因“疏不破注”之说,《中庸》郑注与孔疏被认为完全一致,然分析孔颖达之疏解可发现,其解释倾向与郑注颇为不同,尤其体现在中庸、诚身、圣人三个方面。孔疏将“中庸”理解为圣人之性情,却剥离了郑注“以礼释中”之意,他等修身于诚身,并以之为“中和之为用”的实现形式。在孔氏看来,《中庸》之圣人应从德性上加以理解,因而,有德无位的孔子与传统圣王主要在德性上具有一致性。由此,郑玄“制作礼法”的圣人观念被孔疏予以转换。 Because of “Shu Bu Bu Tong Bu”, “Mean” Zheng Note and Kong Shu are considered exactly the same. However, the analysis of Kong Yingda can be found in the explanation. The explanation tendency is quite different from that in Zheng Note, especially in the mean, sincerity, Saints in three areas. Kong Shu interpreted “Mediocre” as the saint’s temperament, but peeled off the note of “Zheng Li” in “Etiquette,” meaning that he should cultivate himself in sincerity and use it as “ The realization of the form. In Kong’s view, the savvy of the ”golden mean“ should be understood from the perspective of virtue. Therefore, the Confucian virtuous and the traditional holy benevolent basically have the same moral character. As a result, Zheng Xuan ”making etiquette " sage concept was Kong Shu to convert.