孟子不是儒家 | 殷正淯

鮑鵬山教授:「我覺得,先秦諸子中對後來的中國政治影響最大的,確確實實是法家,以及在法家思想指導下建立的秦朝。秦制確立了君主獨裁的制度,漢代以後,信仰上雖然奉行儒家,政治倫理上雖然皈依儒家,但這個“儒家”和先秦孔孟儒家是不同的,更多是荀子之儒,乃至於是混雜了陰陽家尤其是法家的“新儒家”。孔子的形象只是一個道德信仰,而政治體制和政治操作上實行的確確實實的是法家,也就是秦制的那一套,中國歷史和社會的許多黑暗都與此有關。」

南宋以前,孟學一直被放在冷凍庫保存,原因何故?熟讀孔(不是論語,而是春秋)孟的人便知,孟子根本不是儒家,孟子對於性與氣的詮釋與孔子一點關係也沒有。我們只能說孟子很推崇孔子,但未必傳承於孔學。相反地,荀子思想與孔子的思想內在邏輯與理論概念都高度一致,這也就是為何自孟子百年之後,除東漢趙岐之外,孟學無人問津,原因就在於孟子思想與孔學無關,另外還有內在邏輯混亂,概念不清。

孟子不是儒家,就跟宋明理學跟儒家無關一樣,不是說都引用同一個文獻,就是同一個門派,內在邏輯不一樣,思想門派就不同了。六經思想對先秦諸子都有非常深的影響,他們的理論建構也都會援用這些思想,特別是易經,但各自受到所屬環境、成長經驗,與本身的性格等因素影響,產生出的思想結果就不一樣。荀子的學生有漢代的特殊環境因素,他們援用陰陽家的思想也是大勢所趨。

有時候表達方式之外,還要深入底層理論建構的邏輯去分析一個思想家的內在思維方式。以董仲舒為例,他雖然採用五行終始的方式,但內在邏輯還是非常儒家的,五行終始在董仲舒的語境之下,只是「天」、「命」關係的另一種符號。他要闡述的依然是主政者要順應客觀世界的趨勢發展,即便在政治上擁有絕對的權利與權力,可是人的意志不可能超越客觀世界的運作軌跡,主觀意志不能凌駕客觀規律。只是用了陰陽家的語言說了儒家的話。

說孟子不是儒家的人是不多,但他很明顯不是儒家。九流十家這分類,是在史書上整理先秦思想時的便宜之計,老子跟莊子差距也很大,只是沒有孔孟差距這麼大。比較正確認識先秦思想家的方式,就是單獨分開來認識,歸類之後,就容易被制約,反而不能準確掌握思想家的思想核心。

南宋以前,孟子連進孔廟的機會都沒有,孟子有今天的地位,還不到一千年。在此之前,儒學繼承人都是荀子。我基本上不信宋明那幾個腐儒,除了邵雍,他們的後學就更等而下之了。所以我更相信兩漢經學家們的判斷,畢竟,漢初時期的那幾個大師離那個時代更近,看到的相關文獻比我們多更多,也更能判斷出誰更接近孔子。

對了,最近又要公佈新的論語內容了,絕對會讓世人驚艷,因為內容與現行版本差距非常大,而且還是年代最早的版本,有趣的是,出土的地點在湖北荊州,楚國的核心地帶而不是三晉或齊魯儒家傳統盛行地區。這多少顯示出,當時的思想傳播與影響,比我們想像更活躍。

對「孟子不是儒家 | 殷正淯」的一則回應

  1. Who cares?

    Seriously, who cares whether or not Mencius is really “confucian"? I know that there are classification and categorization issues in academia that suck up a lot of time and resources, that get the scholars all worked up. But in the end, most of these classification controversies are artificial, and self-manufactured, and don’t really translate into anything more than a storm in a teacup. They’re stupid and useless.

    Just like Confucianism. Its influence is immense and so it deserves attention. But it’s hollow, and obscure. You can make confucianism fit into anything, morph into anything. It’s been used to support democracy, and all kinds of progressive activism. But you can also use it to support racism, elitism, totalitarianism. It’s anything you want it to be. A thing that can be everything and anything to anyone, is really at the end, just nothing.

    Confucianism is just careerism, nothing more. Confucian, as a person, must have been the most odiously repugnant, egotistical person you’ve ever met. Not an evil person, but someone who you wouldn’t want to talk to for more than 5 minutes. Basically, he’s a bureaucrat pissed off that he didn’t get the promotion he wanted. So he throws his temper tantrum, in the guise of some fake, obscure rationalization about his not getting promoted being the result of the unjust, nonvirtuous workings of the world. But he is the more elevated man and so he must take his leave. Off to the next prince/duke/marquis/king who would take him. repeat. His whole life is summed up thusly:

    官運不順.

    Not that much more. Well, there’s lots of unsuccessful, unpromoted bureaucrats out there and they live quiet, honorable lives. They don’t concoct some cockamamie pseudo-religion/pseudo-cult. to some degree, this confucius person is very much like 洪秀全. both were frustrated in their quest for status within an existing system that won’t have them, and in response, they philosophize.

    Here’s the one question I have for the confucians: What proof is there that a privately virtuous person (in the confucian sense, so that means someone who is filially pious, worshipful towards his ancestors, etc.) would make for a competent, capable public administrator? If there is no proof, and if you (meaning the author, or anyone who fancies himself a confucian) can’t adequatly respond, then your whole philosophy of confucianism is just bullshit.

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com 標誌

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 /  變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 /  變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 /  變更 )

連結到 %s