本文主要探讨的核心问题是清代学人龚自珍（1792-1841）身为嘉道儒者的政教之思。相对于既有的将龚自珍归入近代思想家行列的研究理路，本文立足于重新理解龚自珍及其时代的核心议题，以期还原龚自珍嘉道儒者的基本身份，并透过其理论视野与治学范式，把握清代嘉道年间思想界与学术界内部的复杂性，进而深化对嘉道历史语境的再认识。“本朝”是龚自珍时常提及的词汇，在龚氏对该词的使用中，其内涵不仅指向时间意义上的“当代”，同时还意味着“大一统”格局下全新的“中国”观念。对“本朝”概念的运用，彰显出龚自珍独特的历史与时势意识。“圣人之道”则是龚自珍思想的另一个侧面，它既是读书治学之目标，也是龚氏追寻的经世济民之渊薮。“本朝”意识与“圣人之道”两组概念交互缠绕，共同构成了龚自珍反思与评断嘉道社会问题的嵌入视点，亦成为其政教思想的重要理论基础。出于对汉宋学术纷争的不满，龚自珍在与江藩有关“汉学”与“经学”的争论中，着重突出了清代学术的独立性。在“本朝自有学”的口号之下，龚氏试图重新构建起兼有“尊德性”与“道问学”二端的整全完备的“本朝”学术体系，并藉由此进一步探明“圣人之道”的实质内容。本文着重讨论了龚自珍对于清代学术的认识，不仅来自于对古今学术流变的观察，更根源于对有别于前代的“本朝”特殊时势的认知。在龚自珍的构想中，清代学术循问学之阶，终极意义在于明晰圣人之道、施用于家国天下。在戴震“由词以通道”理论的基础上，龚自珍辨析了“圣人之文”与“圣人之道”的不同，进而强调作为“圣人制作之迹”的“圣人之文”，并非窥探“圣人之道”的唯一门径。在历史中展开的“圣人之道”，并非空言垂文设教，而是顺天应人、因时损益的“治道”。在“治道”展现的过程中，作为“圣人门人”的宾、师，对文明的存续发挥了重要作用。龚自珍通过对“圣人之道”及作为其承载者的历史主体“宾”之间对话关系的诠释，实现了对于“本朝”概念新的突破，并将“本朝”纳入中国政教文明体系中，贯通了历史中国与“本朝”间历史的连续性。本文强调，龚自珍对儒家“圣人之道”的新诠，其论既发端于清代特殊历史语境造就的问题意识，亦是对中国传统政教文明的系统性思考。

This thesis will focus on the political thoughts of Gong Zizhen (1792-1841), a Confucian Scholar of Jiaqing-Daoguang period, Qing Dynasty. Different from the traditional methodology that views Gong as the Contemporary philosopher, this thesis will base on understanding the themes around Gong and his times, with the purpose to unveil the fundamental identity of Gong as a Confucian Scholar of Jiaqing-Daoguang period. The thesis will also try to understand the complexity of the philosophy and academia of Jiaqing-Daoguang period and further the history context, by means of studying Gong’s theory and paradigm of teaching. Gong often mentioned the word of “Benchao”(本朝), which refers to not only the Contemporary from time series, but also a brand new opinion on “China” under the context of “great unification”. The concept of “Benchao” indicates Gong’s particularity of historical consciousness. The other side of Gong’s thoughts can be reflected in “Tao of Sage”(圣人之道), which demonstrates the goal of learning and the origin of statecraft Gong is pursuing. The concepts of “Benchao” and “Tao of Sage” are interlinked and jointly consist of Gong’s reflection on social matters of the period, laying theoretical foundation for his political thoughts. Out of dissatisfaction about the academic dispute on Han and Song, Gong emphasizes the independency of Qing’s academy under the dispute with Jiangfan on Han Study and Confucian Classics. Gong attempts to reconstruct a complete academic system around “Benchao” which contains the characteristics of “respecting morality” as well as “asking to learn” and further explores the substance of “Tao of Sage”. The thesis will focus on Gong’s understanding on Qing’s academy, which stems not only from his observation of the academic evolution, but also his thoughts on “Benchao” different from the earlier times. In Gong’s opinion, the ultimate purpose of Qing’s academic is to have clear views on “Tao of Sage” and to adapt the theory to governance. Based upon Dai Zhen’s theory of understanding Tao by words, Gong Zizhen distinguished interpretation of “Text of Sage” and “Tao of Sage” and argued that textual learning is not the only way to understand “Tao of Sage”. “Tao of Sage” does not only stem from learning and teaching, but also from practice, which conforms to changing with the time. In this process, “Guest-teachers”, the disciple of the Sage, played an important role in passing on the truth. Gong Zizhen demonstrates the value of showing respect to talents by his iteration of “Tao of Sage”. Gong’s theory originating from the internal evolution of Qing academics has been seen as an attempt to address the crisis of the times. The breakthrough of Benchao lies in Gong’s creative iteration on “Tao of Sage” and his interaction with the “Guests”. Gong also include “Benchao” into the Chinese civilization of politics, which connects “Benchao” and the earlier times. As the thesis emphasizes, Gong’s new interpretation on Tao of Sage originates from the awareness of problems under the context of Qing Dynasty, and it is also systematic thoughts on China’s civilization of politics.