before anybody put any Fake Pot in Ren Fu Collection’s Black-List of Fake Zisha Hus, for good measure, the first Fake Zisha Hu we will put on the Black-List is a Fake Daoguang Pear-shaped Zhuni sold by Huang Qian Liang to a Guangdong collector a few years ago.

By the way, be warned that we are told Peng Qing Fu and Liu Chuan Sin, who have closed down their Taiwan Blog and stop appearing publicly, are keeping a very low profile but they are still selling Fake Pots through their connections in auctions in mainland China.

Lastly be reminded that Ren Fu Collection has closed down its Melaka Gallery for good and moved to Semarang, so any future viewing of Pots have to go to Semarang, Indonesia or Kuala Lumpur or Singapore. Remember big viewing in Semarang, viewing in Kuala Lumpur or Singapore…. and good news for people who want a better service from Ren fu Collection, we have a new Personal Assistant in addition to Lily Zhang, to help Tony Ren. One of her job will be to manage the Buy, Sell and Exchange Page in the new website so that Lily Zhang can focus on other matters.

Zisha Hu also called Yixing teapot also called Purple-Sand clay teapot

SantohZhuni Hu also called Chao Zhou Zhuni Hu.

赝品之母：以陈鸣远壶为例，赝品之母，包括某知名学者的震撼回复…………

香港中文大学博物馆馆长黎淑仪在 2007 年的书中说：

《2007年国际紫砂研讨会论文集》（第161页）提到：“少数博物馆展出的一百多件陈鸣远款紫砂壶，不知哪个是真陈鸣远壶，哪些是赝品陈鸣远壶。馆长还说：“考古出土的时大彬壶有7个，但考古出土的陈鸣远壶没有一个”。

现在我们知道你们要说什么了！一，既然你不知道陈鸣远壶是真品还是赝品，为什么还要举办展览，因为人们会学到错误的东西并感到困惑。第二，如果博物馆里有这么多假陈鸣远壶，你能想象市场上的假陈鸣远壶吗？

而现在看到陈鸣远紫砂壶壶展览的人的一些评论，他们认为大多数是假的陈鸣远壶：“展览看起来像一个跳蚤市场”。另一位评论说，“不，这不是跳蚤市场，这是最糟糕的，因为跳蚤市场没有那么多假紫砂壶”。但一位认真的台湾朋友评论说：“任富收藏应该对一百多只陈鸣远壶进行鉴定，看看哪些是真正的陈鸣远壶，因为他们知道什么是真正的陈鸣远壶”。

谢谢，但说句公道话，至少香港中文大学博物馆的女馆长黎淑仪是诚实的，不像黄健亮这样的腐败和不诚实的学者会写假预览或假陈鸣远壶的假故事获得丰厚的经济回报，尤其是在拍卖会上。事实上，几乎所有的都是假陈鸣远款紫砂壶，我们听诚实的专家说，虽然我们没有机会参观展览。

现在，第一个原因我们都知道为什么现在市场上有这么多，这么多的假壶，而且老紫砂壶无法科学鉴定或认证。

其次，因为老紫砂壶无法得到科学鉴定，所以要学会看老紫砂壶或发现一个假的陈鸣远，需要大量考古发掘的紫砂壶作为基准，至于上百个陈鸣远款紫砂壶展览中提到，有专家断言，陈鸣远壶很难说是真品，展览中的壶是在任富藏品出现之前举办的。

现在关于疯狂展览的另一件事是不应该发生的，因为它混淆了人而不是教人，实际上它告诉人们关于陈鸣远款紫砂壶的所有错误的事情，因为几乎所有的壶都是假的陈鸣远紫砂壶。是的，你知道展览中的疯狂壶吗？壶都有来自各种异想天开的疯狂造型、风格和形式，是的，你说的是：陈鸣远在他短暂的活跃制壶生涯中怎么能做出这么多百余壶？（更不用说市场上还有数百个假陈鸣远紫砂壶）。你知道一个陶艺家制作不同形状、不同风格或形式的陶罐，他/她甚至需要时间、精力和灵感来构思一个新的想法吗？看看在中国大陆发现的七个考古发掘的时大彬款壶？尽管时大彬以创意着称，但时大彬只能做几种形状和款式。（你无法研究市场上有许多不同形状和款式的许许多多的时大彬壶，因为它们没有被证明是真品）。制作不同形状和款式的壶是如此繁琐和辛苦，以至于像思亭、君德、留佩轩、潘壶等朱泥紫砂壶这样的老名匠选择只制作一种形状和一种风格的壶。

即使是小孩子也能明白清朝康熙初期的陈鸣远是不可能做到的，展览中的陶器种类之多、款式之多，对于馆内发现的数百件陈鸣远壶来说，甚至是不可能的。现在大多是从书本上得知，正德年间金沙寺的僧人最先制作紫砂壶，其次是供春，然后是时大彬等人，再到惠孟臣、陈明远等，直到今天。正如您所想象的那样，宜兴陶艺家在有限的工作寿命中拥有数以千计的形状和风格的陶罐可供复制或创造。和金沙寺的僧人做第一个紫砂壶比较，再跟顾景舟等当代陶艺家比较？并且为了让你更容易划清界限，就像在明代正德时期，陶艺家只用赤手空拳和原始工具制作陶罐，不像当代陶艺家不仅有双手和陶艺工具，还有电脑、3D 打印或人工智能AI来帮助他们制作。（参见我们的品种按时间顺序增长的金字塔图古壶的样式和形状以便更好地说明）。

是的，我们知道你会说看到市场充斥着假壶，尤其是在这种情况下，假陈鸣远款朱泥壶是荒谬和可怕的。那么，在赝品毁掉陈鸣远的遗产之前，有什么办法可以阻止或揭露这些数量庞大的假陈鸣远款紫砂器呢？

是的，香港博物馆馆长在书中说，如果有考古出土的陈鸣远壶，就像考古出土的时大彬壶，我们可以揭露假陈鸣远壶。

那我们该怎么办呢？

没问题，你现在有任富收藏，我们不仅有发掘陈鸣远壶的确切年代，而且任富收藏还有其他36个老名家和老大师的紫砂壶的确切年代。

更何况任富收藏会将我们的书《拯救老紫砂泥茶壶》一书送给香港博物馆馆长黎淑仪。事实上，香港博物馆的策展人不会是唯一一个任富收藏送书的人。任富收藏将送出100本图书，其中50本送给艺术界的顶级人物，50本送给紫砂壶茶艺生态系统的杰出人物。著名的艺术人物，如马未都、任志宏、特蕾莎·泽·巴塞洛缪、罗丝·克尔等著名艺术家（Teresa Tze Bartholomew、Rose Kerr）等。《纽约时报》、《泰晤士报》、《中国青年报》等全球有影响力的报纸将送出《拯救老紫砂茶壶》一书。目的是首先让他们知道，老紫砂壶因假壶、假事实和主要来自台湾的有组织的欺诈者影响的功能失调的老紫砂壶生态系统而死亡，并且为了使这本书具有影响力，我们还在每本书附上请愿书将黄健亮从台湾故宫博物院撤下，重点是第一个签名的人是马来西亚驻美国大使拿督阿兹米尔·扎比迪。

最后要补充的好消息是，任富收藏的新网站即将上线，据朋友说，这个战斗网站看起来像一个准备战斗的在线“航空母舰”。在战斗网站，我们会教你如何识别假壶，我们将在假紫砂壶黑名单中曝光假壶，让你出售、购买和兑换100%正品老壶。

在我们结束这个故事之前，让我们分享多年前在台北，黄健亮的商业中心，任汤尼和黄健亮之间令人震惊的对话。

将一些精美卖给了黄健亮，简直不敢相信竟然有人拥有这么多这种难得或稀有的清初朱泥壶，任汤尼停下来问了紫砂壶世界最重要的问题：

任汤尼说：“黄老师，我想告诉你，任富收藏中有很多与我们所有出土的陶罐相关的考古材料、记录、证据和发现，你会因为你写关于老紫砂壶的故事而对它们感兴趣吗？基于事实和证据？“

黄健亮说：“我对考古材料、发现或证据不感兴趣，但我很感兴趣，你还想卖给我什么清初紫砂壶？”

从那一刻起，任汤尼就知道老紫砂壶遇到了大麻烦，大危险，必须出手抢救老紫砂壶。任汤尼回到他的酒店，给他在伦敦的老板打电话。在向老板透露了令人震惊的谈话和震惊的真相后，老板说：“去消灭这些骗子们，因为他们正在摧毁老紫砂壶，从这个应该保护而不是伤害老紫砂壶的腐败骗子开始”。

享受任富收藏的历史“一带一路”考古贴文。

P/s：新网站将包含 1190 个（705 个紫砂壶和 485 个汕头朱泥壶），除了致命的武器化假壶黑名单和教你如何识别假壶外，该网站还允许人们出售他们的老壶或在任富收藏新网站的“购买、出售和交换”特殊页面上购买老壶，您可以放心，任何假壶将被扔掉，并阻止进入任富收藏新网站。而任富收藏，作为真理和诚实的斗士，将赋予善良、诚实的人在我们非常知名的网站上揭露假壶的权力，让世界看到，保护善良、无辜的人不被他们的努力所欺骗。赚钱并教人们关于真正的保护老紫砂壶的真实故事。在任富收藏的假紫砂壶黑名单之前，我们第一次上黑名单的是黄健亮卖的假道光梨形朱泥。

几年前给一位广东收藏家购买。

顺便提一下，我们被告知关闭了台湾紫金城博客并停止公开露面的彭清福和刘创新保持非常低调，但在中国内地他们仍然通过他们的关系在大陆拍卖会上出售假壶。

最后要提醒的是，任富收藏已经永久关闭了马六甲的工作室并搬到了三宝垄，因此任何未来的古代紫砂壶观看都必须去印度尼西亚三宝垄，或吉隆坡或新加坡。记住在三宝垄的大观，在吉隆坡或新加坡的小观。对于想要从任富收藏获得更好服务的人来说，好消息是，除了丽丽之外，我们还有一个新的个人助理来帮助任汤尼。她的工作之一是管理新网站中的购买、销售和更新页面，以便丽丽可以专注于其他事务。

紫砂壶也叫宜兴茶壶也叫紫砂壶。

汕头朱泥壶又称潮州朱泥壶。