摘要
本文立基於對姚鼐與桐城派的研究成果之反省，不由文章、文學的角度看姚鼐，而關注其學術及經學觀點。其根基問題在於，姚鼐堅守宋學立場、尊奉程朱，卻認同漢學家普遍認可的偽古文說，並主張將古文《尚書》摒棄於官學之外。但既有論述，無論是將姚鼐視為宋學者，強調其與漢學的對立；或將古文《尚書》真、偽觀點與學人的漢、宋學立場相對應的模式，都無法對姚鼐的古文《尚書》觀點，作出合理的解釋。其次，姚鼐推崇程朱思想，乃人所共知；但姚鼐因堅持古文偽作，而有持論與朱子迥異者，卻罕有人論及。筆者將姚鼐關於古文《尚書》的論述，置於其整體學術觀點來看，對其持宋學立場，古文《尚書》觀點卻偏向漢學一方，提出合理的解釋，可補姚鼐專家研究之不足，並對清代《尚書》學及漢宋學問題，提供另一個思考的方向。
並列摘要
This article investigates the Qing scholar, Yao Nai, and the Toucheng school, based on their views of scholarship and the Classics, rather than their literary efforts. The essential problem is that Yao Nai's viewpoints on the Guwen Shanghshu could not be explained rationally by existing discussions of him. Furthermore, it has not generally been recognized that Yao Nai differs substantially from Zhu Xi because of his belief that the Guwen Shangshu was a forgery. Examining Yao Nai's Guwen Shangshu viewpoints through the framework of his views of scholarship presents a reasonable explanation of this contradiction. This also gives us a new perspective to consider more general issues related to the Guwen Shangshu and Han-Sung Learning.
參考文獻
延伸閱讀
- 歐家榮（2022）。姚鼐古文理論與《古文辭類纂》選文意識研究〔碩士論文，國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202200614
- 李建崑（2016）。姚合詩集之考校與詮釋。東海大學圖書館館刊，(4)，1-12。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20160330003-201604-201604190019-201604190019-1-12
- 楊聯陞（1972）。池田溫「中國古代籍帳集錄」評介。食貨月刊，2(1)，1-8。https://doi.org/10.6435/SHM.197204.0001
- 蔡根祥（2007）。Zhang Jioucheng's Shangshu Study。高雄師大學報：人文與藝術類，(22)，1-25。https://doi.org/10.7060/KNUJ-HA.200706.0001
- 張欣欣（1999）。The life and thought of Shen Yao (1798-1840)〔碩士論文，香港大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0029-1812201200017336