2016年9月7日 星期三

《容安館札記》251~255則


 
南宋乾道高郵軍學刊本《淮海集》



二百五十一[1]



            秦觀《淮海集》十七卷、《後集》二卷、《詞》一卷、《補遺》一卷,道光十七年重刊本。少游詩心思不深,邊幅頗窘,以較東坡之氣體渾灝、山谷之骨格峭奇,便成小家。好雕鍊詞句,早作五古尤甚,殆《童蒙訓》引李公擇語謂似謝家兄弟者,然頗有「換字」之譏,非真語妙。《竹莊詩話》卷十引《禁臠》論東坡〈蘆雁〉詩,因及少游「松江浩無旁,垂虹跨其上」一詩云:「此但排比好句耳,非能使之頓挫也。」更中其失(少游詩見卷二〈與子瞻參寥會松江〉)。【《緯略》卷六引少游跋〈輞川圖〉文;《古今事文類聚續集》卷二載〈答裴仲謀摘白鬚行〉、卷三十七載〈答裴仲謀放兔行〉,皆五古。】七言近體,情致芊綿,偶落纖耳。《苕溪漁隱叢話前集》卷五十一、《詩人玉屑》卷十八皆載少游和王仲至詩云:「簾幕千家錦繡垂」,仲至笑曰:「此語又待入小石調也」;《瀛奎律髓》卷十二批少游〈九月八日夜風雨寄王定國〉詩所謂「敲點匀淨,然以善作詞,多有句近乎詞」者,皆可發明。文雖饒機趣,却清飭不拈弄,格高於山谷也。少游論作律賦語,詳見李方叔《師友談記》所謂「智巧餖飣」只如填詞者。【孫賓谷《庚子銷夏記》卷一載秦少游〈論書帖〉,蓋不知為後人錄山谷語,託名少游書,鑑賞家不足信如此。】

            卷一〈曾子固哀詞〉有云:「篤生我公兮,以文章爲世師」;「發天人之奧秘兮,約六藝而成章」;「不肖以薄技兮,早獲進於門牆。」按此段因緣,秦小峴作《年譜》所未道。卷二〈次韻邢敦夫秋懷〉第三首云:「昔者曾中書,門戶實難瞰。筆勢如長淮,初源可觴濫。」亦謂子固也。

            卷二〈泊吳興觀音院〉:「洩雲彗層空,規荷鑑幽沚。」

            〈春日雜興〉:「雨砌墮危芳,風櫺納飛絮。」按卷三〈睡起〉又云:「爬搔失幽囀,款欠墮危芳。」

            〈送李端叔〉:「著書如結氂,聊以忘憂耳。」

            〈送張和叔〉:「汝南如一器,百千聚飛蚊。終然鼓狂鬧,啾啾竟誰聞。」按此用《楞嚴經》卷五琉璃光法王子白佛曰:「乃至三千大千,一世界內所有眾生,如一器中置百蚊蚋,啾啾亂鳴,於分寸中鼓發狂鬧。」《猗覺寮雜記》卷上謂退之〈醉贈張秘書〉詩「雖得一餉樂,有如聚飛蚊」乃本《楞嚴》此數語,則附會矣。《有不為齋隨筆壬》謂:「此為適合,不係徵用。且細玩一『餉』字,亦非引譬器中聚蚊。」(參觀《竹坡詩話》論退之平日未嘗用佛家語,故〈嘲鼾睡〉詩為偽託。)又按參觀Oeuv. complètes de Guy de Maupassant, T. I, Préface par Pol Neveux, p. 46: “Dans cette vie où nous tourbillonnons sur nous-mêmes ‘comme des mouches dans une carafe’, seul le pire arrive.”J. Thoraval, L’Art de Maupassant, p. 161 引)。【《朱文公集》卷五十八〈答楊子順‧之三〉:「世間許多紛紛擾擾,如百千蚊蚋鼓發狂鬧,何嘗入得他聖賢胸次耶?】

            〈自作挽詞〉:「嬰釁徙窮荒,茹哀與世辭。官來錄我橐,吏來驗我屍。藤束木皮棺,藁葬路傍陂。家鄉在萬里,妻子天一涯。孤魂不敢歸,惴惴猶在兹。(中略)歲晚瘴江急,鳥獸鳴聲悲。空濛寒雨零,慘淡陰風吹。殯宮生蒼蘚,紙錢掛空枝。無人設薄奠,誰與飯黃緇。亦無挽歌者,空有挽歌詞。」按真摯之作。《年譜》元符三年下云:「先生在雷州〈自作挽詞〉,自〈序〉曰:『昔鮑照、陶潛皆自作哀詞,讀余此章,乃知前作之未哀也。』」信然。所引自〈序〉不載《集》中,何也?

            卷三〈紀夢答劉全美〉:「夢出城闉登古原,草木縈天帶流水。千夫荷鍤開久殯……云是劉郎字全美……既寤茫然失所遭,河轉星翻汗如洗。世傳夢凶常得吉,神物戲人良有旨。全美聲名海縣聞,閉久當開乃其理。」按《莊子‧齊物論》早謂:「夢飲酒者,旦而哭泣;夢哭泣者,旦而田獵。」《列子》謂:「將陰夢火,將疾夢食。飲酒者憂,歌舞者哭。」殷浩謂:「得位夢棺,得錢夢糞。」沈廷松《皇明百家小說》第一百十三帙潘游龍《笑禪錄》云:「《楞伽》曰:『觀察世妄相,如幻夢芭蕉』云云。—人告友:『我昨夜夢見大哭.此必不祥。』友云:『無妨無妨,夜裏夢大哭,日裏便是大笑。』其人復云:『若果然,夜裏夢見有我在哭,日裏豈不是無我在笑?』」《六合內外瑣言》「燭光愛主」條亦有凡夢多反之說。【《潛夫論夢列第二十八》論占夢十事有云:「晉文公夢楚子伏己而盬其腦。及戰,乃大勝。此謂極反之夢也。」】【《拍案驚奇二刻》卷十九:「夢是反的:夢福得禍,夢笑得哭。」】Apuleius, Metamorphoseon, Lib. IV. 27: “Tunc etiam nocturnae visiones contrarios eventus nonnumquam pronuntiant” etc.; Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs, p. 88: “Dream of a funeral & you hear of a marriage,” “Dreams go by contraries.” 東坡〈秦少游夢發殯而葬之者云是劉發之柩是歲發首薦秦以詩賀之劉涇亦作因次其韻〉有云:「居官死職士死綏,夢屍得棺真古語。」又按《韻語陽秋》卷十一謂:「少游此詩,乃一時褒美贊喜之詞,非殷浩意。東坡詩則云:『故令將仕夢發棺,勸子勿為官所腐。』可謂巧於遣詞者。」餘見七五九則論《列子‧周穆王篇》。

            〈贈女冠暢師〉:「霧閣雲窗人莫窺,門前車馬任東西。禮罷曉壇春日靜,落紅滿地乳鴉啼。」

            〈睡起〉:「蛛網留晴絮,蜂房受晚香。」

            卷四〈遊龍門山〉:「樓臺特起喧卑外,村落隨生指顧中。」

            〈次韻子由題平山堂〉:「雨檻幽花滋淺淚,風巵清酒漲微瀾。」

            〈遊鑑湖〉:「水光入座杯盤瑩,花氣侵人笑語香。」按陳後山〈九日不出魏衍見過〉云:「壁面稱詩語笑香」,不成語;〈奉陪趙大夫遊桓山〉云:「羅綺叢中語笑香」,亦乏韻味,均不如少游語。惟《吳會英才集》卷二方子雲〈閒居次韻〉亦云:「竹間睡閣簾櫳綠,花裏居人笑語香。」如改「簾櫳」為「神魂」尤佳。唐子西《眉山文集》21〈書齋即事〉:「竹色笑語綠,松風意思涼。[2]」《竹莊詩話》卷廿四引《漫齋語錄》謂少游學古詩「拂石坐來衫袖冷,踏花歸去馬蹄香。」《獨醒雜志》卷六俞處俊詩[3]:「叫月子規喉舌冷,宿花胡蝶夢魂香。」本之杜牧〈除官歸京睦州雨霽〉[4]:「水聲侵笑語,嵐翠撲衣裳。」

            〈答裴仲謀〉:「方愧貧家矜敝帚,忽蒙鄰壁借餘明。[5]

            〈次韻裴仲謀〉:「支枕星河橫醉後,入簾風絮報春深。」

            卷五〈泗州東城晚望〉:「渺渺孤城白水環,舳艫人語夕霏間。林梢一抹青如畫,應是淮流轉處山。」

            〈春日〉:「一夕輕雷落萬絲,霽光浮瓦碧參差。有情芍藥含春淚,無力薔薇臥晚枝。」

            〈秋日〉:「霜落邗溝積水清,寒星無數傍船明。菇蒲深處疑無地,忽有人家笑語聲。」「月團新碾瀹花瓷,飲罷呼兒課楚詞。風定小軒無落葉,青蟲相對吐秋絲。」按危稹《巽齋小集‧春日即事》云:「麥風翻隴潑濃綠,花露滴枝黏老紅。小立樓頭檢春事,一絲暖日墜青蟲。」蓋仿少游此首。又按《野獲編補遺》卷一謂「一瀹便啜」昉於明太祖,用茶芽,而不加香料,碾為龍團,然觀少游此作第二句;《雲笈七籤》卷一百十三下引沈汾《續仙傳》之〈聶師道傳〉以湯潑茶;《蔡忠惠公集》卷三十〈茶錄〉論注茶湯多則雲腳,湯少則粥面;東坡〈試院煎茶詩〉自注:「古語煎水不煎茶」;《欒城集》卷四〈和子瞻煎茶〉則以湯潑茶,所謂「相傳煎茶只煎水,茶性仍存偏有味」;王觀國《學林》卷八「茶詩」條論「茶佳品皆點啜,其煎啜者常品」;《類說》卷四十七載《遯齋閒覽》「李泌茶詩」條論煎茶皆草茶,不知點試之妙,皆見唐、宋已有瀹茗矣。

            〈春日偶題〉:「三年京國鬢如絲,又見新花發故枝。日典春衣非為酒,家貧食粥已多時。」       

            卷十二〈眇倡傳〉:「美倡有眇一目者,謀與母西遊京師。或止之曰:『娼而眇,何往而不窮?且京師天下之色府也,美眄巧笑,雪肌漆髮,籍於有司者以千萬計。使若具兩目,猶恐往而不售,況眇一焉!其瘠於溝中必矣。』倡曰:『固所聞也。然諺有之:心相憐,馬首圓。以京師之大,是豈知無我儷者?』遂行。抵梁,居於濱河逆旅。居一月,有少年從數騎出河上,見而悅,為解鞍留飲燕,終日而去。明日復來,取置別第中。謝絕姻黨,身執爨以奉之。有書生嘲之,少年忿曰:『自余得若人,還視世之女子,無不餘一目者。夫佳目,得一足矣,又奚以多為!』」按參觀第二百五則、二百十三則。【《蛾術編》卷七十九記:「〈七十初度自壽〉云:『賀我爭稱開瞽樂,看人翻笑兩眸多。』宋人小說有士人昵一妓,妓眇一目,其友訝之,士人曰:『美目得一足矣,何必二?予觀天下女子皆多一目。』暗用此。」即此文也。《宋文憲公全集》卷三十七〈燕書四十首〉記:「癸北子翏娶曲逆醜女,眇左目,字之曰『玄姬』[6],反笑世人多一目」云云。參觀六五四則。】【A. Moravia, Racconti Romani: “La controfigura” (Opere complete, Bompiani, VII, p. 48): “per non amarla più cercavo di ricordarmi soprattutto i suoi difetti. Fatica sprecata” etc.

            〈二侯說〉:「閩有侯白,善陰中人,鄉裏憎而畏之,莫敢與較。一日,遇女子侯黑於路,據井傍佯。白怪而問焉,黑曰:『不幸墮珥於井,直百金。能取之,當分半以謝。』白良久計曰:『得珥固可紿而勿與。』因許之。脫衣井旁,縋而下。黑則盡取其衣,亟去,莫知所塗。故今閩人呼相賣曰:『我己侯白,伊更侯黑。』余謂今世薦紳之士,閒居負道德、矜仁義,一旦顯於朝,迫利害,則叛友而誣親,擠人而售己,更相伺候,若弈棋然。二侯之事,何所怪哉!」

            卷十四〈答傅彬老簡〉:「蘇氏之道,最深於性命自得之際;其次則器足以任重,識足以致遠。至於議論文章,乃其與世周旋,至粗者也。閣下論蘇氏而其說止於文章,意欲尊蘇氏,適卑之耳。中書之道,如日月星辰經緯天地,有生之類皆知仰其高明。補闕則不然,其道如元氣行於渾淪之中,萬物由之而不知也。故中書嘗自謂:『吾不及子由。』僕竊以為知言。」

            〈弔鏄鐘文〉,唐覲《延州筆記》卷四謂其本劉蛻〈冢銘〉。

            卷十五〈書晉賢圖後〉:「此畫有古衣冠十人,惟一人舉杯欲飲,其余隱几杖策,傾聽假寐,讀書屬文,了無沾醉之態。龍眠李叔時曰:『此〈醉客圖〉也。』叔時善畫,人所取信。獨張文潛與余以為不然。余舊聞江南一僧,以資得度,未嘗誦經。有書生欲苦之,詣僧問曰:『上人亦嘗誦經否?』僧曰:『然。』生曰:『《金剛經》幾卷?』僧卒為所困,即誣生曰:『君今日已醉,不復可語,請俟他日。』生笑而去。至夜,僧從鄰房問知卷數。詰旦生來,僧大聲曰:『君今日乃可語耳,豈不知《金剛經》一卷也!』生曰:『然則卷有幾分?』僧茫然,瞪目熟視曰:『君又醉耶?』今圖中諸公了無醉態,而橫被沉湎。然後知昔之傳聞為不謬矣。」

            《後集》卷上〈自警〉,按語意頗俗,惟云:「休言七十古來稀,最苦如今難半百。」尤切今人。少游死纔五十二歲耳。

            〈赴杭倅至汴上作〉:「俯仰觚稜十載間,扁舟江海得身閑。平生孤負僧牀睡,準擬如今處處還。」按《王直方詩話》、《藏海詩話》皆作「逋欠僧房睡較佳」[7]

            〈寄公闢〉、〈呈公闢〉等篇皆王禹玉作,見《華陽集》卷三、卷四者,誤收入《後集》卷上。

            卷下〈精騎集序〉:「予少時讀書,雖有強記之力,而常廢於不勤。比來雖有勤苦之勞,而常廢於善忘。比讀《齊史》,見孫搴答邢邵云:『我精騎三千,足敵君羸卒數萬。』心善其說,因取經、傳、子、史事之可為文用者,得若干條。」按《螢雪叢說》卷下:「呂伯恭教學者作文之法,先看《精騎》,次看《春秋》權衡」云云,當即少游此書。

            《淮海詞》:「天還知道,和天也瘦。〈水龍吟〉

               「山抹微雲,天粘衰草。」「斜陽外,寒鴉數點,流水繞孤村。〈滿庭芳〉」按《漁隱叢話後集》卷三十三引《藝苑雌黃》謂此本隋煬帝詩「寒鴉千萬點,流水遶孤村」。賀貽孫《詩筏》云:「此語在煬帝詩中,只屬平常,入少游詞,特為妙絕。蓋妙在『夕陽外』三字,見聞空幻。又『寒鴉』、『流水』,煬帝以五言劃為兩景,少游詞用長短句錯落,與『斜陽外』三景合為一景,遂如一幅佳圖。此乃點化之神。」(《雲谷臥餘》卷五謂:「『千萬點』宜改『三四點』,若『千萬』則一片黑蔽」云云,亦頗有理。)

               「可堪孤館閉春寒,杜鵑聲裏斜陽暮。〈踏莎行〉」按《四庫總目》卷一百十八《野客叢書》條云:「辨『暮』字不誤似矣,復謂當作『斜陽曙』,以避英宗廟諱而改,夫斜陽豈可云『曙』耶?元作『斜陽樹』,宣和中歌者避英宗嫌名,改為『暮』,見項安世《家說》」云云,非也。【《項氏家說》無此條。黃溍《日損齋筆記》云:「寶祐間,外舅王君仲芳隨宦至郴陽,親見其石刻,乃『樹』字。傳錄者以與英宗廟諱同音,故易以『暮』。當時諸公詩用『樹』字不一而足,故少游亦不諱。」】

               「盡道有些堪恨處,無情。任是無情也動人。〈南鄉子〉

               「語軟聲低,道我何曾慣。雲雨未諧,早被東風吹散。瘦殺人,天不管。〈河傳〉

               「遙夜月明如水,風緊驛亭深閉。夢破鼠窺燈,霜送曉寒侵被。無寐、無寐,門外馬嘶人起。〈如夢令〉

            【《觚賸續編》卷一:「『離離山抹雲,窅窅天粘浪』,此少游〈松江〉詩也。『山抹微雲,天粘衰草』,此少游〈滿庭芳〉詞也。】【《猗覺寮雜記》上:「少游云:『夢魂思汝鳥工往,世故著人羊負來。』膾炙人口。『鳥工往』,舜濬井事;『羊負來』乃蒼耳子,見《千金要方‧菓菜門》。」】【《觀林詩話》:「秦太虛用樂天〈木籐謠〉:『吾獨一身,賴爾為二』,作六言云:『身與杖藜為二,影將明月為三。』真奇對也。」按此乃〈寧浦書事〉第五首,見卷五。】【《艇齋詩話》:「秦少游在嶺外貶所有詩云:『揮汗讀書不已,人皆笑我何求。我豈更求聞達,日長聊以消憂。』今集中不見。呂東萊子逢吉口說。」又云:「荊公〈送人使虜〉云:『留犁撓酒見戎心,繡袷通歡歲月深。』少游〈送人使虜〉亦云:『留犁撓酒知胡意,尺牘貽書見漢情。』事見〈匈奴傳〉。」按前一首亦見《淮海集》卷五,〈寧浦書事〉第一首也(「笑」作「怪」);後一首見卷四,〈林次中奉使契丹〉第一首也(「貽」作「移」,「見」作「示」)。】【《淮海集》卷二〈田居四首‧之一〉云:「結束赴中原。」按大似從軍行,宜《載酒園詩話》斥其「驢非驢、馬非馬」也。「錦雉」、「雌蜺」等語亦纖麗不倫。】【《夷堅志補》卷二載長沙妓殉少游死,李次山作〈義倡傳〉。《容齋四筆》卷久自悔失於審訂,定無其事。】【譚復生《石菊影廬筆識‧學篇》第七十一則校正淮海〈擬題織錦圖〉詩誤字,謂當作「悲風鳴葉秋宵長,絲寒縈手淚殘妝」,則回環可誦,句句對韻。】



二百五十二[8]



方岳《秋崖先生小稿》三十八卷。巨山為江湖體詩人後勁,仕宦最達,同時名輩,惟戴石屏姓字掛集中(卷十四〈石屏遊諸老間得詩名又早諸老凋謝獨石屏巋然魯靈光耳予生後三十二年纔此一識秋風別去因書數語集中〉七律一首)。吳龍翰式賢則以巨山與劉後村並推為二師(見《古梅吟稿》卷六〈聯句辨〉,又卷一〈見劉後村先生〉七律四首、〈秋崖先生招飲荷葭塢〉七古、〈秋崖先生以紅石見寄〉七絕,卷二〈庚申冬壽秋崖先生〉七律,卷五〈哭秋崖先生〉五律三首,末首云:「一瓣南豐後,他師不復求。」)蓋放翁、誠齋、石湖既歿,大雅不作,易為雄伯,餘子紛紛,要無以易後村、石屏、巨山者矣。三人中,後村才最大,學最博;石屏腹笥雖儉,而富於性靈,頗能白戰;巨山寫景言情,心眼猶人,唯以組織故事成語見長,略近後村而遜其圓潤,蓋移作四六法作詩者,好使語助,亦緣是也(參觀《圍爐詩話》卷五引賀黃公語云:「宋人好用成語入四六,後并用之於詩,故多硬戇。如丁謂云云,范石湖云云」)。求老得佻,因佻轉腐,用「之」字尤多,湊砌不妥(如「一刻之間直萬金」、「恐是龍蛇之屈蟠」、「試澆之酒將何如」、「風烟之句水雲身」、「元氣之所滋」、「難語之時賢」)。至其合作,巧不傷格,調峭折而句脆利,亦自俊爽可喜。然取逕不高,汲古殊淺,心摹手追,尤在誠齋、放翁。每有佳句,按之皆脫胎近人,如卷三〈春思〉云:「小立佇詩風滿袖,一雙睡鴨占春閑」,本之簡齋〈尋詩〉:「無人畫出陳居士,亭角尋詩滿袖風」(此詩亦見吳可《藏海居士集》卷下,題為〈偶贈陳居士〉,「無人」作「有誰」)。〈道中即事〉云:「喚作詩人看得未,兩抬笠雪一肩輿」,本之放翁〈劍門道中遇雨〉:「此身合是詩人未,細雨騎驢入劍門」。〈農謠〉云:「池塘水滿蛙成市,門巷春深燕作家」,本之後山〈春懷示鄰里〉:「壞牆著雨蝸成字,老屋無僧燕作家」。卷七〈聞雪〉:「黃塵沒馬長安道,殘酒初醒雪打窗。客子慣眠蘆葦岸,夢成孤槳泊寒江。」本之山谷〈六月十七日晝寢〉:「紅塵席帽烏鞾裏,想見滄洲白鳥雙。馬齕枯萁喧午枕,夢成風雨浪翻江」[9]。卷十五〈感懷之九〉云:「竹夫人爽夜當直,木上座臞新給扶」 (木上座乃本空事,《五燈會元卷十三杭州佛日章次》:「師參夾山,山問:『闍黎與甚麼人同行?』師曰:『木上座。』山曰:『何不來相看老僧?』師曰:『和尚看他有分?』山曰:『在甚處?』師曰:『在堂。』山便同師下到堂中,師遂取拄杖擲在山面前。」),本之東坡〈以竹几與謝秀才〉詩:「留我同行木上坐,贈君無語竹夫人」;《山谷內集》卷十一〈趙子充示竹夫人詩蓋涼寢竹器憩臂休膝似非夫人之職予為名曰青奴並以小詩取之二首〉;蔡戡定夫《定齋集》卷十三〈青奴傳〉、卷十七〈遣興之四〉:「同行木上座,并臥竹夫人」;孫仲益〈小詩謝宜黃尉李集義〉:「行隨木上座,臥對竹夫人」;李端叔〈題𧦬老小軒〉:「不見同行木上座,常留伴睡竹夫人」;李光〈獨居自遣〉:「路滑須憑木上座,天寒那用竹夫人」(《莊簡集》卷五);〈偶書〉:「白晝談禪木上座,清宵同夢竹夫人」(《道鄉集》卷十一)。明張羽《靜居集》卷四〈游虎丘〉云:「相携木上坐,來禮石觀音」,則拙劣矣。卷十六〈以越箋與三四弟〉:「過門儘是陳驚座,得句今誰趙倚樓」,本之陳鄂父〈端午洪積仁召客口占戲柬薛仲藏〉:「自媿雖非趙倚樓,何當一效陳驚座」;陳長翁〈次張司戶韻〉: 「假真笑我陳驚座,造妙推君趙倚樓」;又陸放翁〈恩封渭南伯〉:「虛名空作陳驚座,佳句真慚趙倚樓」。卷十七〈次韻陳料院之二〉云:「往來屑屑無家燕,去住匆匆旦過僧」,本之放翁〈病中簡忠彌等〉:「心如澤國春歸雁,身是雲堂早過僧」,又〈夏日雜題〉云:「情懷萬里長征客,身世連牀旦過僧」。卷十九〈春日雜興之十三〉云:「先後筍爭滕薛長,東西鷗背晉齊盟」,本之《誠齋集》卷六〈看筍〉:「筍如滕薛爭長,竹似夷齊獨清」;又《劉後村大全集》卷 101〈題汪薦文卷〉云:「〈演雅〉云:『蜾蠃堯舜父子,鴻雁魯衛兄弟,鬥蟻滕薛爭長,狎鷗晉鄭尋盟』,誠齋自作也,何擬之有?」(按汪名韶,此詩輯入《宋詩紀事》卷七十五又《補遺》卷七十六。又《江湖後集》卷十二誤以秋崖此題名首為胡仲弓作,《宋時紀事補遺》沿之。誠齋語又本之饒德操《倚松老人集》卷一〈賦王立之家四梅〉:「豈爭滕薛長,未與管晏比」。《呂東萊先生詩集》卷一〈三月一日泊舟宿州城外因過天慶觀〉:「千花犯濃雲,紅紫相餞送。未知滕薛長,乃若鄒魯閧。」而後來居上。)又按《誠齋集》卷三十八〈演雅〉云:「觳觫受田百畝,蠻觸有宅一區。蚍蜉戒之在鬥,蠅蚋實繁有徒。」「蜾蠃周公作語,鷾鴯由也升堂。白鷗比德於玉,黃鸝巧言如簧。」《徐青藤書屋文集》卷一〈荷賦〉云:「炎暑結棲,鄒與魯閧」;王笠舫《綠雪堂遺集》卷三〈樊莫齋等晚集餘菴有作〉云:「荷葉風狂鄒魯閧,藤陰歲大紀群交」;卷十四〈喜惇三移居〉云:「藤根紀群交,荷葉鄒魯閧」,自註:「用青藤語」,實則與宋人暗合耳。袁爽秋寢饋宋人詩,《安般簃集詩續》丁〈幽居戲作〉云:「交花廻看鬥邢尹,新竹數到幾仍雲」,亦此機杼。樊樊山〈一春多雨戲為俳體〉云:「筍皆爭長平榷起,絮不群飛壓力深」,實亦此體。拈此六、七例以概其餘,亦徵江湖詩派之淵源不遠、蓄積不厚矣(方虛谷《瀛奎律髓》卷二十七選〈詠楊梅〉一首[10],尊之曰: 「吾家秋崖先生詩,不江湖,不江西,自成一家」云,蓋廻護掩飾之詞也。每自呼其號曰「秋崖」,如能言之鴨,習氣可厭。又《古梅吟稿》後附〈秋崖和作〉五排百韻,此集未收。【《齊東野語》卷四、《湛淵靜語》卷一載「秋崖秋壑兩般秋」詩,《桐江續集》卷二十〈寄同年宗兄桐江府判去言〉第三首自注亦記其事。《秋崖小稿文集》卷二十一〈與廟堂第二書〉、〈與吳參政書〉,卷二十七〈答胡文叔書〉皆云得罪秋壑事。〈與吳參政書〉並載「秋崖秋壑兩般秋」,參見下「卷十一」下方[11]。】【《秋崖小稿》文集卷二十一〈與吳參政書〉:「去郡之日,幸無得罪於士民。呱泣之聲,填街溢衢。兒戲綵旗,所至以千百數,皆謝遣之。獨有一旗遣之不肯去,曰:『不願得錢,願一過目。』試取觀之,則云:『秋崖秋壑兩般秋,湖廣江東又不侔。直至南康尋體統,江西自隔兩三州。』」】【袁小修《游居杮錄》卷十一:「李夢白長公李百藥來,相與論宋、元人詩,百藥極賞方秋崖。」】

            卷一〈山居十六詠〉:「窮塗一何慟,多岐一何泣。指似世間人,路頭從此入。入山林處」「東臯或巾車,西園亦飛蓋。以我方古人,兩腳大自在。便是山」「鐘乳三千兩,胡椒八百斛。笑煞山中人,破紙塞故屋。着圖書所

            卷二〈謝人致蟹〉:「除却金虀霜後橙,更無一物可詩情。誠齋配以彭生臠,豈不冤哉五鼎烹。」岳珂《玉褚集》卷三〈饅頭〉云:「公子彭生紅縷肉,將軍鐵杖白蓮膚」(《兩般秋雨庵隨筆》卷二引宋人咏豬肉包子句即此聯)。清丁敬身《硯林詩集補遺》卷三〈火肉糉歌〉云:「羅含孤黍春緜熟,彭生曲股紅肖玉。」蓋本宋人也。「蜜漬曹公」、「湯燖右軍」以外,又添故實。

            〈蒙恩予祠〉:「月明弄影雪顛癯,只似胡僧不似吾。忽予牙緋稱羽客,道官儒紱釋頭顱。」按《五燈會元》卷二:「傅大士一日披衲頂冠靸履朝見,梁武帝問:『是僧邪?』士指冠。問:『是道邪?』士指履;問:『是俗邪?』士指衲衣。」顧阿瑛《玉山逸稿》卷四〈自讚〉云:「儒衣僧帽道人鞋,到處青山骨可埋。還憶少年豪俠興,五陵裘馬洛陽街。」皆此意,顧詩勝秋崖多矣。

            卷四〈春思〉:「春風多可太忙生,長共花邊柳外行。與燕啄泥蜂釀蜜,纔吹小雨又須晴。」

            卷五〈過湖〉:「纔出城來便不同,綠楊微雨藕花風。過湖船用百錢買,臥看雲歸南北峯。」

            卷六〈荼䕷〉:「山徑陰陰雨未乾,春風已暖却成寒。不緣天氣渾無准,要護荼䕷繼牡丹。」

            卷八〈受誥口號誥詞謂爾岳精習六藝長於詠歌有風人和平之意〉:「雪寒月瘦鬢成絲,緣底天家聖得知。從此江山盡驅使,小民奉敕遣吟詩。」

            〈別子才司令〉:「不如意事常八九,可與語人無二三。自識荊門子才甫,夢馳鐵馬戰城南。」按謝臯羽〈無題〉亦云:「可與語人少,不成眠夜多。」王鏐編郝天挺《陵川文集》卷十五〈感興〉云[12]:「不得意事十八九,可與言人百二三。無慮無愁一樽酒,短屏高枕日東南。」又按 「不如意事」一聯,後來小說院本中常見,如吳炳《綠牡丹》第十二折下句作「可與人言無二三」;《療妬羹》第十二折亦然;孫郁《雙魚佩》第十九折作「可與言人」;灌園主人《秣陵春》第二十四折則又作「可與人言」;《金瓶梅》十八回、三十回:「正是不如意處……可與人言……」。《古謠諺》五十二《嘯虹筆記》作「可與人言」,上句出羊叔子。鄭獻甫《補學軒詩集》卷十〈村居閒詠〉:「事有不如意,人無可與言。」

            卷十〈獨立〉:「村夫子挾兔園冊,教得黃鸝解讀書。能記蒙求中一句,百般嬌姹可憐渠。」

            卷十一〈不寐〉:「不寐何為者,幽居事更稠。怯風思鶴冷,聞雨為花愁。草合妨游屐,沙崩壓釣舟。春蓑故無恙,欹枕數更籌。」「不寐何為者,閑人最號忙。釀方傳得法,詩未足成章。藥草霜多損,寒蔬雨半荒。幸無天下責,夔禼在巖廊。」

            卷十四〈牛菴後古松五株〉:「山中老子一間屋,屋後秦人五大夫。丘壑得專閒日月,衣冠甚偉古眉鬚。計今當是百年物,着我添成五老圖。已有茯苓巢可俯,待烹石鼎療詩癯。」

            〈次韻鄭總幹〉:「人方怒及水中蟹,我亦冥如天外鴻。」「過從一笑酒瓶空,不是樵翁即釣翁。偶種竹成俱崛強,旋移花活尚神通。前身已化歸遼鶴,醉帖新傳戲海鴻。新貴少年吾自老,世間白髮幾曾公。

            〈輸棋〉:「半崦山雲舊草堂,鳥啼花落幾平章。酒無賢聖同歸醉,風有雌雄各自涼。賴與鷗盟同保社,不隨蟻垤夢侯王。未償詩債逢棋敵,誰信閒人最得忙。」

            卷十五〈感懷〉:「去國何年老一丘,於今已換幾公侯。不知我者謂為拙,是有命焉那用求?舴艋舟應容釣蟹,麒麟閣不畫騎牛。百年長短身餘幾,付與西風汗漫游。」「拄上風烟更一層,瘦籐對倚玉崚嶒。左花右竹自昭穆,春鶴秋猿相友朋。五畝園為終老計,半間雲住在家僧。蹲鴟生嬭菰如臂,莫道山翁百不能。

            〈再用潘令君韻》:「時序略如飛鳥過,世終何啻聚蚊喧。」按卷二十九〈新晴〉:「日月雙飛鳥,江湖一聚蚊。」

            卷十六〈舊傳有客謁一士夫題其刺云琴棋詩酒客戲成此詩〉:「誰與莫逆溪山我,幸甚無能詩酒棊。」按上句學東坡〈點絳唇〉詞:「與誰同坐,明月清風我。」南宋蘇泂《泠然齋詩集》卷七〈次韻芻父上已日同游朱園之三〉云:「重來野客朱邢我,坐久摩挲馬柱看」;葉茵順《適堂吟稿》乙集〈鱸鄉道院〉云:「山林受用琴書鶴,天地交游風月吾。」易「吾」字便韻味索然(靖逸此篇誤收入《江湖後集》卷十二胡仲弓名下)。詳見七百十七則。

            卷十七〈老態〉:「看書之眼看山腳,二事俱妨可奈渠。藥自不能專忌蟹,酒吾甚愛未浮蛆。處人間世每如此,微造物游誰與居。衰病老來常態耳,莫教左右手孤予。」    〈雪後〉:「無多酌酒亦成醉,儘足看梅不道寒。」

            卷十九〈雨中有感〉:「何以消憂惟酒可,無能為役以詩鳴。」

            〈集珠溪〉:「斬新山色佛頭綠,依舊桃花人面紅。」本林和靖〈西湖〉:「春水淨於僧眼碧,晚山濃似佛頭青。」開楊鐵崖〈嬉春體〉:「柳條千樹僧眼碧,桃花一株人面紅。」

            〈過北固山下舊居〉:「池塘燕子舊人家,楊柳春寒一逕斜。夜讀自生書帶草,朝饑曾對米囊花。侯誰在矣山如昨,今我來思鬢已華。舍館不知何日定,竹輿鳴雨又咿啞。」

            卷二十〈水月園送王侍郎〉:「翁之樂者山林也,客亦知夫水月乎。」按上句出〈醉翁亭記〉,下句出〈赤壁賦〉。《後村長短句》卷一〈客散循隄步月而作水調歌頭〉亦云[13]:「翁意在乎林壑,客亦知夫水月。滿腹貯清寒,賦詠差有愧,赤壁與滁山。」《秋崖小稿文集》卷六〈擬文房四制自序〉云:「文房四制,經安晚、後村老筆,無復着手處矣。日長無事,試一效顰,亦可知文章家之無盡藏也。」是秋崖見《後村集》之證。

            〈山中〉:「往事自驚天大胆,近詩空撚雪成鬚。」

            卷二十一〈晚眺〉:「不可以風秋後葉,無傷于月晚來雲。」按《鶴林玉露》以此為曾功度詩,「秋」作「霜」,「無」作「何」,「晚來」作「雨餘」。

            卷二十三〈食貓筍〉:「詩腸慣識貓頭筍,食指寧知熊掌魚。」按卷二十四〈次韻劉架閣〉云:「虎頭食肉亦安用,熊掌與魚那得兼。」筆致活潑。

            卷二十四〈次韻程兄〉:「底須賦奏長楊館,只以詩為細柳營。」

            卷二十六〈徐仁伯侍郎挽詩〉、卷二十九〈新晴〉皆五言排律,誤編入五古。



二百五十三[14]



            The Poems [I Canti] of Leopardi, ed. by Geoffrey L. Biekersteth. 不免力取,遂致詞費。Vauvenargues 所云:“cette splendeur d’expression qui emporte avec elle la preuve des grandes pensées” (Oeuvres choisies, éd. Garnier Frères, p. 388),固無取於橫說豎說,每恨斯人平典,似道德論耳。【又第七百二十則、七百三十則。】

            P. 21: “La noia si disannoia” (cf. Lo Zibaldone, I, 351; p. 69: “Man gets rid of his lack of feeling by feeling his lack of it intensely”). “L’uomo si disannoia per lo stesso sentimento vivo della noia universale e necessaria” (Zibaldone, ed. F. Flora, I, p. 254). 按此意本之 La Rochefoucault, Maximes Posthumes: “L'extrême ennui sert à nous désennuyer” (Oeuv. compl., Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, p. 327),亦即 Leo Stein, Journey into Self 所謂 “Boredom is an emptiness filled with insistence” (Clifton Fadiman & Charles van Doren, The American Treasury, p. 899)。正即 Martin Heidegger, Was ist Metaphysik?, S. 20: “Das Nichts nichtet”。詳見第四十六則。

            P. 47: “Poetry [should] ‘present to the mind a crowd of ideas simultaneously or succeeding one another so rapidly that they appear to be simultaneous’ etc. A multiplicity of images ‘confonde l’anima gl’ impedisce di vedere i confini di ciascheduna’ etc. The reader may compare Keat’s saying, ‘Load every rift of your subject with lore.’” 按引 Keats: “Poetry should surprise by a fine excess” (Letter to John Taylor, 27 Feb. 1818) 更切。Leopardi 師法希臘、羅馬,此處却非古典主義宗旨也。Corinna Pindar 曰:“Sow with the hand, & not with the whole sack” (Lyra Graeca, ed. & tr. by J.M. Edmonds, “The Loeb Classical Library”, vol. III, p. 7)Isocrates Nicocles [15]“Choose to fall short rather than to overreach your opportunities; for the happy mean is to be found in defect rather than in excess” (Isocrates, tr. by George Norlin, “The Loeb Classical Library”, vol. I, p. 59)Cicero 論修詞曰:“Etsi suus cuique rei modus est, tamen magis offendit nimium quam parum” (Orat., xxii)。然 Keats 雖早殤,亦正自絢爛歸於平淡,與 Spenser, Milton, Ruskin 之老去更成,初無二致。參觀 E.E. Kellet, Fashion in Literature, pp. 231-3 (“There are signs that, young as he was, Keats was beginning to see that an occasional bare rift is no unpleasing discovery, even for the explorer in the realms of gold” etc.)

            P. 48: “The effect of clearness is not to make the reader conceive a clear idea of a thing in itself, but a clear idea of the precise state of our mind, whether it be seeing clearly or seeing obscurely” (Zibald., III, 120). 按即余論「不隔」之旨,C.E. Montaigne, A Writer’s Notes on His Trade 所謂 “expression of obscurity” vs. “obscurity of expression”[16]

            P. 48: “A distant voice or sound... is pleasant through il vago dell’ idea” (Zibald., VII, 240); “quel vago, quell’indefinito ch’è la principal cagione dello charme dell’antica poesia e bella letteratura.... Il pubblico, il popolo, l’antichità, gli antenati, la posterità: nomi grandi e belli, perché rappresentano un’idea indefinita”[17] (Zibald., V, 3); p. 421: “Il grande spazio frapposto tra Saffo e noi confonde le immagini, e dà luogo a quel vago ed incerto che favorisce sommamente la poesia.” 按此意始發于 Demetrius, On Style, V, 253-4: “Conciseness is so favourable to this [forcible] style that a sudden lapse into silence is often yet more forcible... Even obscurity often produces force, since what is distantly hinted is more forcible, while what is plainly stated is held cheap” (“The Loeb Classical Library”, tr. by W. Rhys Roberts, p. 457)。後來 Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime & Beautiful, Pt. II, sect. iii: “To make anything very terrible, obscurity seems in general to be necessary... No person seems better to have understood the secret of... judicious obscurity, than Milton” etc.; sect. iv: “It is one thing to make an idea clear, & another to make it affecting to the imagination” etc. (Works, G. Bell & Sons, vol. I, pp. 89 ff.)。而 Joubert 道之尤數,Pensées (“Librairie Académique”), Tit. XXII, 23: “Pour qu’une expression soit belle, il faut qu’elle dise plus qu’il n’est nécessaire, en disant pourtant avec précisionce qu’il faut; qu’il y ait en elle abondance et économie; que l’étroit et le vaste, le peu et le beaucoup s’y confondent; qu’enfin le son en soit bref, et le sens infini”; 32: “Il serait singulier que le style ne fût beau que lorsqu’il a quelque obscurité, c.-à-d. quelques nuages”; 33: “C’est un grand art de mettre dans le style des incertitudes qui plaisent”; 34: “Quelquefois le mot vague est préférable au terme propre. Il est, selon l’expression de Boileau, des obscurités élégantes; il en est de majestueuses; il en est même de nécessaires: ce sont celles qui font imaginer à l’esprit ce qu’il ne serait pas possible à la clarté de lui faire voir.”。近世 Poe,  Marginalia: “The indefinite in an element in the true poiêsis. A suggestive indefinitiveness of meaning with the view of bringing about a definitiveness of vague & therefore of spiritual effect... I know that indefinitiveness is an element of the true music... Give to it any undue decision — imbue it with any very determinate tone — & you deprive it, at once, of its ethereal, its ideal, its intrinsic & essential character” (Works, ed. E.C. Stedman & G.E. Woodberry, vol. VII, p. 310); Baudelaire, Fusées: “J’ai trouvé la définition du Beau, de mon Beau. C’est quelque chose d’ardent et de triste, quelque chose d’un peu vague, laissant carrière à la conjecture.... Le mystère, le regret sont aussi des caractères du Beau” (Journaux intimes, éd. par Ad. Van Bever, pp. 18-9),遂成象徵詩派談藝常言矣。Mallarmé: “Toute l'âme résumé”: “Le sens trop précis rature. / Ta vague littérature” (Oeuv. comp., “Bibliothèque de la Pléiade”, p. 73). 餘見第四十則、第六百十三則、六百八十九則。【Turner’s remark “indistinctness is my fault” was misquoted by his first biographer as “indistinctness is my forte” & thus literary evidence of Romantic delight in vagueness (T.L.S., 13 April, 1979, p. 523).】【Wordsworth: “Personal Talk”: “... sweetest melodies. / Are those that are by distance made more sweet.”

            P. 49: “Ideas are attached to words: in fact a man cannot conceive an idea.... until he has discovered the word that which he can signify the idea” (Zibald., V, 95). 按此即歐陽建〈言盡意論〉《世說新語‧文字篇》注、《全晉文》卷一百九所謂:「欲辨其實,則殊其名;欲宣其志,則立其稱。名逐物而遷,言因理而變。猶聲發響應,形存影附,不得與為二矣。苟其不二,則言無不盡矣。」近世行為主義心理學亦昌言之。Montgomery Belgion, The Human Parrot, pp. 19-20: “It may well be that writers often do not know what their meaning really is until they set down words which say something else. It remains that for them to be able to recognize the inadequacy of their words they must have in mind a meaning which is not those words. It is the quest of words to express real meaning that truly establishes the wordlessness of thought... For if when we thought to find words, we thought in words, in what words should we be thinking?” 可謂摧陷廓清者,參觀 F. Brunot, La Pensée et la Langue, p. 16: “Les formes du langage, si nombreuses qu’elle soient, sont toujours en quantité bien moindre que les formes de la pensée”; H. Delacroix, Le Langage et la Pensée, p. 139: “L’unité de fonction sous la diversité des forms, la diversité des fonctions sous l’unité des formes, la discordance de la fonction et de la forme — l’indépendance de la pensée psychologique vis- à-vis de la logique et de la langue”,又前第二十五則、第四十三則。

            P. 70 de Sanctis “Bruto minore” 一詩云:“By thus arguing a man certainly shows the legitimacy of suicide, but no longer commits it”。按 Paolo Ferrari 寫自殺劇本題目為 “Chi lo dice non lo fa” 即此意也。J.M. Robertson, A History of Free Thought in the 19th Century, I, p. 191: “When Schopenhauer, teaching renunciation of life, fled to escape a pestilence, men were entitled to say that he had not assimilated his own doctrine. Pessimism which figures as a mood to live by & not to die by is in a manner its own confutation... To follow up the conception that we are Puppets of the Will to Live with a doctrine which would make us Puppets of the Will to Die is to leave the philosophic situation unchanged.” 參觀 R.W.B. Lewis, The Picaresque Saint, pp. 75-6 Dostoevsky, Conrad, Camus 書中論自殺;G. Picon, L’usage de la lecture, pp. 220 ff. Blanchot 論自殺與藝術。Byron to Moore: “Mme de Staël, who hath published an Essay against Suicide, which, I presume, would make somebody shoot himself; — as a sermon by Blinkensop, in proof of Christianity, sent a hitherto most orthodox acquaintance of mine out of a chapel of ease a perfect atheist” (Letters, Everyman’s Lib, p. 76); also p. 86: “I have not read it for fear the love of contradiction might lead me to a practical confutation.” Cf. Anatomy of Melancholy, Part. I, Sect. IV, Mem. I, Bell, I, pp. 500-5 quoting various authorities for & against suicide; Donne, Biathanatos (J. Hayward, ed., Complete Poetry & Selected Prose, pp. 420 ff.); Paul Hazard, La pensée européenne au 18e siècle, II, p. 92; J.B. Chassinet: “C’est peu de cas de vivre, un tel bien est permis / Egalement à tout, jusqu’aus moindres fourmis / Qui vivent en commun dessous la terre espaisse, / Mais delaisser la vie en resolution, / Et mourir gouverneur de son affection, / C’est là le plus haut point de l’humaine sagesse” (A.J. Steele, Three Centuries of French Verse, p. 89); Paradise Lost, X. 998 ff.; A. Majocchi, Life & Death, pp. 340-1: “The most pessimistic of authors, those who cursed life & invoked death as the sole liberator, showed a clean pair of heels when they caught sight of it. Leopardi fled from Naples when the cholera broke out... Schopenhauer would never hear death mentioned.” Cf. Anatomy of Melancholy, Part. I, Sect. II, Mem. IV, Subs. Vii, Bell, I, p. 420 (Axiochus).(又 Orlando Furioso, VI, 5 見第五百三十一則。)Philip Leon, The Ethics of Power, p. 89: “Suicide can be a violent, if paradoxical, form of self-assertion” (cf. Adler, Individual Psychology, pp. 244 & 254; Bradley, Ethical Studies, p. 306, notes).

            P. 73: “Canti VIII, Inno ai Patriarchi, is more original than a Protestant Englishman with his heritage of the Authorised Version will at first find it easy to understand... Italian literature possesses no Bible.” 按參觀Albert Guérard, Literature & Society, p. 107: “In England, the Bible has become a standard for the vernacular; it has generously given of it treasures to all comers, but it has received much in return.... In France, the Bible has not becomerooted in the literary soil” etc.

            VII. Alla Primavera o delle Favole Antiche: “Vivi tu, vivi, o santa / Natura?...” (p. 184) “Né dell’umano affanno,/ Rigide balze, i luttuosi accenti / voi negletti ferîr, mentre le vostre / paurose latèbre Eco soling / ... Ma non cognato al nostro / il gener tuo...” (p. 186). 按參觀 XX. Il Risorgimento: “... So che natura è sorda, / Che miserar non sa” etc. (p. 252)。庾子山〈思舊銘〉所謂:「所謂天乎,乃曰蒼蒼之氣;所謂地乎,其實摶摶之土。怨之徒也,何能感焉?」(《史記‧伯夷列傳》概乎言之,至云:「所謂天道,是邪非邪?」柳子厚〈天說〉亦即此意);王仲任《論衡雷虛篇》所謂:「天怒殺人,地宜哭之,不聞地哭,何耶?」;少陵〈新安吏〉所謂:「眼枯即見骨,天地終無情」;淮海〈河傳〉詞所謂:「瘦殺人天不管」者也,非復斯多噶派 συμπἀθεια(參觀 Cicero, De Divinatione, II, 34: “coniunctio naturae et quasi concentus atque consensus”; Epictetus, I, 14: “what is on earth feels the influence of that which is in heaven” etc., “The Loeb Classical Library”, vol. I, p. 101)。自基督教大行,黜 Leopardi 詩中之 “Favole Antiche” 為邪說。Heine, Zur Geschichte der Religion und Philosophie in Deutschland, Ites Buch: “Das Christentum verkehrte diese Ansicht [Paganism], und an die Stelle einer durchgötterten Natur trat eine durchteufelte”; “Die christliche Kirche... die altgermanische Nationalreligion so tückisch verkehrt, dass sie die pantheistische Weltansicht der Deutschen in eine pandämonische umgebildet” (Sämtl. Werk., Verlag von A. Weichert, Bd. VIII, S. 7, 23). 然而質旁臨上,人神可以感應,物我可以契合,禱已久而誠則靈。至十九世紀,乃并此而無之。J.S. Mill, Nature 論此最妙,所謂:“Their [cosmic forces] perfect & absolute recklessness... In sober truth, nearly all the things which men are hanged or imprisoned for doing to one another are nature’s everyday performances. Killing, the most criminal act recognized by human laws, Nature does once to every being that lives” (Three Essays on Religion, New Impression, Longmans, Green & Co., 1923, p. 28); “All this Nature does with the most supercilious disregard both of mercy & of justice” (p. 29); “Even when she does not intend to kill she inflicts the same tortures in apparent wantonness... Even the love of ‘order,’ which is thought to be a following of the ways of Nature, is in fact a contradiction of them. All which people are accustomed to deprecate as ‘disorder’ & its consequences is precisely a counterpart of Nature’s ways. Anarchy & the Reign of Terror are overmatched in injustice, ruin, & death by a hurricane & a pestilence” (pp. 30-1)Cf. Basil Willey: “The Turn of the Century”: “Nature was rescued from Satan & restored to God. For the physical world, in spite of its divine origin, was traditionally held to have shared in the fatal consequences of the fall of man & to have become the chosen abode of the apostate spirits.... Science played an all-important part in producing the ‘divinized’ Nature of the 18th century & ultimately of the Romantic generation” (17th Century Studies Presented to Sir Herbert Grierson, p. 375). 大塊冥頑,造物不仁,宜 Leopardi 蒼茫獨立,尤覺身世之悠悠也。使能更進一境,則如 Paul Claudel, Cinq Grandes Odes: “Toute la nature sans moi est vaine: c’est moi qui lui confère son sens”; Franz Werfel, Nur Eines: “Und ich bin Mensch, in meinem Menschenleben, / Dem Schein ein Sein, dem Unsinn Sinn zu geben”,便萬物皆備於我,「能為萬象主,不逐四時凋」矣。參觀下論 XII. L’Infinito。【又 Goethe: “Das Göttliche”(第七○一則)。】

            IX. Ultimo Canto di Saffo: “... Ahi di cotesta / Infinita beltà parte nessuna / Alla misera Saffo i numi e l’empia / Sorte non fenno...” (p. 196); “Alle sembianze il Padre, / Alle amene sembianze eterno regno / Diè nelle genti; e per virili imprese, / Per dotta lira o canto, / Virtù non luce in disadorno ammanto” (p. 198). p. 421: “Il fondamento di questa Canzone sono i versi che Ovidio scrisse in persona di Saffo, Epist. XV, 31: ‘Si mihi difficilis formam natura negavit’ ecc. La cosa più difficile del mondo, e quasi impossibile, si è d’interessare per una persona brutta”; “Leopardi was painfully conscious of his own unattractive outward appearance. Writing to Giordani 2nd March, 1818, he complains...: ‘è costretto a desiderare che la virtù non sia senza qualche ornamento esteriore... Nessuna sapienza può vincere, quasi non ha coraggio d’amare quel virtuoso in cui niente è bello fuorché l’anima’”; 423: “L’uomo d’immaginazione di sentimento e di entusiasmo, privo della bellezza, è verso la natura appresso a poco quello eh’ è verso l’amata un amante ardentissimo e sincerissimo, non corrisposto nell’amore” ecc. (Zibald., II, 148) (ed. F. Flora, I, 507); Boccaccio, Decamerone, VI, 2: “Io non so da me medesima vedere che più in questo si pecchi, o la natura apparecchiando a una nobile anima un vil corpo, o la fortuna apparecchiando a un corpo dotato d’anima nobile vil mestiero”。按相傳 Sappho 黑而侏,貌甚陋(Scholiast on Lucian, Imag., 18,見 J.M. Edmonds, Lyra Graeca, “The Loeb Classical Library”, I, p. 161 引),故 Ovid 詩中以無貌而有才為解嘲 (ingenio formae damna rependo meae),蓋尚不如 Leopardi 此首之親切真實也。Aristotle, Nicom. Eth., I, vii, 8 “Happiness is the End, the Supreme Good” (“The Loeb Classical Library”, tr. by H. Rackham, p. 31),而 I, viii, 15-6: “Happiness also requires external goods in addition... there are certain external advantages, the lack of which sullies supreme felicity, such as good birth, satisfactory children, & personal beauty: a man of very ugly appearance (παναίσχης) or low birth, or childless & alone in the world, is not our idea of a happy man” (ibid, p. 43; cf. H.W. Garrod, Scholarship, pp. 69-71: “It is the logicality & honesty of their minds which makes the Greeks a race apart... Most of us, given such a question, would shilly-shally. Might not the very ugly, perhaps, be blessed in very much the same way as the poor! But Aristotle knows that the utterly ugly man... is precluded from full self-realisation; & he says so plainly. Who else — what moralist, what man — dare say it?” Leopardi 詩而證明。Journal des Goncourt, 5 avril, 1868: “‘Une femme qui n’a pas été jolie, n’a pas été jeune.’ Je lis cela dans un livre de cabinet de lecture, où un crayon de femme a écrit en marge: ‘C’est tristement vrai!’” (Éd. definitive, III, p. 150); Nietzsche, Morgenröte, IV, 282 (Werke, K, Schlechta, I, p. 1184): “Gefahr in der Schönheit — Diese Frau ist schön und klug: ach, wie viel klüger aber würde sie geworden sein, wenn sie nicht schön wäre!”; Schopenhauer, Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung, Buch IV, §54: “So jene antiken Sarkophage zu verstehen, die mit ihren Bildern des glühendesten Lebens dem klagenden Betrachter zurufen: Natura non contristatur” (Sämtl. Werke, hrsg. E. Grisebach, I, S. 362); Gordon S. Haight, Goerge Eliot & John Chapman, p. 31: “As we rested on the grass, I [Chapman] remarked on the wonderful & mysterious embodiment of all the elements, characteristics & beauties of nature which man & woman jointly present. I dwelt also on the incomprehensible mystery & witchery of beauty. My words jarred upon her [Marian Evans] & put an end to her enjoyment. Was it from a consciousness of her own want of beauty? She wept bitterly” (cf. p. 49 Herbert Spencer, Autobiography: “Physical beauty is a sine qua non with me; as was once unhappily proved where the intellectual traits & the emotional traits were of the highest”).【又四百六十則。】若 Jane Eyre,乃過屠門而大嚼,聊作快意浪漫主義之汗漫語,所謂 “the Beauty of the Medusa” (參觀 Mario Praz, The Romantic Agony, pp. 37 ff.)。且使 Charlotte Bronte 貌果得似 Jane Eyre,則何致如 Thackeray 所云:“The poor little woman of genius! The fiery little eager brave tremulous homely-faced creature!... you see is a little bit of a creature without a penny worth of good looks, 30 years old, buried in the country, & eating up her heart there, with no chance to fulfill the burning desire” etc. (The Letters & Private Papers of W.M. Thackeray, ed. By Gordon N. Ray, vol. III, p. 233)Gosse Hardy 書有云:“There is a poem, of which I have a copy, not published, in which she [Charlotte Bronte] tells her heart that love is not for her, that she is plain & unattractive & cannot awaken desire.” (The Life & Letters of E. Gosse, by E. Charteris, p. 349)Samuel Butler Eliza Mary Ann Savage 作詩亦云:“Hard though I tried to love I tried in vain. / For she was plain & lame & fat & short. / Forty & over-kind... / Ah! had she been more beauteous or less kind / She might have found me of another mind.” 傷哉陋也!

            XII. L’Infinito: “Ma, sedendo e mirando, interminati / Spazi di lá da quella, e sovrumani / Silenzi, e profondissima quiete / Io nel pensier mi fingo... / ... e mi sovvien l’eterno, / E le morte stagioni, e la presente / E viva, e il suon di lei. Cosí tra questa / Immensitá s’annega il pensier mio; / E il naufragar m’è dolce in questo mare” (p. 208). 按較之 Pascal, Pensées, 206: “Le silence éternel de ces espaces infinis m’effraie”Pensées et opuscules, éd. Hachette, p. 428 L. Brunschvicg 註云:“Or cet univers infini est ‘muet’, il est destitué de toute vie morale... Ce monde qui emplit l’esprit du savant est comme un désert pour celui qui cherche Dieu. A la parole, de Pascal il convient d’opposer la célèbre pensée de Kant” etc.,蓋指 Krit. d. prakt.Vern., “Beschluss” “Der bestirnte Himmel über mir, und das moralische Gesetz in mir”,以為天行人事,道歸一貫也。J.S. Mill, “Nature”: “The enormous extension in space & time, or the enormous power they exemplify, constitutes their sublimity; a feeling in all cases, more allied to terror than to any moral emotion.” — Three Essays on Religion, New Impression, Longmans, Green & Co., 1923, p. 27 — Pascal 之旨矣);王子安〈滕王閣記〉:「天高地逈,覺宇宙之無窮;樂極悲來,識盈虛之有數」;陳子昂〈登幽州台詩〉:「前不見古人,後不見來者。念天地之悠悠,獨愴然而涕下」,可謂別有會心,亦如柳州〈對賀者〉所謂:「詎知吾之浩浩,非戚戚之尤者?」

            XIII. La Sera del Dìdi Festa: “Or dov’è il suono / di que’ popoli antichi?”ecc.  (pp. 210-2). E. Gilson, Les Idées et les Lettres, pp. 10 ff. 歷數詩中用 “La formula ubi sunt者,於十九世紀意大利作者,舉 Carducci 兩首,而漏却此篇。“Nella mia prima etá, quando s’aspetta / Bramosamente il dí festivo, or poscia / Ch’egli era spento, io doloroso” ecc. (p. 213); p. 433: “Osservate ancor che dolor cupo e vivo sperimentavamo noi da fanciulli, terminato un divertimento, passata una giornata di festa ec” (Zibald., II, 44). 按余嘗論《淮南子》云:浩汗瑰瑋,却與《南華》有仙凡之別。襲《莊子》而竄易一、二字,尤貽「點金成鐵」之譏。然如〈原道訓〉:「建鐘鼓,列管弦,席旃茵,傅旄象,耳聽朝歌北鄙靡靡之樂, 目齊靡曼之色,陳酒行觴,夜以繼日;强弩弋高鳥,走犬逐狡兔。此其爲樂也,炎炎赫赫,怵然若有所誘慕。解車休馬,罷酒徹樂,而心忽然若有所喪,悵然若有所亡也。」則《莊子》心不攖哀樂,正未能體會及此曲終宴罷、人散花殘一段境界。少陵〈觀打魚歌〉所謂「既飽歡娛亦蕭瑟」,〈觀公孫大娘弟子舞劍器行〉所謂「玳筵急管曲復終,樂極哀來月東出」是矣。彭甘亭《懺摩錄》云:「每搭臺演劇時,便欣然有春生之氣;到拆臺時,便凄然有秋肅之氣。恍然有悟於『世無不散的筵席』一句」云云。【王維〈酬諸公見過〉:「登車上馬,倏忽雲散。雀噪荒村,鷄鳴空館。還復幽獨,重欷累歎」;張子平〈西京賦〉:「於是衆變極,心酲醉,盤樂極,悵懷萃」;《抱朴子內篇暢玄第一》:「然樂極則哀集,至盈必有虧,故曲終則歎發,燕罷則心悲也。實理勢之攸召,猶影響之相歸也。」】《兒女英雄傳》十八回闡說「大事已完,如喪考妣」二句尤淋漓暢透,更進一境,於熱鬧時忽憬然有感,悵然不樂,義山〈錦瑟〉詩所謂:「此情可待成追憶,只是當時已惘然」,樊川〈上宰相求湖州第二書〉所謂:「在群眾歡笑之中,常如登高四望,但見莽蒼大野,荒墟廢壟,悵望寂默,不能自解」者也。參觀三三五則論右軍〈蘭亭序〉、七三一則論李嶠〈楚望賦〉。

            XXI. A Silvia: “la dolce lode or delle negre chiome” (p. 258); p. 452: “The women of L’s poetry are all dark. He disliked blondes; cf. Diario d’amore” etc. 按參觀 Sidney Lee, The French Renaissance in England, pp. 273-4 Shakespeare, Sonnets, Love’s Labour’s Lost, IV. iii, 247 ff. (Rosaline “as black as ebony” etc.); Amadis Jamyn, Sonnets XCV (“La modeste Venus, la honteuse et la sage, / Estoit par les anciens toute peinte de noir” etc.); Jusserand, Ronsard, p. 66: “Ronsard décrivit indifféremment une Cassandre blonde et une Cassandre brune, signe certain qu’elle était brune. Depuis Laure, toutes les aimées étaient tennes d’être blondes avec, de preference, des sourcils noirs. Quand un poète violait la règle, c’est qu’il aimait vraiment une femme brune” (cf. Jusserand, A Literary History of the English People, II, 386: “While singing, under blonde disguise, the praise of his dark lady, Jodelle really thought of a real lady”)

            XXXIII. Il Tramonto della Luna. 按參觀第一百五十八則。

            XXXIV. La Ginestra. 按參觀第五十七則。

            XXXV. Imitazione (p. 356). A.V. Arnault 原作 La Feuille: “Je vais où le vent me mène” etc. (p. 496),較之 Verlaine, Chanson de l’Automne: “Je m’en vais / Au vent mauvais / De çà, de là, / Pareil à la / Feuille morte”,更質直無致。一衹有理趣,一遂有情韻,詩中有人無人之別也。

            XXXII. Palinodia: “Quale un fanciullo, con assidua cura” ecc.; “La natura crudel, fanciullo invitto” ecc. (p. 326).Zibaldone, ed. F. Flora, II, 1233: “La Natura è come un fanciullo” ec. 論此尤詳。】按 Fr.Th. Vischer, Auch Einer 則比造化為輕浮而靈巧之婦女: “Die Natur sei das Produkt eines Urwesens weiblichen Geschlechts” usw. (Insel Verlag, S. 67-70)Plato, Laws, 644d, 803c Plotinus, Enneads, III, ii, 15 皆早言上帝以人為玩具,而未言其有童心、好兒戲。【Plautus, Captivi, Prolog. XXII: “Di nos quasi pilas homines habent (The gods play games with men as balls)”; Rudens, III, I, 1 & Mercator, II: “Miris modis di ludos faciunt hominibus (In wondrous ways do the gods make sport with men).”】【Greek Anthology, X. 80, Palladas: “The life of men is the plaything of Fortune... Some whom she had cast down she casteth on high again like a ball...”】【Donne, Letter to Sir Henry Wotton: “That Erle of Arundell that last dyed (that tennis ball whome fortune after tossing & banding brikwald into the hazard)...” (Complete Poetry & Selected Prose, ed. J. Hayward, p. 442). Cf. Jean Rousset, Circé et le Paon, pp. 136 ff.: “ein Ball des falschen Glücks.”Pliny, Nat. hist., VII. I 僅言造物凶酷,如後世 Vigny, “La Maison du Berger” [La Nature]: “On me dit une mère et je suis une tombe,” cf. Vigny, Journal d’un Poète in Oeuv. comp., la Pléiade, II, p. 1005.Thomas Mann, Die Betrogene (cf. The Germanic Review, Jan. 1963).】【Sainte-Beuve: “Le hasard souvent fait spirituelle.”XXXIV. La Ginestra 亦云:“Madre è di parto e di voler matrigna.” (p. 344)。此詩遂活畫出杜審言所謂「造化小兒」(見《唐書》本傳)矣。可與《後西游記》第二十九回「小天公」參觀(陳簡齋〈次韻樂文卿北園〉所謂「造化小兒真薄相」)。【姬翼〈鷓鴣天〉:「造物兒童作劇狂,懸絲傀儡戲當場。般神弄鬼翻騰用,走骨行屍晝夜忙。隨聲逐色誰敲點,拍手歸來笑一場。」(《全金元詞》一二一四頁)】De Sanctis VI. Bruto Minore 云:“By thus arguing a man certainly shows the legitimacy of suicide, but no longer commits it” (p . 70 ). XXVII. Amore e Morte: “Bella Morte, pietosa / Tu sola al mondo dei terreni affanni” (p. 298); Pensieri, VI: “La morte non è male: perché libera l’uomo da tutti i mali” ec. (p. 486); XX. Il Risorgimento: “Che non del ben sollecita [Nature] / Fu, ma dell’esser solo.” (p. 252) 知天地之好生,而復言人生之樂死,遂遜 Chamfort 一籌。Caractères et Anecdotes, DIX: “La nature, en nous accablant de tant de misère et en nous donnant un attachement invincible pour la vie, semble en avoir agi avec l'homme comme un incendiaire qui mettrait le feu à notre maison, après avoir posé des sentinelles à notre porte. Il faut que le danger soit bien grand, pour nous obliger à sauter par la fenêtre” (éd. par Ad. van Bever, pp. 179-80) 可謂驚心動魄、罕譬而喻者矣。Hume 有云:“If these views be natural & obvious, they would have occurred of themselves[18], without the assistance of philosophy; if they be not natural, they can never have any influence on the affections” (Essays, ed. T.H. Green & T.H. Grose, I, p. 224),更可為 De Sanctis 所謂 “legitimacy” 進一解。又按A. Straccali XXVII. Amore e Morte 云:“Se in altri poeti trovi detto frequentemente che la morte è la fine dei dolori... in nessuno incontri... una quale si voglia figurazione... che presenti la morte in forme altrettanto leggiadre” ec. (p. 468)Bickersteth 則引 Whitman, Memories of President Lincoln,謂可相比,是也。此詩稱「死」云:“l’altra ogni gran dolore / ogni gran male annulla” (p. 292),可與《莊子‧大宗師》、《列子‧天瑞》論生為勞苦,死為歸息參觀。Dicta Catonis, III, 22: “Fac tibi proponas, mortem non esse timendam: / Quae bona si non est, finis tamen ilia malorum est” (Minor Latin Poets, ed. J.W. & A.M. Duff, “The Loeb Classical Library”, p. 612) 洵為老生常談,至 “... mors illi Venus est, sola est in morte voluptas” (De Ave Phoenice, l. 165; Ibid., p. 664) 乃詠鳳凰,貌雖同而心則異,故繼之云:“Ipsa sibi proles, suus est pater et suus heres” (l. 167, p. 664),遂成游戲之作,斷章取義,斯大謬矣。參觀第一百九十三則。



二百五十四[19]



            仇遠《山村遺集》一卷、《稗史》一卷、《附錄》一卷,乾隆時歙縣項夢昶輯。《四庫總目》謂仁近別有《金淵集》,項氏均不及錄,蓋非全豹。方虛谷撰〈集序〉、〈送溧陽州教序〉及唱酬諸詩皆編入,而《桐江集》卷四〈跋仇仁近詩集〉一篇却失收。《集》後附遺句,舍《癸辛雜識》載五、七律各一聯外,實出虛谷此篇所引也。方鳳〈序〉有云:「唐人以詩為文,本朝以文為詩。四靈而後,以詩為詩。君曰:近體主唐,古體主《選》。」(按見《存雅堂遺稿》卷三)釋宏道贈詩云:「波瀾唐句法,瀟灑晉賢風。」僧守道贈詩云:「書傳東晉法,詩接晚唐人。」仁近〈題陳去非集〉云:「簡齋吟集是吾師,句法能參杜拾遺。」又書與元仁詩卷後云:「近世習唐詩者,以不用事爲第一格。少陵無一字無來處,衆人固不識也。若不用事云者,正以文不讀書之過耳。」此集古詩所存無幾,未識「主《選》」者何在。近體則江湖派之較有骨力、有事料者耳。然清而不蒼,秀而頗弱,仍近四靈。所謂「師簡齋」,亦不可得而見也。

            〈采薇吟〉:「采薇采薇,西山之西。薇死復,不生夷。陟彼西山,我心悲兮。」

            〈次胡葦杭韻〉:「曾識清明上已時,懶能游冶歩芳菲。梨花半落雨初過,杜宇不鳴春自。雙冡年深人祭少,孤山日晚客來稀。江南尚有餘寒在,莫倚東風褪絮衣。」

            〈奉寄恬上人〉:「病葉已霜猶戀樹,片雲欲雨又歸山。」

            〈再答元父〉:「青黄誰采溝中,黑白當從局外。」

            〈閒居十詠〉:「樹隔殘鐘逺欲,野雲漠漠雨疏。飛蚊盡逐南風,父子燈前共讀。」「仰屋著書無筆,閉門覓句費心。不如花下冥冥,靜看蜻蜓蛺蝶。」「鶯花韋曲舊時游,老去閒情已五休。却笑東風無檢,又隨飛絮過南。」「鳥雀喧秋未肯棲,狂風吹樹影離披。屋邊尚有斜陽在,更看山人一局棋。」

            遺句:「髙荷不受雨,傾瀉與低荷。低荷强自持,聚雨傾入波。見《桐江集》

            《稗史》:「江西古喻蕭太山,好奇之士也,名其堂曰『堂堂堂』,亭曰『亭亭亭』。越陳持節某提舉江西日,蕭延飲,遍歷亭館,次觀其扁,至洞,公戲之曰:『此洞何不名曰「洞洞洞」?』蕭為不懌。」

            「錢大參良臣,自諱其名,其幼子頗慧,凡經史中有『良臣』字輒改之。一日,讀《孟子》『今之所謂良臣,古之所謂民賊也。』遂改云:『今之所謂爹爹,古之所謂民賊也。』可笑,可笑。」

            「上虞鄭宰治邑有聲,及代去,邑人作旗帳餞之,其一云:『邑人借留不肯住,誰能舉網羅雙鳧。』鄭大喜,每宴集必出示之。其弟亦作宰而歸,無有餞詞,頗以為羞,乃曰:『此非頌兄之美,乃譏兄也。『網』即『罔』,『雙』即『兩』,『鳧』即『鴨』,其意以爲『罔兩鴨』也。兄怒命焚之。』按莊季裕《鷄肋編》卷中云:「浙人以鴨為大諱,北人但知鴨羹雖甚熱亦無氣。後至南方,乃知鴨若只一雄,則雖合而無卵,須二、三始有子。其以為諱,蓋為是耳,不在於無氣也。」孔見素《至正直記》卷一云:「錢唐老儒葉森景修,松雪深愛之。家住西湖,婦女頗不潔,蓋杭人常習也。藏王右軍〈籠鵝帖〉石刻,誠為妙品。張外史戲貽詩,有云:『家藏逸少籠鵝字,門繫龜蒙放鴨船。』世以鴨喻五奴也。」《水滸》第二十四回:「鄆哥看着武大道:『幾時不見你,怎麼吃得肥了?便顛倒提你起來,也不妨;煮你在鍋裏,也沒氣。』武大道:『我的老婆又不偷漢子,我如何是鴨?』」皆可考見宋、元間俗忌。《古今小說》卷三〈新橋市韓五賣春情〉云:「不出去門前叫駡這短命多嘴的鴨黃兒!」又云:「那個多嘴賊鴨黃兒!」「鴨黃兒」即今所謂「王八蛋」也。



二百五十五[20]



            郭祥正《青山集》三十卷、《續集》五卷。據朱石君及葛錞兩〈序〉,朱竹君視學來皖得之,以進四庫。然《總目》云《續集》七卷,此僅五卷。細按其篇什,皆出孔平仲《朝散集》卷二、卷三、卷五、卷六,絕非功甫所作。觀卷一〈止謁宣聖廟〉五古「悅之以其道,吾祖當亦喜」二語,的然可據。【參觀第二百二十六則、二百九十二則。】他如「常父」、「清江」之名,兄長之稱,散見詩中,皆《前集》所未有。抵姑孰而不作歸人語,與《前集》之桑梓念切者迥異。何瞶瞶不辨葛龔耶?《桐江集》卷三〈讀太倉稊米集跋〉引周竹坡言謂:「功父徒竊虛稱,在詩家最無法度(見陳天麟〈稊米集序〉中記竹坡語)。」平心之論,不可復易。氣粗獷而語笨率,絕尟超詣,以此學太白,宜朱石君〈序〉以「先生之志則大矣」相嘲也。《許彥周詩話》載山谷戲功父曰:「公作詩費許多氣力做甚?」今讀此《集》,乃悟山谷非謂功父之慘淡經營,正笑其叫囂跳躍,如中酒發狂,作盡「朝飲三百杯,暮吟三百首」張致(二語見卷七〈宣州雙溪閣夜宴〉),自命豪逸耳。《能改齋漫錄》卷十引《王直方詩話》記東坡謂:「功甫只知有韻底是詩。」張芸叟《詩評》謂: 如大排筵席,二十四味,終日揖遜,求其適口者少。」正可參觀。好和太白詩,放翁《入蜀記》載「東坡以太白集中〈姑孰十詠〉為偽作,功父力爭之,東坡曰:『恐是太白後身所作耳!』功父大恚」云云(《能改齋漫錄》卷十載章衡子平〈答郭功甫書〉:「鄭毅夫、章表民、梅聖俞,皆以功甫為太白後身」[21])。卷七即有〈追和太白姑孰十詠詩〉,其不識好歹如此。」。【《養一齋詩話》卷七謂:「郭功甫〈和太白鳳凰臺〉詩,實不中與太白作僕,惟『潮擁新沙換故洲』句,稍研練耳。」】《竹坡詩話》記:「功父晚年,夢中作〈遊采石〉二詩,明日書以示人,曰:『余決非久于世者,如「欲尋鐵索排橋處,只有楊花慘客愁」之句,雖前人亦未嘗有。得之不祥。』不踰月,果死。李端叔聞而笑曰:『不知少陵如何活得許多時?』」亦見其矜夸之一斑。如卷二〈寄聚遠亭〉之「搆名措意豈徒然,景物化爲仁智學」;〈留題西亭〉之「更愛雙劍峯,正落南窗外。誰懷邪佞心,見之膽應碎」;〈松門阻風望廬山有懷李白〉之「天送醇醪傾北斗,群仙吹簫龍鳳吼」;〈桃源行〉之「神仙有無何可量?但愛武陵山水強」;卷三〈登法華臺〉之「請看梁上題,半是泉中鬼」[22];〈和穎叔丁山〉之「君詞如太羹,我語效鹽鹹」;〈酬穎叔見寄〉之「百家拾其餘,所得乃遺溺」(可對《列子仲尼篇》:「承公孫之餘竅」);卷五〈題淨惠院〉之「諸峯却羅列,龍蛇互奔觸」;〈清江臺致酒〉之「妙娥始七歲,彈箏殷晴雷」[23];卷六〈登雨華臺〉之「天花無根蒂,應講來飛浮」;〈題弄水亭〉之「開卷起余興,飄欲乘桴浮」;卷九〈登跂賢亭〉之「竊甘祿食憂謗嘲,有若夜鼠防飢貓」;卷二十一〈臨江春晚〉之「水暖平沙鷺鬥眠」;〈東郊〉之「蜜蜂捕蘂穿花去」;卷二十五〈廣陶淵明四時〉之「夏雲多奇峯,高低千萬重。巫山何處是,神女竟難逢」,或則命意迂謬,或則修詞疵累,多不勝舉。兹摘其較可諷詠及資備掌故者:

            卷二〈廬山三峽石橋行〉:「銀河源源天上流,新秋織女望牽牛。洪波欲渡渡不得,以鵲爲橋誠拙謀。(中略)寄言牛女勿相疑,地下神工尤更奇『尤更』二字不妥。喚取河邊作橋棟,一年何必一佳期?」按此詩亦見陳舜俞《都官集》卷十二[24],題作〈三峽橋〉,疑非功父作。

            〈金山行〉:「鳥飛不盡暮天碧,漁歌忽斷蘆花風。」按此首頗遒放似東坡。《養一齋詩話》卷七謂:「此二句從太白『鳥飛不到吳天長』化出,非真實獨造本領,梅聖俞許為太白後身,何哉?」(《漁隱叢話前集》卷三十七引《王直方詩話》記荊公極賞此聯。)

            卷四〈東望〉:「天兵下安南,獠穴須滅跡」;「男兒逢此時,弗往荷矛戟。胡爲守文法,銖銖較朝夕。終當解官去,大艦挂長席」;「不作凌烟人,猶爲釣鼇客。」按此意功父詩中屢見,如卷二十七〈原武按堤雜詩〉云:「聖賢君相繼虞唐,問罪戎夷復故疆。不將一軍提將印,漫來淤地閱隄防。」「白駒馳隙鬢毛斑,簿領紛紛世愈難。安得一軍提將印,橫行西域斬樓蘭。」《劍南集》、《龍州道人集》中,遂成窠臼。而本朝作者為之先者,蘇子美、功父也。

        〈望牛渚有感〉第一、第三乃五律,誤編入五古[25](又卷十四〈隱靜寺〉二首乃七律,誤編入七古)。

            卷五〈贈陳師道判官〉:「自從梅老死,詩言失平淡。我欲回眾航,力弱不可纜。忽逢陳夫子,兩目海水湛。為我聊一吟,粹芳起俗艷。借令李杜在,決敵未應敢」云云。按功父之於宛陵,雖有知己之感,不免作過情語。但於時輩,獨稱後山,亦為能知異量之美矣。參觀卷十二〈送梅直講聖俞〉云:「青風吹天雲霧開,仙人騎馬天上來。吟出人間見所不可見,常娥織女爲之生嫌猜。公乎至寶勿盡吐,吐盡吾恐黄河水決崑崙摧」云云。海樣言語,於都官詩法了無所解,可見「詩言失平淡」句,不過取都官〈和晏相公韻〉、〈讀邵不疑詩卷〉兩首中語,敷衍題目耳。

            卷三十〈哭梅直講聖俞〉云:「贈蒙以太白,自謂無復疑。篇篇被許可,當友不當師。」自注:「予嘗以師禮見聖俞,聖俞不予當也。」又卷十〈寄獻荊州鄭紫微〉云:「公嘗愛我如李白,恨不即往從公游。」功父自居太白後身,時人以太白許之者,惟可考見聖俞、毅夫及劉莘老三人而已。(毅夫《鄖溪集》卷二十八〈寄郭祥正〉云:「怪得溪山不寂寞,江南又有謫仙人。」又〈酒寄郭祥正〉云:「卻須捉住鯨魚尾,恐怕醉來騎上天。」)(《宛陵集》卷四十三〈采石月贈郭功甫〉云:「青山有冢人謾傳,却來人間知幾年?」)《能改齋漫錄》卷十載章衡子平〈答功甫書〉云:「鄭公毅夫,吾叔表民,及梅聖俞,皆以功甫為李謫仙之後身。」劉莘老《忠肅集》卷十六〈還郭祥正詩卷〉云:「當時未冠人已識,知音第一推梅翁。翁主詩盟世少可,一見旗鼓欣相逢。當友不敢當師禮,呼以謫仙名甚隆。君亦自謂太白出,世姓雖異精靈同。[26]」【《宛陵集》卷四十三〈依韻和郭祥正秘校遇雨宿昭亭見懷〉、〈依韻和郭秘校苦寒〉〈依韻和郭祥正秘校昭亭山偶作〉。】【《後村大全集》卷一百十〈跋聽蛙方氏墨跡〉云:「梅聖俞謂郭功甫有太白之才,觀其自書五言,只如此,恐去太白尚遠。」】【《誠齋集》卷二十一〈張功父舊字時可慕郭功父故易之求予書其意〉有云:「功父雙何遠,相如了不關。」功父身後,尚有此知己。】

        〈題廣慶寺壁〉云:「長廊覽前題,習之最爲甲。物理求其全,用材無乃狹。渾詩亦可取,小雨纔一霎。未能臻甫白,源長流不乏。」

            〈端州逢故人劉暐光道〉:「眾人皆欲戮,出門即有礙上杜句,下孟句。」

            卷二十一〈南樓有懷元輿〉:「田家隔水犬吠犬,天氣新晴鳩喚鳩。」

            卷二十三〈貴池寺照遠軒〉:「山光半擁初生日,天影寛圍不盡江。」

            〈追和梅侍讀題貴池寺韻〉:「陰生廣野千山失,影落空江一雁歸。」

            卷二十七〈和孔周翰侍郎洪州絕句‧之六〉:「江雲凝雨疾風過,陣馬爭回萬疊波。平地看時真一笑,鵬騰鰲倒欲如何?」

            〈所居〉:「營居未就借僧居,貝篆翻尋頗食蔬。獨步青苔人散後,旋收紅柿鳥分餘。」按不如荊公之「客舍黃粱今始熟,鳥殘紅柿昔分甘。」

            〈君儀惠莆田陳紫荔乾即蔡君謨謂之老楊妃者〉:「紅綃皮皺核丁香,日曝風凝玉露漿。不向海邊爲逐客,長安無此荔枝嘗。」

            〈金陵〉:「洗盡青春初變晴,曉光微散淡烟橫。謝家池上無多景,只有黃鸝一兩聲。」按《遯齋閑覽》記此詩為荊公所賞,有金酒杯之遺。功父尚有卷二十七〈西軒看山懷荊公〉、〈寄王丞相荊公〉、〈次上和上荊公〉(卷二十七)、卷二十八〈奠謁王荊公墳〉(有云:「扶持自出軻雄上,光焰寧論萬丈高」,又云:「平昔偏蒙愛小詩,如今吟就復誰知」)諸七絕,卷三十〈王丞相荊公挽詞〉五律,投分不淺。果如《東軒筆錄》卷六所記,荊公恥為為小臣所薦,極口陳功父有文無行(朱石君〈序〉引《宋史‧文苑傳》語實本此出),功父安得不有所聞,而魏道輔獨聞之耶?然世事難知,人心叵測,丞相不在夢中而君在夢中,亦未可遽謂其必無耳。

            【《續通鑑長編》卷三百四十四:「元豐七年三月壬子,前汀州通判、奏議郎郭祥正勒停。坐權漳州補僧道亨住持,不當受金,悔過還主,及違法差送接人,經赦也。[27]」】【《永樂大典》卷七千八百九十一、七千八百九十二「汀」字引功父詩句頗多。】【《永樂大典》卷七八九一「汀」字引郭祥正詩「城池影浸水邊水,鼓角聲傳山外山」。】【《二老堂詩話》卷上謂:「朱新仲《鄞州志》載郭功父〈老人十拗詩〉」云云,《集》中不見。】





[1]《手稿集》405-10 頁。
[2] 原文「風」後多一「色」字。
[3] 原文未註卷數。
[4] 原文脫落「京」字。
[5]「貧家」原作「鄰家」。
[6]「玄姬」原作「玄妃」。
[7] 原文「藏海詩話」脫落「話」字。
[8]《手稿集》410-4 頁。
[9]「齕」原作「齧」。
[10] 原文脫落「谷」字。
[11] 即下文,見《手稿集》412-3 頁夾縫。
[12] 此處有誤,《陵川文集》作者實為天挺孫郝經。
[13] 原文脫落「月」字。
[14]《手稿集》415-24 頁。
[15]Nicocles」原作「Nicoles」。
[16]Trade」原作「Craft」。
[17]pubblico」原作「publico」。
[18]occurred of themselves」原作「occurred themselves」。
[19]《手稿集》424-6 頁。
[20]《手稿集》426-30 頁。
[21]「卷十」原作「卷九」。
[22]「臺」原作「堂」。
[23]「致」原作「置」。
[24]「舜」原作「聖」。
[25]「五律」原作「古律」。
[26]「已識」原作「未識」。
[27] 原文脫落「亨」字。

沒有留言:

張貼留言