《容安館札記》191～195則

Weedon Grossmith 自繪 The Diary of a Nobody 插圖

百九十一[1]

            王懋竑《白田草堂存稿》二十四卷，是能以義理為考據者，心細眼明，筆舌安詳，稍苦冗衍。詩亦尚議論，板實中偶有清新語，而少腐俗氣，亦難得矣。黃式三《儆居集‧讀子集》卷三〈讀白田草堂集〉：「考核朱子之學未精，如謂《易本義》無邵子之說，《家禮》非朱子作等，皆誤。」

            卷三〈盤銘考〉：「《孔疏》謂『沐浴之盤』，非是。〈內則〉記『子事父母』，不過『五日燂湯請浴，三日具沐』，非日日沐浴。洗手之謂『盥』，洗面之謂『頮』。〈內則〉：『鷄鳴，咸盥漱』；『子事父母，面垢，燂潘請靧』。『靧』、『頮』，古今字，是亦非日日頮面者。《大戴禮》武王銘盤曰『盥盤』，當以沃手之器為近。」

            〈漢火德考〉：「漢有天下後，仍襲秦舊，為水德。孝文帝時，公孫臣言，當改用土德，色尚黃。其事未行，至孝武帝始用其說。王莽自以黃帝之後，當為土德，而用劉歆說，以漢為火德。後漢重圖讖，以《赤伏符》之文改用火德。班固作志，遂以著之〈高帝紀〉。而後漢人作《飛燕外傳》有『禍水滅火』之語，不知前漢自王莽、劉歆以前，未有以漢為火德者。」按《四庫提要》卷一百四十三即引此文以證《飛燕外傳》之偽，而謂白田「尚以《外傳》為真出伶元」也。

            卷六〈恭記聖祖仁皇帝兩事〉：「聖祖嘗問翰林侍讀崔蔚林曰：『朱子之格物，王陽明之格物，二者孰是？』對曰：『朱子不是，王陽明亦不是。』聖祖作色曰：『然則汝說轉是耶？』未幾罷職。」

            卷八〈跋歸震川史記〉（考論太僕原本已不可得，今所傳皆非真）。

            卷二十一〈和鹿沙自題二安書屋〉：「入門曲折風無力，當牖周遮月小明。」

            卷二十三〈秋雨偶作〉：「工夫未到何須說，着力研磨更自疑。莫道文章一小技，晦翁親校簡齋詩。」

            〈與近也敏伯〉：「憔悴自憐心未死，昏聾還喜舌猶存。」

            〈又和念堂〉：「陶韋詩淡都無色，班馬文高不道香。」自注：「少陵每稱陶、謝，謝非陶比也，韋少不及，要可並言耳。後山詩：『濃薰班馬香』，班馬不以『香』論也。」語似少誤，按牧之語，非後山也。議論却是。

            〈偶作〉：「不斷虛空流注想，可容罅隙等閒看？」

            卷二十四〈偶閱義山無題詩因書其後〉：「暮雨空林繫所思，孤懷脉脉憶前期。胸中不解分明處，可是無題卻有詩。」「何事連篇刺狡童？鄭君箋不異毛公。忽將腐譜翻新曲，疏義遙知脉絡同〈無題詩〉，鄭、衛之遺音，注家以為寓意君臣，此飾說耳。此與狡童刺忽，指意雖疏，脉絡則一也。」「空望瑤臺只淚垂，此中哀怨竟誰知？靈均憔悴江潭上，千古無人續楚詞『託芳草以怨王孫，假美人以喻君子』，義山自言云爾，然其指意遼絕矣，高唐神女，自其淵源所自，不以誣屈子也。」「春蘭秋菊可同時，萬草千花各自奇。若遇少林胡老子，坐君門外得吾皮〈無題詩〉後來多效之者，然轉入香奩，其趨愈下，若是又義山之所不取也。」按言之雖未明悉，已有見於「無題」與「香奩」之異矣。梁晉竹《兩般秋雨盦隨筆》卷五云：「『無題』與『香奩』，界若鴻溝。義山，『無題』也；冬郎，『香奩』也。『無題』不必盡寫情懷，而『香奩』專作膩語。至『閒情』、『風懷』，則指實事也。」謝佩禾《春草堂詩話》卷一云：「『無題』、『香奩』迥別。歐陽紹洛詩云云，『無題』也；王次回詩云云，『香奩』也。」皆未分疏親切。竊謂「無題」重意境，「香奩」重情事，一泛設而可以旁通，一實寫而衹能真指也。前者可謂為 oblique poetry，後者則 direct poetry（參觀E.M.W. Tillyard, Poetry Direct & Oblique, pp. 3-5）。

百九十二[2]

            余一九三六年夏始遊巴黎，行篋未携英文小說，偶於舊書肆見 Diary of Nobody，憶在 Hugh Kingsmill, Frank Harris 中覩其名，始購歸閱之，歎為奇作，絳亦有同好。一九四○年，此書收入 “Everyman’s Library”，而 V.S. Pritchett 復作文張之 (見 In My Good Books, pp. 87 ff.)，John Betjeman 謂 T.S. Eliot 亦喜此書 (T.S. Eliot: A Symposium, compiled by R. March & Tambimuttu, p. 92)，知者稍多矣。近日圓女方取讀，因復披尋，益驚設想之巧。世間真實情事，胥不能出其範圍，即如 Ch. IV “The Ball at the Mansion House”: “I said, by way of reproof to him: ‘You never sent to-day to paint the bath, as I requested.’ Farmerson said: ‘Pardon me, M^r Pooter, no shop when we’re in company, please!’” 正與 Journal des Goncourt 一八五四年一則 “‘Ne me parlez jamais habits dans la rue, je ne suis tailleur que chez moi!’ J’entends le tailleur Armand dire cela à Baschet, qui s’était permis, sur un trottoir, de lui demander où en était une jaquette commandée depuis une quinzaine de jours.” 正同；Ch. V 記 Blackfriars Bi-Weekly News 誤植 “Pooter” 為 “Porter”，去函更正，則又誤作 “Pewter”，與吳達元見《人民日報》載教授宣言簽名誤作「吳逵元」，去函更正，則又誤作「吳達之」何異？

            【Walter de la Mare, Love: “Introduction”: “Immortal Mr. Pooter & his Carrie, who was another Angel in House.”】

百九十三[3]

            L.P. Smith, The Golden Grove: Selected Passages of Jeremy Taylor.【George Eliot, The Mill on the Floss, Bk. I, ch. iii: M^r Tulliver: “There’s Jeremy Taylor’s ‘Holy Living & Dying’ among ’em; I read in it often of a Sunday” (M^r Tulliver felt somehow a familiarity with that great writer because his name was Jeremy”).】

            XLV: “We do not always remember how largely our modern love of nature is of theological origin” etc. 按參觀 Havelock Ellis, From Rousseau to Proust, p. 66: “The love of the wild in Nature received a powerful impetus from influences associated with the development of primitive Christianity” etc. 積重思返，Schleiermacher 始持異議：“He agrees with Henriette Herz regarding nature as ‘dead stuff’ ‘exhausted by chemical processes.’ He has little sympathy for any kind of religion which consisted of awe at the sublimity of nature or an appreciation of its beauty — ‘a childish way of thinking’” (R.B. Brandt, The Philosophy of Schleiermacher, p. 131). 吾國古代失職不仕者，始知有山水田園之樂。《後漢書‧李膺傳》載荀爽〈貽膺書〉云：「知以直道，不容於時。悅山樂水，家於陽城」云云，此土典籍中，道登臨游觀，莫早於是，而未見稱引。《水經注》卷十一寫陽城淀風物云：「于時行旅過者，亦有慰於羈望矣」；又寫滱水、南山云：「行李所逕，鮮不徘徊忘返矣」；卷十四寫居庸關云：「曉禽暮獸，寒鳴相和，羈官游子，聆之者莫不傷思矣。」與荀爽語相發明，亦見清暉所娛，多為逐臣、游子、遷客。胡震亨撰〈彭宗孟江上雜疏序〉所謂「宦游」、「客游」[4]，一乏「游晷」，一乏「游資」者，皆後世為然。

            XXXI 引 Great Exampler, Pt. III: “Lucifer & many Angels, walking upon the battlements of heaven, grew top-heavy, & fell into the state of devils.” 又 Holy Dying: “They [the fallen angels] grew vertiginous, & fell from the battlements of heaven.” 按 pp. 179-80: “The prayer of an unchaste person... strives to climb the battlements of heaven” (XXV Sermons).

            P. 10: “Although the beams of the sun reflected from a marble, return not home to the body & fountain of light; yet they that walk below, feel the benefit of a doubled heat” (The Great Exampler, Pt. III, Epist. Dedicat.). 按 p. 87: “So have I seen the rays of the sun or moon dash upon a brazen vessel, whose lips kissed the face of those waters that lodged within its bosom; but being turned back & sent off with its smooth pretences or rougher waftings, it wandered about the room, & beat upon the roof, & still doubled its heat and motion” (Holy Dying).

            P. 29: “Such was her death that she did not die too soon; & her life was so useful and excellent, that she could not have liv’d too long” (Funeral Sermon for Lady Carbery). 按 p. 49: “He that hath done all his businesse, & is begotten to a glorious hope by the seed of an immortal Spirit, can never die too soon, nor live too long!” (Holy Dying).

            P. 49: “Such a man must die, when he ought to die, & be like ripe & pleasant fruit, falling from a fair tree, & gathered into baskets for the planters use” (Holy Dying). 按 p. 260: “The death of the righteous is like the descending of ripe & wholesome fruits from a pleasant and florid tree” (The Great Exampler, Pt. III). 此意即 Christian Günther: “An Gott” 詩所云： “zu dem Tode reifer warden” (The Oxford Book of German Verse, p. 43). 然 Paradise Lost, XI, 537: “Gathered, not harshly plucked, for death mature” (Poetical Works, “Everyman’s Lib.,” p. 246)，Rilke 亦發明此意 (J. Bithell, Modern German Lit., pp. 180-1)，至 Kleist 而大明：“Zum Tode war ich nie so reif als jetzt.” (Penthesilea, 1682); “Ganz reif zum Tod, O Diana, fühl’ ich mich!” (Ibid., 2865); “Meine Seele... zum Tod ganz reif geworden ist” (Kleists Werke, hrsg. Schmidt, Bd. V, S. 433). Taylor 論死多，足與 Novalis, Kleist, Hölderlin 相發明【第七百一則】。Shakespeare, Antony & Cleopatra, V, ii, 296 ff.: “The stroke of death” etc. Keats: “I have two luxuries to brood over in my walks, your loveliness & the hour of my death. O that I could have possession of them both in the same minute” (Letters, ed. H.E. Rollins, no. 178 to Fanny Brawne, vol. II, p. 133); “Ode to a Nightingale”: “Now more than ever seems it rich to die.” Leopardi, Canti, XXVII, “Amore è Morte”: “Bella morte, pietosa” (The Poems, ed. G.L. Bickersteth, p. 298). J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan, Act. III: “To die will be an awfully big adventure.” E. & J. de Goncourt, Journal, Éd. déf., III, p. 119: “Des hommes sont tentés par la mort comme par une dernière aventure.” Walt Whitman: “Memories of President Lincoln”, St. 14: “Come lovely & soothing death” etc. Horace Traubel, With Walt Whitman in Camden, IV, p. 89: “Death is like being invited out to a good dinner.” 又第二百五十三則。

            P. 116: “Upon the most beauteous face is plac’d one of the worst sinks of the body” (Unum Necessarium). 按 p. 70: “Upon the fairest face is placed one of the worst sinks of the body, the nose” (Holy Dying).

            P. 83 ff. 論 Sickness 語，參觀第二十五則。

            P. 124: “He that had an ill memory did wisely comfort himself by reckoning the advantages he had by his forgetfulness... Every book is new to an ill memory” (XXV Sermons). 按 p. 272 註謂此本 Montaigne, Essais, I, ix，是也。Cicero, De Finibus, II, 32 載 Themistocles 語：“[Artem] oblivionis mallem; nam nemini etiam quae nolo, oblivisci non possum quae volo” 早發其意。L.P. Smith, Reperusals & Re-collections, p. 3 引 Mme de Sévigné: “C’est un plaisir, que de n’avoir point de mémoire” 及 Montaigne 語，却未及 Taylor 此節，何耶？（此書序言收入 Reperusals & Re-collections, pp. 256 ff.。）

            P. 145: “Nothing is more usual, than to pretend Conscience to all the actions of men... And so Suspicion, & Jealousy, & Disobedience, & Rebellion, are become Conscience” (Ductor Dubitantium). 按精微語。Butler 論良心云：“Had it strength, as it has right; had it power, as it has manifest authority, it would absolutely govern the world” (Sermons, ed. Gladstone, 1897, vol. II, p. 55) 尚未透此關。

            P. 147: “Virtues & vices have not, in all their instances, a great landmark set between them, like warlike nations separate by prodigious walls, vast seas, & portentous hills; but they are oftentimes like the bounds of a parish” etc. (Righteousness Evangelical). 按此即 Leibniz 論 Law of Continuity 所謂 “régions d'inflexion et de rebroussement” (The Monadology & Other Philosophical Writings, Eng. tr. by R. Latta, p. 38)。參觀 Morris R. Cohen, A Preface to Logic, p. 75: “The actual coexistence of opposites in the twilight zone”。

            P. 194 論 Superstitions 有云：“There is no man more miserable in the world, than the man who fears God as his enemy” (XXV Sermons). 按 Daniel Essertier, Les Formes Inférieures de l’Explication 論迷信與魔術最具創見，有云：“L’espoir et l’amour ne sont pas premiers: il a fallu que la peur s’apaisât d'abord... Primus in orbe deos fecit timor” (p. 120). 正可發明。

            Pp. 251-3 歷舉 “A man is a bubble” (Lucian, Charon, C. xix)[5], “Man is the dream of a shadow” (Pindar, Pyth., VIII. 95)【cf. Plutarch, Moralia, “A Letter of Condolence to Apollonius,” §6: “For what is feebler than a shadow? And a dream of it!” (Loeb, II, p. 12)】, “Our life is but a vapour” (St. James, IV. 14)。按《金剛經》「六如」之說，已得其四矣［《淨飯王湼槃經》：「世法無常，如幻如化，如熱時炎，如水中月」；《稱揚諸佛功德經》卷上：「一切如夢，如水中月，幻化之法」；《說無垢稱經‧方便善巧品第二》：「是身如聚沫，如浮泡，如陽焰，如芭蕉」（《維摩詰所說經‧方便品第二》甚長）；〈聲聞品第三〉：「一切法性，生滅不住，皆虛妄見，如夢如焰。所起影象，如水中月，如鏡中像」；又〈觀有情品第七〉：「菩薩觀諸有情，如幻師觀所幻事，如觀水中月，觀鏡中像，觀芭蕉心，觀水聚沫，觀空中鳥跡」【「空中鳥跡」不如 Heine, Zur Geschichte der Religion und Philosophie in Deutschland, Buch II: “aber dieses Glück war wie der Sonnenstrahl, der den Fittich eines vorüberfliegenden Vogels vergoldet, es schwand eben so schnell” (Sämtl. Werke, Berlin: Verlag von A. Weichert, Bd. VIII, S. 75) 之妙，與「玉顏不及寒鴉色，猶帶昭陽日影來」用意大異矣。】；《月上女經》卷上：「如幻化，亦如陽焰，如水中月」；《方廣大莊嚴經》卷五：「如水中月，如谷中響，如幻如泡。」參觀《大智度論》卷六〈十喻釋論第十一〉。又「六如」者，乃用鳩摩羅什譯本，真諦、玄奘、義淨、菩提流支四譯皆作「九如」，尚有「如燈」、「如星」、「如雲」，詳見《容齋四筆》卷十三。］Henry King, Sic Vita 一詩立數十喻 (George Saintsbury, Minor Poets of the Caroline Period, vol. III, pp. 236-7)：“the wind blows out,” “the bubble dies,” “he dew dries up,” “the rose withers,” “the sun sets,” “the dream is gone,” “the water glides,” “the lightning is past,” “The snow dissolves,” “the firework is done,” “the shadow flies”，則露、電、泡、影、夢五者，皆在其列。參觀 Harsdörffer: “Das Leben des Menschen” 一詩擬之 “Ein Laub... Ein Staub... Ein Schnee... Ein See... Die Blum... Der Ruhm... Ein Gras... Ein Glas... Ein Traum... Ein Schaum... Ein Heu... Ein Spreu... Ein Wasserstrom... Ein Wasserblas... Ein Schatten”; Gryphius, Katharina von Georgien, II, “Das Leben” (M. Wehrli, Deutsche Barocklyrik, S. 53-4) 擬 “Dies Leben” 於 “Die Blumen... Die Tau... Ein Funck... Ein Schiff... Ein Vogel... Der Schatten... Der Sturmwind...  Die Pfeile” (J. Rousset, La litt. de Page baroque en France, p. 275 引); Erasmus, Adagia, II, iii, 48: “Homo bulla. Proverbium hoc admonet humana vita nihil esse fragilius, nihil fugacius, nihil inanius” etc. (Richard Crashaw, Poetical Works, ed. L.C. Martin, 2^nd ed., p. xciv 引，參觀 pp. 216 ff. “Bulla”); Ciro di Pers: “Della miseria e vanità umana”: “È la vita mortale / vana un’ombra che passa, / lieve un’aura che fugge; / quasi a’ raggi del sole opposta nebbia, / che tosto si dilegua; / un lampo che, venendo è già sparito; / un fior, che nato appena, / o lo rode la greggia” ecc. (G.G. Ferrero, Marino e i Marinisti, p. 957); Keats: “Sleep & Poetry” (“Stop & consider! Life is but a day” etc., Poems, Everyman’s Lib., pp. 40-1); Christina Rossetti: “The World. Self-Destruction” & “Days of Vanity” (Poetical Works, ed. W.M. Rossetti, Macmillan, pp. 283, 385); Wm. Drummond: “Madrigal I” (a bubble blown up in the aire); Francis Quarles: “Hos ego versiculos” (rose, blossom, morning, sun, shade, etc.) (The Oxford Book of 17^th-Cent. Verse, pp. 253, 339-40)。又 Anthologie de la Poésie Baroque française, I, pp. 9-13 論以泡影水鏡喻世事無常；pp. 45-6, Auvray, La pourmenade de l’âme devote: “Vapeur, fleur, torrent, songe, ombre, et rien tout ensemble”; G.R. Weckherlin: “Über den frühen Tod Fräuleins Anna Augusta Marggräfin zu Baden” 詩以 Tag, Stern, Morgenrot, Seufz 等二十七物為喻 (M. Wehrli, Deutsche Barocklyrik, 3^te Auf., S. 33-4) 為最多矣。參觀一百十九則，also Paul Fleming: “Bei einer Leichen” (MLR, April 1976, p. 327)。A Midsummer Night’s Dream, I, i, Lysander 以 sound, shadow, dream, lightning 四者喻男女歡愛之促。

百九十四[6]

            陳允衡《詩慰》。此選不知用意所在。錢牧齋〈序〉謂：「萬茂先詩曾累寄余，亂後失去。」朱無易之臣〈序〉謂：「拾虞山之偶遺。」然《列朝詩集》漏而未收，或采而未備者，寧止此數家乎？託始於四溟山人，尤不可解。《四溟集選》尾跋語亦不能自圓其說。偶有議論篇什足資考訂耳。

            《謝茂秦詩選》錄《四溟詩話》數則揭集首，於茂秦自舉用「天」字、「燈」字因字得句諸例，頗有加勒帛者。

            《林初文章詩選》：按《露書》卷三頗稱道初文詩。曹學佺原〈序〉：「士有才而必用，女有色而必售，則知己不見重，而入宮不見妬矣，得乎哉？」

            〈昌平道中〉：「春好年年晚，月寒夜夜秋。」

            〈渡江詞〉：「不待東風不待潮，渡江十里九停橈。不知今夜秦淮水，送到揚州第幾橋？」

            《吳允兆夢暘詩選》：〈看殘梅歌〉：「樹頭花少樹底多。」

            〈雨晴〉：「寒徹蕭蕭雨，晴占歷歷星。身將如木槁，思亦與雲停[7]。野色荒差潤，松枝老自青。來投僧住處，日日曉鐘聽。」

            《程孟陽詩選》：〈伏日醉歸柬鄒靜長學憲〉評云：「余嘗以佳墨貽客，客曰：『殊不佳。』從傍叩之，乃硯穢耳。余因悟以墨貽人，須并滌一硯貽之。」

            《王亦房留詩選》：〈道中雜詩〉評云：「頗覺非友夏能辦。」

            〈不寐〉：「霜遲秋養樹，寒早夜攻人。」

            〈初秋志感〉：「病身生死介，鄉夢醉醒中。」

            〈初冬客懷〉：「貧士驕人猶勝諂，庸流愛我不如憎。」

            〈送費元朗下第歸槜李〉：「欲忘難遣事，但較不歸人。」

            《程仲權可中詩選》：〈邢子原太僕見存走答〉：「雨鳴山夢寂，花老旅魂禁。」評云：「湯臨川〈生第五子〉詩：『功名吾不免，兒女婦能禁。』『禁』字妙。」

            〈將如金閶〉：「息影猶防日，謀餐屢廢朝。」

            〈銅井道中〉：「水沉江畫壁，霜淨雁書空。」

            〈旌德道中〉：「曉雲排樹出，清溜篆沙流。」

            《萬茂先詩選》：〈月夜滕王閣〉：「沙遙微見白，山杳競為蒼。」

            〈悼梅梅踞堂外，今薪矣〉：「身殘猶作焰，終報主人恩。」

            〈丙子述懷〉：「冬烘遺恨枉縱橫，天網寧須世上名。笑殺坑儒癡獨絕，不將文字作長平。」

            【《水田居存詩》卷二〈舟次蘭坊聞徵君萬茂先歿於中途詩以哭之〉第一首：「遺詩人尚妬，旅櫬路何長。」自注：「茂先有詩十卷，托友梓於白門，聞茂先死，遂匿。」】

百九十五[8]

            卓爾堪子任《明末四百家遺民詩》十六卷，子任所撰《近青堂詩》附焉。當時搜輯，為事匪難，迄今代遠書亡，賴此一編徵文考信。以予泛覽，四百家中曾覩全集者，纔三十許人，餘或從選本見一鱗片羽，安知非輾轉掇拾者乎？【《淮海英靈集甲集》卷一記子任「于思大腹，從李之芳征閩，摧堅陷陣」，蓋才兼文武者也。《晚晴簃詩滙》卷五謂子任乃漢軍旗人。】

            卷一顧夢遊與治〈高座寺送春〉：「門掩飛花後，春魂不可招。如何方以外，亦共黯然銷？老樹興亡代，長干朝暮潮。馳光無繫處，合付最長條。」

            卷四葛一龍震甫〈新豐曉行〉：「爰循疲馬路，漸入遠鷄村。」

            王貴一象山〈感懷〉：「自是芰荷難作服，可知榆葉不為錢。」

            卷五申涵光鳧盟〈劉雲麓避亂來居郡中〉：「同屬壯年吾較老，共居斯世汝初醒。」

            劉城伯宗〈杜宇〉：「血染花成色，魂依鳥化音。」

        〈春日漫興〉：「不求甚解書嘗讀，亦欲無言麈豈揮。」

            卷六韓畕經正〈雨中送春〉：「綠草疎籬映水濱，清溪寂寂四無鄰。一簾細雨仍飛燕，幾日殘花又送春。多病翻愁今夜酒，傷心如別故鄉人。明年客迹知何在，早向天涯慰苦辛。」

            卷十李鄴嗣杲堂〈集世說詩五古十九首〉。〈擬懷詩〉：「坐處微涼鄰川借，朝來新霽寺鐘傳。」

      徐芳仲光〈晝寢幼女三齡而慧，夏晝倚臥，樓頭捉戶，咿啞不輟，呵之輒曰：『儂開戶為晝，閉戶為夜，未已又開目為晝，閉目為夜』，予聞色喜，而有此詩〉：「閉目聊成夜，開眸遂入晨。晦明彈指事，老壯隙駒身。月解流連明，花知再四春。最憐流浪處，千古夢相因。」

      卷十一徐夜東痴〈富春山中弔謝臯羽〉：「生為信國流離客，死結嚴陵寂寞鄰。」

      卷十二韓洽君望〈鐵馬〉【劉繼莊《廣陽詩集》卷下亦有此詩】：「急響中宵發，凌空鐵騎行。不知風信至，頓使旅魂驚。當世正多事，吾儕方苦兵。那堪簷宇下，又作戰場聲。」

      卷十四陳忱遐心〈閱羅隱詩〉：「餘杭山水役精魂，末世才人眼界昏。憔悴感恩依尚父，可憐尚父事朱溫詩中稱錢鏐為尚父。」按陳即雁宕山樵，作《水滸後傳》者。

            卷十六釋圓信〈天目山居〉：「簾捲春風啼曉鴉，閒情無過是吾家。青山個個伸頭看，看我菴中吃苦茶。」參觀 G. Carducci 寫在 Tirolo 遇雨，枯坐逆旅中情景：“Qua e là notavo anche una montagnetta lontanamente cerulea, che pareva rizzarsi su la punta de’ piedi, e con gran curiosità riguardava per di sopra a le spalle degli altri monti, probabilmente per veder me.” (E. Grillo, Italian Prose Writers, p. 540)。

            釋行悅〈湘上作〉：「稀紅暗綠滿烟蘿，兩岸湘江黛色多。不知鷓鴣何所見，只言行不得哥哥。」按頗有逸趣，東坡〈和陶詩〉云：「前山正可數，後騎且莫驅。」戴石屏〈會稽山中〉云：「若使山中無杜宇，登山臨水定忘歸。」胡仲弓〈郊外即事〉第一首云：「勿聽鷓鴣行不得，雲山深處路尤長。」朱竹垞〈車盤驛題逆旅主人壁〉云：「曲澗層層響，叢篁個個齊。前山行更好，不信鷓鴣啼」，可參觀。

---

[1]《手稿集》268-9 頁。

[2]《手稿集》269-70 頁。

[3]《手稿集》270-2 頁。

[4]「彭宗孟」原作「彭字孟」，「江上雜疏」原作「江山雜疏」。

[5]「Charon」原作「In Charon」。

[6]《手稿集》272-3 頁。

[7] 原文此處重一「與」字。

[8]《手稿集》273-4 頁。

《容安館札記》186～190則

康熙四十七年曹寅刻本《施愚山先生詩集》

百八十六[1]

            《施愚山先生年譜》四卷[2]、《施氏家風述略》一卷、《詩集》五十卷、《文集》二十八卷、《別集》四卷。愚山負一時重名，全謝山極推愚山詩，《韞山堂文集》卷八至謂：「日讀魏叔子古文一、二頁，令人增長器識；日讀施愚山五言詩一、二首，令人疏瀹肺腸。」而詩甚膚衍，文頗冗蕪。漁洋標舉愚山五言佳句（張宗泰《魯岩所學集》卷十五〈書漁洋詩話後〉斥其取愚山五律為《主客圖》，謂：「一人之作，何分主客？」），李越縵從而增益之，細按則太半因襲清淺。康發祥《伯山詩話後集》卷一則謂：「七律較勝，五律多板滯。」實亦無所軒輊也。而《文集》卷二十八〈寄金長真書〉自論其詩云：「不敢望李、杜後塵，亦或與三唐諸賢分一坐位」云云，可謂人苦不自知矣。【施山《薑露盫雜記》卷一云：「余嘗箋愚山詩，卒卒未就。」】

            《年譜》卷一：「崇禎七年，十七歲，元配梅宜人來歸」；「順治三年，二十九歲，李宜人來歸」；「五年，三十一歲，長子彥淳生，夫人李氏出」；「十一年，三十七歲，梅宜人卒於家」；卷二：「順治十二年，三十八歲，次子彥恪生，側室蔣孺人出。」按李非妾媵，明其「兩頭大」也。梅尚未死，何得更有正妻？《文集》卷二十二〈書亡妻梅宜人墓碣〉云：「生一女一子，皆慧而殤，憂懣成疾，卒以是殞」云云，當是飾詞，此中有不可告人者在。愚山復有徐氏姬，卷五十〈戲示徐姬‧自序〉云：「聊以煖老，暑則異榻，寒則同衾，牀笫之間，邈若千里」者也。徐氏亦能作五絕，觀卷四十六〈寄和徐姬珠淵〉、卷五〈和姬人珠淵寄小鏡〉、〈得姬人珠淵寄詩憐而和之〉諸篇附錄可知。

            《詩集》卷十二〈石門吳右弨進士詩仿韓孟肯示數首臨別有贈〉：「時論泥詩格，膚附少礧砢。有宋趨杜韓，變雅淪俚瑣。譬乘破浪風，要捩長年柁。卓犖延陵子，獨賞薄眾可。我罕韓孟詩，耽奇興亦頗。」按卷十八〈莆田余希之注李長吉詩作歌寄之〉：「吾愛昌黎有奇癖，鵾鵬垂翅能先識。世人皮相韓無詩，天孫怒罷機中絲。請君並輯為韓李，光怪應須纏十指。」《文集》卷五〈定力堂詩集序〉：「昌黎之崛奧，長吉之詭奇，閬仙、東野之巉削幽寒，皆於唐人淹熟中另為別調，以孤行者也。」

            卷二十六〈秦淮閣夜〉：「明月非霜雪，滿城生夜涼。」

            〈官亭即事〉：「雀聲空院竹，秋色半亭蕉。」

            卷三十〈老至〉：「老自何年至，追歡萬事殘。」

            〈谿村書事‧之四〉：「野岸沈江雨，生涯送渚田。偶緣沽酒計，忝受作碑錢。汎覽頻更帙，多吟屢失編。籬邊聞剝啄，時繫客來船。」

            卷三十二〈中秋對月〉：「杯乾成獨醉，髮白與爭明。」

            卷四十〈見宋荔裳遺詩悽然有作〉：「好客平生酒不空，高歌零落痛無窮。西川終古流殘淚，東海從今少大風。國士魂銷多難後，離人望斷九原中。張堪妻子應誰託，巢卵長抛虎豹叢。」《韞山堂文集》卷八云：「沈確士云：『張堪卒於官，無託妻子事。』願託妻子於朱生，見《後漢書‧朱暉傳》」。（又按沈改「應誰」為「愁難」，蓋緣不知此事，與其改王阮亭詩、崔不雕絕句，如韞山所譏為「使昔賢名句索索無生氣」者，況而愈下。）

            〈除夕同雪懷〉：「浮生遲暮身如客，久客重禁天一涯。歲序欺人慵守歲，家書到眼當還家。清夢話舊殷勤致，紅燭邀春爛熳花。此夕鹿門妻子在，不眠相對說京華。」

            《文集》卷一〈吃賦〉：「乃有非喑非啞，藥石罔治，掀脣頓頰，疊韻重詞，語未壯而顏頳，聲欲急而逾遲。」

            卷四〈邢孟貞詩序〉：「孟貞嘗謂余曰：『剝盡今人面皮，斯成古人。』」

            卷二十七、卷二十八諸書，尺牘氣甚重，而《年譜》卷四所載示子兩書論鴻博試事者，皆未收。李武曾《秋錦山房外集》卷一附愚山一簡，亦見遺。其詞云：「早間偶作〈春雪〉詩一首，倘興到賜和為望，切勿一一拘韻，迫人為韻所限，或碍好詩，直是作韻，非作詩耳。」按納蘭容若《淥水亭雜識》卷四載友人云非做詩乃做韻，蓋即指愚山。吳修齡〈答萬季野詩問〉亦稱引愚山此語而申論之。錢飲光《田間文集》卷十六〈兩園和詩引〉曰：「次韻愈出愈奇，奇在能押韻耳，於作者本意無與也，詩道於是大弊。詩言志，志動而有韻。今和詩因韻生志，是以志從韻也」云云，尤明切。《尺牘新鈔》初、二皆載愚山書牘，未知有溢出者否？當校核之。《𢈪堂集》卷二十一〈詹言下〉云：「步韻、限韻初非詩人所貴。龔合肥好用古人韻，曰：『綑了好打』，不知為打詩乎？打題目乎？娛性情，標風雅，而望之交手足受榜所揳也，等之辱形苦境哉。」《聊齋》卷十〈臙脂〉條載愚山一判一詞。《香祖筆記》九：「龔大宗伯往往酒酣賦詩輒用杜韻，歌行亦然，予嘗舉以為問，公笑曰：『無他，只是綑了好打耳！』」

            施瑮《隨村先生遺集》六卷，愚山孫。據乾隆元年吳芮序，當作《剩圃詩集》，時隨村已沒矣。詩殊俚弱，未成家數；然有資《紅樓夢》考訂者一事，而治紅學之徒無道之者。卷六〈病中雜賦〉第八首云：「楝子花開滿院香，幽魂夜夜楝亭旁。廿年樹倒西堂閉，不待西川淚萬行。」自注：「曹楝亭公時拈佛語對坐客云：『樹倒猢猻散』，今憶斯言，車輪腹轉！以瑮受公知最深者也。楝亭、西堂，皆署中齋名。」（參觀《愚山集》梅庚跋云：「先生殁三十年，今通政楝亭曹公追念舊游，舉《全集》授諸梓，又館其孫瑮於金陵，事讎校」。又《隨村先生全集》卷一〈四君吟〉第一首：「曹通政楝亭，愛才惜生，少時曾以詩請贄於先祖，今遺集猶藉公之力，得以流傳。」）按《紅樓夢》第十三回秦可卿道：「一日樂極生悲，若應了那句『樹倒猢猻』的俗語，豈不虛稱了一世詩書舊族了。」第三十回脂研齋評云：「『樹倒猢猻散』之語，今猶在耳，屈指三十五年矣，傷哉」云云。據隨村詩注，則此語固雪芹祖父以來慣聞之庭訓也（此語始見龐元英《談藪》）。趙甌北〈觀穫〉云：「人似翅開飛蛺蝶，蝗如樹倒散猢猻。」〈感事〉：「往日肉羶趨螞蟻，衹今樹倒散猢猻。」《象山先生全集》卷三十五：「如鶻孫失了樹，更無住處。」《輟耕錄》卷二十八王梅谷戲嘲回回〈下火文〉云：「壓倒象鼻塌，不見貓睛亮。（中略）阿剌一聲絕無聞，哀哉樹倒胡孫散。」《初刻拍案驚奇》卷二十二：「這叫做『樹倒猢猻散』。」徐文長《雌木蘭》第二折：「花開蝶滿枝，樹倒猢猻散。」

百八十七[3]

            G.W. Stonier (ed.), New Statesman Competitions, pp. 99-101: “Not Quite Fair, Perhaps” [“Instances where a word or a phrase offer the modern reader a second, ludicrous meaning”] 舉 Henry James: “‘I shall go to America,’ said M^me Merle, & then she passed out”; Congreve: “Blooming poets”; Hardy: “Who when wooing Gave her the bird”[4] 等例。按 Bonamy Dobree, ed., The Letters of Lord Chesterfield, I, p. 169: “Critics have misunderstood the word ‘dissipation.’ Chesterfield meant it in the old sense of relaxation, as opposed to ‘concentration’”; Ivor Brown, No Idle Words, pp. 46-7: “Debauched... means, essentially, no more than lured aside or led astray. Aubrey recorded of Shakespeare that he ‘would not be debauched’ — Shakespeare, when writing, was not to be diverted by invitations to parties.” A. Huxley, Texts & Pretexts (“The Phoenix Library”), p. 50 論 Wordsworth: “On ground which British shepherds tread” 一句云：“Those British shepherds in the last line come very near to blighting[5], retrospectively, the whole of Wordsworth’s poem. Words change their meaning &, still more, their flavour. In Wordsworth’s day, ‘British’ was primarily associated with King Arthur & Boadicea & the Druids. Its flavour was romantic, antiquarian. The self-conscious imperialism which has made it, for modern palates, so extremely distasteful, had not yet been thought of.” W.B. Stanford, Ambiguity in Greek Literature, pp. 28-9: “Homer was not to know that the Attic for an olive tree would be ἐλἀα, rendering his μἀστξεν δἔλἀαν ludicrous[6]. Nor could Virgil have been expected to anticipate the obscenities that Celius & Ausonius found in Incipiunt agitata tumescere. (Georg., I, 357)” cf. I. Bloch, Die Prostitution, I, S. 556: “Quintilian (Inst. Orat., VIII. 3. 47) Quintilian berichtet von ihm, dass er sogar in don harmlosen Worten Virgils über das Meer eine Unanständigkeit gewittert habe. Übrigens gehörte Celsus (De Medicina, VI, 18, 1) zu der schon im Altertum recht zahlreichen Gattung der sogenannten ‘Nuditätenschnüffler’” (De Medicina, “The Loeb Class. Lib.”, II, p. 268: [on the disease of “partes obscenas”:] “Apud nos foediora verba ne consuetudine quidem aliqua verecundius loquentium commendata sunt, ut difficilior haec explanatio sit simul et pudorem et artis praecepta servantibus”). Geoffrey Tillotson, Essays in Criticism & Research, pp. xviii-xx: “The famous speech of Macbeth struck Johnson as ludicrous because it employed the ‘low’ words ‘blanket,’ ‘dun’ & ‘knife.’ In our time we see Johnson as ludicrous... No critic should be allowed a hearing on Milton or 18^th-century poetry till he has washed his mind historically clean to receive blooming promise, fleecy care & the rest with the delight that was once novelly their due. The original meaning of a word in a great poem is the only one worth attending to”; René Wellek & Austin Warren, Theory of Literature, p. 150: “The standard derived from our present-day usage is misleading. We must forget the modern meaning in such lines as ‘To have a dame indoors, who trims us up. / And keeps us tight’ (Tennyson: ‘Edwin Morris’).” “The line with which Burns opens his Address to Edinburgh, ‘Edina, Scotia’s darling seat,’ will probably make most modern readers think of a lavatory bowl” (New Statesman, 24 Jan. 1959, p. 119). Cf. T.F. Higham in his Introduction to Higham & C.M. Bowra, Oxford Book of Greek Verse in Translation, p. xiv, quoting Ruskin to his heart: “Thou little bounder, rest!”; xiv, Thomas Stanley’s tr. of Bion’s “Lament for Adonis”: “His short Pants Venus grieve.” Francis Thompson: “She gave me tokens three, / A look, a word of her winsome mouth, & a sweet wild raspberry.”[7] Cf. Quintilian, VIII, iii, 44-47, “Loeb”, III, pp. 234-6. New Statesman, 9 May 1980, p. 74, Arthur Marshall: “In Motion” (on the use of the word ‘motion’ in Wordsworth). 蓋亦如〈離騷〉：「溘吾游此春宮兮。」東坡〈十二月二十八日蒙恩責授檢校水部員外郎黃州團練副使復用前韻〉：「出門便旋風吹面。」（參觀《潛研堂文集》卷三十一〈跋東坡詩集〉[8]。）

            P. 110: “Yet More Last Words”: Henry James: “Mountain your molehills, my dear, mountain your molehills.” 按此本 MacCarthy, Portraits, I, p. 152 論 Henry James 擅長 “the art of mountaining molehills.”

百八十八[9]

            The Table Talk of Martin Luther (“Bohn’s Library”), ii: “The books of the heathen taught nothing of faith, hope, or charity... they contemplate only the present... Look not therein for aught of hope or trust in God” (p. 2). 又CCXCVIII: “Everything in the world is done by hope...How much more does hope urge us on to everlasting life & salvation?” (p. 146). 按參觀第百四十則 Diogenes Laertius, V, 18。

            XCIX: “The most acceptable service we can do & show unto God, & which alone he desires of us, is that he be praised of us”; C: “He asks only that we acknowledge him for our God, & thank him for his gifts” (p. 45). 按 W. Somerset Maugham, The Summing-up, §LXIX: “Most of us find it embarrassing when flowery compliments are paid to us... When I was young I had an elderly friend who used often to ask me to stay with him in the country. He was a religious man and he read prayers to the assembled household every morning. But he had crossed out in pencil all the passages in the Book of Common Prayer that praised God. He said that there was nothing so vulgar as to praise people to their faces &, himself a gentleman, he could not believe that God was so ungentlemanly as to like it.”（據 Maugham, The Vagrant Mood[10]，此乃 Augustus Hare 語。）《春在堂隨筆》卷八：「余嘗戲語諸君子云：『神祠中楹聯固多諛詞，然神像乃土木偶耳，偃然坐其上，不知愧也。余則尚非土木偶，朝夕出入恆於斯，對此諸聯視，吾色不且赧赧然乎？』」Voltaire, Zadig, ch. 6, “Le Ministre” (Romans et contes, “La Pléiade”, pp. 646-7): “Irax, était un grand seigneur... corrompu par la vanité et par la volupté... Zadig entreprit de le corriger... Il lui envoya de la part du roi un maître de musique avec douze voix et vingt-quatre violons et quatre chambellans... Le premier jour, dès que le voluptueux Irax fut éveillé,... on chanta une cantate qui dura deux heures, et, de trois minutes en trois minutes, le refrain était: ‘Que son mérite est extrême! / Que de grâces! que de grandeur! / Ah! combien Monseigneur / Doit être content de lui-même!’... Après l’exécution de la cantate, un chambellan lui fit une harangue de trois quarts d’heure, dans laquelle on le louait expressément de toutes les bonnes qualités qui lui manquaient. La harangue finie, on le conduisit à table... Le dîner dura trois heures ; dès qu’il ouvrit la bouche pour parler, le premier chambellan dit: Il aura raison. À peine eut-il prononcé quatre paroles que le second chambellan s’écria: Il a raison! Les deux autres chambellans firent de grands éclats de rire des bons mots qu’Irax avait dits ou qu’il avait dû dire. Après dîner on lui répéta la cantate... Cette première journée lui parut délicieuse...; la seconde lui parut moins agréable; la troisième fut gênante; la quatrième fut insupportable; la cinquième fut un supplice.” 此人位衹卿相，故無此大量。使其貴為一國之君，則多多益善，樂此不疲矣。Cf. 第七二三則。

            CXXXII: “The crawl... childhood approaches nearer to the state of innocence wherein Adam lived before his fall.” 按由前之說，則蛇本有足；後說則 Talmud, Hermetica, Boethius, Vaughan, Wordsworth 所昌言者也。L.C. Martin: “Henry Vaughan & the Theme of Infancy” (Seventeenth Century, Presented to Sir Herbert Grierson, pp. 243 ff.) 却未引此。十九世紀末葉，學者方知童稚野性未除，不得為人，而況天乎？（參觀 E. Jones, Papers on Psychoanalysis, ed. 1918, p. 588 引 Le Neveu de Rameau [“Textes litt. fr.”, éd Jean Fabre, p. 95，亦見 “Hobbisme” (Oeuv., Assézat, XV, p. 123)]: “Si le petit sauvage... réunît au peu de raison de l’enfant la violence des passions de l’homme de 30 ans, il tordrait le col à son père et coucherait avec sa mère”; p. 633 引 Browning: “A Soul’s Tragedy”: “The sweetest child... would be rudely handled by the world’s inhabitants, if he retained these angelic infantine desires when he has grown 6 feet high, black & bearded.” 又 Havelock Ellis, The Criminal, 5^th ed., p. 258: “The child is naturally nearer to the animal, to the savage, to the criminal, than the adult” etc.）

            DCLIV: “When I am assailed with heavy tribulations I rush out among my pigs rather than remain alone by myself. The human heart is like a millstone in a mill; when you put wheat under it, it turns & grinds, & bruises the wheat into flour; if you put no wheat in it, it still grinds on; but then ’tis itself it grinds & wears away. So the human heart, unless it be occupied with some employment, leaves space for the devil, who wriggles himself in, & brings with him a whole host of evil thoughts, temptations, & tribulations, which grind out the heart” (p. 275). Grillparzer: “Antispekulation”: “Eine Mühle vergleich’ ich dem Verstand, / Die mahlt, was an Korn sie geschüttet fand; / Doch geschehen der Schüttungen keine, / So reiben sich selber die Steine / Und erzeugen Staub und Splitter und Sand” (Werke, hrsg. S. Hock, II, S. 408)，又 Gesam. Werk., hrsg. E. Rollett & A. Sauer, VII, S. 90 論 Griibelei 亦用此喻。《朱子語類》卷九十六云：「有主於中，外邪不能入，便是『虛』；有主於中，理義甚實，便是『實』。」卷一百十三云：「有主則『實』，此『實』字是好，蓋指理而言也；『無主則實』，此『實』字是不好，指私欲而言也。」《宋元學案》卷六十五引陳器之潛室語云；「明道言：『中有主則實，實則患不能入。』伊川言：『心有主則虛，虛則邪不能入。』其所主不同，何也？蓋有主則『實』，謂有主人在內，先實其屋，外客不能入。有主則『虛』，謂外客不能入，只有主人自在。知惟實故虛。」皆可參觀。

            DCCLIV 記尼菴池中、地下皆小兒骸骨 (p. 307)。按 Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy 亦言之 (”Everyman’s Lib.”, III, pp. 244, 414) 。Ploss, Bartels & Bartels, Woman, ed. by E.J. Dingwell, III, pp. 271-2 記此等事最詳，育兒至擲溷圊中也 (Barlette: “O quot luxuriae! O quot sodomiae! O quot fornicationes ! / Clamant latrinae latibula ubi sunt pueri suffocati!”; Maillard: “Utinam haberemus aures apertas, et audiremus voces puerorum in latrinis projectorum et in fluminibus.” — p. 272) 。

百八十九[11]

            《寐叟題跋》二冊，商務印書館景印本。書具眾體，有學唐太宗〈溫泉銘〉而參以米南宮、張即之者，有學包倦翁者，有學金冬心者，有似翁覃谿者，有出入錢南園、翁瓶盫者，有學張濂亭者。至以北碑、八分作章草[12]，則子培所創也。合作固多，而波磔處失之矯揉造作，稍不經意，便成惡札，如〈此碑在秋曹〉一跋、〈宣統甲寅帖估周生〉一跋、〈明拓閣帖七冊〉一跋皆是也。

            第一冊論支、謝詩三則，余《談藝錄》第二八六頁已辨之[13]。

            第二冊末〈和康更生〉七律四首非題跋類，不宜編入。第四首結句云：「覺阿吃飯隆師飽，那必雲臺有姓名？」自識云：「但願覺阿有飯吃，隆師自在安養國中踁行受供也。」使事微舛。姚元之《竹葉亭雜記》卷七云：「漁洋載覺隱吃飯事，嘗疑其傳聞有誤。甲申正月二十日，過胡默軒家，成邸舊藏坾仙畫、覺隱書，上有大同山翁凝始子題謂：『覺隱吃飯畢，坾仙亦飽。坾仙吃飯，覺隱亦飽。有覺隱題，坾仙方肯畫。』乃知漁洋非寓言。」覺隱元至正時人，釋覺阿自是道、咸時人，子培誤憶為一人。竊謂王冕嘗畫〈張公吃酒李公醉圖〉，貢性之題詩，不料寓言竟成實事也。陳眉公《太平清話》卷上載覺隱〈莫造屋歌〉及七絕二首。

            「寒女蓍簪，澘焉心痛。敝帚蓍簪，奭焉傷懷。損泐無復神采，殆於公路枯骨，非但秋孃遲暮而已。畫家石谷，如詩有歸愚，門下宗傳，都成凡鈍。」

百九十[14]

            《野叟曝言》第四十七回李姓〈詠梅〉結句云：「月下朦朧驚我眼，如何空剩老丫叉？」元姓說之曰：「出神入化之筆！月色朦朧，與梅花融成一片，豈不單剩了枝梗？」按此雖本俗傳蘇小妹詩話之「輕風扶細柳，淡月失梅花」，以嘲諷斗方名士惡詩，而句中用意則固唐、宋名家所常有也。雍陶〈詠雙白鷺〉云：「立當青草人先見，行傍白蓮魚未知。」李郢〈淛河館〉詩云：「青蛇上竹一種色，黃蝶隔溪無限情。」李洞〈宿成都松溪院〉云：「翡翠鳥飛人不見松也，琉璃瓶貯水疑無溪也。」《後村大全集》卷一百七十五〈前輩咏蝶〉云：「狂隨柳絮有時見，舞入梨花無處尋。」（《類說》卷五十六《古今詩話》作謝學士詩。）尹穡〈西軒〉詩云：「草黃眠失犢，石白動知鷗。」（《澗泉集》卷十七〈和昌甫〉第一首自注引。）姚勉〈四望亭觀荷花〉云：「面面湖光面面風，可人最是白芙蓉。分明飛下雙雙鷺，才到花邊不見蹤。」（《雪坡舍人集》卷十二）以及《五燈會元》卷二十洞山付曹山詞云：「銀碗盛雪，明月藏鷺。」Marino: “Mentre Lidia premea. / Dentro rustica coppa. / A la lanuta la feconda poppa, / I’ stava a rimirar doppio candore, / Di natura e d’amore; né distinguer sapea / Il bianco umor da le sue mani intatte, / Ch’altro non discernea che latte in latte” (“Ninfa mungitrice” — G.G. Ferrero, Marino e i Marinisti, p. 361). Jules Renard, Journal, p. 309: “Noir sur noir, comme un corbeau dans la nuit.”【Marino: “Ninfa mungitrice”: “né distinguer sapea / il bianco umor da le sue mani intatte, / ch’altro non discernea che latte in latte” (G.G. Ferrero, Marino e i Marinisti, p. 361).[15]】胥同手眼。嚴鐵橋《全後漢文》卷二十九馬第伯〈封禪儀記〉云：「遙望其人，或以爲小白石，或以爲氷雪。久之，白者移過樹，乃知是人也。」【第伯此文《容齋隨筆》卷十一自應劭《漢官儀》節錄，而極歎其工，頗怪昔賢無稱道者。周晉仙《方泉先生詩集》卷一〈山行行歌〉第七首云：「遠望山腰多白石，細看知是野人行。」即用此文，疑轉本之容齋者。《孫月峯先生全集》卷九補訂此〈記〉全文。陳夢錫《無夢園初集‧馬集》卷四〈名世文宗序〉引此〈記〉爲「文式」。】明人王禕〈開先寺觀瀑布記〉：「從樹隙見岩腰采薪人，衣白，大如粟。初疑此白石耳，有頃漸移動，乃知是人也。」袁小修《珂雪齋詩集》卷四〈感懷‧三十三〉：「如雪如素練，晃耀亂山赭，白者移過樹，乃知是人也。」魏默深《古微堂詩集》卷五〈太室吟〉云：「山腳仰視峯影小，數點白者出林杪，須臾移過雜樹間，乃知是人非飛鳥。」可參觀。餘見七百八十則。

---

[1]《手稿集》264-6 頁。

[2] 此處原文「施愚山先」至「施氏家風」間有所脫落，據本則後文臆補「生年譜四卷」五字。

[3]《手稿集》266 頁。

[4] 自 19 世紀中葉以來，便有以「give the bird」為「發噓聲」、「喝倒彩」之俗語用法。後來遂由聲音衍生出手勢，今日「flip the bird」或「give someone the bird」皆指「舉中指」之侮辱性手勢。

[5] 原文脫落「very」字。

[6] 此處希臘原文似誤，待考。

[7] Brian Aldiss: “It’s like the poem by Francis Thompson that ends ‘She gave me tokens three, a look, a word of her winsome mouth, and a sweet wild raspberry’; there again the meaning has changed. It really was a wild raspberry in Thompson’s day.” (Recorded informal conversation between C.S. Lewis, Kingsley Amis, and Brian Aldiss, cited in Walter Hooper, ed., Of This and Other Worlds.) 現代俗語中，「raspberry」或「razzberry」與「give the bird」涵意相同，皆指「發噓聲」、「喝倒彩」。

[8]「研」原作「邱」。文云：「東坡詩『出門便旋風吹面』……注家引《左傳》注以『旋』為『小便』」云云。

[9]《手稿集》266-7 頁。

[10]「The Vagrant Mood」原作「A Vagrant Mind」。

[11]《手稿集》267 頁。

[12] 此處重一「章」字。

[13]《談藝錄‧六九‧隨園論詩中理語‧附說十九‧山水通於理趣》：「近人沈子培《寐叟題跋》上冊有論支謝詩三則，深非劉勰『莊老告退、山水方滋』二語，以為『六朝詩將山水莊老，融併一氣。謝康樂總山水莊老之大成，支道林開其先，模山範水，華妙絕倫。陶公自與嵇阮同流，不入此社』云云。沈氏知作詩『以莊老為意，山水為色』，頗合『理趣』之說。《世說》一書所載曲阿、印渚、華林園、山陰道等游觀諸語，皆老莊風氣中人所說；孫興公『齋前種松，楚楚可憐』，亦幾有濂溪、明道愛翫階草之意。然支道林存詩，篇篇言理，如〈八關齋〉、〈述懷〉、〈詠懷〉、〈利城山居〉等作，偶點綴寫景一二語，呆鈍填砌，未見子培所謂『模範華妙』者。子培好佛學，故論詩蠻做杜撰，推出一釋子，強冠之康樂之上，直英雄欺人耳。以山水通於理道，自亦孔門心法，子培必欲求之老莊，至不言讀《論語》，而言讀皇侃疏，豈得為探本窮源乎。陶公不入此社，固也，與嵇阮亦非同流。陶尊孔子，而〈擬古〉肯稱莊周為『此士難再得』；阮學老莊，而〈達莊論〉乃大言莊周不足道。子培之言，誠為淆惑矣。」

[14]《手稿集》267-8 頁。

[15] 此段重引。