《春秋》:以礼褒贬是非之书--刘敞对《春秋》政治合法性的重建

Chun Qiu:the book of judging right and wrong by the standard of propriety--Liu Chang’s Reconstruction of the Political Legitimacy of Chun Qiu

中唐以来,如何重建《春秋》的政治合法性成为新《春秋》学的普遍问题意识。宋儒刘敞对汉唐三传学皆有所扬弃,他反对杜预《春秋》用旧史、从赴告等说,继承公羊家以《春秋》为孔子之志之说,但因公羊家之王鲁等说会陷孔子于非义,故其又反对公羊家此类说法,而是吸收穀梁家范宁之说,以《春秋》为褒贬是非之书。其褒贬既不同于左氏家的史学批判之褒贬,亦不同于公羊家将褒贬诸侯称号视同于进退爵位,而只以之为是非判断,并以礼为其准的。由此,其将《春秋》从杜预之史书、公羊家的素王改制、为汉制法之书转变为依循周礼的是非褒贬之书,试图实现对《春秋》政治合法性的重建。

Since the middle of the Tang Dynasty,how to reconstruct the political legitimacy of the Chun Qiu has become a common problem in the new study of the Chun Qiu.Liu Chang,a Confucian scholar in the Song Dynasty,reflected on the study of the Chun Qiu in the Han and Tang Dynasties.He objected to Du Yu’s claim that the Chun Qiu followed the principles of historical writing.He inherited Gongyang’s view that Chunqiu was regarded as Confucius’ideal.However,Confucius was unjust because of the views of“Wang Lu”and other views advocated by the scholars of Gongyang.Therefore,he objected to such views of the scholars of Gongyang.He absorbed the Guliang scholar Fanning’s point of view,that Chun Qiu is a book of praise and criticism.He thought that the praise and criticism of the Chun Qiu was not the same as the historical criticism advocated by the scholars of Zuo Zhuan,nor was it the same as the view of the scholars of Gongyang that the praise and criticism were equal to the promotion or lowering of official position.He believed that the praise and criticism of the Chun Qiu were only a judgment of right and wrong based on the standard of propriety,and thus rebuilt the political legitimacy of the Chun Qiu.