《述學》一書，歷來被視為清人汪中（1745-1794）之代表著作，迭經刊刻、整理、著錄。關於此書之版本問題，前人雖有所研討講明，然其中曲折細微之處，仍有待掘發。而今人新式整理點校本，對此仍存在不少錯誤的認識。故此一問題仍有值得研究之必要。容甫著作之保存、整理與刊佈，其子汪喜孫具有最大之功績，然因後人研讀《述學》一書時，多僅以喜孫彙刻之《汪氏叢書》本為標準，而忽略其與更早版本間之異同，因此形成一些不同，甚至錯誤之理解。若過於倚賴汪喜孫整理的成果，未能廣泛搜輯各種版本，比勘卷次、文字異同，進而發掘其中可能存在之問題，則對於容甫學術研究之進展，不能不說有所妨礙。本文主要針對以上數點，略述己意，期待對《述學》的版本源流有所澄清。

Generally considered as the representative work of the famous Qing scholar Wang Zhong (1745-1794), Shuxue, his collection of essays, has been edited, published and registered on various occasions, hence the problem of its textual history. This problem is worth re-considering today, as despite researches and elucidations by many scholars since its first publication, many details are still to be explored, and quite a few descriptions and judgements in its recent recensions remain to be corrected. Wang Xisun, Wang Zhong’s son, had made utmost effort to preserve, edit and publish his father’s works. However, the under-evaluation of the textual differences between the previous editions of Shuxue and Wang Xisun’s edition in Jiangdu Wangshi Congshu which is generally taken as the standard text has been a source of different (and sometimes wrong) understandings of Wang Zhong’s words for the researchers. Too much reliance on the Congshu edition as well as the lack of real editing work through collection and comparison of the many different existing texts may cause a neglect of problems concealed therein and even become a hindrance to further developing the studies of Wang Zhong. The present study aims therefore at presenting my personal opinions on the above-mentioned points and suggest a possible timeline of Shuxue’s different editions.

汪中;述學;汪喜孫;版本

Wang Zhong;Shuxue;Wang Xisun;Edition