“愚民”与“不可使知”之间——论清末民初学人对“民可使由之”章的解释

“Stultifying the Populace”or“They May Not Be Made to Understand It”:Interpretations about the Chapter of“The People May Be Made to Follow A Path of Action”by Scholars in the Late Qing Dynasty and the Early Republic of China

《论语·泰伯》篇中的"民可使由之"章在清末民初引起了很大的争议,争议的焦点主要集中在愚民的问题上。有关此章是否愚民的讨论在戊戌变法之前就已经出现,并在20世纪初吸引了不少学者的注意,康有为、梁启超等人都试图为此章进行辩护。然而,这些辩护并未止息这场论争,相反,从清末至民初,围绕此章的争议已经延伸到孔子以及儒家是否愚民的问题。而学界较少关注的是,这场论争还有另外一个侧面,即由"不可使知"引出的儒家是否为宗教的问题。"愚民"和"非宗教"是近代儒家面临的两大质疑,而同时出现在围绕"民可使由之"章的论争中,透过这场论争,或许有助于我们理解近代儒家在"教化"与"宗教"问题上的双重困境。

In a chapter in The Analects of Confucius,Confucius is found to claim that"the populace may be made to follow a path of action,but they may not be made to understand it."This statement has caused great controversy over the issue of obscurantism in the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China.Actually,the controversy had appeared before 1898,and attracted the attention of many scholars in the early 20th century.Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao both tried to make a defense for Confucius,but they failed to quell the dissatisfaction.On the contrary,from the late Qing Dynasty to the early Republic of China,the controversy got beyond this statement to a more inclusive question of whether there is a Confucian obscurantism in general.However,there is another aspect to this debate which has been largely overlooked,that is,Confucianism is not considered as a religion because it does not deny people to understand.Confucianism has long been considered as obscurantist on the one hand and non-religious on the other,and these two challenges have appeared together in this debate.Through this debate,we may gain some insight into the double predicament of modern Confucianism.