The substantive difference between ancient and modern literature and etiquette is not in the scriptures themselves, nor in the Confucian struggle for fame and profit, but in the form of what kind of Tianzi rites to lay the foundation of the state's political system. Wei Xuancheng (now Wenjing) approved of the "pushing ceremony to the son of heaven" under the spirit of pro-kinship, but when the present Confucian sheng truly constructed the jingguo canon, the pro-kinship spirit also became a fatal obstacle. Liu Xin (Ancient Wenjing) started from the spirit of respect and respect, proposed and gradually improved his own Tianzi ceremony, but it led to the shift from "respect" to "respect and inferiority". In essence, this is a process of moving closer to the Qin system, betraying the original intention of Han Confucianism and passing through Qin. It can be said that the two Han dynasties and ancient texts have failed in constructing the classics of the country.
The author, Li Ruohui, is a professor at the School of Philosophy of Fudan University.
Source: Wen Shi Zhe, No. 3, 2017, pp. 106-122.
Note: This article is an abbreviated version, if there is a reprint, please refer to the original issue.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="4" ></h1>
Confucianism in the Han Dynasty began with the Qin dynasty of Lu Jia, Jia Yi and others. Unfortunately, however, at that time, the state system was precisely the Han Dynasty Qin system. Therefore, the name of Han Confucianism is Over Qin, but its essence is over Han. Retro rejuvenation has always been the unremitting pursuit of Han Ru. The question is, did the Confucians really lay the foundation for the Confucian state system? In terms of Confucianism and social system, scholars are mostly concerned with the Confucianization of law. Qu Tongzu believes that "Confucianism turned to attempt to Confucianize law" and that "the Confucianization of law in the Han Dynasty has begun". Take Jia Yi as an example. Qu cites the "Biography of Jia Sheng Lie" of Qu Yuan, believing that Jia Sheng had changed the law order, but compared with the "Biography of Jia Sheng Lie" and the "Book of Feng Zen" and the "Book of Han And Li Lezhi", Jia Sheng's work was to learn the grass and the Han ritual, and wanted to use the "law of The More Qin", that is, to draft a comprehensive Han Dynasty etiquette system, in an attempt to completely change and replace the Qin law. Although Qu was drawn to the Confucian reform of the law, it completely overshadowed Han Confucianism's original basic attitude toward the Qin and Han laws and their actions, that is, to completely abolish the Qin law and formulate a comprehensive Han ritual to replace it. Why did Han Confucianism's practice of changing rituals disappear in the long river of history? Duan was unsuccessful in his efforts and eventually turned to the confluence of rituals. What this article wants to do, that is, hook the shen historical books, explores the reasons for the failure of the Han Confucian system.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="23" > second, the ceremony of the priest and the ceremony of the son of heaven</h1>
Liu Xin rebuked the modern literature and classics, especially the etiquette, from the perspective of ancient literature and scripture, especially etiquette: "As for the country, there will be major events, and if the rituals of libido, sealing Zen, and hunting are hidden and unknown. The Book of Han and Li Lezhi also says: "Scholars today cannot see it, but the teachings of Tui Shi Li and the Son of Heaven are quite absurd" There are more scholars than the differences and disputes in the study of ancient literature and etiquette, focusing on the ancient texts and yijing, but in fact, from the perspective of the politics of scripture, this is not the case. Although the modern Wen liturgy is "protecting the disabled and guarding the deficiencies" in the face of the ancient Wenyi "Rites", what the ancient Wenli Studies has drawn is not the Guangda Ancient Wenyi "Rites". The focus of the debate between the two sides is really to determine what kind of heavenly rites. The gifts of the Princes of Heaven could not be prepared at the time of Kong Meng. Although the present Wen Liturgy also talks about the rites of the Son of Heaven, there is no text in the Rites, that is, in the seventeen chapters of the Rites. Ma Yifu's "Introduction to Etiquette and Introduction" says: "The "Hejaz" says that Hou Cang and others 'push the shi li to the Son of Heaven' are also wrong. The seventeen chapters of the Rites are not purely shi li, and the title of "Shi Li" is only "Crown", "Dusk", "Funeral", and "Meeting"; if "Shao Prison Feeds Food" and "You Si Cheng", Ming is the Doctor's Ceremony; "Village Drink" and "Shooting", then the Scholar and the Doctor are the same; "Yan Li", "Great Shooting", "Dowry Ceremony", "Public Food Doctor Ceremony", all princes' ceremony; "Qiao Li" is the prince's gift to see the Son of Heaven. Ho Yun Shi Li Ye? The Son of Heaven, judah, who has no birth in the world and is noble, should also use the courtesy of the son of Heaven, although he is the son of the Son of Heaven. 'The three years of mourning are as great as the Son of Heaven, and the loss of one's parents is not noble. 'The system of self-forgiveness is not good, and the future emperors are changing the sun and the moon, and the abolition and the government are the most unjustified. "It denounces the Rites of Rites as non-ceremonial, non-also. Nowadays, Wen Lixue calls the "Rites" a ceremony, which means that all the ranks above the level of the scholar, including the rites of the Son of Heaven, can be deduced by the rites, which means that all rites are based on the rites. Modern scholars believe that the ceremonies of the rank of scholars and above, including the Tianzi ceremony, have little to do with the explicit text, and if there is one, there is no precedent, and if so, Huang Yizhou's "Book of Rites" is called "to push the system of the princes of the Heavenly Son". It is precisely because of this that the gift of the Son of Heaven derived by the present wen liturgy is, as Ma Shi said, "no noble and one unworthy.".
In terms of scriptures, although there are more ancient texts and rituals, ancient literature and ritual studies have not actually read much valuable from these scriptures. Yi Li is nothing more than a cover and tool for ancient Wen Li Studies, used to prove that the present Wen Li Jing is indeed broken. However, compared with the ancient liturgists, the ancient Wen Yi Li is actually mutilated, and it still lacks the lifeblood of the ancient Wen Li, the Tianzi Li, which is the real dissatisfaction of the ancient Wen Li Xue with the modern Wen Li Xue. Guan Dingyan's "Yi Li Fu Wei" can be known - the "Han Zhi" describes the Tianzi Li, and can only cite biographical documents of unknown origin, "Ming Tang Yin Yang" and "Wang Shi Shi Ji", which can be circumstantial evidence. What really poses the question is why the ancient rites must emphasize the separate ancient texts of the Tianzi rites and never agree with the inferences of the present rites? This shows that ancient rites believed that the Heavenly Son's rites could not be deduced by the rituals of the priests. Nowadays, the study of etiquette means that the types of etiquette of the scholar and the son of heaven are the same, but the number of famous items is different, so the son of heaven is essentially only a more advanced soldier, from the scholar to the son of heaven, although the rank is different, the noble and the lowly are not separated. The Tianzi ceremony of ancient Wen Lixue is a completely different type of etiquette from that of scholars, which is what Liu Xin said: "The country will have great events, and if it is established, it will be the ceremony of opening up the Yong, sealing Zen, and patrolling the hunts." There are no such types of etiquette since the princes, let alone the ceremonies! As a result, the Son of Heaven became the absolute ruler above all, and no one could match in etiquette. Therefore, we can call the Ancient Rites of Heavenly Son "SuperNatural Rites".
Although the tyrannical Qin died, Han inherited its system. Therefore, there are two paths in front of the Confucians of the Han Dynasty: First, to restore the Zhou Li, to use the Zhou Li Confucianism to transform the Qin system inherited by the Han Dynasty, and to recreate the moral group that integrates the upper and lower levels. This path is the present Wen LiXue, which was derived from the Shi Li and the Tianzi Li in conjunction with Mencius's Tianzi as one of the knights. Another path is to decorate the Qin system with Confucian edges, creating a deceptive absolute monarch with Yang Confucianism and Yin Law. The ancient Wen Lixue shaped the Heavenly Son with the "super-absolute ceremony", and it was precisely because of Confucianism that the Qin system's "honor and inferiority" made the autocratic monarch gain legitimacy argument in Confucianism, and at the same time replaced the "honor" of the two-way sexual ethic with the "respect" of the one-way ethics, transforming Confucianism into the obedient slave of the absolute monarch. In terms of political science, the monarchy is the state system, and what type of monarchy is the form of government. Therefore, the controversy over the study of ancient literature and etiquette in the Han Dynasty is not a simple academic issue of literature, let alone a question of competing for fame and profit, but a question of what type of monarchy China adopts and where China is going!
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="24" >3, Jinwen Classics and Wei Xuancheng Temple Discussion</h1>
"The Book of Han, Wei Xuancheng Biography", during the reign of Emperor Yuan, Gong Yu said: "The Seven Temples of the Ancient Heavenly Son, the present Temple of Filial Piety and Filial Piety, are all close to each other, and it is advisable to destroy them." "Yongguang decreed the destruction of the temple in the fourth year. Forty-four people, including Wei Xuancheng, thought that Emperor Gao had been appointed to set the world, and it was advisable to be the temple of the emperor Taizu, and that the world should not be destroyed, and that those who inherited the aftermath should be destroyed. The Taishang Emperor, Xiao Hui, Xiao Wen, and Xiao Jing Temple are all suitable for destruction, and the Imperial Examination Temple is not exhausted, as before. This performance was refuted by the other ministers on two points. First, the great Sima Che riding general Xu Jia and twenty-nine other people thought that Emperor Xiaowen should be the temple of Emperor Taizong. Yin Zhong, a court lieutenant, thought that Emperor Xiaowu should be the temple of Sejong. Second, eighteen people, including Yin Gengshi, thought that the imperial examination temple was ordered by Zhaomu, which was not a proper ceremony and should be destroyed. According to his teacher, the Biography of Ru Lin of the Book of Han made Wei Xuan a posthumous scholar of Shen Gong. The fundamental problem of Xuan Cheng's discussion is not Ah Shangyi, which distorts scholarship for politics. That is, in terms of the "Poetry" of the Classics, the small preface of the "Poetry Shang song Liezu": "Liezu, Emperor Zhongzong of Qizhong." Kong Yingda quoted Xu Shen's "Five Classics of Different Meanings": "The poem Lu said that Xiang Kuangheng thought that Emperor Zhongzong of Yin, Zhou Cheng, and King Xuan were all destroyed by time. Chen Shouqi's "Loose Evidence" compiled this sentence, the case said: "Kuang Heng Xi "Qi Poem", this cloud 'Lu said', Gai Chuan wrote incorrectly, as 'Qi said'. Chen Qiaofeng quoted the "Biography of Wei Xuancheng" Xuan Cheng as saying: "Yuan Chengzhi 'Lu Shi', this Lu said that the Zhou Chengwang Temple was destroyed by time. He also discussed Peng Xuan, Zhan ShiManchang, and Dr. Zuo Xian, all believing that the five temples below the ancestors had been destroyed, and although there were sages after that, they could not be ranked with the ancestors, and this was also said that "Emperor Zhou Chengxuan of Yin Zhongzong was destroyed by time". Man Changzhi's "Qi Poems" are also the same as Lu Shu's "Qi Poems". Pi Xi Ruikao's "Biography of Wei Xuancheng" Yun: "By the time of Emperor Yuan, Gong Yu played the seven temples of the ancient Tianzi, and now the temples of filial piety and filial piety are all suitable for destruction", the case says: "After filial piety and before filial piety, Yu Yan filial piety, filial piety and filial piety are not as good as filial piety, which is also said that although filial piety is not suitable for destruction, that is, 'Zong has virtue, the temple is not destroyed'. Wei Xuancheng made it clear that Xiaowen was "personally destroyed." Now according to Xu Shen, Gong Yu is the family of the Ram, and it is Qi Xue. If Qilu says the same, then Xu Shi quotes Kuang Heng, why should he specifically mark "Lu said", and Jingyun "Qi said" can be done. If it is said that "Lu said" is a mistake of "Qi theory", how can it be solved that the theory of destroying the temple is in line with Xuancheng and contrary to Gong Yu? This shows that qilu destroyed the temple contrary, and Kuang Hengte used Lu to say ear. The "Book of Han And Wei Xian's Biography" contains Kuang Heng's admonition to Xie for destroying the temple: "The five elements of the heavenly order, the five genera of human relatives, and the son of heaven are worshipped, so they respect their system according to their will." It is in the order of tasting, and there are more than five. The ordained King bows to heaven and does not fall into all worlds. Following the lie, the five temples were moved, the upper Chen Taizu, the inter-age and the poor, its way should be heaven, so Fulu forever ended. According to its strict five-temple system, it is the same as Wei Xuancheng's performance, and there is no room for any consideration of "zong has virtue and does not destroy the temple". It can be seen that Wei Xuancheng and Kuang Heng originally used the sutra as a phase, and indeed strictly based on the scriptures to agree on the system. Moreover, the sutra that Erxiang upholds is exactly the "Lu Saying of the Poems" that is the most core of the modern literature and scriptures.
Judging from the two points of refutation of the courtiers, the first point is that the Seven Temples of the Son of Heaven should have a temple that cannot be destroyed to honor the merits of the former emperor. In other words, the destruction of the temple should not simply focus on whether it is personally exhausted, but should pay attention to publicizing the merits of the dynasty, so that the people of the world and the descendants of the world will know why the dynasty enjoys the world. In ancient language, it is to establish the "law of the ancestors" of this dynasty, lay down the rules of conduct, and establish rules for future generations of heirs; in modern language, it is to declare the historical status of this dynasty and set an example for the trees of all generations in the world. The second point is that the Seven Temples of the Son of Heaven must worship the Son of Heaven and must not be subordinate to the throne of Heaven. In other words, even the Son of Heaven should not mess with the state with his private relatives. Therefore, the issue of Xuan Cheng's discussion was clearly revealed: the Tianzi temple system is the great ceremony of the country, and it should focus on the country under the heavens and open up the peace of all generations. Xuan Cheng's vision was obviously too low, and he only considered all the problems from the perspective of relatives. And this is also the root cause of the Western Han Dynasty's modern literature and scriptures, especially the lack of Jianlu learning to govern the country: that is, "pushing the ceremony to the Son of Heaven"! The "Ritual Rites" are exactly the "rituals" transmitted by Lu Gaotangsheng. When it comes to worshipping ancestors, they really only know their relatives. In terms of doctors, it is also harmonious. As for the princes, it is also in line with the suppression of the princes under the Han system--the relegation of the king of a country in the Zhou Li to the family. But once they reach the level of the Son of Heaven, the Heavenly Son's rites require the dignity of the relatives above, thinking that all the people are instrumental and the dharma of all the worlds. Therefore, the modern scripture of "pushing the ceremony to the Son of Heaven" only knows the number of the Seven Temples of the Son of Heaven, and as for why there are seven temples, he wants to cut everything by the grace of his relatives, so he must be unable to determine the Seven Temples! This is exactly what Liu Xin denounced after that: "I don't know the Heavenly Son's Gift"! At that time, Yuangusheng told Empress Dou that "Lao Tzu" as his family's words, and Yang Shuda's "Book of Han Peeping Pipe" explained: "Family members are common people, and Han people often speak." Then it is said that Lao Tzu Daoist said that "Yuan Sheng's so-called family basket in the basket, should not be promoted to the Wang Tingye." "When Confucianism is still in the wilderness, Yuangusheng made this indignant remark. It is expected that since the Yuan Dynasty, the study of the present literature and scriptures has been lu Bingzheng, which is not enough to speak of the canon of the country, and it has gradually become exposed. Xuan cheng only knows the love of his family and does not know the righteousness of the country and the world, that is, his obvious example. In essence, the Confucian students of the present scriptures are really incapable of making rituals and making music.
The problem now is that the old texts of the Han Dynasty, especially the achievements of the restructuring since Emperor Wu, have been denied by the Yuan Cheng Zhu Confucians. If the Confucians of the present text can make ceremonies and make music, it will be enough to establish the dynasty ceremony, but they are incompetent, and there is a danger of dynastic rudeness. Since there is no Tianzi ceremony in the present text (in fact, there is no heavenly gift in the ancient texts), instead of arguing with the Confucians day by day, it is better to follow the old scriptures and think of the Han system instead of following the ancients. But in this way, at the level of Confucian theory, it is actually equivalent to abandoning the ideal of retro reform.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="25" >4. Ancient Scriptures and Liu Xin Temple Discussion</h1>
If the study of the present text is unable to construct the canon of the scriptures, then who can stand up and take on this great responsibility? Undoubtedly, the doubters of Wei Xuancheng's proposal became the first choice. Since the old Han system was built by Emperor Wu, a series of debates began around whether Emperor Wu was a temple of Emperor Wu. In the Book of Han and the Biography of Xiahou Sheng, Emperor Xuan of Han ascended the throne at the beginning of his reign, wanting to praise Emperor Wu and set up a temple music. Xiahou Sheng, the Shaofu of Changxin, said: "Although Emperor Wu had the merit of repelling the vast territory of Siyi, he killed many soldiers, exhausted the people's financial resources, extravagantly died, the world was wasted, the people were displaced, and the people were half dead." Locusts have risen, the land is thousands of miles, or the people cannibalize, and the stockpile has not yet recovered. The dead are in the people's land, and it is not appropriate to build a temple. Sheng is a doctor of the Shang Shu of the present text, and this biography also says that "for the sake of learning the fine, the question is not a master, and he is good at speaking dress." It is advisable to say so. The Book of Han and the Biography of Gong Yu, the Yuan Emperor Dynasty, Gong Yu Shangquan pointed directly to Emperor Wu's "Heavenly Son Crossing the Heavenly Dao", "The king is ordained by heaven, for the people's parents, it should be so!" Heaven forbid? On the other hand, in addition to Yin Zhong, Liu Xin also tried his best to honor Emperor Wu, saying that "Emperor Xiaowu's meritorious service is also for Emperor Wu Shizong." From the controversy between the two sides, the difference between the han dynasty and the spring and autumn literature is also revealed. The present Wen Lixue is based on the Son of Heaven who is not superior to the people, but should have a close love with the people. The study of "Spring and Autumn" focuses on the righteousness of respect, righteousness and judgment. Liu Xin discussed Emperor Wu's meritorious deeds at length, but in fact, Yin Zhong's nine characters were exhausted: "Correct Shuo, change clothes, and hold the four Yi", which is exactly the righteousness of the "Spring and Autumn" honoring the king.
Zhou Yutong believes: "Liu Xin is the founder of ancient classics, without Liu Xin, there would be no ancient classics. "Look at Liu Xin's temple discussion again." The consistent position of The Present Confucian Is still to abolish the Temple of Emperor Wu. Liu Xin used Emperor Wu as the temple of Wu Shizong not to be destroyed, and compared the Wenwu of Han to the Wenwu of Zhou. When liu xin praised the merits of Emperor Wu, he deliberately emphasized that the merits of Emperor Wu, especially the four Yi, were to inherit the evils of the Decline of the Zhou Dynasty and open up the foundation of the world. That is to say, it is beyond one family and one surname. Based on this, Liu Xin further proposed that the Tianzi Temple number "seven, its Fa-rectification number, can be constant number also." Zong is not in this number. Sect, change also, if there is merit, then the sect, can not be predetermined as a number... However, the merits of those who persuade the emperor are great. Abolishing the limit on the number of "sects" can be described as a salary draw from the discussion of the abolition of martial arts by the present Wen Confucian. However, there is still a gap in this theory, that is, Confucians can still judge whether the merits of a certain emperor are enough for the "sect"—as Xiahou Sheng did. So Liu Xin played again: "The saint Yu Qizu, out of affection, the ceremony is all smooth, so there is no destruction of the temple." Zigong Yujian's proposal to destroy it, Hui, Jing and Taishang's sleeping garden were abandoned and false, and it was disrespectful! Without destroying the temple, the Confucians naturally no longer need to argue about why the emperor is called "Zong". This effectively canceled the comments of later courtiers on the previous monarchs. As a result, the meaning of "honor" in the Spring and Autumn Period was replaced by the meaning of "respect and inferiority", and the two-way ethics since Confucius of the Zhou Dynasty ended. Lü Simian revealed that "Spring and Autumn" has the righteousness of honoring the king, and the ignorant people talk with the honorable king, suspecting that it is contrary to the righteousness of the people and nobles, which is also a mistake. Whoever rules is a domestic affair, and the king is the king of the nations, not his people. The kings and lords abuse their people, and the nations ask them to have a common lord, so that they can correct them. Whoever is within the nations, his subjects are his kings, and his sons are his fathers, and if he abuses the people and has nothing to fear, he should also have a mighty power. Therefore, the righteousness of the king and the people are not contrary to each other, and they are also suitable. However, Liu Xinzhi's "Spring and Autumn" study, its connotation replaces the "honor" of Zhou Li Confucianism with the "dignity and inferiority" of the Qin system law, and its surface is to change "honor the king" to "honor the king". Looking at the fourteenth year of Xianggong in the "Zuo Zhuan": "Husband, the Lord of God, and the hope of the people." If the Lord of the poor people, the worship of the gods, the despair of the people, and the lack of a master of the community, will it be used in peace? What is the purpose of the Buddha? The king who is born of the people, so that the priests and shepherds, do not lose their nature... Heaven loves the people so much that he makes a man wanton over the people, in order to forsake the nature of heaven and earth from his fornication? It must not be! It is required that the king "raise the people like sons" and that the people "love them as their parents", otherwise they will be expelled. This verse can be compared with Xiahou Sheng's words and deeds. It can also be seen from this that han Confucian's so-called "Spring and Autumn" (especially "Zuo Zhuan") zunjun is the Han Confucian scripture that replaces the "honor" of the old meaning of Confucianism's "Spring and Autumn" with the "dignity" of the Qin system of laws and orders, and changes the two-way ethics to one-way. Now Liu Xin was also faced with the same problem as the Present Confucians, how to construct the Jingguo Canon. The whole set of scriptures and canons is not only absent from the present text, but also without the ancient scriptures. Therefore, Liu Xin chose the path of superficial ceremonial master and auxiliary, and the actual ritual and law were integrated. The Book of Han, Yiwenzhi, zhuziluo, a small preface to the class of legal scholars: "The flow of the legalists, the cover is out of reason, and the rewards must be punished, and the system of etiquette is supplemented." "The Hejaz is originally from the Beilu, and the Seven Sketches are set in Xin, so this statement should come from Xin. This is also a path of combining Confucianism with the Qin system. Due to space limitations, the details of which can only be discussed separately.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="26" >5</h1>
"History of Li Sheng Lu JiaLie's Biography": "Lu Sheng said: 'If you get it immediately, you'd rather cure it immediately?'" Volume VI of the "Qin Shi Huang Benji" records Jia Yi's "On Passing the Qin" with clouds: "Benevolence and righteousness do not do but attack and defend the momentum is different." Li Cunshan believes that the words of Lu Jia and Jia Yi are all based on the Book of Shangjun And Kaisai: "Zhou is not a lawless shang, Xia is not lawless, and three generations of different forces can all be kings." Therefore, the king of Xingxing has a way, and he holds on to the different reasons. The King of Wu rebelled against the odds and was obedient, fighting for the world and giving way. It is taken from strength and righteousness. Li Shi further proposed: "What needs to be discussed is that in the late Warring States period, the Book of Shang Jun was already written and written, so why did the "Kaisai" chapter 'King Wu reversed and Gui shun ... The idea of taking strength and upholding righteousness did not attract the attention of legal scholars, including Han Feizi, and was even more inundated after the Qin unified China? Here, it is worth paying attention to Lee's question rather than Lee's answer. In fact, after qin destroyed the six kingdoms and the first emperor became emperor, the voice of the change of course has been very loud. In the twenty-sixth year of the first emperor, shortly after becoming emperor, Wang Qi, the prince of Xiangxiang, and others proposed to restore the feudal system and make his sons kings, but this was rejected by the court lieutenant Li Si. Thirty-four years later, Dr. Chun Yuyue again demanded feudalism, leading to the burning of books by the chancellor Li Si. Even so, even after the pit Confucianism, there are still "Fu Su, the eldest son of the First Emperor, who said: 'The world is initially determined, the distant Qianshou has not been gathered, all beings are reciting the Fa Confucius, and now all the people in the world are heavy on the law, and the subjects are afraid of the world.'" Only look up. The First Emperor was furious and made Fu subei imprisoned in Shangjun. In the "Biography of Li Silie", Hu Hai gave the false edict of Fu Su to die, "The number of letters bluntly slandered what I did", which shows that Fu Su was still bitterly advising the First Emperor to change his course after being expelled from Xianyang. It is certain that after the reunification of Qin, the call for a change from "taking power from it" to "holding on to righteousness" has always existed in the qin world, but it has been repeatedly suppressed.
As a teacher of Li Si and Han Fei, Xun Zi, a representative figure of Confucianism in the late Warring States period, paid more attention to the feasibility of theory than Confucius and Meng. Typically, Xunzi adjusted Mencius's view of wang hegemony. Wei Zhengtong pointed out: "Since Wang Ye is only a supreme ideal and has set a model for practical deeds, he cannot but call the hegemony of MeiHuan Gongguan Zhong, and it seems that he will inevitably be demoted to seek it compared to Mencius, but it also shows that Xunzi is more important in political ideology than Mencius." In fact, in Xun Zi's mind, sometimes, the overlord and the king are not far apart. From this point of view, whether it is the "take the force and hold on to the righteousness" of the "Book of ShangJun Kaisai", or Lu Jia's "Get it immediately, it is better to cure it immediately", from the perspective of Confucianism, in essence, it is already a kind of regression: Although the world of Yao Shun Tang Wu can be perfected to rule the world, but Yao Shun Tang Wu is an ancient saint king, and there is no Yao Shun Tang Wu in this world, what should be done? "Han Feizi Nanshi Chapter": "And Fu Yao Shun Shu Shu Shu It is born shoulder to shoulder, and the ruler of the world is endless. I am the one who speaks, and I am also in the middle. In the middle, the upper is not as good as Yao Shun, and the lower is not as good as Yao Shun, and if you hold the law, you will rule, and if you violate the law, you will be chaotic. Now the situation is abolished and the law is violated, and waiting for Yao Shun, Yao Shun to rule is a thousand worlds of chaos and one rule; holding the law and dealing with the situation, and waiting for the law, waiting for the chaos, and waiting for the chaos, is the rule of a thousand worlds and a chaos. "If han fei means xunzi's words, then it is said: When there is great chaos in the world, instead of sitting and waiting for the holy king to be born to practice the king's way, how can it be as if he were a feasible person in the world and act domineering with the resources of the Chinese." In this way, it is actually an acknowledgement of Confucianism's inability to do anything about the chaotic world. "Han Feizi Rape and Robbery of the Courtiers": "And the saints, judging the truth of right and wrong, are also aware of the feelings of chaos." Therefore, his rule of the country, the righteousness of the law, and the severe punishment of Chen will save the chaos of the masses, go to the scourge of the world, make the strong not weak, the multitude not be violent, the old will be successful, the young will be lonely, the border will not invade, the monarchs and subjects will be close to each other, the father and the son will protect each other, and there is no death and the plague of captivity, and this is also the most meritorious person! Trying to compare it with the "World of Great Harmony" in the Book of Rites and Fortunes, in terms of purpose, what Han Fei said is no different from the Confucian ideal of datong. The difference is that Han Fei uses "mingfa severe punishment" as a means, which is different from the benevolent government of Confucianism. To the extreme, Gu Yanwu Naiyun: "Although Qin's punishment has passed, the meaning of his people's orthodox customs has not been different from that of the Three Kings." Since the Han Dynasty, the Qin method has been used, and to this day there are many people. The Confucians of the world, when it comes to Qin, even if they think that the law of subjugation of the country is not deeply examined! ”
Li Si, Han Fei and Fu Qiu Bo were all involved in Xunzi, but they tended to be bipolar. In fact, this exposes the dilemma of the Xunzi doctrine and even the entire pre-Qin Confucianism: the pursuit of action will inevitably lose the purpose of benevolence in the actual government, and the way of keeping death and good will inevitably lose the ability to act, and will have to cling to the scriptures alone. For historical reasons, Han Fei failed to put his theory into action, while Li Si, who had the ability to act and put it into practice, repeatedly suppressed the "righteous" turn: the means have controlled the end. If Xunzi lived in Chu in his later years, and his doctrine may have influenced Xiang Yu of the Chu general family, then it is clear that although Xiang Yu spent his life pursuing the overthrow of the Qin system, the revival of feudalism, and the promotion of hegemony, when he put it into action, he could only use the military violence of the absolute monarch as a means. At the same time, it is indisputable that in the process of the unification of the Qin and Han dynasties, the role of Confucianism was extremely limited. Thus, it was only after the Han Dynasty decided to implement the turn of "perseverance and righteousness" that the value of Confucianism began to appear. However, Shusun Tong's efforts to formulate Han Yi were fiercely attacked by Lu Zhichunru. "History of Liu Jing's Uncle Sun Tong Lie": "So Uncle Sun Tong sent more than thirty people to Zhenglu Zhusheng. Lu had two lifetimes of refusing to do so, saying, "Whoever does the work of the commons and the ten lords, all face to face in order to be dear to you." Today, it is decided that the dead are not buried, the wounded are not up, and they want to rejoice. The liturgical music began, accumulated virtue for a hundred years and then could be rejuvenated. I can't bear to do it for the public. The public office is not in line with the ancients, I can't. Don't pollute me! Uncle Sun Tong laughed and said, "If you really despise Confucianism, you don't know how the times change." Lu Liangsheng swore to the death to defend the Confucian ideal of constructing the canon of the jingguo with pure virtue. Although Shusun Tong's answer can be denounced as a reverence for power and benevolence, this criticism undoubtedly applies to Jia Yi as well. If you substitute Jia Yi to ask Lu Liangsheng, you can say: Did you want the Han Dynasty to accumulate virtue in the Qin system for a hundred years? But in this way, Jia Yi will inevitably face the problem of how to construct virtue in the Qin system. His own fate truly answered this question. The state apparatus is necessarily violent. The Dharma, because of its path dependence, directly uses state violence to pursue its political ideals, and it is a lament that no matter how noble this political ideal may have been, it was eventually eroded in the use of violence: violence itself became an end. Confucianism sought to construct the state with benevolence, and Mencius's benevolent government actually wanted to run the state apparatus with benevolence and avoid the use of violence. The reality is that benevolence is in fact unable to control the state apparatus, that is, benevolence cannot shield itself from violence. Correspondingly, while the Confucians accuse the Dharma of tyranny, the Dharma is also ridiculing the benevolence of the Confucian women. As shown in this article, Wei Xuancheng could not deduce the Tianzi ceremony from the shi li to establish the Confucian classics of the state. The inability to cross the cliff between relatives and respects has become the eternal nightmare of the Confucian political system.
![Love him and kiss him— give your child a loving kiss[fig]]()