requestId:684c3e16d42729.78117668.
What kind of lord? Who is the one to pay?
———Taking the discussion on “Resolute people’s rebellion” in “Year Ram” as the middle*
Author: Zeng Yi*
Source: Author Authorized by Confucian Network Published
“Confucius Hall” 2019 Issue 4
Time: Confucius was in the 25th year of Gengzi, Gengyin, Gengzi, March 25th, Gengyin
Faced with the crime of the monarch, the “Gongyang” divided the responsible subjects of three different levels, namely the emperor, Fang Bo, or the marquis, and the ministers. However, under the political landscape of the weekend’s collapse and auspicious political situation, everyone has the most important stakeholder. However, “Rams” put forward the statement of “correcting people” based on specific considerations of the actual situation, which in turn forgives the ministers for not being able to negotiate. The article also combines the differences between Confucianism on this issue after the Song Dynasty, reminding Confucianism of its inherent strength on this issue.
【Keywords】Monthly, ministers, monarchs, ages, Gongyang dynasties
Confucianism has always regarded the ruler, ministers, fathers and sons as the majorFemale college students to take care of the club, which can be called the modern Chinese href=”https://www.taiwanlovelog.com/Penny/%e6%89%be%e5%8c%85%e9%a4%8a%e9%81%87%e5%88%b0%e8%a9%90%e9%a8%99%e8%a9%a6%e8%bb%8a/”>Incubation Network universal value. Because of this, the behavior of the predecessors of the king and father has been regarded as “big evil” since “Year”, and to the decrees after the Sui and Tang Dynasties, they were even listed as “Ten Worries” and considered as unforgivable serious crimes. However, for ordinary people, everything is pure and individual behavior, which can escape the ruling of the law. As for the behavior of those monarchs, the consequences are often much more complicated. The strong political energy behind them plays a role in the arrangement, especially some “powerless people” who use this opportunity to usurp the throne, which makes it harder to punish the monarch. Therefore, when the predecessors dealt with the monarch’s crimes, they could not only stay in the level of moral judgment, and they should consider more practical reasons for the contract.
Since the beginning of the Han Dynasty, the “Age” is regarded as a “criminal book” by mainstream scholars.In other words, it represents a judicial opinion that Confucius faced a kind of evil behavior in age, not just a certain moral judgment. In the eyes of the Gongyang scholar, since Confucius did not truly grasp political power, his judgment on the evil deeds of politicians could not be fulfilled, so he could only be the “Su King” and add his “king heart” to the politicians and their actions, thereby demonstrating the “national laws” of the manager, the country and the whole country in Confucius’ mind. In this regard, the judicial rulings expressed by Confucius in “Age” have only virtual nature. At most, in the era of Confucius’ career, this ruling cannot be truly brought into real politics. Because of this, at most after the Han Dynasty, with the useful use of Hanwu Confucianism and the court on Confucianism, these severance departments in “Year” gained realism, which is what Confucianism calls “Year” and even uses meaning to guide all practical behaviors.
In this, “Gongyang” is an arrangement explanation of “Year”, which contains the statement “resolute people to rebel”, which touches on a certain special consideration of the monarch’s crimes in front of predecessors. The so-called “revolution” is not only limited to the moral judgments of predecessors discussing historical figures and affairs, but should also be regarded as a certain type of judicial ruling, that is, the so-called “revolution”. To be precise, if the son of the country was here at that time, when the emperor was guilty of the monarch, how should he be punished? In addition to all the absolute rebellion, “regular rebellion” represents a very special judicial opinion. [1]
One, Trade, who is responsible?
In “Year”, all the subjects that call the king a “salary” and who are responsible for the sacrificial responsibility should be the emperor and Fang Bo. “Baihutong” even believes that “the meaning of the marquis is not the emperor’s order, and people cannot force up the people to raise troops and express disobedience, so they are strong and weak, respect the emperor, and humble the marquis.”[2]. In other words, only the emperor or those who are ordered by the emperor can withdraw their troops and make a case. The truth in this is exactly what the “Journal of Ji Family” says, “There is a righteous nation, and the tribute and tribute are born from the emperor; there is no moral nation, and the tribute and tribute are born from the marquis of Zu.”
However, the “Speech Questions” records such a thing:
Chen Chengziyan, a simple man. Confucius took a bath and went to the court, and told Duke Ai, “Chen Heng is right, please tell him.” Duke said, “Tell me about my three sons!” Confucius said, “I dare not refuse to tell me after I have passed away. You said, “Tell me about my three sons.” The third son said, “I can’t help but raise my three sons.” Confucius said, “I dare not refuse to tell you after I have been a great man.”
The incident of Chen Hengjun happened in Qiguo, which seemed to have nothing to do with Lu, but in Confucius’s view, the incident of a king occurred in the country. Although Lu was not Fang Bo, he seemed to have the responsibility to complain, let alone the ministers of his own country! [3] Later, the Song Confucian scholars held this viewFor example, Hu Anguo thought that “the law of “Year” is the reward of the king, and people get it and criticize it”[4]; Zhu Zi was the same, “If the minister is the emperor, the age of the people is changed, and the law of heaven cannot tolerate it. If everyone gets it and praise it, will the country be bound?”[5] Both advocate that Zhang Luguo has the moral responsibilities of withdrawing troops and urging.
But from the actual political situation, it is quite difficult for Lu to withdraw his troops and fight. According to the “Zuoshi”, at that time, Duke Ai of Lu Ai mentioned this level of concern, but Confucius believed that “Chen Heng was not close to his king. With the addition of the singular half of the people, it can be defeated.” It can be seen that Confucius’ initiative to withdraw troops and discuss the situation was not purely derived from a certain moral and emotional relationship, but had a political real-life emotional consideration. Moreover, there are precedents to follow in this matter, that is, in the late age, when Duke Huan of Qi died, he fought for the throne. With the help of Song Dynasty, which was also a small country, Duke Xiao of Qi was able to succeed.
However, according to the “Zuo Ji”, the Confucians of Song denied their authenticity from the perspective of morality, as Cheng Zi said:
This is not Confucius’ words. If you say this, then power is not meaningful. If Confucius’ ambition is to rectify his crime, he will report to the emperor and the lower side to Fang Bo, and lead the country to criticize him. As for the reason why we are vigorous is Confucius’s remaining affairs, how could the people of the Prairers be missed? [6]
It can be seen that in the Song Confucianism’s moral high-quality theory, Confucius was purely a saint with moral character, rather than a “saint king” who handles actual affairs. Therefore, in the eyes of Song Confucianism, there is no need to be complete. Even so, when Zhu Zi discussed this matter, in addition to proposing “everyone can praise it” in terms of morality, he also mentioned that Confucius could have a picture of real meaning, that is, he summoned Chen Heng with a speech. In fact, because the three schools of Lu were always unruly, Confucius used this matter to be discouraged and warned him deeply. It can be said that the Confucian Confucians regarded Confucius as a saint in moral character, while the Confucians, Han, were king in moral character. For the king, it is not only satisfied with showing a certain fantasy value in the dirty world, but also concerned about how to effectively implement this value to the real level, and even makes certain steps and sacrifices needed.
However, the moral high morality of the Song Confucians was not entirely unaccountable for academic purposes. In the fourth year of “Gongyang Biography”, He Xiu’s note, said:
The critics were eliminated, and everyone in the Ming Dynasty could criticize them, so they were able to maintain the path of loyalty and filial piety.
Similar words are also seen in “Tengqiu Tan Gong”
發佈留言