Evidence 2 shows it is a variant character（异体字） of 件，and in this case maybe it is a textual variant（异文） of 舛. A textual variant (异文) might be caused by the use of a variant character (异体字), but it could also involve completely different words or structures.
Based on the discussions and evidences of both [WS2021-00655] and this proposal, it is better to encode ⿰击頁 independently, and add a new UCV for 頓~ ⿰击頁.
Thanks for comment #11574.
But for evidence 2，⿰口釐 is attested in the photographic reproduction of the book. As both this form and the more common 喱 were used purely for phonetic transcription in this context, they were functionally interchangeable. Their concurrent usage in the source material confirms that this is a valid textual variant, thereby supporting its encoding. https://www.shidianguji.com/book/CADAL02081307/chapter/1lcim2bmceaeu?page_from=searching_page¶graphId=7548201344226623527&keywords=%E4%B9%98%E9%A3%8E%2C%E9%A9%B6%2C%E4%B8%87%E5%B1%B1%2C%E4%B9%98%E9%A3%8E%E9%A9%B6%E5%87%BA%E8%80%81%E4%B8%87%E5%B1%B1&hightlightIndex=0&topicId=&version=3&contentMatch=1
Under normal circumstances, ⿰目力 is a variant form of the character "助," as described in the 异体字典 (p1,https://dict.variants.moe.edu.tw/dictView.jsp?ID=4126):
"Characters derived from the phonetic component 且 (qiě) typically follow a left-radical, right-phonetic structure, with rare exceptions of right-radical, left-phonetic arrangements. Consequently, in variant forms of 助, the component 且 is often miscopied as 目 (mù). This error is most frequently observed in the 敦煌俗字譜. 字鑑 and 正字通 both note it.This demonstrates that the use of 目 in vulgar forms was widespread, hence its inclusion here."
Evidence 3 is drawn precisely from Dunhuang manuscripts. This form appears extensively in origal books, such as the 文苑英華 and 説文通訓定聲, as shown in p2 ~p5. Another example is Evidence 2, which cites six instances in the 尚書注疏彙校 (Chief Editor Du Zexun杜澤遜, Zhonghua Book Company, 2018) where "助" is written as "⿰目力" in collation notes for the Song dynasty "Eight-Line Edition" (abbreviated "八") and the Song dynasty Wang Pengfu edition (abbreviated "王") of the 尚書注疏.
A notable exception is Evidence 1 from the 孫臏兵法校理, where the character ⿰目力 appears in the "Sun Bin's Art of War Bamboo Slips from the Yinqueshan Han Tombs.", as shown in the facsimile copy of the original bamboo slips(p6).
The 孫臏兵法校理 describes this character as "composed of 目 and 力." The author refutes the interpretation in (銀雀山漢墓竹簡) 孫臏兵法 (Cultural Relics Publishing House, 1975, CN 7068-339), which "suspected it should be read as 冒 (mào)," arguing instead that it is an abbreviated form of the character "瞗 (diāo)"(p7).
p1
(Zhonghua Book Company, 1966, facsimile edition based on Song dynasty fragments and Ming dynasty prints)
p2
p3
p4
p5
p6
Thanks for the correction! Although rare, ⿱艹妖 does exist, and I will submit new evidences. The character 妖 is a clerical-script abbreviation of 𡝩, yet in the modern writing system, 妖 has become the standard form, while 𡝩 has faded into obscurity. This unfamiliarity with 𡝩 may explain why it is occasionally written as ⿱艹妖.
薛瑞兆 編撰 ：《新編全金詩•卷五二•王澮•感遇四首》，中華書局，2021年05月，第1版，第1366頁。
its original version 谷音二卷，民國十八年（1929）上海商務印書館影印本
錢仲聯 主編 ：《清詩紀事》，鳳凰出版社，2004年04月，第1版，第3361頁。
IRG Working Set 2024v3.0
Source: SU Ruixin
Date: Generated on 2025-11-07
Unification
Showing 2 comments.
Evidence
Showing 4 comments.
But for evidence 2，⿰口釐 is attested in the photographic reproduction of the book. As both this form and the more common 喱 were used purely for phonetic transcription in this context, they were functionally interchangeable. Their concurrent usage in the source material confirms that this is a valid textual variant, thereby supporting its encoding.
"Characters derived from the phonetic component 且 (qiě) typically follow a left-radical, right-phonetic structure, with rare exceptions of right-radical, left-phonetic arrangements. Consequently, in variant forms of 助, the component 且 is often miscopied as 目 (mù). This error is most frequently observed in the 敦煌俗字譜. 字鑑 and 正字通 both note it.This demonstrates that the use of 目 in vulgar forms was widespread, hence its inclusion here."
Evidence 3 is drawn precisely from Dunhuang manuscripts. This form appears extensively in origal books, such as the 文苑英華 and 説文通訓定聲, as shown in p2 ~p5. Another example is Evidence 2, which cites six instances in the 尚書注疏彙校 (Chief Editor Du Zexun杜澤遜, Zhonghua Book Company, 2018) where "助" is written as "⿰目力" in collation notes for the Song dynasty "Eight-Line Edition" (abbreviated "八") and the Song dynasty Wang Pengfu edition (abbreviated "王") of the 尚書注疏.
A notable exception is Evidence 1 from the 孫臏兵法校理, where the character ⿰目力 appears in the "Sun Bin's Art of War Bamboo Slips from the Yinqueshan Han Tombs.", as shown in the facsimile copy of the original bamboo slips(p6).
The 孫臏兵法校理 describes this character as "composed of 目 and 力." The author refutes the interpretation in (銀雀山漢墓竹簡) 孫臏兵法 (Cultural Relics Publishing House, 1975, CN 7068-339), which "suspected it should be read as 冒 (mào)," arguing instead that it is an abbreviated form of the character "瞗 (diāo)"(p7).
p1
(Zhonghua Book Company, 1966, facsimile edition based on Song dynasty fragments and Ming dynasty prints)
p2
p3
p4
p5
p6
薛瑞兆 編撰 ：《新編全金詩•卷五二•王澮•感遇四首》，中華書局，2021年05月，第1版，第1366頁。
its original version 谷音二卷，民國十八年（1929）上海商務印書館影印本
錢仲聯 主編 ：《清詩紀事》，鳳凰出版社，2004年04月，第1版，第3361頁。
（2）［唐］慧琳 撰 ：《一切經音義》，《中華大藏經（漢文部分）》，中華書局，1993年02月，第1版，第327頁。
（3）［唐］玄應 撰：《一切經音義》，《中華大藏經（漢文部分）》，中華書局，1993年02月，第1版，第939頁。
（4）《洪武正韻》
（5）張涌泉 主編 ：《敦煌經部文獻合集》，中華書局，2008年08月，第1版，第4859頁。
（6）日版《大藏經》