摘要：《礼记·王制》是晚清经学的重要话题。《王制》篇格局宏大、特点鲜明，在解释史中，历代经师已围绕该篇的现实功能、及如何在经学系统中为其定位展开反复讨论。而时入晚清，在今文经学思潮蓬勃发展的影响下，《王制》的重要性更被不断彰显。

廖平、康有为是清末今文学的代表性学者，他们对于《王制》，有着特别的研究和关注。廖平治学屡变其说，但其利用《王制》整顿经学之心则贯穿始终，他利用《王制》建立起自己的经学体系，并通过《王制》回应时变、思考未来。其一变借助《王制》平分今古，超越东汉经学的模型，建立起新的经学格局。而二变在一变的基础上，深化了对于“制度”、“改制”的理解，为《王制》梳理出制度大纲，将其视作统摄六经的关键。三变以后廖平以“小大统”理解经学，借助《王制》展开了他对中国、世界的规划与展望。可以说，《王制》正是廖平改造经学应对新世的枢纽。

《王制》对于康有为也有着特别的意义。他重视《王制》在突出改制需求、论证改制合法性上的标志性功能，重视《王制》在启发新制度建设中的引导性功能。通过解说《王制》、宣传《王制》，康氏推进着他的维新事业。程大璋继承老师，提炼概括《王制》的思想主旨。把康有为的政治思想化为《王制》的核心精神，使这个文本和康氏的政治理念更加紧密地结合在了一起。对于康氏及其弟子来讲，《王制》一方面作为变法的符号，一方面作为变法的参照，成为其表达政治思想的重要支撑。

廖平将《王制》视作支撑经学的核心，而康有为则将《王制》视作辅证变法的重要材料。他们共同将这个古老文本带出了历史，和现实问题发生交流和碰撞，重新焕发了《王制》的生命力。但是，由于他们的一些观点极大地颠覆了人们的认识。因此，其解读在形成巨大影响的同时，也立即引发了争议。一些学者忧虑于二人的张扬，希望收束一些锋芒，将今文学引上更加平实的轨道。而另一些学者则愤怒于今文家的天马行空，力图对如此解经进路予以绞杀。在这些争议中，《王制》研究走入越来越单调的时代考证与越来越细化的名物考索，却与现实世界越发脱节。今天来看，今文《王制》学展现了晚清经师积极调动经学资源以应对新世的努力，其问题意识与解读方法应该得到再重视。晚清今文家为这个文本所开出的丰富可能性，正是我们重新理解经学、开展经学所应重视的宝贵财富。

关键词：《王制》  廖平  康有为  通经致用

Abstract:Known for its grand vision and unique language, the WangZhi in the Book of Rites fueled scholarly discussions on the function and teleology of the Confucian Classics in history. In late Qing, with the rise of the modern Confucian Classics as a new discourse, WangZhi became ever more central to the discourse of Confucian Classics as a whole.

Liao Ping and Kung Youwei-renowned scholars of their day-made significant contributions to the study of WangZhi. In using WangZhi to restructure the entire discourse of Confucian Classics, Liao Ping made a series of moves to build his own meta-discourse based on this text in order to arrive at an understanding of historicity. The first move was to go beyond the paradigmatic discourse of the Confucian Classics laid in the Eastern Han Dynasty and bring the discourse of modern Confucian classics into equal footing. The second move was to mete out the specificities of the notions such as "order" and "reform" and use WangZhi as a base text to govern the Six Classics in his meta-discourse. The third move was to use WangZhi as a blueprint text to envision a local order for China and a global order for the world. Needless to say, Liao Ping played a pivotal role in bringing the discourse of modern Confucian Classics to life.

For Kung Youwei, WangZhi justified and legitimated the Reform on the one hand and proved inspiring for the institution-building under the Reform on the other. While Kung worked tirelessly to promote WangZhi to further his Reformative cause, his student Cheng Dazhang tethered WangZhi to Kung's political vision. For Cheng, WangZhi was not only a symbol but also a reference for the Reform.

Both Liao Ping and Kung Youwei brought WangZhi to bear on some of the thorniest issues of their time. While Liao saw WangZhi as the central locus of the discourse of the Confucian Classics, Kung Youwei found justification for the Reform in it. In spite of this difference, both Liao and Kung greatly challenged the establishment and spurred considerable controversies. One group of scholars, unlike Liao and Kung, hoped to steer the discourse of modern Confucian Classics to a less politicized route; another group of scholars found their approaches too speculative and therefore troublesome. What all these scholars did, as a result, was to bring WangZhi into an evidentialist philology and bury once more the potentialities rediscovered by Liao and Kung. What we can retrieve and learn from WangZhi today, however, is precisely these potentialities Liao and Kung illuminated when they mobilized WangZhi to respond to the problems and issues of their own time.

Key Words:WangZhi   Liao Ping   Kung Youwei   The use of Confucian Classics

导师：汤一介教授、干春松教授