王引之《经义述闻》对虞翻《易》注的辨驳  

Confutations in Wang Yinzhi’s Jing Yi Shu Wen towards Yu Fan’s Annotations for Zhouyi

作　　者：杨效雷 

机构地区：[1]天津师大历史文化学院

出　　处：《古籍整理研究学刊》2009年第4期11-13,53,共4页Journal of Ancient Books Collation and Studies

摘　　要：论及清代《易》学,今人多仅关注其钩沉整理汉《易》之功,以至于对清代《易》学的认识有失片面。其实,清吴派学者对汉《易》多钩稽之业,而皖派学者对汉《易》则多所辨驳之功。吴派和皖派学者都以探求经籍本义为归。吴派学者因汉儒去古未远,因而致力于汉《易》的钩沉,以求古之途径而求是;皖派学者则认识到汉《易》亦非尽得《周易》之本义,因而信其所当信,疑其所可疑,以考据之途径而求是。皖派释经方法至高邮王念孙、王引之父子而益精。本文通过梳理王引之《经义述闻》中对虞翻《易》注的辨驳,从一个侧面探究皖派学者解《易》特色,冀对清代《易》学有更为全面的评估。Referring to Yi-ology Studies of Qing Dynasty, present generations pay more attention to the achievement of its compilation research for Zhouyi in Han Dynasty, and form a one-sided understanding about Yi-ology Studies of Qing Dynasty. Actually, scholars of Schools of Wu in Qing Dynasty achieved more about compilation research for Zhouyi in Han Dynasty. ：However, scholars of Schools of Wan did more about confutation. They were both seeking the original meaning of Zhouyi. Scholars of Schools of Wu were influenced by Confucian in Han Dynasty; therefore, they were buckled to the compilation research of Yi-ology of Han Dynasty. However, scholars of Schools of Wan realized that Zhouyi in Han Dynasty was different with the original one. Therefore, they did the research after the textual study and examination. The research method has become perfect from Schools of Wan to Wang Niansun and his son Wan Yinzhi in Gaoyou City. According to confutation from Wang Yinzhi＇s ＂Jing Yi Shu Wen＂ towards Yu Fan＇s annotations for Zhouyi, this paper would research into the features of expounding of Zhouyi from scholars of Schools of Wan, in order to gain a overall evaluation of Yi-ology Studies of Qing Dynasty.

关 键 词：王引之 《经义述闻》 虞翻 

分 类 号：K204[历史地理—历史学]