论文部分内容阅读
汉代公羊学家提出的“黜周王鲁”说是经学史上争讼已久的话题,它引起了“宗周”与“黜周”两种异见。围绕这两个问题,诠释者发表了不同的观点。探析文本,《论语》为孔子与门人对答之辑录,最能反映孔子真实思想,从《论语》本文来检视孔子的政治取向,更有典据意义上的说服力。本文立足历代《论语》研究之诠释史,对“吾其为东周乎”“吾从周”加以梳理,又摭拾于他经,在经典互证的基础上,突破“以经证经”的诠释传统,试图以史、子、集证经,期以实现经、史、子、集间的对话,以求孔子所言之本义,解决孔子宗周,抑或黜周的经学问题。通过对《论语》的诠释史的考察,以及与儒家典据之间的互动、互证,可以得出汉儒与清儒所大倡的“黜周王鲁”说,乃是基于现实政治的需要所做的诠释,孔子实际是以损益的精神“宗周”。
It is a long-held topic in the history of Confucianism proposed by scholars of the Rams in the Han Dynasty. It raises two kinds of dissidence such as “Zongzhou” and “Zhou”. Around these two issues, interpreters have published different views. Probing the text, “The Analects of Confucius” is a compilation of confrontations between Confucius and Menmen, which can best reflect the true thoughts of Confucius. It can be used to examine the political orientation of Confucius from the Analects of Confucius. Based on the annotation history of the Analects of Confucius in ancient China, this essay tries to sort out the history of The Analects of Confucius, Sutra “, trying to use the history, the book, the collection of evidences and period to realize the dialogue among the sutra, the history, the son and the set, in order to seek the original meaning of Confucius, to solve Confucianism Zong Zhou, problem. Through the study of the annotation history of The Analects and the interaction and mutual proof with the Confucianism, we can conclude that the Confucianism and the Confucianism advocated by the Confucianists and Confucianism are based on the reality Political interpretation of the needs of doing, Confucius is actually the spirit of profit and loss ”Zongzhou ".