:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:惠棟的《春秋》學
書刊名:臺大文史哲學報
作者:張素卿 引用關係
作者(外文):Chang, Su-ching
出版日期:2002
卷期:57
頁次:頁99-101+103-140
主題關鍵詞:漢學古義解釋類型解經乾嘉之學Han LearningGuyiType of interpretationExegesis of the ClassicsChien-ChiaHsueh shu
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(0) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:1129
  • 點閱點閱:30
惠棟以漢儒「近古」而守「家法」,且將古訓著於竹帛,故標榜以「漢學」解經,為乾嘉之學開一門徑;「述而不作」的「古義」則是其代表性的解 釋類型。「古義」以輯佚、考據為基礎,注重訓詁之學,《易漢學》、《周易述》等一系列著述,巳為撰述新注疏揭開序幕。依《左傳補註》、《公羊古義》和《穀梁古義》三傳古義而言,惠氏之《春秋》學非嚴守今文、古文之壁壘,不墨守一家之說;治經重心從書法義例轉向古訓,由識字審音進而考索典章制度,循此進路以解經釋義。以禮治《春秋》,正是以「漢學」補正魏晉注解的突破關鍵,其中仍寓有經世的終極關懷。總之,惠棟經學標榜述「古」,實則以「漢學」立幟開新。
Hui Dong considered that the Han Confucians were closer to antiquity, followed the traditional schools of interpretation, and transcribed the transmitted archaic pronunciations onto bamboo and silk. Thus he had respect for the Han and concentrated on the Han Learning interpretation of the Classics that respected antiquity, emphasizing the "guyi ( 古義 )" of the Confucian phrase, "Transmit but do not create," as the representative model of interpretation. He used guyi as the basis for his textual reconstruction and evidential scholarship, stressed study of ancient pronunciation, and authored texts such as Han Learning Yi ( 易漢學 ), and the Explanation of the Zhouyi ( 周易述 ), outlining the beginning of a new way of commentary. According to his three texts, Supplementary Notes to the Zuozhuan ( 左傳補註 ), "Guyi of the Gongyang Commentary ( 公羊古義 )," and "Guyi of the Guliang Commentary ( 穀梁古義 )," all may be classed as the type of interpreta – tion of "guyi ( 古義 )." We can say that his Spring and Autumn Annals scholarship did not strictly preserve the distinction between Old Textand New Text schools, and he was not bound to study solely according to anyone traditional school or commentary. The core of his exegeses of the Classics changed from the interpretation of their concealed meanings, to ancient pronunciation, and he turned in the direction of ancient philology according to meaning and pronunciation; in addition, concentrating on researching the system of governmental decrees and regulations. Ordering the Spring and Autumn Annals according to ritual, this was actually a breakthrough in that he used Han Learning to supplement and correct the Wei and Jin Dynasty commentaries; and also we should not overlook his ultimate goal of ordering the world. In sum, although Hui Dong's study of the classics declared that it described what was ancient, it actually opened up a new direction through Han Learning.
期刊論文
1.張素卿(2002)。經其及解釋-陳澧的經學觀。中國哲學,24,642-680。  延伸查詢new window
2.陳居淵(2000)。論惠棟的經學思想。中國哲學,21,405-427。  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.陳祖武、林慶彰(1994)。關於乾嘉學派的幾點思考。清代經學國際研討會。臺北:中央研究院中國文哲研究所籌備處。  延伸查詢new window
2.張素卿(2000)。「經之義存乎訓」-惠棟經學管窺。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
3.張素卿(2000)。「經之義存乎訓」─惠棟經學管窺。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.蔡孝懌(1998)。惠棟《春秋左傳補註》之研究(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.蔡孝懌(1998)。惠棟《春秋左傳補註》之研究(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄。  延伸查詢new window
3.耿志宏(1984)。惠棟之經學研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.章炳麟(1984)。訄書。訄書。上海:人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.臧琳(1970)。經義雜記。臺北:藝文印書館。  延伸查詢new window
3.惠棟(1983)。易例。臺北:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
4.支偉成(1986)。清代樸學大師列傳。長沙:岳麓出版社。  延伸查詢new window
5.楊向奎(199403)。清儒學案。濟南:齊魯書社。  延伸查詢new window
6.梁啟超(1985)。清代學術概論。清代學術概論。臺北。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.林慶彰、賈順先(1992)。楊慎研究資料彙編。臺北:中央研究院中國文哲研究所。  延伸查詢new window
8.袁枚、王英志(1993)。小倉山房文集。南京:江蘇古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.李開(1992)。戴震評傳。江蘇。  延伸查詢new window
10.惠棟(1970)。九曜齋筆記。臺北:藝文印書館。  延伸查詢new window
11.錢穆(1987)。中國近三百年學術史。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
12.盧文賠、王文錦(1990)。抱經堂文集。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
13.戴震(1978)。戴東原先生全集。臺北:大化書局。  延伸查詢new window
14.漆永祥(1998)。乾嘉考據學研究。中國社會科學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
15.李開(1997)。惠棟評傳。南京:南京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
16.惠棟(1970)。松崖文鈔。臺北:藝文印書館。  延伸查詢new window
17.邵寶(1997)。左觿。臺南:莊嚴文化公司。  延伸查詢new window
18.顧炎武(1962)。左傳杜解補正。臺北:藝文印書館。  延伸查詢new window
19.焦循(1962)。春秋左傳補疏。臺北:藝文印書館。  延伸查詢new window
20.永瑢、紀昀(1983)。四庫全書總目。臺北:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
21.柳興恩(1964)。穀梁大義述。臺北:藝文印書館。  延伸查詢new window
22.曹書杰(1998)。中國古籍輯佚學論稿。東北師範大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
23.陳澧、楊志剛(1998)。東塾讀書記。生活.讀書.新知三聯書店。  延伸查詢new window
24.陳澧(1970)。東塾集。臺北縣:文海出版社。  延伸查詢new window
25.王熙元(1974)。穀梁著述考徵。臺北:廣東出版社。  延伸查詢new window
26.錢穆(1985)。國史大綱。臺北:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
27.錢大昕、呂友仁(1989)。潛研堂集。上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
28.錢穆(1987)。中國近三百年學術史。臺北:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
29.錢儀吉(1993)。碑傳集。中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
30.張素卿(1998)。敘事與解釋:《左傳》經解研究。書林出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
31.梁啟超(1985)。清代學術概論。台北:台灣商務印書館。new window  延伸查詢new window
32.陳新雄(1964)。春秋異文考。臺北:嘉新水泥公司文化基金會。  延伸查詢new window
33.阮元、鄧經元(1993)。揅經室集。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
34.沈玉成、劉寧(1992)。春秋左傳學史稿。江蘇古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
35.錢穆(1995)。國史大綱。臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
36.鍾文烝、駢宇騫、郝淑慧(1996)。春秋穀梁經傳補注。中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
37.梁啟超(1984)。中國近三百年學術史。臺北:華正書局。new window  延伸查詢new window
38.林慶彰(1981)。實證精神的尋求-明清考據學的發展。中國文化新論.學術篇。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
39.王熙元(1974)。榖梁著述考徵。榖梁著述考徵。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
40.周予同(1989)。經學歷史。經學歷史。北京。  延伸查詢new window
41.徐復觀(1985)。中國思想史論集續集。中國思想史論集續集。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
42.淩廷堪(1998)。校禮堂集。校禮堂集。北京。  延伸查詢new window
43.張惠言(1962)。周易虞氏義。周易虞氏義。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
44.徐復觀(1985)。中國思想史論集。臺北:時報文化出版事業有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
45.張素卿(2002)。經其及解釋─陳澧的經學觀。中國哲學(第24輯)。瀋陽。  延伸查詢new window
46.陳居淵(2000)。論惠棟的經學思想。中國哲學(第21輯)。瀋陽。  延伸查詢new window
47.林慶彰(1981)。實證精神的尋求─明清考據學的發展。浩瀚的學海。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.(清)劉文淇(1979)。春秋左傳舊注疏證,日本,京都:中文出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.(清)永瑢(1983)。四庫全書總目,北京。  延伸查詢new window
3.(漢)許慎(1970)。五經異義,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
4.(清)陳立(1964)。公羊義疏,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
5.(清)惠棟(1962)。古文尚書考,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
6.(清)惠棟(1962)。左傳補註,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
7.(清)惠棟(1962)。九經古義,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
8.(清)惠棟(1964)。明堂大道錄,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
9.柳興恩(1964)。榖梁大義述,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
10.(明)邵寶(1997)。左觿,臺北縣。  延伸查詢new window
11.(清)淩廷堪(1995)。校禮堂集,北京。  延伸查詢new window
12.(東漢)許慎,(清)王謨(1970)。五經異義,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
13.(清)張惠言(1962)。周易虞氏義,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
14.陳立(1964)。公羊義疏,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
15.(清)惠棟(1962)。古文尚書考,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
16.(清)惠棟(1962)。左傳補註,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
17.(清)惠棟(1962)。九經古義,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
18.(清)惠棟(1964)。明堂大道錄,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
19.(清)惠棟(1970)。九曜齋筆記,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
20.(清)焦竑(1962)。春秋左傳補疏,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE