胡一桂《周易啟蒙翼傳．外篇》文獻考述──以「卜筮類」、「丹道類」為探討對象

Study of Books Recorded in Hu Yi-Gui’sZhouyi Qi Meng Yi ZhuanWaiPian–Taking Divination and Dan Tao Types as Discussion Subjects

元初胡一桂《周易啟蒙翼傳》依性質可分為〈內篇〉與〈外篇〉。〈內篇〉詮釋易學，〈外篇〉闡揚術數學，此書的分類可視為宋元時期術數與易學交融的一環。胡一桂不僅指出《易緯》、《京氏易傳》、《龍虎經》為後人附會之作，對其他術數典籍亦有所質問，明清學者多援用其說。〈外篇〉保存了唐宋的版本，對於術數文獻的留存頗具貢獻。〈外篇〉載錄十一部術數典籍，筆者將之分為「卜筮、丹道、擬易、圖書」四類別。其中的「卜筮類」五書：《易緯》、《焦氏易林》、《京氏易傳》、《郭氏洞林》、《衛氏元包》及「丹道類」：《周易參同契》暨《龍虎經》兩書，承襲了《周易》陰陽二分法的宇宙模型。本論文遂先針對此七部術數典籍進行作者、源流、版本、真偽等文獻上的稽考，再結合胡一桂對此七部術數典籍在文獻學方面的論述，藉此窺探唐宋的術數文獻流傳現象，以及元初學者對術數文獻的辨析。

The Zhouyi qi meng yi zhuanby Hu Yi-Gui, of the early Yuan Dynasty, can be divided into Nei pianand Waipian in accordance with properties. Nei pian interpreted the Yi-ology and Waipian the figure-ology. The classification of Zhouyi qi meng yi zhuan can be regarded as a ring of the blend of the figure-ologyand Confucianism of the Sung and Yuan dynasties. Hu Yi-Guinot only pointed out that Yi wei, Jingshi yi zhuan, and Long hu jing were the far-fetchedworks of thelater generations but also questioned about other figure-ologyclassics, which was agreed by most of the scholars of the Ming and Qing dynasties. Waipiankept the version the same with that of the Tang and Sung dynasties and was quite contributive to thefigure-ologyliteratures. Waipian recorded eleven figure-ology classics, which were classified into four types, i.e., divination, dan tao, imitation of Zhouyi, and diagram, by the writer of thisstudy. There were five books belonging to divination, including Yi wei, Jiao shi yi lin, Jing shi yi zhuan, Guo shi dong lin and Wei shi yuan bao. Zhou yi can tong qi and Long hu jingfell into the category of dan tao and continued the universe model of Zhouyi’s dichotomy of yin and yang.Therefore, a literature review of the seven figure-ologyclassics on author, source and course, version, authenticity and so on first was conducted in the current study. And then Hu Yi-Gui’s philologicaldiscussions of the seven figure-ologyclassicswere combined with in order to look into the circulation phenomenon of thefigure-ologyliteratures of the Tang and Sung dynasties and the early Yuan Dynasty scholars’ differentiation and analyses of thefigure-ologyliteratures.