“刘歆作伪说”在清代学术史上的演进

Rethink:The Alleged Forgery by Liu Xin in History of Qing Scholarship

清代学术史上的“刘歆作伪说”有着复杂的演进历程。该说源自宋明儒者对《周礼》的怀疑,在清初扩展至三礼学领域。此说在清初不乏反对者,至乾嘉更引来惠栋、戴震等汉学家的批驳,因而一度被彻底否定。汉学家从文字、历法等角度重新展开考辨,认为刘歆在《尚书》文字和年月上存在误读。这种取径被庄述祖在《尚书》学研究中汲取并转化,催生了今文经学意义上的“刘歆作伪说”。刘逢禄把对刘歆作伪的指控扩展至《左传》,此后迭经宋翔凤、龚自珍、魏源、邵懿辰、廖平扬其波,逐渐向多种经典蔓延。康有为《新学伪经考》实集诸家之大成,其学术源泉遍布整个清代学术史。厘清“刘歆作伪说”的起承转合之迹,不仅有助于衡估康说的理论价值,亦有助于重审清代今古文之争中关键议题的渊源与流变。

The present paper,reconstructing the history,in which Qing scholars since Qianlong and Jiaqing reigns accused Liu Xin,a leading scholars of Former Han(202 BC-8 AD),of academic forgery and all these accusations were finally epitomized in Kang Youwei's well-known work exposing forged Confucian classics,argues that this rethinking effort is conducive to reevaluating the theoretical value of Kang's work and clarifying origin and changes of key topics in Qing scholars'debate on old-text and new-text Confucianism.