原情達權：趙鵬飛《春秋經筌》的解經方法

Interpreting Methods and Academic Significance of Zhao Peng-fei's Analysis and Interpretation on Spring and Autumn Annals

本文分析南宋趙鵬飛《春秋經筌》的解經方法，認為其書同樣承續晚唐北宋以降捨傳求經、以意去取的治學綱領，援引漢唐諸儒「原情」、「達權」之說，重組定調為解經方法的貫串軸線，藉此打破三《傳》固定制式的義法模式，建立以經明經的徑路。但在實際解經過程仍舊無法迴避三《傳》，甚至「原情」、「達權」也含有三《傳》痕跡。不過，趙鵬飛援用三《傳》的立場並非擁傳、主傳，而是尊經、從經，試圖秉公無私，排除己欲，接受態度遠比那些癖護師門、黨同伐異者更加開放。部分內容參考三《傳》也符合「原情」與「達權」的思維，在解經上蘊有更大的彈性空間，藉此修正孫復經說的苛刻之失。這也意味儒者雖堅守捨傳從經的學術路線，卻試圖從舊學中擷取元素，加工再造成符合己見的新學模型，這捨傳、取傳之間的累積轉移是一道去蕪存菁的流程。

This article analyzes the interpreting methods in Zhao Peng-fei's Analysis and Interpretation on Spring and Autumn Annals in the Southern Song dynasty, and considers that it continues the principles of focusing on literatures instead of history and the subjective perspectives deriving from the late Tang dynasty and the Northern Song dynasty, referring to the theories of ''origin'' and ''flexibility'' of Confucianism in the Han and Tang dynasties and integrating them into the primary interpreting methods so as to go beyond the fixed and formulated understanding of the three Zhuan (Zuo Zhuan, Gongyang Zhuan, and Guliang Zhuan) and to establish the ways of interpreting literatures by literatures. However, the three Zhuan inevitably remain in ''origin'' and ''flexibility'' when interpreting literatures. Using the three Zhuan by no means refers to his advocacy or praise on the three Zhuan, but shows his fairness and unselfishness in honoring the literatures. He was more open-minded than those who only praised their masters and those who defied others with different opinions. By referring to three Zhuan, some of his work included the understanding of ''origin'' and ''flexibility,'' having more room for correcting slips due to the strictness by Sun Fu-jing. This also indicates that the Confucians attempted to put the old wine into new bottles in terms of establishing new study model. Such accumulation from discarding and mwanwhile taking from history is a process of separating the wheat from the chaff.