隋唐時期復仇與法律互涉的省察與詮釋

An Analytical Study of Revenge and the Law during the Sui and Tang Dynasties

本文旨在探討隋唐─尤其是李唐時期─復仇現象／復仇觀及其與法律的互涉，釐清此一時期復仇觀的實況與遞嬗之跡。全文重點有四：一、略述筆者近年研究復仇觀的相關論著與觀點，說明本文的取材範圍與論析方向。二、省察隋代復仇現象及其與法律的互涉略況，指出隋朝因時代混亂，「為主復仇」最為常見；又因隋文帝重視「孝義」思想，且赦令頻繁，導致復仇風氣盛行。三、透過唐代三個關鍵復仇案例─徐元慶復仇事例與陳子昂議及柳宗元〈駁復讎議〉、張琇兄弟復仇事例、梁悅復仇事例與韓愈〈復讎狀〉─的實際考察，發現：初唐時，官方重視「孝」、「禮」，復仇者非但甚少伏法，且多能得到有司或帝王的嘉勉／獎掖；武后時陳子昂對徐元慶復仇案例的奏議，則成為唐代禮／法爭議的開端，自武后垂拱年間至憲宗元和初年，「法」遂陵越「禮」，成為官方執法的主要考量，當時的幾件復仇案例，復仇者皆遭正法；但民間／社會的輿論始終傾向於同情「孝義」的復仇行為，禮／法的衝突依然存在。憲宗元和年間的梁悅復仇案例，韓愈既上疏論議，提出禮／法衝突時「必資論辯」的論點，柳宗元也批判了陳子昂奏議的重法主張，既反映出中唐士人已意識到禮／法衝突的困境，進而企圖解決，也反映出此一時期儒學孝義思想／意識再次抬頭的境況。四、析論與復仇相關的二則《唐律》，指出唐末「捨律從禮」的執法態度與《唐律》「知殺不告」、「禁私和」與流徙刑的實例與略況。

This paper will look at revenge - both the concept of and actual acts of - and its standing with respect to the law during the Sui and Tang dynasties (especially the latter) in order to better understand the concept of revenge during this period and in relation to earlier periods. To begin with, we will briefly review our recent research in this topic and discuss sources used for this paper and the direction the discussion will take. We will then move on to a brief discussion of the relation between revenge and the law during the Sui dynasty. It will be shown that the instability of this period resulted in a frequent acts of revenge taken on behalf of one's master (為主復仇). Furthermore, the frequent pardons handed down by Emperor Wen gave a boost to the culture of revenge. Next, we will look at three important instances of revenge during the Tang dynasty: the Xu Yuanqing (徐元慶) case and Chen Zi'ang's (陳子昂) memorial thereon as well as Liu Zongyuan's (柳宗元) ‘A Rebuttal of Memorial on Revenge' (駁復讎議); the case of the brothers Zhang Xiu (張琇) and Zhang Huang (張瑝); and finally the case of Liang Yue (梁悅) and Han Yu's (韓愈) ‘A Briefing on Revenge' (復讎狀). From these cases we find that during the early years of the Tang dynasty, officials put an emphasis on filial piety (孝) and li (禮). As a result, only in a very few cases were the perpetrators of revenge punished, and in fact in many cases officials or even the emperor himself would heap praise or rewards on the perpetrators. In this respect, Chen's treatment of the Xu Yuanqing case in a memorial submitted to the emperor served as the starting point for the debate between li and law during the Tang dynasty. During the years between 685 CE to the early years of the Emperor Xian's reign (806-820), the law took priority over li and served as the most important consideration for officials charged with investigating cases of revenge. As a result, officials handed out punishments for many such cases during this period. At the same time though, a strong sentiment among the general populace to sympathize with acts of revenge carried out in the name of filial piety and justice (義) shows that a tension law and li on the one hand had not disappeared. When the case of Liang Yue came to light during the Emperor Xian's reign, Han Yu submitted a memorial on justice arguing that in cases were there was a conflict between the law and li, “both must be taken into consideration” (必資論辯). Meanwhile, Liu Zongyuan took the opportunity to criticize Chen's earlier memorial for overly emphasizing the law. This shows that literati of the middle Tang were aware of the conflict between the law and li and were trying to come to some sort of resolution thereof. Likewise, we can also see a revival of Confucian notions (or ideology) of filial piety and justice during this period. Finally, we look at regulations covering revenge in the Tang Code (唐律) in order to discuss the legal attitude of “foregoing the law for li” (捨律從禮) during the end of the Tang dynasty, as well as cases involving the Tang Code's prohibition against private settlement (禁私和) and the punishment of exile.