论文部分内容阅读
孟子、董仲舒、司马迁等大力推崇《春秋》,而姚曼波、王世舜教授认为《春秋》“漏洞百出”,“颠倒黑白”,孔子所作不应是《春秋经》而是“《春秋》传”——《左传》,并且认为这是“意义重大”的发现,其实是出于《春秋》由经降史所生的误解。成见在胸,欲完成这项“神圣的”工作,于是“遍考秦汉典籍,找不到一条孔子作《春秋经》的坚实依据”。实则所作“考证”充满主观臆断。董仲舒“引经文而称孔子”,则认为董“偷天换日”,“移花接木”,把《左传》调包为《春秋》,这是连当时的皇帝都无法做到的事。又曲解《史记》,声称《史记》“以孔子作《传》”,实则望风捕影,把自己的成见强加于司马迁。经学史上的客观事实,不会因为后人不理解和拒不承认而不存在。自以为“廓清了千年迷雾”,实则制造了混乱。评价历史、人物而没有历史观点,必定陷于谬误。
Mencius, Dong Zhongshu, Sima Qian and other vigorously respected “spring and autumn”, and Yao Mambo, Professor Wang Shishun that “Spring and Autumn” “full of loopholes”, “upside down black and white,” Confucius should not be “Spring and Autumn” but “Spring and Autumn” Biography - “Zuo Zhuan” and considered it a “significant” discovery. This is actually a misunderstanding of the “Spring and Autumn” from the downfall of history. Prejudiced in the chest, to accomplish this “sacred” work, so “all over the Qin and Han dynasties books, can not find a Confucius as” a solid basis for the Spring and Autumn “. In fact, ”research“ is full of subjective assumptions. Dong Zhongshu, who quoted Confucius as quoting the passage of the scriptures, believed that Dong could not afford to do anything that the emperor could do at the time because he was ”stealing everything from sky to sky“ and ”transfiguration“. Also misinterpreted ”Historical Records“, claiming that ”Historical Records“ ”to Confucius as“ Biography ”“, but in fact the wind shadow, imposing his own prejudices Sima Qian. The objective fact in the history of the school does not exist because the posterity does not understand and refuses to admit it. Self-righteous ”clearance of the millennium fog", but in fact created chaos. Evaluation of history, character without historical point of view, must be caught in fallacy.