從〈洪範〉到憲法典──天命哲學的典範轉移

From Grand Norm to the Code of Constitution–A Paradigm Shift of the Doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven

憲法一詞，今日華文世界或不陌生，洪範二字，字面語意恰是憲法的同義詞；然則〈洪範〉背後的政治文化基底，是周初以來的天命哲學傳統，與依憲政主義而頒布的憲法典，既有其共通之處，亦有重大差異。當滿清一代成為過去，憲政主義之憲法一旦為中土世界所採納，即將發生典範轉移。基於天命哲學觀所生的〈洪範〉，與憲政主義的憲法，在（一）認知權力有惡，乃須建立賦予統治正當性的標準，而且言說制裁的規範、（二）以庶民福祉為施政之目性價值、（三）追求樹立和平穩定的政治秩序、（四）在朋黨政治之上建立公正無偏的基準，與（五）庶民參與形成決策的審議民主發源，皆有其共通性。洪範與憲法典之間，在（一）凡君王皆濫權的假設、（二）政治人格平等的假設、（三）定期選舉領袖的機制、（四）開明專制不是權力分立等四個方面，仍有明顯的政治文化觀念差異。後二者都與天命哲學強調政治道義的實質價值甚於重視防止權力為惡的程序性設計，以致不易有效處理天子為惡引起循環政治動亂革命流血的歷史難題，可資對照。比較〈洪範〉與憲法典，背後涉及的典範轉移有三處，一是在政治正當性的基礎上從「天命」完全轉變為主權在民的「民意」；二是在前提價值上從樹立政治階級的「等之」轉變為政治平等的「平等」；三是在方法上於強調政治「道義」之外，增加法治的「程序」，包括權力分立與獨立司法審查的設計，用具備檢驗政治正當性功能的和平正當程序來維持政治正當性，以更有機會有效解決天命哲學遺留的歷史難題。 Hsien-fa (憲法) is a common translation of the term “constitution” describing a code of supreme law. Hong-fan (洪範, Grand Norm), a synonym for hsien-fa, first appeared in the Shang Shu (尚書, the Book of History), and is rooted in the doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven that was created as long ago as the early Chou dynasty. The two have traits in common, as well as major differences. Upon the demise of the Ch’ing dynasty and the founding of the Republic of China in the early 20th century, a paradigm shift, powered by constitutionalism, was inevitable. The traits in common include the following: (a) power may be associated with evil, thereby requiring norms to gauge legitimacy and envisage possible sanctions; (b) the purpose of government cannot discount the welfare of the people; (c) a stable political order should be pursued; (d) a fair common ground should be established beyond partisan politics; and (e) taking public opinion into account in the decision-making process is the origin of deliberative democracy. If we contrast the Grand Norm and the code of constitution, several political and cultural differences are apparent: (a) the presupposition that all emperors tend towards corruption; (b) the presupposition of political equality of personality; (c) the institution of periodic elections; and (d) benevolent despotism does not equal separation of powers. The latter two points answer the emphasis of the Mandate of Heaven on the merits of political morality over procedural mechanisms to rein in corruption of rulers, an emphasis which perpetuated the vicious circle of bloody political turmoil. The movement from the Grand Norm to the code of constitution required a paradigm shift on three fronts: (a) political legitimacy was to be based solely upon “popular will” in a people's sovereignty, not upon any mandate from heaven; (b) the basic premise of political equality in lieu of inequality that fixes political-social classes; and (c) in addition to the emphasis on political morality, adoption of procedures of the rule of law, including separation of powers and independent judicial review, to solve the historical quandary of power unchecked by due process and thus increase the opportunities for peaceful power transitions.