想像與嫁接－荀子傳經系統的建構與問題

荀子對於漢代經學的傳承有著關鍵地位，這是歷來學者所闡述與認同的論點。然而，考究文獻歷史，可以發現荀子傳經的論述，大抵至清代才被大書特書，在此之前多為零星片段。這點可從歷來對於荀子傳經的論述中探得嫁接與拼湊的痕跡。基本上，荀子之時「經學」尚未形成，甚至亦無「五經」、「六經」的概念，不能以經學時代的後見之明而賦予荀子傳經之功。又荀子以「經典」為教材和「荀子傳經」是兩回事，亦不可混為一談。應該明確區分先秦與兩漢的兩種學術型態：「儒學中有經典」與「經學中有儒學」。荀子做為通儒，不會有「經學時代」專於一經的師法系統之傳承關係。「子學時代」的通儒以生命的學問為核心，而「經學時代」的經生則以經典為核心，二者的態度截然不同，不能以後世的眼光去論述荀子與經典的關係。因此，「荀子傳經」之論大抵可能是清儒對於「宋學」的反動，利用荀子填補漢代道統的空缺，以建構「漢學」的權威與正當性。

關鍵字

荀子；漢學；宋學；經學；荀學復興

並列摘要

The past research of scholars have come to the conclusion that the teachings of Xunzi are the fundamental basis for learning the classics in the Han dynasty. However, after talking a deeper look into history and exploring the related documents, the discussions on Xunzi being the leading scholar of the classics is most prevalent in the Qing dynasty(清朝), and almost non-existent before it. Thus, this paper aims to bring light upon how scholars from the Qing dynasty aimed to reconstruct and transform the teachings of Xunzi, thus making him the source of the fundamental values for disseminating the classics. In understanding a source material we must not use the concepts of the present time to analyze that of the past. That being said, we cannot use the concept of later eras to examine the contribution of Xunzi and his teachings of the classics because during the time of Xunzi there were no classic studies, not to mention a concept of the ＂five(six) classics＂ . It must also be noted that there is a stark difference between the thought in the Pre-Qin(先秦) and Han dynasty. That is to say, as Xunzi being a scholar in the ＂period of scholars＂, and teaching comprehensive knowledge and wisdom differs greatly from just teaching Confucianism and its classics, which is more common in the Han dynasty. Thus it must be pointed out that the ＂classics＂ and the way Xunzi discussed and interpreted them is not synonymous with the ＂five(six) Classics＂ and how they are taught in later dynasties. It can be seen that this paradigm shift in the Qing dynasty was a reaction against the thought of Neo-Confucian scholars. Thus in direct contrast to the Neo-Confucian emphasis on Meng zi, the Qing scholars made Xunzi the leading figure in classic studies and the primary successor to Confucius.