《春秋》“公子遂如京师,遂如晋”的何、郑之争及其诠释学缘由

The Controversy between He and Zheng in the Spring and Autumn Annals:“The Prince Sui Goes to the Capital and the State of Jin” and Its Hermeneutic Reasons

何休作为《公羊》学固守派,从《公羊》学的立场出发,质疑《穀梁传》传文对经文“公子遂如京师,遂如晋”的解释;郑玄则以古文经学为宗,兼采今古,对何休的质疑作出批驳。由何、郑二人的争论,可管窥《春秋》经的言简义深与两汉《春秋》学以传解经的时代风尚,并可见今古文经传诠释之风貌。两人交锋的学术缘由,与当时的今古文官学纷争及各自治学有关,更与学界尚少探讨的汉代学理上的相互辩难的经学时风密不可分。

He Xiu firmly supported the study of Gongyang and questions the interpretation of “Gongzi Sui is like the capital,Sui is like Jin” in the Gu Liang Zhuan from the perspective of Gongyang studies.Zheng Xuan,on the other hand,took the study of ancient literature and classics as his sect and adopted both modern and ancient methods to refute He Xiu's attacks on Gu Liang Zhuan.Through an in-depth analysis of the debate between He and Zheng,it can be seen that although the language of the Spring and Autumn Annals is simple,the meaning is profound,and the academic trend of using Commentary to explain the Spring and Autumn Annals in the Han Dynasty and the style of interpreting ancient texts in modern times can be seen.The academic reason for their confrontation is not only related to the disputes and respective academic pursuits between the Han Dynasty and ancient civil servant schools,but also closely related to the Confucian era of mutual debate in the Han Dynasty academic theory that has yet to be explored in the academic community.