“Der unterjochte Ehemann” and “Das Weiberregiment” from E. Fuchs, Illustrierte Sittengeschichte: Renaissance
百三十六[1]
程嘉燧孟陽《松圓浪淘集》十八卷（詩）、《松圓偈菴集》二卷（文）。松圓詩格靡弱而詞膚率，殊不足觀。以牧齋標榜，遂得盛名。（參觀《柳南隨筆》卷三云：「蒙叟於古人詩推元裕之，今人詩推程孟陽，皆過當。家次山兄峻云：『推裕之者，因晚節既墜，欲借野史亭以自文耳。若孟陽，乃其師承所自。」）詩初學少陵，卷六以前痕跡宛然，乃七子體之疲闒者。婁子柔堅〈書孟陽所刻詩後〉云：「尤愛少陵之作，嘗稱李獻吉。雖規規摹擬，而才氣實非餘人所及」云云，可徵祈嚮。牧齋於此段因緣諱而勿道，衹以中歲以後學東坡，引為同調，正如其隱飾蕭伯玉之喜竟陵。陳伯璣《詩慰》選孟陽詩，并錄子柔此評云：「子柔先生古文不在艾東鄉之下。子柔淵源震川，而文氣紆徐舒折，每在行墨字句之外。東鄉猶時有凌厲處。孟陽初未嘗不學杜而偷空同，晚年乃別徑旁通宋、元。虞山公深贊其得意于《中州》、《西涯》諸集，然不喜讀者從此入首，恐不曉老杜與空同為何物，將來流弊或有甚於鍾、譚者，小子衡僭為疏明之。」又評〈雨夜燕客〉七律云：「極學空同。」可見當時人耳目尚不易掩也。
卷二〈潤州城下泛舟登金山寺〉云：「積翠連山石岸迴，畫屏搖曳錦帆開。州城秀色波中見，寺閣風烟水上來。天入滄溟雙砥柱，江經灩澦一孤臺。依然舉目徧蕭瑟，落日秋陰送客哀。」同卷〈登瓜洲大觀臺望金山寺〉有云：「浪蹵日車通蜀險，風飄雲蓋入吳愁」，「遼遠不屬與桑乾」，「斜照千門月碣石，長吹萬里風何異。」非《圍爐詩話》卷六所詆之「瞎唐詩」乎？卷十四〈泛舟法海寺登觀音閣望金山〉云：「小榼輕橈度淺灣，霜林蕭閣出烟鬟。野風颯颯帆移浦，江暗戎戎塔表山。一水相望如可接，片雲無意杳難攀。殘崖尚有殘碑在，儻繫高人興盡還。」（「江暗」不詞，當作「江樹」。少陵〈放船〉云：「江市戎戎暗，山雲淰淰寒。」董斯張《吹景集》卷六云：「《毛萇傳》『何彼穠矣』云：『穠，猶戎戎也。』《古文苑》載張衡賦『靈木戎戎』，注：『戎戎，盛貌。』」）題目略同，而風格迥異。松圓一生詩學，可以此兩篇概之。
卷二〈集張二丈池上〉：「舉杯忽送雙歸鳥，點席爭投自照螢。」卷四〈宋中懷古〉：「芒碭雁呼雲一去，黃河日落馬雙尵。」……[2]卷七〈送春〉：「慵拈雪鏡愁邊照，判遣風花醉裡飛。」此類造語割裂，不可勝舉，使在《滄溟集》中，牧齋笑齒早冷矣。
卷七〈憶金陵題畫扇〉：「秋陰殢客思騰騰，木末荒臺盡日登。誰信到家翻遠憶，雨齋含墨畫金陵。」〈崑山雜題畫〉：「愛作江天萬木枯，棘籬茅屋水禽呼。酒腸但放槎牙出，不管還宜醒眼無。」余於千首詩中，僅取此兩絕句。
卷十二〈閶門訪舊〉之「多年華髩絲相似，三月春愁水不如」，已見譏於邵子湘。至《香祖筆記》卷二所稱之「瓜步江空微有樹，秣陵天遠不宜秋」[3]，則《浪淘集》中未見。《柳南隨筆》卷五謂：「『秣陵』句，新城極賞之，實襲戴叔倫語，以天遠易凋蔽而已。」
《偈菴集‧自序》：「願當齋日，閉閤晏坐，焚香寫經，寂如枯禪。而當其水上忽發，鄰情自來，雖悟聲空，終難聞盡。」卷上〈浪淘集序〉：「曰『浪淘』者，以余宿習舊質，已在憶忘之間，似沉沙然，偶為驚濤激浪淘汰而出之者耳。」按松圓文以此二篇最妙，餘文筆致從容，時苦冗衍。
百三十七[4]
John Dickson Carr, The Life of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle 以稗官筆法敘事，而浮囂拉雜，遠遜 Hesketh
Pearson, A. Conan Doyle。依據雖廣，不足貴也，如 p. 279
記 Conan
Doyle 云：“Just remember that no woman is ugly”，而 Pearson, p. 182:
“No woman is ugly. Every woman is beautiful. But some are more beautiful than
others”，隽永多矣。參觀 “Lord Stowell: Brother John, this port is
good. Lord Eldon: Brother William,
all port is good, but some port is better than other” (The Pollock-Holmes Letters, ed. M.DeW. Howe, II, p. 174); George
Orwell, Animal Farm, p. 87: “All
animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”; Encounter, no. 38, p. 86: “All literary
butlers are perfect, but some are perfecter than others, & Jeeves is the
mostest”; Emily Faithfull, Three Visits
to America (1884), p. 326 記一 Feminist
云：“I believe sexes were created perfectly equal, with
the woman a little more equal than the man” (E.J. Dingwall, The American Woman, p. 100 引); P.
Guedalla: “A Russian Fairy Tale”, in which the villain “believed that all
fairies were equal before the law, but held strongly that some fairies were
more equal than others” ( TLS, 26
Nov. 1982, p. 1292); Noël Coward: “The Café de la Paix”: “Never mind, dear,
we’re all made the same, though some more than others” ( The Penguin Dict. of Modern Quotations, p. 53); Samuel Butler, Note-books: “All philosophies, if you
ride them home, are nonsense; but some are greater nonsense than others.”
知福爾摩斯為 Joseph
Bell 者，莫早於 R.L. Stevenson，與 Conan Doyle 書云：“Only
this one thing troubles me: can this be my old friend Joe Bell?” (Letters of R.L.S., ed. Sidney Colvin,
II, p. 346). Bell觀人術 (trained eye... deductive powers... “This man is a
left-handed cobbler”... “This man is a French-polisher”) (Carr, p. 23). 按希臘哲人 Democritus 亦具此技。Diogenes Laertius, IX, 42: “When Hippocrates came to see him, he ordered
milk to be brought, &, having inspected it, pronounced it to be the milk of
a black she-goat which had produced her first kid...Moreover, Hippocrates being
accompanied by a maidservant, on the first day Democritus greeted her with
‘Good morning, maiden,’ but the next day with ‘Good morning, woman.’ As a
matter of fact the girl had been seduced in the night” (“The Loeb Classical
Library”, E. T. by R.D. Hicks, vol. II, pp. 451-3). Claude de Rulhière 亦有觀人術，略類此，見 Diderot
所記 (Sainte-Beuve, Causeries
du Lundi, IV, pp. 572-3)。《大正大藏經》第四卷《舊雜譬喻經》卷上第二十二則云：「有二人從師學道。於路見象跡，一人言：『此母象懷雌子，象一目盲；象上有一婦人，懷女兒。』後悉如所言。一自念：『我與俱從師學，獨不見要。』後還白師，師呼一人，問何因知此。答曰：『我見象小便地，知是雌象。見其右足踐地深，知懷雌也。見道邊右面草不動，知右目盲。見象所止有小便，知是女人。見右足蹈地深，知懷女。我以纖密意思惟之耳。』」（《能改齋漫錄》卷十八袁天綱郊行見牛迹，知牝牛，又有孕、左目傷、必犢牡事，實本此。）《聊齋志異》卷九〈刁姓〉則「仙舫附記」：「某甲號稱預知，善決人吉兇。高坐一廟廊，時大雨如澍。有客執雨具，提筥，筥盛梨二、藥裹一，奔入，問吉凶。甲起課曰：『問病。』客然之。[5]又曰：『病熱渴。』客又然之，而尚未之神也。忽又曰：『子姓王。』客始大驚。又謂：『病者當為爾妻。』其人惶恐，側拜，泣問愈否。大呼曰：『歸，體愈矣。』客款謝而去。其子異而問之。曰：『筥有藥裹，知其問病；置二梨，知病熱渴；雨具柄雕「王記」，則為王姓無疑。』其子曰：『何以知其為妻？』甲笑曰：『冒雨覓藥，奔入求卜，恐即父母瀕危，亦未必如是急急也。』」[6]《六合內外瑣言》卷十二〈占乾鑿度〉一則全同。元曲孫仲章《勘頭巾》第三折，則儼然福爾摩斯之判析物證矣。他如 E.
Storer, Il novellino 第三則 (pp. 40-44)[7]
(按實之《天方夜譚》“The Adventures of the Royal Bastard”，見 The Thousand Nights & One Night, tr. Powys Mathers, IV, pp. 49-61: The sultan &
three hashish-eaters); Voltaire, Zadig:
“Le chien et le cheval” (Romans et contes,
Pléiade, pp. 9 ff.); Die Wunderblume:
“Der Aufmerksame Mann”, S. 247-8，皆福爾摩斯術之祖也。
Carr, p. 107: “In Egypt the
Khedive’s Government translated [Holmes’s] exploits into Arabic & issued
them as a text-book for the police.” 按《燕下鄉脞錄》卷十：「順治七年《三國演義》譯成，國初滿洲武將不識漢文，類多得力於此。嘉慶間，忠毅公額勒登保初以侍衛從海超勇公帳下，每戰輒陷陣。超勇曰：『爾將材可造，須略識古兵法。』以翻清《三國演義》授之。卒為經略」云云，二事無獨有偶。（按震鈞《天咫偶聞》卷二云：「國初滿洲理學有阿什坦，字海龍，康熙九年官給事中。時稗官小說盛行，滿人翻譯者眾；海龍上言：『學者立志，宜以聖賢為期，經史為導，此外雜書無益之言悉當屏絕。請敕旗下人，自經史外雜書不許翻譯。』報可。」）又劉鑾《五石瓠》[8]卷五〈水滸小說之為禍〉一條云：「獻忠之狡也，日使人說《三國》、《水滸》諸書，凡埋伏攻襲咸效之。八大王（獻忠在穀城時舊號）老本營管隊楊興吾嘗語孔尚大如此。」[9]《莊諧選錄》卷二記胡文忠公曰：「草野中全以《水滸傳》為師資，滿口英雄好漢，所謂奇謀秘策，無不粗鹵可笑」；卷八：「日本人為拿破崙傳，言其行軍携書一冊，藏庋甚秘，不使人見，蓋即吾華之《水滸傳》也。」
Carr, p. 142: Lieutenant-Colonel F.N.
Maude: “The advantage of either sword or lance in cavalry work is that a severe
wound drops the man at once. A man may be mortally wounded by rifle or revolver
bullet & still fight on for a couple of hours.” 按此兵家舊說。Souvarov: “La balle est folle, mais la baïonnette sait ce qu’elle fait”
(見 Larousse du XXe Siècle, art. “Souvarov”). Hugo, La Légende des siècles, XLIX. “Le Temps Presse”, no. 6 “Le imetière
d’Eylau”: “Le sabre est un vaillant, la bombe une traîtresse” (Oeuv. poét. comp., Éd. B. Valiquette, p.
591).
Carr, p.234: “He invented the
enigmatic clue... illustrated by a passage which has been repeated over &
over. ‘Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention?’ ‘To
the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.’ ‘The dog did nothing in the
night-time.’ ‘That was the curious incident.’” (見 The Memoirs of S.H.: “Silver Blaze”。參觀 His Last Bow: “The Devil’s Foot”: “‘I [S.H.] followed you—’ ‘I saw no one.’ ‘That is
what you may expect to see when I follow you.’”) 按此亦與古為新。希臘哲人語如：“When [Thales] was asked why he had no children of his own, he replied
‘because he loved children.’” (Diogenes Laertius, I. 26, “The Loeb Classical
Library”, E. T. by R.D. Hicks, vol. I, p. 27); “When [Solon] was weeping for
the loss of his son, & someone said to him, ‘It is all of no avail,’ he
replied, ‘That is why I weep, because it is of no avail’” (I, 63, vol. I, p. 65)
(cf. Gray’s sonnet on the death of Richard West: “And weep the more because I
weep in vain.”); “When someone... asked [Myson] why he laughed when no one was
near, he replied, ‘That is just the reason’” (I, 108, vol. I, p. 113)，機杼如一。
T.S. Eliot 愛讀福爾摩斯探案，見 T.S. Eliot: A Symposium, compiled by R. March & Tambimuttu, p. 90。
汪穰卿《莊諧選錄》卷八〈密會〉一則即〈五橘核〉也；歇洛克律師者，即福爾摩斯。汪以為實事，不知其出稗官也。汪書成於光緒三十年。
百三十八[10]
郎世寧畫〈海西知時草〉軸
以英語入詩者，莫先於貝青喬子木《咄咄吟》[11]。道光二十一年，英人攻定海、寧波，貝參奕經戎幕，目擊身經，作此抒慨。卷一：「堂啟金絲咽暮笳，皁旗誰衛素王家。不堪翠館雙鬟女，忍抱羌渾作小𡡳。」自注云：「日練夷兵於寧波府學大成殿，土娼殷狀元有二女招贅郭士立為婿。《海島逸志》載夷人稱妻曰『𡡳』，平聲。」「wife」也。稍後則高錫恩古民《友石齋集》卷八之〈夷閨詞〉，作於同治二年。前第六十二則已備錄之，如第三首之「寄語儂家赫士勃」，「husband」也；第八首之「度埋而立及時春」，「To marry」也。同治五年，斌椿出使歐洲，撰《乘查筆記》後附《海國勝遊草‧包姓別墅》第二首云：「彌思自注：譯言女兒也小字是安拏，明慧堪稱解語花。嚦嚦鶯聲誇百囀，方言最愛學中華。」「Miss」也。趙之謙撝叔《悲盦居士詩賸‧子奇復用前韻成雜感四章見示依次答之》第二首云：「英法通商求五口，雅片毒人逞禍首。呼度一吠凡犬馴自注：夷呼犬曰度，入聲，物有相畏性所因。「Dog」也。同治十年，王芝子石游歐洲，明年返國，作《海客日談》，卷六〈三月丙戌丁亥二日香港永安自注：洋行名閣呈黃陳主人〉第二首云：「潮打黃昏海色淒，一樓花雨澳門西。愁聽架上紅鸚鵡，語學西洋的令低自注：的令，飲也；低，茶也。」「Drink
tea」也。【《海客日談‧英吉利語略》最令人捧腹，如「息工，天也」、「格審，日也」、「戈溫洛，專部大酋也」、「愛，眼也」、「黑，髮也」、「摟時，鼻也」、「綠海，視也」、「罕耳，手也」、「東圖裸，不知也」、「姑圖摩領，接手禮也」，尚可揣度。如「阿囫圇，月也」、「貝鼓，風也」、「們那，兄也」、「阿嬀女，弟也」、「巴里，教士也（padre?）」、「堵，鑰也」、「歪，油也（oil?）」、「公班，雅片烟也」，則不可究詰。「威里姑圖，人豪也」、「拜蒲，烟草也」，解雖不的，亦能知其原文。尤可笑者，為「漱慈，履也；叟，亦履也」、「伊鐵乃時，吃飯也」、「非哩乃時，已吃飯也」、「乃慈，米也」。】《南亭四話》卷三論作詩用西語，謂僅見此首差強人意，而誤作者姓名為宋石子。又云：「嘗見一傖作《西洋竹枝詞》百首，滿紙蠻語，無復文理，直一英文讀本耳。」按《海客日談‧凡例‧第十四條》：「其叔月漁先生有〈歐羅巴竹枝詞〉百二十首，俱載《海天信筆》中」云云。王韜紫詮《甕牖餘談》卷三〈星使往英〉條云：「道光壬寅年間，有浙人吳樵珊從美魏茶往英，居年餘而返，作有〈倫敦竹枝詞〉數十首，描摹頗肖」云云，余皆未見。南亭所云，當是指局中門外漢《倫敦竹枝詞》，詞凡百首，成於光緒甲申秋九月，尚滑稽有致，惜不免失拈出韻。據《小方壺輿地叢鈔》第十一帙所收桐城張祖翼《倫敦風土記》，全出《竹枝詞》註，乃知「局中門外漢」即張也。第四首云：「五十年前一美人，居然在位號魁陰。教堂高坐稱朝賀，贏得編氓跪唪經。」自注：「『魁陰』，譯言『女主』。」 「Queen」也。音義雙關，甚妙。第十九首云：「風來陣陣乳花香，鳥語高冠時樣妝。結伴來遊大巴克，見人低喚克門郎。」自注：「『巴克』，譯言『花園』；『克門郎』，譯言『來同行』。」「park」也，「come along」也。第二十一首云：「握手相逢姑莫林，喃喃私語怕人聽。定期後會郎休誤，臨別開司劇有聲。」自注：「『姑莫林』，譯言『早上好』；『開司』，言『接吻』。」「good morning」也，「kiss」也。第二十四首云：「紫絲步障滿園林，羅列珍奇色色新。二八密司親手賣，心慌無暇數先令。」第二十五首云：「往來蹀躞捧盤盂，白帽青衣綽約如。一笑低聲問佳客，這回生代好同車。」自注：「『生代』，譯言『禮拜日』。」「Sunday」也。第二十九首云：「十五盈盈世寡儔，相隨握算更持籌。金錢笑把春葱接，贏得一聲坦克尤。」「Thank you」也。第三十三首：「銷魂最是亞魁林，粉黛如梭看不清。一盞槐痕通款曲，低聲溫磅索黃金。」「Aquarium」也，「wine」也，「one」也。第三十四首云：「紅草絨冠黑布裙，擺攤終日戲園門。自知和氣生財道，口口聲聲邁大林。」「My darling」也。第七十六首云：「相約今宵踏月行，擡頭克落克分明。一杯濁酒黃昏後，哈甫怕司到乃恩。」「clock」也，「Half past nine」也。《南亭四話》卷四云：「洋貨掮客好作英語，『雪唐』、『排哀』之聲，不絕於口，皆『別琴』派也，即華言『洋涇浜』語。陽湖洗耳狂人作《別琴竹枝詞》凡百餘章，擇尤錄之，云：『生意原來別有琴，露天通事盡知音。不須另學英人字，的里溫多值萬金。』『算賬先呼押克康，推而大辣即銀洋。勞薪概說為疇四，是否何人蝦勃郎。』『衣裳楚楚語陪陪，考姆陪陪歇歇來。多少洋行康白杜，片言茹吐費疑猜。』『清晨相見谷貓迎，好度由途敘濶情。若不從中肆鬼計，如何密四叫先生。』『行看么二打溫多，每道花烟勿老窩。欣說長三郎的里，不知戲館叫如何。』『大腳娘姨辣住飛，非司法脫臉盤肥。余今口渴側司脫，很葛立兮肚裡饑。』『滑推姆問是何時，定內橫因用酒巵。一夜纔當溫內脫， 自鳴鐘謂克勞基。』」則「pidgin」也，「one, two, three」也，「account」也，「tall」也，「dollar」也，「wages」也，「who belong」也，「baby」也，「come bye-&-bye」也，「good morning」也，「how do you do」也，「miss」也，「one-two」也，「flower」也，「long-three」也，「large feet」也，「face fat」也，「thirst」也，「hungry」也，「what time」也，「dinner wine」也，「one night」也，「clock」也。蓋光緒以後士夫狙儈，莫不兜離僸佅，效參軍蠻語，見之詩者，無間莊諧雅俗，匪特譚嗣同之有「綱倫慘以喀私德，法會盛於巴力門」而已。《掌故叢編》第一輯乾隆五十七年十月二十七日軍機奏片：「遵將郭世勳等奏到𠸄咭唎國原稟二件，傳到在京西洋人等，令其認識。據稱原稟有西洋字一件[12]，伊等俱能認識，謹譯出呈覽。其𠸄咭唎字稟一頁，伊等不能認識」云云，曾幾何時，風氣大變矣。又吳振棫《養吉齋叢錄》卷二十六及張晉本《達觀堂詩話》卷四載乾隆御製〈知時草〉詩并序，詩五律六韻，序曰：「西洋有草名『僧息底斡』，譯漢言為『知時』也。其貢使携種以至。以手撫之則眠，踰刻而起」云云。殆即「sensitive plant」，前字譯音，後字譯意（郎世寧圖上乾隆題此詩，見《故宮週刊》四百五十四期）。《咄咄吟》卷下「釜底游魂九死餘」一首注云：「英夷稱傳譯之人曰『馬占』，亦未詳其義。」則不知何字，幾於「波爾勒斯」矣（《莊諧選錄》卷二：「某初至申，偕友至游，忽遇人眾擁擠，華捕持棒亂毆人。某忽怒罵曰：『波爾勒斯！』捕肅然垂棒而走。友怪問曰：『汝亦能操西語乎？』某曰：『吾見伊輩唯知畏洋人，且實不甚知西語，故偽作西語嚇之，不意果中我計也』）。甚疑「major」字，貝氏誤會耳。
【明末王餘祐謂：「西洋呼『月』為『老瓦』，杜詩『莫笑田家老瓦盆』，即月盆也；如月琴、月臺之類，取其形似」云云，見所撰《五公山人集》。《四庫提要》卷一八一痛斥其誕謬。「老瓦」當即「luna」，耳學訛傳，舌本木強，遂成此音。觀一二五則摘《寧靈銷食錄》卷一英吉利字世可以類推[13]，是遠在唐代已成西語入詩矣，一笑。】
【Charles
G. Leland, Pidgin-English Sing-Song,
9th ed., 118, p. 127: “Joss-pidgin ‘religion’ etc.” J.D. Ball, Things Chinese, 4th ed., p.
471: “Who he is or ‘Who you b’long?’” (p. 508: “Soliloquy in Hamlet: ‘Can do,
no can do, how fashion?’” Leland, Pidgin-English
Sing-Song, p. 11: “‘My belongey China-side,’ is readily intelligible as
meaning ‘I am a native of China.’” Arnold Silcock, Verse Worse, p. 30: “...C.G. Leland... also was the only poet to
write verse in & popularize Pidgin-English.”】
百三十九[14]
劉子翬《屏山全集》二十卷。屏山義理甚淺。據朱子撰〈劉公墓表〉：「少時好佛老清淨寂滅之說，後於《易》得入德之門，以『不遠復』為三字符，作〈復齋銘〉、〈聖傳論〉以見志」云云，〈復齋銘〉集中未見。論學宗旨詳於明心復性，略於格物致知，尚是《學蔀通辨》所謂「養神」一路。朱子雖出其門牆，實別開蹊徑也。其文調排比而語整飭，頗工修詞。偶出以寓言諧讔，如卷六〈蒼庭筠傳〉、〈髯戲〉、〈閒境志〉之類，蓋道學家之饒風趣者。詩以五、七古、七絕為最佳，筆致爽健，時苦粗直。雖與呂居仁友善，却不作江西體，亦尟《擊壤集》語。
卷一〈聖傳論〉：「此甲彼乙，不能相統。心心有主，喙喙爭鳴。」「不覩其全，各守其偏，聖人之道始離；互攻其異，不反其同，聖人之道始孤。」「昧乎一，則莫知元本；滯乎一，則入於虚妙。」「學有三，上焉汲汲然，其次悠悠然，其次懵懵然。夫懵懵者，非不向學也，心未達也。誘而達之，矢去川决，安知懵懵不爲汲汲也耶！故悠悠者最爲害道。」「李翺〈復性〉三篇，其言非不髙妙，然非子思《中庸》之學也。《中庸》之學，未嘗滅情也。善養性者，不汨於情，亦不滅情；不流於喜怒哀樂，亦不去喜怒哀樂。非合非離，中即契焉。」（參觀第三百四十八則。）
卷四〈漢書雜論‧下〉：「項羽引兵欲渡，烏江亭長艤船待，請羽急渡。羽不渡，乃戰死。蓋是時漢購羽千金，邑萬戶，亭長之言甚甘，羽疑其欺己也。羽意謂丈夫窮途，寧戰死，不忍為亭長所執，故託以江東父老之言為解爾。使羽果無東渡意，豈引兵至此哉？及田父所紿，陷於大澤中，羽知人心不與己，安知亭長不出田父之計哉。」
卷六〈示六經堂學者〉：「汝心之休，處此如遊；汝心之流，處此如囚。」「視彼迅晷，若弗云來。今汝不勉，則何有哉。」
卷十一〈四不忍〉（「玉體能勝饑渴無？我食雖甘何忍飽！玉體能勝凜冽無？我服雖華何忍御！玉體能勝暴露無？我榻雖安何忍寐！玉體能勝寂寞無？我瑟雖調何忍聽！」）凡四章，皆傷鑾輿之蒙塵也。
〈子魚〉：「一咀命千百，雖甘汝安無。」「虐戲等刳孕，淫刑幾戮孥。」「閩風易殺子，盥水沉其軀。詎有惻怛心，旁推及豚魚。」按卷十二〈諭俗〉第三首：「何州無戰爭，閩粵禍未銷。或言殺子因，厲氣由此招。蠻陬地瘠狹，世業患不饒。生女奩分貲，生男野分苗。往往衣冠門，繼嗣無覆髫」云云，是此數語註腳。又按卷十一〈食蠣房〉一首羅列海族之入饌者，至云：「鰷鱨鰋鯉鰻，鱣鮪鰍魴鯽。微物倘見知，捐軀不足惜。」下語甚妙。特以朱子論人之法繩之，必曰二詩矛盾矣。
卷十二〈餘柑〉：「猶聞雜蜜草，少轉森嚴味。奇才用不專，雖用何殊棄。」
卷十三〈讀平險銘寄李漢老〉：「官侯鑿平劍浦灘，游子不歌行路難。李公作銘垂不刊，峻峰激流生筆端。斯文豈但夸雄觀，寓理之奧開聾眢。惟人性天同廣胖，橫目立見分庭壇。紛敷蔽翳榛葦萑，騰逃鬱屈猿蛇蚖。（中略二句）千崖百瀨中繞蟠，覆溺嵬岸糜堅完。（中略二句）浮思縱坂走彈丸，不殛不止巧力殫。（中略二句）堂堂靈君司五官，乍臣乍叛勞控摶。（中略二句）躁謀欲驟加雕剜，慘若蕭斧臨髀髖。自醒夷之良可嘆，何如含垢休索瘢。灑灑落落從中看，豁然四通裂囊簞。有如灘流平不湍，鑑靜天空秋月寒。（下略）」按《全晉文》卷八十六仲長敖〈覈性賦〉僅云：「方寸地，九折坂。」屏山鑄語瑰瑋如此，何礙作道學詩乎！《子華子》下〈晏子問黨〉章「心胸之兩間」一節差相似耳。方中通《陪古》卷一〈九龍灘記〉更恣肆矣。【足以繼韋承慶〈靈臺賦〉（見《全唐文》卷一八八）。北魏釋道安〈平心露布文〉云：「偽心主阿黎耶識，擅假名器，叨竊生民。揚旌色野，問罪心庭。四月十六日，軍次心境」云云（《全後魏文》卷五十九），方此蔑如矣。】卷六〈閒境志〉云：「閒境志（按此字衍）者，肇闢乎方寸之間，而莫知其際限（按當作垠）之所接。無炎凉之俗，無風波之途。非夫特立高尚之士，莫能居也。坐忘寄傲之流，閉門却掃之士[15]，送日月於枯棋，泯乾坤於一醉，皆乘堅策駿，有意臻其藩域者也。乃有黃冠羽服，壞衲方袍，逍遙其間，自立門戶，曰『清都』，曰『淨土』，蓋閒境之別名也。自世途歆艷，斯境榛塞。余嘗熟遊，送之者皆自崖而反也」云云，機杼略同，可謂善狀內景者。至卷十二〈聽詹溫之彈琴歌〉云：「又疑夫堯禹之躬行，丘軻之立言，瞿耼之同歸，百家諸子之紛然，更歷千萬古，此意不滅絲桐間。」[16]則叶韻講章，板腐可厭矣。
卷十五〈江上〉：「江上潮來浪薄天，隔江寒樹晚生烟。北風三日無人渡，寂寞沙頭一簇船。」
卷十六〈景陽鐘〉：「景陽鐘動曉寒清，度柳穿花隱隱聲。三十六宮梳洗罷，却吹殘燭到天明。」
卷十七〈北風〉：「雁起平沙晚角哀，北風回首恨難裁。淮山已隔胡塵斷，汴水猶穿故苑來。紫色䵷聲真倔強，翠華龍袞暫徘徊。廟堂此日無遺策，可是憂時獨草萊。」按同卷〈書事〉亦云：「紫色蛙聲倔強間。」
卷十八〈汴京紀事〉：「聯翩漕舸入神州，梁主經營授宋休。一自胡兒來飲馬，春波唯見斷氷流。五」「空嗟覆鼎誤前朝，骨朽人間罵未銷。夜月池臺王傅宅，春風楊柳太師橋。七」「輦轂繁華事可傷，師師垂老過湖湘。縷衣檀板無顏色，一曲當時動帝王。二十」按《後村大全集》卷一百七十四引「師師」一首。《三朝北盟會編‧靖康中帙‧卷五》：「靖康元年正月，籍沒李師師家。」《墨莊漫錄》卷八：「李生流落來浙中，士大夫猶邀之以聽其歌，然憔悴無復向來之態矣。」可與屏山詩參證。宋失名撰《李師師外傳》記其不肯為金人屈，吞簪而死，蓋非實錄。《聽秋聲館詞話》卷十七謂張子野、秦少游詞中所詠，乃另一「師師」，是也。宋末劉學箕〈賀新郎〉詞自注：「白牡丹，京師妓李師師也。畫者曲盡其妙。」觀其詞，亦當時行首，非此師師。
百四十[17]
Diogenes Laertius, E. T. by R.D.
Hicks (“The Loeb Classical Library”). 掌故之書，辨章學術非所思存也。其利病則 Hicks: “a Dryasdust, vain & credulous, of
multifarious reading, amazing industry, & insatiable curiosity” (I, xiv)，及 M. Zevort: “Rhéteur
sans goût et sans style, épigrammatiste sans esprit, érudit sans profondeur” (R.
Hope, The Book of Diogenes Laertius: Its Spirit
& Its Method, p. 31引) 可以盡之。Hicks 謂 Diogenes
Laertius 自作詩甚拙劣，而能採錄 Callimachus 悼 Heraclitus 詩，則尚非不別薰蕕者 (xii: “We cannot deny that he had taste.”)。Nietzsche
考論此書淵源，引 F. Patrizzi 語謂 Diogenes
Laertius 因詠弔先哲篇什無位置處，故撰言行錄以安插之 (ut haberet quo loco elegantia illa sua vel Epigrammata
vel Epitaphia insereret.) (Werke, Leipsic,
XVII, S. 175-6)，尤異聞也。
Bk I. 55: Solon: “70 years are the
term of man’s life” (vol. I, p. 55). 按 Pythagoras 則謂人壽八十年，二十年為一節 (quarter)，如四時之成歲 (VIII. 10, vol. II, . 329)。《舊約全書》：“The days of our years are threescore years & ten; & if by
reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour &
sorrow” (Psalms, XC. 10). 則兼二家之說。
58: “He compared laws to spiders’
webs, which stand firm when any light & yielding object falls on them,
while a larger thing breaks through them & makes off” (vol. I, p. 59). 按 William
Shenstone, Essays on Men & Manners,
“On Politics”: “Laws are generally found to be nets of such a texture, as the
little creep through, the great break through, & the middle-sized alone are
entangled in.” La Fontaine, Fables,
II, 16: “L’exemple est un dangereux leurre; / Où la guêpe a passé, le moucheron
demeure.” 王逢原《廣陵先生文集》卷二〈贈慎東美伯筠〉云：「世網掛士如蛛絲，大不及取小綴之。」《易‧大過‧彖》：「大者過也。」羅隱《讒書》卷一〈秋蟲賦〉：「秋蟲，蜘蛛也。……物之小兮，迎網而斃。物之大兮，兼網而逝。而網也者，繩其小而不繩其大。」【C. Linati, Due
tempi in provincia[18]:
“incappatta nella sua tela la città andò tessendo intorno a me una rete fitta e
delicate di obblighi, d’interessi, di simpatia” (D. Provenzal, Dizion. d. immagini, p. 202).】
59: “He prohibited Thespis from
performing tragedies on the ground that fiction was pernicious” (vol. I, p. 61).
按 Plato, Republic,
607B 有云：“the ancient quarrel of poetry & philosophy”，近人
Katherine E. Gilbert & H. Kuhn, A
History of Esthetics, p. 1 舉 Xenophanes 論
Homer, Hesiod 語為證，惜未引 Solon 及 Heraclitus: “Homer deserved to be chased out of
the lists & beaten with rods, & Archilochus likewise”[19]
(IX. 1; vol. II, p. 409)，蓋皆在 Plato 以前。至 Epicurus 之排斥文藝，則 Saintsbury, History
of Criticism, vol. I, pp. 62-3; Paul E. More, Hellenistic Philosophies, p. 62 詳言之矣。又據 V. 19 所引 Theophrastus 斥美貌為 “a mute
deception”，Theocritus 斥美貌為 “an evil in
an ivory setting” (vol. I, p. 463)，足徵希臘後來不復以 τò
καλóν 為 αρήτη[20]，歧「美」與「善」而二之，非復如 Werner
Jaeger 所言矣 (Paideia,
E. T. by Gilbert Highet, vol. I, pp. 416, 420)。
75: “Pittacus pronounced the half to
be more than the whole” (vol. I, p. 77). 按
Hesiod, Works & Days, 40: “O
fools! They know not how much more the half is than the whole” (“The Loeb
Classical Library”, tr. H.G. Evelyn-White, p. 75); Florian: “L’enfant et le
dattier”: “Le tout ne vaut pas la moitié” (Oeuv.,
“Collection des grands classiques”, p. 35); Samuel Butler: “‘Two are better
than one.’ Yes, but the man who said that did not know my sisters. This proverb
is the help-meet for The Half is Greater than the Whole of Hesiod” (H.F. Jones,
Samuel Butler, II, p. 8); W.A. Wright,
ed., More Letters of Edward FitzGerald,
p. 146: “Victor Hugo has not learned, even at his age, that the Half is better
than the Whole: & so his Poems defeat themselves.”
83: “Bias: ‘Tell Alyattes, from me, to make his diet of onions,’
i.e., to weep” (vol. I, p. 87). 按後世遂成常語，如 Heine,
Gedanken und Einfälle: “Man preist
den dramatischen Dichter, der es versteht, Tränen zu entlocken. Dies Talent hat
auch die kümmerlichste Zwiebel, mit dieser teilt er seinen Ruhm” (Gesammelte Werke, hrsg. von G. Karpeles,
Bd. VIII, S. 259); Mark Lemon, The Jest
Book, §277: “Thackery on a noisy tragedian: “Macready & onions”; cf. Taming of the Shrew, Induction sc. I,
Lord; Antony & Cleop., I. ii
& IV. ii Enobarbus; All’s Well,
V. ii, Lafeu。以上卷一。
Bk II. 36-37 (vol. I, p. 167) 記蘇格拉底妻潑悍事。按 James Thomson 文 “A
Word for Xantippe”: “An unfortunate woman, no less warm-hearted than
hot-tempered, has the foolish goodness to marry a man who is... much older than
herself & absurdly ugly... [who] neglected [his stone-cutting trade]...
& never took payment for his lessons. He shared in the festivities of the
great Athenian houses... He often was absent from home for days & queer
tales was told of the women & young men with whom he was most intimate” (Essays & Phantasies, pp. 220 ff.). 又 Hans
Licht 亦稱 Xantippe
為 “eine
völlig unbedeutende Alltagsnatur, aber eine ganz brave Hausmutter”，橫被惡名，實非公道 (bitterer Unrecht) (Beiträge zur
antiken Erotik, S. 46)。
37: “He said he lived with a shrew
so that he... would learn to adapt himself to the rest of the world.” 按 Aulus
Gellius, The Attic Nights, Bk. I,
XVII 亦道此，而引 Varro 語說之：“Vitium uxoris aut tollendum aut ferendum est. Qui
tollit vitium, uxorem commodiorem praestat; qui fert, sese meliorem facit”
(“The Loeb Classical Library”, vol. I, P. 84).
69: “When Dionysius inquired what
was the reason that philosophers go to rich men’s houses, while rich men no
longer visit philosophers, Aristippus replied, ‘The one know what they need
while the other do not’” (vol. I, p. 199). 按《說郛》卷九十李廌《師友談記》云：「李文正嘗曰：『士人當使王公聞名多而識面少。』寧使王公訝其不來，無使王公厭其不去。」正可各明一義。
74: “To one who accused him of
living with a courtesan, Aristippus put the question, ‘Why is there any
difference between taking a house in which many people had lived before &
taking one in which nobody has ever lived?” etc. (vol. I, p. 203). 按 Sir
John Suckling: “I’ll marry a widow, who is rather the chewer than thing chewed.
Would you not think him a madman who[21],
whilst he might fair & easily ride on the beaten roadway, should trouble
himself with breaking up of gaps?... ’Tis prince-like to marry a widow, for
’tis to have a taster” (The Works of Sir
John Suckling, ed. A. Hamilton Thompson, pp. 309-310).【“Taster”
即希臘之 “protenthes”，羅馬之 “progeustae”，見 The Deipnosophists, tr. by C.B. Gulick, “The Loeb Classical Library”,
vol. II, p. 277。《周禮‧天官冢宰‧膳夫》節：「品嘗食，王乃食。」《禮記‧玉藻》：「（君賜臣食）先飯辯嘗羞。」（詳見孫詒讓《周禮正義》卷七。）】更進一層。E. Pailleron, le
Monde où l’on s’ennuie, I, x, La Duchesse: “Un coeur neuf, c’est comme une
maison neuve, ce ne sont pas les vrais locataires qui essuient les plâtres!”《夜雨秋燈錄‧天緣巧合》條嚴子卿云：「八珍甫備，而廚者先膏；大厦未成，而匠人先坐。予只求人物中選耳，再醮何害？」抑不特此也，名妓閱人多，則願與狎者愈眾；浪子惑婦多，則願與通者愈眾。此皆為虛聲所動，以得供枕席為誇耀，非關好色也。
75: “I have Laïs, not she me” (vol.
I, p. 203). 按即 “Habeo,
non habeor” 一語之始，其境界殆如《楞嚴經》卷八所謂「於邪淫中，心不流逸，澄瑩生明，命終之後，鄰於日月，名四天王天」者。Petrarch 論教會擁資財云：“Bene si habet, pessime si habetur” (Fam., VI. i 見 J.H.
Whitfield, Petrarch & the Renaissance,
p. 115 引) 實本此，神祕主義所謂 “La
sainte indifference” 是也。R.A. Vaughan, Hours
with the Mystics, 6th ed., vol. I, p. 52 謂斯說昉自 The Bhagavad Gita (參觀 A. Huxley, The
Grey Eminence, pp. 137-8, 186)，未識希臘哲人亦明是理也。《五燈會元》卷二元珪云：「變化而不為動，畢盡寂默而不為休。雖娶非妻也，雖饗非取也，雖柄非權也，雖醉非惛也。[22]若能無心於萬物，則羅欲不為淫，福淫禍善不為盜，濫誤疑混不為殺，先後違天不為妄，惛荒顛倒不為醉，是謂無心也，無心則無戒。」（參觀卷十五雲門「道火不能燒口」一節、卷二十紹悟論「禁足」一節。）
75: “Simus showed him costly houses
with tesselated pavements, when Aristippus coughed up phlegm & spat in his
face. And on his resenting this he replied, ‘I could not find any place more
suitable’” (vol. I, p. 205). 按《傳燈錄》卷二十七：「一行者隨師入殿，向佛而唾。師詰之，行者曰：『將無佛處來與某甲唾。』」（《增壹阿含經》[23]三十之六：「舍利弗曰：『佛亦如此地，亦受淨，亦受不淨，屎尿穢惡皆悉受之，膿血涕唾終不逆之。然此地亦不言惡，亦不言善。」《太平廣記》卷一百《宣室志》記道嚴事謂：「世人好唾佛寺地，天命一巨神以背接之，受唾，背有瘡，乞道嚴傅以膏油。」）
79: “Those who went through the
ordinary curriculum, but in their studies stopped short at philosophy,
Aristippus used to compare to the suitors of Penelope. They won the handmaidens,
but were anything but successful in their wooing of the mistress” (vol. I, p.
209). 按 Sainte-Beuve: “M. Boissonade”: “Je ne sais quel
ancien a comparé ceux qui s’appliquaient à la grammaire, faute de mieux, à ces
amants de Pénélope, qui, rebutés par la maîtresse, se rejetaient sur les
servantes” (Nouveaux Lundis, VI, p.
105). 即從此脫胎（又第四百六十一則）。以上卷二。
Bk V. 4 (vol. I, p. 447) 記亞理士多德好色 (in an excess of delight sacrificed to a weak woman as the Athenians
did to Demeter of Eleusis)。按 Havelock Ellis, Studies in the Psychology of Sex, II, . 111-2: “The legend of the
erotic servitude of Aristotle was widely spread in Europe, & pictures exist
of the venerable philosopher on all fours ridden by a woman with a whip.” 可參觀。E. Fuchs, Illustrierte
Sittengeschichte: Renaissance, 200 與 201 頁間彩色插圖 “Der
unterjochte Ehemann”（十六世紀荷蘭木刻）即畫一男子伏地，口銜勒，一婦人騎其背，手揮鞭，210 頁有插圖 “Das
Weiberregiment” 畫婦人揮鞭騎一老男背，172 頁云即 “Aristotle
und Phyllis”; L’oeuvre du Divin Arétin,
I, p. 101-2; Joyce, Ulysses, “Modern
Library,” p. 425; Gilber Highet, Classical
Tradition, p. 57; cf. a bronze Mosan aquamanile before 1300... (Peter Gay, Education of the Senses, after p. 182).
18 (vol. I, p. 461): “Hope is a
waking dream.” 按 W.R. Inge, God
& the Astronomers, p. 168: “Hope as a moral quality is characteristic
of Christianity. St. Paul places it between Faith & Love as one of the
three great Christian virtues. To the Pagans Hope had been a gift of doubtful
value, an illusion which helps us to endure life... an ignis fatuus.” 可參觀。Cf. R. Crashaw, “Answer for Hope” (“faith’s sister”
etc., Oxford Bk. of 17th Cent.
Verse, pp. 650-1; cf. Per contra,
p. 95, Cowley: “Against Hope.”)。又 Locke, Essay,
II, xix, 1 稱 ecstasy 為 “dreaming
with the eyes open”（參觀第百八十八則）。G.V. Gravina, Region
Poetica: “per lo più gli uomini sognano con gli occhi aperti” (J.G.
Robertson, Genesis of the Romantic Theory,
p. 38).
20: “When some one inquired why we
spend much time with the beautiful, he said: ‘That is a blind man’s question” (vol.
I, p. 463). 按當以 Aelian, Varia
Historia, xiv, 47: “When asked why we admired so much Zeuxis’s picture of
Helen, Nichomachus said: ‘If you had my
eyes, you would not have asked.’” 進一解。以上卷五。
Bk VI. 37: “One day, observing a
child drinking out of his hands, he cast away the cup from his wallet with the
words, ‘A child has beaten me in plainness of living’” (p. 39). 按與《逸士傳》許由擲瓢事相似（《類說》卷二第九頁）。
Bk VI. 40: “Plato had defined Man as
an animal, biped & featherless... Diogenes plucked a fowl & brought it
into the lecture-room with the words, ‘Here is Plato’s man’” (vol. II, p. 43). 按汪謝城《湖雅》云：「道光辛卯，吾友海寧許心如丙鴻與余論近人《山海經圖》之誕妄，時適多蚊。因仿《山海經》說之云：『蟲身而長喙，鳥翼而豹腳。設依此為圖，必身如大蛹，有長喙，背上有二鳥翼，腹下有四豹腳，成一非蟲非禽非獸之形，誰復知為蚊者？』余曰：『是也，但猶未備，請續之曰：「晝伏夜飛，鳴聲如雷，是食人。」』相與拊掌。」二事劇類。《荀子‧非相篇》：「然則人之所以為人者，非特以二足而無毛也。」Cf. Saint-Amant: “Le Mauvais Logement, Caprice”
(A.J. Steele, Three Centuries of French
Verse, p. 142); Coleridge: “The Ancient Mariner.”又一百二十五則眉。[24]
41: “He lit a lamp in broad daylight
& said, as he went about, ‘I am looking for a man’” (vol. II, p. 43). 按《舊雜譬喻經‧卷上‧第二十九則》云：「有高才梵志到舍衛國，白日然火行，曰：『國冥無明，故然火也。』」《法句譬喻經‧多聞品第三》記此尤詳。Cf. Nietzsche, Menschliches,
Allzumenschliches, Bd. II, Abt. ii, §18: “Der moderne Diogenes.”
46: 見第一百三十九條末書眉。[25]【VI.
46: “When behaving indecently in the marketplace, he wished it were as easy to
relieve hunger by rubbing an empty stomach” (p. 47). 按
Mirabeau 云：“Diogène, qui déraisonnait avec beaucoup de raison:
‘Je suis heureux de trouver en moi-même ce qui porte les autres à faire mille
dépenses et mille crimes.’ On racontoit que Mercure ayant eu pitié de son fils
Pan, qui couroit nuit et jour par les montagnes, éperdu d’amour pour une
maîtresse dont il ne pouvoit jouir, lui enseigna... Les célibataires ont appris
à se suffire... Le marquis de Santa-Crux commence l’Art de la guerre par dire:
que la première qualité indispensable à un grand général, c'est de savoir se br.
le v., parce que cela épargne tous les caquetages” (L’oeuvre du Comte de Mirabeau, “Les Maîtres de L’amour,” pp. 86,
88, 89).[26] 哲學家如 Chrysippus, Peregrinus,
Proteus亦如是 (見 Hans
Licht, Beitrge zur Antiken Erotik, p.
667)。】
54: 仝。[27]【VI. 54:
“To a youth blushing. ‘Courage,’ quoth he, ‘that is the hue of virtue’” (p. 55).
按拉丁諺語 “Rubor
est virtutist color.” 本此。然 Shakespeare, Much
Ado About Nothing, IV, i, 43: “Her blush is guiltiness, not modesty”;
Moliere, Dom Garcie de Navarre, II,
v: “L’'innocence à rougir n’est point accoutumée”; La Bruyère, Les Caractères: “Les hommes rougissent
moins de leurs crimes que de leurs faiblesses et de leur vanité”; Rousseau, Émile, “Quiconque rougit est déjà
coupable; la vraie innocence n'a honte de rien.” 故 George
Eliot, Daniel Deronda, III, ch. 35: “A
blush is no language, only a dubious flag-signal, which may mean either of two
contradictions.”】以上卷六。
Bk VII. 87: “Zeno was the first to
designate as the end ‘life in agreement with nature’, which is the same as a
virtuous life, virtue being the goal towards which nature guides us” (vol. II,
p. 195). 按 Heraclitus 亦有 “Life
according to nature” 之說 (H. Diels, Die
Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, 22B) 意指模棱，自古已然。W.C. Greene 論
Seneca, Epist. 90 云：“But
is nature a fact (things as they are) or an ideal (what will or should be)?” (Moira, p. 342) 一語破的。W.M. Urban, Beyond Realism &
Idealism, p. 233: “The so-called new naturalisms have exploited ‘to the
limit’ a fundamental ambiguity in the concept of nature. On the one hand, naturalism
is defined in terms of scientific method & this is [sic.] secured all the prestige which comes from such
identification. On the other hand, when the new naturalists wish to display
their humanity, & to prove that naturalism is friendly to all forms of the
human spirit, they soft-pedal, even if they do not abandon outright, this
scientific concept of nature and include in their omnitudo realitatis all those things which such a concept necessarily
excludes.” 正可發明。蓋以人出於天，於是人定之勝天、人為之逆天，莫不為天運 (I. Edman, Four
Ways of Philosophy, p. 273: “The same substance that flowers into corn or
into roses blossoms into man, & in man into imagination, thinking &
feeling. The symphonies of Beethoven are just as natural as flowers or snakes.
Man is one of the forms & habits of nature.”)，囫圇吞棗，爛糊煮麵，而不知天之與人、自然之與當然仍有別也。參觀 J.M. Balwin, Genetic
Theory of Reality, p. 114: “Comte’s religion of humanity, to be a religion,
must mean religion of ideal humanity; but this is what religion of divinity
also means.” 以上卷七。
Bk IX. 5: “Heraclitus was nobody’s
pupil, but he declared that he ‘inquired of himself’” (vol. II, p. 413). 按希臘人最重師弟淵源。今所謂「派」(school)，希臘人謂之「傳授」(succession) (vol. I, xviii)，故無所師承者謂之「突起」(sporadic) (VIII. 91; vol. II, p. 407)，《瑜珈師地論》卷二十七所謂「證教授」者是也（獨處所悟曰「證教授」；「依師所傳，不增不減，教授於他」曰「教教授」）。《西游記》第二回悟空答祖師曰：「決不敢提起師父一字，只說是我自家會的便罷。」
76: “Even the saying ‘Every saying
has its corresponding opposites’ itself, like a purge which drives the
substance out & then in its turn is itself eliminated & destroyed” (vol.
II, pp. 489-491). 按此論 Pyrrho 之說攻他而亦自破，即 Newman: “Doubt is often taken to mean the
deliberate recognition of a thesis as being uncertain; in this sense doubt is
nothing else than an assent, viz., an assent to a proposition at variance with
the thesis” (A Grammar of Assent,
Burns, Oates, &Co., 1870, p. 5); Urban: “The sceptic contradicts himself
when he asserts that there is no knowledge. The very denial itself constitutes
an exception to the denial” (Realism
& Idealism, p. 126). 又 Thackeray 日記引不知誰何云：“Douter c’est croire, car douter c’est penser. Celui qui doute croit-il
qu’il doute, ou doute-t-il qu’il doute? S’il doute qu’il doute, il détruit par
cela même son scepticisme; et s’il croit qu’il doute, il le détruit encore” (Letters & Private Papers of W.M.
Thackeray, ed. Gordon N. Ray, I, p. 226) 而譬喻特妙。以上卷九。
Bk. X. 6: Epicurus’s letter to Pythocles:
“Hoist all sail, my dear boy, & steer clear of all culture (παιδειαν)” (vol.
II, p. 535). 按不料披猖至此，以 Diogenes 之糠粃一切，而曰：“Education (παιδειαν) is a controlling grace to the
young, consolation to the old, wealth to the poor, & ornament to the rich.”[28]
(VI. 68; vol. II, pp. 69-71)，未嘗絕聖棄智也，斯又 Jaeger,
Paideia 所未道矣。以上卷十。
[3]「樹」原作「雨」。
[8]「五石瓠」原作「五石觚」。
[11]「貝青喬」原作「貝喬」。
[12]「據稱原稟有」原作「據稟稱原有」。
[22]「先後違天」原作「先殺違天」。
[23]「增壹阿含經」原作「增益阿含經」。
沒有留言:
張貼留言