Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: 漢代春秋折獄之法律思想及方法論探微-以政治案件之誅心論及權變思想為核心
Other Titles: A Study on Legal Thoughts and Methodology of “Ch’un-Ch’iu Chüeh-yü” in Han Dynasty
Authors: 張永鋐
Chang, Yiung-hong
Keywords: 法律儒家化;春秋折獄;齊化儒學;公羊春秋;赦事誅心;論心定罪;君親無將;罪同異論;類比;經權;以禮入法
Confucianization of Law;Ch’un-Ch’iu Chüeh-yü;Kung-yang;Analogy
Date: 2002-05
Issue Date: 2016-06-02 11:55:14 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 儒家思想為東方文化的形成過程裡,一個無與倫儔的推動力量,影響所及並泛及傳統法制的層面,因此「法律儒家化」向來亦是傳統法律文化中,極為核心的研究課題。有漢一代律法乃承秦制而來,係法家思想為本的立法;屆至漢武尊儒,儒學逐漸形成當途得勢的重要力量,漢代儒者也逐漸存有改造有漢一代制度之決心。事實上,制度的儒家化乃是整體趨勢,因此「法律儒家化」只是「制度儒家化」的一個環節,政治權威也已逐漸成為儒者倚畀之重要憑藉。\r 任何政治社群皆不可能免於以規範作為社會控制與秩序規整的工具,法家與儒家觀點也未必全然不容,其間或有若干互補之處,因此理論層次的調融,亦可從儒學的齊化,逐漸雜揉法家學說等處見其端倪。儒者深知要達到禮教立法之「法典化」目標,必然無法速成,因此以其他循序漸進的方式,訴諸於「春秋折獄」此一緩慢的司法變革,對於艱難案件的解決,藉由儒家經義作為鞫獄之依據,將儒學的精神注入實定法或司法程序當中,以跬步之積,逐漸實現以禮入法之成就。因此,「春秋折獄」無疑是開啟以禮入法進程的重要先驅。 「春秋折獄」固然有其不可磨滅的歷史地位,然而其實際運作卻也引發許多爭議。儒家經典多立意深長,義蘊悠遠,字詞文義的模糊性又使經典的詮釋呈現高度歧異性,往往因詮釋者的不同,而有相當差異。一旦引為決獄的依據,更加引發許多疑義,因此「罪同異論」遂成為「春秋折獄」最惹訾議的根本問題。本文針對上述課題,除了以政治案件為主軸,探討「春秋折獄」案例的論證,以及決斷的形成過程之外,亦將進一步著眼於貫串「春秋折獄」案例的誅心思想,與儒學所強調的權變精神,從方法論層面檢視其利弊得失的問題。最後則以「春秋折獄」所代表之「開創性」意義,與受限於政治現實或時空背景的「侷限性」等層面,討論漢代「法律儒家化」的進程如何開展,何以無法進至「儒家法典化」的理想階段,藉以推究「春秋折獄」在傳統法上特殊的歷史意義。
“Confucianization of Law” is the most important concept in the legal history of ancient China, which refers to the incorporation of the spirit or the actual provisions of the “li” into legal codes. The so-called “Confucianization of Law” takes its rise in the“Ch’un-Ch’iu Chüeh-yü”, which is about cases decisions based on the Spring and Autumn Annals or other Confucian classics in the Han dynasty. By virtue of the“Ch’un-Ch’iu Chüeh-yü”, the shift in emphasis from Legalist’s law to Confucian views betokens a movement to merge the “fa” with “li”. The revival of Confucian views also signals the retreat of Legalists’ influence. Despite its special status in the traditional Chinese legal system, “Ch’un-Ch’iu Chüeh-yü”have arisen some problems. The most important problem resides in the supposed lack of “objectivity” or “accurate standard” in the criminal process and cases decisions, because of some unpredictable judgments that according to the esoteric, inexact, and ambiguous language or concepts rooted in these Confucian classics. For this reason, some results of these cases are insufficient to permit designation of the conclusions as “correct” or “reasonable”, especially in political cases. This essay doesn’t involve all the process of the history of “Confucianization of Law”, but only focus on this field:─“Ch’un-Ch’iu Chüeh-yü”alone. It expounds seven cases in the Han dynasty, and points out some methodological guidelines that shape the argument of these cases. This essay also seeks to expound its historical environment, the philosophical background, the development clue, and the special historical meaning in the system of imperial law.
Relation: 政治大學歷史學報, 19, 15-70
The Journal of History
Data Type: article
Appears in Collections:[政治大學歷史學報 THCI Core ] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat

All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

社群 sharing