清代的六谕诠释传统  

On the Explicating Tradition of Six Maxims by Ming Taizu in Qing Dynasty

作　　者：陈时龙[1] CHEN Shi-long

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院古代史研究所暨徽学研究中心,北京100101

出　　处：《吉林大学社会科学学报》2022年第3期163-173,238,239,共13页Jilin University Journal Social Sciences Edition

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目(18BZS067)。

摘　　要：清初顺治帝重颁明太祖的六谕,使六谕在清代获得合法性,清初地方官及理学名臣均重视以六谕行教化,延续明代诠释传统并形成了《六谕集解》等新的注解文本。康熙九年圣谕十六条颁行后,逐渐取代了六谕在乡约中的核心位置,但六谕仍以潜流的方式在族规家训等文本中存在。19世纪,六谕被重新提倡,地方官员、儒学士人以及宗教人士对六谕的兴趣被激活,在清末更出现了《宣讲拾遗》《宣讲新篇》《圣谕六训集解》等新型体裁的六谕诠释文本,脱离乡约而趋向于善书。After reinstated by Qing’s Shunzhi emperor in 1552,Ming Taizu’s Liu Yu( Six Maxims) achieved its legitimacy in the new dynasty. In the early Qing dynasty,most of the local officials and neo-Confucian scholar-bureaucrats tended to quote Liu Yu( Six Maxims) to cultivate the normal people,which resulted in a longer tradition of Six Maxims explication,and more paraphrase texts( e. g. Liu Yu Jijie). However,the Sacred Edict( Sixteen Maxims) by Emperor Kangxi was issued in 1670,and began to take Liu Yu’ s place in the local community covenant system. From then on,Liu Yu was marginalized but existed in a style of underflow,sometimes published in the title page of the genealogies. In 19th century,Liu Yu was advocated by the local officers,scholars and religious activists. More paraphrase texts were produced in Late Qing dynasty,such as Xuanjiang Shiyi,Xuanjiang Xingpian and Shengyu Liuxun Jijie,which characterized more as moral-instruction books rather than propaganda texts in the community covenant system.

关 键 词：“六谕” “圣谕十六条” 清代教化 魏象枢 许三礼 《宣讲拾遗》 

分 类 号：K249[历史地理—历史学] D691[历史地理—中国史]