论文部分内容阅读
唐《五經正義》多引及《家語》,其態度則或依或違、或依違未定,甚至矛盾,並不統一。依從《家語》之例,還每每在與《家語》互見之文獻中取《家語》爲優先,顯示作者對《家語》史料價值的重視。《正義》對《家語》的違駁則多從“出身”上對其作抽象的“釜底抽薪”式的否定,但這與上面的依從是矛盾的。其實,王肅之駁鄭,《家語》之外亦多引其他文獻及前賢之說,前人對《家語》在王肅駁鄭證據系統中的作用實有誇大之嫌,即王肅依《家語》立說亦多有勝于鄭君處。由于《正義》的撰修多依六朝舊疏,因此其中對《家語》的引及也不能排除照錄舊疏的可能:這一方面說明《正義》中對《家語》的依違互見或前後矛盾,可能亦係六朝以來鄭、王之争餘緒的反映,另一方面也說明其中所引《家語》可能也並非盡是“唐本”。
Tang “Five Classics just” and “home language” and his attitude is based on or against, or undetermined, or even contradictory, not uniform. Following the example of “home language”, “home language” is also often taken as the first priority in the literature of mutuality with “home language”, showing the author’s emphasis on the historical value of “home language”. “Justice” on the “home language” is more from the “origin” to its abstract “underpaying” type of negation, but this is inconsistent with the above compliance. In fact, when Wang Suzhi refuted Zheng and his “family language” quoted other sources as well as other predecessors, his predecessors exaggerated the role of “Jiayu” in refuting Zheng evidence system by Wang Su, Home language “also said there is more than Zheng Jun Department said. Since the compilation of ”justice“ is based on the old rules of ”six dynasties,“ the reference to ”home language“ can not exclude the possibility of recording the old rules: on the one hand, we can see that ”righteousness“ The inconsistencies may also be the reflection of the contention between Zheng and Wang in the dispute since the Six Dynasties. On the other hand, the ”home language“ quoted in it may not all be ”Tang Ben".