论王念孙、王引之父子的易学解释  

On WANG Niansun and WANG Yinzhi's Approach to the Changes

作　　者：林忠军[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东大学易学与中国古代哲学研究中心,山东济南250100

出　　处：《周易研究》2013年第1期5-16,共12页Studies of Zhouyi

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目:"象数易学史研究"(11AZX004)

摘　　要：王氏父子的易学承接清初顾炎武易学之端绪,以易学文本为旨归,通过理解和解释《周易》经传文本的字词句,建立了一套行之有效的、具有方法论意义的经典解释学。他倡导因声求义的方法,发现《周易》二十四个通假字,提出了"诸说并列则求其是"、"以己意逆经义"、"证以成训"的易学和经学原则。反对增字解经,排斥脱离文本的象数解经,更反对为解经随意改变文本等,有别于惠栋、张惠言、焦循等人的易学而独具特色,对于《周易》疑难卦爻辞文字解释具有独特的意义,成为清代乾嘉时期以文字学方法解《易》的巅峰,为后世解释易学文本意义提供了典范。然而,王氏父子对于易学乃至经学的研究仅仅停留在文字训诂的层面上,未能由此开显出义理,是其缺憾。他们反对远离文本的汉代象数,却以汉人卦气说反对其纳甲、爻辰、旁通等说,同样令人难以置信。WANG Niansun and his son WANG Yinzhi＇s approach to the Changes succeeded GU Yanwu＇s initiation, which rooted on the text in order to understand and interpret the characters, terms, and sentences of the Zhouyi, setting up an ef- fective and methodological hermeneutics on classics. They advocate seeking meaning from pronunciation and found twenty- four variants of characters which enlarged their vision in interpreting the Changes and other Classics. They object to adding words in the exegesis of the Classics and disapprove of image-numerological interpretations which break away from the text, and they were particularly critical of changing the text at will in the interpretation. This approach was distinctive from Hui Dong＇s ZHANG Huiyan＇s and JIAO Xun＇s approaches, arrived at the peak of textual interpretations in the Qianjia period （1736-1820）, and provided a model for later scholars to explain the meanings of the text, particularly significant to the hexa- gram and line statements difficult to be interpreted. Yet regretfully, their studies of the Changes merely stopped at textual exegesis and did not develop to meanings and principles. Though they opposed to the Han tradition of image-numerology, they refuted Najia, yaochen, and pangtong techniques fabulously by the Han scholars＂ gua-qi theory.

关 键 词：乾嘉时期 王氏父子 训诂方法 回归易学文本 易学解释 

分 类 号：B249.9[哲学宗教—中国哲学] B221