戴震《考工記圖》所論「軹」之商兌

Discussion on the Term ''Zhi'' in Dei Zhen 's Illustrated Chapter of Handicrafts

《周禮．考工記．輪人》：「軹崇三尺有三寸也。」鄭注：「軹音只，轂末也。」宋至有明．對於此說幾乎深信不疑，到了清代，戴震著《考工記圖》，特別對「轂末小穿」究竟當如何定名，提出特別看法。戴氏以為轂末與簪笄形製近似，故轂末之命名，無論就音讀或字義，皆與簪笄義相關。又鄭〈注〉：「故書軹為□，杜子春云：『□當作軹，軹謂轊也。或讀□為簪笄之笄。』」證古籍本作「□」，今本「軹」字，乃杜子春乙改之誤。惟簪笄與轂末小穿，無論形制或功能，皆有極大懸殊，戴氏如此比擬，或嫌牽強。本文試參考各家之說及出土文物，以證「轂末小穿」不當改為「□」。此外，杜子春為何要更動經文？也是本文欲探索的議題。

The Zhou Book of Rites, chapter on handicrafts, section about wheels, says: ''The end of the hub (軹zhi) has to be three chi three cun above the ground''. Zheng Xuan(鄭玄) comments: ''Zhi (軹) is read 只 (zhi) means the end of the hub(轂gu) ''.''. From Song till Ming period, almost no one doubted this explanation, during Qing dynasty, Dai Zhen (戴震) wrote the book The Illustrated Chapter on Handicrafts (考工記圖). .In which he particularly expressed his view on the problem of how to name the end of the hub and its hole. Dai thought that the shape of the hub end was similar to a hairpin(簪笄). Therefore concluded, no matter regarding the reading or the meaning of the character, it all had to be connected to the meaning of hairpin. Zheng Xuan explains: ''In old books, the hub end was called □ (jian), Du Zichun (杜子春) said: “the hub end (□) should be written as 軹 (zhi) and 軹 (zhi) is the same as 轊 (hui). Maybe □ should be read the same as笄 (ji) in the word 簪笄. ''Dai Zhen thus proved that in the old books, it was ''□'', and that the present use of 軹was due to a correction on error by Du Zichun (杜子春). However, a hairpin and the end of a hub, no matter regarding shape or use, are very distinct from each other, so Dai Zhen's comparision seems rather unconvincing. This article attempts to review the former opinions as well as archeological findings, and to point out that the hub end should not be named ''□''. Also, why did Du Zichun change the classical text? This is another topic dealt with in this paper.