一孟子曾说：“礼，门也。”（《孟子·万章下》）对于儒学以及中国的历史与文化来说，孟子的这个断语非常贴切，而且包含了很多的含义与可以引申的空间。依笔者之见，礼的确是进入儒学以及中国文化之“门”，进了这道门，里面曲径通幽，别有洞天，可以尽揽儒学与中国文化之奥秘；若不由这道门进入，则不见宗庙之美、百官之富（用子贡评价孔子语，见《论语·子张》），对于儒学的理解和中国文化的把握也始终在外围盘旋，不能见得其真谛。因此之故，古今学者大多承认，礼是中国文化的重要特征，研究儒学、研究中国历史文化，不能不谈礼。那么，我们应该如何理解礼是中国文化的特征呢？处在历史情境中的古人其实也意识到了这个问题，他们谈论礼的重要性，一般是从两个方面来说。一是认为礼与天地并列，突出礼的重要性，如《左传》记载春秋时期人们的看法：“夫礼，天之经也，地之义也，民之行也。”（《左传·昭公二十五年》）《礼记》也说：“是故夫礼，必本于大一，分而为天地，转而为阴阳，变而为四时，列而为鬼神。”（《礼记·礼运》）在传统中国的思维观念中，以天地为大。认为礼与天地并列，是天经地义，这是对礼的重要性的最好说明。二是认为礼自人类文明开化之初就已出现，突出了礼在中国历史文化中的悠久性。如《礼记》中就提出礼始诸饮食（《礼记·礼运》）、始于男女之别（《礼记·内则》）等不同的说法。杜佑在《通典》中进一步总结说：“自伏羲以来，五礼始彰。尧舜之时，五礼咸备。”380719如果按照这样的说法，礼当是文明产生的标志，其历史久远，意义自然重大。传统的看法认为礼起自人类文明开化之初，这种看法虽然很有意义，但若从严格的学术角度来看，实则多为推测之辞，在近代以来的学术发展脉络中就显得有些粗略。在近代的史学发展中，学者们结合新的材料与理论，将这个问题转换为对礼的起源的探讨，并取得了很大的突破与进展。王国维结合殷墟卜辞的研究，对礼的起源做了进一步的考证，认为礼起源于宗教祭祀仪式。其实这种说法是对《说文解字》的进一步落实。《说文解字》指出：“禮，履也，所以事神致福也。从示从豐。豐亦声。又豐部：豐，行礼之器也。”这是说，礼起源于祀神求福的宗教祭祀仪式。王国维认为，礼的古字“皆象二玉在器之形。古者行礼以玉，故《说文》曰‘豐，行礼之器’，其说古矣”。礼的本义就是器皿中盛两串玉以祭献神灵。后来也兼指以酒祭献神灵，再后来则一切祭神之事皆称为礼。380720王国维借助甲骨文的研究，从文字学的角度入手来考察礼的起源，支持了《说文》的看法，得到后来许多学者的肯定，成为学术界较为通行的一种观点。380721此外，还有另一种观点也较有代表性，认为礼起源于原始社会的风俗习惯，这种看法以杨宽先生《古史新探》中的一系列文章最为典型。杨先生通过对古代冠礼、籍田礼、乡饮酒礼、射礼等起源的研究，认为“礼的起源很早，远在原始氏族公社中，人们已习惯于把重要行动加上特殊的礼仪。……这些礼仪，不仅长期成为社会生活的传统习惯，而且常被用作维护社会秩序、巩固社会组织和加强部落之间联系的手段。进入阶级社会后，许多礼仪还被大家沿用着，其中部分礼仪往往被统治阶级所利用和改变，作为巩固统治阶级内部组织和统治人民的一种手段”。“西周时代贵族所推行的‘周礼’，是有其悠久的历史根源的，许多具体的礼文、仪式都是从周代氏族末期的礼仪转化出来的。”380722认为礼起源于宗教祭祀仪式，或者来源于上古社会的风俗习惯，都是近代以来学者从较为实证、科学的角度对礼的起源做的进一步的探讨，比起传统礼书中的诸种看法，已经有了质的飞跃。但是，无论是传统的看法如《礼记》所说，认为礼起源于饮食、男女之别，还是进一步认为礼源自宗教祭祀仪式，或者上古社会形成的风俗习惯，这些其实都是人类社会普遍存在的文化现象，如果仅就这几个方面来说，都不足以凸显礼在中国文化中的重要性与独特性。我们认为，礼之所以在中国历史文化中独具特色，且具有重要地位和意义，还有两方面重要的原因。第一，礼虽然源自上古社会人们逐渐形成的一些风俗习惯，或宗教祭祀仪式，但是经过了周公的制作和孔子的继承，礼纳入了儒学，成为儒学所传承的重要内容。古代的儒家一致认为，周公曾“制礼作乐”，西周灿烂盛大的礼乐制度都是出自周公的创制。其实，历史地看，周公不可能亲自制定繁复细致的礼制，也不可能创作出《周礼》，但是，周公在礼的发展历程中却是承前启后的关键人物。孔子就曾经说，三代之礼是“损益”发展的，而且“周监于二代”（《论语·八佾》），周礼是对夏、殷二代之礼以及二代文化的继承与发展，从这个方面来看，周公作为西周初期政治、文化方面的核心人物，虽然不可能一一亲自制定周的礼仪制度，但他对礼制有所损益，制定周的礼仪法度的原则，这应该是合理的。因此，我们对周公“制礼作乐”应该作全面的、广义的理解。正如顾颉刚先生所说：“‘周公制礼’这件事是应该肯定的”，周初的礼制“既然有所损益，就必定有创造的成分在内，所以未尝不可说是周公所制”。380723我们应该从这个角度来理解周公制礼作乐。孔子生活在礼坏乐崩的春秋末期，他对于“郁郁乎文哉”的周礼推崇备至，孔子一生的志向是“从周”（《论语·八佾》），复周礼。孔子认为，僵化的礼文并不是真正的礼。孔子以仁释礼，将传统的礼学与儒家的仁学联系起来，因此在孔子开创的儒学中，仁与礼是两个重要的支柱，也是两个重要的层面，缺一不可。虽然后世儒学的发展在不同阶段对两个方面有所偏重，但绝没有偏废，礼始终是儒学的重要内容。经过了周公的制作与孔子的传承，礼就绝不仅只是源于上古社会的冠昏丧祭等各种仪式了，礼还成为儒学的重要特征，成为儒学传承的重要内容。历代儒家学者对三《礼》文献的梳理、考证，对上古礼仪制度的探讨，就逐渐发展为儒家的礼学。另外，如前文所指出的，古人认为礼与天地并列，对于这样的论断，如果没有充分的论证，它的丰富的思想内涵还不足以展现。对礼做理论上的阐释，主要也是由后世的儒家所完成的，历代的大儒对礼均有深刻的阐释，由此形成了儒学当中丰富的礼学思想，这些内容不仅是儒学的重要组成部分，而且对中国传统哲学也产生了很大的影响，同时也使礼成为中国哲学思想的一个重要特征。第二，礼不仅是儒学传承的一门专门之学，而且还对中国古代社会政治的发展，产生了极其深远的影响，礼成为中国政治历史的一个重要特征。早在先秦时期，人们就已经认识到，礼具有明确的政治含义，如：“礼，经国家，定社稷，序民人，利后嗣者也。”（《左传·隐公十一年》）“礼，国之干也。”（《左传·僖公十一年》）“礼者，君之大柄也。所以别嫌明微，傧鬼神，考制度，别仁义，所以治政安君也。”（《礼记·礼运》）“礼之于正国也，犹衡之于轻重也，绳墨之于曲直也，规矩之于方圆也。”（《礼记·经解》）“人之命在天，国之命在礼。”（《荀子·强国》）“礼者，所以御民也；辔者，所以御马也。无礼而能治国家者，晏未之闻也。”（《晏子春秋·谏上》）礼之所以能治国，就是因为礼是权力的象征。380724礼具有丰富而又明确的政治含义。按照司马迁的看法，秦的朝仪是“悉内六国礼仪，采择其善，虽不合圣制，其尊君抑臣，朝廷济济，依古以来”（《史记·礼书》），秦礼是在区分尊卑等级秩序的前提下杂采六国礼仪而成的。叔孙通制作的汉仪在此基础之上增减损益而成。汉代的建立者刘邦及其追随者都出自社会下层，他们在推翻了秦帝国之后，虽然废除了秦的各项严刑酷法，以“简易”为尚，但是在朝廷之上“群臣饮酒争功，醉或妄呼，拔剑击柱”，深为高祖所患（《史记·叔孙通列传》）。儒生叔孙通看到这样的局面，感到既有损于帝国的威严，也不利于朝廷的长治久安，因此在征得高祖同意之后，征鲁诸生三十余人及学者弟子共百余人，演习一月有余，制定了汉的朝仪。这套仪式尊卑有序，在演习之后竟然令高祖曰：“吾乃今日知为皇帝之贵也。”（《史记·叔孙通列传》）让刘邦感到当皇帝的尊贵的当然是礼制的威严。秦汉的朝仪也就是当时的国家礼典，包含了“君臣朝廷尊卑贵贱之序，下及黎庶车舆衣服宫室饮食嫁娶丧祭之分”（《史记·礼书》）。魏晋以后，国家礼仪制作有了进一步的发展，其主要表现就是在《周礼》的“五礼”基础上，形成了严格而完整的五礼制度，以此作为每一个时期的礼典。这些国家层面的礼典礼制，不但属于国家的大经大法，在国家政治发展中具有重要意义，而且历代的礼典礼制的制作也多是在儒家的指导下完成的。除此之外，历代的法典也明显受到礼的影响，礼是中国古代法的指导思想，这一点也是得到大多数学者所承认的。380725从这个角度来看，儒家的礼学主导了中国古代政治制度史的发展，使中国古代的政治文化具有鲜明的特色。综上所述，礼是儒学的重要特征与主体内容，在儒家的指导下形成的礼典贯穿了秦汉以后中国古代历史的发展。礼学不仅是中国传统思想、学术的一个重要方面，而且还是指导国家政治与民众生活的准则。从这两个方面来看，礼不仅是所有的人类社会都具有的一种文化形态，更在中国传统思想文化当中具有重要的地位和影响。正是在后一种意义上，我们才可以说礼是中国文化的重要特征，是认识儒学与中国文化传统之“门”。礼是儒学的重要内容与本质特征，而且还弥散在中国文化的各个方面，因此对礼的研究也可以从多个方面展开。就目前学术界的研究来看，主要有两个方面的研究取向。一是在经学史（包括经学思想史）的研究脉络中对礼学的研究，二是礼制史的研究，这个方面的研究主要限于史学界（尤其是制度史的研究）。经学史的研究侧重于文献，而礼制史的研究则重在制度史与政治史、社会史等领域的结合。本书的研究与这两个方面的研究取向均有不同。本书立足于儒学，采取的是一种以哲学思想的分析为主，结合经学文献、社会政治以及礼仪制度而形成的较为综合的研究。具体来说，本书研究的主要内容是北宋时期的儒家礼学。之所以选择宋代的礼学作为研究对象，是出于两个方面的原因。第一，从中国哲学研究的角度来看，由于理学是传统儒学发展的顶峰，因而宋代的儒学研究主要侧重于理学，这方面的研究至少从20世纪80年代以来，已经取得了很大的进展，成果纷呈，名家辈出，自不待言。但是，仁和礼是孔子和儒家思想的两个方面，尽管宋代的心性义理之学空前发达，对儒学的心性内圣之学做深入的研究阐发固然重要，也是必须的，如果顾此失彼，忽视了对礼的研究，对制度外王之学的探究，那么对儒学的理解就是不完整的，对儒学的研究也是有缺陷的。近些年来，学术界已经意识到这个问题，指出应当对宋代的儒学做完整的理解和把握，甚至还提出整体的“宋学”概念，将儒学的外围也包括在研究范围之内，以期对宋代的儒学有完整的把握。第二，从儒家礼学的角度来看，传统礼学研究的重点是两汉礼学和清代礼学，而对于这两个阶段之间的宋代礼学则较为忽略。在礼学当中，三《礼》的成书、传承以及礼学当中所有的纷争都要上溯到两汉时期，因此两汉礼学历来是礼学研究以及整个经学研究中的重点。清代振兴汉学，以考据为主的礼学自然受到乾嘉汉学家的重视。更为重要的是，乾嘉礼学推尊汉学，因此对宋代理学化了的礼学、以理代礼的礼学痛加批斥。此风延续甚久，甚至清末较为平实的经学史家（如皮锡瑞）以及现代以来的一些礼学、经学研究，都受此影响，多认为宋代的礼学背离了礼是实学的传统，因而成就不高，不足为观。其实，如果就三《礼》的注疏考证成就来看，宋代虽然没有出现像清代那样的总结性、集大成之作，但依然数量可观，且独具特色。仅《宋史·艺文志》礼类就收录著作一百一十三部，共计一千三百九十九卷。另外还有不著录者二十六部，四百六十九卷。这些著作大多为宋人作品。其中王安石《周官新义》、王昭禹《周礼详解》、朱熹与门人弟子共同编纂的《仪礼经传通解》以及宋末卫湜《礼记集说》等，在三《礼》学的注疏历史上也都是重要的作品。从内容来看，宋代的礼学以《周礼》学为主，这一方面是由于宋代的儒学重视通经致用，儒学发展的目标是建立合理的、儒家式的理想社会，而且内圣学的发展最终也要落实到外王的理想上面来，在儒家经典当中，《周礼》恰好具有这样的思想品格，因而格外受到重视。另外，由于王安石以《周礼》行新法而引起了士人群体的分化，很多人由于反对新法进而反对新学，这也刺激了宋代学者对《周礼》的关注，甚至釜底抽薪，认为《周礼》是刘歆伪造的观点也是在这样的背景之下提出来的。由此可见，在北宋特殊的政治背景之下，古老的《周礼》又一次走到了政治的前台，儒家礼学与现实政治之间的复杂关系再次得到了充分的展现。对于这些问题，我们应当不受前人成见的束缚，站在客观的立场上作深入的研究，学术的归学术，政治的归政治，甚至学术与政治之间胶着不清的地方也应作合理细致的分析。从哲学思想的研究来看，宋代的儒学虽然以义理学为特色，成就也最高，但是从整体上来看，在义理学的体系中，如何安置传统儒家所重视的以伦常日用、社会秩序为标识的礼，如何厘清礼与理的关系，依然是理学以及儒学发展必须解决的问题。宋代的理学家对礼均有非常深入的论述，他们将礼纳入天理的叙述结构当中，这样，礼论其实也成为理学家思想当中的重要内容。先秦以及两汉时期的思想家，尤其是儒学家，固然非常重视礼，但他们对于礼的认识，总体上来说还是重视礼的功能，多从礼对于维系人伦社会秩序的角度来阐释礼的作用。而理学家对礼的解释则从天理的角度着眼，这样就从本质上提升了礼的地位，“礼者理也”，也正是在这样的理论框架中礼才真正具有了哲学含义。对于这些内容，以往的理学和儒学研究注意不够，因此这也是促使我们研究宋代礼学思想的一个重要缘由。最后，有必要指出的是，虽然我们在本书中一再强调宋代礼学是儒家礼学发展过程中的一个重要环节，不能受清代学者的成见而贬低宋代礼学；我们的研究也表明，理学家对礼的解释具有重要的理论意义，他们从天理论的角度捍卫了儒学的价值与立场。理学家不再简单地以传统儒家的礼作为与外来文化相抗衡的工具，而是对礼做了更新的、深入的解释，使礼具有了天理的依据，也使天理具有了具体的内涵，这样不但从更深的层次肯定了礼的功能，而且还赋予礼本体的地位，这样也表明了儒学的真正复兴。但是，我们在肯定宋代礼学具有重要的学术价值与意义的同时，也要指出，礼的定亲疏、别贵贱的本质并没有因为礼的形上化而改变，礼依然是区分尊卑贵贱等级的标志。指出这一点尤为重要，它可以使我们对传统礼学保持清醒的认识，做出恰如其分的历史评价。随意贬低礼学固然不可取，但是任意拔高、美化礼学，沉醉于钟鸣鼎食、诗书簪缨的礼学研究之中而有意无意淡化礼的本质，尤其在礼学思想的研究当中脱离文本语境和历史情境来抽象地讲“礼之以和为贵”，刻意回避礼与当代某些价值（如法治、正义等）之间的冲突，也不是历史的态度。二本书名为《北宋礼学研究》，但其实并未曾对北宋时期所有的三《礼》学注疏著作，以及北宋时期所有儒学家、理学家的礼学思想做全面的研究。这主要有两个方面的原因，一是从文献目录来看，宋代的三《礼》学注疏著作虽然为数不少，但很多都已佚失，完整流传至今的并不多见。若作全面的研究，除了尽量利用后世学者辑佚的一些资料之外，还需在史料方面下大量的功夫钩沉辑佚，这项学术工作既非本人专长，也是费时耗力的一件事。若不从扩展资料入手，仅依现存的一些文献目录（如《经义考》等），大多仅能做一些较为空泛的介绍，难以深入。因此，本书的研究主要以现有资料为主，包括前人已经辑佚的作品（如中国台湾学者程元敏辑佚的王安石《周官新义》）。这样，本书对北宋时期的三《礼》学就不能算作是一个全面的研究，而只是针对某些著作做较为深入的专题研究。二是就北宋时期的儒家学者来说，虽然他们很多人都有丰富的关于礼的思想和论述，如欧阳修、司马光甚至苏轼等，但一则学界已有一些专门的研究，更主要的是，从整体上来看，他们的思想同质化较明显，均是在与佛老的抗争中肯定礼的作用与意义。这样的看法虽然有一定的思想史意义，但对礼学思想的发展，却没有太多的实质性的推进。因此，本书只选取了理学家中有代表性的张载、二程与吕大临，这是因为他们对于儒家礼学思想的论述相比以往有了本质的提升，而且在他们各自的思想当中，也比较完整地体现出新兴的理学与传统礼学之间的互动甚至冲突，这些内容不仅对于礼学思想的发展有重要意义，而且对于理学以及儒学的发展，也都有很重要的意义。出于这两个方面的原因，笔者认为，与其做面面俱到但难以深入的“全面”研究，这样的专题探讨更有意义一些。针对礼学的特殊性，传统的礼学研究在方法上也各有特色。如清人总结出来礼学研究有“分节、绘图、释例”三法，对于礼书的流传和礼经中的名物制度，一般又多用辨伪考证的方法。对于历代编定的礼典与礼制研究，史学界的研究较多，且方法更加多样。对前辈学者的研究，无论采取何种方式方法，只要其成果对礼学研究有所推进，惠及后学，我们均对之充满敬意，但是我们的研究则并没有遵从传统礼学以考证辨伪为主的研究方法，而更多采用的是思想史分析研究的方法，将礼学放在宋代儒学发展和哲学思想演变的脉络当中，将礼学与北宋时期特定的政治背景和历史发展联系起来，试图对礼学与宋代儒学的发展作综合的考察。我们关注的问题是：《周礼》在宋代儒学发展过程中的作用与意义是什么？怎样理解与把握宋代围绕《周礼》而形成的学术与政治之间的纠缠与争斗？传统儒家的礼学与新兴的理学之间是何关系？我们究竟应当怎样理解“礼者理也”这个命题？理学的兴起是否意味着对传统儒学的彻底超越？笔者对北宋时期礼学的研究主要就是围绕这些问题而展开的。下面对本书的主要内容做一简要的叙述。本书的第一章从整体上对宋代礼学的发展作了分析。传统学术思想的研究首先重视“辨章学术，考镜源流”，对宋代的礼学从整体上作分辨与把握是非常必要的。我们参考了传统的学术史（如《宋元学案》）和哲学史对宋代理学、宋代哲学不同学派的辨析与研究，将宋代的礼学大致划分为三个派别，即礼图学派、经世学派和义理学派。礼图学是宋代礼学中较为专门的一派，这是参考了清代学者陈澧、曹元弼等人的看法而提出的。以图解经本来就是经学研究的一种行之有效的方法，但是，图谱学的真正兴起是在宋代，其中以易学、礼学尤为突出。就礼学来说，宋代学者已经非常有意识地用图来研究三《礼》，出现了诸如聂崇义《三礼图》、杨甲《六经图》、杨复《仪礼图》以及大量的《周礼》图著作，礼图成为宋代礼学当中自成门类的一派。另外，宋代新兴的学问金石学以著录、考辨古器物为主，而这些所谓的古器物又大多属于三代礼器，因此，《考古图》《博古图》之类的著作，其实也应属于礼图学。宋代还出现了从理论上说明图谱的价值、功能以及在学术研究中的意义的作品，这以郑樵《通志》二十略中的《图谱略》为代表。郑樵所谓的“图”，大多与礼图有关，而且有一些内容完全就是礼制（如器用、车旂、衣裳、坛兆、名物等），因此郑樵对图谱的理论总结，其实在很大程度上也是对礼图的功能、价值与意义的总结。正是出于这几个方面的原因，我们将礼图学作为宋代礼学中独立的一个派别。儒家认为“制度在礼”（《礼记·仲尼燕居》），礼学中蕴含着儒家所规划的社会的礼乐制度、伦理规范和政治理想。在北宋儒学复兴的过程中贯穿着建立合理的社会秩序这样一条内在的线索，而社会秩序在儒学当中的资源就是礼，因此范仲淹说“天下之制存乎礼”。宋代学者重视礼学，其实也是他们实现社会政治理想的一种体现。具体来说，宋代学者围绕《周礼》而引发出的经世致用的主张，其中主要以李觏和王安石的《周礼》研究为代表。另外，王安石新学派的其他学者对于《周礼》的研究（如王昭禹《周礼详解》）以及南宋的永嘉礼学在整体上也都属于经世学派。与经世相对应的义理派，主要是以理学家对礼的探讨为主而形成的重视礼的义理的一种礼学流派。自清代以来，学者们立足于汉学的传统，多认为“礼是实学”，对宋代以理代礼的礼学提出了很多批评。其实，历史地来看，礼学的发展从来没有脱离过礼学思想的更新。理学家重视天理性命，但是他们这一套形而上的理论最终还是要落实于现实社会，因此理与礼是无论如何也分割不开的。虽然早在《礼记》中就提出了“礼者理也”的看法，但这个命题只有在理学的观照之下，才真正具有了哲学含义。我们在本书中一再指出，我们参照学术史研究的通例，把宋代的礼学按照其内容与特色划分为三个不同的派别，这样的划分只是为了对研究对象有更清晰的全面把握，这三派之间其实并不是绝然对立的，它们只具有相对的意义，如果按照人物来看，其间也有很多重合的地方。如吕大临编有《考古图》和《续考古图》，这是宋代金石学发展中很有代表性的古器物图录，我们把它放在礼图学当中加以论述；他与张载等人一同讨论宗法等问题，这又是以礼学经世的重要内容；当然，最为重要的，吕大临还是北宋时期礼学义理化过程中的一位重要代表，由于他曾学于张载与二程，对传统的礼学与二程的理学均有深入的体会，在他的身上明显地体现出礼学与理学的冲突与融合。因此，就吕大临来说，虽然他主要是义理派的重要代表，但他其实身兼三派。又如，我们以李觏、王安石的礼学作为北宋经世礼学的代表，但理学家张载等人热烈讨论的井田、封建、宗法等问题，也是典型的以礼经世的做法。宋代学者以《周礼》经世，从而形成了礼学研究中重视经世致用的一派，因此，我们对于北宋时期礼学的研究也是以《周礼》入手，这是本书的第二、三、四章的主要内容。我们的《周礼》研究和传统以注疏、考证为主的《周礼》研究不同，我们更重视从哲学史、经学史和社会思潮之间的综合的、整体的角度来考察宋代学者对于《周礼》的看法以及《周礼》在北宋时期的社会意义和价值。历史上，儒学主要是以注释经典和经典诠释的形式发展。在关于宋代儒学和理学的研究中，很多学者都已经注意到了《易》学、《春秋》学、“四书”学与宋代儒学和理学发展演进之间的关系，并且做出了很好的研究成果。我们则以《周礼》为主，首先从整体上考察了《周礼》与北宋儒学发展之间的关系。笔者认为，由于北宋时期的儒家学者普遍重视《周礼》，因此自中唐以来的儒学复兴的目标，就从韩愈还比较模糊的“古道”明确为“三代”，这对于儒学的复兴是有力的推进，同时也表明北宋时期的儒学发展到了更高的一个层次。李觏、王安石、张载以及二程等人以《周礼》“推明治道”，针对北宋社会面临的诸种社会矛盾，讨论了封建、井田、宗法等问题。尽管当时和后世都有人对此提出批评，认为他们的这些看法不切实际，流于空想，但是我们还是要指出，他们关注、讨论的这些古代礼书中的问题，回应了北宋时期的社会危机以及中国古代社会自中唐以后转型而产生的新问题，如以井田制回应北宋时期由于土地占有集中而引起的社会危机，以封建与《周礼》中的乡遂制回应北宋由于实行强干弱枝政策而导致的地方势力的削弱和军事上的失利，以宗法来回应中唐以后由于门阀制度的消减而形成的新的社会结构，等等。从《周礼》以及传统儒家而来的封建、井田等主张，历来是儒家学者应对社会问题的主要理论资源，因此，我们对于北宋儒家学者提出的这些经世主张，不能简单以“复古”而忽视甚至否定它们内在的理论意义。本书第三章是对王安石的《周官新义》的专题研究。《周官新义》是王安石学术思想和政治思想的集中体现，自北宋后期始，就有学者由批评新法新政开始进而批评新学，从而对《周官新义》彻底否定。我们认为，对于《周官新义》应当有全面的认识，既要看到它指导新法的政治性，同时也不能否认它是北宋时期一部有影响、有价值的独立的经学著作。王安石从儒家经典中选中了“三经”，从三《礼》中选中了《周礼》，它不仅体现了王安石的经学思想与政治思想，而且也反映出北宋儒学发展的趋势。我们在本章既讨论了《周官新义》与熙宁新法之间的关系，也重视它作为一部经学著作本身所取得的成就和存在的问题，以及从《周官新义》当中反映出来的宋代政治文化。由于王安石借《周礼》而行新法，这样就刺激了宋代学者对《周礼》的关注与研究。荆公学派很多学者都擅长礼学，著名者如王昭禹著《周礼详解》四十卷，是对《周官新义》的进一步发挥。南宋时期出现的永嘉礼学也继承了北宋时期以礼经世的传统。反对者则有杨时《周礼义辨疑》、王居正《周礼辨学》等，专门以批驳《周官新义》为目的。另外，很多学者由于反对新法而反对新学，进而对新学所依据的经典《周礼》也提出怀疑与批驳，司马光、胡安国、胡寅、胡宏、苏辙、晁说之、洪迈、黄震等人提出的刘歆伪造《周礼》说，就是在这时出现的。刘歆伪造说在《周礼》研究史上是一个重要问题，但通过我们这里的研究，主要是揭示出这一观点出现的背景以及由此反映出的与《周礼》相关的学术与政治之争。除此之外，对于宋代出现并延续至明代的“《冬官》未亡说”以及辑补《冬官》的热潮，我们也认为，不必如《四库》馆臣那样对此严厉批评，而是应有一种同情之理解。我们认为，辑补《冬官》与宋初以来疑经改经的学风是一脉相承的，而且其前提是认为《周礼》是一部完整的经典，这对于怀疑《周礼》，甚至认为《周礼》出自刘歆的伪造，是一种有力的回击，同时也证明《周礼》在儒家经典中的权威地位不容撼动。我们还以理学家对《大学》文本的调整与争论，甚至不惜改动、补阙《大学》为参照，说明俞庭椿、王与之等改动《周礼》在儒学内部并非仅有。虽然二者在哲学意义方面并不完全对等，但如果将“《冬官》未亡”、辑补《冬官》看做是毫无意义，那也是有失公允的。宋明以来兴起的辑补《冬官》的做法，其目的是恢复《周礼》的完整性，证明《周礼》是“全经”，并由此确认《周礼》是周公所制的一王大法，是儒家政治理念与政治设计的典范，从这个角度来看，也是有意义的。我们从北宋时期对《周礼》的关注与讨论可以看出宋代礼学鲜明的经世特色，同时，理学家对礼的重视以及理论阐发，则是宋代礼学重视义理的另一特色。本书第五章“礼学与理学的互动”包含了六篇独立的专题论文，其主题则集中讨论了儒学在义理化的过程中形成的理学与传统礼学之间的复杂关系，礼学的义理化、天理化过程，以及礼在天理论的叙述模式中的地位和意义。笔者一直认为，其实从来就没有脱离了思想史发展脉络的所谓实学的礼学。从孔子以仁释礼开始，儒家礼学在发展过程中与各个时代的主流思潮之间一直存在着深刻的互动与影响，这也是推动礼学发展的一个重要因素。战国时期，儒家学者讨论礼的时候就与当时流行的阴阳五行思想相结合，从而形成了战国至汉代以阴阳五行为特色的礼学思想。关于这一点，笔者曾在《先秦礼学思想与社会的整合》一书中有较为详细的讨论。因此，从严格的意义上来说，礼学与哲学思想的结合并不始自宋代。当然，在理学的脉络当中，将作为人伦秩序的礼与天理相关联，这对于传统儒家的礼学思想是一个极大的提升与飞跃，当我们集中讨论宋代义理化的礼学的时候，从历史发展的源流来看，结合中国古代哲学思想史的发展演进，至少在之前的魏晋时代，就已经出现了对两汉礼学的反动而逐步义理化的思想倾向。本章首先研究了王肃的三《礼》学，其主旨则是揭示王肃的礼学删繁就简，是礼学义理化过程中的一个重要环节。对魏晋南北朝时期礼学思想的发展与转向的研究也具有同样的目的。魏晋时期是中国历史上的一个分裂动乱的时代，但也唯有在这样的时代，才能对礼的价值与功能有更加深入的认识，同时对礼之本也有了更多的看法。但这些所谓“本”，如道德规范、婚姻制度、农桑事务等还是以伦理秩序为主，而且多停留在经验的层面，还不具有哲学上本体的含义。裴针对“贵无”而提出“崇有”，这是在“越名教而任自然”的时代背景之下对儒家礼乐纲常的正面肯定。但是，儒家的礼乐除了它的社会功能之外，是否还有更深层次的哲学上的依据？虽然东晋南朝出现了“礼玄双修”，但在这个根本的理论问题上，礼学还没有达到玄学的高度。宋代理学的兴起，则接续了这个思想环节。二程、张载都属于北宋道学的奠基者，尽管他们的思想还是有很大的差异，但在论证“礼者理也”这一点上，将儒家思想当中代表人伦社会秩序的礼提升到和天理同等的高度，他们是有相通之处的。尤其是张载，按照余敦康先生的看法，“在儒学史上，把儒家所服膺之礼提到天道性命的哲学高度进行系统的论证，从而为礼学奠定了一个坚实的理论基础，应以张载为第一人”。380726但是，如果我们进一步分析，二程和张载对于礼的认识以及礼在道学体系中的位置还是有一些不同。就二程来说，他们认为“礼者理也”这个命题并不是简单地将礼和理并列起来，将礼提高到天理的高度，而是将礼纳入天理论的论述当中来看待礼。具体来说，在二程的思想当中，理与礼的关系，相当于形上形下的关系，相当于理气的关系，同样也相当于体用的关系。这样，礼在理学的论述当中，就与理贯通一体。从礼的角度来说，作为人伦秩序的礼有天理的依据，从理的角度来说，天理不仅高妙，更为重要的是，天理是充实的、具体的，它有具体的社会内容，与人类社会是联系在一起的。这样的天理就与佛教有关理的思想划清了界限，说明道学的天理是儒理。本来，理学天理论的建立所针对的主要是玄学以无为本的本体论和佛学以现世为空虚的世界观。程颐提出理事一致说，认为理与礼是“体用一源”，这都是从哲学上对玄学和佛学的否定，从而从正面建立了儒学的本体论，确立了儒学的价值立场。“以礼立教”是张载建立的关学的一个重要特征。二程认为理与礼是体用的关系，礼的地位是靠理的绝对性来保证的，张载则直接认为，礼本身就是“合体与用”的。从理论上来说，这个看法一方面批评了佛学有体而无用的否定人伦秩序的虚无思想，另一方面也指出，礼不仅只是纲常名教，而且是体用皆备的。与北宋初期重视礼的学者如欧阳修、李觏等人相比，张载真正将礼提升到本体的地位，从本体的角度说明了礼的地位与价值。吕大临从学于张载和二程，对关学与洛学均有深刻的体悟。吕大临思想的特色是礼学精博，这反映出关学的影响。他注解的《礼记解》，既受到时代思潮的影响，重视对礼的义理的解释，又尽量保持了传统礼学以及关学朴实笃厚的学术传统，不离开具体的礼仪制度来空谈礼的义理。在从学二程以后，他的思想又有所变化，在一些方面放弃了早年的主张而更加接近二程洛学。这两个方面在吕大临的早期著作《礼记解》和后来的《中庸解》当中均有明显的体现。从吕大临思想的转向以及与二程之间的分歧，更典型地反映出理学在形成过程中与传统儒家礼学之间的冲突与融合。从对二程、张载和吕大临礼学思想的分析，我们基本可以看到在道学兴起发展的过程中，礼学逐渐纳入道学的论述方式中而义理化的过程。这对于礼学、对于道学以及儒学，都是有重要意义的。本章最后还收录了一篇研究南宋叶时《礼经会元》的论文。叶时是南宋与朱熹同时期的一位学者型官僚，他著的《礼经会元》是研究《周礼》的一部专题论文集。此书后世评价颇高，认为“实可缉濂洛之未备”。《礼经会元》的一个突出特色是以《中庸》解《周礼》。南宋时期，《中庸》已经确立了道学性理之书的经典地位，但是叶时却将《中庸》与儒家的经世之书《周礼》联系起来，认为“欲观《周礼》，必先观《中庸》”，《中庸》是探讨《周礼》的原则与依据。叶时认为，一方面，贯穿《周礼》以及儒家所重视的礼乐制度的是中庸思想，另一方面，中庸之道虽然优优大哉，但是最终还是要落实到礼书与礼制当中。为了实现中庸，需要有礼乐的保证。叶时的《礼经会元》虽然没有从理论上将儒家的性理之学和礼乐制度完全融合起来，但是他指出二者应该相结合，内圣与外王应当相贯通，也是礼学与理学融合互动的一个典型例证，而且也有助于我们对宋代的儒学有完整的把握和理解。本书第六章是礼制与思想史结合的研究，这其实也是笔者研究儒家礼学所关注的一个方面，这里收录的四篇论文反映了笔者在这方面所做的一些初步的探讨。从儒家经典以及当代宗教学、符号学等不同角度来看，我们可以确信，礼绝不仅仅体现为各种名物典章制度与进退揖让等仪节。礼是有意义的。在各种名物、仪节以及容貌颜色的背后，体现的是政治、社会、思想等复杂的含义。礼是中国历史文化的一个重要特征，这不仅体现在儒家三《礼》的注疏当中，而且自汉代以后，尤其是魏晋时期五礼制度确立之后，上至国家的政治结构、宗庙祭祀、外交往来，下至普通民众的婚丧嫁娶等日常生活，都有各种详细的礼制规定，而这些礼制最终又汇总为一个时代的礼典。正是由于礼不只是停留在儒家的经典与注疏当中，而且还广泛地渗透到社会的各个方面与领域，这才决定了礼对于中国历史文化的重要性。就礼制研究来说，近些年的研究取得了很大的成就，对于各个时代的礼制与变迁，都有了较为深入的研究。笔者认为，对于礼制研究，探讨各种具体礼制的来龙去脉，在文献缺失或模糊不清的地方用力钩沉，查遗补缺，进而探讨礼制与政治权力、社会发展之间的复杂关系，都是非常重要而有学术价值的研究。380727但是除此之外，探讨礼制与礼制变革中蕴含的思想意义，将礼制研究与思想史和社会史的研究结合起来，既对于深化礼制研究极有裨益，同时也拓宽了礼学研究的范围，是礼学研究在探讨礼的哲学观念，考证名物制度，梳理三《礼》注疏文献之外，值得重视的课题。当然，正如笔者在本书当中所指出的，将礼制研究与思想史研究相结合，从浩如烟海的礼典、礼制当中选择出具有思想史内涵的内容进行研究，是有一定难度的。本章的四篇论文虽然是在这样一种学术理解之下所做的探讨，但总体来说，距离完美地实现这一学术目标还有很大的差距，这也将是笔者日后礼学研究主要拓展的一个方面。三本书是以北宋时期儒家礼学为主要内容的一部专著，其中的各个章节，其实都是围绕着宋代礼学这个主题而展开的一系列的专题研究论文。笔者最初对宋代礼学的关注始于王安石的《周官新义》，此后顺着这个脉络不断扩展，并向前后延伸，最终形成了目前这样的研究成果。虽不敢说集腋成裘，但自认为各项专题研究多少还都有一见之得。其中的部分内容写成后以论文的形式发表，另有若干篇也曾在国内主办的以礼学为主题的学术讨论会上宣读过。下面按照本书的目录顺序，对已经公开发表过的论文做一交代。第二章第一节“近现代《周礼》研究的回顾”，曾以《百年来〈周礼〉研究的回顾》为题，收入《中国思想史论集》第三辑（张岂之主编，广西师范大学出版社2008年版）。第二节“《周礼》的成书年代与战国时代的社会变革”，收入《经学与中国哲学》（蔡方鹿主编，华东师范大学出版社2009年版）。第三章第二节“王安石的礼学思想”曾以《王安石的礼乐论与心性论》为题，发表于《中国哲学史》2010年第2期。第五章第一节“王肃的三《礼》学与‘郑王之争’”，发表于《中国哲学史》2014年第4期，又收入《反思中的思想世界——刘泽华先生八秩华诞纪念文集》（天津人民出版社2014年版）。第三节“二程的礼学思想与宋代礼学的新发展”曾以《宋代礼学的新发展——以二程的礼学思想为中心》为题，发表于《中国哲学史》2013年第4期。第五节“吕大临的《礼记解》与宋代理学的发展”曾以《礼学与理学的互动——吕大临的〈礼记解〉与宋代理学的发展》为题，发表于《中国儒学》第八辑（王中江、李存山主编，中国社会科学出版社2013年版）。第六节“叶时《礼经会元》与宋代儒学的发展”，发表于《中国哲学史》2012年第2期。第六章第一节“战国时期儒家的变礼思想——以国家政权转移的理论为中心”，发表于《世界哲学》2007年第6期。第二节“周公‘摄政称王’及其与儒家政治哲学的几个问题”，发表于《人文杂志》2008年第4期，又收入韩国成均馆大学主办的《儒教文化研究》第十一辑（2009年）。第三节“家礼中的政治意识及其政治作用——以《礼记》为中心”，曾以摘略的形式发表于《湖南大学学报》2005年第4期。第四节“‘濮议’与北宋儒学的发展”曾以《再论濮议》为题，发表于《中国思想与社会研究》第一辑（刘泽华主编，中国社会科学出版社2007年版）。另外，笔者还于2012年参加了国家社科基金重大招标项目“中国礼制变迁与现代价值研究”，课题组成员均为国内礼学研究领域的专家。笔者参加了课题组分别于2014年8月在沈阳和2015年4月在西安举办的“中华礼制变迁与现代社会”两次学术研讨会，本书第五章第二节“魏晋南北朝时期礼学思想的发展与转向”和第四章第三节“永嘉礼学”，就是分别在这两次会议上宣读的论文。由于本书各篇均以独立论文完成，因此在相关背景的介绍、材料的征引方面，难免会有一些重复之处。在统编成书的过程中，虽然进行了删改与调整，但还是难以完全避免。其实，各篇的重点不同，材料征引的角度、叙述的繁简也各不相同，因此书中个别地方存在论述和引文稍有重复之处，也是出于这样的缘由。

A Mencius once said, "Rites, doors." For Confucianism and Chinese history and culture, Mencius's assertion is very appropriate, and contains a lot of meaning and space that can be derived. In the author's opinion, Li is indeed entering the "door" of Confucianism and Chinese culture, and entering this door, the inside is full of winding paths, and there are other holes, which can fully grasp the mysteries of Confucianism and Chinese culture; If you do not enter through this gate, you will not see the beauty of the temple and the wealth of all officials (use Zigong to evaluate the Confucius language, see "Analects of Confucius"), and the understanding of Confucianism and the grasp of Chinese culture will always hover around the periphery, and the true meaning cannot be seen. For this reason, most ancient and modern scholars admit that etiquette is an important feature of Chinese culture, and it is impossible to study Confucianism and study Chinese history and culture without talking about etiquette. So, how should we understand etiquette as a characteristic of Chinese culture? The ancients in historical situations were actually aware of this problem, and they talked about the importance of etiquette, generally from two aspects. First, it believes that etiquette is juxtaposed with heaven and earth, highlighting the importance of etiquette, such as the "Zuo Chuan" records people's views in the Spring and Autumn Period: "Fu Li, the scripture of heaven, the righteousness of the earth, and the deeds of the people." (Zuo Chuan Zhao Gong Twenty-five Years) The Book of Rites also says: "It is the rite of the old husband, which must be based on the first year, divided into heaven and earth, turned into yin and yang, changed into four times, and listed as ghosts and gods." In traditional Chinese thinking, heaven and earth are great. It is natural to think that etiquette is juxtaposed with heaven and earth, which is the best illustration of the importance of etiquette. Second, it is believed that etiquette has appeared since the beginning of human civilization, highlighting the longevity of etiquette in Chinese history and culture. For example, in the Book of Rites, different statements such as the beginning of rituals and diets ("Liji Li Yun") and the difference between men and women ("Li Kei Nei Zhi") are put forward. Du You further concluded in the Tongdian: "Since Fuxi, the five rites have been revealed. When Yao Shun is over, the five gifts are prepared. 380719 according to this statement, etiquette is a symbol of the emergence of civilization, and its history is long and of great significance. Although the traditional view that rituals originated from the beginning of human civilization is very meaningful, if viewed from a strictly academic point of view, it is actually mostly speculative, and it seems a bit rough in the context of academic development since modern times. In the development of modern historiography, scholars have combined new materials and theories to transform this question into a discussion of the origin of rites, and have made great breakthroughs and progress. Wang Guowei combined with the study of Yin Wubu Zhi to further investigate the origin of rites, and believed that rituals originated from religious rituals. In fact, this statement is a further implementation of the "Shuowen Jizi". The "Shuwen Jie Zi" pointed out: "Rites, fulfillment, so things are blessed by God." From Shi Cong Feng. Feng Yisheng. Toyobu: 豐, the instrument of ritual also. This is to say that rituals originated from religious rituals that worship the gods for blessings. Wang Guowei believes that the ancient characters of rites "are all like two jades in the shape of a vessel." The ancients used jade to salute, so the "Shuowen" is called 'Feng, the instrument of rituals', and it is said to be ancient." The original meaning of the ritual is to hold two strings of jade in a vessel to sacrifice to the gods. Later, it also referred to the sacrifice of wine to the gods, and later all sacrifices to the gods were called rituals. 380720 Wang Guowei used the study of oracle bones to investigate the origin of rites from the perspective of philology, which supported the view of "Shuowen", which was affirmed by many later scholars and became a more common view in the academic community. 380721 in addition, there is another view that is also more representative, that etiquette originated from the customs and habits of primitive society, which is most typical of the series of articles in Mr. Yang Kuan's "New Exploration of Ancient History". Through his research on the origins of ancient crown ceremonies, field ceremonies, township drinking ceremonies, and shooting ceremonies, Mr. Yang believes that "the origin of rituals is very early, and as far back as primitive clan communes, people have become accustomed to adding important actions to special etiquette. ...... These rituals have not only long been a traditional habit of social life, but are often used as a means of maintaining social order, consolidating social organization and strengthening ties between tribes. After entering class society, many rituals are still used by everyone, and some of them are often used and changed by the ruling class as a means of consolidating the internal organization of the ruling class and ruling the people." "The 'Zhou Rite' promoted by the aristocracy of the Western Zhou Dynasty has its long historical roots, and many specific rituals and ceremonies are transformed from the etiquette of the late Zhou Dynasty." 380722 believes that rituals originated from religious sacrificial rituals, or from the customs and habits of ancient society, which are further discussions on the origin of rites by scholars from a more empirical and scientific perspective in modern times, and have made a qualitative leap compared with the various views in traditional ritual books. However, whether it is the traditional view that ritual originated from diet, the difference between men and women, or further believed that ritual originated from religious sacrifice rituals, or customs and habits formed in ancient society, these are actually cultural phenomena common in human society, and if only in these aspects, they are not enough to highlight the importance and uniqueness of etiquette in Chinese culture. We believe that there are two important reasons why rites are unique in Chinese history and culture, and have an important position and significance. First, although rituals originated from some customs and habits gradually formed by people in ancient society, or religious sacrifice rituals, after the production of the Duke of Zhou and the inheritance of Confucius, rites were incorporated into Confucianism and became an important content of Confucianism. Ancient Confucians unanimously believed that the Duke of Zhou had "made ritual music", and the splendid and grand system of ritual music in Western Zhou was created by the Duke of Zhou. In fact, historically, it is impossible for the Duke of Zhou to personally formulate a complex and meticulous etiquette system, nor to create the "Rite of Zhou", but the Duke of Zhou is a key figure in the development of the rite. Confucius once said that the rites of the three generations are developed by "profit and loss", and "the supervisor of Zhou is in the second generation" (Analects of Eight Dynasties), and the rites of Zhou are the inheritance and development of the rites of the second generation of Xia and Yin and the culture of the second generation, from this point of view, the Duke of Zhou, as the core figure in the political and cultural aspects of the early Western Zhou Dynasty, although it is impossible to personally formulate the etiquette system of Zhou one by one, but he has some gains and losses on the etiquette system, and the principle of formulating the etiquette law of Zhou, which should be reasonable. Therefore, we should have a comprehensive and broad understanding of Zhou Gong's "making ritual music". As Mr. Gu Jiegang said: "The matter of 'Zhou Metric Ceremony' should be affirmed", and the etiquette system at the beginning of Zhou "Since there are gains and losses, there must be elements of creation, so it cannot be said that it is the system of Zhou Gong". 380723 we should understand the Zhou metric system of ritual music from this perspective. Confucius lived in the late Spring and Autumn Period, when etiquette and happiness collapsed, and he admired the "melancholy and civilized" Zhou Li, and Confucius's lifelong ambition was to "follow the Zhou" (Analects of the Eight Emperors) and repeat the Zhou Li. Confucius believed that rigid ritual texts were not true rituals. Confucius linked the traditional study of etiquette with the Confucian study of benevolence, so in the Confucianism pioneered by Confucius, benevolence and propriety are two important pillars and two important levels, one of which is indispensable. Although the development of Confucianism in later generations emphasized two aspects at different stages, it was by no means abandoned, and rites were always an important part of Confucianism. After the production of the Duke of Zhou and the inheritance of Confucius, rites are not only various rituals such as crown and funeral sacrifices originating from ancient society, but also become an important feature of Confucianism and an important content of Confucian inheritance. The combing and examination of the three "rites" documents by successive generations of Confucian scholars and the discussion of the ancient etiquette system gradually developed into Confucian etiquette. In addition, as pointed out above, the ancients believed that ritual is juxtaposed with heaven and earth, and its rich ideological connotation is not enough to show such a statement without sufficient argumentation. The theoretical interpretation of rites was mainly completed by later generations of Confucianism, and successive generations of great Confucians have profound interpretations of rites, thus forming a rich idea of etiquette in Confucianism, which is not only an important part of Confucianism, but also has a great influence on traditional Chinese philosophy, and also makes rites an important feature of Chinese philosophical thought. Second, etiquette is not only a specialized study inherited from Confucianism, but also has an extremely far-reaching impact on the development of ancient Chinese society and politics, and etiquette has become an important feature of China's political history. As early as the pre-Qin period, people had already recognized that rites had clear political meanings, such as: "rites, through the state, fixed society, order the people, and benefit the heirs." ("Zuo Chuan Yin Gong Eleventh Year") "Rite, the country no Kanya. ("The Eleventh Year of Zuo Chuan, Duke Xuan") "The Rite, the Great Handle of the King." So don't be disgusted, ghost god, test the system, don't be benevolent and righteous, so govern the government and the king also. "Etiquette is to Zhengguoye, Juheng is to light and heavy, rope and ink are to Qu Zhiye, and rules are to Fang Yuanye." "The destiny of man is in heaven, and the destiny of the kingdom is in the rite." ("Xunzi Qiangguo") "The rite, so the imperial people; Breech, so the imperial horse also. Those who are rude and able to govern the country are not heard of. The reason why rites can govern the country is because rites are a symbol of power. 380724 rituals have rich and clear political implications. According to Sima Qian's view, Qin's imperial rites were "the etiquette of the six kingdoms in Si Nei, choosing its good, although it was not in line with the holy system, its honored princes and ministers, and the imperial court was prosperous, since ancient times" ("Shiji Lishu"), Qin rites were made by mixing the etiquette of the six kingdoms under the premise of distinguishing the order of honor and inferiority. The Hanyi made by Shusun Tong was made on this basis by increasing or decreasing profits and losses. Liu Bang, the founder of the Han Dynasty, and his followers were all from the lower strata of society, and after they overthrew the Qin Empire, although they abolished Qin's harsh punishment laws and regarded "simplicity" as a priority, they were deeply afflicted by Gaozu above the imperial court, "the group of courtiers drank and fought for merit, drunk or shouted, and drew their swords and hit pillars" ("Shiji Shusun Tonglie"). Seeing this situation, Confucian uncle Sun Tong felt that it was not only detrimental to the majesty of the empire, but also to the long-term peace and stability of the imperial court, so after obtaining the consent of Emperor Gaozu, more than 30 Lu Zhusheng and more than 100 scholar disciples, exercised for more than a month, and formulated the Han imperial rites. This set of ceremonies was honorable and orderly, and after the exercise, Gao Zu even said: "I am known today as the noble emperor." ("Shiji Uncle Sun Tongli Biography") What made Liu Bang feel that the honor of being an emperor was, of course, the majesty of the etiquette system. The imperial rites of the Qin and Han dynasties were also the state ceremonies of the time, including "the order of the honor and humility of the courtiers and courtiers, and the distinction between the lower and the Li Shu Che Yu clothes, palace food, marriage, and funeral sacrifices" ("Shiji Lishu"). After the Wei and Jin dynasties, the production of national etiquette has been further developed, and its main manifestation is the formation of a strict and complete five-rite system on the basis of the "Five Rites" of the "Rites of Zhou", which is used as the etiquette of each period. The ceremonial system at the national level not only belongs to the country's great economic law and is of great significance in the country's political development, but also the production of the ceremonial system in previous dynasties has mostly been completed under the guidance of Confucianism. In addition, the codes of law of successive dynasties were also clearly influenced by rites, which were the guiding ideology of ancient Chinese law, which is also recognized by most scholars. 380725 From this point of view, Confucian etiquette dominated the development of the history of ancient China's political system, giving ancient Chinese political culture distinctive characteristics. To sum up, etiquette is an important feature and main content of Confucianism, and the rituals formed under the guidance of Confucianism run through the development of ancient Chinese history after the Qin and Han dynasties. The study of etiquette is not only an important aspect of traditional Chinese thought and scholarship, but also a guideline for guiding the country's politics and people's life. From these two aspects, etiquette is not only a cultural form shared by all human societies, but also has an important position and influence in traditional Chinese ideology and culture. It is in the latter sense that we can say that etiquette is an important feature of Chinese culture and the "door" to understanding Confucianism and Chinese cultural traditions. Rites are an important content and essential feature of Confucianism, and they are also pervasive in all aspects of Chinese culture, so the study of rites can also be carried out from many aspects. As far as the current academic research is concerned, there are two main aspects of research orientation. The first is the study of etiquette in the context of the study of the history of scripture (including the history of scriptural thought), and the second is the study of the history of etiquette, which is mainly limited to the field of history (especially the study of institutional history). The study of the history of scripture focuses on documents, while the study of the history of ritual systems focuses on the combination of institutional history, political history, social history and other fields. The research in this book has a different approach to both aspects. Based on Confucianism, this book adopts a more comprehensive study based on the analysis of philosophical thought, combined with classical literature, social politics, and etiquette systems. Specifically, the main content of the study in this book is Confucian etiquette in the Northern Song Dynasty. The reason why the etiquette of the Song Dynasty was chosen as the research object is for two reasons. First, from the perspective of Chinese philosophical research, since science is the pinnacle of the development of traditional Confucianism, the study of Confucianism in the Song Dynasty mainly focuses on science, and this research has made great progress since at least the 80s of the 20th century. However, benevolence and propriety are two aspects of Confucius and Confucianism, although the Song Dynasty's study of spiritual righteousness was unprecedentedly developed, and it is certainly important and necessary to do in-depth research and interpretation of Confucianism's inner sanctity of the mind, if one neglects the other, ignores the study of rites, and explores the study of kings outside the system, then the understanding of Confucianism is incomplete, and the study of Confucianism is also flawed. In recent years, the academic community has realized this problem, pointing out that it is necessary to make a complete understanding and grasp of Confucianism in the Song Dynasty, and even put forward the concept of "Song Studies" as a whole, including the periphery of Confucianism in the scope of research, in order to have a complete grasp of Confucianism in the Song Dynasty. Second, from the perspective of Confucian etiquette, the study of traditional etiquette focuses on the study of the two Han rites and the Qing dynasty etiquette, while the Song dynasty etiquette between these two stages is more neglected. In the study of rites, the writing, inheritance and all disputes in the study of rites date back to the Two Han Dynasty, so the academic qualifications of the Two Han Rites are the focus of the study of rites and the study of scripture as a whole. In the Qing Dynasty, Sinology was revitalized, and the study of etiquette, which was mainly based on evidence, was naturally valued by Qianjia sinologists. More importantly, Qianjiali respected sinology, so he bitterly criticized the etiquette that Song had learned and the etiquette that Yili had substituted. This trend has continued for a long time, and even the more plain historians of the late Qing Dynasty (such as Pi Xirui) and some studies of etiquette and scripture since modern times have been influenced by this, and most believe that the etiquette of the Song Dynasty deviated from the tradition of etiquette as practical learning, so the achievements were not high and insignificant. In fact, if we look at the achievements of the annotations and examinations of the three "rites", although the Song Dynasty did not appear as summative and comprehensive works as the Qing Dynasty, they are still considerable in number and unique. The "History of Song, Art and Literature" alone contains 113 works, a total of 1,399 volumes. There are also twenty-six undocumented books, four hundred and sixty-nine volumes. Most of these works are Song works. Among them, Wang Anshi's "Zhou Guan Xinyi", Wang Zhaoyu's "Detailed Explanation of Zhou Li", Zhu Xi and his disciples jointly compiled the "Interpretation of the Rite Scriptures", and Wei Xiang's "Collection of Rites" at the end of the Song Dynasty are also important works in the history of the commentary on the three "rites". From the content point of view, the etiquette study of the Song Dynasty is mainly based on the study of the "Rites of Zhou", on the one hand, because the Confucianism of the Song Dynasty attaches great importance to the application of the scriptures, the goal of the development of Confucianism is to establish a reasonable, Confucian-style ideal society, and the development of the inner saint science must eventually be implemented on the ideal of the outer king. In addition, because Wang Anshi used the "Rite of Zhou" to implement the new law, which caused the division of the scholar group, many people opposed the new law and then opposed the new learning, which also stimulated the attention of Song Dynasty scholars to the "Rite of Zhou", and even drew salaries from the bottom of the cauldron, believing that the "Rite of Zhou" was forged by Liu Xin was also put forward in this context. It can be seen that under the special political background of the Northern Song Dynasty, the ancient "Rites of Zhou" once again came to the forefront of politics, and the complex relationship between Confucian etiquette and realpolitik was once again fully displayed. For these problems, we should not be bound by the prejudices of our predecessors, and conduct in-depth research from an objective standpoint, and make reasonable and meticulous analysis of the academic and political aspects, and even the confusion between academia and politics. From the perspective of the study of philosophical thought, although Confucianism in the Song Dynasty was characterized by the theory of righteousness and had the highest achievements, on the whole, in the system of righteousness, how to arrange the rituals marked by daily use and social order that traditional Confucianism attaches importance to, and how to clarify the relationship between etiquette and reason, is still a problem that must be solved in the development of science and Confucianism. The philosophers of the Song Dynasty had a very in-depth discussion of rites, and they incorporated rites into the narrative structure of Tianli, so that etiquette theory actually became an important content in the thinking of philosophers. Although the thinkers of the pre-Qin and Two Han dynasties, especially Confucianists, attached great importance to etiquette, their understanding of etiquette generally attached importance to the function of etiquette, and mostly explained the role of etiquette from the perspective of maintaining human social order. The explanation of etiquette by philosophers is from the perspective of heavenly reason, which essentially enhances the status of etiquette, and it is in this theoretical framework that etiquette really has philosophical meaning. Previous studies of science and Confucianism have not paid enough attention to these contents, so this is also an important reason for us to study the thought of ritual studies in the Song Dynasty. Finally, it is necessary to point out that although we repeatedly emphasize in this book that the study of Song Dynasty etiquette is an important link in the development of Confucian etiquette, we should not be disparaged by the stereotype of Qing scholars; Our research also shows that the interpretation of rites by philosophers has important theoretical significance, and they defend the values and positions of Confucianism from the perspective of heavenly theory. Physicists no longer simply use traditional Confucian rites as a tool to compete with foreign cultures, but have made updated and in-depth explanations of rites, so that rites have a basis for heavenly reason, and also give heavenly reason a specific connotation, which not only affirms the function of rite from a deeper level, but also gives the status of the etiquette ontology, which also indicates the true revival of Confucianism. However, while affirming the important academic value and significance of the study of etiquette in the Song Dynasty, we should also point out that the essence of etiquette has not changed due to the metamorphosis of etiquette, and etiquette is still a symbol that distinguishes the rank of honor and inferiority. It is particularly important to point out this point, as it enables us to maintain a clear understanding of traditional etiquette and make a proper historical evaluation. It is certainly not advisable to arbitrarily disparage the study of etiquette, but arbitrarily elevating and beautifying etiquette, indulging in the study of etiquette with bells ringing and food, poetry and books, and intentionally or unintentionally downplaying the essence of etiquette, especially in the study of etiquette thought, detaching from the textual context and historical context to abstract "etiquette is valued by peace", deliberately avoiding the conflict between etiquette and certain contemporary values (such as rule of law, justice, etc.), is not a historical attitude. The two books are entitled "Studies on the Rites of the Northern Song Dynasty", but in fact, they have not done a comprehensive study of all the three "Rites" in the Northern Song Dynasty, as well as the etiquette ideas of all Confucians and philosophers in the Northern Song Dynasty. There are two main reasons for this, one is that from the bibliography point of view, although there are many works of the three "rites" in the Song Dynasty, many of them have been lost, and there are few complete and handed down to this day. If you do a comprehensive study, in addition to making as much use as possible of some materials compiled by future scholars, you also need to put a lot of effort into historical materials, which is not my own specialty, but also a time-consuming and labor-intensive matter. If you do not start with the expansion of the materials, only rely on some existing bibliographies (such as the "Jingyi Kao", etc.), most of them can only make some relatively general introductions, which is difficult to go deep. Therefore, the research of this book is mainly based on existing materials, including works that have already been compiled by predecessors (such as Wang Anshi's "Zhou Guan Xinyi" by Taiwanese scholar Cheng Yuanmin). In this way, this book cannot be regarded as a comprehensive study of the three "rites" of the Northern Song Dynasty, but only a more in-depth thematic study of certain works. Second, as far as the Confucian scholars of the Northern Song Dynasty are concerned, although many of them have rich ideas and expositions on rites, such as Ouyang Xiu, Sima Guang and even Su Shi, there have been some special studies in the academic circles, and more importantly, on the whole, their ideological homogeneity is more obvious, and they are all affirming the role and significance of rites in the struggle with Buddha. Although this view has a certain ideological historical significance, it has not made much substantive progress to the development of etiquette thought. Therefore, this book only selects Zhang Zai, Er Cheng and Lü Dalin, who are representative of the philosophers, because their exposition of Confucian etiquette thought has been substantially improved compared with the past, and in their respective thoughts, it also reflects the interaction and even conflict between the emerging theory and traditional etiquette, which is of great significance not only to the development of etiquette thought, but also to the development of science and Confucianism. For these two reasons, the author believes that such a thematic discussion is more meaningful than a comprehensive but difficult to conduct in-depth "comprehensive" research. In view of the particularity of etiquette, the traditional study of etiquette also has its own characteristics in terms of methods. For example, the Qing people summarized that the study of etiquette has three methods of "sectioning, drawing, and interpretation", and generally uses the method of distinguishing and examining forgery for the circulation of ritual books and the system of names in ritual scriptures. For the study of rituals and ritual systems compiled by previous dynasties, historians have done more research and more diverse methods. For the research of the predecessors, no matter what methods and methods are adopted, as long as the results of the study of etiquette have promoted and benefited the later studies, we are full of respect for it, but our research does not follow the traditional research method of etiquette based on examination and falsification, but more adopts the method of analysis and research of intellectual history, placing the study of etiquette in the context of the development of Confucianism and the evolution of philosophical thought in the Song Dynasty, linking the study of etiquette with the specific political background and historical development of the Northern Song Dynasty, and trying to make a comprehensive investigation of the development of etiquette and Confucianism in the Song Dynasty. The question we are concerned about is: What is the role and significance of the Rite of Zhou in the development of Confucianism in the Song Dynasty? How to understand and grasp the entanglement and struggle between academia and politics formed in the Song Dynasty around the "Rite of Zhou"? What is the relationship between traditional Confucian etiquette and the emerging science? How should we understand the proposition of "propriety and reason"? Does the rise of science mean a radical transcendence of traditional Confucianism? The author's research on etiquette in the Northern Song Dynasty mainly revolves around these issues. The following is a brief description of the main contents of this book. The first chapter of the book analyzes the development of etiquette in the Song Dynasty as a whole. The study of traditional academic thought first attaches importance to "distinguishing the academic and examining the source of the mirror", and it is very necessary to distinguish and grasp the etiquette of the Song Dynasty as a whole. We refer to the traditional academic history (such as the "Song and Yuan School of Studies") and the history of philosophy to distinguish and study different schools of Song Dynasty philosophy and philosophy, and roughly divide the etiquette school of the Song Dynasty into three schools, namely the Litu School, the Jingshi School and the Yili School. Etiquette is a more specialized school of etiquette in the Song Dynasty, which is proposed with reference to the views of Qing dynasty scholars Chen Li, Cao Yuanbi and others. Interpreting scriptures by illustration was originally an effective method of scriptural study, but the real rise of atlasology was in the Song Dynasty, among which Yi Xue and Li Xue were particularly prominent. As far as etiquette is concerned, scholars in the Song Dynasty have very consciously used maps to study the three "rites", such as Nie Chongyi's "Three Rites", Yang Jia's "Six Classics", Yang Fu's "Lili Tu" and a large number of "Zhou Li" map works, Litu has become a school of its own in the Song Dynasty etiquette studies. In addition, the emerging epigraphy of the Song Dynasty is mainly based on the bibliography and examination of ancient artifacts, and most of these so-called ancient artifacts belong to the three generations of ritual artifacts, so works such as "Archaeological Map" and "Bogu Tu" should actually belong to the study of ritual maps. The Song Dynasty also saw works that theoretically explain the value, function, and significance of atlases in academic research, represented by the "Atlas Sketch" in the twenty sketches of Zheng Qiao's Tongzhi. Most of Zheng Qiao's so-called "maps" are related to ritual maps, and some of the content is completely ritual systems (such as instruments, cars, clothes, altar signs, famous things, etc.), so Zheng Qiao's theoretical summary of the map is actually a summary of the function, value and significance of the etiquette map to a large extent. It is for these reasons that we regard Lituxue as an independent school of etiquette in the Song Dynasty. Confucianism believes that "the system is in the rites" (Liji Zhongni Yanju), and the study of etiquette contains the etiquette system, ethical norms and political ideals of the society planned by Confucianism. In the process of the revival of Confucianism in the Northern Song Dynasty, there was an internal clue of establishing a reasonable social order, and the resource of social order in Confucianism was propriety, so Fan Zhongyan said that "the system of heaven exists propriety." The emphasis placed by scholars in the Song Dynasty on the study of etiquette was actually a manifestation of their realization of social and political ideals. Specifically, the ideas of Song Dynasty scholars around the Rites of Zhou were mainly represented by the study of the Rites of Zhou by Li Mi and Wang Anshi. In addition, the study of the Zhou Li by other scholars of the Wang Anshi New School (such as Wang Zhaoyu's Detailed Explanation of the Rite of Zhou) and the Yongjiali School of the Southern Song Dynasty also belong to the Jingshi school as a whole. The Yili school corresponding to the Jing Shi is mainly a school of etiquette that attaches importance to the righteousness of etiquette formed by the discussion of rites by philosophers. Since the Qing Dynasty, scholars have based themselves on the tradition of sinology, mostly believing that "rites are practical learning", and have made many criticisms of the etiquette of the Song Dynasty. In fact, historically, the development of etiquette has never been separated from the renewal of etiquette thinking. Physicists attach importance to natural destiny, but their set of metaphysical theories must ultimately be implemented in real society, so reason and propriety are inseparable in any way. Although the idea of "Li Zhi Ye" was put forward as early as the "Book of Rites", this proposition only has a philosophical meaning under the observation of theory. We have repeatedly pointed out in this book that we refer to the general practice of academic historical research, and divide the etiquette of the Song Dynasty into three different schools according to its content and characteristics, such a division is only to have a clearer and comprehensive grasp of the research object, these three schools are not absolutely opposed, they only have relative meaning, if according to the characters, there are also many overlaps. For example, Lü Dalin compiled "Archaeological Map" and "Continuing Archaeological Map", which are very representative catalogs of ancient artifacts in the development of epigraphy in the Song Dynasty, and we put it in the study of rite maps to discuss it; He discussed patriarchal law and other issues with Zhang Zai and others, which was an important part of the study of the world through etiquette; Of course, the most important thing is that Lü Dalin is also an important representative in the process of etiquette and rationalization in the Northern Song Dynasty, because he studied Zhang Zai and Ercheng, he has a deep understanding of the traditional etiquette and the theory of the second journey, and he clearly reflects the conflict and integration of etiquette and theory. Therefore, as far as Lü Dalin is concerned, although he is mainly an important representative of the righteous faction, he actually has three factions. For example, we take the etiquette studies of Li Xiao and Wang Anshi as the representatives of the etiquette studies of the Northern Song Dynasty, but the wellfields, feudalism, patriarchal law and other issues heated by physicists Zhang Zai and others are also typical practices of using rites to learn the world. Therefore, our research on etiquette in the Northern Song Dynasty also begins with the "Rite of Zhou", which is the main content of the second, third and fourth chapters of this book. Our Zhou Li research is different from the traditional study of the Zhou Li, which is mainly based on annotation and research, and we pay more attention to examining the views of Song Dynasty scholars on the Zhou Li and the social significance and value of the Zhou Li in the Northern Song Dynasty from a comprehensive and holistic perspective between the history of philosophy, the history of classical studies and social trends. Historically, Confucianism developed mainly in the form of commentaries on the classics and interpretations of the classics. In the study of Confucianism and science in the Song Dynasty, many scholars have noticed the relationship between Yi, Spring and Autumn, and the Four Books and the development and evolution of Confucianism and science in the Song Dynasty, and have made good research results. We focus on the Rites of Zhou, and first examine the relationship between the Rites of Zhou and the development of Confucianism in the Northern Song Dynasty as a whole. The author believes that since Confucian scholars in the Northern Song Dynasty generally attached importance to the Rites of Zhou, the goal of the revival of Confucianism since the Middle Tang Dynasty has been clearly defined from the "ancient road" of Han Yue to "three generations", which is a powerful promotion for the revival of Confucianism, and also shows that Confucianism in the Northern Song period has developed to a higher level. Li Mi, Wang Anshi, Zhang Zai, Er Cheng and others used the "Rite of Zhou" to "push the Ming Zhi Dao" and discussed feudalism, well fields, patriarchal law and other issues in view of the various social contradictions faced by the society of the Northern Song Dynasty. Although some people at that time and later generations criticized this, considering their views unrealistic and utopian, we still want to point out that the problems in these ancient ritual books that they paid attention to and discussed responded to the social crisis of the Northern Song Dynasty and the new problems arising from the transformation of ancient Chinese society since the Middle and Tang Dynasties, such as the well-field system in response to the social crisis caused by the concentration of land occupation in the Northern Song Dynasty, and feudalism and the "Rites of Zhou" The township system responded to the weakening of local power and military defeat in the Northern Song Dynasty due to the implementation of the policy of strong cadres and weak branches, and used patriarchal law to respond to the new social structure formed after the Middle Tang Dynasty due to the reduction of the gate valve system, and so on. Feudalism, Jingtian and other propositions from the "Rite of Zhou" and traditional Confucianism have always been the main theoretical resources for Confucian scholars to deal with social problems, so we cannot simply ignore or even deny their intrinsic theoretical significance with "retro" for these Jingshi claims put forward by Confucian scholars of the Northern Song Dynasty. The third chapter of the book is a special study of Wang Anshi's Zhou Guan Xinyi. Since the late Northern Song Dynasty, some scholars have started criticizing the new laws and policies and then criticizing the new learning, thus completely rejecting the "Zhou Guan Xinyi". We believe that we should have a comprehensive understanding of the Zhou Guan Xinyi, not only to see the political nature of its guidance for the new law, but also to deny that it is an influential and valuable independent scriptural work in the Northern Song Dynasty. Wang Anshi selected the "Three Classics" from the Confucian classics and the "Rites of Zhou" from the three "Rites", which not only reflected Wang Anshi's classical thought and political thought, but also reflected the trend of the development of Confucianism in the Northern Song Dynasty. In this chapter, we discuss not only the relationship between the Zhou Guan Xinyi and the Xining New Law, but also the achievements and problems of it as a scriptural work itself, as well as the political culture of the Song Dynasty reflected in the Zhou Guan Xinyi. Because Wang Anshi used the "Rite of Zhou" to implement the new method, this stimulated the attention and research of Song Dynasty scholars to the "Rite of Zhou". Many scholars of the Jing Gong School were good at the study of etiquette, and the famous ones such as Wang Zhaoyu wrote the forty volumes of the "Detailed Explanation of Zhou Li", which is a further play on the "New Yi of Zhou Guan". The Yongjia Rite School that appeared in the Southern Song Dynasty also inherited the tradition of using rites in the Northern Song Dynasty. Opponents include Yang Shi's "Zhou Li Yi Discernment" and Wang Juzheng's "Zhou Li Discernment Study", which are specifically aimed at refuting the "Zhou Guan Xinyi". In addition, many scholars opposed the new study because they opposed the new law, and then raised doubts and rebuttals of the classic "Zhou Li" on which the new study was based, and it was at this time that Sima Guang, Hu Anguo, Hu Yin, Hu Hong, Su Zhi, Chao Shizhi, Hong Mai, Huang Zhen and others proposed that Liu Xin forged the "Rite of Zhou". Liu Xin's forgery is an important issue in the history of the study of the Rite of Zhou, but through our research here, it mainly reveals the background of the emergence of this view and the academic and political controversy related to the Rite of Zhou. In addition, we also believe that there is no need to criticize this harshly as the librarians of the Siku that appeared in the Song Dynasty and continued to the Ming Dynasty, as well as the "Winter Official" craze. We believe that the compilation of "Dongguan" is in the same line as the style of study since the early Song Dynasty, and its premise is that the "Rite of Zhou" is a complete classic, which is a powerful counterattack to the suspicion of the "Rite of Zhou", and even the belief that the "Rite of Zhou" is a forgery by Liu Xin, and it also proves that the authoritative position of the "Rite of Zhou" in the Confucian classics cannot be shaken. We also use the adjustment and debate of the text of the "University" by philosophers, and even did not hesitate to change and supplement the "University" as a reference, showing that Yu Tingchun, Wang and others changed the "Rite of Zhou" within Confucianism. Although the two are not completely equal in philosophical significance, it would be unfair to regard "The Winter Official is not dead" and the compilation of the "Winter Official" as meaningless. The purpose of the practice of supplementing the Winter Official since the Song and Ming dynasties is to restore the integrity of the Rite of Zhou, prove that the Rite of Zhou is a "complete classic", and thus confirm that the Rite of Zhou is a great law of the king of the Duke of Zhou, and is a model of Confucian political ideas and political design, which is also meaningful from this point of view. From the attention and discussion of the "Rites of Zhou" in the Northern Song Dynasty, we can see the distinctive characteristics of the Song Dynasty etiquette, and at the same time, the emphasis of physicists on etiquette and theoretical elaboration is another characteristic of the Song Dynasty's etiquette that attaches importance to righteousness. Chapter 5, "The Interaction between Etiquette and Theory," contains six separate monographs, and its themes focus on the complex relationship between Confucianism and traditional etiquette, the process of righteousness and rationalization, and the status and significance of rites in the narrative mode of heavenly theory. The author has always believed that in fact, there has never been a so-called practical etiquette study that is divorced from the development of intellectual history. Beginning with Confucius, Confucian etiquette has always had a profound interaction and influence with the mainstream trends of thought in various eras in the process of development, which is also an important factor in promoting the development of etiquette. During the Warring States period, when Confucian scholars discussed rites, they combined them with the popular ideas of the five elements of yin and yang at that time, thus forming the etiquette thought characterized by the five behaviors of yin and yang from the Warring States to the Han Dynasty. Regarding this point, the author has discussed it in more detail in the book "The Integration of Pre-Qin Rite Thought and Society". Therefore, in a strict sense, the combination of etiquette and philosophical thought did not begin in the Song Dynasty. Of course, in the context of science, the etiquette as a human order is associated with heavenly reason, which is a great improvement and leap for the traditional Confucian etiquette thought, when we focus on the etiquette of the Song Dynasty, from the source of historical development, combined with the development and evolution of the history of ancient Chinese philosophical thought, at least in the previous Wei and Jin era, there has been a reactionary and gradual rationalization of the two Han rites. This chapter first studies Wang Su's three "rites", and its main purpose is to reveal that Wang Su's etiquette is simplified and simplified, which is an important link in the process of rationalizing the study of etiquette. The study of the development and turn of etiquette thought during the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties periods also has the same purpose. The Wei and Jin dynasties were a time of division and turmoil in Chinese history, but only in such times could we have a deeper understanding of the value and function of rites, and at the same time a greater understanding of the essence of rites. However, these so-called "essences", such as moral norms, marriage systems, and agricultural affairs, are still mainly based on ethical order, and most of them stay at the level of experience, and do not have the meaning of philosophical ontology. Pei's proposal of "sublime have" in response to "noble nothing" is a positive affirmation of Confucian ritual music in the context of the era of "more famous teachings and letting nature". But does Confucian ritual music have a deeper philosophical basis beyond its social function? Although the Eastern Jin and Southern Dynasties appeared the "Lixuan double cultivation", on this fundamental theoretical issue, the study of etiquette has not yet reached the height of metaphysics. The rise of Song agency science continued this ideological link. Ercheng and Zhang Zai both belong to the founders of Taoism in the Northern Song Dynasty, and although their ideas are still very different, they have something in common in arguing that the "etiquette is also the principle of propriety" and elevating the ritual that represents the social order of human ethics in Confucianism to the same height as the heavenly principle. In particular, Zhang Zai, according to Mr. Yu Dunkang, "In the history of Confucianism, the philosophical height of the Confucian rites served by Confucianism has been systematically argued, thus laying a solid theoretical foundation for the study of rites, and Zhang Zai should be the first person." 380726 However, if we analyze further, there are still some differences between Ercheng and Zhang Zai's understanding of rites and their position in the Taoist system. As far as Ercheng is concerned, they believe that the proposition of "etiquette and reason" is not simply juxtaposing etiquette and rationality, raising etiquette to the height of heavenly reason, but incorporating etiquette into the discourse of heavenly theory to view etiquette. Specifically, in the thought of Ercheng, the relationship between reason and propriety is equivalent to the relationship between the metaphysical and the physical, the relationship between rationality and qi, and the relationship between physical use. In this way, propriety is integrated with reason in the discourse of theory. From the perspective of etiquette, as a human ethical order, etiquette has the basis of heavenly reason, from the perspective of reason, heavenly reason is not only wonderful, but more importantly, heavenly reason is full and concrete, it has specific social content, and is linked to human society. This kind of heavenly principle draws a clear line with the Buddhist idea of rationality, indicating that the heavenly principle of Taoism is Confucianism. Originally, the establishment of the theory of Rigaku Tian was mainly aimed at the metaphysical ontology based on nothingness and the Buddhist worldview of emptiness. Cheng Yi proposed that the directors unanimously said that reason and propriety are "one source of body and use", which is a philosophical denial of metaphysics and Buddhism, thus establishing the ontology of Confucianism from the positive and establishing the value position of Confucianism. "Establishing religion with propriety" is an important feature of the Guanxue established by Zhang Zai. Ercheng believes that reason and propriety are the relationship between body use, and the status of etiquette is guaranteed by the absoluteness of reason, while Zhang Zai directly believes that etiquette itself is "combined and used". Theoretically, on the one hand, this view criticizes Buddhism's tangible and useless nihilistic idea of denying human order, and on the other hand, it also points out that ritual is not only a common teaching, but also a practical use. Compared with scholars who attached importance to rites in the early Northern Song Dynasty, such as Ouyang Xiu, Li Xiao and others, Zhang Zai really elevated rites to the status of ontology, explaining the status and value of rites from the perspective of ontology. Lü Dalin studied from Zhang Zai and Er Cheng, and has a deep understanding of both Guan Xue and Luo Xue. Lü Dalin's thought is characterized by the mastery of etiquette, which reflects the influence of Guan Xue. His annotated "Commentary on Rites" is not only influenced by the trend of the times, attaches importance to the interpretation of the righteousness of etiquette, but also tries to maintain the traditional etiquette study and the simple and sincere academic tradition of Guanxue, and does not depart from the specific etiquette system to talk about the righteousness of etiquette. After learning the second course, his thinking changed again, and in some respects he abandoned his earlier ideas and became closer to the second cheng Luoxue. These two aspects are evident in Lü Dalin's early work "Li Ji Xie" and later "Zhong Yong Xie". The shift from Lü Dalin's thought and the divergence from Ercheng more typically reflects the conflict and integration between the theory of science and traditional Confucian etiquette during its formation. From the analysis of the ideas of Ercheng, Zhang Zai and Lü Dalin Lixue, we can basically see that in the process of the rise and development of Taoism, the study of etiquette was gradually incorporated into the exposition of Taoism and the process of rationalization and rationalization. This is of great significance to the study of etiquette, to Taoism, and to Confucianism. The chapter concludes with a paper on the Lijing Hui Yuan during the Southern Song Dynasty. Ye Shi was a scholarly bureaucrat of the Southern Song Dynasty and Zhu Xi, and his book Lijing Hui Yuan is a collection of monographs on the Rites of Zhou. Later generations of this book were highly evaluated, believing that "it can be really unprepared". A prominent feature of the Book of Rites is the interpretation of the Rites of Zhou with the "Mean". During the Southern Song Dynasty, the "Mean Mean" had already established the classic status of the book of Taoist nature, but Ye Shi linked the Ming Mean with the Confucian book of classics "Zhou Li", believing that "if you want to see the "Rite of Zhou", you must first look at the "Rite of Zhou", and "The Mean" is the principle and basis for discussing the "Rite of Zhou". Ye Shi believes that on the one hand, what runs through the "Rites of Zhou" and the etiquette system that Confucianism attaches importance to is the idea of moderation, and on the other hand, although the golden mean is excellent, it must eventually be implemented in the etiquette book and etiquette system. In order to achieve moderation, it is necessary to guarantee courtesy. Although Ye Shi's "Lijing Hui Yuan" does not completely integrate the Confucian theory of nature and the system of etiquette and music in theory, he pointed out that the two should be combined, and the inner saint and the outer king should be connected, which is also a typical example of the integration and interaction between etiquette and science, and it also helps us to have a complete grasp and understanding of Confucianism in the Song Dynasty. Chapter 6 of this book is a study of the combination of etiquette and intellectual history, which is actually an aspect of the author's research on Confucian etiquette, and the four papers included here reflect some preliminary discussions in this regard. From the different perspectives of Confucian classics, contemporary religious studies, semiotics, etc., we can be sure that etiquette is not only embodied in various famous rules and regulations and ceremonies such as advance and retreat. Etiquette is meaningful. Behind the various famous objects, rituals, and facial colors, complex meanings such as politics, society, and thought are reflected. Rites are an important feature of Chinese history and culture, which is not only reflected in the annotations of the three Confucian "Rites", but also since the Han Dynasty, especially after the establishment of the five-rite system in the Wei and Jin dynasties, from the country's political structure, temple sacrifices, foreign exchanges, to the daily life of ordinary people such as weddings and funerals, there are various detailed etiquette regulations, and these etiquette systems are eventually summarized into the etiquette of one era. It is precisely because rites not only stay in the classics and commentaries of Confucianism, but also widely penetrate into all aspects and fields of society, which determines the importance of rites to Chinese history and culture. As far as the study of etiquette is concerned, great achievements have been made in recent years, and there has been in-depth research on the etiquette system and changes in various eras. The author believes that for the study of etiquette, it is very important and of academic value to explore the ins and outs of various specific etiquette systems, to hook and sink in places where literature is missing or ambiguous, to check and fill in the gaps, and then to explore the complex relationship between etiquette, political power and social development. 380727 in addition, discussing the ideological significance of the etiquette system and the reform of the etiquette system, and combining the study of the etiquette system with the study of intellectual history and social history, is not only extremely helpful for deepening the study of the etiquette system, but also broadens the scope of the study of etiquette. Of course, as the author points out in this book, it is difficult to combine the study of etiquette with the study of intellectual history, and select content with intellectual history connotations from the vast sea of etiquette and etiquette for research. Although the four papers in this chapter are discussed under such an academic understanding, on the whole, there is still a long way to go before the perfect realization of this academic goal, which will also be a major aspect of the author's future research on etiquette. The three books are a monograph with Confucian etiquette in the Northern Song Dynasty as the main content, and each chapter in it is actually a series of special research papers on the theme of Song Dynasty etiquette. The author's initial focus on Song Dynasty etiquette began with Wang Anshi's "Zhou Guan Xinyi", and since then it has continued to expand along this vein and extend back and forth, and finally formed the current research results. Although I dare not say that it is a collection of armpits, I think that I have seen more or less in various thematic studies. Some of them were written and published as papers, and several others were presented at seminars on the theme of etiquette sponsored in China. The following is an explanation of the published papers in the order of the table of contents of this book. The first section of Chapter 2, "A Review of the Study of the Zhou Li in Modern and Modern Times", was entitled "A Review of the Study of the Zhou Li in the Past Hundred Years" and was included in the third series of the Essays on the History of Chinese Thought (edited by Zhang Yizhi, Guangxi Normal University Press, 2008). The second section, "The Writing of the Rites of Zhou and the Social Changes of the Warring States Period", is included in Jingxue and Chinese Philosophy (edited by Cai Fanglu, East China Normal University Press, 2009). The second section of Chapter 3, "Wang Anshi's Thought on Etiquette", was published in History of Chinese Philosophy, No. 2, 2010, under the title "Wang Anshi's Theory of Etiquette and Mind". Chapter 5, Section 1, "Wang Su's Three Rites and the 'Dispute between King Zheng'", was published in the 4th issue of History of Chinese Philosophy in 2014, and was also included in "The World of Thought in Reflection: A Commemorative Collection of Mr. Liu Zehua's Eighth Rank Birthday" (Tianjin People's Publishing House, 2014). The third section, "The Thought of Etiquette in the Second Cheng and the New Development of Etiquette in the Song Dynasty", was published in the History of Chinese Philosophy, No. 4, 2013, entitled "The New Development of Etiquette Studies in the Song Dynasty-Centered on the Thought of Etiquette in the Song Dynasty". The fifth section, "Lü Dalin's Interpretation of Rites and the Development of Song Agency Studies", was published in the eighth series of Chinese Confucianism (edited by Wang Zhongjiang and Li Cunshan, China Social Sciences Press, 2013). The sixth section, "Ye Shi's Lijing Hui Yuan and the Development of Confucianism in the Song Dynasty," was published in History of Chinese Philosophy, No. 2, 2012. Chapter 6, Section 1, "Confucian Thought of Changing Manners in the Warring States Period: Centered on the Theory of the Transfer of State Power," was published in World Philosophy, No. 6, 2007. The second section, "The Duke of Zhou's 'Regent Title' and Several Problems with Confucian Political Philosophy," was published in Humanities Magazine, No. 4, 2008, and included in the eleventh series of Studies in Confucian Culture (2009) sponsored by Sungkyunkwan University in South Korea. The third section, "Political Consciousness and Its Political Role in Family Gifts: Centered on the Book of Rites", was published in the Journal of Hunan University, No. 4, 2005. The fourth section, "'Pu Discussion' and the Development of Confucianism in the Northern Song Dynasty", was published in the first series of Chinese Thought and Society Studies (edited by Liu Zehua, China Social Sciences Press, 2007). In addition, in 2012, the author also participated in the major bidding project of the National Social Science Foundation "Research on the Change of Etiquette System and Modern Value in China", and the members of the research group are all experts in the field of etiquette research in China. The author participated in two academic seminars on "Changes in Chinese Etiquette System and Modern Society" held by the research group in Shenyang in August 2014 and Xi'an in April 2015, respectively, and the second section of chapter 5 of this book, "The Development and Transformation of Etiquette Thought in the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties" and chapter 4, section 3, "Yongjia Lixue", are the papers presented at these two conferences respectively. Since each article in this book is completed as an independent paper, it is inevitable that there will be some duplication in the introduction of relevant backgrounds and the citation of materials. In the process of compiling the book, although it has been deleted and adjusted, it is still difficult to completely avoid it. In fact, the focus of each article is different, the angle of material citation, and the complexity of the narrative are also different, so there are some repetitions of discussions and quotations in some places in the book, which is also for this reason.（AI翻译）