“Osculum infame” from Compendium
Maleficarum (1608)
六百六十六[1]
José María Arguedas & Ruth
Stephen, The Singing Mountaineers: Songs &
Tales of the Quechua People (1957). The songs leave me cold, but the tales
are a quite good read. They have to a striking degree the characteristics of
all genuine folktales, impassive innocence & artless restraints: not only
the improbable impossibilities related without the least suggestion of
starry-eyed wonder, but love & death, violence & catastrophe are
observed with dry eyes & touched on, as Thomas Edwards said of the editing
of texts, with a dry finger (cf. Austin Dobson, Later Essays, p. 24). The clean & chaste freedom from emotion
is different from practised self-control or reasoned fortitude (Spinoza’s Acquiescentia, Goethe’s Entsagung, De Vigny’s Abnégacion or Nietzsche’s Amor fati), both of which imply a mind
seasoned by experience; in short it is neither sophisticated “dead pan” nor
disciplined “stiff upper lip.” It is rather a blithe imperturbability which
combines invincible ignorance of the laws of things & men with tranquil
incuriosity about the riddle of the universe or the meaning of existence. In
such a book of life there are no marks of exclamation or interrogation.
Folklorists, I am sure, will have no difficulty in fitting these hitherto
unknown tales into Stith Thompson’s types or showing them to belong to Jung’s “archetypes
des unbewussten.” There are of course many familiar motifs & stock
situations. For instance, in the amusing tale “The Head of the Town & the
Demon”, we read that people calling on the Demon must first kiss his buttocks,
which will then expel a filthy fart & let loose a huge quantity of fecal
matter in the form of gold & silver (pp. 114, 116). This naturally recalls
the osculum infame or sub cauda osculatur as an act of homage
to the Master of the Sabbat (see Montague Summers, The History of Witchcraft & Demonology, p. 137). The Devil’s
answer to his follower: “Ed egli avea del cul fatto trombetta”[2]
(Dante, Inferno, XXI, 139, Opere, ed. E. Moore & P. Toynbee, p.
31; the vigorous drawing “Der mit Gestand entweichende Teufel” given in E.
Fuchs, Illustrierte Sittengeschichte,
Ergänzungsband I, S. 156 might serve as an illustration of Dante’s line); the
donkey is the first story of Il
Pentamerone, which, at the word “Arri, cacauro!” lets out “diarree d’oro e
torbidi di gemme”, an “evacuazione preziosa” (G. Basile, Il Pentamerone, I. 9, tradotta di B. Croce, p. 18); cf. Brüder
Grimm, Haus- und Kindermärchen,
“Tischen deck dich, Goldesel und Knüppel aus dem Sack” (Die Kinderbuch Verlag,
S. 186); & the goose in the forty-first story, which “schizza flussi di
scudi” (Ib., V. I, p. 472); & the
scatological association of money (see Ernest Jones, Papers on Psychoanalysis, ed. 1918, pp. 676-7; Freud said: “Es ist
bekannt, dass das Geld, welches der Teufel seinen Buhlen schenkt, sich nach seinem
Weggehen in Dreck verwandelt.... Ja, schon in der altbabylonischen Lehre ist
Gold der Kot der Hölle.” See also 第五百二十四則 a propos of the catchphrase “Fall into a heap of
shit & come out with a gold watch”). According to Luther, the devil
expresses his scorn by exposing his rear parts… and man can completely defeat
him by farting into his nostrils & telling him where his kiss is welcome
(E.H. Erikson, Young Man Luther, pp.
61-2, 79). There is the famous story of the old Lapp woman who, confronted
suddenly by a bear, whipped up her skirt to show the animal her private parts
in order to shame it into immediate flight” (New Statesman, 10 April 1964, p. 556). Cf. La Fontaine’s “Le Diable
de Papefiguière” (Contes et Nouvelles,
Garnier, pp. 319 ff.) in which Perrette scared away the devil by showing him
her crack: “Elle fait voir... Et quoi? chose terrible. / Le diable en eut une
peur tant horrible” etc. (p. 325).
六百六十七[3]
改琦繪〈海叜先生像〉
《袁海叜詩集》觀自得齋叢書本。七古及近體詩學杜，亦衹得其皮毛，然尚非如七子之撏撦。所摹追乃在少陵蒼老之格，亂頭粗服，以率求真，亦異於七子之務雄濶也。風骨不堅，肌理不密，舍卷三〈客中除夜〉（「今夕為何夕，他鄉說故鄉。看人兒女大，為客歲年長。戎馬無休歇，關山正渺茫。一杯柏葉酒，未敵淚千行」）【戴復古《石屏詩集》卷四〈九日〉：「今日知何日，他鄉憶故鄉」；趙長卿〈南歌子〉：「此日知何日，他鄉憶故鄉」】、卷四〈京師得家書〉（「江水一千里，家書十五行。行行無別語，只道早還鄉」）兩名作外，卷二〈大醉率爾三首〉、卷三〈村居懷京下一二友生〉、〈望南邨〉第一首、卷四〈閒步〉第二首（「半雨半晴天氣，半開半落山花。半醉半醒游客，半村半郭人家」）尚可諷詠，餘皆鱗所之而矣。
〇李滄溟詩中好用「風塵」二字，人呼為「李風塵」；海叜詩中好用「老夫」二字，當稱「袁老夫」矣。
〇李、何、李、王雖肌理不密，尚骨卓力渾，乍視之，頗有健鶻盤空，大魚跋浪之觀。海叟筆致槎枒，却不衿拔。
〇卷四〈浦口竹枝〉云：「浦口荷花生紫煙，花時日日醉沙邊。更將荷葉包魚蟹，老死江南不怨天。」按陳仁錫編《沈石田先生集》七絕〈題畫〉云：「秋林黃葉獨行人，短髪蕭騷兩鬢銀，老到江南窮不死，也勝騎馬踏京塵。」頗兼海叟詩與宋盧秉〈題驛舍〉云：「青衫白髮病參軍，旋糶黃粱置酒樽。但得有錢留客醉，也勝騎馬傍人門」（《宋文鑑》卷二十八）。
〇附錄引陸深《金臺紀聞》載：「太祖嘗欲戮一人，皇太子懇釋之。召海叟問，對曰：『陛下刑之者，法之正；東宮釋之者，心之慈。』太祖怒，以為持兩端，下之獄。」又《明良記》載：「一日，有父訟子者，帝已察其非罪，命付太子。太子論子得死，帝諭太子誤決獄，太子言：『子致父訟，雖冤死無赦。』帝問廷臣，莫有答者。忽班中一人對曰：『陛下所論，乃申天下之仁；太子所論，乃廣天下之孝。皆是也。』帝問：『對者為誰？』曰：『監察御史袁凱。』」姚宏緒《松風餘韻》嘗謂海叜遺事記載多可疑，此其一也。按《金臺紀聞》一節，采入《紀錄彙編》卷一百三十二，而卷一百三十所采徐禎卿《剪勝野聞》亦載海叟此事[4]，又在陸書之前。《史記‧魏其武安侯列傳》略云：「魏其之東朝，盛推灌夫之善，武安又盛毀灌夫所為橫恣，於是上問朝臣：『兩人孰是？』御史大夫韓安國曰：『魏其言是也，丞相言亦是。唯明主裁之。』武安怒曰：『與長孺共一老禿翁，何為首鼠兩端』」云云，海叟即師韓長孺故智耳。袁子才《小倉山房尺牘》卷四〈答唐靜涵又一書〉、《隨園隨筆》卷二十七〈兩歧語自佳〉稱引海叟答明太祖語及大覺禪師答李林甫語，蓋不知即《史記》所謂「兩端語」，亦正宗門傳授機鋒也。《六祖大師法寶壇經‧付囑第十》云：「忽有人問汝法，出語盡雙，皆取對法，來去相因。究竟二法盡除，更無去處。」《全唐文》卷五百十二李吉甫〈杭州徑山寺大覺禪師碑〉云：「嘗有設問於大師曰：『今傳舍有二使，郵吏為刲一羊。二使既聞，一人救，一人不救，罪福異之乎？』大師曰：『救者慈悲，不救者解脫。』」《南部新書》己：「有江西廉使問馬祖云：『弟子吃酒肉即是，不吃即是？』師云：『若吃是中丞祿，不吃是中丞福』」《傳燈錄》卷六、《五燈會元》卷二本此作馬祖所道，隨園所道亦即此事，而說為李林甫與大覺。後世嘲弄禪門，亦每用此法。趙南星《清都散客笑贊》云：「鷂子追雀，雀投入一僧袖中，僧以手搦定曰：『阿彌陀佛，我今日吃塊肉。』雀閉目不動，僧只說死矣。張手，雀飛去，僧曰：『阿彌陀佛，我放生了你罷。』」咄咄夫《增補一夕話》卷四云：「一僧與婦同舟，目之不已。婦怒，命僕打之。僧乃閉目而坐，婦又命打。僧曰：『如今何罪？』婦曰：『汝閉目，乃想我，更不好。』」此其例。明太祖雖出身皇覺寺，未習纏誦，宜其不解耳。辯證法實亦不外乎此，參觀 Goethe:
“Über Wahrheit und Wahrscheinlichkeit der Kunstwerke”: “...Wortspiele dieser
Art selbst ein Bedürfnis des Geistes
anzeigen, der, da wir das, was in uns vorgeht, nicht geradezu ausdrücken
können, durch Gegensätze zu operieren, die Frage von zwei Seiten zu
beantworten, und so gleichsam die Sache in die Mitte zu fassen sucht” (G.F.
Senior & C.V. Bock, Goethe the Critic,
p. 18); Jonas Cohn, Theorie der Dialektik,
S. 284 論 “Bipolar”
之 “Gebietsabgrenzung”
及 “Gegenseitige
Anerkennung”，正 George Orwell, Nineteen
Eighty-Four, p. 37 所言 “‘Reality
control’, they called it: in Newspeak, ‘doublethink’.... to hold simultaneously
two opinions which cancelled out....” 實則 Marx 嘲法國憲法云：“Jede dieser Freiheiten [Press-, Rede-,
Assoziations-, usw Freiheit] wird nämlich als das unbedingte Recht des
französischen Citoyen proklamiert, aber mit der beständigen Randglosse, dass
sie schrankenlos sei, soweit sie nicht durch ‘die gleichen Rechte anderer und die öffentliche Sicherheit’ beschränkt
werde... Jeder Paragraph der Konstitution enthält nämlich seine eigene
Antithese, sein eignes Über- und Unterhaus in sich, nämlich in der allgemeinen
Phrase die Freiheit, in der Randglosse die Aufhebung der Freiheit” (Der Achtzehnte Brumaire des Louis Bonaparte,
Diez, S. 26-7)，不知此正其所謂「辯證」，亦即 Julien Benda, Du
Style d’Idées, p. 140: “Un mode de penser qui conduit fatalement à des
affirmations totalement vaines, souvent risibles est la volonte de concilier à
tout prix des notions qui par définition, s’excluent l’une l’autre. Ces moeurs,
qui reviennent à proclaimer qu’une chose est en meme temps un cercle et un
carré, s’observent éminemment dans la vie politique, l’orateur ne pouvant
avouer aux masses, sous peine d’impopularité que tel advantage qu’il leur
propos comporte logiquement le sacrifice de tel autre auquel elles tiennent
aussi. Ainsi Casimir-Périer clame ‘L’ordre, sans sacrifice pour la liberté’” (按可與納粹口號 “Geordnete
Meinungsfreiheit” 及 New Statesman, 21 March 1959, p. 389 又 28
March 1959, p. 433 所嘲美國外交政策口號 “elastic
rigidity”, “firm elasticity”, “united in flexible rigidity” 等參觀)。Rudolf
Metz, Die Philosophischen Strömungen in
Grossbritannien, Bd. II, S. 332: “Er [Bosanquet] Bradleys schroffes
Entweder-Oder überall in ein milderes Sowohl-als-auch verwandelt hat”; Molière,
La Bourgeois Gentilhomme, I, ii:
Jourdain: “Vous avez raison tous deux”; Addison, The Spectator, No. 122: “That much might be said on both sides.” 僧遭打事，正六祖所謂「更無去處」，其事可參觀《東軒筆錄》卷十二：「馮京帥太原，以書詫於王平甫曰：『并門歌舞妙麗，吾閉目不窺，但日與和甫談禪耳。』平甫答曰：『所謂談禪者，直恐明公未達。蓋閉目不窺，已是一重公案。』」《圖書集成‧神異典第七十六》載《笑禪錄》：「問藥山如何不被境惑？曰：『聽他何礙！一長者妓席閉目叉手，酒畢妓重索賞，長者云：「我不曾看。」妓曰：「看的何妨，想的獨很。」』」錢秉鐙《田間文集》21〈髠殘石溪小傳〉：「一日同藿溪及予同赴城南齋，予亦僧服，過小巷，有壯婦，塗粉狼藉，叉手當門目之。既過，師曰：『世間有如此穢物，人偏好之，不可解也！』予嬈之曰：『我過未見有物，汝如何自獨見之？』師指罵曰：『忒欺心！』三人相與絕倒。」
〇何大復〈海叟集序〉云：「李、杜歌行、近體誠有可法，而古作尚有離去者，未可盡法之也。故景明學歌行、近體，有取於二家，旁及唐初、盛唐諸人，而古作必從漢、魏求之。」按《漁洋詩問》卷上云：「滄溟先生論五言，謂：『唐人無五言古詩，而有其古詩。』此定論也。至虞山錢氏，但截取上一句，以為滄溟罪案，滄溟不受也」云云，未免曲為開脫。滄溟之論五古，正同大復之論歌行，蓋此說自弘正七子已然矣。滄溟語見《滄溟集》卷十五〈選唐詩序〉。
〇補〈雷震田父耕牛謠〉：「雷哥哥。」按參觀第一百七則所舉「風爹」、「雪公」、「frate sol」等。
六百六十八[5]
Émile Henriot, Maîtres d’hier & contemporains, 1955, pp. 320-1: “Louÿs
recommandait à son nouvel ami [Claude Farrère] de refaire son livre en le
recopiant.... Pratiqué par les écrivains soucieux de la forme, ce travail à la
main est en effet la condition essentielle de la décantation de l’oeuvre et du
perfectionnement du style.” The word “décantation” is a very happy one. Cf. an
equally felicitous use of the word in Lanfranco Caretti, Filologia e critica, 1955, p. 8: “[A propos of what he calls ‘l’apparato
sincronico’ in the establishment of the definitive text of a Greek or Latin
author] Quando noi, infatti, provvediamo alla ricostruzione di un archetipo, ci
fondiamo sull’ ipotesi di lavoro che la serie delle varianti risultanti dalla
tradizione ci conservi celato il testo originale da scoprire, l’unico testo originale, mescolato alle
varie corruzioni e interpolazioni. Questo giustifica l’opera, per così dire, di
decantazione che noi compiamo per
separare l’unica lezione valida delle incrostazioni parassitarie.” Henriot also
quoted from Joseph Caillaux’s Mes
Mémoires the sentence, “Il [Poincaré] m’abbandone pour s’agglutiner à M.
Clemenceau”, and comments: “S’agglutiner sonne assez bien...” (Éd.
“Bibliothèque de la Pléiade”, p. 123).
Noel Coward, Present Indicative (Doubleday Doran & Co.), p. 50: “Mrs
Astley-Cooper draped scarves over all mirrors because she said she could find
no charm in her own appearance whatever.” Judging from an entry in Gide’s Journal, Fin Février 1903, “c’est Schwob
étendant des papiers devant ses miroirs” (op.
cit., p. 132), Marcel Schwob, who was notoriously ugly and was said to look
like “un oeuf dur sans coquille” (Jules Renard, Journal, éd. NRF, p. 101), seems also to have suffered from this
kind of inverted Narcissism — what Oscar Wilde describes in the Preface to Dorian Gray as “the rage of Caliban
seeing his face in a glass.”【Paul Claudel: “Gide est fasciné par les miroirs. Son
Journal n’est qu’une série de poses
devant lui-même” (R. Mallet, Paul Claudl et André Gide, Correspondance, p. 250).】Cf. Lucilius’s epigram in The Greek Anthology quoted in 第七三八則 a propos of L’Adone, V. 26;
Tasso, Aminta, I. i, Dafne: “... e
già non dico / allor che fuggirai le fonti, ov’ ora / spesso ti specchi e forse
ti vagheggi: / allor che fuggirai le fonti, solo / per tema di vederti crespa,
e brutta” (Poesie, ed. F. Flora, pp. 620-1). Cf. 李漁《憐香伴》第二齣闕里侯「惡影不將燈作伴，怒形常與鏡為仇」；《清異錄》卷下〈居室門〉[6]：「王希默簡淡無他好，惟以對鏡為娛，整飾眉髩；以杜甫有『勳業頻看鏡』之句，作『策勳亭』。」
There is a very amusing conversation
in Octave Mirbeau’s Le Journal d’une
femme de chambre (p. 266[7]).
Mme de Rambure asked Sartorys, who was a notorious passive sodomite,
how he succeeded in inducing the nuns to part with their jewellery. “Je me
livre sur elles à des pratiques anti-naturelles,” he answered. La baronne
Gogsthein chipped in: “Qu’appelez-vous des pratiques anti-naturelles?” “Cela dépendde
quel côté Sartorys place la nature,” Maurice Fernancourt replied for him. There
is a moral to this scabrous joke, to wit, “everything has two handles,” as Epictetus
said (Enchiridion, XLIII; Epictetus, tr. W.A. Oldfather, “The Loeb
Classical Library”, vol. II, p. 527). Cf. Bordeu’s reply to Mlle de L’Espinasse’s
skittish inquiry about sodomy: “Tout ce qui est ne peut être ni contre nature
ni hors de nature.” Cf. Bishop William Warburton: “Orthodoxy is my doxy;
heterodoxy is another man’s doxy” (Oxford
Dictionary of Quotations, second ed., p. 559); Feuerbach: “Nachgelassene
Aphorismen”: “Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Volk und Pöbel? Wenn der Pöbel
glaubt oder thut, was den Herrschenden gefällt oder nützlichscheint, so ist der Pöbel Volk, im entgegensetzen Falle das Volk Pöbel”
(Sämtliche Werke, hrsg. W. Bolin &
Fr. Jodl, Bd. X, S. 316; G.A. de Caillavet & R. de Flers, L’Habit vert, I. ii: “Démocratie est le
nom que nous donnous au peuple chaque fois que nous avons besoin de lui”); Eduard
Engel, Deutsche Kunst, 22te bis 24te Aufl., S. 179: “All dies
Geschwätz von Objektiv und Subjektiv bedeutet, wenn irgend etwas, nur dieses:
Objektiv ist meine Meinung, subjektiv jede andre; ich besitze die objektive ewige Wahrheit, ihr alle seid
in schnöder Subjektivität befangen. Es erinnert an die schöne Erklärung von
Egoismus: ‘Dieser Mensch ist der verkörperte Egoismus! Über eine unterhalte ich
mich miss ihm, und nicht ein einzig Mal spricht er von mir.’” One thinks also
of vulgarity defined as “other people’s behaviour” & sentimentality as “other
people’s feelings.” This is a rather chastening thought to all who claim to be “revolutionaries”
& “progressives”; at the same time let all those who are stigmatised as “counterrevolutionaries”
& “reactionaries” derive what consolation they can from it. On whose side
then is history? Alas! History, une fille
mille fois violée, like Nature, is “double-barrelled”[8]
and can too play Sartorys’s “fore-and-after” game — of course in her fashion.
In 第六百四十九則, a propos of Croce’s sharp
distinction between “poetry” & “oratory” or “eloquence”, I quoted J.S. Mill
& the Yeats’s who corroborated Croce by insisting on “solitude” &”intimacy”
as the mark of the finest literature. When one soliloquizes in solitude or
talks in intimacy, one does not raise one’s voice; loud theatrical declamation
is definitely ruled out. Saintsbury, too, while objecting to “the absence of
quiet” in Ruskin, borrows the famous words of Goethe’s poem to praise Pater: “On
the apex of English prose, there is Rest” (A
History of English Prose Rhythm, p. 420; “Wandrers Nachtlied”, ii: “Ueber
allen Gipfeln / Ist Ruh”). Cf. Angelus Silesius, Der Cherubinischer Wandersmann: “Wir beten: es gescheh, mein Herr
und Gott, dein Wille; / Und sieh, er hat nicht Will, er ist ein ewge Stille” (F.J.
Warnke, European
Metaphysical Poetry, p.
190); Hegel’s fine passge in his Ästhetik,
Iter Teil, 3tes Kap. on “die heitere Ruhe und Seligkeit”,
“als den Grundzug des Ideals an die Spitze stellen” & “Heiterkeit & stille”
of the gods (Aufbau-Verlag, 1955, S. 184).【Cf. S.
467 from...[9]】Carducci
had perhaps the Goethean phrase in mind when he spoke of Foscolo as one who “ricercava
le cime quiete della poesia... trasportava nella serenit omerica e pindarica il
dubbio e il dolore moderno...” (Del
rinnovamento letterario in Italia, quoted in Walter Binni, ed., I
Classici Italiani nella Storia della Critica, II, p. 361). This applies, it
seems, not only to the beautiful, but also to the good. Malebranche, for
instance, said: “La raison parle bas, il
faut de l’attention pour l’entendre... mais les sens, devenus insolents... mais
si agréablement et si vivement, que l’esprit séduit et dominé suit aveuglement
tous les désirs qu’ils inspirent” (Médit. Chrét., quoted in André Lalande, Vocabulaire technique et critique de la
philosophie, 7e éd, p. 969); Heidegger puts the matter in a
paradox: “Das Gewissen redet einzig und ständig im Modus des Schweigens. So
verliert es nicht nur nichts an Vernehmlichkeit, sondern zwingt das an- und
aufgerufene Dasein in die Verschwiegenheit seiner selbst” (Sein und Zeit, I, 3te Auf., S. 273). One also remembers “the
still small voice” of the Lord in the Bible (I Kings, XIX.11); and it is only in the case of a scoundrel like
Sampson Brass that the still small voice can loudly “sing comic songs with him”
(see Old Curiosity Shop, ch. 66).
Even the highest voluptuous happiness is quiet, e.g., in Tasso’s beautiful poem
“Tacciono i boschi e i fiumi”: “Amor non parli o spiri, / Sien muti i baci e
muti i miei sospiri” (Poesie, “Rime”,
Parte III, no. 68, ed. F. Flora, p. 791). All this comes home to a person
living in an age of admass media when the people are governed, educated,
entertained — in short, “softened up” & stupefied — with unrelenting noise,
& when all thoughts & feelings have to issue in vociferous verbal diarrhea,
& when even oratory & eloquence degenerate into roaratory & yelloquence,
or to borrow the Abbé Galiani’s pun on the logical forms of certain arguments
in poems & speeches, the raisonnements
become mere résonnements (quoted in
Sainte-Beuve, Causeries
du Lundi, II,
p. 436). Cf. Meister Eckhart, Sermon,
VIII: “The word lies hidden in the soul in such a way that one does not know it or hear it. Unless room is made in the
ground of hearing, it cannot be heard;
indeed, all voices &
sounds must go out, & there must be absolute silence there & stillness”
(James M. Clark, Meister Eckhart, p. 162);
Wm. Watson: “The Mystery of Style”: “Serenity based upon strength”, “Passion plus self-restraint” (Excursions in
Criticism, pp. 106, 107).【Jean Paul, Vorschule
der Ästhetik, §11: “Der rechte Genius beruhigt sich von innen; nicht das
hochauffahrende Wogen, sondern die glatte Tiefe spiegelt die Welt” (Werke, Carl Hanser Verlag, III, S. 578,
581).】【Aristotle,
Nicomachean Ethics, Bk.
VII, ch. 14: “This is why God always enjoys a single and simple pleasure; for
there is not only an activity of movement but an activity of immobility, &
pleasure is found more in rest than in movement.”】【Cf. infra 第六百八十九則.】
T. Sturge Moore: “I had always
understood that Chesterton & Belloc were the two buttocks of one bum. Now I
learn that you are as strongly for the one as against the other?!!” (Ursula
Bridge, ed., W.B. Yeats &
T. Sturge Moore: Their Correspondence, p. 20). Cf. a piece of dialogue in Tennessee
Williams’s Cat on the Hot Tin Roof, “Pelican
Plays”, p. 95: “‘That half-ass story!’ ‘What’s half-ass abut it?’ ‘Something’s
left out of the story.’”
Sturge Moore on a TLS review
of his Armour for Aphrodite: “...
with several drops of malignity in the mush” (Op. cit., p. 148). Cf. Paul Léautaud, Journal Littéraire, II, p. 41: “Vallette me dit qu’il y aurait
quelques jolies lignes à écrire sur Hérold [his predecessor as dramatic critic
of the Mercure de France], des fleurs recouvrant des épines”; Kathleen
Tillotson’s characterization of Arnold’s description of Carlyle in the lecture
on Heine: “the bunches of snakes tied up with flower” (quoted RES, Feb 1959, p, 108).
六百六十九[10]
《五燈會元》卷一云：「世尊在靈山會上，拈花示眾。眾皆默然，唯迦葉尊者破顏微笑。世尊曰：『吾有正法眼藏，湼槃妙心，實相無相，微妙法門，不立文字，教外別傳，密付囑摩訶迦葉』」云云[11]。按此事意趣殊妙，而未詳所出。《景德傳燈錄》卷一初無記載，宋釋志磐《佛祖統紀》卷五〈摩訶迦葉傳〉註文引《梅谿集》云：「荊公謂慧泉禪師曰：『世尊拈花，出自何經？』泉云：『藏經所不載。』公曰：『頃在翰苑，偶見《大梵王問佛決疑經》三卷，有云：「梵天王在靈山會上，以金色波羅花獻佛，請佛說法，世尊登座，拈花示眾，人天百萬，悉皆罔措」云云』。」《梅溪集》未識誰作，王龜齡《集》中無其文也。釋智昭《人天眼目》卷五逕曰荊公云云，不言《梅溪集》。Suzuki, Essays in Zen Buddhism,
I, p. 153 謂是古天竺遺說，即引《五燈會元》為注，實未探本。近覩西方著述，每援此典，如 R.G. Collingwood, The Principles of Art, p. 243: “There is
a story that Buddha once, at the climax of a philosophical discussion, broke
into a gesture-language as an Oxford philosopher may break into Greek: he took
a flower in his hand, &d looked at it; one of his disciples smiled, and the
master said to him, ‘You have understood me.’ It is therefore not true that
vocal language has an exclusive function in the expression of thought.” 又 Allan Wade, ed., Letters of W.B. Yeats, p. 715: “Do you remember the story of Buddha
who gave a flower to some one, who in his turn gave another a silent gift &
so from man to man for centuries passed on the doctrine of the Zen school? One
feels at moments as if one could with a touch convey a vision — that the mystic
vision & sexual love use the same means.” Nikos Kazantzakis, The Odyssey: A Modern Sequel, 中之 Prince Motherth 即釋迦也，其臨終時，諸子求囑付：“Master, before you die, grant us your wisest word!’ / Then the serene
face shone with a faint smile... / but he spoke not.... I’ve gone beyond the
Word, cut through thought’ foolish nets, / and fling you, for profound reply, a
wordless smile” (Bk. XXIV, ll. 842-5, 863-4, tr. K. Friar, pp. 763, 764). 皆即 W.M. Urban, Language
& Reality, p. 230: “Linguistic communication is imbedded in &
presupposes behavioral communication.... e.g., the ‘language’ of eyes,
gestures, etc.” 至理妙道至男歡女愛無俟言說，已見第百九十八則論 Balzac, Contes
Drolatiques, Éd. Louis Conard, I, p. 136，第二百四則論 Max Scheler, Die Wissensformen und die Gesellschaft,
S. 63。至 Yeats 論愛染而舉根器相觸 (touch)，未盡欲界中彼此通郵之道，兩情交悅，兩心相印，尚有如《楞嚴經》卷八真鑑疏中偈所謂「四王㣼利同一道，燄摩執手兜率笑。化樂相視他暫視，此是諸天真快樂」（按本之《長阿含經》之三十《世紀經‧㣼利天品第八》：「人及龍、鳥相觸，阿須倫相近，四天王、㣼利、焰摩亦如是，兜率天執手，化自在天熟視，他化自在天暫視成陰陽」；《瑜珈師地論》卷五：「男女展轉，二二交會，不淨流出，熱惱方息。欲界諸天，雖行淫行，無此不淨，然於根門，有風氣出。時分天，唯互相抱；知足天，唯相執手；樂化天，相顧而笑；他化自在天，眼相顧視，熱惱便息[12]」）是也。蓋適與西方所謂 “quinque lineae amoris”（相視、共語、偎依、接吻、媾歡）（詳見 E.R. Curtius, Europäische Literatur und Lateinisches
Mittelalter, 2te Auf., S. 501-2）相反，諸天之所謂極境，正人間之初榥而已。Paradise Lost, VIII. 615-7, Adam: “Love not the Heavenly Spirits, and how their love
/ Express they — by looks only, or do they mix / Irradiance, virtual or
immediate touch?” 622-9, Raphael: “Whatever pure thou in the body enjoy’st /
(And pure thou wert created) we enjoy / In eminence, & obstacle find none /
Of membrane, joint, or limb, exclusive bars. / Easier than air with air, if
Spirits embrace, / Total they mix, union of pure with pure / Desiring, nor
restrained conveyance need / As flesh to mix with flesh, or soul with soul” (參觀 A. Gilchrist, Life
of Wm Blake, “Everyman’s Lib.”, p. 337記 Blake 言 Milton 現形：“wished me to expose the falsehood of his doctrine
taught in the P.L., that sexual intercourse arose out of the Fall”; Sturge
Moore, Art & Life, p. 207: “An
amusing example of [Blake’s] ineffectual reading. The famous passage [P.L., IV.
771 ff.] actually illustrate the opposite opinion”; Fr. Schlegel, Literary Notebooks, ed. Hans Eichner, §1489,
p. 152: “Sollen sich denn nicht auch die Geister Küssen, umarmen, befruchten,
Eins werden?” p. 273 注引 J. Böhme,
Morgenröte im Aufgang: “... die
Geister Gottes in sich fein lieblich einander gebören, und ineinander auf
steigen, als ein liebliches Holsen, Küssen und von einander essen” (Sämtl. Werk., ed. K.W. Schiber, II, S.
120). 吾國詩人寫相視莫逆之境最夥者為孫子瀟，如《天真閣外集》卷一〈記遇〉第三首云：「廋詞竟被全猜著，眉語偏乘不備來」；〈寒夜〉云：「星眼暗擡人不覺，風情略透語無痕」；〈新年詞〉第二首云：「眼波敏捷迴身溜，眉語聰明對面通」；〈無題〉第一首云：「眼波頻遣魂搖蕩，眉語能通思款深」；卷二〈意中人〉第二首云：「語出眉梢須領會，波生眼角定分明」；〈新病〉云：「極檢點時惟手札，最分明語在眉尖。」然眉挑目語，雖賦情聊勝，終含意未申。按古羅馬詩中數詠眉語：Ovid, Amores, I. iv. 19: “verba
superciliis sine voce loquentia dicam”，又 II. v.
15 略同；Propertius, III. 7: “tecta
superciliis si quando uerba remittis”。意大利古謠因云：“Non mi mandar messaggi, ché son falsi; / Non mi mandar messaggi, ché
son rei. / Messaggio siano gli occhi quando gli alsi, / Messaggio siano gli
occhi tuoi a’ miei”[13]
(L.R. Lind, Lyric Poetry of the Italian
Renaissance, p. 44: “Strambotti siciliani”, I). 而晁元禮〈洞仙歌〉則云：「眼來眼去，未肯分明道。有意於人甚不早」；又〈少年游〉云：「眼來眼去又無言，教我怎生團？又不分明，許人一句，縱未也心安」（《全宋詞》卷六十六）。至若孫惟信〈晝錦堂〉詞云：「嬋娟。留慧盼，渾當了、匆匆密愛深憐」《絕妙好詞》卷二；石子章〈八聲甘州〉云：「不承望空溜溜了會眼兒休」，則用意又異，非復眼意心期，而幾同鵁鶄之睛交，如 Emerson 詩 “The Initial Love” 所謂 “And kiss, & couple, & beget, / By those
roving eye-balls bold” 矣！詳見第五百五十九則論方子漁《繡屏風館詩集》卷四〈惆悵詞〉。
六百七十[14]
〇崔珏〈美人嘗茶行〉云：「明眸漸開轉秋水」，而〈有贈〉第二首云：「一眸春水照人寒。」易實甫《丁卯之間行卷》卷二〈滬上冶游詩詞序〉云：「肌似雪而偏溫，眼雖波而未冷」，可作轉語，用心已異唐人矣（參觀第二百四十八則[16]）。
〇李頻〈春閨怨〉云：「紅妝女兒燈下羞，畫眉夫婿隴西頭。自怨愁容長照鏡，悔教征戍覓封侯。」按太襲王昌齡〈閨怨〉。
〇李洞〈贈徐山人〉云：「瓦礫變黃憂世換，髭鬚放白怕人疑。」按《續列仙傳》鍾離真君授呂洞賓黃白秘方，云：「三千年後還本質。」洞賓曰：「誤三千年後人，不願為也」云云，即上句之意。
〇尉遲匡〈塞上曲〉云：「夜夜月爲青塚鏡，年年雪作黑山花」（《雲溪友議》卷中）。按蘇郁詩亦云：「關月夜懸青塚鏡，塞雲秋薄漢宮羅」（《雲溪友議》卷下）。
〇李義山〈贈歌妓〉第二首云：「只知解道春來瘦，不道春來獨自多。」馮《注》卷五說之云：「爾只解道『我春來消瘦』，何不解道『我春來獨自』歟？」頗為得之，蓋言傷別憔悴，即〈古詩十九首〉：「相去日已遠，衣帶日已緩」；〈讀曲歌〉：「逋髮不可料，憔悴為誰睹。欲知相憶時，但看裙帶緩幾許」；《焦氏易林》卷二「師之噬嗑」，又卷五「臨之大過」、卷七「無妄之恒」、卷十五「巽之乾」皆云「失信不會，憂思約帶」（卷五「蠱之謙」，「信」作「期」，參觀卷六「復之節」云：「簪短帶長，幽思窮苦」，卷八「恒之咸」作「幽思苦窮」）之旨也。李清照〈鳳凰臺上億吹簫〉云：「今年瘦，非干病酒，不是悲秋」；孫花翁〈燭影搖紅〉云：「絮飛春盡，天遠書沉，日長人瘦」（《絕妙好詞》卷二）；趙汝茪〈如夢令〉云：「歸未，歸未，好個瘦人天氣」（《絕妙好詞》卷三）；姚梅伯〈賣花聲〉云：「春痕顦顇到眉姿，只道寒深耽病久，諱説相思」（《國朝詞綜續編》卷十五），皆此意。孫、趙較義山為含渾，然仍點眼。清照語尤蘊蓄耐尋味，以二「非」逼出「是」來，却又不說是何，參觀 Burton, Anatomy
of Melancholy 舉 “leanness”
(Ovid: “fecit amor maciem”) 為 “Symptoms
of Love” 之一 (“Everyman’s Lib.”, III, p. 133)；《兒女英雄傳》三十四回長姐兒見安公子下場，金鐲子落地；四十回長姐兒知安公子赴烏里雅蘇臺，「衣裳的腰褙，肥了就有四指」，雖成笑枋，亦此意也；宋劉學箕〈賀新郎〉：「手展流蘇腰肢瘦，歎黃金、兩細香消臂。」
〇孫花翁〈望遠行〉云：「量減才慳，自覺是、歡情衰謝。但一點難忘，酒痕香帕，如今雪鬢霜髭，嬉遊不忺深夜。怕相逢、風前月下。《浩然齋雅談》卷下載」按張亨甫《思伯子堂詩集》卷二十三〈乙未九月將去福州述舊絕句〉第十三首云：「何曾兩廡愛孤豚，漸覺中年百感存。只合落花風裏坐，看人兒女自銷魂」[17]（句法參觀羅隱〈偶興〉云：「逐隊隨行二十春，曲江池畔避車塵。如今贏得將衰老，閑看人間得意人」），余最喜誦之，以為道得我意中事出[18]，勝於花翁此詞。李易安〈臨江仙〉云：「誰憐憔悴更凋零，試燈無意思，踏雪沒心情」[19]；〈南歌子〉云：「舊時天氣舊時衣，只有情懷，不似舊家時」，亦皆不似亨甫詩之能令人惘惘不甘、忽忽有失也。《一瓢詩話》稱張伯起詩「而今老去春情薄，漠漠寒江水自流」[20]，更不足道。
〇《四友齋叢說》卷三十七極稱王實甫《西廂‧混江龍》之「繫春心情短柳絲長，隔花陰人遠天涯近」數句，以為「雖李供奉復生，不能有以加之。」按周草窗〈拜星月慢〉云：「幾千萬、絲縷垂楊，繫春愁不斷」；吳融〈淛東筵上〉云：「見了又休真似夢，坐來雖近遠於天」，歐公〈瑞鷓鴣〉全取之；朱淑真〈生查子〉云：「人遠天涯近。」【歐陽修〈千秋歲〉：「夜長春夢短，人遠天涯近。」】實甫後來居上矣（按實甫語見《西廂記》第二本第一折）！楊恩壽《續詞餘叢話》卷二謂下句即《詩經‧蒹葭》章之意。
〇《夷堅志》壬七「王彥齡舒氏詞」條載其詞云：「此事憑誰知證，有樓前明月，窗外花影。」按此本曹組〈憶瑤姬〉，見《花草粹編》卷十一，「知」字作「執」。
〇朱希真《樵歌》卷上〈念奴嬌〉云：「嬾共賢爭，從教他笑，如此只如此。雜劇打了，戲衫脫與獃底。」按《花菴中興以來絕妙詞選》卷四吳禮之〈瑞鶴仙〉云：「我直須、跳出樊籠，做個俏底」，與此正貌異心同。「俏」者，「俐」也，「乖」也。《樵歌》卷中〈憶帝京〉云：「管教沒人嫌，便總道、先生俏」，又倪君奭〈夜行船〉：「年少疎狂今已老，筵席散、雜劇打了」（《隨隱漫錄》卷三），劉後村〈水調歌頭〉：「莫是散場優孟，又似下棚傀儡，脫了戲衫還」，〈念奴嬌〉：「戲衫拋了，下棚去」，皆可以參觀。又按 The Greek Anthology, B. IX, 49: “Hope & Fortune, a long farewell. I
have found the haven. I have no more to do with you. Make game of those who
come after me” (tr. W.R. Paton, “The Loeb Classical Library”, vol. III, p. 27) 此意亦見
Bk. IX, 134-5 (vol. III, pp. 69-71); Bk. IX, 172 (vol. III, p. 89)。後來如 Apuleius, Metamorphoseon, Lib. XI. 15 僧正
(Sacerdos) 謂 Lucius 云：“Eat nunc et summo furore saeviat et crudelitati
suae materiem quaerat aliam”；又 Le Sage, Gil
Blas, Liv. IX, ch. 10: “Je veux... écrire sur la porte de ma maison ces
deux vers latins en lettres d’or: Inveni portum. Spes et Fortuna, valetc. / Sat
me lusistis; ludite nunc alios!” (Éd. “Classiques Garnier”, p. 517) 無不師其意。Lenau: “Aus”: “Ob jeder Freude seh ich schweben / Den Geier bald, der
sie bedroht; / Was ich geliebt, gesucht im Leben, / Es ist verloren oder tot. //
... // Ich will nicht länger töricht haschen / Nach trüber Fluten hellem
Schaum, / Hab aus den Augen mir gewaschen / Mit Tränen scharf den letzten
Traum” 亦此旨，而沉摯淒黯，異於作達。皆即朱希真詞所謂「雜劇打了，戲衫脫與獃底」也。希真不以世路風波為言，而托之逢場作戲。E.R. Curtius, Europäische
Literatur und Lateinisches Mittelalter, 2te Aufl., S. 148-150 及 Jean
Jacquot: “Le Théâtre du monde de Shakespeare à Calderôn” (Revue de la litt. comp., Juillet-Sept. 1957, pp. 341-372) 所考論 “mimus vitae”,
“theatrum mundi” 已見第四百十六則論《容齋隨筆》卷十四。
〇陸天隨〈病中秋懷寄襲美〉云：「雙燕歸來始下簾。」按《六一詞‧采桑子》云：「垂下簾櫳，雙燕歸來細雨中」，殆本此耶？情生文，文生情，人多知之。事與景生文，而文亦生事、生景，則談藝者尟道。【G. Picon, La
Littérature du XXe siècle, in R. Qeuneau, ed., Histoire des Littératures, “Pléiade”, t.
III, p. 1320: “Rhétorique? C’est dire
que la poésie est fondée sur le langage, non sur une expérience.”】古詩寫景記事，固有如鍾記室所云「即目」、「所見」者，然已往往承襲，浸至倚聲，則更循文而不徵實 (Entdinglichung)，乃古有此言，而不必今覩其事 (nicht in der Sache, sondern in der Sprache) 見 Hugo Friedrich, Die Struktur der modernen Lyrik von Baudelaire bis zur Gegenwart,
1952, S. 532。參觀 E.R. Curtius, Europäische Literatur und Lateinisches Mittelalter, 2te
Aufl., S. 192 論中世紀詩中每道橄欖樹及師子等，非目驗其物：“Aber das Naturgefuhl... hat hier nichts zu suchen...
Alle diese exotischen Bäume und Tiere sind... allerdings aus dem Süden bezogen
worden, aber nicht aus Gärten und Menagerien, sondern aus der antiken Poesie
und Rhetorik.” 吳程九《笏菴詩》卷十一〈尋詩〉云：「尋詩偶步逐春行，景物新奇眼倍明。笑矣乎開風正過，鱗之而長水方生。南華莫悔曾經讀，爾雅還愁未識名。最愛放翁多巧句，不須屬對倩飛卿。」舍景物而掉書袋，固不待言，頸聯所寫，當時果眼見此二物耶？抑止見其一，憑空生出語言眷屬耶？春郊景物，舍花若柳，而獨言竹，豈非得「鱗之而」三字後，花柳成語無可屬對，遂以李陽氷「笑」字之說（見第三百五十九則論《攻媿集》卷七十八〈跋文與可竹〉），合之李白〈笑歌行〉首句耶？此詩非《笏菴集》中上乘，然可借以明因文生景，而非即景成文之理。Mallarmé, Divagations,
p. 246: “... poëte, qui cède l’initiative aux mots”，此之謂歟？（「鱗之而」謂水，郭景純詩云：「潛波渙鱗起。」劉希夷〈秋日〉云：「魚鱗可憐紫，鴨毛自然碧。吟詠秋水篇，渺然忘損益」，正謂水。）Marjorie Fleming 詠猴云：“His noses cast is of the roman / He is a very pretty weoman / I could
not get a rhyme for roman / And was obliged to call it weoman” (The Oxford Dictionary of Quotation, 2nd
ed., p. 208)，雖稚騃語，正亦道出老於文字者伎倆也。【Henri Davray[21]:
“Ils cherchent des sentiments pour les accommoder à leur vocabulaire” (Ezra
Pound, A.B.C. of Reading, p. 90 引).】【H.
Weber, La Création poétique au 16e
siècle en France, I, 116: “Pour Ronsard comme pour la plupart de ses amis, la fureur poétique naît le plus
souvent de l’enthousiasme qu’ils éprouvent à la lecture des poétes anciens...
elle jaillit plus rarement du contact direct avec la vie.”】【《詩人玉屑》卷十七引《西清詩話》、《高齋詩話》、《漁隱叢話前集》卷三十四、《梅墅續評》論荊公句「殘菊飄零滿地金」，歐公一作東坡戲曰：「秋英不比春花落，為報詩人仔細看。」漁隱謂二家集中無此詩荊公謂此緣讀《楚詞》不熟，不知「餐秋菊之落英」也。《梅墅》謂「落」乃「初」、「始」之意，荊公誤解云云，亦賦物而不觀物，以古書障目之一例，所謂循聲而不責實也。詳見第七六一則。】【陸農師《埤雅》卷十七云：「蓋菊不落華，蕉不落葉。」格物之學，智過乃師矣！】【《四溟山人全集》卷二十二云：「意落於某韻，意隨字生，豈必先立意哉！」卷二十四云：「因字得句，句由韻成，所謂詞後意也。」】【湯賓尹《睡菴文集》卷一〈蒹葭館詩集序〉云：「情之所不必至，而屬對需之；景之所不必有，而押韻又需之。」】【Baudelaire: “Le soleil”: “Trébuchant sur les mots
comme sur les pavés / Heurtant parfois des vers depuis longtemps rêvés.”】
〇陸天隨〈丁香〉云：「殷勤解却丁香結，縱放繁枝散誕春。」按抵龔定菴（《續集》卷三）一首〈病梅館記〉。鄭子尹《巢經巢文集》卷三〈梅垓記〉云：「府君蓄盆梅一。一日先孺人撫而言曰：『凡物皆有全量。使夭閼不盡其性者，皆人為害之也。』因出植籬間」云云，與定庵〈記〉相發明。又按《荊公集》卷三十四〈出定力院作〉云：「江上悠悠不見人，十年塵垢夢中身。殷勤為解丁香結，放出枝間自在春。」太蹈襲矣！
〇袁珏生《恐高寒齋詩》卷下〈壬子四月續開實錄館〉第一首：「詩惜虞山後勝前」，自注：「昔人評王覺斯書入國朝後遜於前，錢牧齋詩入國朝後勝於前。」按下語不曉何本，上語見王砥齋《山史初集》卷一云：「王宗伯於書道，天分既優，用工又博，合者直可抗跡顏、柳。晚年為人，略無行簡，書亦漸入惡趣。三百年來書，當以東吳生為最，愈看愈佳。宗伯則久之生厭。」
〇劉賓客〈金陵懷古〉云：「而今四海為家日，故壘蕭蕭蘆荻秋。」[22]杜司勳〈題曲屏〉云：「今日聖神家四海，戍旗長捲夕陽中」，用意相同。參觀第七八九則論少陵〈過先主廟〉。王棨〈江南春賦〉遂云：「今日併為天下春，無江南兮江北。」《全唐文》卷七百七十，又卷七百六十七陳黯〈送王棨序〉，又卷八百十七黃璞〈王郎中傳〉皆稱引此二句。則開高季迪〈登金陵雨花臺望大江〉云：「從今四海永為家，不用長江限南北」；楊孟載〈祁陽行〉云：「天下於今皆樂土，何須更覓武陵溪」；彭甘亭〈白登〉云：「今日一家中外合，春風不隔兔毛河」（《小謨觴館詩集》卷一）。參觀張炎〈壺中天‧夜渡古黄河〉云：「笑當年底事，中分南北。」[23]
〇劉賓客〈竹枝詞〉云：「東邊日出西邊雨，道是無晴却有晴。」巧語也！楊發〈翫殘花〉云：「低枝似泥幽人醉，莫道無情似有情。」遂極有韻致，非徒口角玲瓏矣！其意則賓客〈柳花詞〉所謂「無意似多情」耳。
〇昌黎〈送無本師歸范陽〉云：「無本於為文，身大不及膽。吾嘗示之難，勇往無不敢」云云，思路甚創。《全唐文》卷八百二沈光〈李白酒樓記〉云：「嗚呼！太白觸文之強，乘文之險，潰文之毒，搏文之猛」，即從韓語化出。
〇《全唐文》卷八百七十李從謙〈夏清侯傳〉，言竹簟也，亦〈毛穎傳〉、陸龜蒙〈管城侯傳〉、司空圖〈容城侯傳〉之體，而巧立名目，語意纖仄，如「碧虛郎」、「凌雲處士」、「卓立卿」、「凝秋叟」之類，蓋輯自《清異錄》卷三之類，如卷一「虛中子」、「甘銳侯」、卷三「淨君」、「涼友」。《王子年拾遺記》已肇此風（如「書倉」、「針神」、「舌耕」等），唐人如王仁裕《開天遺事》繼之。其它詩文如樊宗師以竹、柏為「青士」、「蒼官」；鮑溶以淚為「眼泉」；施肩吾以茶為「滌煩子」，酒為「忘憂君」；《朝野僉載》記養豬致富為「烏金」。宋人偽書踵事增華，《雲仙雜記》是矣。《清異錄》尤蔚為大觀耳。
〇《全唐詩》采《貴耳集》卷下載黃巢五歲〈詠菊花〉云：「颯颯西風滿院栽，蕊寒香冷蝶難來。他年我若為青帝，移共桃花一處開。」按此詩不見南宋以前記載。以洪景盧《唐人萬言絕句》之買菜求益，而亦未采及黃巢隻字，其為偽託，不問可知。朱孟震《續玉笥詩談》謂有作道聽錄者以此詩附會為明太祖作。【《七修類稿》卷三十七《清暇錄》載：「黃巢下第，有〈菊花〉詩云：『待到秋來九月八[24]，我花開後百花殺。衝天香陣透長安，滿城盡帶黃金甲！』我太祖亦有〈詠菊花〉詩：『百花發，我不發；我若發，都駭殺。要與西風戰一場，遍身穿就黃金甲。』」按黃巢此詩見《貴耳集》，云兒時作。《夷白齋詩話》載此詩，亦云明太祖詠菊作。】《鏡花緣》第一回嫦娥請百花仙子發個號，百花齊放，百花仙子答曰：「開百花於片刻，聚四季於一時；，真是戲論」云云；第四回武后云：「即便朕要挽回造化，命他百花齊放，他又焉能違拗」云云，蓋本之《卓異記》，可為此詩註脚。《羯鼓錄》唐明皇所謂「此事不喚我作天公，可乎？」霸道蠻做，古今強暴，真如一轍（來集之《倘湖樵書初編》卷一「草木各物仰遵朝旨」條亦舉明皇、武后二事）。【清康熙時張瀾《萬花臺》院本寫武后於九月命桃、梨再放（第三齣）。】
〇周紫芝《竹坡詩話》云：「有數貴人遇休沐，携歌舞燕僧舍者。酒酣，誦前人詩：『因過竹院逢僧話，又得浮生半日閒。』僧笑曰：『尊官得半日閒，老僧卻忙了三日。』一日供帳，一日燕集，一日掃除也。」按參觀 Samuel
C. Chew, Byron in England, p. 63: “...
the kind of Sunday which, Ruskin said, spoiled for him 3/7 of the week,
Saturday by anticipation, Sunday itself, & Monday by remembrance.” Publilius
Syrus, §62: “Bona nemini hora est, ut non alicui sit mala” (Nobody has a good
time without its being bad for someone) (Minor
Latin Poets, “Loeb”, p. 22). Emerson:
A Modern Anthology, ed. A. Kazin & D. Aaron, p. 167: “I decline
invitations to evening parties chiefly because beside the time spent, commonly
ill, in the party, the hours preceding & succeeding the visit, are lost for
any solid use...”
〇戎昱〈苦哉行〉第一首云：「彼鼠侵我廚，縱貍授粱肉。鼠雖爲君却，貍食自須足。冀雪大國恥，翻是大國辱」云云。按參觀 Aristotle, Rhetoric,
1393b 所引 Stesichorua 寓言：鹿侵馬地食草，馬乞援於人，人曰：「汝啣勒出我胯下，我執槍以逐鹿，事乃有濟。」馬允之，遂俯首受馭 (“Loeb Classical Library”, tr. J.H. Freese, p.
275; 亦見 J.M. Edmonds, Lyra
Graeca, II, p. 16) 。又《全唐文》卷六百八十二牛奇章〈譴貓〉謂「貓蠹踰鼠」，舉漢之更始、晉之羅沖為比，謂「防盜而亂，則踰於盜」；卷八百六十七楊夔〈蓄貍說〉謂野貍捕鼠，「攫生搏飛，舉無不捷」，而「野心思逸，罔以子育為懷」，如侯景之於梁武，疋磾之於劉琨。《郁離子‧构櫞篇》（《誠意伯文集》卷三）：「趙人患鼠，乞貓於中山。月餘，鼠盡而鷄亦盡，子曰：『盍去諸？』父曰：『吾之患在鼠，不在乎無鷄。』」Machiavelli, Il
Principe, cap. 13 論此最深切：“[Le arme ausiliarie] sono per chi le chiama sempre
dannose; perchè perdendo, rimani disfatto, e vincendo resti loro prigione” (Opere, a cura di Mario Bonfantini, p.
44).【Germ. “den Teufel mit Beelzebub austreiben.”】【唐蘇拯〈獵犬行〉：「狡兔何曾擒，時把家鷄捉。」參觀第六七四則劉賓客〈養鷙詞〉[25]。】【Leszek
Kołakowski: “If you use one devil to cast out another, you will still be left
with one.”】【Cf. Dryden, The
Hind & the Panther, ch. III, the parable told by the Hind of the Pigeons
inviting the Buzzards to be their King against the chickens (Poems, ed. John Sargeant, pp. 148 ff.).】【Rivarol:
“Si un troupeau appelle des tigres contre ses chiens, qu i pourra le défendre
contre ses nouveaux défenseurs” (Ste-Beuve, Causeries
du Lundi, vol. V, 74).】
[6]「卷下」原作「卷三」。
[8] Cassell’s Dictionary of Slang: “double-barrelled:
adj.... [late 19C] used of a woman
enjoying simultaneous vaginal and anal intercourse.”
[15]「掃地焚香」原作「焚香掃地」。
[19]「凋零」原作「飄零」。
[22]《唐詩紀事》卷三十九《全唐詩話》卷三引此詩，題皆作〈金陵懷古〉。《劉賓客文集》卷二十四題為〈西塞山懷古〉，「而今」作「今逢」。
[23]「壺中天」原作「念奴嬌」。
[24]「九月八」原作「八月八」。
[25]「養鷙詞」原作「養鷙行」。
沒有留言:
張貼留言