书写之异与“尊王”之法——《春秋》“惠公仲子”之三传比析

The Difference of Writing and the Law of “Zunwang”:A Comparative Analysis of the Three Classical Texts of Explanation to “Huigongzhongzi” in Chunqiu

《左》《公》《穀》三传对《春秋》隐公元年"惠公仲子"条解释有异,其焦点是仲子身份问题。《左传》以仲子为桓公之母却未卒受赗,"桓未君"而王室归赗其母,此"非礼"之书写体现出作者责王"以示劝诫"的思想;《公羊》认同仲子为桓公之母而讲"隐为桓立",彰显出"立子以贵"及以"尊尊而亲亲"之王权观念;《穀梁》认同仲子为惠公之母而"正隐""治桓",则以"亲亲而尊尊"取"蹈道"之价值。仲子身份虽因三传书写之异而终不为定论,却与各家相关阐释体系或主要价值观念不悖,又因其在血缘与地缘、家族与国家两个维度上的张力而并行不辍。

The three classical texts of explanation to Chunqiuhad different explanations about＂Huigongzhongzi＂,which focused on the identity of Zhongzi.Zuozhuanrecognized her as the mother of Huangong who without death received funeral gifts,which reflected the thoughts of＂admonishment＂.Gongyangidentitied Zhongzi as the mother of HuanGong and highlighted the concept of＂Yinweihuanli＂which revealed the concept of kingship by ＂Liziyigui＂and ＂Qinqin＂,＂Zunzun＂.Guliangidentitied Zhongzi as the mother of Huigong and criticized both Yingong and Huangong for＂Zaodao＂through ＂Zunzun＂of＂Qinqin＂.Although the debating on Zhongzi＇s identity was not eventually resolved due to the differences in the three characters,it is consistent with the related interpretations and the main values.Moreover,it continues its negotiating in meaning in terms of kinship and region,the family and the state.