| 摘要: | 本論文以1966至1991年的中華文化復興運動為背景，探討《論語》在國家政策、學校教育與學術考辨共同影響下所呈現的現代詮釋轉向。中華文化復興運動使《論語》不再只是傳統經學文本，而將其納入教材體系與國家文化治理架構之中，成為傳遞倫理價值與文化認同的重要資源。本研究關注的核心問題是：在此制度化脈絡下，《論語》如何被重新編選、詮釋與傳播，其思想內容以及可被理解、教學與運用的方式又如何隨之改變。
第一章回顧中華文化復興運動的組織架構、政策目標與文化實作，說明中華文化復興運動推行委員會如何透過教育、出版與文化宣傳，將《論語》置入國家文化治理體系。第二章以錢穆《論語新解》與毛子水《論語今註今譯》為中心，分析現代章句型詮釋如何在回應朱熹傳統權威的同時，透過語境說明與白話翻譯，使《論語》更適合現代閱讀、教學與實踐。第三章分析陳大齊《論語臆解》與王邦雄、曾昭旭、楊祖漢《論語義理疏解》，探討主題式編選與系統化義理詮釋，藉助語言分析與哲學方法，使《論語》成為可供現代倫理與生命反思的思想資源。第四章則以李炳南《論語講要》、《論語講記》與南懷瑾《論語別裁》為研究對象，說明講學式與宗教化詮釋如何結合佛學語彙與修行觀，將《論語》轉化為面向大眾的心性修養與人生實踐讀本。
第五章綜合比較上述三類詮釋取向，指出中華文化復興運動時期的《論語》詮釋呈現三項共同特徵：其一，義理思想被轉化為教學與實踐的道德原則；其二，孔子及其弟子形象趨於平實化，成為貼近日常的人生典範；其三，《論語》被用以回應當時的政治、教育與心靈需求。本文進一步以「克己復禮」這一核心概念的詮解為實例，說明經典如何在政策、教材與講學實作中被逐步轉化為以品格教育為核心的標準詮釋，也指出在普及化的同時，經典的思想層次不免有簡化之憾。
本研究有助於釐清「中華文化復興運動」期間《論語》的詮釋方向與成果，並從注疏傳統、教材編選、文化政策推動的脈絡衡定《論語》學的發展樣態，讓我們能更清楚理解經典是如何被接受與理解，為當代《論語》的注釋、閱讀與教學方式提供具體的反思基礎。
;This study examined the interpretive transformations of the Analects (also known as the Sayings of Confucius) during the Chinese Cultural Renaissance Movement from 1966 to 1991, focusing on how national policy, school education, and academic inquiry jointly shaped its reception. Through this movement, the Analects was no longer treated solely as a traditional Confucian classic; instead, it was incorporated into the educational curriculum and the framework of national cultural governance, becoming a crucial resource for transmitting ethical values and cultural identity. The core questions addressed in this study are how, within this institutionalized context, the Analects was re-edited, reinterpreted, and disseminated, and how its ideas—and the ways in which they were understood, taught, and applied—changed accordingly.
Chapter One reviews the organizational structure, policy objectives, and cultural practices of the Chinese Cultural Renaissance Movement, explaining how the Chinese Cultural Renaissance Movement Promotion Committee integrated the Analects into the system of national cultural governance through education, publishing, and cultural propaganda. Chapter Two focuses on Qian Mu’s The Analects of Confucius: A New Annotated Translation and Mao Zishui’s Modern Annotations and Translation of the Analects, analyzing how modern, chapter-and-verse-style interpretations retained the authoritative legacy of Zhu Xi while, through contextual explanations and vernacular translation, making the Analects more accessible for modern reading, teaching, and practice. Chapter Three examines Chen Daqi’s A Subjective Interpretation of the Analects as well as Wang Bangxiong, Zeng Zhaoxu, and Yang Zuhan’s Philosophy and Analysis of the Confucian Analects, exploring how thematic compilation and systematic philosophical interpretations drawing on linguistic analyses and philosophical methods recast the Analects as a source of reflection for modern ethics and human life. Chapter Four investigates Li Bingnan’s The Outline of Analects of Confucius, The Lecture Notes of Analects of Confucius and Nan Huaijin’s A New Approach to the Confucian Analects, showing how lecture-based and religiously inflected interpretations incorporated Buddhist terminology and self-cultivation, transforming the Analects into a widely accessible guide to moral self-cultivation and practical life wisdom.
Chapter Five compares the three interpretive approaches and identifies three shared characteristics of Analects interpretations during the Chinese Cultural Renaissance Movement: first, philosophical principles were translated into moral norms in education and practice; second, the images of Confucius and his disciples were rendered more down-to-earth, serving as everyday models of life; and third, the Analects was employed to respond to the political, educational, and spiritual needs of the period. Using interpretations of the core concept of “restraining oneself and returning to ritual propriety” as a case study, this study explained how the classical text was gradually transformed through policy, textbooks, and lecturing practices into a standardized interpretation centered on character education, while also pointing out that, in the process of popularization, while also noting that, in the process of popularization, some degree of simplification of the classic’s intellectual depth was unavoidable.
This study helped clarify the interpretive orientations and achievements of the Analects during the Chinese Cultural Renaissance Movement and evaluated patterns of its development from the perspectives of the exegetical tradition, textbook compilation, and cultural policy promotion. This study thus provides a clearer understanding of how the classic was received and understood, offering a concrete basis for reflection on contemporary methods to annotating, reading, and teaching the Analects. |
