晚清民国《礼记·儒行》的再经典化及其意义诠释

On the Prominence of the LIJI-RUXING in the Late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China and Its Significance

宋儒提出《礼记·儒行》非圣人之言以后,宋元明清七八百年间,《儒行》受到普遍的质疑。其间虽有明末清初黄道周、李二曲等肯定《儒行》的价值,尤其是黄道周作《儒行集传》为《儒行》与“儒”正名,但质疑的声音仍占主流,随着王夫之、陆奎勋、姚际恒等人的诠释,使质疑愈演愈烈。晚清儒者对《儒行》经典的重新确立有一个内在过程,可追溯至李光坡、孔广森等对宋学的批评。晚清陈澧、文廷式、廖平等处理《儒行》与孔门七十子的关系问题,至康有为直接将《儒行》视为孔子之教理,最终恢复《儒行》的经典权威性。此后《儒行》的诠释进入两个重要阶段:由于时代的迫切需要,章太炎、林纾等极力推崇《儒行》的刚猛气节,但有失《儒行》原旨;因而有唐文治、熊十力、刘咸炘等作出批评与纠正,试图将《儒行》的诠释拉回纯正的儒家思想当中,体现了坚守儒门正旨的保守性。

After that the Confucians in Song Dynasty put forward the idea that RUXING is not Confucius’s words,RUXING was generally questioned in the seven or eight hundred years of Song,Yuan,Ming and Qing Dynasties.Although Huang Daozhou and Li Erqu affirmed the value of the RUXING in the late Ming and early Qing Dynasty,especially the Variorum of RUXING,which was written by Huang Daozhou,was named for the RUXING and Confucianism,the voice of questioning still occupied the mainstream.With the interpretation of Wang Fuzhi,Lu Kuixun and Yao Jiheng,the questioning became more and more intense.There was an internal process for the Confucian scholars in the late Qing Dynasty to re-establish the classics of the RUXING,which can be traced back to the criticism of Song school by Li Guangpo and Kong Guangsen.In the late Qing Dynasty,Chen Li,Wen Tingshi and Liao equally dealt with the relationship between RUXING and the seventy Confucian disciples,then Kang Youwei directly regarded RUXING as Confucius’doctrine,and the classic authority of RUXING was finally restored.Since then,the interpretation of RUXING has entered into two important stages.Due to the urgent needs of the times,Zhang Taiyan,Lin Shu,etc.highly praised the rigid integrity of RUXING,but they lost its original purpose.Therefore,Tang Wenzhi,Xiong Shili,Liu Xianxin,etc.made criticism and correction,trying to pull the interpretation of RUXING back to its pure Confucian thought,reflecting the conservatism of sticking to the true purpose of Confucianism.