“疑古”,还是“信古”?——尧舜美德传说刍议

“Doubting the Ancient” or “Trusting the Ancient”?——A Tentative Discussion on Virtues of King Yao and King Shun

尧舜素来被尊崇为君主治国理政的典范和仁人志士修身成德的楷模,然尧舜时期尚无成形文字,尧舜事迹多以传说形式于后世著作流传,尧舜美德传说的真实性历来充满争议。以儒家为代表的"法古"派对尧舜传说推崇备至,而以《竹书纪年》、道家、法家等为代表的"反法古"派对尧舜事迹持怀疑态度。近代疑古史学家将尧舜美德传说的合法性问题重新纳入学术视野,在学界引发广泛争议和深入探讨,并将这一问题的争论推向高潮。我们认为,信古,应该有所根据;疑古,也应该有一定限度。"疑古"并非否定一切,古史传说的历史价值亦需正确看待,应该坚持"考古—疑古—信古—释古"四者有机结合的理解范式,科学把握"尧舜美德传说"的精神内涵。

King Yao and King Shun have long been praised as the model of the state administration by monarchs and as role models for virtuous people. However, there was no writing documents during the Yao and Shun periods. Yao and Shun deeds have been mostly circulated among later generations in the form of legend, and the authenticity of the Yao and Shun vir- tues has always been controversial. The ＂Emulating the Ancient＂ school represented by Confucianism highly praised the Yao and Shun traditions. However, the ＂Anti-Ancient＂ school represented by the ＂Bamboo Chronical＂ authors, Taoists and Le- galists were skeptical of the Yao and Shun deeds. In the modern period, historians who are suspicious of the ancient have re- incorporated the legitimacy of the Yao and Shun virtues into the scholarly perspective, and have triggered widespread contro- versy and in-depth discussion in the academic field, which culminated in the debate on this issue. We believe that ＂trusting the ancient＂ should be based on the evidences; ＂doubting the ancient＂ should also be conducted within certain limits. ＂Doubting the ancient＂ does not mean the negation of everything. The historical values of ancient legends must also be cor- rectly viewed. We should adhere to the understanding paradigm of ＂archeology-doubting the ancient-trusting the ancient-inter- preting the ancient＂, and grasp the spirit of ＂Yao and Shun virtues＂ in a scientific manner.