荀子《疠怜王》答谢书索隐  

Research on Xunzi’s Lilianwang Reply Letter

作　　者：姚海涛[1] YAO Haitao(Qingdao University of Technology Qindao College,Qingdao,Shandong 266106,China)

机构地区：[1]青岛理工大学琴岛学院,山东青岛266106

出　　处：《重庆三峡学院学报》2020年第2期29-37,共9页Journal of Chongqing Three Gorges University

基　　金：青岛理工大学琴岛学院人文社会科学重点课题“明‘分’使群与尚‘术’利生——荀子政治哲学研究”(QY18RA01)。

摘　　要：有清以来,围绕《疠怜王》答谢书真伪分为泾渭分明的两派:否定派与肯定派。此书信在《孙卿书录》《荀子》《韩非子》《韩诗外传》《战国策》《风俗通义》《春秋后语》《长短经》等典籍中均有记载。通过梳理《疠怜王》答谢书的不同版本,大致可以分析出彼此间增减损益的传承相关性。由此可推知,答谢书当为今本《荀子》所逸失之内容。Since the Qing dynasty, there are two opposite views of true or false on Lilianwang Reply letter. This letter has been recorded in Sunqingshulu, Xunzi, Hanfeizi, Hanshiwaizhuan, Zhanguoce, Fengsutongyi, Chunqiuhouyu, Changduanjing and other classics. By sorting out different versions of Lilianwang reply letter, it is possible to analyze the inheritance and correlation between them. It can be inferred that Lilianwang reply letter should be a lost part of Xunzi.

关 键 词：荀子 《疠怜王》答谢书 《疠怜王书》 《遗春申君赋》 

分 类 号：B222.6[哲学宗教—中国哲学]