清中后期的礼、理之辨——以凌廷堪礼学为轴心
|
摘要
从清初到乾隆二十年(1755年)前后,学术思想逐渐由推崇程朱理学转变为推崇汉代经学,进而推崇上古礼学。与之相应的是清廷四库馆和三礼馆的开设。凌廷堪的礼学思想就是在这一背景下形成的,其代表作《礼经释例》被钱大昕誉为习礼学的"指南车"。凌氏试图恢复西周时期的礼乐文明,提出"舍礼无学"、"舍礼无教"、"舍礼无道"的主张,乃是一种狭隘的"唯礼主义"。他以《论语》有"礼"字而无"理"字为由,排斥对"理"概念的援引和使用,这对中华民族理论思维的提高是不利的。晚清黄式三、黄以周父子批评他"矫枉过正"是正确的,但他们又提出"穷理者,即治礼之学",亦欠周延。学术性强而思想性差,这或许是清代多数学者无法解脱的宿命。
From the early Qing Dynasty to twenty years before or after Qianlong emperor,the academic thoughts gradually changed from the promotion of Neo-Confucianism to the promotion of Confucius classics of Han dynasty,and thenpromote Confucius rituals,which are corresponding to the setting of Four Categorical Cannons Library and Three Ritual Halls in Imperial Court. LingTingkan's ritual thoughts were formed under the background. His masterpiece Interpretation of Ritual Classicswas praised by QianDazhen? as a "guide car"for rituals studying. Ling Tingkantried to restore the civilization of rite and music in the Western Zhou Dynasty,and proposed the ideas that "there is no education without ritual","there is no teaching without ritual"and "there is no moral without ritual",which is a narrow view of "religiousism."He rejected to quote or use the concept of "Neo-Confucianism"with the reason that there is no? "Neo-Confucianism"but"ritual"inthe Analects of Confucius. This is unfavorable to the improvement of the theoretical thinking of Chinese nation. It was right for Huang Shisan and and his father Huang Yizhou criticized him for being "hypercorrection"in late Qing Dynasty,but meanwhile they proposed "the study of rituals equals to the study of Neo-Confucianism",this is alsoinadequate. What Huang proposed was academically strong butpoor in ideological level,which probably the fate of most scholars in Qing Dynasty.
From the early Qing Dynasty to twenty years before or after Qianlong emperor,the academic thoughts gradually changed from the promotion of Neo-Confucianism to the promotion of Confucius classics of Han dynasty,and thenpromote Confucius rituals,which are corresponding to the setting of Four Categorical Cannons Library and Three Ritual Halls in Imperial Court. LingTingkan's ritual thoughts were formed under the background. His masterpiece Interpretation of Ritual Classicswas praised by QianDazhen? as a "guide car"for rituals studying. Ling Tingkantried to restore the civilization of rite and music in the Western Zhou Dynasty,and proposed the ideas that "there is no education without ritual","there is no teaching without ritual"and "there is no moral without ritual",which is a narrow view of "religiousism."He rejected to quote or use the concept of "Neo-Confucianism"with the reason that there is no? "Neo-Confucianism"but"ritual"inthe Analects of Confucius. This is unfavorable to the improvement of the theoretical thinking of Chinese nation. It was right for Huang Shisan and and his father Huang Yizhou criticized him for being "hypercorrection"in late Qing Dynasty,but meanwhile they proposed "the study of rituals equals to the study of Neo-Confucianism",this is alsoinadequate. What Huang proposed was academically strong butpoor in ideological level,which probably the fate of most scholars in Qing Dynasty.
引文
[1]清实录.[M].北京:中华书局,1986.
[2]朱子全书[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2002.
[3]陆九渊集[M].北京:中华书局,1980.
[4]孟森.明清史讲义[M].北京:商务印书馆,2011.
[5]钦定皇朝文献通考[M].景印文渊阁四库全书:第637册[Z].台北:(台湾)商务印书馆,1986.
[6]凌廷堪.校礼堂文集[M].北京:中华书局,1998.
[7]廖莹中.东雅堂昌黎集注[M].景印文渊阁四库全书:第1075册[Z].台北:(台湾)商务印书馆,1986.
[8]钱穆.中国近三百年学术史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[9]段玉裁.说文解字注[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1988.
[10]朱骏声.说文通训定声[M].北京:中华书局,1984.
[11]阮元.十三经注疏[M].北京:中华书局,1980.
[12]黎翔凤.管子校注[M].北京:中华书局,2004.
[13]程颢,程颐.二程集[M].北京:中华书局,1992.
[14]胡广,等.性理大全书[M].景印文渊阁四库全书:第711册[Z].台北:(台湾)商务印书馆,1986.
[15]戴震集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1980.
[16]黄以周.礼书通故[M].北京:中华书局,2007.
[17]黄式三全集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2014.
[18]黄以周全集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2014.
[19]黄家岱.嬩艺轩杂著(卷下)[M].清光绪二十一年(1895年)刻本.
[20]朱熹.四书章句集注[M].北京:中华书局,1983.
[21]朱维铮,李天刚.徐光启全集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2010.
[22]顾炎武.与施愚山书[A].顾炎武全集:第21册[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2011.
[23]杨峰,张伟.清代经学学术编年(下)[M].南京:凤凰出版社,2015.
[2]朱子全书[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2002.
[3]陆九渊集[M].北京:中华书局,1980.
[4]孟森.明清史讲义[M].北京:商务印书馆,2011.
[5]钦定皇朝文献通考[M].景印文渊阁四库全书:第637册[Z].台北:(台湾)商务印书馆,1986.
[6]凌廷堪.校礼堂文集[M].北京:中华书局,1998.
[7]廖莹中.东雅堂昌黎集注[M].景印文渊阁四库全书:第1075册[Z].台北:(台湾)商务印书馆,1986.
[8]钱穆.中国近三百年学术史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[9]段玉裁.说文解字注[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1988.
[10]朱骏声.说文通训定声[M].北京:中华书局,1984.
[11]阮元.十三经注疏[M].北京:中华书局,1980.
[12]黎翔凤.管子校注[M].北京:中华书局,2004.
[13]程颢,程颐.二程集[M].北京:中华书局,1992.
[14]胡广,等.性理大全书[M].景印文渊阁四库全书:第711册[Z].台北:(台湾)商务印书馆,1986.
[15]戴震集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1980.
[16]黄以周.礼书通故[M].北京:中华书局,2007.
[17]黄式三全集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2014.
[18]黄以周全集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2014.
[19]黄家岱.嬩艺轩杂著(卷下)[M].清光绪二十一年(1895年)刻本.
[20]朱熹.四书章句集注[M].北京:中华书局,1983.
[21]朱维铮,李天刚.徐光启全集[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2010.
[22]顾炎武.与施愚山书[A].顾炎武全集:第21册[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2011.
[23]杨峰,张伟.清代经学学术编年(下)[M].南京:凤凰出版社,2015.