谁是清学开山祖?——从阎若璩论钱谦益看明清之际考证学的兴起

Who was the Founder of Qing Learning?:The Rise of Textual Criticism from the Late Ming to the Early Qing Based on Yan Ruoqu's View of Qian Qianyi

受到清代乾嘉以降"儒林"(经儒)与"文苑"(文士)对立观念的影响,研究者总是将考证学视为"儒林"内部的事情,故倾向于往明代的"儒林"(即理学)去追问考证学的缘起,对其时"文苑"中蕴藏着的"博学于文"的传统则基本视而不见。然而晚明"文苑"里的博文传统绝不容小视,阎若璩将钱谦益推重为考证学的头号宗师,就是基于这个事实。清代考证学的一个突出特征是倾向"游于艺"而淡化"志于道"。而相对来说,"儒林"与"志于道"的距离更近,"文苑"则不免"游于艺"的倾向更重。对于塑造清代考证学的基本学术性格而言,来自于晚明清初"文苑"的传统可能将比来自"儒林"的传统发挥更能起到直接的作用,也因此具有特别重要的意义。

Due to the influence of the eighteenth-century view juxtapose scholars of the Confucian classics against scholars of literature, there has been a tendency to view textual criticism as a matter of Confucian scholarship and to seek its origin the in late Ming Neo Confucianism. For this reason the tradition in the literary world has been overlooked. In fact, textual criticism was not at all belittled in literary world and Yah Ruoqu had a high regard for Qian Qianyi as a past master of the practice. A prominent characteristic of Qing textual criticism was the tendency to emphasize ＂cultivation of the arts＂ over ＂seeking the way. ＂ In other words, the Confucianists were closer to seeking the way and the literati gave greater importance to cultivating the arts. In this way, the conventions of late Ming and early Qing literati probably had more influence than Confucianists on the essential academic character of textual criticism.