清儒之學術轉向及其儒學史上的意義──以「學派」為討論中心

The Academic Transformation of Confucianism in the Qing Dynasty and Its Meaning in Confucian History: Using “Academic Schools＂ as the Focal Point Discussion

自章太炎撰〈清儒〉一文對清代學術作一總結後，對於清學各種面向的探究總不乏其人。若就學術史的眼光視之，梁啟超與錢穆二者可說是近代清學研究的奠基者，然真正能擺脫清學僅是「考據」的刻板印象，而示之以清儒獨特面貌、時代內蘊者，當推余英時為代表。余英時「內在理路說」的側重處，非在具體討論清學的內容，而在於解釋清學何以後來會轉向「考據」一途，這是基於學術動力因上的解釋。本文承此更進一步探究，若將清儒對於前代學術的「轉向」，置於整個儒學史的脈絡來看，則我們是否可得出有別於「漢宋之爭」、「回歸原典」等不一樣的視野。本文試圖以「學派」的視野，觀察出清儒對宋明理學的轉向與對儒門教義的判準，在漢宋之爭的激烈面貌外，實另有一番「趣味」與儒學史上之意義。

After Zhang Taiyan had written the essay “Qing Ru” (The Confucianists in the Qing) and summarized the academics of the Qing Dynasty, more scholars probed into the various dimensions of Qing scholarship. From the perspective of academic history, Liang Qichao and Qian Mu are perceived as the scholars who had built the foundation of modern Qing academic research. However, Yu Yingshi is one of the representatives who could actually removed stereotypes of Qing scholarship as merely “Kaoju” (Textual Criticism). What Yu Yingshi emphasizes in his “Inner Logic” is the explanation of why Qing scholarship transformed to “Textual Criticism” rather than focusing on its contents. If we examine the changes that Qing Confucianists made on the scholarship of previous generations in China's Confucian history, we can understand the distinctive perspectives that are different from concepts such as “Han-song zhi zheng” (competition of academic supremacy between the Han and Song Dynasties) and “Huigui yuandian” (Returning to textual origins). From the perspective of schools of thought, this paper attempts to explore how Qing Confucian scholars transformed Song and Ming academics, and to also evaluate changes in Confucian teachings. Under the academic rivalry within the Han and Song dynasties, Qing Confucian scholars have their meaning and place in Confucianist history.