Search

「古文」作爲傳統中國士人日常表達和學術著作的主要文體，在思想世界與知識世界中具有重要的地位。然而，除了在文學史研究中討論「知識」對「文章」的重要性，我們似乎很少反過來設問，「文章」對「知識」有何作用？作爲「學問」載體的古文，是否真正介入了這些學術性知識的傳承與變革？基於這一思路，本文希望將對「古文」的研究，置於一更大的社會文化脈絡之中，探討「文章」如何塑造了讀書人的知識視野和學問秩序。, 文章與知識之間的張力，在古代文學史及思想史上一直存在；然在清代，由於儒家知識主義之興起，此一張力獲得了更爲自覺和充分的展開。本文認爲，從晚明到清初，中國士人的知識視野經歷了一次擴張，而明中期以降博覽求古的「文章」趣味，正是其重要的動力。入清之後，「文」「學」之緊張日益顯現。康熙十七年詔徵博學鴻儒，還是以「詞章」評判「博學」；至乾隆間開經學特科，所重便是「根柢經史」的專門學問；由「博」而「精」，「文」「學」相離。不過，在以「文章」訓練為主的書院教育中，對「古學」的提倡往往還需要借助「古文」之力；同時清人以「著書明道」為理想，考經證史的成績、自身的學術趣味與知識修養，都需要選擇恰當的「著述」體裁以表達之。在編次文集乃至註釋經書之時，不少學者都對其「著作」的方式作出精心的安排，以求體現其學問之系統。「文」與「學」的互動，實又通過另一種形式表現出來。此外，「著書明道」，還可以看作一個以「私言」發明「公道」的實踐，故而「著作」不僅是對公共「知識」的傳遞，更是對個人「性情」的表達。在清中期，「文」與「學」的張力進一步推演出性情與知識關係的重整。「文」「學」離合之間，清代讀書人知識世界的遷變，正有跡可循。, The concept of ‘wenxue’(文學) in Chinese intellectual tradition philologically consists of two basic elements: belle-lettres (文wen) and learning (學xue). Thus when talking about ‘wenxue’ we are referring to not only a heritage of literature, but also a genealogy of knowledge. This dissertation aims to shed light upon the socio-cultural and epistemic aspects of classical prose(古文 guwen), which is a main genre of classical literature as well as the prevailing form of both practical and scholarly writing in late imperial China. Questions raised in my research include: How were different categories of knowledge ordered and systematized? In what way did the literary taste of intellectuals delimit and displace their epistemological boundaries? And how was the world of knowledge embodied through the compiling of literary anthologies and the writing of scholarly works?, China’s long eighteenth century (1644-1799) witnessed an adequate and self-conscious unfoldment of the perennial tension of literature and knowledge in the shadow of the Confucian intellectualism. The Ming literati’s interests for archaic literature and ancient texts, which lead to a trend of vast learning, herald the expansion of knowledge in late Ming and early Qing. In the 1679 ‘Boxue Hongru’ Examination, literary excellence was still regarded as a crucial criterion for the selection of ‘erudite scholars’. The rise of evidential study, however, intensified the tension between literary talent and scholarly learning. Men of letters were criticized for having no knowledge of the real way of learning, although they had copious knowledge of classical literature. The curiosity for erudition and was regulated, if not replaced by the pursuit of philological study on the Confucian classics. In spite of such idealistic divergence of ‘literati’ and ‘scholar’, literary writing played a significant role in the propagation and expression of scholarship. On one hand, study on Confucian classics and ancient history was advocated in local academies(shuyuan 書院) through the training of prose writing. On the other hand, scholars had to be very concerned about choosing the appropriate genre or the most refined textual form to lucubrate their academic work. Furthermore, debates on the proper form of academic writing made special contribution to the revival of subjectivism in the realm of academic studies. From my perspective, the interaction of ‘wen’ and ‘xue’ played a decisive role in shaping the trajectory of both literary and academic history of late imperial China., Detailed summary in vernacular field only., 胡琦., Parallel title from added title page., Thesis (Ph.D.) Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2015., Includes bibliographical references (leaves 540-551)., s also in Chinese., Hu Qi., http://library.cuhk.edu.hk/record=b6116468, Use of this resource is governed by the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons “Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International” License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

有明末造，顧憲成、高攀龍諸君講學東林，風動天下，以致黨禍連結，與國運相始終。「東林」遂為政治史與思想史之一大關目，匪特同世之人，褒貶迭出，自近代以降，學人研究亦稱夥矣。然前人關注之重心，主要為「明末」在朝之「東林黨」；於「東林書院」之活動，尤其是書院在清初的發展演變，尚鮮有及之。本研究擬以順治、康熙兩朝為主要時段，從遺民與當道互動的角度考察東林書院之興復及其講學活動，對學界少有關注的書院祀典之爭加以考述和分析，並探討清初東林學者如何就「氣節」「學統」等議題對明代東林傳統作出反省與建構，希望繇此對東林書院由明入清之歷史變化作一勾勒。, 本文將清初東林書院之史事置於「道」「勢」相對的框架之中展開分析，相對於前人用「以道抗勢」分析士權與君權的對峙，本文則更關注士人階層内部在「道」「勢」兩重身份之間的張力。儒家士人既要守「道」傳學，又當以「勢」經世，兩者之閒本須權衡調和。而在明清易代之際，「民間學者」與「地方官員」兩種士人身份之殊途，實質上形成了「道」與「勢」的分離。書院作爲一地方性的學術組織，既是在野學者力量之代表，又不能不受制於官方之權力，在此時遂成爲一個「道」與「勢」折衝的空間。然而，「道」「勢」二者之關係在調和之中亦悄然變化。如果說明代的東林運動有一種「以道馭勢」的理想與實踐；那麽在清初書院的發展中，學者本身「政治」一面弱化，「學術」也退守於中行默修，於是「道」乃反為「勢」所羈縻。而在理學委頓、樸學代興這一學術本身的轉折中，「道」「勢」關係之遷變亦可為一機緣。緣乎是，對清初東林書院的研究，不但可以在一個點上展現士人文化與社會風氣的變遷，更能為我們理解傳統中國「政治」與「學術」之互動提供助益。, The anti-eunuch struggle of the ‘Tung-lin Party’ (東林黨) which was succeeded by continuous partisan disputes in the late Ming Period has long been considered of great significance to understand its contemporary politics and even the collapse of the dynasty. However, the other aspect of this movement, namely the scholarly practice of the Tung-lin academy (東林書院) has not been given equivalent attention. Therefore, the development of the academy after the so-called ‘partisan disaster’ (黨禍) has been, not surprisingly, seldom discussed by existing studies. This thesis aims at providing a historical account of the Tung-lin academy in early Qing period (1644-1722), focusing on four main topics: the organization of public conferences or lectures(講會), the debates over the academy’s pantheon , the discourse on moral integrity(氣節) and the increasing concerns for academic orthodoxy among intellectuals., Scholars in the academy were by definition involved in the tension between Confucian values(道) and the political authority(勢) since they were supposed to be both academic and political elites. What complicated the issue was the defiant attitude of Ming-loyalists towards the newly established Manchu regime. Although being regarded as shelters for scholars who refused to serve the Qing government, academies could hardly be insulated from those ambitious local officials who were playing the role of patron as well as regulator. By exploring closely the case of Tung-lin academy, this thesis attempts to indicate that, the conflict and compromise between intellectuals and political authorities, alongside with the retrospection upon the cultural crisis of late Ming, had gradually shaped the interest of Qing scholars who inclined to restrain their work purely academic in contrast with their late-Ming predecessors who were enthusiastic about pursuing the political implications of their learning. This very transition could also be reasonably one of the many contributors to the declination of Li-hsüeh(理學，the study of principle)., Detailed summary in vernacular field only., 胡琦., "2012年8月"., "2012 nian 8 yue"., Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2012., Includes bibliographical references (leaves 206-218)., in Chinese and English., Hu Qi., Chapter 緒論 --- 道勢之間：「東林」的多重面向 --- p.7, Chapter 第一節 --- 「以道抗勢」和「以道馭勢」：儒家士人的内在規定性 --- p.7, Chapter 第二節 --- 「黨」或「書院」：研究史的回顧 --- p.14, Chapter 第三節 --- 清議與講學：明代之「東林」傳統 --- p.22, Chapter 第四節 --- 由明到清：「道」「勢」分合與風氣代變 --- p.39, Chapter 附論 --- ：東林志乘述略 --- p.44, Chapter 第一章 --- 遯世與應世：清初東林書院的講學活動 --- p.48, Chapter 第一節 --- 種得星火：黨禍後東林學脈之承續 --- p.49, Chapter 第二節 --- 此日再得：清初東林書院之興復 --- p.54, Chapter 第三節 --- 以故老為師儒：陸世儀之講學 --- p.64, Chapter 第四節 --- 教化斯民：李顒之南行 --- p.79, Chapter 第五節 --- 出處之間：關於「講學」的掙扎 --- p.100, Chapter 第六節 --- 「書院」之外的「東林」 --- p.138, Chapter 第二章 --- 釐正「東林」：祀典中的權力與歷史 --- p.152, Chapter 第一節 --- 公私之辨與「官祭」的興起 --- p.156, Chapter 第二節 --- 「祀典」與「有司」之涉入 --- p.162, Chapter 第三節 --- 「黨人與書院無與」：湯斌與左周諸公入祀之爭 --- p.170, Chapter 第四節 --- 「祗慎重於將來，毋更張於已往」：宋犖對東林祀典的釐正 --- p.182, Chapter 第五節 --- 由「典」到「史」 --- p.188, Chapter 附錄1 --- ：清初東林書院道南祠入祀記錄簡表 --- p.191, Chapter 附錄2 --- ：東林書院道南祠全圖 --- p.192, Chapter 第三章 --- 從「氣節」到「道脈」：清初「東林」觀念的漸變 --- p.193, Chapter 第一節 --- 小引：「東林」概念之衍生 --- p.193, Chapter 第二節 --- 氣節本於理學：明代東林之氣節論 --- p.198, Chapter 第三節 --- 殉國之忠：明清之際的「氣節」 --- p.214, Chapter 第四節 --- 反思講學：「道脈」論的生長 --- p.219, Chapter 第五節 --- 篤行默修：士風之轉向 --- p.233, Chapter 第四章 --- 「宗朱」學統之建成：東林書院與官方朱學思潮 --- p.238, Chapter 第一節 --- 「尊朱」立場下的調和：明代東林學者對王學的態度 --- p.239, Chapter 第二節 --- 建構學統：清初東林論學的一個特點 --- p.249, Chapter 第三節 --- 「官方朱學」與「民間朱學」：一個闡釋框架的再檢討 --- p.259, Chapter 結論 --- 失「勢」之「道」：清初政治與學術轉向 --- p.281, 參考書目 --- p.286, http://library.cuhk.edu.hk/record=b5549013, Use of this resource is governed by the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons “Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International” License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)