从章句问题看敦煌本《诗经》的性质及其学术史意义

摘要

In the extant versions of Mao’s Poetry, the commentaries are marked after the verses, and there are three poems with the “original words”of Duke Mao in their sentences, which illustrate the differences between the versions commented on by Duke Mao and by Zheng Xuan. However, in the version of “Mao’s Poetry”found among the Dunhuang documens, commentaries are marked in front of the verses or sentences without“ original words.” A comparative study of the Dunhuang version of “ Mao’s Poetry,” the Song dynasty engraved version of the “Proper Meaning of Mao’s Poetry,” and the Explanation on Classics suggests that the Dunhuang version exhibits the difference and process of unification of classical studies in pre-Tang and early Tang periods, and so it is of significant meaning for studying the origins and evolution of the extant version of Mao’s Poetry.%流传至今的《毛诗》中，每一首诗的章句均标注在诗篇之后，而且有三首诗的章句载有毛公“故言”，说明毛公和郑玄划分章句的差异。然而敦煌本《毛诗》中，却出现章句标注在诗篇之前的现象，且完全不载毛公“故言”。本文针对这一现象，通过比较敦煌本《毛诗》以及宋刻《毛诗正义》和《经典释文》等，认为敦煌本《毛诗》展现了唐以前及唐初南北经学的区别以及融合过程，对于考察《毛诗》传本原貌及其流变具有重要的学术史意义。