盘古创世神话外来说文献证据再检讨  

Review of the Evidence from Ancient Literature Related to the View of the Foreign Origin of Pangu Creation Myths

作　　者：张开焱[1] 

机构地区：[1]湖北师范学院文学院,湖北黄石435002

出　　处：《贵州师范学院学报》2013年第5期1-6,共6页Journal of Guizhou Education University

基　　金：2009年度教育部人文社科基金课题<世界祖宗型神话--中国上古创世神话叙事原型重构>系列成果之一;项目编号(09YJA751023)

摘　　要：盘古神话外来说,尤其是印度来源说是20世纪很有影响的学术观点,认同者众多。对持此观点的著名中外学者所使用的文献证据进行检讨发现,支撑盘古神话印度来源说的文献证据是几部印度经典中的类似创世神话。但文献学资料显示,可靠的中国文献中盘古的名字出现在汉末,这几部印度经典中只有一部佛典在三国时代传译中土,其它几部经典则最早要到北魏甚至现代才传译中土。这个时间差距不能有力支持盘古神话来源印度的观点。尽管不排除这些经典以纸媒文本的形式传译中土之前就被口头传播中土的可能,但严格的学术讨论不能将这种逻辑上的可能性当成事实来使用并推出结论。因此,盘古神话外来说的观点尽管很有启发性但尚不是铁论。The view of foreign origin of Pangn Creation Myths, especially that of Indian origin, is a very influential academic theory acknowledged by many scholars in the 20th century. The review of the ancient literature used by the famous Chinese and foreign scholars discovers that the evidence from ancient literature which supported the view of Indian origin is the similar creation myths in several Indian classics. Literature data, however, indicates that the name of Pangn in the reliable Chinese literature occurs at end of Han Dynasty, and that, of the several Indian clas- sics, only one was introduced into China in the period of Three Kingdoms, while the others were not introduced into China until the Northern Wei Dynasty or even in the modem times. The time gap fails to support the view of Indian origin effectively. Although it is possible that these classics were orally introduced into China before they were intro- duced in the form of print text, the rigorous academic discussion should not take such possibility as a fact. Therefore, the view of the foreign origin of Pangn , though illuminating, is still not a tenable theory.

关 键 词：盘古 创世神话 外来说 文献 再检讨 

分 类 号：G12[文化科学]