《歸藏易》硏究之顧與評議
The Retrospection and Review about the Studies of Guicang-Yi
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Classics_Zhouli-Chunguan-Zongbo-Taibu was written the contents to be in charge of the law about three Yi_ Lianshan, Guicang and Zhouyi, all the classic trigrams were eight divinatory symbols and their differentiated hexagrams were 64 ancient divination symbols. The scholars traditionally deemed that Guicang was ascribed to the Yinshang period and the first hexagram was ‘Kun’, so it was named Guicang. Guicang was’nt recorded into Hanshu-Yiwenzhi, but Suishu-Jingjizhi was recorded as below: “Guicang had been lost in the beginning of Han Dynasty, Zhongjing in Jin Danasty had only been recorded the divination but dissimilar to the Saint’s implication.” So we can know Guicang has been lost after Wei-Jin Dynasties. Confucian scholar_ Ma Guo-Han（1794-1857）in Qing Dynasty collected the lost Guicang in his masterpiece_ Yuhan-Shanfang Jiyishu. Until now the famous work is still based on by the current scholars. However the scholars in all the past dynasties always unceasingly debated and had’nt obtained the identical opinions. Fortunately, the 15th Qin tomb at Wangjiatai, Jiangling City, Hubei Province in March, 1993 had been come out of an excavation_ Guicang（Wangjiatai-Qinjian-Guicang）, therefore again unsealed the great mass fervor to research Guicang. The main aims of this paper not only collate the research results about Guicang-Yi, but also proceed the retrospection and review about the studies. The author sincerely hopes the scholars can return into the root and initiate the new aspects. The paper can be provided the scholars for investigating the indistinction and be required the contemplation and reference resources upon the research of Guicang-Yi.
Abstract
The Classics_Zhouli-Chunguan-Zongbo-Taibu was written the contents to be in charge of the law about three Yi_ Lianshan, Guicang and Zhouyi, all the classic trigrams were eight divinatory symbols and their differentiated hexagrams were 64 ancient divination symbols. The scholars traditionally deemed that Guicang was ascribed to the Yinshang period and the first hexagram was ‘Kun’, so it was named Guicang. Guicang was’nt recorded into Hanshu-Yiwenzhi, but Suishu-Jingjizhi was recorded as below: “Guicang had been lost in the beginning of Han Dynasty, Zhongjing in Jin Danasty had only been recorded the divination but dissimilar to the Saint’s implication.” So we can know Guicang has been lost after Wei-Jin Dynasties. Confucian scholar_ Ma Guo-Han（1794-1857）in Qing Dynasty collected the lost Guicang in his masterpiece_ Yuhan-Shanfang Jiyishu. Until now the famous work is still based on by the current scholars. However the scholars in all the past dynasties always unceasingly debated and had’nt obtained the identical opinions. Fortunately, the 15th Qin tomb at Wangjiatai, Jiangling City, Hubei Province in March, 1993 had been come out of an excavation_ Guicang（Wangjiatai-Qinjian-Guicang）, therefore again unsealed the great mass fervor to research Guicang. The main aims of this paper not only collate the research results about Guicang-Yi, but also proceed the retrospection and review about the studies. The author sincerely hopes the scholars can return into the root and initiate the new aspects. The paper can be provided the scholars for investigating the indistinction and be required the contemplation and reference resources upon the research of Guicang-Yi.
참고문헌 (59)
- 鄭玄注, "周禮注疏" (2010), 上海，上海古籍出版社
- 南朝梁, "文心雕龍注釋" (2007), 臺北，里仁書局
- 令狐德棻, "隋書" (1973), 北京，中華書局
- 房玄齡, "晉書" (1983), 臺北，鼎文書局
- 劉昫等, "舊唐書" (1975), 北京，中華書局
- 王堯臣, "崇文總目" (2008), 廣州，廣州出版社
- 歐陽脩, "新唐書" (1985), 臺北，鼎文書局
- 鄭樵, "光緒中浙江書局刊本" (2007), 西安，陜西人民出版社
- 嚴可均, "全上古三代秦漢三國六朝文" (1961), 臺北，世界書局
- 馬國翰, "玉函山房輯佚書" (2004), 揚州，廣陵書社
- 劉汝霖, "漢晉學術編年" (1935), 上海，上海書店
- 邢文, "帛書周易研究" (1997), 北京，人民出版社
- 楊慶中, "二十世紀中國易學史" (2000), 北京，人民 出版社
- 艾蘭, "新出土簡帛研究" (2004), 北京，文物出版社
- 王明欽, "王家臺秦墓竹簡概述", pp.26~49
- 王葆玹, "從秦簡《歸藏》看《易象》說與卦德說的起源", pp.146~153
- 柯鶴立, "兆與傳說──關於新出《歸藏》簡書的幾點思考", pp.154~157
- 柯鶴立, "Omens and Myth: Thoughts on the Guicang Manuscript", pp.158~162
- 田笠, "Some Observations on Milfoil Divination", pp.163~166
- 邢文, "《歸藏》的分篇及其學派", pp.167~
- 賴貴三, "臺灣易學史" (2005), 臺北，里仁書局
- 楊伯峻, "春秋左傳注" (2008), 北京，中華書局
- 劉師培, "〈《連山》《歸藏》考〉，收入《周易研究論文集》，第一輯，《中國學報》（洪憲），第二冊。", ~
- 郭沫若, "周易 之制作年代. In 收入 青銅時代" (1945), 臺北，文治出版社
- 楊樹藩, "連山易 與董仲舒思想", 中華文化復興月刊, 3(7), pp.13~17 (1970)
- 高明, "連山 歸藏 考. In 收入 高明文輯, 上冊", pp.117~140 (1978), 臺北，黎明文化事業公司
- 杜而未, "《連山》與《歸藏》問題", 恆毅, 28(8), pp.30~33 (1979)
- 黃師沛榮, "先秦筮書考", 書目季刊, 17(3), pp.80~87 (1983)
- 翟中麟, "黃帝《歸藏易》醫學（上）", 中華易學, 8(1), pp.43~49 (1987)
- 翟中麟, "黃帝《歸藏易》醫學（中）", 中華易學, 8(2), pp.34~41 (1987)
- 翟中麟, "黃帝《歸藏易》醫學 （下）", 中華易學, 8(3), pp.43~47 (1987)
- 翟中麟, "試論黃帝《歸藏易經》應用一例 （上）", 中華易學, 8(9), pp.22~26 (1987)
- 翟中麟, "試論黃帝《歸藏易經》應用一例 （下）", 中華易學, 8(10), pp.24~29 (1987)
- 荊州地區博物館, "江陵王家臺15號秦墓", 文物, (1), pp.40~42 (1995)
- 王寧, "《歸藏》卦名辨證", 周易研究, (2), pp.14~20 (1995)
- 連劭名, "江陵王家臺秦簡與《歸藏》", 江漢考古, (4), pp.66~68 (1996)
- 王明欽, "試論《歸藏》的幾個問題. In 一劍集──北京大學考古專業八六屆畢業十週年紀念文集", pp.101~112 (1996), 北京，中國婦女出版社
- 李零, "跳出《周易》看《周易》──數字卦的再認識", 傳統文化與現代化, (6), pp.22~28 (1997)
- 李家浩, "王家臺秦簡 ｢《易》占｣為《歸藏》考", 傳統文化與現代化, (1), pp.46~52 (1997)
- 王明欽, "〈《歸藏》與夏啟的傳說——兼論臺與祭壇的關係與釣臺的地望〉，原載《華學》，第3輯，1998年10月。後收入荊州博物館，《荊州博物館建館五十周年紀念論文集》", 文物出版社, ~ (2008)
- 邢文, "《左傳》、《國語》筮例的再認識", 國際儒學研究, 4 (1998)
- 王興業, "三論《歸藏易》", 周易研究, (2), pp.3~11 (1999)
- 王寧, "秦墓 ｢《易》占｣與《歸藏》之關係", 考古與文物, (1), pp.49~55 (2000)
- 邢文, "秦簡《歸藏》與《周易》用商", 文物, (2), pp.58~63 (2000)
- 林忠軍, "王家臺秦簡《歸藏》出土的《易》學價值", 周易研究, (2), pp.3~12 (2001)
- 廖名春, "王家臺秦簡《歸藏》管窺", 周易研究, (2), pp.13~19 (2001)
- 連劭名, "江陵王家臺秦簡《歸藏》筮書考", 中國哲學史, (3), pp.5~11 (2001)
- 朱淵清, "王家臺《歸藏》與《穆天子傳》", 周易研究, (6), pp.9~13 (2002)
- 任俊華, "《歸藏》、《坤乾》源流考──兼論秦簡《歸藏》兩種摘抄本的由來與命名", 周易研究, (6), pp.14~23 (2002)
- 梁韋弦, "王家臺秦簡 ｢《易》占｣與殷《易》──《歸藏》", 周易研究, (6), pp.38~43 (2002)
- 王輝, "王家臺秦簡《歸藏》校釋（28則）", 江漢考古, (1), pp.75~84 (2003)
- 梁韋弦, "秦簡《歸藏》與汲塚書", 齊魯學刊, (6), pp.121~123 (2003)
- 程二行, "《歸藏》非殷人之《易》考", 中國哲學史, (2), pp.100~107 (2004)
- 徐道一, "從《歸藏》發展到《周易》的啟示", 殷都學刊, (3), pp.33~42 (2004)
- 蔡運章, "秦簡〈寡〉、〈天〉、〈■〉諸卦解詁──兼論《歸藏易》的若干問題", 中原文物, (1), pp.42~52 (2005)
- 李尚信, "讀王家臺秦墓竹簡《易》占札記", 周易研究, (2), pp.17~32 (2008)
- 王立洲, "《歸藏》在漢、魏兩代的文化史意義", 古典文獻研究, pp.1~13 (2009)
- 宋鎮豪, "談談《連山》和《歸藏》", 文物, (2), pp.48~58 (2010)
- 史善剛, "王家臺秦簡《易》卦非 ｢殷《易》｣亦非《歸藏》", 中國哲學, (3), pp.34~41 (2010)