초록 열기/닫기 버튼
儒家历史上存在着一个反差巨大、却很少得到合理解释的现象：一方面, 孔孟圣贤在世的时候长期处于“不能用”的状态；另一方面, 在汉代“独尊儒术”之后的两千多年里, 无数在道德品格和学问知识方面远不如他们的儒者又受到了统治者们的高度重用｡ 细究起来, 在理论上导致儒家命运发生这种深刻转折的最根本原因, 是孔孟儒学与荀董儒学在处理“忠孝不能两全”的二难困境时采取的两种截然不同的态度：孔孟虽然十分强调“孝”和“忠”的和谐统一, 乃至主张“移孝作忠”, 但在讨论二者出现冲突的案例时, 却自觉不自觉地按照血缘亲情不但享有本根地位、而且具有至上意义的“事亲为大”原则, 潜在地赋予了“孝”凌驾于“忠”的终极意义, 主张人们在“忠孝不能两全”的情况下应当“舍忠而尽孝”, 而不是“舍孝而尽忠”｡ 正是这种鼓励臣民为了维护自己父母的利益不惜牺牲统治者利益的取舍态度, 阻碍了也很强调“忠君”的孔孟受到当时统治者们的重用｡ 荀子察觉到了这一点, 因此在同样肯定血缘亲情本根地位的基础上, 通过彰显君主抚养和教育臣民的双重功能超越了父母仅仅生养子女的单向度功能, 转而主张“礼莫大于圣王”, 明确要求臣民按照“君主高于父母”、“忠高于孝”的原则处理“忠孝不能两全”的困境, 从而为儒家摆脱“不能用”的宿命奠定了理论上的关键契机｡ 汉代的董仲舒继承发扬了荀子的这一立场, 在“王道三纲”的著名架构中明确将君臣关系置于父子关系和夫妇关系之前, 强调“君为臣纲, 父为子纲, 夫为妻纲”, 从而与孟子指认的“人之大伦”明显有别, 却与荀子指认的“君臣、父子、兄弟、夫妇”的“义之伦”根本一致, 凭借“屈民而伸君”的“春秋之大义”彰显了“王”的“至高无上的伦理地位”, 结果让儒家思潮最终摆脱了因为孔孟主张“孝高于忠”所陷入的“不能用”境地, 在“忠高于孝”的基础上一举实现了后来在朝廷官府面前一直“很受用”的目的｡ 就此而言, 儒家思潮从战国到汉代的命运转折并不能“唯一”性地归因于它“对教育的垄断”；毋宁说, 更重要的原因在于：董仲舒的“三纲”说在坚持孔孟血亲本根精神的基础上, 又融合进来了荀子的“礼莫大于圣王”信条和法家的某些观念, 不但鼓吹“君主至上”, 而且强调“忠高于孝”, 因此可以说充分迎合了“帝王的偏好、主要大臣的兴趣、官员的关怀”, 从而导致后者在寻求意识形态的精神支柱时目标精准地从其他思潮(包括法家)那里转向了儒家思潮｡
There is a strange and yet seldom explained phenomenon in the history of Confucianism: on the one hand, Kongzi and Mengzi were rarely put in an important position by their contemporary rulers when they were alive; on the other, so many Confucians have been put in very important positions in more than two thousand years since the Han Dynasty, although they cannot be compared favorably with Kongzi and Mengzi at all. The basic reason why the destiny of Confucianism has taken such a dramatic turn lies in its two very different attitudes towards the dilemma between filial piety and loyalty: while Kongzi and Mengzi also emphasized the harmony of filial Piety and loyalty, they usually placed filial piety above loyalty in the case of conflict and demanded that people should choose filial piety to their parents at the cost of loyalty to their rulers according to the principle “filial piety is the greatest”. It is this very choice that makes them not be put in an important position by their contemporary rulers, even though they themselves indeed stressed loyalty to the ruler very much. Xunzi was aware of this theoretic defect and thus argued that the functions of the ruler to bring up and teach subjects were far more important than the functions of parents to bear and bring up children. Then he demanded that people should choose loyalty to their rulers at the cost of filial piety to their parents in the case of conflict according to the principle “loyalty to the ruler is the greatest”. As a famous Confucian in the Han Dynasty, Dong Zhongshu carried on this principle and definitely placed loyalty to the ruler above filial piety to parents in the so‐called “Three Cardinal Guides”, thereby helping Confucianism eventually in being highly and even solely honored by the rulers in more than two thousand years. Viewed from this perspective, the dramatic turn of the destiny of Confucianism in the history could not be attributed merely to its monopoly of education, but first and foremost to the in‐depth change of its attitude towards the dilemma between filial piety and loyalty.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
the destiny of Confucianism, the dilemma between filial piety and loyalty, being useless, being useful.
