英文摘要
|
This paper attempts to compare the similarities and differences between Dai Zhen's and Jiao Xun's way of interpreting classics, pointing out that they respectively differ from their predecessors in interpretation and evidential studies of classic texts. Their annotation of classic texts can be included in, yet not confine to, the field of evidential studies, so it is not proper to merely classify their annotation under Han-learning interpretation. Both Dai Zhen and Jiao Xunconstantly emphasize the importance of interpreting and understanding classics. They believe that one's disposition and soul are the focuses of learning classic texts, and so are good explanation of the texts and realization of "Tao." One can also deepen the learning by exchanging ideas within circle of scholars and colleagues; still, one can construct personal thinking by editing and annotating classic texts or writing books. Their belief reveals the special feature of the classic interpretation during Qian-Jia period.
|