论文部分内容阅读
《孝经郑注》作者问题是中国经学史上一桩公案。郑玄自言注《孝经》,但自陆澄首发难端,陆德明、孔颖达等续加疑辞,刘知几再设“十二验”断言《孝经》非郑玄所注,王应麟继称郑小同注《孝经》。清代汉学复兴,《孝经郑注》作者之争空前激烈,陈鳣、袁钧、严可均、钱侗、侯康、郑珍、潘任、曾朴、皮锡瑞、曹元弼等前后踵继,通过考核证验,寻出《孝经注》必属郑玄的种种内证,同时针对刘知几“十二验”逐一辩驳,又对“郑小同注《孝经》”说予以否定,力翻陈案。这一典型的案例,具体展示出清代汉学持续发展的历程与后出转胜的成就。
“Xiao Jing Zheng Note” author problem is a history of Chinese classics in a public case. Zheng Xuan self-note “filial piety”, but since Lucheng first catastrophe, Lu Deming, Kong Yingda continue doubts, Liu Zhiji several “12 test” assert “Filial Piety” non-Zheng Xuan note, Wang Ying Lin Zheng Xiaolong notes “filial piety.” The dispute over the rejuvenation of Sinology in the Qing Dynasty and the writership of “Filial Piety Zheng Note” were unprecedentedly intense. Chen Tie, Yuan Jun, Yan Kejun, Qian Tong, Hou Kang, Zheng Zhen, Pan Ren, Zeng Pu, Pi Xi Rui, Through examining and verifying, we can find out that “Book of Filial Piety” is all kinds of internal evidence of Zheng Xuan, at the same time, it refutes one by one against Liu Zhiji and " Turn over the case. This typical case shows the continuous development of sinology in Qing dynasty and its success afterwards.