《鬼谷子》真?zhèn)渭拔膶W價值
發(fā)布時間：2018-04-25 03:21
本文選題：鬼谷子 + 真?zhèn)?/strong>��； 參考：《西北師范大學》2004年博士論文
【摘要】： 本文共約19萬字，分9章對《鬼谷子》進行研究，其中主要涉及《鬼谷子》的真?zhèn)螁栴}、作者問題、成書問題，以及其中蘊涵的文學理論及其在先秦文學史上的地位等4個大的問題。主要結(jié)論及其證據(jù)如下： 關(guān)于真?zhèn)螁栴}，從第一章至第五章，分別從《鬼谷子》不偽的文獻學考察、與出土文獻及傳世文獻作比較、先秦思想史、語言發(fā)展史等五個方面，對真?zhèn)螁栴}進行全面分析論證。在第一章，筆者主要從文獻學的角度論述《鬼谷子》不是偽書。從唐代柳宗元開始對《鬼谷子》的真?zhèn)螁栴}提出懷疑，此后歷代學者一直爭論不休。直到近代，隨著疑古風氣的盛行，其為偽書基本已成定論。筆者對偽書說的證據(jù)進行一一分析，認為其結(jié)論均不能成立。關(guān)于《鬼谷子》與《蘇子》的關(guān)系，有人認為《鬼谷子》是《蘇子》一部分，故為偽書，反對者則認為《鬼谷子》是《蘇子》一部分恰證明其為先秦舊作，不是偽書。經(jīng)過研究，筆者發(fā)現(xiàn)，《鬼谷子》曾誤名為《蘇秦書》，又因此而被誤為《蘇子》�！豆砉茸印犯静皇恰短K子》的一部分。又以漢人的記載為依據(jù)，論定《鬼谷子》不是偽書。 除了文獻學上的證據(jù)之外，筆者把《鬼谷子》與馬王堆帛書《經(jīng)法》、《戰(zhàn)國縱橫家書》、郭店楚簡《語叢四》、阜陽漢簡等內(nèi)容相同部分進行比較，得出《鬼谷子》早于帛書和竹簡的結(jié)論；再把《鬼谷子》與傳世文獻《鄧析子》、《管子》、《戰(zhàn)國策》等內(nèi)容相同部分進行比較，從語言發(fā)展的角度看，同樣得出《鬼谷子》的內(nèi)容要早于這些傳世文獻。通過這樣的對比，得出《鬼谷子》應(yīng)是戰(zhàn)國中期作品的結(jié)論。 根據(jù)學術(shù)發(fā)展由簡單到復(fù)雜，呈現(xiàn)逐步疊加的趨勢，本文從先秦時期代表性的著作《詩經(jīng)》、《論語》、《老子》、《周易》、《墨子》、《莊子》、《孟子》、《荀子》、《韓非子》、《呂氏春秋》等著作中篩選出“陰陽五行思想”、“認識論的發(fā)展”、“因的理論發(fā)展”、“圣人認識的發(fā)展”等這一時期一些主要理論的發(fā)展線索，歸納這些理論的發(fā)展環(huán)節(jié)，然后分析《鬼谷子》中這些思想的實際內(nèi)容，找出《鬼谷子》在先秦思想發(fā)展史上的對應(yīng)環(huán)節(jié)，以確定《鬼谷子》的真?zhèn)�。同時輔以德國哲學家雅斯貝爾斯的世界文明“軸心期”的理論，選擇出戰(zhàn)國時期理論上的幾個熱點，看《鬼谷子》是否參與了這些熱點的討論。根據(jù)這一思路來檢索《鬼谷子》，發(fā)現(xiàn)其確實參與了這一時期部分學術(shù)熱點的討論，并發(fā)表了很好的見解，由此推斷《鬼谷子》確實是產(chǎn)生于戰(zhàn)國中期的著作。 判斷某部著作是否是偽書，，從語言學的角度，尤其是音韻學的角度來研究是一個很科學的方法．本文以曾運乾《音韻學講義》的理論為基礎(chǔ)，結(jié)合羅常培、周祖謨合著的《漢魏晉南北朝韻部演變研究》中關(guān)于“周秦音”與“兩漢音”韻部分合的觀點，在參照江有誥《先秦韻讀·鬼谷子韻讀》、姚文田《古音諧》的基礎(chǔ)上系統(tǒng)整理《鬼谷子》的用韻情況，得出全書共有76處用韻。其中魚侯分立、真元分立、脂微分立、質(zhì)物分立、歌支分立、幽宵分立的現(xiàn)象說明，《鬼谷子》的產(chǎn)生年代下限不可能晚至西漢時期，又從其中“冬”部已從“侵”部分化出來，判斷其產(chǎn)生年限的上限不早于《詩經(jīng)》。 關(guān)于作者問題。從用韻特點看，《鬼谷子》的第一部分《捭闔》等六篇、《符言》篇、《本經(jīng)陰符》的用韻相一致，其作者應(yīng)為鬼谷子本人；《揣》等五篇的很少用韻，且用韻特點與《捭闔》等不一致，其作者當為鬼谷先生的弟子中縱橫家一派；《持樞》、《中經(jīng)》均不見用韻，其作者可能是鬼谷先生的門人或后學。鬼 谷先生，真實姓名不詳，生平年代大約為前400至前320年左右，他早年可能曾 傳授孫膜、龐涓兵法，后入齊國，做過齊翟下先生，并在齊地傳授蘇秦、張儀縱 橫裨闔之學，晚年隱居于鬼谷著述，并教尉繚兵法。其得名是因為曾居住過鬼谷 這個地方，而被人們稱為鬼谷先生。后世有人稱其王栩、王禪、劉務(wù)滋等均不可 靠。鬼谷之地在今河南登封縣境內(nèi)，其得名主要是因為殷商時期的鬼方曾居住于 此。 關(guān)于成書問題。根據(jù)今本《鬼谷子》的殘缺情況，可以把其分為三組，通過 分析這三組作品發(fā)現(xiàn)，每組的第一小組作品均不殘，后面的一組則殘缺或遺佚， 結(jié)合音韻規(guī)律，得出這三組作品不是一人所作，而是鬼谷先生的三個不同派別的 學生把老師鬼谷先生的作品放在前，把自己的述作放在后而形成的。《裨闔》等 六篇為鬼谷先生作，《揣》等五篇是其弟子中縱橫家一派所作，其縱橫家弟子作 了編輯工作。這次的編輯，形成今本《鬼谷子》的一個源頭;《符言》為鬼谷先 生所作，《轉(zhuǎn)丸》等兩篇已遺失的作品，當為其弟子中道家一派所作，他們把鬼 谷先生的作品放在前，把自己的述作放在后，形成今本《鬼谷子》的另一個源頭; 《本經(jīng)陰符七術(shù)》為鬼谷先生作，《持樞》等為其弟子中其他學派中的人所作， 這些弟子或門人把鬼谷先生的作品與自己的述作放在一起，形成今本的第三個源 頭。前兩個源頭被劉向整理編輯成一個本子，這是《鬼谷子》的第一次成書;第 三部分在西晉之前也被編入《鬼谷子》中，從而形成《鬼谷子》三卷本，這是《鬼 谷子》第二次成書�！豆砉茸印烦蓵螅群笥谢矢χk、陶宏景、樂壹?
[Abstract]:In this paper, there are about 19 thousand words and 9 chapters to study the "ghost millet", which mainly involves the authenticity of the "ghost millet", the author's question, the book problem, the literary theory contained in it and its status in the literary history of the pre-Qin period, and other 4 major problems. The main conclusions and the evidence are as follows:
From the first chapter to the fifth chapter, from the first chapter to the fifth chapter, respectively from the literature study of "ghost millet >", the comparison with the unearthed literature and the literature of the world, the history of the pre Qin thought and the history of language development, the author makes a comprehensive analysis and demonstration of the true and false problems. In the first chapter, the author mainly discusses from the angle of philology that "ghost millet > is not a false book. From Tang Dynasty" Liu Zongyuan began to doubt the true and false of "ghosts". Since then, the scholars have been arguing all the time. Until modern times, with the popularity of the doubt, the perjury is basically a conclusion. The author analyses the evidence of the false book and thinks that all the conclusions can not be established. Ghost millet > is a part of the Soviet son, so it is a false book, and the opponents think that the "ghost millet > is a part of the Soviet Zi" is not a false book. After research, the author found that the "ghost millet >" was mistaken as < Su Qin book >, and therefore was mistaken for "Su Zi >." "ghost millet >" is not a part of the "Soviet Zi >". It is not a false book to determine that "ghost millet" is not a false book.
In addition to the documentary evidence, the author compares the contents of "ghosts millet > the silk book of Mawangdui", "the Warring States", "the Warring States", the four > the Fuyang bamboo slips in the same part, and draws the conclusion that "the ghost millet > earlier than the silk book and the bamboo slips"; and then the contents of the "ghost millet >" and the bibliography < Deng >, < Guan Zi >, "gustate policy >") Compared with the same part, from the point of view of language development, the content of the "ghost millet" is earlier than the literature of these generations. Through this comparison, it is concluded that the "ghost millet" should be the conclusion of the works in the middle of the Warring States period.
According to the trend of academic development from simple to complex and gradually superimposed, this article from the representative works of the pre Qin period: the Book of Songs >, the Analects of Confucius, < Lao Zi >, < Zhou Yi >, < Mo-tse >, < Chuang-tzu >, < Mencius >, < Xunzi >, < Han Fei Zi >, < Lu's spring and autumn > and so on. "The development of the five lines of the Yin and Yang", "the development of epistemology", "the development of the theory", The development of some of the main theories in this period, such as "the development of the saints' cognition", summarized the development links of these theories, then analyzed the actual contents of these ideas in the "ghost millet >" and found out the corresponding links in the history of the thought development in the pre Qin period, in order to determine the authenticity of the "ghost millet >" and the German philosopher Jaspers. The theory of the "axis period" of the world civilization chooses several hot spots in the period of the Warring States period to see whether or not the "ghost millet" has participated in the discussion of these hot spots. A Book produced in the middle of the Warring States period.
It is a scientific method to judge whether a book is a false book, from the linguistic point of view, especially in the perspective of phonology. This article is based on the theory of "the speech of phonology", which combines Luo Changpei and Zhou Zumo's "study of the evolution of the rhyme of the northern and Southern Dynasties in the Han, Wei and Jin Dynasties" and the rhyme of "Zhou Qin Yin" and "Han Yin". The point of view is to make a systematic arrangement of the rhyme of "ghost millet" on the basis of Jiang Yu Gao, "the first Qin rhyme reading" and "the ancient phonology" and "ancient phonology". It is concluded that there are 76 rhymes in the whole book. In the whole book, there are 76 rhymes in the whole book. It may be late to the Western Han Dynasty, and from the "winter" part of the "invasion" part of the judgment, the age limit of its production is not earlier than "Book of Songs >.
In terms of the author's question. From the features of the rhyme, the first part of the ghost Valley, the first part of the ghost Valley, and other six articles, and the same rhyme of the book of Yin, the author should be the ghost millet himself; the author is the one of the disciples of the ghost Valley, and the author is a disciple of the ghost valley. There is no rhyme in the passage. The author may be the disciple or the later school.
Mr. Gu, whose real name is unknown, was about 400 to 320 years ago.
To teach Sun Mo, Pang Juan's art of war, to go to the Qi State, to do Mr. Qi Zhai, and to teach Su Qin and Zhang Yizong together.
In the later years, he lived in the valley of the ghost and wrote the martial arts.
This place is known as "ghost Valley". Later generations call it Wang Xu, Wang Chan, Liu Zi Zi and so on.
The land of ghost Valley is located in Dengfeng County of Henan today. Its name is mainly because the ghost party lived in the Shang Dynasty.
This is the case.
According to the incomplete condition of the present gugui Zi, it can be divided into three groups.
Analysis of these three groups found that the first group of each group was not disabled, and the latter group was incomplete or missing.
Combined with the laws of phonology, it is concluded that these three groups of works are not made by one person, but by three different factions of Mr. Gu Gu.
Students put their works in front of their teacher's works.
The six is the work of Mr. Gu Gu, and five of his disciples.
The editor is the source of this book.
Two works that have been lost, such as "Sheng Bao" and so on, are made by the Taoist family of their disciples.
Mr. Gu's works are placed before him, and his own works are put into a later source, forming another source of this book.
This book is written by Mr. Gu Gu, and is written by people in other schools of his disciples, seven.
These disciples or gatekeepers put together the works of Mr. Gu Gu and his own works to form the third sources of this book.
The first two sources were compiled into a book by Liu.
The three part was also compiled into "guguzi" before the Western Jin Dynasty, thus forming "ghost millet" > three volumes.
Millet > second books. "Gugui Zi" after the book, Huangfu Mi, Tao Hongjing, Le Yi successively?
【學位授予單位】：西北師范大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2004
【分類號】：K206
【引證文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條
1 馮立;;《鬼谷子》歷代研究綜述[J];許昌學院學報;2008年06期
2 梁奇;;戰(zhàn)國前期韓國作家群體考論[J];文藝評論;2013年04期
相關(guān)博士學位論文 前1條
1 李艷華;秦漢之際縱橫策士考論[D];西北師范大學;2007年
相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前1條
1 李霞;《鬼谷子》偏正結(jié)構(gòu)研究[D];西南大學;2013年
本文編號：1799535
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/shekelunwen/zhongguolishiwenhua/1799535.html
