【作者】 李秀华；

【导师】 方勇；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 中国古代文学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 《淮南子》是一部文采绚烂、义理精深的著作,东汉许慎、高诱相继为之注解。历来有关此书的研究文献也称得上汗牛充栋,但专门针对许高二注的所占比重很小。而学者研究许高二注,不外乎版本校勘、注文辑佚、注文疏补以及训诂成就等方面,对其所蕴含的思想、学术等深层次意义则忽视不置。本文既要在前人成果的基础上继续推进一步,又要努力尝试从新的视野展开探讨。第一章,对《淮南子》许高二注的文献状况作一番较为全面、系统的调查与考校。虽然清代学者在这个方面取得了很大成就,但仍有不少地方值得修缮和补充。关于二注的相杂及区分,则是首当其冲的问题。根据历朝史志和私家书目,同时参以历代著述所引二注的情形,我们发现,许高二注相杂一书应是发生在北宋太宗和真宗朝,起因可能是缘于一场宫廷大火,而此前两者一直并行别传。二注相杂不久,即被苏颂发现并区分,但他的成果掩没不闻,大约过了八百年才重新为清代陶方琦等人辨别。清人的区分主要立足于苏颂《校淮南子题序》,其实从注文内容如互见法的使用、重复释文的出现等方面,也可以得到有力的支撑。二注相杂及区分这一问题得到清理后,其两千年的流传历史就比较容易勾勒了。同时,二注残缺也为清代学者辑佚留下很大空间,但他们只注重许注而忽略了高注。通过搜罗和考究历代文献所引《淮南子》注文,我们认为大概有70余条引文应属高注佚文,还有100余条引文疑是许注佚文,为清人所遗漏。第二章,主要从问世时间、训诂特征、思想性以及与《说文解字》的关系等方面,对许注八篇展开集中讨论。许慎为《淮南子》作注皆因机缘所促成,因为习读《淮南》既非他的家学师承,又非他的兴趣所在。汉安帝永初四年,许慎以太尉掾属的身份被征诏参加盛大的东观校书活动,即是以校注《淮南子》为务,一年后书成并上呈朝廷。虽然许慎的《淮南子注》已无完本,但现存八篇也能管中窥豹。总的说来,许慎注《淮南》,重视对原书各篇大意的概括,偏重字词、名物、史事的解释,比较注意原书楚语的使用,而且行文追求简朴明了,很少使用训诂术语。由许注八篇的一些相关注文看,许慎对于《五经》有很多自己独到的见解。他既相信明经致用的经学传统,又敢于正视原书中批判《五经》的言论,同时不排斥诸子尤其是老庄的观点,表现出通达的思想认识。更为重要的是,《说文解字》与《淮南子注》之间还存在相融互补的关系。两者互相取用,共同促进了许慎学术的发展。第三章,以高注十三篇为对象,主要讨论高诱的生平著述、高注的内容及特色、高注的思想性、高氏群经之学等问题。与许慎正好相反,高诱为《淮南子》作注,既是承继马融、卢植的家学师法,又是自身兴趣和责任所在。从仅存的十三篇看,高注涵盖非常广博,但着重于解释字词、训解名物典章、考述史传典故和阐发文句义理。同汉代其它注书相比,高注还体现出注重篇名解题、细化注音方式、广罗方言俗语以及校勘、阙疑并重的训释特色。作为一位具有忧患意识的经学家,高诱还有意把大量富有儒家色彩的思想言论植入到《淮南子》的注释中,以期将原书纳入辅翼儒家经传的范畴。而且,他疏解字词文意又多以儒家经传为准的,对原书批评儒家的言辞也有意曲解,用以维护和尊崇儒学,由此表现出强烈的宗经、崇儒意识。这种意识直接导致高诱在注解《淮南》道家派言论时有意将其导向儒家义旨,一定程度上形成了以儒解道的倾向。除了能够窥测高诱的思想外,高注十三篇还为我们了解其学术状况打开了入口。通过分析高诱引述儒家经传的情况和论述《五经》的言论,其经学架构和受学渊源都能得到疏理,从而探知他的群经之学。第四章,从社会及学术背景、注解体例、诂训异同等方面对许高二注进行比较研究,并综合评价其学术地位和价值。许注产生于东汉中期,高注出现在汉之末世,整整相隔百年。虽然这一百年依旧是经学一统,但社会机体的内层却在悄悄发生转型。就政治面貌看,国家正由平稳兴旺转入混乱衰败。就学术格局看,经学正由昌明鼎盛转入昏暗式微。就社会思潮看,老庄思想正由微弱潜伏转入渐强显豁。时代背景的不同,造就士人治学方向和态度的不同。许慎忽子书,故注解疏阔；高诱重子书,故注解精详。相对《淮南子》来说,这一百年又是幸运的一百年,不但流布甚广,而且不乏研究者。许慎即是始作俑者,高诱则是总结者。这种情况决定了高注对许注存在直接的承袭关系。高诱毕竟是一位卓出的注疏家,与许注相比,高注的体例更加丰富,解题、释义、注音、引书、存异、校勘、阙疑一应俱全,并且形成了一套较为固定的训义体系。这反映出汉末学术重视集成、总结和求变的特点。尽管许高二注存在诸多差异,但从学术发展的历史看,两者皆有承上启下的学术地位,在文献、训诂等方面也包含着十分重要的价值。更多还原

【Abstract】 HuaiNanZi is a work of gorgeous literary grace and deep thoughts. Xu Shen and Gao You had notes for it successively in the Eastern Han Dynasty. There have been many research literatures about this book since ancient times. However, there are very few literature of Xu Shen and Gao You’s notes. And research results obtained about Xu Shen and Gao You’s notes is nothing more than the collection, amendment, as well as exegetical achievements, etc. But scholars have been not concerned about the ideological and academic significance of Xu Shen and Gao You’s notes. This article should not only continue to push for further on the basis of their achievements, and also try hard some dicussions from an entirely new angle.The first chapter is about the comprehensive investigation of the literature condition for XuShen and Gao You’s notes. Although the Qing dynasty scholars has made great achievements in this area, there are still many aspects that been worth repairing and supplement. The mix and discrimination of Xu Shen and Gao You’s notes is a problem which bears the brunt. According to the official and private bibliographies, we found that the two scholars’ notes were mixed in a book because of a palace fire during the ruled peroid of Song Taizong and Song Zhenzong. However, they had spread independently since then. Soon after, Su Song found the truth of the matter and made a distinction between Xu shen and Gao You’s notes. But his achievement had not brought to the attention. The two scholars’notes were separated again by Tao Fangqi 800 years later. The discrimination by the Qing dynasty scholars are mainly based on the Foreword of HuaiNanZi by Su Song. In fact, we can find a lot of evidences for the discrimination from the notes content such as the use of "see each other", the repetition of the same note, etc. Then the two thousand years spread history of Xu Shen and Gao You’s notes are more easily outlined. At the same time, the Qing Dynasty scholars only paid great attention to collecting Xu Shen’s lost notes and neglected the collection of Gao You’s. We find that there are about 70 lost notes belong to Gao You and more than 100 lost notes which not collected by the Qing Dynasty scholars belong to Xu Shen by the investigation to the condition of notes for HuaiNanZi been quoted in all previous dynasties’literatures.The second chapter begins with the concentrative discussions to 8 section of Xu Shen’s notes to HuaiNanZi mainly from being published time, exegesis characteristics, ideological nature as well as the relationship between Xu Shen’s notes and ShuoWenJieZi. Xu Shen explained HuaiNanZi in accidental situation. Studying HuaiNanZi was neither his family tradition, but also not his interest. On YongChu four years of the Eastern Han Dynasty(A.D.110), Xu Shen participated in a conference to re-organizing books as a subordinate official of TaiWei Fu. His task was to organize HuaiNanZi. One year later, his book was finished and gived to the royal government. Xu Shen’s notes to HuaiNanZi are incomplete, but the existing notes in eight chapters can also reflects the appearance of the entire book. In general, Xu Shen emphasised on summarizing the main idea of HuaiNanZi’s each chapter and explaining the words, the names and the history events. He also paid attention to Chu Dialect in HuaiNanZi. And exegetical terminology is rarely in his presentation, which makes it simple and clear. Xu Shen had a lot of his own unique insights for the Five Classics. He not only believed the old tradition of Confucian classics, but also had the courage to facing the critics to the Five Classics in HuaiNanZi. Xushen did not repel the viewpoint of pre-Qin thinkers particularly Lao-Zhuang and embodied strong knowing abilities. More importantly, the relationship between ShuoWenJiezi and Xu Shen’s notes for HuaiNanZi is complementary to each other, which promotes the academic development of Xu Shen.The third chapter is about the discussions to Gao You’s life and writings, the content and features of Gao You’s notes, the ideology of Gao You’s notes, the study of Confucian classics by Gao You and other issues, which been based on 13 section of Gao You’s notes for HuaiNanZi. Contrary to Xu Shen, Gao You explained HuaiNanZi that not only inherited Ma Rong and Lu Zhi’s study, but also is his own interest. From the remaining Gao You’s notes of view, the covered content is very extensive, with emphasis on the interpretation of the words, the names, the history events and seeking the great principles in subtle words that existed HuaiNanZi. Compared with other commentators in the Han Dynasty, Gao You paid more attention to interpretate the article title, refinement phonetic notation way, collect dialects and common sayings,as well as collate the difference of the words and leave some questions open. As a classicist with the consciousness of hardship, Gao You transplanted a large number of Confucian opinions to the Notes for HuaiNanZi, which integrated HuaiNanZi to the Confucianist classics. Moreover, he also took the Confucianist classics as a standard when he explained the words and meaning of HuaiNanZi. Gao You intended to misinterpret the critical comments to Confucians in HuaiNanZi that was used to maintain and respect Confucianism. Gao You had strong consciousness of respecting the classics which led him to use the Confucianist essential meaning when he explained the Taoism in HuaiNanZi. Gao You’s notes also opens the entrance for our understanding of his academic structure. We are able to discovery of Gao You’s study of Confucian classics by By analysis on the situation that Gao You quoted Confucian classics and commented on the Five Classics.The fourth chapter is about the comparative study of Xu Shen and Gao You’s notes for HuaiNanZi from the social and academic background, the style of notation, the similarities and differences in exegesis, etc. Xu Shen’s Notes to HuaiNanZi was produced in the mid-Eastern Han Dynasty and Gao You’s Notes for HuaiNanZi appeared in the end-Han Dynasty. There are nearly 100 years apart between the two. It was still a period of domination by Confucianism, but the inner layer of the social body had quietly taken place in the transition in this 100 years. On the political landscape, the state had being shifted from prosperity and stability to chaos and decay. On the academic structure of view, Classical studies had being plunged into the decline from its peak flourishing. On social thought of view, the thoughts in Lao-Zhuang had being more and more popular. Different background results in the different direction and attitudes of scholarship. Xu Shen neglected ZiShu, so his notes to HuaiNanZi were curt. Gao You attached importance to ZiShu, so his notes to HuaiNanZi were detailed. For HuaiNanZi, it was a period of being spread widely and studied deeply in this 100 years. Xu Shen was the initiator and Gao You was the summarizer of studying HuaiNanZi, which led to a direct inheritance relationship between Xu Shen and Gao You’s Notes to HuaiNanZi. After all, Gao You was an outstanding commentator. Compared with XuShen’s notes, the styles of his notes are richer which inculd the interpretation of the article title, exegesis, phonetic notation, quotation, reserving differences, collation and leaving questions open. Moreover, there is a set of relatively fixed interpretation system in Gao You’s notes. This reflects the academic characteristic of integrating, summarizing and innovating in end-Eastern Han Dynasty. Although there are many differences between Xu Shen and Gao You’s notes to HuaiNanZi, they both have a role of linking the preceding with the following and documentary value in the history of academic development.更多还原