摘要
《全唐詩》卷八〇八收有慧宣詩三首、逸詩兩句,道恭詩一首。道恭詩和慧宣逸詩兩句都是貞觀十一年(637)唐太宗召見他倆並出示名貴袈裟時令他倆寫的詩。陳尚君先生考證:道恭應該是法恭,慧宣應該是法宣;同卷中另有法宣詩二首,兩者應該合并。這個考證有粗疏之處。雖然據不同文獻記載的同一件事顯示,道恭應稱法恭,慧宣應稱法宣,但有詩二首的法宣,卻不是應稱法宣的慧宣,這個法宣是活動在北齊的僧人,兩首詩應歸入北齊詩,從《全唐詩》中剔除。
Vol. 808 of"The Whole Tang Poetry"( 《全 唐詩 》) includes Huixuan's three poems,his two sentences of one lost poem, and Daogong's one poem; the latter two were both written when Tang Taizong met with the two poets and showed them the precious kasaya.According to Mr. Chen Shangjun's textual research,he proposed that Daogong should be Fagong, and Huixuan should be Faxuan.Furthermore,he said it was wrong that the same volume involved Faxuan's two poems. I think his opinion is inattentive. According to the same incident in different literature, Daogong was also called Fagong,while Huixuan was also called Faxuan. However,the Faxuan who wrote the two poems was a monk lived in the Northern Qi Dynasty,not the one who was also called Huixuan,so his two poems should be deleted from "The Whole Tang Poetry"and be included in the Northern Qi poetry.
出处
《中华文史论丛》
CSSCI
北大核心
2016年第1期103-116,共14页
Journal of Chinese Literature and History