“一詩三重境：曹唐《蕭史攜弄玉上昇》詩用典分析” [Three-fold Realms in a Single Poem: An Allusion Analysis of Cao Tang's ... more “一詩三重境：曹唐《蕭史攜弄玉上昇》詩用典分析” [Three-fold Realms in a Single Poem: An Allusion Analysis of Cao Tang's Poem "Xiaoshi xie Nongyu shangsheng" (Xiaoshi Carrying Nongyu Ascends)]
游仙诗是晚唐诗人曹唐最具特色的部分。对曹唐大游仙诗的研究， 学者往往先从典故考证入手。但研究不应止步于考证典故的来源，因为诗人可以化用和改变典故在作品中的意义。以曹唐大游仙诗中的一首《萧史携弄玉上升》为例，研究者极易望题生义，以为本篇所涉典故即为《列仙传》中的萧史弄玉之典。而本文从诗中的“缑山”等意象出发，认为该诗的抒情主人公其实是王子乔。不同的故事在诗中相互作用，从而生发出不同的境界。最后，本文认为曹唐在典故的运用方面独具匠心，其用典之技巧与后结构主义者所提出的互文性有较多共通之处。
“Distinguishing between Discourses and Historical Records: A Discussion on the Use of Raw Data in... more “Distinguishing between Discourses and Historical Records: A Discussion on the Use of Raw Data in the Research of Chan Master Shilian Dashan” 有關清初名僧石濂大汕的研究，部分學者在其史料運用上，或存在較大問題。第一個問題是，曾為爭辯之另一方的潘耒，其言論在未經其他材料驗證的情況下，能否當作事實來引用？第二，在大汕入獄後產生的有關他的評價，不可避免將帶上意識形態色彩。那麼未加以分析判斷是否可以直接引用？顯然對這兩個問題的回答都只能是否定的。 繆荃孫《石濂和尚事略》一文為學界常加以引用。然其文基本上是依照潘耒和王士禎的文字排比而成。如果沒有注意到《事略》之文獻來源而輕信之，後果便是易受其所引材料暗含偏見之左右，並由此對大汕持較負面之看法。因此，在使用和大汕有關的史料的時候，必須考慮到材料本身的立場局限，並區分話語體系和文獻記載。
嶺南學報 Lingnan Journal of Chinese Studies (LJCS), vol.18, 2023
Based on the investigation into the term “Rock flowers” (Shihua, 石華), this paper aims to reexamin... more Based on the investigation into the term “Rock flowers” (Shihua, 石華), this paper aims to reexamine the motives of Xie Lingyun’s sailing out to the Fanhai Sea and the main themes of his poem “A Tour of Red Rocks followed by a Cruise on the Fanhai Sea”(You Chishi jin Fanhai, 遊赤石進帆海). And by analysing several allusions, such as lunar fire（Yinxia, 陰霞）, barren land (Qiongfa, 窮髪) and vacant boat (Xuzhou, 虛舟), the paper highlights the images and source texts relating to the poem, and comments on new meanings given by reconstructing these allusions. Finally, the paper concludes that the poet wanted to express his concern about his life and safety. In one word, Xie’s trip was motivated by seeking the medicine for immortality, searching for the immortals, and exploring the unknown remote sea, blending pragmatism, romantic imagination, and scientific search. The themes of the poem should be as follows: having no self-interest as the most noble one does; acting according to his inner mind without regard to the outside world; keeping low profile for self-protection. Finally, the whole poem speaks of the same idea of keeping healthy.
嶺南學報 Lingnan Journal of Chinese Studies (LJCS), 2021
The last line of the poem by Xie Lingyun “On Climbing the Solitary Island in the River” (Deng ji... more The last line of the poem by Xie Lingyun “On Climbing the Solitary Island in the River” (Deng jiang zhong Guyu 登江中孤嶼) has always been regarded as extraneous and disharmonious, described as a ‘tail of mysterious words’(xuanyan de weiba 玄言的尾巴). This perception has ineluctably led to the question, what is the logic connecting the division of the poem into narrative/descriptive verse and reasoning/lyrical verse? In addition, as the metaphors of ‘Mount Kun’ (Kunshan 崑山) and ‘Mr. An Qi’(安期先生) belong to separate worlds of pantheons, how do they relate to each other in the latter part of the poem?
The key to the above-mentioned questions lies in the references to Mount Kun and Mr. An Qi. This article will demonstrate that Mount Kun is an allusion to the goddess Madam Tai Zhen (太真夫人), while the character of Mr. An Qi is not the original one appeared in The Legendary Biographies of Taoist Immortals of Antiquity (Liexian zhuan, 列仙傳) or The Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji, 史記)，but a new character derived of the Hagiology of Master Ma
Moreover, Xie Lingyun included the statement that An Qi is the master of Ma Mingsheng in his “Ode on Dwelling in the Mountain” (山居賦). This relationship between Mr. An Qi and Ma Mingsheng also derives from the Hagiology. Xie had the great fortune to gain easy access to the Hagiology because his mother was the granddaughter of Liu Xia (劉遐), one of the authors of the text.
The final content will offer a new interpretation of the poem based on the above-mentioned background research of the Hagiology and a detailed analysis of the link between Xie Lingyun and the Hagiology, focusing in particular on his unique comprehension of this text and the reasons for the integration of specific imagery and related concepts in his poetry.
古典文獻研究Journal of the Institute for Chinese Classics Studies [Nanjing University] , 2021
A Preliminary Research of Sandong Qunxian Lu (The Records of the Multitude of Immortals of Three ... more A Preliminary Research of Sandong Qunxian Lu (The Records of the Multitude of Immortals of Three Caverns) 《三洞群仙錄》二十卷，南宋紹興間陳葆光編纂。是書乃採集從古盤古到北宋一千餘名得道者的傳奇故事，每個故事用四字麗語概括，兩個故事合為一則。人物的排列並無時代的先後。全書內容從盤古開天闢地 開始，而書中明確出現的最後記事年代為北宋徽宗崇寧（1102年-1106年），記南康軍進士彭天寵得道士贈金銀鑰匙返家事 。因此，與五代時王松年所編《仙苑編珠》一樣，《三洞群仙錄》亦可以視作一部特殊體例的仙道傳記通史。由於是書之編纂以引述為主，因而可以看作宋前古文獻的淵藪，書中保存了不少已佚道書的片段。筆者曾對這部作品進行全面整理，而本文將對這部《蒙求》體仙傳集的作者與成書、內容與價值、引書與體例等，逐一進行考辨與評述。
谢灵运《山居赋》中提到“洞真经”的概念。由于该赋撰于424年至425年之间，早于陆修静完成《三洞经书目录》（471年）近50年，故即使谢灵运所引的“洞真经”确实指向早期上清经，但是，一则他的“洞... more 谢灵运《山居赋》中提到“洞真经”的概念。由于该赋撰于424年至425年之间，早于陆修静完成《三洞经书目录》（471年）近50年，故即使谢灵运所引的“洞真经”确实指向早期上清经，但是，一则他的“洞真经”的概念从实质上并不同于陆修静三洞经书中的洞真上清经，二则其“洞真经”也并不一定即等于具体经典《大洞真经》。谢灵运另一赋作《罗浮山赋序》中也出现了“洞经”的概念，经考此“洞经”实际上指的是《茅君传》。在此基础上，本文试对谢灵运“洞真经”概念之来源作一简略考证。
《仙苑編珠》三卷，作者為王松年。全書所記始於有道之初，終於後梁開平三年（909）謝沖寂沖天。該書題署曰“天台山道士王松年撰”。關於作者王松年的年代，有唐人、五代人、五代或宋人三種說法，而以五代... more 《仙苑編珠》三卷，作者為王松年。全書所記始於有道之初，終於後梁開平三年（909）謝沖寂沖天。該書題署曰“天台山道士王松年撰”。關於作者王松年的年代，有唐人、五代人、五代或宋人三種說法，而以五代或宋人為善。然而向來因為資料匱乏，難以判定王松年生前是否已經入宋。 《中國近世道教的形成：淨明道的基礎研究》一書的第一章，在注13中，譯者按語提出王松年為宋人，主要理由是《仙苑編珠》卷下“法善月宮”條文中出現了“賈嵩”，而賈嵩為宋人，故王松年當亦為宋人。 然據筆者考證，唐宋各有一賈嵩，書中的提到的賈嵩，當為唐代善作賦的賈嵩，而非宋代撰寫《華陽陶隱居內傳》的賈嵩。因此王松年仍當為五代宋人。
古典文獻研究 Journal of the Institute for Chinese Classics Studies[Nanjing University], 2020
The Stone House, Spiritual Field and Xie Lingyun’s Daoist ideas: a New Interpretation on A Poem o... more The Stone House, Spiritual Field and Xie Lingyun’s Daoist ideas: a New Interpretation on A Poem on Stone House Mountain This paper argue that in xie lingyun’s poem titled as "a Poem on Stone House Mountain", the stone house (shishi,石室) cannot be looked the same as the Stone House Mountain(Shishi Shan, 石室山). It is a spiritual field，not a material one. 謝靈運<石室山>詩所涉地點,向來存在兩種說法,即始寧說和永嘉說。近來學界多認同永嘉說。然而實際上永嘉石室山亦有二，一在永嘉西北一百三十里，一在永嘉東七十里。本文認為謝靈運此詩所涉石室山為距永嘉縣東七十里者。 本詩中有“靈域”、“幽異”這樣的說法，傳統說法乃認為“靈域”即指石室山，謝客所尋求的“幽異”則指“幽勝奇異的風景”或“清勝異景”。然而這樣質實的解釋，未能看到謝詩透過表象暗示內在之靈神的一面，從而不能解釋何以詩中出現“總笄羨升喬”這樣的句子。本文認為，詩的開頭所提到的“幽異”，並非具體的風景，而是不同於凡間的幽境與靈境，是含靈之所，與“靈域”是一致的概念。“靈域”則可以解釋為“有靈之域”，即有仙人或真人存在的地方。這樣的所在，如要具體到眼前實景，則是指石室，而非石室山。石室與石室山其實是部分與整體的關係。 《石室山》一詩表現出謝客對求仙的追求，為尋找“地仙”而作出的努力。另外該詩還體現出謝客受彼時所流行的名山說和前洞天說的影響，而對超越性的時空有所認識。
澳門道教，是一道較獨特的文化景觀。一則澳門的道教，傳承自中國粵閩等地，淵源悠久；二則，中國道教傳統進入澳門以來，因為澳門的特殊歷史條件和社會地理環境，受到中西方文化的影響和激蕩，展現出豐富而多元... more 澳門道教，是一道較獨特的文化景觀。一則澳門的道教，傳承自中國粵閩等地，淵源悠久；二則，中國道教傳統進入澳門以來，因為澳門的特殊歷史條件和社會地理環境，受到中西方文化的影響和激蕩，展現出豐富而多元的特徵。因此，展開對澳門道教的歷史、存在形式、文化特色的研究，其實是非常有意義和必要的。
謝霊運「発帰瀬三瀑布望両渓」詩のことば「同枝條」について、先学の多くは「曇隆、法流の両法師」と解釈している。筆者はこのことばは同心の知己と解釈できるが、人間ではなく仙人を指していると考える。謝氏... more 謝霊運「発帰瀬三瀑布望両渓」詩のことば「同枝條」について、先学の多くは「曇隆、法流の両法師」と解釈している。筆者はこのことばは同心の知己と解釈できるが、人間ではなく仙人を指していると考える。謝氏「入華子岡是麻源第三谷」詩の「恒充俄頃用」一句は「発帰瀬三瀑布望両渓」詩の「此日即千年」を逆用した表現であり、神仙界の特殊な時間概念と仙人への憧憬を表している。謝靈運の求仙思想の背景には六朝の地仙思想が挙げられる。（黄昱訳）
謝靈運《發歸瀨三瀑布望兩溪》詩中最後兩句為“倘有同枝條，此日即千年”，其中的“同枝條”，學者多解為“曇隆、法流二法師”。在這個問題上，雖然也有學者提出懷疑，但尚未有明確合理解釋。筆者認為此詩中的... more 謝靈運《發歸瀨三瀑布望兩溪》詩中最後兩句為“倘有同枝條，此日即千年”，其中的“同枝條”，學者多解為“曇隆、法流二法師”。在這個問題上，雖然也有學者提出懷疑，但尚未有明確合理解釋。筆者認為此詩中的“同枝條”，雖可以解為志同道合者或同心知己，但指向的卻並非凡塵俗世，而是超越性的仙界中的仙人。本文即以此語下句“此日即千年”的解讀為契機，引入謝客另外一首詩《入華子岡是麻源第三谷》，論證該詩中的“恒充俄頃用”其實是《發歸瀨三瀑布望兩溪》中“此日即千年”的反向表達，而兩句詩同為仙人世界的特殊時間模式之反映，為謝客所認識並寫入詩中。相應地，二詩也均反映了謝客對於仙人世界的嚮往。最後本文論述了謝客所處的晉宋之際仙學的發展和地仙思想的發生，乃是謝客求仙思想的時代背景和促使他進行不倦山水登涉的動機所在。
《道教研究學報：宗教、歷史與社會》Daoism: Religion, History and Society, 2017
The Gao dao zhuan 高道傳 (Biographies of Distinguished Daoist Masters; hereafter, The Biographies), ... more The Gao dao zhuan 高道傳 (Biographies of Distinguished Daoist Masters; hereafter, The Biographies), by Jia Shanxiang 賈善翔, a Daoist master active in the Northern Song dynasty, is a collection of the life stories of remarkable Daoist masters from the Later Han to the Northern Song dynasties, starting with Zhang Daoling 張道陵 and ending with Liu Congshan 劉從善. Providing large amount of information on Daoist masters who lived in the Tang and Song dynasties, the book holds great value for research about the history of Daoism, Daoist temples and the lives of Daoist monks during that period. It is a pity that the book had been lost. Yan Yiping 嚴一萍 ever collected the materials of the book, including information about 85 Daoist figures, compiled them in four volumes, and incorporated the restored book in his Daojiao yanjiu ziliao 道教研究資料 (Research Documents on Daoism), volume I. However, Yan failed to notice some materials about those masters available in the Daomen tongjiao biyong ji 道門通教必用集 (Universal Handbook of Daoist Rituals) and the Shuo fu說郛 (Collection of Unofficial Histories). On the basis of these two books and other sources, the author supplements the existing literature with another 12 masters, bringing the total number to 96. The paper intends to shed some light on the author’s efforts to restore the work, and to provide some evidence and additional information regarding the biography of Jia Shanxiang, the background to his writings and the time when the book was lost. The biography of Jia Shanxiang was first found in a chapter titled “Twelve Immortals in Pengshan (蓬山十二仙),” in the Yudi jisheng 輿地紀勝 (Geographical Records of Chief Sights). The grouping of those immortals had everything to do with He Gefei 何格非, a native fellow of Jia Shanxiang, and thus Jia’s biography was most probably written by He, in the author’s opinion. The paper finds that The Biographies should have been compiled between 1087 and 1118. The Lishi zhenxian tidao tongjian 歷世真仙體道通鑑 (Complete History of the Perfected and the Immortals) mentions that Jia Shanxiang wrote The Biographies during the reign of Zhezong 哲宗 of the Northern Song (1086–1100). It seems that the written record is a reliable source. As to the time when it was lost, Ding Peiren 丁培仁 judged on the basis of the Daozang quejing mulu 道藏闕經目錄 (Missing List of Daoist Canon) that when the Daozang 道藏 (Daoist Canon) was compiled during the Ming dynasty, the book had already been lost. Yan Yiping thought that the book should have been lost during the transitional period between the Yuan and the Ming dynasties. However, Wang Shizhen 王世貞 had quoted from The Biographies in one of his books during the Wanli 萬曆 reign (1573–1620), which is an evidence of proof that the book should have been lost after the Wanli reign.
“一詩三重境：曹唐《蕭史攜弄玉上昇》詩用典分析” [Three-fold Realms in a Single Poem: An Allusion Analysis of Cao Tang's ... more “一詩三重境：曹唐《蕭史攜弄玉上昇》詩用典分析” [Three-fold Realms in a Single Poem: An Allusion Analysis of Cao Tang's Poem "Xiaoshi xie Nongyu shangsheng" (Xiaoshi Carrying Nongyu Ascends)]
游仙诗是晚唐诗人曹唐最具特色的部分。对曹唐大游仙诗的研究， 学者往往先从典故考证入手。但研究不应止步于考证典故的来源，因为诗人可以化用和改变典故在作品中的意义。以曹唐大游仙诗中的一首《萧史携弄玉上升》为例，研究者极易望题生义，以为本篇所涉典故即为《列仙传》中的萧史弄玉之典。而本文从诗中的“缑山”等意象出发，认为该诗的抒情主人公其实是王子乔。不同的故事在诗中相互作用，从而生发出不同的境界。最后，本文认为曹唐在典故的运用方面独具匠心，其用典之技巧与后结构主义者所提出的互文性有较多共通之处。
“Distinguishing between Discourses and Historical Records: A Discussion on the Use of Raw Data in... more “Distinguishing between Discourses and Historical Records: A Discussion on the Use of Raw Data in the Research of Chan Master Shilian Dashan” 有關清初名僧石濂大汕的研究，部分學者在其史料運用上，或存在較大問題。第一個問題是，曾為爭辯之另一方的潘耒，其言論在未經其他材料驗證的情況下，能否當作事實來引用？第二，在大汕入獄後產生的有關他的評價，不可避免將帶上意識形態色彩。那麼未加以分析判斷是否可以直接引用？顯然對這兩個問題的回答都只能是否定的。 繆荃孫《石濂和尚事略》一文為學界常加以引用。然其文基本上是依照潘耒和王士禎的文字排比而成。如果沒有注意到《事略》之文獻來源而輕信之，後果便是易受其所引材料暗含偏見之左右，並由此對大汕持較負面之看法。因此，在使用和大汕有關的史料的時候，必須考慮到材料本身的立場局限，並區分話語體系和文獻記載。
嶺南學報 Lingnan Journal of Chinese Studies (LJCS), vol.18, 2023
Based on the investigation into the term “Rock flowers” (Shihua, 石華), this paper aims to reexamin... more Based on the investigation into the term “Rock flowers” (Shihua, 石華), this paper aims to reexamine the motives of Xie Lingyun’s sailing out to the Fanhai Sea and the main themes of his poem “A Tour of Red Rocks followed by a Cruise on the Fanhai Sea”(You Chishi jin Fanhai, 遊赤石進帆海). And by analysing several allusions, such as lunar fire（Yinxia, 陰霞）, barren land (Qiongfa, 窮髪) and vacant boat (Xuzhou, 虛舟), the paper highlights the images and source texts relating to the poem, and comments on new meanings given by reconstructing these allusions. Finally, the paper concludes that the poet wanted to express his concern about his life and safety. In one word, Xie’s trip was motivated by seeking the medicine for immortality, searching for the immortals, and exploring the unknown remote sea, blending pragmatism, romantic imagination, and scientific search. The themes of the poem should be as follows: having no self-interest as the most noble one does; acting according to his inner mind without regard to the outside world; keeping low profile for self-protection. Finally, the whole poem speaks of the same idea of keeping healthy.
嶺南學報 Lingnan Journal of Chinese Studies (LJCS), 2021
The last line of the poem by Xie Lingyun “On Climbing the Solitary Island in the River” (Deng ji... more The last line of the poem by Xie Lingyun “On Climbing the Solitary Island in the River” (Deng jiang zhong Guyu 登江中孤嶼) has always been regarded as extraneous and disharmonious, described as a ‘tail of mysterious words’(xuanyan de weiba 玄言的尾巴). This perception has ineluctably led to the question, what is the logic connecting the division of the poem into narrative/descriptive verse and reasoning/lyrical verse? In addition, as the metaphors of ‘Mount Kun’ (Kunshan 崑山) and ‘Mr. An Qi’(安期先生) belong to separate worlds of pantheons, how do they relate to each other in the latter part of the poem?
The key to the above-mentioned questions lies in the references to Mount Kun and Mr. An Qi. This article will demonstrate that Mount Kun is an allusion to the goddess Madam Tai Zhen (太真夫人), while the character of Mr. An Qi is not the original one appeared in The Legendary Biographies of Taoist Immortals of Antiquity (Liexian zhuan, 列仙傳) or The Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji, 史記)，but a new character derived of the Hagiology of Master Ma
Moreover, Xie Lingyun included the statement that An Qi is the master of Ma Mingsheng in his “Ode on Dwelling in the Mountain” (山居賦). This relationship between Mr. An Qi and Ma Mingsheng also derives from the Hagiology. Xie had the great fortune to gain easy access to the Hagiology because his mother was the granddaughter of Liu Xia (劉遐), one of the authors of the text.
The final content will offer a new interpretation of the poem based on the above-mentioned background research of the Hagiology and a detailed analysis of the link between Xie Lingyun and the Hagiology, focusing in particular on his unique comprehension of this text and the reasons for the integration of specific imagery and related concepts in his poetry.
古典文獻研究Journal of the Institute for Chinese Classics Studies [Nanjing University] , 2021
A Preliminary Research of Sandong Qunxian Lu (The Records of the Multitude of Immortals of Three ... more A Preliminary Research of Sandong Qunxian Lu (The Records of the Multitude of Immortals of Three Caverns) 《三洞群仙錄》二十卷，南宋紹興間陳葆光編纂。是書乃採集從古盤古到北宋一千餘名得道者的傳奇故事，每個故事用四字麗語概括，兩個故事合為一則。人物的排列並無時代的先後。全書內容從盤古開天闢地 開始，而書中明確出現的最後記事年代為北宋徽宗崇寧（1102年-1106年），記南康軍進士彭天寵得道士贈金銀鑰匙返家事 。因此，與五代時王松年所編《仙苑編珠》一樣，《三洞群仙錄》亦可以視作一部特殊體例的仙道傳記通史。由於是書之編纂以引述為主，因而可以看作宋前古文獻的淵藪，書中保存了不少已佚道書的片段。筆者曾對這部作品進行全面整理，而本文將對這部《蒙求》體仙傳集的作者與成書、內容與價值、引書與體例等，逐一進行考辨與評述。
谢灵运《山居赋》中提到“洞真经”的概念。由于该赋撰于424年至425年之间，早于陆修静完成《三洞经书目录》（471年）近50年，故即使谢灵运所引的“洞真经”确实指向早期上清经，但是，一则他的“洞... more 谢灵运《山居赋》中提到“洞真经”的概念。由于该赋撰于424年至425年之间，早于陆修静完成《三洞经书目录》（471年）近50年，故即使谢灵运所引的“洞真经”确实指向早期上清经，但是，一则他的“洞真经”的概念从实质上并不同于陆修静三洞经书中的洞真上清经，二则其“洞真经”也并不一定即等于具体经典《大洞真经》。谢灵运另一赋作《罗浮山赋序》中也出现了“洞经”的概念，经考此“洞经”实际上指的是《茅君传》。在此基础上，本文试对谢灵运“洞真经”概念之来源作一简略考证。
《仙苑編珠》三卷，作者為王松年。全書所記始於有道之初，終於後梁開平三年（909）謝沖寂沖天。該書題署曰“天台山道士王松年撰”。關於作者王松年的年代，有唐人、五代人、五代或宋人三種說法，而以五代... more 《仙苑編珠》三卷，作者為王松年。全書所記始於有道之初，終於後梁開平三年（909）謝沖寂沖天。該書題署曰“天台山道士王松年撰”。關於作者王松年的年代，有唐人、五代人、五代或宋人三種說法，而以五代或宋人為善。然而向來因為資料匱乏，難以判定王松年生前是否已經入宋。 《中國近世道教的形成：淨明道的基礎研究》一書的第一章，在注13中，譯者按語提出王松年為宋人，主要理由是《仙苑編珠》卷下“法善月宮”條文中出現了“賈嵩”，而賈嵩為宋人，故王松年當亦為宋人。 然據筆者考證，唐宋各有一賈嵩，書中的提到的賈嵩，當為唐代善作賦的賈嵩，而非宋代撰寫《華陽陶隱居內傳》的賈嵩。因此王松年仍當為五代宋人。
古典文獻研究 Journal of the Institute for Chinese Classics Studies[Nanjing University], 2020
The Stone House, Spiritual Field and Xie Lingyun’s Daoist ideas: a New Interpretation on A Poem o... more The Stone House, Spiritual Field and Xie Lingyun’s Daoist ideas: a New Interpretation on A Poem on Stone House Mountain This paper argue that in xie lingyun’s poem titled as "a Poem on Stone House Mountain", the stone house (shishi,石室) cannot be looked the same as the Stone House Mountain(Shishi Shan, 石室山). It is a spiritual field，not a material one. 謝靈運<石室山>詩所涉地點,向來存在兩種說法,即始寧說和永嘉說。近來學界多認同永嘉說。然而實際上永嘉石室山亦有二，一在永嘉西北一百三十里，一在永嘉東七十里。本文認為謝靈運此詩所涉石室山為距永嘉縣東七十里者。 本詩中有“靈域”、“幽異”這樣的說法，傳統說法乃認為“靈域”即指石室山，謝客所尋求的“幽異”則指“幽勝奇異的風景”或“清勝異景”。然而這樣質實的解釋，未能看到謝詩透過表象暗示內在之靈神的一面，從而不能解釋何以詩中出現“總笄羨升喬”這樣的句子。本文認為，詩的開頭所提到的“幽異”，並非具體的風景，而是不同於凡間的幽境與靈境，是含靈之所，與“靈域”是一致的概念。“靈域”則可以解釋為“有靈之域”，即有仙人或真人存在的地方。這樣的所在，如要具體到眼前實景，則是指石室，而非石室山。石室與石室山其實是部分與整體的關係。 《石室山》一詩表現出謝客對求仙的追求，為尋找“地仙”而作出的努力。另外該詩還體現出謝客受彼時所流行的名山說和前洞天說的影響，而對超越性的時空有所認識。
澳門道教，是一道較獨特的文化景觀。一則澳門的道教，傳承自中國粵閩等地，淵源悠久；二則，中國道教傳統進入澳門以來，因為澳門的特殊歷史條件和社會地理環境，受到中西方文化的影響和激蕩，展現出豐富而多元... more 澳門道教，是一道較獨特的文化景觀。一則澳門的道教，傳承自中國粵閩等地，淵源悠久；二則，中國道教傳統進入澳門以來，因為澳門的特殊歷史條件和社會地理環境，受到中西方文化的影響和激蕩，展現出豐富而多元的特徵。因此，展開對澳門道教的歷史、存在形式、文化特色的研究，其實是非常有意義和必要的。
謝霊運「発帰瀬三瀑布望両渓」詩のことば「同枝條」について、先学の多くは「曇隆、法流の両法師」と解釈している。筆者はこのことばは同心の知己と解釈できるが、人間ではなく仙人を指していると考える。謝氏... more 謝霊運「発帰瀬三瀑布望両渓」詩のことば「同枝條」について、先学の多くは「曇隆、法流の両法師」と解釈している。筆者はこのことばは同心の知己と解釈できるが、人間ではなく仙人を指していると考える。謝氏「入華子岡是麻源第三谷」詩の「恒充俄頃用」一句は「発帰瀬三瀑布望両渓」詩の「此日即千年」を逆用した表現であり、神仙界の特殊な時間概念と仙人への憧憬を表している。謝靈運の求仙思想の背景には六朝の地仙思想が挙げられる。（黄昱訳）
謝靈運《發歸瀨三瀑布望兩溪》詩中最後兩句為“倘有同枝條，此日即千年”，其中的“同枝條”，學者多解為“曇隆、法流二法師”。在這個問題上，雖然也有學者提出懷疑，但尚未有明確合理解釋。筆者認為此詩中的... more 謝靈運《發歸瀨三瀑布望兩溪》詩中最後兩句為“倘有同枝條，此日即千年”，其中的“同枝條”，學者多解為“曇隆、法流二法師”。在這個問題上，雖然也有學者提出懷疑，但尚未有明確合理解釋。筆者認為此詩中的“同枝條”，雖可以解為志同道合者或同心知己，但指向的卻並非凡塵俗世，而是超越性的仙界中的仙人。本文即以此語下句“此日即千年”的解讀為契機，引入謝客另外一首詩《入華子岡是麻源第三谷》，論證該詩中的“恒充俄頃用”其實是《發歸瀨三瀑布望兩溪》中“此日即千年”的反向表達，而兩句詩同為仙人世界的特殊時間模式之反映，為謝客所認識並寫入詩中。相應地，二詩也均反映了謝客對於仙人世界的嚮往。最後本文論述了謝客所處的晉宋之際仙學的發展和地仙思想的發生，乃是謝客求仙思想的時代背景和促使他進行不倦山水登涉的動機所在。
《道教研究學報：宗教、歷史與社會》Daoism: Religion, History and Society, 2017
The Gao dao zhuan 高道傳 (Biographies of Distinguished Daoist Masters; hereafter, The Biographies), ... more The Gao dao zhuan 高道傳 (Biographies of Distinguished Daoist Masters; hereafter, The Biographies), by Jia Shanxiang 賈善翔, a Daoist master active in the Northern Song dynasty, is a collection of the life stories of remarkable Daoist masters from the Later Han to the Northern Song dynasties, starting with Zhang Daoling 張道陵 and ending with Liu Congshan 劉從善. Providing large amount of information on Daoist masters who lived in the Tang and Song dynasties, the book holds great value for research about the history of Daoism, Daoist temples and the lives of Daoist monks during that period. It is a pity that the book had been lost. Yan Yiping 嚴一萍 ever collected the materials of the book, including information about 85 Daoist figures, compiled them in four volumes, and incorporated the restored book in his Daojiao yanjiu ziliao 道教研究資料 (Research Documents on Daoism), volume I. However, Yan failed to notice some materials about those masters available in the Daomen tongjiao biyong ji 道門通教必用集 (Universal Handbook of Daoist Rituals) and the Shuo fu說郛 (Collection of Unofficial Histories). On the basis of these two books and other sources, the author supplements the existing literature with another 12 masters, bringing the total number to 96. The paper intends to shed some light on the author’s efforts to restore the work, and to provide some evidence and additional information regarding the biography of Jia Shanxiang, the background to his writings and the time when the book was lost. The biography of Jia Shanxiang was first found in a chapter titled “Twelve Immortals in Pengshan (蓬山十二仙),” in the Yudi jisheng 輿地紀勝 (Geographical Records of Chief Sights). The grouping of those immortals had everything to do with He Gefei 何格非, a native fellow of Jia Shanxiang, and thus Jia’s biography was most probably written by He, in the author’s opinion. The paper finds that The Biographies should have been compiled between 1087 and 1118. The Lishi zhenxian tidao tongjian 歷世真仙體道通鑑 (Complete History of the Perfected and the Immortals) mentions that Jia Shanxiang wrote The Biographies during the reign of Zhezong 哲宗 of the Northern Song (1086–1100). It seems that the written record is a reliable source. As to the time when it was lost, Ding Peiren 丁培仁 judged on the basis of the Daozang quejing mulu 道藏闕經目錄 (Missing List of Daoist Canon) that when the Daozang 道藏 (Daoist Canon) was compiled during the Ming dynasty, the book had already been lost. Yan Yiping thought that the book should have been lost during the transitional period between the Yuan and the Ming dynasties. However, Wang Shizhen 王世貞 had quoted from The Biographies in one of his books during the Wanli 萬曆 reign (1573–1620), which is an evidence of proof that the book should have been lost after the Wanli reign.
生活在清初的石濂大汕禪師(1633–1704 or 1705)引起学者们的研究兴趣，其中備受關注的是大汕評價之争议性。本文認為，這正是话语建构的结果, 始于潘耒1699年發表的《救狂砭语》。根據... more 生活在清初的石濂大汕禪師(1633–1704 or 1705)引起学者们的研究兴趣，其中備受關注的是大汕評價之争议性。本文認為，這正是话语建构的结果, 始于潘耒1699年發表的《救狂砭语》。根據有關“異端”的社會學理論，潘耒是将大汕看作异端来攻击的。在潘耒的言辞中，不难发现其愤怒的情绪，而這正反映了大汕作为异端所发生的效果。潘耒的指责集中在大汕的商贾式的实用主义和功利主义，而他要维护的是儒家式的“秩序”原则。在Zito所提出的異端和正統人士“採用共同話語”這方面，我們發現，其实大汕和潘耒都批评对方对皇帝不敬，这表明以君臣大义为主导的秩序名教体系其实就是包括大汕和潘耒在内的清代知识分子的共同的思想体系基础，也是他们认为不需讨论的，大家都认可的大前提。[in Tommaso Previato (ed.) Fear, Heterodoxy and Crime in Traditional China: Toward an Anthropological History of Emotion and Its Social Management, (Brill, 2024), 261–298.]
《君子于役》出自《诗经·王风》。《王风》中的“王”，即王都的简称。《君子于役》这首诗，写一位女子对出征在外的丈夫的思念，而包含多种有关归来的意象。诗写日暮牛羊归家，仿佛有一凝眸含睇者在焉，含蓄蕴... more 《君子于役》出自《诗经·王风》。《王风》中的“王”，即王都的简称。《君子于役》这首诗，写一位女子对出征在外的丈夫的思念，而包含多种有关归来的意象。诗写日暮牛羊归家，仿佛有一凝眸含睇者在焉，含蓄蕴藉，耐人寻味，又情景交融，对后来黄昏书写造成了深远影响。
黎志添、李靜編著《廣州府道教廟宇碑刻集釋》，2013年由北京中華書局和香港三聯書店聯合出版。本書是對廣州府的道教民間廟宇相關碑刻的一個完全的搜集，收錄廣州府縣道教廟宇共121座，包括了從宋、明而... more 黎志添、李靜編著《廣州府道教廟宇碑刻集釋》，2013年由北京中華書局和香港三聯書店聯合出版。本書是對廣州府的道教民間廟宇相關碑刻的一個完全的搜集，收錄廣州府縣道教廟宇共121座，包括了從宋、明而迄清末（1910），在廣州府屬及其十三個縣境內與道教廟宇的歷史活動有關的碑刻文獻282通。這些碑刻文獻資料將提供大量的社會經濟、歷史、宗教制度和思想意識等豐富信息，對研究地方道教史或一般宗教社會史有十分重大的意義。另外，本書的突出貢獻還在於：本書所收282通道教廟宇碑刻之中，有112通是我們通過實地訪查48座道教廟宇之後而獲得的研究成果，佔了本書收錄碑文總數的百分之四十。 本書每個廟宇的單元中，包括了廟宇名稱、廟宇簡介、碑題、碑刻信息、碑文正文、作者簡介，以及碑文考釋等項。其中“廟宇簡介”的部份，言簡意賅地說明每一座道教廟宇的歷史沿革、神壇和神像的佈置。這些介紹都是過去宗教碑刻出版集所缺乏的，但對一般讀者都是非常有用的歷史補充資料。“碑文考釋”主要是對碑文內容的介紹和評價，而以介紹為主。即使是評價，也儘量依據碑刻和文獻資料，以及撰寫者的研究成果。另外，碑文考釋也包括了作者生平簡介。
Uploads
Papers by Jing LI
游仙诗是晚唐诗人曹唐最具特色的部分。对曹唐大游仙诗的研究， 学者往往先从典故考证入手。但研究不应止步于考证典故的来源，因为诗人可以化用和改变典故在作品中的意义。以曹唐大游仙诗中的一首《萧史携弄玉上升》为例，研究者极易望题生义，以为本篇所涉典故即为《列仙传》中的萧史弄玉之典。而本文从诗中的“缑山”等意象出发，认为该诗的抒情主人公其实是王子乔。不同的故事在诗中相互作用，从而生发出不同的境界。最后，本文认为曹唐在典故的运用方面独具匠心，其用典之技巧与后结构主义者所提出的互文性有较多共通之处。
有關清初名僧石濂大汕的研究，部分學者在其史料運用上，或存在較大問題。第一個問題是，曾為爭辯之另一方的潘耒，其言論在未經其他材料驗證的情況下，能否當作事實來引用？第二，在大汕入獄後產生的有關他的評價，不可避免將帶上意識形態色彩。那麼未加以分析判斷是否可以直接引用？顯然對這兩個問題的回答都只能是否定的。
繆荃孫《石濂和尚事略》一文為學界常加以引用。然其文基本上是依照潘耒和王士禎的文字排比而成。如果沒有注意到《事略》之文獻來源而輕信之，後果便是易受其所引材料暗含偏見之左右，並由此對大汕持較負面之看法。因此，在使用和大汕有關的史料的時候，必須考慮到材料本身的立場局限，並區分話語體系和文獻記載。
In one word, Xie’s trip was motivated by seeking the medicine for immortality, searching for the immortals, and exploring the unknown remote sea, blending pragmatism, romantic imagination, and scientific search. The themes of the poem should be as follows: having no self-interest as the most noble one does; acting according to his inner mind without regard to the outside world; keeping low profile for self-protection. Finally, the whole poem speaks of the same idea of keeping healthy.
The key to the above-mentioned questions lies in the references to Mount Kun and Mr. An Qi. This article will demonstrate that Mount Kun is an allusion to the goddess Madam Tai Zhen (太真夫人), while the character of Mr. An Qi is not the original one appeared in The Legendary Biographies of Taoist Immortals of Antiquity (Liexian zhuan, 列仙傳) or The Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji, 史記)，but a new character derived of the Hagiology of Master Ma
Moreover, Xie Lingyun included the statement that An Qi is the master of Ma Mingsheng in his “Ode on Dwelling in the Mountain” (山居賦). This relationship between Mr. An Qi and Ma Mingsheng also derives from the Hagiology. Xie had the great fortune to gain easy access to the Hagiology because his mother was the granddaughter of Liu Xia (劉遐), one of the authors of the text.
The final content will offer a new interpretation of the poem based on the above-mentioned background research of the Hagiology and a detailed analysis of the link between Xie Lingyun and the Hagiology, focusing in particular on his unique comprehension of this text and the reasons for the integration of specific imagery and related concepts in his poetry.
在謝靈運的<登江中孤嶼>一詩中，最後的四句常被詬病為不和諧的「玄言的尾巴」。由此提出的問題是，本詩的敘事寫景和說理抒情之間有什麼邏輯關係？另外，「崑山」和「安期」，從表面上看分別代表不同的神話（神仙）系統，那麼，「想像崑山姿」二句與「始信安期術」二句之間又有什麼樣的聯繫？
要解決上述問題，關鍵在於對「崑山」和「安期」的理解。這裡的崑山，指向的不是西王母，而是《馬君傳》中的太真夫人，安期也不是《史記》和《列仙傳》中的安期，而是《馬君傳》中的安期先生。謝靈運《山居賦》中有｢安期先生是馬明生之師｣的表述，這一情節當來自《馬君傳》。而由於母親的關係，謝靈運也是有機緣見到《馬君傳》的。故本文試圖從該傳的知識背景出發，對此詩作一全新的解讀，並對謝靈運和《馬君傳》之間的關係作一考證。
《三洞群仙錄》二十卷，南宋紹興間陳葆光編纂。是書乃採集從古盤古到北宋一千餘名得道者的傳奇故事，每個故事用四字麗語概括，兩個故事合為一則。人物的排列並無時代的先後。全書內容從盤古開天闢地 開始，而書中明確出現的最後記事年代為北宋徽宗崇寧（1102年-1106年），記南康軍進士彭天寵得道士贈金銀鑰匙返家事 。因此，與五代時王松年所編《仙苑編珠》一樣，《三洞群仙錄》亦可以視作一部特殊體例的仙道傳記通史。由於是書之編纂以引述為主，因而可以看作宋前古文獻的淵藪，書中保存了不少已佚道書的片段。筆者曾對這部作品進行全面整理，而本文將對這部《蒙求》體仙傳集的作者與成書、內容與價值、引書與體例等，逐一進行考辨與評述。
《中國近世道教的形成：淨明道的基礎研究》一書的第一章，在注13中，譯者按語提出王松年為宋人，主要理由是《仙苑編珠》卷下“法善月宮”條文中出現了“賈嵩”，而賈嵩為宋人，故王松年當亦為宋人。
然據筆者考證，唐宋各有一賈嵩，書中的提到的賈嵩，當為唐代善作賦的賈嵩，而非宋代撰寫《華陽陶隱居內傳》的賈嵩。因此王松年仍當為五代宋人。
This paper argue that in xie lingyun’s poem titled as "a Poem on Stone House Mountain", the stone house (shishi,石室) cannot be looked the same as the Stone House Mountain(Shishi Shan, 石室山). It is a spiritual field，not a material one.
謝靈運<石室山>詩所涉地點,向來存在兩種說法,即始寧說和永嘉說。近來學界多認同永嘉說。然而實際上永嘉石室山亦有二，一在永嘉西北一百三十里，一在永嘉東七十里。本文認為謝靈運此詩所涉石室山為距永嘉縣東七十里者。
本詩中有“靈域”、“幽異”這樣的說法，傳統說法乃認為“靈域”即指石室山，謝客所尋求的“幽異”則指“幽勝奇異的風景”或“清勝異景”。然而這樣質實的解釋，未能看到謝詩透過表象暗示內在之靈神的一面，從而不能解釋何以詩中出現“總笄羨升喬”這樣的句子。本文認為，詩的開頭所提到的“幽異”，並非具體的風景，而是不同於凡間的幽境與靈境，是含靈之所，與“靈域”是一致的概念。“靈域”則可以解釋為“有靈之域”，即有仙人或真人存在的地方。這樣的所在，如要具體到眼前實景，則是指石室，而非石室山。石室與石室山其實是部分與整體的關係。
《石室山》一詩表現出謝客對求仙的追求，為尋找“地仙”而作出的努力。另外該詩還體現出謝客受彼時所流行的名山說和前洞天說的影響，而對超越性的時空有所認識。
關鍵詞：
謝靈運 石室山 靈域 地仙 洞天
The paper intends to shed some light on the author’s efforts to restore the work, and to provide some evidence and additional information regarding the biography of Jia Shanxiang, the background to his writings and the time when the book was lost. The biography of Jia Shanxiang was first found in a chapter titled “Twelve Immortals in Pengshan (蓬山十二仙),” in the Yudi jisheng 輿地紀勝 (Geographical Records of Chief Sights). The grouping of those immortals had everything to do with He Gefei 何格非, a native fellow of Jia Shanxiang, and thus Jia’s biography was most probably written by He, in the author’s opinion. The paper finds that The Biographies should have been compiled between 1087 and 1118. The Lishi zhenxian tidao tongjian 歷世真仙體道通鑑 (Complete History of the Perfected and the Immortals) mentions that Jia Shanxiang wrote The Biographies during the reign of Zhezong 哲宗 of the Northern Song (1086–1100). It seems that the written record is a reliable source. As to the time when it was lost, Ding Peiren 丁培仁 judged on the basis of the Daozang quejing mulu 道藏闕經目錄 (Missing List of Daoist Canon) that when the Daozang 道藏 (Daoist Canon) was compiled during the Ming dynasty, the book had already been lost. Yan Yiping thought that the book should have been lost during the transitional period between the Yuan and the Ming dynasties. However, Wang Shizhen 王世貞 had quoted from The Biographies in one of his books during the Wanli 萬曆 reign (1573–1620), which is an evidence of proof that the book should have been lost after the Wanli reign.
游仙诗是晚唐诗人曹唐最具特色的部分。对曹唐大游仙诗的研究， 学者往往先从典故考证入手。但研究不应止步于考证典故的来源，因为诗人可以化用和改变典故在作品中的意义。以曹唐大游仙诗中的一首《萧史携弄玉上升》为例，研究者极易望题生义，以为本篇所涉典故即为《列仙传》中的萧史弄玉之典。而本文从诗中的“缑山”等意象出发，认为该诗的抒情主人公其实是王子乔。不同的故事在诗中相互作用，从而生发出不同的境界。最后，本文认为曹唐在典故的运用方面独具匠心，其用典之技巧与后结构主义者所提出的互文性有较多共通之处。
有關清初名僧石濂大汕的研究，部分學者在其史料運用上，或存在較大問題。第一個問題是，曾為爭辯之另一方的潘耒，其言論在未經其他材料驗證的情況下，能否當作事實來引用？第二，在大汕入獄後產生的有關他的評價，不可避免將帶上意識形態色彩。那麼未加以分析判斷是否可以直接引用？顯然對這兩個問題的回答都只能是否定的。
繆荃孫《石濂和尚事略》一文為學界常加以引用。然其文基本上是依照潘耒和王士禎的文字排比而成。如果沒有注意到《事略》之文獻來源而輕信之，後果便是易受其所引材料暗含偏見之左右，並由此對大汕持較負面之看法。因此，在使用和大汕有關的史料的時候，必須考慮到材料本身的立場局限，並區分話語體系和文獻記載。
In one word, Xie’s trip was motivated by seeking the medicine for immortality, searching for the immortals, and exploring the unknown remote sea, blending pragmatism, romantic imagination, and scientific search. The themes of the poem should be as follows: having no self-interest as the most noble one does; acting according to his inner mind without regard to the outside world; keeping low profile for self-protection. Finally, the whole poem speaks of the same idea of keeping healthy.
The key to the above-mentioned questions lies in the references to Mount Kun and Mr. An Qi. This article will demonstrate that Mount Kun is an allusion to the goddess Madam Tai Zhen (太真夫人), while the character of Mr. An Qi is not the original one appeared in The Legendary Biographies of Taoist Immortals of Antiquity (Liexian zhuan, 列仙傳) or The Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji, 史記)，but a new character derived of the Hagiology of Master Ma
Moreover, Xie Lingyun included the statement that An Qi is the master of Ma Mingsheng in his “Ode on Dwelling in the Mountain” (山居賦). This relationship between Mr. An Qi and Ma Mingsheng also derives from the Hagiology. Xie had the great fortune to gain easy access to the Hagiology because his mother was the granddaughter of Liu Xia (劉遐), one of the authors of the text.
The final content will offer a new interpretation of the poem based on the above-mentioned background research of the Hagiology and a detailed analysis of the link between Xie Lingyun and the Hagiology, focusing in particular on his unique comprehension of this text and the reasons for the integration of specific imagery and related concepts in his poetry.
在謝靈運的<登江中孤嶼>一詩中，最後的四句常被詬病為不和諧的「玄言的尾巴」。由此提出的問題是，本詩的敘事寫景和說理抒情之間有什麼邏輯關係？另外，「崑山」和「安期」，從表面上看分別代表不同的神話（神仙）系統，那麼，「想像崑山姿」二句與「始信安期術」二句之間又有什麼樣的聯繫？
要解決上述問題，關鍵在於對「崑山」和「安期」的理解。這裡的崑山，指向的不是西王母，而是《馬君傳》中的太真夫人，安期也不是《史記》和《列仙傳》中的安期，而是《馬君傳》中的安期先生。謝靈運《山居賦》中有｢安期先生是馬明生之師｣的表述，這一情節當來自《馬君傳》。而由於母親的關係，謝靈運也是有機緣見到《馬君傳》的。故本文試圖從該傳的知識背景出發，對此詩作一全新的解讀，並對謝靈運和《馬君傳》之間的關係作一考證。
《三洞群仙錄》二十卷，南宋紹興間陳葆光編纂。是書乃採集從古盤古到北宋一千餘名得道者的傳奇故事，每個故事用四字麗語概括，兩個故事合為一則。人物的排列並無時代的先後。全書內容從盤古開天闢地 開始，而書中明確出現的最後記事年代為北宋徽宗崇寧（1102年-1106年），記南康軍進士彭天寵得道士贈金銀鑰匙返家事 。因此，與五代時王松年所編《仙苑編珠》一樣，《三洞群仙錄》亦可以視作一部特殊體例的仙道傳記通史。由於是書之編纂以引述為主，因而可以看作宋前古文獻的淵藪，書中保存了不少已佚道書的片段。筆者曾對這部作品進行全面整理，而本文將對這部《蒙求》體仙傳集的作者與成書、內容與價值、引書與體例等，逐一進行考辨與評述。
《中國近世道教的形成：淨明道的基礎研究》一書的第一章，在注13中，譯者按語提出王松年為宋人，主要理由是《仙苑編珠》卷下“法善月宮”條文中出現了“賈嵩”，而賈嵩為宋人，故王松年當亦為宋人。
然據筆者考證，唐宋各有一賈嵩，書中的提到的賈嵩，當為唐代善作賦的賈嵩，而非宋代撰寫《華陽陶隱居內傳》的賈嵩。因此王松年仍當為五代宋人。
This paper argue that in xie lingyun’s poem titled as "a Poem on Stone House Mountain", the stone house (shishi,石室) cannot be looked the same as the Stone House Mountain(Shishi Shan, 石室山). It is a spiritual field，not a material one.
謝靈運<石室山>詩所涉地點,向來存在兩種說法,即始寧說和永嘉說。近來學界多認同永嘉說。然而實際上永嘉石室山亦有二，一在永嘉西北一百三十里，一在永嘉東七十里。本文認為謝靈運此詩所涉石室山為距永嘉縣東七十里者。
本詩中有“靈域”、“幽異”這樣的說法，傳統說法乃認為“靈域”即指石室山，謝客所尋求的“幽異”則指“幽勝奇異的風景”或“清勝異景”。然而這樣質實的解釋，未能看到謝詩透過表象暗示內在之靈神的一面，從而不能解釋何以詩中出現“總笄羨升喬”這樣的句子。本文認為，詩的開頭所提到的“幽異”，並非具體的風景，而是不同於凡間的幽境與靈境，是含靈之所，與“靈域”是一致的概念。“靈域”則可以解釋為“有靈之域”，即有仙人或真人存在的地方。這樣的所在，如要具體到眼前實景，則是指石室，而非石室山。石室與石室山其實是部分與整體的關係。
《石室山》一詩表現出謝客對求仙的追求，為尋找“地仙”而作出的努力。另外該詩還體現出謝客受彼時所流行的名山說和前洞天說的影響，而對超越性的時空有所認識。
關鍵詞：
謝靈運 石室山 靈域 地仙 洞天
The paper intends to shed some light on the author’s efforts to restore the work, and to provide some evidence and additional information regarding the biography of Jia Shanxiang, the background to his writings and the time when the book was lost. The biography of Jia Shanxiang was first found in a chapter titled “Twelve Immortals in Pengshan (蓬山十二仙),” in the Yudi jisheng 輿地紀勝 (Geographical Records of Chief Sights). The grouping of those immortals had everything to do with He Gefei 何格非, a native fellow of Jia Shanxiang, and thus Jia’s biography was most probably written by He, in the author’s opinion. The paper finds that The Biographies should have been compiled between 1087 and 1118. The Lishi zhenxian tidao tongjian 歷世真仙體道通鑑 (Complete History of the Perfected and the Immortals) mentions that Jia Shanxiang wrote The Biographies during the reign of Zhezong 哲宗 of the Northern Song (1086–1100). It seems that the written record is a reliable source. As to the time when it was lost, Ding Peiren 丁培仁 judged on the basis of the Daozang quejing mulu 道藏闕經目錄 (Missing List of Daoist Canon) that when the Daozang 道藏 (Daoist Canon) was compiled during the Ming dynasty, the book had already been lost. Yan Yiping thought that the book should have been lost during the transitional period between the Yuan and the Ming dynasties. However, Wang Shizhen 王世貞 had quoted from The Biographies in one of his books during the Wanli 萬曆 reign (1573–1620), which is an evidence of proof that the book should have been lost after the Wanli reign.