(一)《韩非子·五蠹》“是以圣人不期修古,不法常可。”句中的“不期修古”,课本注释为:“期,希求。修,远。修古,远古。”“法常可”,注释为:“效法可常行之道。常可,指旧制度。”此注首先令人生疑的是语意晦涩、逻辑欠通:“修古”一词,释之为“远古”,而“远古”何指?如单指上文的“上古之世”,则有乖原意;如兼指上文的“中古之世”与“近古之世”,则称名不当。再者,释“修”为“远”,而“法古则后于时,修今则塞于势”(《商君书·开塞》)中的“修今”一词则无法讲解。“常可”一词,释之为“可常行之道”也不确切,难道“可常行之道”还不值得效 (A) “Han Feizi five beetles” “Sage not from time to repair the ancient, unscrupulous.” Sentence in the “untimely repair ancient” textbook notes: “period, . ”“ Fa Chang Ke ”, the comment is:“ The law can be viable. Often, refers to the old system. ”This note is the first suspicious of the obscure sentiment, lack of logic:“ ancient repair ” As “ancient”, and “ancient” mean? If the single refers to the “ancient world”, then the original intention of good; as both the above “medieval world” and “ancient world”, then the name is not appropriate . Moreover, the term “revisionism” is not explained in the sense that “revision” is “far”, while “ancient revisionism is the essence of the ancient revisionism” (“Shangjun”). The term “often can”, interpreted as “can often do” is not precise, is it not worthwhile