- 期刊
- OpenAccess
漢代「第五家《詩》」說獻疑
The Case Against the Fifth Recension of Odes Interpretation in Han Times
摘要
近世地不愛寶，學界可藉出土新資料之助重新審視古籍文獻的記載，如指出阜陽雙古堆漢簡《詩經》打破了傳統漢代只有魯、齊、韓、毛四家《詩》學家派之說。本文以為，前人因信奉一家之內有統一而一貫的《詩》學，故新資料一旦與現存資料無法比對，只有歸之入「第五家《詩》」一途。本文以探討《魯詩》學者唐長賓及褚少孫的《詩》學為中心，指出漢代《詩》學一家之內根本不存在統一而一貫的《詩》學，因此《詩》的新見異文、異說有可能仍屬四家《詩》學家派之一，只屬未有充分證據歸派的資料。本文藉打破前人理論的前設，掃除研究漢代《詩經》學史的盲點，一窺《詩經》在先秦兩漢的流傳情況，重新審視學界所提出先秦兩漢《詩經》的流傳為口耳相傳而非文本傳承之說，並由此得見《阜詩》等出土文獻在研究漢代《詩經》學史上應有的地位。
並列摘要
Recent excavation of manuscripts has offered scholars an opportunity to reexamine the early history of Chinese classics. In particular, the Fuyang 阜陽 Odes is considered as compelling evidence against the conventional belief that only four recensions (or teaching traditions, jia 家) of Odes interpretation existed in Han times. This article challenges the overarching assumption that texts and interpretations within one recension have a remarkable level of unifying consistency. According to this line of thought, the newly found textual variants, which are at odds with existing evidence, do not belong to any conventional recensions. By analysing the erudition of Lu Shi 魯詩 classicists Tang Changbin 唐長賓 and Chu Shaosun 褚少孫, this article suggests that the consistency within one recension is an erroneous premise, and that the variants could still be affiliated to one of the four recensions, though full evidence is still lacking. This article will reconsider the theoretical assumptions about the Odes, and investigate the blind spots of the history of the Odes, thereby understanding the transmission process of the Odes during Han times. Lastly, this article will enquire into the notion that the Odes was orally, rather than textually transmitted, which helps us appreciate how the newly excavated texts can assist the study of early history of Chinese classics.