本文以漢、宋《尚書》學最具代表性的蔡沈《書集傳》及王鳴盛《尚書後案》為核心，以對〈堯典〉的詮釋為例，分析二人對聖人之理解，以由具體治經成果，分析漢、宋學思想之異，再以此為基礎，比較二者治學方法之異同。以此指出漢、宋學之異，不在考據／義理或客觀／主觀之別，而與學術立場、學術判斷標準，及對經典的理解有分不開的關係。此一分析所得，有助於對清代漢、宋學問題的理解，也為清代《尚書》學之研究，提供緜薄之助。

Cai Chen 蔡沈 (1167-1230) finished his Shujizhuan 書集傳 following the wish of his teacher Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130-1200). This book became a designated textbook for the civil service examinations, and was very influential during the Ming and Qing dynasties as a representative work of the so-called “Song learning” (Song xue). In contrast to Cai’s, Wang Mingsheng’s 王鳴盛 (1722-1797) Shangshuhou’an 尚書後案, written in order to illustrate ZhengXuan’s 鄭玄 (127-200) teachings, is a representation of “Han learning” (Han xue). The opposition between the Han and Song learning was a critical issue in the academia of the Qing dynasty, and has become a significant topic for modern scholars. The Yaodian chapter from the Shangshu typically represents the image of the sage (shengren 聖人), and became an idol for later generations. In this article, I discuss the difference of the Han and Song learning by comparing Cai Chen’s and Wang Mingshen’s portrayals of the sages through their annotations on Yaodian 堯典.Based on their works, I find that the difference between the Han and Song learning involves the close definitions of concept and methodology. The difference helps us to better understand the complex issue of the Han-Song learning.