- 學位論文
清代「鄭志」輯本及其「鄭學」之研究
The Lost Writings of "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志）in Qing（清） Dynasty and "Zheng Xue"（鄭學） Studies
摘要
《鄭志》一書為鄭玄後學所編，該書內容記載了鄭玄與其弟子之間，在經學議題上的論學答問，因此可作為研究鄭學師門的重要依據。此書流傳至宋代已不可復見，直至清代，始有學者關注《鄭志》一書的還原工作，遂使得「鄭志」一書得以還魂重現。因此，《鄭志》的複雜性，不僅可從「鄭玄弟子」的角度來反觀鄭玄，更涉及了漢、魏之際，以及清代輯家對於「鄭學」的觀點。 清代輯家除了梳理散佚於浩瀚書海中的「鄭志」文獻，也面臨重新判讀與復原的問題。因此在面對何謂「鄭志」原貌的課題時，輯家可以各持不同的考量立說，這也使得「鄭志」輯本的形式背後，各有不同的理論依據。在重輯《鄭志》的過程中，經學史上的議題，將「鄭志」輯本區分為三種主要形式；這三種形式的依據，與判斷問答形式有關。像是《鄭志》既是記載鄭玄與諸弟子的答問，是以界分「鄭玄弟子」的標準，就成了首當其衝的課題；站在清代「鄭學」的立場，攸關於「鄭玄弟子」對話的《鄭記》一書，究竟應歸屬於「鄭志」？抑是截然不然的脈絡？二書之間的盤根錯節關係，也透過「鄭志輯本」形式的探究，展現了輯本家不同的思維。此外，後世學者在討論鄭玄一生的學思歷程時，常苦於鄭玄在注經上頗有出入；在《鄭志》一書中，鄭玄自陳早期經注與晚年經注的立場不同，其中頗多修正早年之說，則《鄭志》輯本的重要性，或可視為保存鄭玄「晚年定論」之論著。 本文依據文獻上的不同判讀，對《鄭志》輯本的形成進行梳理，分析「鄭志」中的問答形式，如何影響輯家對於《鄭志》與《鄭記》二書之間的解釋。並且從清代學術史對於「鄭學」的立場，重新釐清清代輯家對於重現鄭玄文獻的貢獻與創見。
並列摘要
"Zheng Zhi"（鄭志）, a book was compiled by the learners after Zheng Xuan（鄭玄）, in which recorded the dialogues on the issues of Confucian ideology discussed between Zheng Xuan（鄭玄） and the disciples, so that could be as an important basis of the research for Zheng ideology（鄭學）. This book had no longer been seen in the Song （宋）Dynasty while handed down. Till Qing（清） Dynasty, some scholars had begun to concern the reduction work of "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） and consequently made the revival of "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志）. Therefore, the great complexity of "Zheng Zhi" （鄭志）was revealed not only by looking at Zheng Xuan（鄭玄） from the standpoint of the disciples of Zheng Xuan（鄭玄）, more involved the points of view of the compilers among the Han, Wei and Qing Dynasty in "Zheng ideology"（鄭學）. Besides combing for the "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） documents that scattered over the vast sea of books, the Qing （清）Dynasty compilers also faced the problems in re-interpretation and recovery. As a result, in the face of the subject what the original of "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） is, the compilers presented their argument with different considerations, which also made the styles of "Zhent Ji"（鄭記） compilations based in accordance with different theories. In the process of "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） recompilation, the "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） compilations were divided into three main styles by the issues in the history of Confucian ideology; the basis of these three styles were related to the determination to the style of dialogues, such as "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） was recorded the dialogues between Zheng Xuan and the disciples. Hence, the standard to identify as Zheng Xuan （鄭玄）disciple became the first subject; standing in the Qing （清）Dynasty, what should the "Zheng Ji"（鄭記） a book about the dialogues among the disciples be classified to? Or it is entirely different thread of thought? Intertwined relationship between the two books through the exploration of the style of "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志）compilation showed the different ways of thinking of the compiler. In addition, while discuss the life history of studying and thinking about Zheng Xuan（鄭玄）, the later scholars often suffer from the discrepancies made by Zheng Xuan（鄭玄） on the notes of Confucian classics; In the "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志）, Zheng Xuan（鄭玄）self declared the position on the notes of Confucian classics in his early years is different from in his later years, in which there are quite more statements about amendments for the early years saying. So the importance of the "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志）compilations may be regarded as the book to reserve for Zheng Xuan’s final conclusion in his later years. This study in accordance with different interpretation from documents, sorts out the formation of "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志）compilations, analysis the style of dialogues in "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） how to affect the compilers to interpret "Zheng Zhi"（鄭志） and "Zheng Ji" （鄭記）between the two books, and from the Qing（清） Dynasty Academic History for "Zheng ideology”（鄭學） position, to re-clarify the contribution and originality of Qing（清） Dynasty compilers in the revival of "Zheng Xuan"（鄭玄） documents.