摘要
孟子言孔子作《春秋》是“天子之事”,汉代《春秋》学理解为孔子当“素王”,宋代《春秋》学则理解为孔子“以天自处”。高拱以二说皆有损尊君之义,著《春秋正旨》驳正之。以为“天子之事”当指文、武之制,孔子作《春秋》,只是按文、武法度据事直书而已,并对“素王”说、“以天自处”说进行了系统的解构,将尊时王的意思推到了极致。文章从《春秋》学的现世主义和未来主义角度进行分析,认为高拱的理论是取消了未来主义面向,将《春秋》降为一代之史,时王与新王合一,使得《春秋》的批判性大为减弱。
Mencius said that Confucius wrote Chunqiu and what Chunqiu contains was matters proper to the sovereign.In Han Dynasty,scholars believed that Confucius was“Su Wang”(real king),while scholars in Song Dynasty believed that Confucius was the same as God.Gao Gong objected to these two views.He thought that Confucius was just a historian who obeyed the institution of Zhou Dynasty established by King Wen and King Wu,and Chunqiu was just a history book,not a design for the future world.Gao Gong’s view shows the greatest respect to the king of secular regime.Based on the analysis of secularism and futurism in the study of Chunqiu,this paper holds that Gao Gong’s theory has eliminated futurism,degraded Chunqiu to the history of a dynasty and integrated the king of the secular regime with the new king,which greatly weakens the criticism of Chunqiu.
作者
黄铭
HUANG Ming(Institute for Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences,Chongqing University,Chongqing 400044,China)
出处
《同济大学学报（社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2019年第4期95-102,共8页
Journal of Tongji University:Social Science Edition
基金
重庆大学中央高校基本科研业务费学院专项资助(项目批准号:2019CDSKXYGYY0045)
关键词
《春秋》
高拱
尊时王
鲁史
天子之事
Chunqiu
Gao Gong
veneration of the king of the secular regime
history of Lu
matters proper to the sovereign
