五、秦汉时期的墨家问题
关于《墨子》一书的形成及在秦汉的流传，关于墨家在汉代的传播及其消亡，或墨家在汉代、汉后的影响问题，西方汉学家的研究才刚刚开始，有待进一步的展开。
戴梅可(Michael Nylan)在《古代思想中的孔子与墨子、儒与墨》一文中首先对《史记》有关墨子24字的传记作了反省。她认为这个传记没有提到许多肯定与墨子相关联的教义，例如墨子对于有意识之鬼神存在的肯定，而其中或许最令人震惊的是，它竟然没有试图将墨子与“兼爱”的口号联系起来。与此同时，从《史记》其他段落的文本中可以看出，墨子的影响直至西汉中期以后仍然继续存在。通过寻求、评论目前可见的孔、墨或儒、墨并称的证据，戴梅可希望探求墨家在汉代的地位及其延续时间的问题。王充《案书》指出:“儒家之宗，孔子也;墨家之祖，墨翟也。且案儒道传而墨法废者，儒之道义可为，而墨之法议难从也。”根据《汉书·艺文志》中关于墨子弟子及其书籍的记载，戴梅可怀疑王充论证的确切性。由于汉初提倡节俭，所以汉代的文献常把墨子比作晏婴。相应地，墨子的名字与曾子相提并论:曾子作为实践“孝”的榜样而经常出现在礼学文献中。与孔子一道，墨子很早就以尧、舜、文王、周公这些圣王之学生的身份出现。(87)
汉代时期，思想家们往往是实用主义者。在戴梅可看来，甚至形而上学的代表人物扬雄的“太玄”(the Great Mystery)也根本不算太玄(great mystery)，而宇宙之“道”决不干预统治精英的责任，而意味着对公共生活之德性(virtues)的一般支持。因此，将思想上的显著特性归并于孔子和墨子而作为“证据”，这是汉代思想运动中的一种重要倾向。将墨子解释为一个推进“好古”运动的思想家，这与在伪经的基础上提出削弱王室花费的主张是相一致的。不过，即便是这样的情节也仍然处于推测之中，因为我们缺乏足够的证据来肯定任何东西。
耿优进(JoachimGentz)在《〈春秋繁露〉中的墨家痕迹》一文中考察了《春秋繁露·俞序》、《十指》等篇与墨家主张的关系，认为墨家的痕迹在《春秋繁露》较早的篇章中随处可以察觉到，在《公羊传》中不能发现的墨家传统的中心话题、概念、术语和方法，我们可以在《春秋繁露》中加以确定。耿优进认为，作为一个连贯的墨家思想体系在西汉时代已停止存在，因此可以推断，在汉代儒学的新参考系统中，墨家的痕迹似乎获得了一个新的儒家身份而丧失了墨家的特质。(88)
［1］ALICE LUM.Social Utilitarianism in the Philosophy of MoTzu. Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1977，4(2):187-207.
［2］AUGUS CHARLES GRAHAM.Disputers of the Tao:Philosophical Argument in Ancient China.La Salle:Open Court Publishing Company，1989.
［3］A.C.GRAHAM.Divisions in Early MohismReflected in the Core Chapters of Mo-tzu.Singapore:National University of Singapore，1985.
［4］A.C.GRAHAM.Later Mohist Logic，Ethics and Science.Hong Kong:The Chinese University Press，1978.
［5］BENJAMIN I.SCHWARTS.TheWorld of Thought in Ancient China. Cambridge:Harvard University Press，1985．
［6］BENJAMINWONG，HUI-CHIEH LOY.War and Ghosts in Mozi'sPolitical Philosophy.Philosophy East and West，2004，54(3):343-363.
［7］BURTONWATSON.Mo Tzu:BasicWritings.New York＆London: Columbia University Press，1963.
［8］WING-TSIT CHAN.A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy.Princeton:Princeton University Press，1963.
［9］CARINEDEFOORT.Argumentation and Persuasion in AncientChinese Texts:Introduction.Oriens Extremus，205(6):91-98.
［10］CARINE DEFOORT.The Growing Scope of Jian:Differences Between Chapters 14，15 and 16 of the Mozi.Oriens Extremus，2005(6):119-140.
［11］CARINEDEFOORT.The Metaphor ofWeighing Body Parts in Mohist Thought.Leuve，2009(6):25-28.
［12］CHADHANSEN.A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought.Oxford:Oxford University Press，1992.
［13］CHADHANSEN.Language and Logic in Ancient China.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press，1983.
［14］CHAD HANSEN.Chinese Language，Chinese Philosophy，and“Truth”.Journal of Asian Studies，1985，44(3):491-519.
［15］CHAD HANSEN.Mozi:Language Utilitarianism:The Structure of Ethics in Classical China.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1989，16: 355-380.
［16］CHAEHYUNCHONG.The Neo-MohistConception of Bian．Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1999，26(1):1-19.
［17］CHRIS FRASER.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):437-454.
［18］CHRIS FRASER.More MohistMarginalia:AReply to Makehamon Later Mohist Canon and Explanation B 67.The Journal of Chinese Philosophy and Culture，2007(11):227-259.
［19］CHRIS FRASER.The Ethics of the Mohist Dialogues.Leuven，2009(6):25-28.
［20］DANROBINS.The Moists and the Gentlemen of theWorld.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008．35(3):385-402.
［21］DAVIDSOLES.Mo Tzu and the Foundation ofMorality.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1999，26(1):37-48.
［22］DENNIS AHERN.IsMo Tzu a Utilitarian.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1976，3(2):185-193.
［23］DESHENGZONG.Studies of Intensional Contexts in MohistWritings.Philosophy East and West，2000，50(2):208-228.
［24］DIRCKVORENKAMP.Another Look at Utilitarianismin Mo-Tzu's Thought.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1992，19(4):423-443.
［25］ERICABRINDLEY.Human Agency and the Ideal of Shang Tong in Early MoistWritings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2007，34(3):409-425.
［26］ERIKW.MAEDER.Some Observations on the Composition of the“Core Chapters”of the Mozi.Early China，1992，17:27-82.
［27］FRANKLINPERKINS.The MoistCriticismof the Confucian Use of Fate.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):421-436.
［28］HENRYROSEMONT.Chinese Textsand Philosophical Contexts:Essays Dedicated to AngusC.Graham.La Salle:Open CourtPublishing Company，1991:323-328.
［29］H.R.WILLIAMSON.Mo Ti，A Chinese Heretic:A Short Sketch of His Life andWorks.Tsinan:The Tsinan University Press，1927.
［30］HUI-CHIEHLOY.Justification and Debate:Thought on MoistMoral Epistemology.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):455-471.
［31］HUI-CHIEH LOY.On a Gedankenexperiment in the Mozi Core Chapters.Oriens Extremus，2005(6):141-158.
［32］HUI-CHIEHLOY.The junzi in the Mozi“Qinshi”Chapter:On the Mohist Subversion of Virtue.Leuven，2009(6):25-28.
［33］HUI-CHIEHLOY.The Moral Philosophy of the Mozi“Core Chapters”.Adviser:University of California，2006:336.
［34］IANJOHNSTON.Choosing the Greater and Choosing the Lesser:A Translation and Analysis of the Daqu and Xiaoqu Chapters of the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2000，27(4):375-407.
［35］IAN JOHNSTON.The Gongsun Longzi:A Translation and an Analysis of Its Relationship to Later Mohist Writings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2004，31(2):271-295.
［36］JANEM.GEANEY.ACritique of A.C.Graham's Reconstruction of the“Neo-Mohist Canons”.Journal of the American Oriental Society，1999，119(1):1-11.
［37］JOACHIMGENTZ.Mohist Traces in the Chunqiu fanlu.Leuven，2009(6):25-28.
［38］KARENDESMET.The Growth of Compounds in the Core Chapters of the Mozi.Oriens Extremus，2005(6):99-118.
［39］KRISTOPHERDUDA.Reconsidering Mo Tzu on the Foundation of Morality.Asian Philosophy，2001，11(1):23-31.
［40］KWONG-LOI SHUN.Mencius'Criticismof Mohism:An Analysis of Meng Tzu 3A:5.Philosophy East＆West，1991，4(2):203-214.
［41］MICHAEL NYLAN.Kongzi and Mozi，the Ru and the Mohists，in Classical-Era Thinking.Leuven，2009(6):25-28.
［42］MICHAEL PUETT.To Become a God:Cosmology，Sacrifice，and Self-Divinization in Early China.Cambridge:The Harvard University Center for the Harvard-Yenching Institute，2002.
［43］MIRANDABROWN.Mozi's(Re)invention of Ancient Authority.Leuven，2009(6):25-28.
［44］NICOLAS STANDAERT.Heaven as Standard.Leuven，2009(6): 25-28.
［45］OWEN FLANAGAN.Moral Contagion and Logical Persuasion in the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):473-491.
［46］PHILIP J.IVANHOE，BRYANVANNORDEN.Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy.Indianapolis:Hackett Publishing Co.，2003.
［47］QIANFANZHANG.Human Dignity in Classical Chinese Philosophy:Reinterpreting Mohism.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2007，34(2):239-255.
［48］RODNEYTAYLOR.Religion and Utilitarianism:MoTzu on Spirits and Funerals.Philosophy East andWest，1979，29(3):337-346.
［49］ROEL STERCKX.Mozi 31:Explaining Ghosts，Again.Leuven，2009(6):25-28.
［50］RONNIE LITTLEJOHN.Book Reviews.Philosophy East andWest，2006，56(4):687-691.
［51］SCOTT LOWE.Mo Tzu's Religious Blueprint for a Chinese Utopia: TheWill and theWay.Lewiston:Edwin Mellen Press，1992.
［52］THIERRY LUCAS.Later Mohist Logic，Lei，Classes，and Sorts. Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2005，32(3):349-365.
［53］WEIXIANGDING.Mengzi's Inheritance，Criticism，and Overcoming of Mohist Thought.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，38(3):403-419.
［54］XIUFENG LU.Understanding Mozi's Foundations of Morality:A Comparative Perspective.Asian Philosophy，2006，16(2):123-134.
［55］YI-PAOMEI.The Ethical and PoliticalWorks of Motse.London: Arthur Probsthain，1929.
［56］YI-PAOMEI.Mo-tse:The Neglected Rival of Confucius.London: Arthur Probsthain，1934.
［57］YONG LI.The Divine Command Theory of Mozi.Asian Philosophy，2006，16(3):237-245.
［58］http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mohism/.
［59］http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mohist-canons/.
【注释】
(1)本文得到了武汉大学“海外人文社会科学研究前沿追踪计划”项目的资助，项目名称为“英语世界的《墨子》研究综述”。本文由董红涛收集资料，由丁四新、董红涛、闫利春译写，最后由丁四新统稿。
(2)丁四新，武汉大学哲学学院教授、中央财经大学高等研究院兼职教授。董红涛、闫利春为武汉大学哲学学院博士研究生。
(3)YiPao Mei.The Ethical and PoliticalWorksofMotse.London:Arthur Probsthain，1929:274．据梅译本《前言》介绍，此前他曾写了一本名为《墨子:被冷落的孔子竞争者》(Motse，The Neglected Rival of Confucius)的指南册子，该书亦于1934年由Arthur Probsthain出版，共222页。又，福柯(Alfred Forke)的《墨翟》(MêTi)德文全译本于1922年出版，与梅译本一起，为当时仅有的用西方语言翻译的两本著作。
(4)BurtonWatson.Mo Tzu:BasicWritings.NewYork＆London:Columbia University Press，1963:140.
(5)Wing-tsit Chan.A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy.Princeton:Princeton University Press，1963:211-231.
(6)A.C.Graham.Later Mohist Logic，Ethics and Science.Hong kong:The Chinese University Press，1978.
(7)Ian Johnston.The Gongsun Longzi:ATranslation and an Analysis of Its Relationship to Later MohistWritings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2004，31(2)．
(8)Philip J.Ivanhoe，Bryan van Norden.Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy.Indianapolis:Hackett Publishing Co.，2003.
(9)A.C.Graham.Disputersof the Tao:Philosophical Argument in AncientChina. La Salle:Open Court Publishing Company，1989:41.
(10)A.C.Graham.Disputersof the Tao:Philosophical Argument in AncientChina. La Salle:Open Court Publishing Company，1989:41-42.
(11)A.C.Graham.Later MohistLogic，Ethicsand Science.Hong Kong:The Chinese University Press，1978:590.A.C.Graham.Disputers of the Tao:Philosophical Argument in Ancient China.La Salle:Open Court Publishing Company，1989:502.
(12)A.C.Graham.Divisions in Early MohismReflected in theCoreChaptersofMotzu.Singapore:The Institute of East Asian Philosophies，1985.A.C.Graham.Disputers of the Tao:Philosophical Argument in Ancient China.La Salle:Open Court Publishing Company，1989.
(13)Chris Fraser.Significance and Chronology of the Triads.Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:Supplement to Mohism，2002.
(14)Carine Defoort.Argumentation and Persuasion in AncientChinese Texts:Introduction.Oriens Extremus，2005(6):93.此文，经过略加改写后以中文的形式又发表在王守常，余瑾.庞朴教授八十寿辰纪念文集.中华书局，2008:135-149.
(15)Carine Defoort.Argumentation and Persuasion in Ancient Chinese Texts:Introduction.Oriens Extremus，2005(6):92-93.Karen Desmet.The Growth of Compounds in the Core Chapters of the Mozi.Oriens Extremus，2005(6):99-118.
(16)Hui-chieh Loy.On a Gedankenexperiment in the Mozi Core Chapters.Oriens Extremus，2005(6):141-158.
(17)Erica Brindley.Human Agency and the Ideal of Shang Tong in Early Moist Writings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2007，34(3):409.
(18)Erica Brindley.Human Agency and the Ideal of Shang Tong in Early Moist Writings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2007，34(3):413.
(19)Erica Brindley.Human Agency and the Ideal of Shang Tong in Early Moist Writings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2007，34(3):413-416.
(20)Erica Brindley.Human Agency and the Ideal of Shang Tong in Early Moist Writings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2007，34(3):417-420.
(21)Chad Hansen.A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought.Oxford:Oxford University Press，1992:106-108.
(22)Franklin Perkins.The MoistCriticismof the Confucian Use of Fate.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):427.
(23)Franklin Perkins.The MoistCriticismof the Confucian Use of Fate.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):428-429.
(24)Franklin Perkins.The MoistCriticismof the Confucian Use of Fate.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):431-432.
(25)Franklin Perkins.The MoistCriticismof the Confucian Use of Fate.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3)432-433.
(26)Dan Robins.The Moists and the Gentlemen of the World.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):386.
(27)Dan Robins.The Moists and the Gentlemen of the World.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):386-388.
(28)Owen Flanagan.Moral Contagion and Logical Persuasion in the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):473.
(29)Owen Flanagan.Moral Contagion and Logical Persuasion in the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):474-476.
(30)Owen Flanagan.Moral Contagion and Logical Persuasion in the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):481-483.
(31)Owen Flanagan.Moral Contagion and Logical Persuasion in the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):485-486.
(32)Owen Flanagan.Moral Contagion and Logical Persuasion in the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):487-488.
(33)Dan Robins.The Moists and the Gentlemen of the World.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):389.
(34)Dan Robins.The Moists and the Gentlemen of the World.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):390-391.
(35)Dan Robins，The Moists and the Gentlemen of the World.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):392.
(36)Benjamin Wong，Hui-chieh Loy.War and Ghosts in Mozi's Political Philosophy.Philosophy East and West，2004，54(3):343-363.
(37)Benjamin Wong，Hui-chieh Loy.War and Ghosts in Mozi's Political Philosophy.Philosophy East and West，2004，54(3):343.
(38)Benjamin Wong，Hui-chieh Loy.War and Ghosts in Mozi's Political Philosophy.Philosophy East and West，2004，54(3):344.
(39)Benjamin Wong，Hui-chieh Loy.War and Ghosts in Mozi's Political Philosophy.Philosophy East and West，2004，54(3):356.
(40)Benjamin Wong，Hui-chieh Loy.War and Ghosts in Mozi's Political Philosophy.Philosophy East and West，2004，54(3):358.
(41)Michael Puett.To Become a God:Cosmology，Sacrifice，and Self-Divinization in Early China.Cambridge:The Harvard University Center for the Harvard-Yenching Institute，2002:101-104.
(42)Hui-chieh Loy.TheMoral Philosophy of theMozi“Core Chapters”.Adviser: University of California，2006.
(43)Hui-chieh Loy.TheMoral Philosophy of theMozi“Core Chapters”.Adviser: University of California，2006.
(44)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):437.
(45)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):439.
(46)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):440.
(47)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):443.
(48)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):444.
(49)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):445.
(50)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):445.
(51)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):450.
(52)Chris Fraser.Moismand Self-Interest.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):451.
(53)Dennis Ahern.Is Mo Tzu a Utilitarian.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1976: 185-193.
(54)Dirck Vorenkamp.Another Look at Utilitarianismin Mo Tzu's Thought.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1992:431.
(55)David Soles.Mo Tzu and the Foundation of Morality.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1999，26(1):37-48.
(56)Kristopher Duda.Reconsidering Mo Tzu on the Foundation of Morality.Asian Philosophy，2001，11(1):23-31.
(57)Xiufeng Lu.Understanding Mozi's Foundations of Morality:A Comparative Perspective.Asian Philosophy，2006，16(2):123-134.
(58)Hui-chieh Loy.Justification and Debate:Thought on MoistMoral Epistemology.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):455.
(59)Hui-chieh Loy.Justification and Debate:Thought on MoistMoral Epistemology.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):456-458.
(60)Hui-chieh Loy.Justification and Debate:Thought on MoistMoral Epistemology.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):461.
(61)Hui-chieh Loy.Justification and Debate:Thought on MoistMoral Epistemology.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2008，35(3):462-463.
(62)Jane M.Geaney.ACritique of A.C.Graham's Reconstruction of the“Neo-Mohist Canons”.Journal of the American Oriental Society，1999，119(1):1-11.
(63)Jane M.Geaney.ACritique of A.C.Graham's Reconstruction of the“Neo-Mohist Canons”.Journal of the American Oriental Society，1999，119(1):1.
(64)Jane M.Geaney.ACritique of A.C.Graham's Reconstruction of the“Neo-Mohist Canons”.Journal of the American Oriental Society，1999，119(1):1.
(65)Jane M.Geaney.ACritique of A.C.Graham's Reconstruction of the“Neo-Mohist Canons”.Journal of the American Oriental Society，1999，119(1):10-11.
(66)Desheng Zong.Studies of Intensional Contexts in MohistWritings.Philosophy East and West，2000，50(2):208-228.
(67)Desheng Zong.Studies of Intensional Contexts in MohistWritings.Philosophy East and West，2000，50(2):208.
(68)Desheng Zong.Studies of Intensional Contexts in MohistWritings.Philosophy East and West，2000，50(2):220.
(69)Desheng Zong.Studies of Intensional Contexts in MohistWritings.Philosophy East and West，2000，50(2):224.
(70)Chaehyun Chong.The Neo-Mohist Conception of Bian(Disputation)．Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1999，26(1):1-19.
(71)Chaehyun Chong.The Neo-Mohist Conception of Bian(Disputation)．Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1999，26(1):1.
(72)Chaehyun Chong.The Neo-Mohist Conception of Bian(Disputation)．Journal of Chinese Philosophy，1999，26(1):16-17.
(73)Thierry Lucas.Later Mohist Logic，Lei，Classes，and Sorts.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2005，32(3):349-365.
(74)Thierry Lucas.Later Mohist Logic，Lei，Classes，and Sorts.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2005，32(3):349-350.
(75)Thierry Lucas.Later Mohist Logic，Lei，Classes，and Sorts.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2005，32(3):361-363.
(76)Ian Johnston.TheGongsun Longzi:ATranslation and an Analysis of Its Relationship to Later MohistWritings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2004，31(2):271-295.
(77)Ian Johnston.The Gongsun Longzi:ATranslation and an Analysis of Its Relationship to Later MohistWritings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2004，31(2):271.
(78)Ian Johnston.The Gongsun Longzi:ATranslation and an Analysis of Its Relationship to Later MohistWritings.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2004，31(2):290.
(79)Ian Johnston.Choosing the Greater and Choosing the Lesser:A Translation and Analysis of the Daqu and Xiaoqu Chapters of the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2000，27(4):375-407.
(80)Ian Johnston.Choosing the Greater and Choosing the Lesser:A Translation and Analysis of the Daqu and Xiaoqu Chapters of the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2000，27(4):399.
(81)Ian Johnston.Choosing the Greater and Choosing the Lesser:A Translation and Analysis of the Daqu and Xiaoqu Chapters of the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2000，27(4):375.
(82)Ian Johnston.Choosing the Greater and Choosing the Lesser:A Translation and Analysis of the Daqu and Xiaoqu Chapters of the Mozi.Journal of Chinese Philosophy，2000，27(4):399.
(83)Chris Fraser.More Mohist Marginalia:AReply to Makehamon Later Mohist Canon and Explanation B 67.The Journal of Chinese Philosophy and Culture，2007(11):227-259.
(84)Chris Fraser.More Mohist Marginalia:AReply to Makehamon Later Mohist Canon and Explanation B 67.The Journal of Chinese Philosophy and Culture，2007(11):227.
(85)Chris Fraser.The Ethics of the Mohist Dialogues.Leuven，2009(6)．
(86)Carine Defoort.The Metaphor of Weighing Body Parts in Mohist Thought.Leuven，2009(6)．
(87)Michael Nylan.Kongzi and Mozi，the Ru and the Mohists，in Classical-Era Thinking.Leuven，2009(6)．
(88)JoachimGentz.Mohist Traces in the Chunqiu fanlu.Leuven，2009(6)．
免责声明：以上内容源自网络，版权归原作者所有，如有侵犯您的原创版权请告知，我们将尽快删除相关内容。
