此文主旨在建立並檢討戴君仁對閻毛論辯的思維看法並論及其《尚書》學相關論點。藉由知人論世之法，先分析戴君仁在時代背景下撰作《閻毛古文尚書公案》的原因，得出戴君仁撰書帶有實用目的，欲藉由清代考據學中科學成分的突顯，提供研究者邏輯思維上的訓練，並進一步提高對傳統學術的信心及認同。此文另全面考察戴君仁《尚書》著述，得出四點結果，分別為他以科學實證精神作為閻若璩及毛奇齡在論辯《古文尚書》真偽所採用之考證方法的區別，藉以張揚閻是毛非的論點。他並綜合各項資料及前賢學者的說法，提出偽古文在晉宋之間曾有兩套偽本出現，今本偽《古文尚書》非梅賾所獻，應該出現於南朝晉、宋之間。戴君仁又以神祕及平實作為漢代今文學說及古文學說詮釋上的差異特點，概括指出漢代經學發展的過程特質，戴君仁並釐清部分文字所代表的典章制度意涵。此文透過對戴君仁《尚書》學具體而全面的論析，有助於學界對臺灣戰後經學發展的認知，未來可藉由對戴君仁各經之逐步研究，完整建構出其經學思想體系。

The purpose of this study is to construct and explore the argument of Yan Ruoqu and Mo Qiling and the thoughts on “Book of Documents” on Daijun Ren. This study used the following research method to explore the author and his world. This study analyzed how Daijun Ren wrote “YanMoGuWenShangShuGongAn”, and concluded that Daijun Ren was writing with a “practical” or “empirical” purpose. He tried to promote the scientific spirit of textual criticism in the reigns of Emperor Qianlong and Jiaqing. He believed this could provide training in logical thinking for readers, and increase the confidence of traditional academic study. This study draws three conclusions. The first is that Daijun Ren used the scientific spirit as a way of distinguishing between Yan Ruoqu and Mo Qiling, and praise Yan Ruoqu more than Mo Qiling. The second is that Daijun Ren thought the false ancient writings, the “Book of Documents,” appeared in the period of the Southern Dynasties. The third conclusion is that Daijun Ren used the concepts of “mysterious” and “plain” or “direct” as the difference between the ancient writing school and the new writing school. The fourth conclusion is that Dai Junren thus endeavored to explain the meaning of several texts. This study is helpful to recognize the development of Taiwan’s classical study, and we can gradually promote Dai Junren’s Confucian thought.

戴靜山; 閻若璩; 毛奇齡; 閻毛古文尚書公案; 臺灣經學研究

Dai Jingsan; Yan Ruoqu; Mo Qiling; YanMoGuWenShangShuGongAn; The classical syudies by Taiwan