透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.15.5.183
  • 期刊

「東漢定型圖讖」中夢意象的文化意涵

The Cultural Meanings of Dream Symbol in "Dong Han Ding Hsing Tu Chen"

摘要


羅馬哲學家馬克羅比烏斯將夢分成五個類型:謎語夢、預言夢、神諭夢、鬼夢、夢魘;劉文英則將釋夢的徑路歸納為三種:(一)直解法,(二)轉釋法,(三)反說法。占夢者可以從夢境類型作適當的詮解。至於明、清的「緯書輯本」中有關「夢」的記載為數不少,但是「緯書輯本」雜有誤收讖文以及六朝以後文獻,並不符「東漢定型圖讖」原貌,是以本文摘取「緯書輯本」中的佚文,並考證其中確實屬於「東漢定型圖讖」的部分,進而分析所述夢兆的文化意涵,以呈顯夢在定型圖讖中的文化價值。由於讖緯文獻的考證非常繁瑣,使得筆者論述時,不能簡單的採用傳統線性的方式展開,而不得不反覆編織、回溯一些相互關聯的論證線索。例如《河圖挺佐輔》的「黃帝受圖之夢」,依據歷代類書、緯書輯本等文獻所引述,又有作《河圖始開圖》、《河圖祿運法》者,文字長短不等,其實後二者為傳抄時的衍訛。至若夢境內容:「余夢見兩龍挺白圖,即帝以授余於河之都」,與醒後立壇祭祀並得夢兆應驗云云,乃漢代交感巫術中最常描述的情形,可證此條讖文意圖肯定黃帝獲得天命的正當性。但是藉由文獻證實,這個黃帝時代的夢境無疑是漢代造作的,編造者錯置了夢境的參照系統。再如「孔子夢獲麟」,在《左傳》中只是簡述其事,《史記.孔子世家》、《孔叢子》、《孔子家語》所述也不見夢境成分,直至緯書輯本《孝經援神契》、《孝經右契》中,纔加上了神秘的夢境意義,表現出孔子感傷的心理與王命的預言。至於讖文的真偽問題,經由文獻考知,明代孫瑴《古微書》的《孝經援神契》長段讖文實屬誤收,原本只是七字之短文,內容也與「獲麟」情事全然無關。《孝經右契》首見於干寶《搜神記》中,說「孔子夢獲麟」最詳也較可信,但是將孔子見「赤烟」聯結到漢代「火德」的興起,必然是西漢末年確定「漢為火德」之後的今文經學神秘其說的誇飾,並未賦以可分析性的預兆式的夢意涵思想。圖讖所以會藉由托夢以逕行其政治運作,原因大概是這種純粹屬於個人的感知和心理操作的手法,較諸占筮所需的工具與技術,顯然簡單多了。至於緯書輯本所收夢例,並非東漢定型圖讖佚文,則更為不少,如《古微書.孝經鉤命決》言及帝王登基之兆,《通緯.尚書中候》登基之夢兆,《通緯.龍魚河圖》收有黃帝夢西王母授兵符以征蚩尤,多由於明、清的緯書輯佚者不明究裏的草率收錄,形成層累推積的錯誤還原,並不符合東漢定型圖讖的原貌。因此,今日探究東漢定型圖讖的思想時,對於來源可疑的讖緯佚文,實應作更明確的考定,纔可作為東漢定型圖讖的文獻資料。更以傳統共識中的圖讖有預言功能角度觀之,這些編造於兩漢之際的讖文,當然無法作為先秦古史進程中的先驗證明。

關鍵字

定型圖讖 緯書 夢境 文化意涵

並列摘要


Dreams are a strange reflection of our thoughts, feelings, and ideas. The Roman philosopher Macrobius classified dreams into five main types: the enigmatic dream, the prophetic vision, the oracular dream, the nightmare, and the apparition. The first three are worth interpreting, but the last two are not, since they have no prophetic significance.In ”Dong Han Ding Hsing Tu Chen” there are some stories about prophetic dreams, but only a few scholars have dealt with them. So, this paper is an attempt to collect all the relevant literature review on chen wei and to explore and discover the cultural meanings of dreams ”Dong Han Ding Hsing Tu Chen”.After a thorough study of the ancient literature review, we noted that many dream scenes in chen wei were invented in Han Dynasty, and that many of them were different from the events in ancient history. In addition, we also found that the collector of wei shu was very careless, so there are many mistakes in wei shu, whose content is not the same as that of the original ”Ding Hsing Tu Chen”. Therefore, we need to be careful not to include those suspicious texts in our discussion of the thoughts of chen wei.

延伸閱讀