论文部分内容阅读
20世紀,社會現實與思想文化的巨大變化,使流傳千年的“孔子是《春秋》作者”的共識被打破,“孔子不作《春秋》”成爲非常流行的一種觀點。顧頡剛、錢玄同、馮友蘭、孫次舟、毛起、洪業、魏應麒、徐中舒、童書業、羅世烈、楊伯峻、胡念貽、曹聚仁、王和、浦衛忠、張平轍、姚曼波等人圍繞“孔子不作《春秋》的證據”、“現行《春秋》是什麽”、“孔子與《春秋》是何關係”列舉了林林總總的證據,作了各種各樣的論説,但都不足以推翻“孔子作《春秋》”的傳統説法。不過,他們確實指出了“孔子作《春秋》”説的一些不嚴密的地方,促使“孔子作《春秋》”説的學者進一步去探討研究,完善孔子作《春秋》的證據,在這一過程中深化了對《春秋》經本身的研究與探討。
In the 20th century, the great changes in social reality and ideology and culture have made the consensus that “Confucius was the author of Spring and Autumn” was passed down by thousands of years. “Confucius did not make” Spring and Autumn “as a very popular view. Guzheng Gang, Qian Xuan Tong, Feng Youlan, Sun Ci Zhou, Mao Qi, Hong Ye, Wei Ying Qi, Xu Zhongshu, Tong Shuye, Luo Shier, Yang Boshan, Hu Nian Yi, Cao Ju Ren, Wang Wo, Pu Wei Zhong, What is the relationship between Confucius and the Spring and Autumn Annals ?, ”The numerous evidences and omnipresent arguments are made, but they are not enough to overthrow the Confucius as “Spring and Autumn” “the traditional argument. However, they did point out that ”Confucius made Spring and Autumn“ ”some ill-defined places and urged scholars who said“ Confucius made Spring and Autumn ”to further explore the research and perfect the evidence that Confucius had made“ Spring and Autumn ” In the process of deepening the “Spring and Autumn” by its own research and discussion.