《文心雕龙·辨骚》“雅颂之博徒”析论

An Analysis of“The Botu to the Book of Poetry”in Discriminate Sao

《文心雕龙·辨骚》篇“雅颂之博徒”一句,论者或将博徒解作“人之贱者”,或解作“博通之徒”,其实两说皆误。《辨骚》篇“博徒”词义并非赌徒,而当训为博弈之徒,引申为对局者。刘勰此语本以弈棋为喻,意在描述文学发展史上《诗经》和楚辞特有的互补关系。文宗乎经而变乎骚,《诗经》为源,楚辞为流;《诗经》为正,楚辞为奇;《诗经》为雅,楚辞为艳;故楚辞之于《诗经》,恰如高手对局,各擅胜场。汉魏以后《诗》《骚》所以并称,刘勰所以批评汉人论骚“鉴而弗精,玩而未核”,主张“凭轼以倚雅颂,悬辔以驭楚篇”,原因即在于此。

In the Discriminate Sao chapter of Wen Xin Diao Long(The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons),there is a sentence that goes:“The Botu to the Book of Poetry.”Some commentators may interpret the Botu as“the lowly person”or as“the knowledgeable person”,but in fact,neither statements are correct.The meaning of the word Botu in the Discriminate Sao chapter is not that of a gambler,but rather that of a player in a game,which can be extended to the rival in the game.Liu Xie originally used playing Go as a metaphor to describe the unique complementary relationship between the Book of Poetry and the Chu Ci in the history of literary development.The Book of Poetry is the source,and the Chu Ci is the flow.The Book of Poetry is correct,while the Chu Ci is unique.The Book of Poetry is elegant,while the Chu Ci is gorgeous.Therefore,when it comes to The Book of Poetry,Chu Ci is like a game between masters,each skilled in winning.After the Han and Wei dynasties,The Book of Poetry and the Chu Ci were collectively referred to,and Liu Xie criticized the Han people's discussion of the Chu Ci as the“judgments were inaccurate,and evaluation unconvincing”.This the very reason for it.