“三年之喪”起源諸說考辨
The Analysis of Multiple Perspectives about the Origin of the Mourning for Three Years
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
About the origin debate on ‘morning for three years’ existed for a long time. So far, academic circles have formed seven representative perspectives, such as Yao, Shang dynasty, Dong Yi nation, Emperor Wu, Confucius, Shu Xiang and Zhou Gong. Among this, few agree with Zhu Xi’s view. however, on the analysis of multiple perspectives, we found that nobody implemented the ‘morning for three years’ before Emperor Wu and Bo Qin’s report on government affairs is the first documentary records about ‘morning for three years.’ Therefore, we holds that the most likely origin of ‘morning for three years’ should be ‘the Ritual system of Zhou Gong.’ On the analysis of records of literature and historic events, such as Emperor Wu’s demise, three consanguinity ministers’ rebellion, to the territory of Bo Qin and Confucius’ worship for Zhou Gong, we believe that the view of Zhu Xi is reasonable. Zhou Gong has the Corresponding ability, power, moral and timing. Therefore, he could formulated and implemented etiquette. In the later generations, the morning for three years have some changed in mourning’s objects. To sum up, this article holds that the most likely origin of ‘morning for three years’ should be ‘the Ritual system of Zhou Gong.’
Abstract
About the origin debate on ‘morning for three years’ existed for a long time. So far, academic circles have formed seven representative perspectives, such as Yao, Shang dynasty, Dong Yi nation, Emperor Wu, Confucius, Shu Xiang and Zhou Gong. Among this, few agree with Zhu Xi’s view. however, on the analysis of multiple perspectives, we found that nobody implemented the ‘morning for three years’ before Emperor Wu and Bo Qin’s report on government affairs is the first documentary records about ‘morning for three years.’ Therefore, we holds that the most likely origin of ‘morning for three years’ should be ‘the Ritual system of Zhou Gong.’ On the analysis of records of literature and historic events, such as Emperor Wu’s demise, three consanguinity ministers’ rebellion, to the territory of Bo Qin and Confucius’ worship for Zhou Gong, we believe that the view of Zhu Xi is reasonable. Zhou Gong has the Corresponding ability, power, moral and timing. Therefore, he could formulated and implemented etiquette. In the later generations, the morning for three years have some changed in mourning’s objects. To sum up, this article holds that the most likely origin of ‘morning for three years’ should be ‘the Ritual system of Zhou Gong.’
참고문헌 (47)
- 鄭玄, "禮記正義" (1999), 北京大學出版社
- 鄭玄, "儀禮注疏" (1999), 北京大學出版社
- 楊伯峻, "論語譯注" (1980), 中華書局
- 楊伯峻, "春秋左傳注" (1990), 中華書局
- 楊伯峻, "孟子譯注" (2010), 中華書局
- 王先謙, "『諸子集成』(二)" (2006), 中華書局
- 周振甫, "周易譯注" (1991), 中華書局
- 孫詒讓, "『諸子集成』(四)" (2006), 中華書局
- 焦循, "孟子正義", 中華書局 (1987)
- 傅斯年, "『胡適近學論著』 附錄一" (1998), 山東人民出版社
- 胡適, "胡明․胡適精品集" (1998), 光明日報出版社
- 楊朝明, "“三年之喪”應為殷代遺制論", 史學月刊, (2) (1995)
- 楊軍, "論三年之喪", 齊魯學刊, (6) (1996)
- 孔安國, "尚書正義" (1999), 北京大學出版社
- 馬承源, "『上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書』 二" (2002), 上海古籍出版社
- 岑仲勉, "兩周文史論叢" (1958), 商務印書館
- 方述鑫, "“三年之喪”起源新論", 四川大學學報, (2) (2002)
- 徐元誥, "國語集解" (2002), 中華書局
- 司馬遷, "史記" (1982), 中華書局
- 顧頡剛, "『浪口村隨筆』 卷四" (1998), 遼寧教育出版社
- 李民, "高宗“諒陰”與武丁之治", 歷史研究, (2) (1987)
- 楊華, "“諒闇不言”與君權交替-關於“三年之喪”的一個新視角", 古禮新探 (2012), 商務印書館
- 郭沫若, "『郭沫若全集』(歷史編)", 郭沫若全集, 1 (1982), 人民出版社
- 郭沫若, "十批判書․孔墨的批判", 『郭沫若全集』(歷史編) 第二卷, 2 (1982), 人民出版社
- 郭沫若, "論儒家的發生", 『郭沫若全集』(歷史編), 3 (1984), 人民出版社
- 章景明, "先秦喪服制度考" (1971), 中華書局
- 王迅東, "夷文化與淮夷文化研究" (1994)
- 高誘注, "『諸子集成』(七)" (2006), 中華書局
- 王念孫, "『讀書雜誌』第十三冊" (1985), 北京市中國書店
- 張雙棣, "淮南子校釋" (1997), 北京大學出版社
- 王明華, "“三年之喪”為武王創制說評議", 『華僑大學學報』(人文社科版), (3) (2001)
- 李洪君, "論三年喪俗起源于武王伐紂", 蘭台世界, 11下 (2011)
- 康有為, "孔子為制法之王考", 孔子改制考 (1958), 中華書局
- 錢玄同, "重論經今古文學問題-重印<新學偽經考>序(康有為", 新學偽經考 (1956), 古籍出版社
- 顧洪, "試論“三年之喪”的起源", 齊魯學刊, (3) (1989)
- 朱熹, "四書章句集注" (1983), 中華書局
- 朱熹, "中庸章句" (1983), 四書章句集注
- 李學勤, "清華大學藏戰國竹簡(貳)" (2011), 上海文藝出版集團中西書局
- 王國維, "觀堂集林" (1959), 中華書局
- 吳毓江, "墨子校注" (1992), 西南師範大學出版社
- 沈文倬, "略論禮典的實行和<儀禮>書本的撰作(下)", 文史, (16) (1982)
- 容庚, "商周彝器通論" (1983), 臺灣通大書局
- 丁鼎, "“三年之喪”為武王創制說評議", 『華僑大學學報』(人文社科版), (3) (2001)
- 何丹, "孔子的喪祭思想研究", 佳木斯大學社會科學學報, (5) (2012)
- 何丹, "三年之喪”與“孔子複禮", 甘肅聯合大學學報(社會科學版), (5) (2013)
- 何丹, "春秋時期婚姻特點之探究", 華南理工大學學報(社會科學版), (1) (2014)
- 何丹, "三年之喪”與“周公制禮", 蘭台世界, (6) (2014)