《世說新語．惑溺》探賾

Studies on ＂Huo Ni＂ in Shi Shuo Hsin Yu

黃羽璿(Yu-Hsuan Huang)

《世說新語》 ； 惑溺 ； 女性 ； 容色 ； 妒 ； Shi Shuo Hsin Yu ； Huo Ni ； female ； beauty ； envy

興大中文學報

34期（2013 / 12 / 01）

25 - 41

繁體中文

本文旨在論考「惑溺」此一條目於《世說新語》中之實質內涵，透過對「惑溺」之詞義考究暨該篇所錄七則內容之分析，揭其立目之所由。結論為「惑」、「溺」二字連用，乃首創於《世說新語》，且全書僅條目用之，不見於他處。在此之前，惑自惑，溺自溺；唯惑因情迷，溺由嗜欲，引申之，該詞便易與男女關係結合，後世遂進而認其為專為女性所設之「不德」條目。實則分析〈惑溺〉內容，所錄七則雖皆有女性，然多半為惑溺之「對象」，而非「惑溺者」本身；換言之，是篇所責多男性，而非女性。如曹操惑溺於惠而有色之甄氏而屠鄴，荀粲惑溺於有色之婦而獲譏，賈充惑溺於酷妒之郭槐而無子，王戎惑溺於婦而恒聽其卿，王導惑溺於幸妾致有雷尚書之譏皆屬之。凡此適可說明何以〈排調〉、〈規箴〉中時見違禮無行之婦女，卻不入〈惑溺〉，蓋其所責，本非女性之不德，而是男性見此等行徑後之順承及應許─即成為惑溺者後之偏差行為。此外，篇中惑溺之對象不全為女性，男性亦得居之，如賈充女惑溺於美姿容之韓壽而弗拒其求即是，故不宜將「惑溺」一詞直接與「沈迷女色」畫上等號。該條目於《世說新語》中當屬一人性缺失之表徵，其入選標準暨表述形式為「惑溺對象」使「惑溺者」做出「不當行為」所致之「後果」或「負評」。唯「惑溺者」暨「惑溺對象」並不限單一性別，男女皆得當之，此條目非專為負評女性所設。研究結果有助於釐清〈惑溺〉之去取標準，重新認識該篇在書中之定位，並思考《世說新語》之條目創建暨其所由。

This paper aims to explore the entry, ＂Huo Ni,＂ in ＂Shi Shuo Hsin Yu＂. By investigating the contexts of ＂Huo Ni＂, this paper argued that the use of ＂Huo Ni＂ as a phrase started in ＂Shi Shuo Hsin Yu＂. Moreover, the use of ＂Huo Ni＂ is merely seen in the entries of ＂Shi Shuo Hsin Yu＂. Based on the researcher's investigation, ＂Huo＂ was defined as being seduced, and ＂Ni＂ referred to the desires for something. As a consequence, the phrase ＂Huo Ni＂ tended to be inferred as the relationship between two sexes, which in later literature people considered this classification specifically to be created for ＂vicious＂ women. However, if we further analyze the seven contexts of ＂Huo Ni;＂ it becomes relatively easy to figure that female characters were the targets (objects) of the vicious behaviors. In other words, ＂Huo Ni＂ was meant to blame on the males (the actors) but not the females. For example, Cao Cao coveted after Zhen Shi, Gu Chong lusted for Guo Huai, and Xun Can, Wang Rong, and Wang Dao had affairs with beauties. This also explained why the vicious females were documented in ＂Pai Diao＂ and ＂Gui ＂Zhen＂ but not in ＂Huo Ni＂. The purpose of ＂Huo Ni＂ was to blame on the males' misbehaviors, having affairs with females. In addition, Not only females but also male could be the targets of ＂Huo Ni.＂ For example, Gu Chong Ru to Han Shou. Therefore, it was inappropriate to directly related ＂Huo Ni＂ to being lascivious. ＂Huo Ni＂ in Shi Shuo Hsin Yu was classified as a deficiency for human beings. The doer of ＂Huo Ni＂ conducts something inappropriate to the target of ＂Huo Ni＂, and thus gave rise to the following consequences. Furthermore, the doer of ＂Huo Ni＂ and the target of ＂Huo Ni＂ should not be categorized exclusively to one sex, both sexes could be the doer or the target. Hence, this ＂Huo Ni＂ could not be viewed particularly as a category for vicious females. In short, this paper helps to clarify some concepts in ＂Huo Ni＂ and create a new understanding for ＂Huo Ni＂ in the context of ＂Shi Shuo Hsin Yu＂.

1. 吳冠宏(2008)。余嘉錫箋疏《世說新語》之詮釋特色及其文化意義初探。成大中文學報，22，1-22。
   連結：
2. 梅家玲(1997)。依違於婦德與才性之間：《世說新語．賢媛篇》的女性風貌。婦女與兩性學刊，8，1-28。
   連結：
3. (1995)。續修四庫全書。上海:上海古籍出版社。
4. (1995)。續修四庫全書。上海:上海古籍出版社。
5. (2001)。十三經注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
6. (2001)。十三經注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
7. (2001)。十三經注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
8. (2001)。十三經注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
9. (1995)。續修四庫全書。上海:上海古籍出版社。
10. (1995)。續修四庫全書。上海:上海古籍出版社。
11. 南朝宋劉義慶、南朝梁劉孝標注、余嘉錫箋疏、周祖謨整理、余淑宜整理、周士琦整理(2009)。世說新語箋疏。北京:中華書局。
12. 南朝宋劉義慶、南朝梁劉孝標注注、朱鑄禹彙校集注(2008)。世說新語彙校集注。上海:上海古籍出版社。
13. 唐房玄齡(2003)。晉書。北京:中華書局。
14. 清王先謙(2004)。莊子集釋。北京:中華書局。
15. 清王先謙(2007)。荀子集解。北京:中華書局。
16. 清王念孫(2000)。廣雅疏證。南京:江蘇古籍出版社。
17. 清張廷玉(2003)。明史。北京:中華書局。
18. 房厚信(2007)。從《世說新語》的編撰看劉義慶的女性觀。宿州學院學報，22(3)，64-66。
19. 高月娟(2008)。〈賢媛〉與〈惑溺〉二篇女性形象析論。育達學報，22，44-54。
20. 曾文樑(1987)。《世說新語》列女述記（下）。輔仁國文學報，3，333-345。
21. 楊勇(1988)。世說新語校箋。臺北:正文書局。
22. 楊勇(2000)。世說新語校箋（修訂本）。臺北:正文書局。
23. 寧稼雨(2000)。《世說新語》書名與類目釋義。文獻季刊，3，31-49。