《大學》「明明」重言說考

《大學》「在明明德」，朱一新批評段玉裁讀「明明」為重言，並指其暗襲毛奇齡，而毛氏又用李塨說。經考，史實層面，一、毛氏先於李塨提出此說，且李塨仍用鄭玄注；二、段氏指明出自戴震《大學補注》，但現存戴氏著作皆將「明德」連讀，段乃發揮師說；三、段說來源尚無法考實。義理層面，一、宋儒已取「明明」說，多直陳意見而無論證；二、毛奇齡說似是延續宋人而來；三、段玉裁從文字訓詁入手，以語義詮釋，力求證明經典內部之義理一貫性，但此說並不適用於《大學》。對比可見段氏於毛、李乃至宋儒之繼承、連貫與不同，而朱一新又借此例反思經學之出路。在此意義上，《大學》「明明」說不啻為清代學術思想演進之小小縮影。

關鍵字

《大學》；明明德；毛奇齡；戴震；段玉裁

並列摘要

"Zai Ming Ming De" comes from The Great Learning. Duan Yucai interpreted "Ming Ming" as a reduplicated word, but Zhu Yixin criticized Duan Yucai for plagiarizing Mao Qiling and Mao plagiarized Li Gong. Research shows that, in terms of historical facts, first, Mao Qiling put forward this statement before Li Gong, and Li Gong still used Zheng Xuan's annotation; second, Duan himself said that this statement came from his teacher Dai Zhen's Daxue Buzhu, in the existing works of Dai's works, it was "Ming De"; third, the source of Duan's statement has yet to be verified. In terms of philosophical connotations, first, Song Confucianism had adopted the "Ming Ming" theory, but most of them had expressed opinions without argument; second, Mao Qiling's theory seemed to be a continuation of the Song Confucianism's theory; third, Duan Yucai started from the textual exegesis and tried to prove the coherence of the internal meanings of the classics through semantic interpretation, but this theory does not apply to The Great Learning. The comparison shows the inheritance, coherence, and difference of the Duan from Mao, Li, and even Song Confucianism. Zhu Yixin took this example to reflect on the way out of Confucianism. In this sense, the "Ming Ming" theory of The Great Learning can be said to be a miniature epitome of the evolution of academic thought in the Qing Dynasty.