论洪良品对阎若璩古文《尚书》辨伪的批判  

On Hong Liangpin s Criticism of Yan Ruoqu s Forgery Identification in the Ancient Text The Book of Documents

作　　者：杨文通 Yang Wentong(College of Liberal Arts,Chongqing Normal University,Chongqing 401331)

机构地区：[1]重庆师范大学文学院,重庆401331

出　　处：《嘉兴大学学报》2024年第5期73-83,共11页Journal of Jiaxing University

基　　金：重庆市研究生科研创新项目(CYS240383)。

摘　　要：晚清古文《尚书》辨真悍将洪良品对阎若璩的辨伪进行了批判:批判阎若璩“根柢”的舛讹,揭示了阎氏辨伪逻辑基点的谬误;批判阎若璩“枝节”的错讹,反映了阎氏在内容考证上的疏漏。洪良品的批判反映了他与阎若璩在“经典之真”观念上的差异:洪良品重经典“价值”之真,阎若璩重经典“历史”之真。这一批判也体现出阎氏的辨伪仍有商榷余地,对古籍真伪考订方法的运用必须限制在严格的条件之内才具有效力。Hong Liangpin,a sharp ancient text scholar in the late Qing Dynasty,criticized Yan Ruoqu s identification of forgeries in The Book of Documents.He pointed out Yan Ruoqu s foundational mistakes,revealing the fallacy in Yan s logical starting point,and criticized Yan s mistakes in detailed textual research,which reflected Yan s oversights in content research.Hong Liangpin s criticism reflects the difference in the understanding of the“authenticity of the classics”between Hong and Yan:Hong Liangpin attaches importance to the“value authenticity”of classics while Yan Ruoqu emphasizes the“historical authenticity”of classics.This critique also shows that Yan s theory of forgery identification is still open to question,and the application of methods for the authentication of ancient texts must be limited to strict conditions in order to be effective.

关 键 词：洪良品 阎若璩 辨真 批判 辨伪 

分 类 号：K221.04[历史地理—历史学]