论文部分内容阅读
周武王死后,周公作为辅政者,为何其所作所为会引起“群弟”的猜忌?那段史实,当后人想要知其究竟时,总是有语焉不详之憾。最早记录这段史实的传世文献是《尚书·金縢》篇。《尚书》是重要的儒家经典,相传曾经孔子手订,以后历代经学家不断地诠释《尚书》。就《金縢》篇而言,我们从这些诠释中看到的是事实理解还是逻辑理解?笔者似乎更倾向于后者。朱维铮常论逻辑与历史的一致性问题,可我们从中国经学诠释的历史中,常常可以看到这二者的疏离。本篇主要梳理明朝以前不同经学家笔下不同的周公形象。
After the death of King Wu of Zhou Dynasty, Zhou Gong as a junior government official, why did what he did caused the suspicion of “brother-in-law”? That historical fact is that when the posterity wants to know the truth, there is always a word of regret. The earliest record of this historical facts of the handed down is “Shang Shu Jin Kui” articles. “Shangshu” is an important Confucian classics, according to legend, Confucius once signed, after the successive generations of scholars continue to interpret the “Shangshu.” As far as the “Jin” is concerned, what can we see from these interpretations is factual comprehension or logical comprehension? The author seems to be more inclined to the latter. Zhu Weizheng often talks about the consistency of logic and history, but we can often see the alienation of these two from the history of Chinese classics interpretation. This article mainly sorts out the different images of Zhou Gong written by different scholars by Ming Dynasty.