王夫之的经义观与其文章本体论

The Confucian Classics Argumentation by Wang Fuzhi and the Ontology of his Articles

王夫之以乐教为本体,以诗学为津梁,以经义为发挥,这一为文的内在理路有助于儒学之建构,在明清制义史上独树一帜。但他批评的对象是明代制义,制义毕竟为科举而存在,它一方面以经学为指归,但另一方面它又必须遵循科场的内在规律。从命题方式到解题方法乃至制义文之审美境界,制义文都具有区别于经义文和一般文章的独特性。在王夫之的制义批评中,我们看到了明代制义的诸多弊端,但同时,由于他以经义范畴去批评制义范畴,其不合理之处也显而易见。在他之后,一些理学家、制义作家、选家立足于科举体制,承接晚明"以古文为时文"的创作理论与实践,充分正视制义诸法在阐发经典义理和建构儒学美文上的作用,为清初的制义写作带来新的局面。

Wang Fuzhi took Confucian music education as an ontology, poetry as a methodology and Confucian classic argumentation as an exposition. This internal logic of his writing benefited the construction of Confucianism and became distinctive in an eight-part essay used in the imperial examination of the Ming and Qing dynasties. The target of his criticism was the eight-part essay in the imperial examination of the Ming dynasty, which existed as a core principle of the Confucian classics while it had followed the internal rule of the imperial examination. From the ways of posing questions, to the methods of answering such questions, and to the aesthetic realm of the eight-part essays, they were distinctive from the essays of Confucian classic argumentations and ordinary writings. In Wang Fuzhi’s criticism, we can observe multiple shortcomings of the imperial examination in the Ming dynasty. Simultaneously, he criticized the eightpart essays from Confucian classic argumentation, yet many of his criticisms were evidently unreasonable. After him,many neo-Confucian philosophers, eight-part essay writers and examiners, who were based on the imperial examination and inherited the composition theory and practice of"taking ancient articles as contemporary ones"in the later Ming dynasty, fully recognized the role of the eight-part essay writing methods in expounding the classical philosophy and constructing Confucian essays, and thus led to a new scenario of the eight-part essay writings in the early Qing dynasty.