摘 要 近賢探究董仲舒對《春秋》學的詮釋研究成果，基本上可分為四大 類，意義否定說、傳統經典解釋、依附詮釋學解讀、共時倫理解釋論。當 中，若《春秋繁露》作為解釋倫理學，不應是一項孤立的現象，必有共時 學者，類同的價值觀可資參考。 本文對董仲舒《春秋》詮釋，分為：核心（況）、規矩（指）、印 證（事）、彌縫（名號）。董生作為傳經之儒，他確實在秦火後，揭示出 《春秋》選擇讀者的事實，在對之進行情理兼察的謹慎詮釋之餘，並把解 讀法則付之公評，為後學提供明確的討論場景。董生於儒門學統的垂範作 用，固非好學深思者，不能確知其意也！

Abstract When contemporary scholars research into the results of Dong Zhongshu’ s study of the Confucian classic “Chunqiu”, their analyses can be divided into four categories. They are ‘negation’ (refusing to believe that it is a book of any academic significance), ‘conventionalism’ (conforming to the traditional interpretations of the Chinese classics), ‘hermeneutics’ (relying on this western philosophical concept to explore new viewpoints) and ‘contemporary ethics’ (believing that Dong was comparing the views between Confucius and his contemporaries). Among these, if “Chunqiu Fanlu” is considered as a book of explanatory ethics, it should not be regarded as an individual phenomenon. There must have been other scholars and similar value concepts available for reference during the times of Dong Zhongshu. This paper divides Dong Zhongshu’s interpretation of “Spring and Autumn” into the following sections: the core (‘kuang’), the rules (‘zhi’), citations (‘shi’) and nomenclature (‘minghao’). As a scholar who was determined to pass on the Confucian classics after the devastating fire ordered by Qin Shihuang to burn all books, Dong had revealed his intention to confine the contents of “Spring and Autumn” to a selected few. Not only had he prudently interpreted this classic with both worldly wisdom and logical reasoning, he had also put rules of such an interpretation under public critique. He had set a precise and specific platform for future debates by his posterity. Only those who love knowledge and think vigorously would truly appreciate Dong’s exemplary role in the echelon of traditional Confucian scholars.