期刊文献+

“读书当论道”还是“唯其真而已”?——清儒关于伪《古文尚书》废立的争论及困境 被引量:2

The Debates and Controversy around the Forged Old Text Chapters of the Shangshu among Qing Scholars
原文传递
导出
摘要 清儒关于《古文尚书》的争论大体分为两个相互联系的主题,一为"真伪",一为"废立"。现代的研究者站在"文献学"或"史学"的立场,需要关心者只涉及"真伪"问题。但对清代的儒者而言,"真伪"本身并不能完全决定《古文尚书》在儒学系统中的价值,因为在这个考据层面之上,还牵涉一层义理的问题。清儒大体公认《古文》虽伪却义理纯美,因此应当如何在考据与义理两边取舍——或以"伪"而废,或以"正"而立,成为他们长期争论的一个难题。"义理"基本已经淡出现代学术的关怀,惟其如此,如果能够将现代"史学"或"文献学"的回溯逻辑暂搁一旁,转而深入清儒因"义理"而来的关于《古文》"废立"的困境,那么通过这场伪《书》废立的争论所折射出的清代汉学(考据学)的思想史意义,也许就不再是其作为现代学术的源头活水,反而是它与现代学术之间的巨大断裂了。 There were two themes in the argument about the Old Text Chapters of the Shangshu (Book of Documents) among Qing Confucian scholars. The first approach determined whether it was genuine or fake, while the second approach wanted to exclude or preserve it from the canon. Modem scholars relying on philology and history have addressed whether it was genuine. While Qing Confucian scholars eschewed the simple true-or-false dichotomy because it could not consider the value of Old Text Chapters of the Shangshu for Confucianism. Because there was a layer of argumentation above the level of textual study, Qing scholars generally regarded the Old Text Chapters of the Shangshu as excellent. So that how to deal with textual study and principle excluding it based authenticity or preserving it for its an ongomg controversy to them. Since the principles expressed in the text has been excluded from the modem scholarship, if we can put aside the traceability of modem history and philology and turn it into the dilemma of exclusion or preservation of Old Text Chapters of the Shangshu which stems from the Qing scholars' insistence of the principles, then the significance of the Han learning for Qing intellectual history, which was reflected in the continuous controversy, would be that it was not the source of modem scholarship, but a big break between Han Learning and modem scholarship.
作者 张循
出处 《清史研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2015年第3期1-14,共14页 The Qing History Journal
  • 相关文献

参考文献11

  • 1齐召南.《宝纶堂文钞》卷3,转引自吴通福.《晚出<古文尚书>公案与清代学术》,上海古籍出版社,2007年,第177-178页.
  • 2阎咏.《朱子古文书疑》,见阎若璩.《尚书古文疏证》,上海古籍出版社,2010年,“附录”第681页,第696-697页.
  • 3王芑孙.《渊雅堂文稿》,《丛书集成续编》本,第132册,第839页下栏..
  • 4阮元.《引书说》,邓经元点校.《擘经室集》,中华书局,1993年,第77-80页.
  • 5汪家禧.《东里生烬余集·与陈扶雅书》,转引自钱穆.《中国近三百年学术史》,商务印书馆,1997年,第572页.
  • 6方东树.《汉学商兑》卷下,《汉学师承记》(外二种),三联书店1998年版,第384页.
  • 7简朝亮.《朱九江先生年谱》,《朱九江先生集》卷首,《续修四库全书》,第1535册,第18页下栏..
  • 8张循.《汉学内部的“汉宋之争”--从陈澧的“汉宋调和”看清代思想史上“汉宋之争”的深层涵义》,《汉学研究》第27卷第4期,第295-327页.
  • 9黄宗羲.《尚书古文疏证序》[A]..《黄宗羲全集》第10册[C].浙江古籍出版社,1993年..
  • 10孙星衍.《岱南阁集》卷2《呈覆座主朱石君尚书》,《孙渊如先生全集》,商务印书馆《国学基本丛书》本,无版权页,第197页.

共引文献2

引证文献2

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部