〈坊記〉、〈七十二弟子解〉稱引《論語》書題再議

Re-deliberation on Quoting the Title of Lun Yu in "Fang Ji" and "Qi Shi Er De Zi Jie"

10.6238/SIS.200803_(30-1).0003

林保全(Bao-Quan Lin)

論語 ； 孔子家語 ； 坊記 ； 七十二弟子解 ； 緇衣 ； Lun Yu ； Kong Zi Jia Yu ； Fang Ji ； Qi Shi Er De Zi Jie ； Zi Yi

中國學術年刊

30_1期（2008 / 03 / 01）

31 - 57

繁體中文

本文旨在重新探討《禮記•坊記》、《孔子家語•七十二弟子解》稱引《論語》書題，是否可信無疑。〈坊記〉與〈七十二弟子解〉本可作為判斷《論語》書題出現時間之重要依據。然武內義雄根據文例、與上下文句之語意，推斷〈坊記〉所引《論語》一段，恐為注文混入正文之中，其說頗為現今學者所依據。〈七十二弟子解〉出自《家語》，先儒舊稱王肅所偽，本不為學者所採。然今簡牘文獻出土以來，皆促使學者重新利用〈坊記〉與《孔子家語》等文獻內容。於是學者多據簡本〈緇衣〉，認定今本〈坊記〉亦屬先秦文獻，遂又據信〈坊記〉中稱引《論語》書題，斷定《論語》書名成於先秦。然據本文考察，即使相關簡牘文獻出土，〈坊記〉、〈七十二弟子解〉稱引《論語》書題，仍有諸多疑慮，未可斷然據信，而論定《論語》書題即成於先秦。

This thesis attempts to re-examine the question of quoting the title of ”Lun Yu” in ”Fang Ji” (of Li Ji) and ”Qi Shi Er De Zi Jie” (of Kong Zi Jia Yu), and to discuss whether the title of ”Lun Yu” existed in pre-Qin time, or if it was later added by Confucianists in Han dynasty. ”Fang Ji” and ”Qi Shi Er De Zi Jie” were to determine when Lun Yu was named. Earlier Japanese scholar Takeuchi Yoshio construed that, according to literary format and context, the quotation of ”Lun Yu” in ”Fang JI” did not exist in pre-Chin dynasty, and was later added by other Confucianists. Mr Yishio's idea was generally accepted, and is still the most influential up to present days. ”Qi Shi Er De Zi Jie” is from Kong Zi Jia Yu, which was generally believed a pseudo work by Wang Su, and was therefore of no credibility by most scholars. The later excavation, however, gives further proofs that Li Ji and Kong Zi Jia Yu are not pseudo works. Scholars thus start to bring back the contents of ”Fang Ji” and Kong Zi Jia Yu as proofs to illustrate the title of ”Lun Yu” firstly emerged from pre-Chin dynasties. Due to the excavation of ”Zi Yi”, many scholars are convinced that contemporary edition of ”Fang Ji” was also existent in pre-Chin time. And these scholars posit that the title of ”Lun Yu” quoted in ”Fang Ji” is an evidence that the title of Lun Yu was actually named in pre-Chin time. This paper offers comprehensive dimensions to re-examine the quotation of the title of ”Lun Yu” in ”Fang Ji” and ”Qi Shi Er De Zi Jie”. This paper is to argue that, even with the excavation of relevant documents, this question is still speculative, and needs more careful scrutiny.

1. 明何孟春注(1995)。四庫全書存目叢書：孔子家語。臺南:莊嚴文化事業有限公司。
2. 漢司馬遷(1969)。史記。北京:中華書局。
3. 漢班固(1969)。漢書。北京:中華書局。
4. 漢戴聖編、漢鄭玄注、唐孔穎達疏(2001)。禮記正義。臺北:藝文印書館。
5. 魏王肅注(1968)。孔子家語。臺北:臺彎中華書局。
6. 林礽乾先生、載周何、田博元主編(1986)。國學導讀。臺北:康橋出版社。
7. 武內義雄(1929)。《論語》原始。支那學，5(1)，19-63。
8. 唐明貴(2005)。《論語》學的形成、發展與中衰－漢魏六朝隋唐《論語》學研究。北京:中國社會科學出版社。
9. 郭沂(2001)。郭店竹簡與先秦學術思想。上海:上海教育出版社。
10. 單承彬(2002)。《論語》源流考述。長春:吉林人民出版社。