【作者】 孙蕴；

【导师】 李士彪；

【作者基本信息】 鲁东大学 ， 中国古典文献学， 2012， 硕士

【摘要】 毛奇龄乃清初著名经学家、文学家，其学识渊博，在经、史、文、诗、词、音韵、书法等各方面均成就显著。毛奇龄身历明清易代，生平坎坷，经历传奇，宏学长寿，著作颇丰，在经学史上地位十分重要；更因性格奇崛，恃才傲物，好为不羁之言而备受争议，世人褒贬不一。对这样一位具有广泛影响的经学大家进行研究，无疑具有重要价值与意义。毛奇龄治经学尊崇原典，反对在著书立论之时加入别家思想倾向。朱熹编订《大学》、《中庸》章句，并《孟子》、《论语》定为“四书”，加以注解诠释，乃成经典。然朱熹《四书集注》具有明显的理学倾向，对一些具体条目的诠释亦有牵强附会之嫌。毛奇龄著《四书改错》点出朱注四书的谬误，并在纠错的过程中以自己宏博的学术修养对四书本义加以说明，力图摆脱以宋明理学诠释四书的偏差，端正四书原典的地位。《四书改错》前身为《四书正事扩略》（七卷附录一卷），乃是毛奇龄的儿子及门生辑录其经集讲录中涉及到四书的内容编订而成，内且有缺略不足之处。毛奇龄以耄耋之龄对《正事》加以增损补订，分三十二门部，计四百五十一条，合二十二卷（二十一卷附录一卷），成《四书改错》之书。本文主要内容有三：一是《四书改错》成书与版本研究；二是从《四书改错》看毛奇龄的治经思想；三是从《四书改错》看毛奇龄四书学。第一部分主要探究了从《四书正事扩略》到《四书改错》的成书过程，考证了成书之后毛奇龄“自毁其版”的始末，并追溯了《四书改错》一书的版本流传情况。第二部分探讨了《四书改错》原书的体例划分，并按“考据错”与“释经错”将其内容重新归为两大目四小类，各举原书一二实例加以分析，从而厘清毛奇龄经学思想的精髓，以及其经学思想中体现出的对朱王理学的批判、承继与发扬。第三部分分析了《四书改错》从《大学》出发，贯穿《中庸》、《孟子》、《论语》而最终回归《大学》的思想体系，展现出毛奇龄四书学构建的“治己——治人——自治”的循环以及其对“知行合一”的践履，并分析了毛奇龄的四书学思想在经学史上的过渡意义。更多还原

【Abstract】 Mao Qingling is a famous scribes of Confucianism and writer of Qing Dynasty who hadbroad and profound knowledge and made great contribution to scripture, history, literary,poem, Chinese poems in Song Dynasty, phonology and calligraphy.Mao experienced thechange on Ming and Qing Dynasty. His legend life was full of frustrations. Living a long lifeand having a strong knowledge, he was really productive. He played an important role in thehistory of the study of Confucian classics. Mao was proud and insolent because of his talent.As a man of marked individuality who often spoke wildly, he is controversial. People passdifferent judgments on him. It is definitely important to make a study of such a great man.The rule of Mao Qiling’s study was in honor of the original classics and against to add inothers’thought. Zhu Xi’s compiling of The Great Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean,together with Mencius, the Analects of Confucius, is called "The Four Books". Zhu xi gaveinterpretation of the note and then it becomes a classic. However, the Notes of the Four Bookshas an obvious tendency of Neo-Confucianism and Zhu’s interpretation of some specific entryis really far-fetched. Mao Qiling’Correcting The Four Books’ mistakes point out the fallacy.During the correcting process, Mao Qiling using his rich academic accomplishment toillustrate the Four Books, trying to get rid of deviation of the interpretation ofNeo-Confucianism, straighten out the original position of the four books.Correcting The Four Books’ mistakes is formerly known as Brief Introduction on theFallacy of the Four Books which has seven volumes with one appendix. This book iscompiled by Mao Qiling’s son and protege, involving Mao’s notes about the four books, stillit has some shortcomings and was imperfect. Mao Qiling did the correction job on the book inhis later years in life, including thirty two sections that totally are four hundred and fifty oneentries. Mao divided them into twenty two volumes (twenty one volume with one appendix)and named it Correcting The Four Books’ mistakes.There are three main content of this article. First, the study of the writing process and theversion of this book; second, from analyzing this book to talk about Mao Qiling’s thought ofstudying Confucian classics; thirdly, through the study of Correcting The Four Books’mistakes to show Mao Qiling’s study of The Four Books. The first part explores thepublishing process from Brief Introduction on the Fallacy of the Four Books to Correcting The Four Books’ mistakes, does textual research on the whole story of Mao Qiling whodestroyed the block himself and how the version spread. The second part discusses theoriginal division style of the book, redistricts it into two large accounts on the rule of "textualmistakes" and "explanation mistakes" and gives some examples each. By doing this canreaders analysis the soul of Mao Qiling’s thought of studying Confucian classics and thecritical inheritance he did on Zhu Xi and Wang Yangming’s Neo-Confucianism. The third partanalyzes the ideological system of this book that starts from The Great Learning to theDoctrine of the Mean, the Analects of Confucius, Mencius and turned back in circulation toThe Great Learning. This shows out Mao Qiling’s circulation theory of the study of The FourBooks that from treating oneself to treating others and then back to autonomy and his practiceof uniting knowledge and action. In the end, this paper analyzes the transition significance ofMao Qiling’s thought of the studying of The Four Books in the scholarship History ofConfucian Classics.更多还原