先秦法家思想比较研究

【作者】 杨玲；

【导师】 束景南；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 古典文献学， 2005， 博士

【摘要】 法家是先秦诸子中重要的一支,其思想是构成中国文化不可忽略的因素,更是中国传统法律文化的核心所在,因而对其进行全面、深刻研究很有意义。 法家按地域可分为齐、晋两支。齐法家的代表是《管子》,晋法家的代表是《商君书》和《韩非子》。虽都名为法家,但其取舍却大异其趣。《管子》和《商君书》、《韩非子》有作为法家的共同之处,同时也存在不容忽视的差异,因而有比较研究的可能和必要。本文在吸收前贤研究成果的基础上,既注意齐、晋法家宏观方面的不同,也不放过细微之处,力求对二者的比较细致、深入、周详。全文包括以下章节: 第一章:首先界定先秦法家,然后从政治背景、经济背景、学术背景三个方面阐述其产生原因与条件。因为法家是先秦诸子中的后起者,故本章还探讨了法家的学术渊源,即儒、道、名、墨对法家的影响。 第二章:比较齐、晋文化的异同,并分析其成因,以便从地域文化角度揭示法家产生在齐、晋两国的必然性和两类法家差异存在的原因。 第三章:《管子》、《商君书》虽非完全为管仲、商鞅亲炙之作,但与二者关系密切。本章首先探讨管仲和《管子》、商鞅和《商君书》的关系,然后对管仲、商鞅、韩非三者从身世、经历、性格特征等方面进行比较,从人的角度阐释两类法家之不同。 第四章:比较齐、晋法家在经济上的异同。重农是其相同之处,但其对“农”的理解和重农策略不尽相同。在商业上,齐法家有节制地发展,晋法家则抑制。不同的经济观念是导致其治国理念不同的原因之一。 第五章:在民众观上,齐法家重视民众的智慧和力量,晋法家轻视之;齐法家亲民、富民而用民,晋法家贫民、弱民而用民。 第六章:齐、晋法家均把物质相对于人口的不足视为争斗产生的原因,进而归为法产生的原因。他们都注意到人口与生产资料的比例、人口职业比例以及人口质量在治国中的重要作用,但其内涵却不同。 第七章:在君臣关系上,晋法家视君臣绝对对立,齐法家则在君尊臣卑的前提下力求建立二者之间的和谐。齐、晋法家不同的君臣观念与其对“道”的理解有关,同时与齐、晋文化中原有的君臣观念不无联系。 第八章:比较齐、晋法家的立法原则。道是法家共同的立法基础,但齐法家是“法出于道”,而晋法家则是“因道全法”;他们都主张因人情、量民力立法,但齐法家在因人情的同时还提出顺民心,而对民力的把握也有“度”的不同。 第九章:齐法家客观认识刑赏效用,主张刑赏适当,晋法家力主重刑厚赏。贵必贵诚、无刑无讼、慎刑慎赏是齐、晋法家在刑赏观念上的相同之处,但这些“大同”中还渗透着的“小异”是必须注意的。 第十章:齐法家治国法、德并用,具体体现在重法的同时重礼、重俗、重人君的道德感召力。晋法家治国以法为主,但认识到道德对法律实施的影响,因而主张建立与法价值取向一致的道德体系,为此甚至要求道德法律化。 第十一章:势是法家思想重要的一部分,齐、晋法家势论的共同之处在于势为人君独有、势是君王的治国之资和获得尊重之资。不同的是齐法家重势但没有将其绝对化,而且因为重势要求人君做出守法的表率。晋法家把势绝对化,而且认为君主只有拥有势才能使法发挥作用。 第十二章:在术论上,“审合形名”、“无为而治”是齐、晋法家均认可的治国之术。其不同表现在齐法家要求“名”与“实”主旨相合即可,晋法家则要求二者完全吻合,毫厘不更多还原

【Abstract】 Legalism is an important branch among the exponents of the various schools of thought during pre-Qin. It should not be neglected in Chinese culture. It is the kernel of Chinese traditional law culture. So it is significant to study legalists’ thought roundly and thoroughly.According to the region where the legalists were born, they can be divided into two groups:Qi and Jin.Guanzi is the representative of Qi legalists and Hanfeizi,, Shangjunshu are the representatives of Jin legalists. They have the sameness as legalists, and exist unneglective differences at the same time .So it is possible and necessary to draw a comparison study. On the base of production that have been made by other scholars, the paper pays attention to not only the obvious differences but also the subtle, significant differences between Qi legalists and Jin legalists. I do my best to draw a deep, general and delicate comparison. The paper includes chapters as following:Chapter 1st: Define the legalists at first, then expound the reasons and conditions that legalists were born from the political, economic and academic background. Because the legalists were born later than other pre-Qin schools, I discuss the effects that Confucian, Tao, Ming and Mo have on the legalists.Chapter 2nd: Compare Qi culture with Jin culture, and analyse the causes of formation in order to reveal the inevitability that legalists came into being in Qi and Jin. At the same time I analyse the differences between the two groups from the regional culture.Chapter 3rd: Though Guanzi and Shangjunshu were not written by Guan Zhong and Shang Yang themselves, they have close relation with them. In this chapter, the relation between Guanzi and Guan Zhong JShangjunshu and Shang Yang are discussed first, then the parentage, life experiences and characters of Guan Zhong, Shang Yang and Han Fei are compared in order to open out the differences between Qi legalists and Jin legalists from the angle of human being.Chapter 4th: Compare the sameness and differences in economy between Qi legalists and Jin legalists. They all attached importance to agriculture, but the policies they brought into effect are different. Qi insisted developing commerce, but Jin restrained it.Chapter 5*: On plebs Qi legalists admitted plebs’ wisdom and power, so they loved plebs , made plebs rich at first ,then used them. But Jin legalists despised plebs.They made plebs poor and weak in order to use them.Chapter 6th: Qi legalists and Jin legalists all thought that the shortage of material compared to population caused the combat, so the law appeared. They all paid attention to the proportion between population and materials, occupation proportion and population quality, but the matter is different.Chapter 7th: On the relation between the king and the officials, Jin legalists thought they were absolutely opposite. Qi legalists tried to make a harmonious relation under the condition that the king was honorable and the officials were humble. The differences lie in the difference of Tao in their thoughts and the original idea about the relation between the king and the officials in Qi culture and Jin culture.Chapter 8~th: Compare the legislation principles from six respects. Tao is the legalists’ legislation foundation. But Qi legalists claimed that the laws came from Tao, Jin legalists only更多还原