论文部分内容阅读
清乾嘉时期,礼学回归郑学,学者对敖继公的《仪礼集说》多持批判态度。在尊郑斥敖的风气下,徽州学者凌廷堪不为时风所囿,所作《札经释例》,在对待郑学和敖说的态度上,客观公允。凡敖说精当处,则予以肯定;凡敖说谬误之处,则予以批驳;凡郑、敖各有理据之处,则两说俱存。凌氏对《仪礼集说》的继承与批判,不仅仅展示了一代礼学大师客观求实的治学态度,也从侧面证明了敖氏礼说独特的学术价值。即使在清儒深恶敖氏礼说的环境下,学者们对《仪礼集说》也不能全废其说。
In the Qing and Jia period, the courtesy return to Zheng Xue, scholars hold more critical attitude toward Ao Jigong’s “rites set.” Under the circumstance of respecting Ao Ching Ao, Ling Chingkeng, a scholar of Huizhou, is not an hour of the wind, and his “Letters of Chronicles” are objective and fair in his treatment of Zheng Xue and Ao. Where Ao said that when the fine office, then be affirmed; Where Ao fallacies, then be criticized; where Zheng, Ao each has its own merits, then the two said. Ling’s inheritance and criticism of “Rites Set Theory” not only shows the objectivity and truth-seeking attitude of a generation of ritual masters, but also proves the unique academic value of Ao’s rites. Even in the circumstance of Qing Confucianism and Ao Shih-li’s ritual, academics can not completely abolish the “ritual collection”.