论文部分内容阅读
刘逢禄的《论语述何篇》和康有为的《论语注》是清代以“公羊学”注解《论语》的首末。虽然同以“公羊学”注解《论语》,但两人在解释起点、策略和内容上都有差别:刘氏认为《春秋》与《论语》的关系是“表里”关系,强调两者间的互证互补,守“公羊”家法;康氏则认为两者是“辅助”关系,以《春秋》贯《论语》,运用糅合了《礼运》“大同”的“三统三世”说“别择而发明”《论语》的微言大义。两人的解释从注经的角度看均属于过度诠释,但在其背后隐含着时代背景的转变。
Liu Fenglu’s “Analects of Confucius” and Kang Youwei’s “Analects of Confucius” are the first and the last of “Analects of Confucius” annotated with “Kung Fu” in the Qing Dynasty. Although annotating “The Analects of Confucius” with “Ram ”, both of them differ from each other in the starting point, strategy and content of their interpretation: Liu believes that the relationship between Spring and Autumn and The Analects is , Emphasizing the mutual complementarity between the two, keeping “Rams” family law; Kang believes that the two are “auxiliary ” relationship to the “Spring and Autumn” through the “Analects of Confucius”, the use of a blend of “Li Yun” “Datong ” “Three Sansi ” “Say ” Choose and invent “” The Analects "of the micro-righteousness. Both explanations from the perspective of injection are all excessive interpretation, but behind it implies a change in the background of the times.