“春秋大义”的形上过程及其学理化
|
摘要
孔子将《春秋》之"义"理解为"礼义",试图按照礼的精神,建构起一套足以评价历史人物是非、历史事件正误的学理依据,以之作为新的历史共识。《春秋》三传充分体认并尊重孔子所立之"义",再进行学说的阐释和学理的建构,从不同维度对《春秋》中所寄托的"义"进行深化和细化。其中,《左传》强化"德义",认为"德"是历史评价的根本,视"义"为道德共识,强调其对于历史评价的普遍意义;《谷梁传》更重视"经义",侧重分析《春秋》笔法及微言所寄托的大义,形成对"义"的逻辑建构;《公羊传》以董仲舒"春秋大义"立意,从价值共识的维度诠释"义"在治道中的存在方式,成为汉代大一统学说的基本学理。这些阐释的合力,使得《春秋》既成为了衡量历史成败得失的史学文本,又成为了关注世道人心的经书著述。
Confucius interpreted "yi(义)" in Chunqiu(The Spring and Autumn Annals) as "liyi(礼义,propriety and righteousness)" and tried to construct a set of theoretical bases to evaluate historical figures and events. The most famous three commentaries on Chunqiu recognize and respect the concept of "righteousness" established by Confucius, and then on its basis make theoretical interpretation and construction and make deeper and detailed interpretation of "yi"embedded in Chunqiu from different perspective. Among them, The Commentary of Zuo( 左传)emphasizes "deyi(德义,morality and faith)",takes "de(morality)" as the basis for historical evaluation,the most important moral quality, and emphasizes its universal significance for historical evaluation. The Commentary of Guliang(谷梁传) values "jingyi(经义,moral principles from Chinese classics)", focuses on the writing techniques of Chunqiu and the great principles embedded in it, forming a logic construction of "yi". The Commentary of Gongyang(公羊传), on the basis of DONG Zhong-shu's"Chuqiu Dayi(春秋大义,Dong felt that Confucius not only recorded events to exercise judgment upon them but also laid down the rules to be used in governing future dynasties)", interprets the way of integrating "yi" into governance and ruling from the perspective of universal values, which makes the basic theory of centralized politics in Han Dynasty. All these interpretations make Chunqiu not only a historical text that measures success and failure in history, but also a classic on moral codes and social ethos.
Confucius interpreted "yi(义)" in Chunqiu(The Spring and Autumn Annals) as "liyi(礼义,propriety and righteousness)" and tried to construct a set of theoretical bases to evaluate historical figures and events. The most famous three commentaries on Chunqiu recognize and respect the concept of "righteousness" established by Confucius, and then on its basis make theoretical interpretation and construction and make deeper and detailed interpretation of "yi"embedded in Chunqiu from different perspective. Among them, The Commentary of Zuo( 左传)emphasizes "deyi(德义,morality and faith)",takes "de(morality)" as the basis for historical evaluation,the most important moral quality, and emphasizes its universal significance for historical evaluation. The Commentary of Guliang(谷梁传) values "jingyi(经义,moral principles from Chinese classics)", focuses on the writing techniques of Chunqiu and the great principles embedded in it, forming a logic construction of "yi". The Commentary of Gongyang(公羊传), on the basis of DONG Zhong-shu's"Chuqiu Dayi(春秋大义,Dong felt that Confucius not only recorded events to exercise judgment upon them but also laid down the rules to be used in governing future dynasties)", interprets the way of integrating "yi" into governance and ruling from the perspective of universal values, which makes the basic theory of centralized politics in Han Dynasty. All these interpretations make Chunqiu not only a historical text that measures success and failure in history, but also a classic on moral codes and social ethos.
引文
[1]春秋左传正义[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999.
[2](清)焦循.春秋左传补疏[A].(清)阮元编.皇清经解[M].南京:凤凰出版社,2005.8801.
[3](明)王夫之.春秋家说[A].船山全书[M].长沙:岳麓书社,1988.263.
[4]春秋谷梁传注疏[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999.
[5]杨树达.春秋大义述[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2007.52.
[6]史记[M].北京:中华书局,1959.
[7]冯友兰.孔子在中国历史中之地位[A].三松堂全集[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2000.135-149.
[8]徐元诰集解.国语集解[M].北京:中华书局,2002.
[9](清)黄宗羲.明儒学案[M].北京:中华书局,1985.285.
[10]孟子注疏[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999.
[11](南宋)吕大圭.论夫子作春秋[A].(清)陈梦雷编.古今图书集成[M].北京:中华书局,1985.69769.
[12]梁启超.中国历史研究法[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2014.18.
[13](清)张自超.春秋宗朱辨义总论[A].李淼编.中国古代序跋文选集[M].汕头:汕头大学出版社,1996.658.
[14](清)顾炎武著,黄汝成集释.日知录集释[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2014.71.
[15]曹胜高.义政说的学理建构与学说指向[J].古代文明.2013,(3):102-111.
[16](清)戴震撰.经考[A].戴震全书[M].合肥:黄山书社,1994.555.
[17]曹胜高.上古礼学的内在结构与逻辑层级[J].河南科技大学学报.2011,(4):5-13.
[18][德]阿斯特.诠释学[A].洪汉鼎编.理解与诠释:诠释学经典文选[M].北京:东方出版社,2001.1-22.
[19]汉书[M].北京:中华书局,1962.1715.
[20]曹胜高.义兵论与秦汉军争的合法性阐释[J].古代文明.2014,(2):102-111.
[21]苏舆撰.春秋繁露义证[M].北京:中华书局,1992.
(1)“义”之所以成为阐释《春秋》的核心,根本原因在于《春秋》的文本性质与功能具有“义”的原始发生内涵与指代功能,故《春秋》中无“义”字,却能以“大义”精神独领群经。(参见谭佳《<春秋>与“义”:“义”的文化渊源及内涵之探》,《百色学院学报》,2010年第6期)这种从《春秋》三传对“义”的建构的角度分析,不无道理。回到《春秋》文本,《春秋》是记事史书,在行文中并无论辩,故没有使用“义”之涵义的语境。不独于此,《春秋》中也无“仁”字,可为旁证。
(2)参见(西汉)董仲舒《春秋繁露》,(北宋)胡安国《春秋胡氏传》,(清)廖平《榖梁古义疏》等。
(3)参见(西晋)杜预《春秋经传集解》,(唐)孔颖达《春秋左传正义》,刘师培《春秋左氏传例略》《春秋左氏传古例诠微》等。
[2](清)焦循.春秋左传补疏[A].(清)阮元编.皇清经解[M].南京:凤凰出版社,2005.8801.
[3](明)王夫之.春秋家说[A].船山全书[M].长沙:岳麓书社,1988.263.
[4]春秋谷梁传注疏[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999.
[5]杨树达.春秋大义述[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2007.52.
[6]史记[M].北京:中华书局,1959.
[7]冯友兰.孔子在中国历史中之地位[A].三松堂全集[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2000.135-149.
[8]徐元诰集解.国语集解[M].北京:中华书局,2002.
[9](清)黄宗羲.明儒学案[M].北京:中华书局,1985.285.
[10]孟子注疏[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999.
[11](南宋)吕大圭.论夫子作春秋[A].(清)陈梦雷编.古今图书集成[M].北京:中华书局,1985.69769.
[12]梁启超.中国历史研究法[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2014.18.
[13](清)张自超.春秋宗朱辨义总论[A].李淼编.中国古代序跋文选集[M].汕头:汕头大学出版社,1996.658.
[14](清)顾炎武著,黄汝成集释.日知录集释[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2014.71.
[15]曹胜高.义政说的学理建构与学说指向[J].古代文明.2013,(3):102-111.
[16](清)戴震撰.经考[A].戴震全书[M].合肥:黄山书社,1994.555.
[17]曹胜高.上古礼学的内在结构与逻辑层级[J].河南科技大学学报.2011,(4):5-13.
[18][德]阿斯特.诠释学[A].洪汉鼎编.理解与诠释:诠释学经典文选[M].北京:东方出版社,2001.1-22.
[19]汉书[M].北京:中华书局,1962.1715.
[20]曹胜高.义兵论与秦汉军争的合法性阐释[J].古代文明.2014,(2):102-111.
[21]苏舆撰.春秋繁露义证[M].北京:中华书局,1992.
(1)“义”之所以成为阐释《春秋》的核心,根本原因在于《春秋》的文本性质与功能具有“义”的原始发生内涵与指代功能,故《春秋》中无“义”字,却能以“大义”精神独领群经。(参见谭佳《<春秋>与“义”:“义”的文化渊源及内涵之探》,《百色学院学报》,2010年第6期)这种从《春秋》三传对“义”的建构的角度分析,不无道理。回到《春秋》文本,《春秋》是记事史书,在行文中并无论辩,故没有使用“义”之涵义的语境。不独于此,《春秋》中也无“仁”字,可为旁证。
(2)参见(西汉)董仲舒《春秋繁露》,(北宋)胡安国《春秋胡氏传》,(清)廖平《榖梁古义疏》等。
(3)参见(西晋)杜预《春秋经传集解》,(唐)孔颖达《春秋左传正义》,刘师培《春秋左氏传例略》《春秋左氏传古例诠微》等。