本文乃係作者論商代的祖妣報示暨祖先崇拜之第二部分。第一部分已以《論商代的祖妣報示》為題，於2010年5月在台北東吳大學所舉辦的『中國文字學會第21屆學術研討會』發表。該文先考證且（祖）為陶祖之象形；示為神主之象形；而匕之作匕柶與匕之作妣匕，乃同形異字；匕可為牝器之象形，引申而用為女性祖先字。次將商代有關祖、妣二稱之語詞分為「複合普通名詞」及「複合專有名詞」二類，並依其語詞之「前綴＋詞根＋後綴」結構，作前綴、後綴的成分分析，以完整呈現商人祖、妣二概念之結構內涵。對商人報、示概念之分析比照祖、妣。作者並指出經由報、示之分析，可推知商人在建國前，其祖先崇拜經墓祭轉為廟祭，並產生了禮制及宗法上的效應。作者以為在討論商人經由祖先崇拜中的廟（宗）祭儀式，建立起血緣組織系統暨相關的宗法制度之時，尚有一個與祖先崇拜、姓氏血緣組織糾葛在一起的，且與圖騰崇拜有關的問題，即如朱天順在《中國古代宗教初探》一書中所說的「圖騰崇拜是自然崇拜和祖先崇拜結合在一起的一種原始宗教」，又如何星亮在〈圖騰名稱與姓氏起源〉一文中所說的「最早的姓氏是圖騰名稱」，亦即商人的玄鳥神話問題，須要先予探討、說明暨厘清。本文（即前文的第二部分）乃以此為寫作主題。在本文中，作者先考證玄鳥神話在先秦時代不同的流傳版本，並對照商甲骨文相關的記錄確定較比可信的商玄鳥神話的具體內容，再依據人類學家對圖騰制度的研究，來考察玄鳥神話是否具有商人圖騰的性質。作者再從具象思維、抽象思維的觀點，來比較初民的圖騰，與商人祖先崇拜中認祖歸宗，及周人稱氏繫姓等制度所採行的思維模式的異同。作者指出商人思維模式兼有具象（透過個別具體的廟呈現）和抽象（透過個別祖先的名號呈現）的性質，而周人除了以廟制作為親人分類的工具，又平行發展出以姓氏來作血親分類的工具；而後者之思維模式已屬抽象性質，且可獨立於廟制之外，自成一格；此二種思維模式與圖騰制度之具象思維模式不同。

This paper is the second half of the author's study on Shang ancestors and ancestral worship. The first part was published on The Proceedings of the 21st Annual Seminar of the Association of Chinese Etymology (May 5, 2010). Therein, the author discussed the original meanings of the words zu 祖, pi 妣, bao 報, shi 示, i.e.. words used by the Shang people to name their different types of ancestors, and made a structural and componential study on them together with their prefix and suffix. The author also pointed out that before the founding of the Shang Dynasty, there were a system change from cemetery sacrifices to temple sacrifices. This change generated the birth of Shang people's family law.On the present paper, the author first examines the different versions of the xi-niao 玄鳥 mythology and elucidates the contents of the more credible one. The author then compares the modes of thinking as applied by the Shang or by the Chou people or by the primitives for the recognition and classification of their ancestors. The author points out that the Shang people used one that was both concrete and abstract, and that the Chou people both concrete and abstract. The Shang and the Chou people were different from the primitives, who used concrete mode of thinking which also could be understood as totemic.