清代《左传》考证研究

【作者】 金永健；

【导师】 田汉云；

【作者基本信息】 扬州大学 ， 中国古代文学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 《左传》学演进至清代,以其重考据的特质,进入总结和开新的历史时期。近三百年间的《左传》研究,可谓学者辈出,成果丰硕,但主流无疑是以考证的方法研治《左传》,考据贯穿其流变递嬗的全过程。清初顾炎武扭转时代风气,倡导为学经世致用,崇尚征信求实,以考据的方法研究《左传》,从文字校勘、名物训诂、历法和地理考证诸多方面,补正晋杜预《春秋经传集解》,是清代《左传》学的发端,在研究的内容与方法上,启朴学之途径,为清代《左传》考据学的发展提供了良好的范式。受崇实致用思想的影响,清代前期的《左传》学,逐步由义理转向了考据,在历史、地理、历法、礼制诸多方面,形成一系列专题性考证成果。考史论经者有马骕《左传事纬》、高士奇《左传纪事本末》,考证地理者有江永《春秋地理考实》,而顾栋高《春秋大事表》则是历史、地理、历法、礼制研究的综合性著作。马骕、高士奇等学者以史论经,以其精确的史事考证,探寻兴亡治乱之迹,注重对经义的发微阐幽,都表现出显著的以史为鉴的经世意图,主要运用的也都是朴实的考据方法。顾栋高荟萃毕生精力,撰成综合研究《春秋》经传的鸿篇巨制——《春秋大事表》,古地理考证,精思独到;古历法研究,趋于精密;礼制考索,考论精确;义理阐发,贴近本旨;全篇证据精明,议论雅正。江永远承朱子格物遗教,于天文、地理之术尤精,他以淹通博洽的学识,从考证地理的角度研究《左传》,将清初隐含经世倾向的地理研究,拓展到《左传》研究的领域,不仅以小学声音考辨古地名,并对杜《注》孔《疏》进行了订讹补阙,表现出从宋学到汉学迁移的倾向。随着汉学思潮的兴起与考据学的兴盛,清代《左传》学在乾嘉时期走向了考据的顶峰。学者以汉儒去古未远,家法相承,七十子之大义犹存,开始以汉学治经,并蔚为风气。惠栋确立汉学宗旨,以汉学研治《左传》,其《左传补注》为汉学发皇,发掘并继承汉儒《左传》学,以识字审音考证法,订补杜预训诂之失,驳正杜预释礼之误。在惠栋的引领下,羽翼声张者甚众。在他们的《左传》著述中,表现了由惠栋开启的相辅而行的两种学术趋向,一是缀次古义,还原古学,一是批判杜《注》孔《疏》。《左传》多古字古音,由文字、音韵、训诂以寻求义理,是汉学家考据《左传》的主张,洪亮吉《春秋左传诂》、马宗琏《左传补注》、臧寿恭《春秋左氏古义》,均为相继追踪古义之作,可谓“古学未兴,道在存其学;古学大兴,道在求其通。”风气之下,学者又大力辑佚汉儒旧注,如严蔚《春秋内传古注辑存》。在汉儒旧注中,又尤以贾逵、服虔为宗,李贻德详尽搜集并考释贾服《左传》遗说,《春秋左氏传贾服注辑述》应运而生,《左传》汉学至此而粲然复章。继惠栋之后,汉学经由戴震的大力推阐,由“求其古”进而“求其是”,重视文本校勘,治经以小学立基,以考据求义理,实事求是遂成为一代学术风尚。《左传》研究倾向于考据训诂,含《左传》在内的《十三经校勘记》,尤其是高邮王氏的以字说经,熟于汉学之门户,而不囿于汉学之藩篱,《左传》考据臻于至精。通过追溯《左传》古义,学者发现杜《注》孔《疏》是破坏汉学的始作俑者,尤其是杜预,袭取汉儒之说而不标注,不臻古训,昧于古义。于是学者纷纷从考据和义理集矢于杜《注》,由补注辨正,到纠驳批判,直至全盘否定,程度愈来愈烈,其中攻击不遗余力者,当为沈钦韩《春秋左氏传补注》和焦循《春秋左传补疏》。沈钦韩长于训诂考证,在文字训释、名物训诂、礼制考论以及义理阐释方面,全盘否定杜《注》的价值。焦循则重点从义理角度纠驳杜《注》,揭示杜预掩饰司马氏篡弑的隐衷,彻底否定杜《注》的义理价值。乾嘉学者莫不以考据的方法研治《左传》,且考据方法的日臻精密。考据学家对《左传》的全面整理和研究,为仪征刘氏建立《左传》新疏奠定了基础。仪征刘氏以汉注取代杜《注》,荟萃清代《左传》学成果,撰著《春秋左氏传旧注疏证》,是清代《左传》考据学的集大成之作。清代后期,各种社会矛盾日益加深,变法维新之说起,西学东渐活跃,学者经世致用的思想重新抬头,经学由考据又转向义理,这些都深刻影响到《左传》研究。常州今文学派兴起,在推阐西汉《公羊》学的同时,以《左传》为刘歆伪造。今古文围绕《左传》之真伪进行了激烈争论。晚清的《左传》考据学,是在与今文学派的争论中展开的。以章太炎和刘师培为代表的古文学者,反驳今文学派的《左传》伪作说,尤其是刘师培的考证,注入时代的新气息,成为《左传》考据学的最后辉煌,也标志着清代《左传》学开始走向近代。本文选择了从清初顾炎武到晚清刘师培,凡十三家的《左传》著述为研究对象,他们都是以考据的方法研治《左传》,都是清代《左传》学不同时期或不同领域的代表。本文以个案分析为基础,重点考察有清一代最具影响力的《左传》考据学成果,研究他们考证《左传》的内容要义、学术思想和方法,兼顾其他《左传》著述,适当作横向和纵向比较,力求点面结合,前后联系。清代《左传》学的繁荣与考据学的兴盛密切相关,与政治也密切关联,本文注重考察《左传》考据学内在理路的发展,同时结合社会政治和学术思潮的外缘考察,由微观到宏观,研究清代《左传》学流变形态的特点,总结清代《左传》考证的成就,探索清代《左传》学发展的规律。笔者认为,有清经术,独绝千古,其中《左传》考证,可谓居功至伟。清儒在《左传》研究的主要环节上,都取得了超越前人的成就。一、文本校勘。《左传》流传两千年,其间辗转传写刊刻,文字谬误者其数不在少。清儒善以小学治经,第一次全面地对《左传》文本刊误订讹,并将校订的范围扩大至杜《注》和孔《疏》,校勘之精审,前所未有。二、辑存汉注。清儒认为,杜氏盛行而贾、服浸微。他们博稽载籍,广为搜采,使散佚已久的汉儒之说,稍还旧观,后人赖以重睹《左传》汉学之大概。三、批驳杜《注》。前人极少怀疑杜预《集解》,清儒不畏权威,以汉学为宗,从名物训诂和义理,对其讹谬进行了全面清查与匡正。四、建立新疏。不满于唐人《正义》,推翻杜《注》,扶微捃佚,以汉诂为宗,“撷取一代经说之菁华”,荟萃众家之说,撰成《左传》新义疏,实为后出转精之作。乾嘉时期,群经新疏叠出,仪征刘氏《春秋左氏传旧注疏证》,堪称“新疏之冠”。其他如典章制度、历史、地理、历法等,都形成了专精的考证成果,成就也非常突出。一反明季空疏的学术风气,清儒“厌倦主观的冥想而倾向于客观的考察”,奉行“虚则易岐,实则难假”的理念。不为凿空之谈,据实以求是,是清代学者研治《左传》的学术风尚,重考据成为清代《左传》学的主流。开风气之先者为顾炎武,乾嘉考据学家研治《左传》从求古到求是,莫不重视文字、音韵、训诂,由考据以求义理,在汉学思潮的推波助澜下,《左传》考证完全走向了考据的时代。晚清时期,《左传》研究在激烈的今古文争论中,注入了更多的时代气息。受西学影响,也受今文刺激,古文学家考据《左传》也注重阐释义理,“援古制以匡今失”,配合民族、民主革命,重新捡回了经学经世的传统。不过,重实证、以考据为中心,仍然是这一时期《左传》研究的思想方法。清代《左传》考证成就卓著,学者以其精纯的考据方法,于经义传文旁征曲喻,得其本义,使古圣贤见之而必解颐,堪称旷古绝今。清代《左传》学,全面总结历史而达到了历史的最高峰,其学术成就和价值,为现代《左传》学奠定了厚实的基础。更多还原

【Abstract】 When it came to Qing Dynasty, the study of“Zuo Commentary”, with emphasis on textual research, started a new era of summary and innovation. Many scholars emerged and fruitful achievements were obtained in the three hundred years. Without doubt, the mainstream of research method applied was textual research, which went through all the course of development.In the early Qing Dynasty, Gu Yanwu changed the trend by proposing practical and realistic study of“Zuo Commentary”with the method of textual research. He supplemented and corrected the work of“Collective Classics Annotation of Spring and Autumn Annals”by Du Yu in the Jin Dynasty from the aspects of character checking, annotating, and calendar and geography examining, and ect. This brand new approach started the study of“Zuo Commentary”in a new way in the Qing Dynasty, providing a model for the development of textual research. The study of“Zuo Commentary”gradually put emphasis on textual research from the principle in early Qing Dynasty, under the influence of the practical and realistic thought. A series of accomplishments were made on the history, geography, calendar, rites and customs and so on.“Textual events in Zuo Commentary”by Ma Su’s and“Ins and outs of events in the Zuo Commentary”by Gao Shiqi’s both examined history and classics.“Textual research of geography in Spring and Autumn Annals”by Jiang Yong’s focused on Geography. Gu Donggao’“The Table of Events in the Spring and Autumn Annals”was a comprehensive book covering history, geography, calendar and rites. Mu Su, Gao Shiqi and other scholars discussed the classics according to history record. They traced the rise and fall of dynasties with textual research of historical events, while they paid attention to classical interpretation, and represented practical and realistic pursuit. The way of textual research was the most important method in their research. Gu Donggao composed“The Table of Events in the Spring and Autumn Annals”, which was a comprehensive study of“Spring and Autumn Annals”and was highly spoken of for original geography verification, meticulous calendar calculation, accurate rites and customs description, cohesive theme elaboration, adequate arguments and thought-provoking remarks. As a follower of Zu Xi’s thoughts, Jiang Yongyuan, an expert at astronomy and geography, applied practical method in geographical study to“Zuo Commentary”through his erudite knowledge. He not only checked and discriminated ancient places, but also corrected and complemented Du and Kong’annotation by means of etymology, semantics and phonology. It exhibited the transfer from Song Study to Sinology.With the rising of the sinological thought and the textual research, the study of“Zuo Commentary”in the Qing Dynasty came to the peak during the period of QingLong and Jia Qing. That scholars studied the classics became a trend, sharing the view that Confucianism had not gone far and its tenet should be inherited. Hui Dong established the tenet of sinology. He researched“Zuo Commentary”with sinologcial thoughts. His work“Compensatory Explanation of Zuo Commentary”, the beginning of sinology, exploited and inherited the subject of the“Zuo Commentary”of sinological Confucianism. He corrected and made up Du Yu’s mistakes of the explanation, with the way of discerning the word and voice. Under the guidance of Hui Dong, many scholars emerged. Two tendencies were identified in their works about“Zuo Commentary”. The one was to explain the archaic principle and restore the original meaning, while the other was to criticize Du and Kong’s works. There were many archaic words and pronunciation in the“Zuo Commentary”. The textual research on the“Zuo Commentary”was to seek the principle according to words, pronunciation, and annotation. Hong Lingji’s“Explanation on the Zuo Commentary and Spring and Autumn Annals”, Ma Zonglian’s“Compensatory Explanation of Zuo Commentary”, Zang Shougong’s“Archaic Principle of Zuo Commentary and Spring and Autumn Annals”were works of seeking archaic principles. They followed the saying“archaic learning unrises, holds the principle; archaic learning rise, research the principle”. Against the backdrop, the scholars made great efforts to compile sinological works, for example, Yan Wei’s the“Compiling of Explanation on Spring and Autumn Annals”. Among the authors of sinological works, Jia Kui and Fu Qin took the lead. The“Compiling of Jia and Fu’s explanation on the‘Zuo Commentary’and‘Spring and Autumn Annals’”finished with Li Yide’contribution. Sinological study of“Zuo Commentary”prospered. After Hui Dong, Dai Zhen promoted Sinology energetically, so the pursuit gradually shifted from original texts to principles. He paid attention to collating the text, studying the classics and seeking truth from facts. Being practical and realistic became a scholarly custom. The study of“Zuo Commentary”turned to textual research and annotation. The collation of thirteen classics”including“Zuo Commentary”, in particular, explained the classics with words by clan of Wang in Gao You County. These works showed the essence of sinology, but not confined to its limits. The textual research of“Zuo Commentary”reached the highest level.Looking back at the archaic principle of the“Zuo Commentary”, the scholars found that Du and Kong’s explanation was the first to undermine the sinology. Though Du Yu followed the pattern of sinological Confucian’s idea, he did not make footnotes and did not keep the archaic principle either. The scholars singled out the mistakes in the Du’s works from the view of textual research and principle. At first, they just made annotations and corrections, then criticism, and total negation in the end. The strongest criticism came from Shen Qinhan’s“Making up Explanation of Zuo Commentary”and Jiao Xun’s“Making up Re-explanation of Zuo Commentary”. Shen Qinhan was skilled in the textual research. He negated Du’s“Notation of Zuo Commentary”totally from some aspects of words’explanation, annotating, rite’s research and explanation of principle. Jiao Xun corrected Du’s work from the view of the principle. He revealed the inner feelings of Sima clan’s usurping and killing that was covered by Du Yu, and totally negated the value of Du’s work in the principle.The scholars in the period of Qian Long and Jia Qing researched the“Zuo Commentary”all by the way of textual research. And this method was more and more mature. The collation and study about the“Zuo Commentary”by the scholars of textual research, laid the foundation for establishing the new explanation on“Zuo Commentary”by Liu clan in Yi Zheng. He replaced Du’s works of sinological explanation, and assembled the achievement of“Zuo Commentary”in the Qing Dynasty. His works“textual research of old explanation about Zuo Commentary”was the culmination in the field of study of“Zuo Commentary”in the Qing Dynasty.In the late Qing Dynasty, as all kinds of social conflicts became more and more severe, the call for change and reform emerged. Influenced by western sciences, textual research of classics turned to seeking the principle. So was the case for the study of“Zuo Commentary”. Scholars holding classics in esteem appeared in Chang Zhou. Examining and explaining“the Spring and Autumn Annals of Gong Yang Clan”in West Han Dynasty, they considered that“Zuo Commentary”was fabricated by Liu Xin. The intense debate occurred between archaic and contemporary schools about the“Zuo Commentary”. Represented by Zhang Taiyan and Liu Shipei, the archaic scholars disagreed with new school’s opinion. Since the textual research of Liu Shipei kept abreast of times, it became the final glory. It also indicated that the study of“Zuo Commentary”moved toward modern times.This dissertation selects the works of thirteen kinds of“Zuo Commentary”, starting from Gu Yanwu in the early Qing Dynasty to Liu Shipei in the late, as they all study the“Zuo Commentary”with the method of textual research, and are the representatives on the study of“Zuo Commentary”at different periods and fields. Based on the case study, the dissertation reviews the most influential achievements of textual research about the“Zuo Commentary. Then it focuses on the content, academic views and approaches, at the same time, pays attention to other writings in order to achieve an overall understanding by comparison and contrast. The prosperity of subject of“Zuo Commentary”in the Qing Dynasty is closely related to the rising of textual research and the politics. Examines the development of the textual research of“Zuo Commentary”with regard to social politics and the trend of thoughts, this dissertation studies the features of“Zuo Commentary”in different periods, summarizes its achievements and probes into the development pattern.The author believes that classics of the Qing Dynasty are unique, while the textual research of“Zuo Commentary”can be of the most importance. The Confucian scholars of the Qing Dynasty make unprecedented achievements in the research of“Zuo Commentary”. The first is to collate the texts. The“Zuo Commentary”has circulated for two thousand years, so there contains a lot of mistakes and errors due to repeated manuscripts copying and reprinting. The Confucian scholars of the Qing Dynasty examined the classics from the etymology, semantics and phonology. It was the first time that they corrected the text of the“Zuo Commentary”in a comprehensive manner, and applied it to Du and Kong’s works. The second is to compile sinological explanation. The Confucian scholars of the Qing Dynasty believed that the viewpoint of Du clan overshadowed Jia and Fu’s opinion. They collected the ancient books widely to compile the sinological views and restore the original looks so that the later generations were able to appreciate the sinological study of“Zuo Commentary”. The third is to criticize Du’s works. Few scholars doubted Du Yu’s“aggregative explanation”before the Qing Dynasty. However, they had the courage to defy the authority. Treating sinology as the tenet, they checked and corrected the mistakes from semantics and principle. The fourth is to establish the new explanation. They were dissatisfied with“the explanation”of the Tang Dynasty, discarded Du Yu’s works. Regarding the sinology as the tenet, they composed the new explanation of the“Zuo Commentary”by gathering the essence of various doctrines. In the period of Qian Long and Jia Qing, the new explanation of various classics emerged one after another. The“explanation of old one on the Zuo Commentary and Spring and Autumn Annals”by Liu clan in Yi Zheng could be the first. Other achievements of textual research in institution, history, geography, calendar and so on, were also very prominent.Quite different from academic atmosphere in the later of Ming Dynasty, the Confucian scholars of the Qing Dynasty were tired of the subjective thinking and turned to objective observation, holding that“vacancy is easy, reality is not false”. It was the academic trend that the study of“Zuo Commentary”by the scholars in the Qing Dynasty was based on the truth and facts. The textual research was the mainstream of the subject on the“Zuo Commentary”. Gu Yanwu was the first to begin the trend. The scholars of textual research on the“Zuo Commentary”in the period of Qian Long and Jia Qing all attached importance to words, rhyme and tone, and annotation. They did textual research to seek the principle. With the tide of Sinology, the study of“Zuo Commentary”made the era of textual research. In the late Qing Dynasty, more new thoughts were infused into the study of“Zuo Commentary”from the debates between ancient and contemporary schools. The ancient Confucian scholars paid much attention to principle when researching the“Zuo Commentary”, affected by western sciences and stimulated by the contemporary thoughts. It returned to the tradition of being practical and realistic in pursuit of studies in service for national democratic revolution. However, being practical and realistic was the major method in the study of“Zuo Commentary”.The achievements of textual research about the“Zuo Commentary”were very prominent in the Qing Dynasty. The scholars sought the original meaning with the method of textual research and made an overall summary of previous studies and achieved the historical summit in the study of“Zuo Commentary”. The academic achievements and value laid a solid foundation for the modern study of“Zuo Commentary”.更多还原