洪業〈白虎通引得序〉辨

To Identify Hong, Ye <A Preface of Index to Po Hu Tung>

10.29766/JCLLNTU.201103.0004

周德良(Te-Liang Chou)

洪業 ； 自虎通引得序 ； 白虎通 ； 自虎通義 ； 自虎觀會議 ； Hong ； Ye ； ； Po Hu Tung ； PoHu Tung Yi ； Pohuguan mccting

臺北大學中文學報

9期（2011 / 03 / 01）

99 - 128

繁體中文

自元大德本《白虎通》（1305）問世以來，世人始有完整文本一窺東漢白虎襯會議究竟，進而以《白虎通》對質漢代經學、政治制度，及訓詁學等相關議題。民國二十年（1931），洪業為哈佛燕京學社作〈白虎通引得序〉。序文揭露《白虎通》：其行文氣韻與班固文章大不相類，且與當時漠制往往不合，並且《白虎通》鈔襲魏博士宋哀之緯注甚多，已瞭若指掌；此外，蔡邕之時尚有「白虎議奏」，及至魏繆襲始引《白虎通》文句。因此，洪業質疑今本《白虎通》：「疑其書非班固所撰」、「疑其非章帝所稱制版決者」、「疑其為三國時作品」，如此始能合理解釋：「所以不僅許慎馬融不能得其書而讀之，且蔡邕鄭玄並不曾舉引」之特殊現象。洪業序文無疑是推翻前人對《白虎通》之基本共識，並為後繼者提供別開生面之研究領域，而序文中揭示環統於《白虎通》文本諸多不合理事項，是極為可貴之研究成果。然而，發現問題與解決問題，明為二事。洪業所舉之事證，偶有缺失，論證效力稍嫌不足；而假設「好事者」用「白虎議奏」，撮合經緯注釋而成《白虎通》，此事亦無明確事證；至於洪業所提之解答，依然無法合理解釋環繞於《白虎通》文本之諸問題。

Since Yuan Date (Po Hu Tung) edition (1305) was published, we had, finally, a complete textual to interpret Donghan Pohuguan meeting. Further, to compare it with jing-xue, political system and xun-gu-xue of I-Ian Dynasty. In 1931, Hong, Ye wrote ＜A preface of Index to Po Hu Tung＞ for Harvard-Yenching Institute. He exposed that ( Po Hu Tung) was different from all articles of Ban,Gu, and did not conform to Han system, and it have been known that ( Po Hu Tung) plagiarized many explanatory notes from Wei master Song, Zhong Besides, in the time of Cai, Yong, there was ( Po Hu Yi Zou) , until Wei Miu, Xi began to quote the article from ( Po Hu Tung) Therefore, Hong, Ye had queried that ”(Po Hu Tung) was not wrote by Ban, Gu” ,”its compiling was not authorized by Zhang-di”,”it could be wrote in Sanguo”, so that to reasonably explain why ” not only Xu, Shen, Ma, Rong haven't read it, but Cai, Yong, Zheng, Xuan also haven't quoted it before”.Hong, Ye had gave the overthrow to the common consensus of (Po Hu Tung), and open a new region to later generations. It was also a precious achievement to announce many unreasonable subjects in (Po Hu Tung). However, he had just exposed but not solved the problems, the evidence that Hong, Ye had gave was not enough. In case that ”someone” had adapted (Po Hu Yi Zou) to become (Po Hu Tung), this could not be proved. As for the explanations given by Hong Ye, still couldn't reasonably explain all the questions of (Po Hu Tung).

1. (1970)。國粹學報。臺北:文海出版社。
2. 十三經注疏本。臺北:藝文印書館。
3. (1969)。百部叢書集成。臺北:藝文印書館。
4. 〈白虎通引得序〉洪業著，北京︰燕京大學圖書館引得編纂處編，1931年。
5. (1969)。百部叢書集成。臺北:藝文印書館。
6. 梁蕭子顯(1978)。南齊書。臺北:鼎文書局。
7. 清陳立(1987)。白虎通疏證。臺北:廣文書局。
8. 漢班固、唐顏師古注(1982)。漢書。北京:北京中華書局。
9. 劉宋范曄、唐李賢注(1965)。後漢書。北京:中華書局。
10. 上海古籍出版社編(1994)。緯書集成。上海:上海古籍出版社。
11. 于首奎(1988)。兩漢哲學新探。四川:四川人民出版社。
12. 陳毓賢(1992)。洪業傳。臺北:聯經出版事業公司。
13. 劉夢溪編(1996)。中國現代學術經典。河北:河北教育出版社。