论文部分内容阅读
胡瑗与孙复,都是北宋著名的经学家与教育家。两人对《春秋》都有深入的研究,孙复有《春秋尊王发微》传世,而胡瑗的春秋学著作却已失传,只有片言只语保留在后世的春秋学研究之中。当世学者给胡瑗春秋学说辑佚,最引人注目的,是胡瑗有不少春秋学经说,竟与孙复的著作,一字不差。两人不可能在早年一起读书,因此就不可能把两人著作一字不差,解释作共同研究的成果。而且胡瑗的《易》与《洪范》研究,也同样大幅抄录前人经注而没有说明来源出处。因此,最合理的解释,是胡瑗抄袭孙复春秋学经说以为己说。胡瑗抄袭孙复,为史上“孙胡交恶”的公案,提供了可信的旁证。因为孙复讨厌胡瑗,很可能正因为不满胡瑗抄袭孙复之说为己说。
Hu Kui and Sun Fu, are famous Northern Song scholars and educators. Both of them have in-depth research on “Spring and Autumn”. Sun Fu-jun’s “Spring and Autumn respect Wangfa” handed down, but Hu Qun’s Spring and Autumn Academic writings have been lost, only a few words remain in later spring and autumn studies. When the scholar to the Hu Qun Chun Qiu theory is lost, the most striking is that Hu Qun has said many Spring and Autumn Period, actually with Sun Fu’s work, the word is not bad. It is impossible for the two to study together in their early years, so it is impossible to interpret the two books as a single word, explaining the results of a joint study. Moreover, Hu Yi’s “Yi” and “Hongfan” research also copied a large number of predecessors’ notes without any indication of their source. Therefore, the most reasonable explanation is that Hu Kui copied Sun Fuchun Qiu Xue to say it. Hu Fang plagiarized Sun Fu, for the history of “Sun Hu evil” case, provided a credible circumstantial evidence. Because Sun Fubin hate cynicism, it is possible because of dissatisfaction with Hu Kuang Sun Fuzhi plagiarism to say it.