CAJ | 학술논문

先秦时期的诸多典籍都曾引述《尚书》,由此表明《尚书》古已有之.秦朝禁毁诗书,致使《尚书》失传20余年.西汉时期重出的《尚书》有伏生今文本、孔安国整理并传注的孔壁古文本（孔传本）、河间献王征藏本、张霸“百两篇”以及单篇《泰誓》,至两汉之际又出现杜林古文本.伏生今文本通过欧阳和大小夏侯三家传授,在汉晋之世一直立于学官,地位显赫,但于永嘉乱中绝迹;河间献王征藏本于征藏者去世后也不知下落;张霸“百两篇”在当时就被核实为伪书;单篇《泰誓》起初被归入伏生今文本,后经诸儒与经传比勘,也认定其非本经;杜林古文本因贾逵、马融、郑玄等传注而流传久远,但至宋代仍归亡佚;唯有孔传本,虽在西晋末年也曾短暂消失,但不久便由梅赜献出而流传至今,弥足珍贵.但自南宋开始,梅赜所献孔传本却被斥为“伪书”,疑《书》者们认为该文本的风格“平缓卑弱,殊不类先汉以前之文”,并认为其传承脉络茫昧无稽,由此构成怀疑的前提;又以“吹毛索瘢”的方式寻找该文本的“破绽”,由此构成怀疑的证据;进而,确指或泛指某人拼凑缀合古籍中的引《书》文句以作成伪书,由此构成怀疑的结论.然而,梅赜所献孔传本的风格不足以成为怀疑的前提,其传承脉络并非茫昧无稽,所谓“作伪”的证据没有可信度,被指控的诸多“作伪者”一概没有作伪的必要和可能;梅赜所献孔传本就是孔子后人为避秦火而藏于旧宅壁中的百篇遗存,也就是孔子亲手删定的先圣教言和华夏古史.不过,这一文本并非都是其所标系时代的成品,而当是西周至春秋早期的文化精英们根据传述或书写的上古史料编成的经典,这种成书方式根本不存在所谓“作伪”问题,而是轴心时代各大文明之经典产生的共同方式.
선진시기적제다전적도증인술《상서》,유차표명《상서》고이유지.진조금훼시서,치사《상서》실전20여년.서한시기중출적《상서》유복생금문본、공안국정리병전주적공벽고문본（공전본）、하간헌왕정장본、장패“백량편”이급단편《태서》,지량한지제우출현두림고문본.복생금문본통과구양화대소하후삼가전수,재한진지세일직립우학관,지위현혁,단우영가란중절적;하간헌왕정장본우정장자거세후야불지하락;장패“백량편”재당시취피핵실위위서;단편《태서》기초피귀입복생금문본,후경제유여경전비감,야인정기비본경;두림고문본인가규、마융、정현등전주이류전구원,단지송대잉귀망일;유유공전본,수재서진말년야증단잠소실,단불구편유매색헌출이류전지금,미족진귀.단자남송개시,매색소헌공전본각피척위“위서”,의《서》자문인위해문본적풍격“평완비약,수불류선한이전지문”,병인위기전승맥락망매무계,유차구성부의적전제;우이“취모색반”적방식심조해문본적“파탄”,유차구성부의적증거;진이,학지혹범지모인병주철합고적중적인《서》문구이작성위서,유차구성부의적결론.연이,매색소헌공전본적풍격불족이성위부의적전제,기전승맥락병비망매무계,소위“작위”적증거몰유가신도,피지공적제다“작위자”일개몰유작위적필요화가능;매색소헌공전본취시공자후인위피진화이장우구택벽중적백편유존,야취시공자친수산정적선골교언화화하고사.불과,저일문본병비도시기소표계시대적성품,이당시서주지춘추조기적문화정영문근거전술혹서사적상고사료편성적경전,저충성서방식근본불존재소위“작위”문제,이시축심시대각대문명지경전산생적공동방식.
That many classical books in pre-Qin ever quote Collection of Ancient Texts proves the classic existed in ancient times. Collection of Ancient Texts lost for twenty more years because Qin Dynasty prohibited and destroyed classics in general. There were modern script of FU Sheng（伏生今文本） ,pre-Qin script found in Confucius old house and arranged and annotated by KONG Anguo （孔传本）, script gathered by King Hejianxianwang（河间献王征藏本）, one hundred and two pieces of ZHANG Ba （张霸“百两篇”） ,and one piece Taishi（单篇《泰誓言》） reappeared in Western nan Dynasty, and pre-Qin script of DU Lin（杜林古文本） emerged between Western and Eastern Han Dynasties. Modern script of FU Sheng became official learning from Western Han to Western Jin Dynasties by OUYANG（欧阳）and XIAHOU Senior and Junior（大小夏侯） teaching, but lost in war and disorder of Yongjia（永嘉） Time, Western Jin Dynasty. Script gathered by King Hejianxianwang was also unknown whereabouts after the King died. One hundred and two pieces of ZHANG Ba was confirmed forgery at that time. One piece Taishi was decided not to true classic too. Pre-Qin script of DU Lin spread for a long time by JIA Kui（贾逵）, MA Rong（马融）, ZHENG Xuan（郑玄）annotating, but still missing at Song Dynasty. It is unique that pre- Qin script arranged and annotated by KONG Anguo, although lost briefly at last years of Western Jin Dynasty, soon was offered by MEI Ze （梅赜） and has been handed down up to now and very precious. However Collection of Ancient Texts offered by MEI Ze was reprimanded forgery from Southern Song Dynasty till now. Persons who doubt the classic hold that the inheriting sequence of Collection of Ancient Texts offered by MEI Ze is blurred, thereby make up the presupposition of doubt; then find faults in the classic so as to make up the basis of doubt; finally suspect somebody of forging the classic, thus make up the conclusion of doubt. But actually the inheriting sequence of Collection of Ancient Texts offered by MEI Ze is not blurred at all ; that faults found in the classic has no credibility; and the persons accused of forging the classic totally have no any necessity and probability to make forgery. Collection of Ancient Texts offered by MEI Ze is just the legacy concealed in Confucius old house by Confucius＇descendant to avoid prohibiting and destroying from Qin Dynasty, and is just sage doctrine and Cathay history edited by Confucius. Certainly the pieces of the classic are not completely finished works indicated the times, but ought to be documents compiled by cultural geniuses in Western Zhou till early of Spring and Autumn Period according to historical materials of remote antiquity spoken or written. It is the common way to form classics in all axial civilizations, but not forgery problem at all.