緣飾與漢法：西漢尊儒政策思維的糾葛與變化

Transforming the Adornment into the Orthodoxy: The Formation of Policy on Confucianism in the Western Han Dynasty

本文探討西漢武、昭、宣三朝尊儒政策思維的發展，並聚焦武帝的「緣飾以儒術」，如何轉出儒家思想能夠參與政治運作的宣、元之世。全文分三部分：首先以「離析儒家道、術兩面」，總挈尊儒政策最初的緣飾思維，並指出武帝以君主集權為宗旨的根本考慮。其次藉由鹽鐵會議中的孔子無用之辯，指出緣飾思維的制度化困難，如何使得儒家可能以其內在張力，反抗政策的離析。繼而，本文分析石渠閣會議的政治意義，指出宣帝如何既延續武帝政策的根本綱領，也修正緣飾思維的未盡之處，遂使儒學與君主集權政體得以嵌合。由此，本文指出：西漢的尊儒政策，雖顯得糾結周折，然其間變化並非出自個別君王的扭轉，而是在政策延續性的要求下作調整，其內在思維實皆本於秦漢新政體的君主集權綱領，脈絡相承。

This article explores the formation of“Confucian orthodoxy”in the light of policy-making during the reigns of Emperor Wu, Emperor Zhao, and Emperor Xuan in the Western Han dynasty, and offers an analysis of the argument asserting the“triumph of Confucianism.”According to Emperor Wu’s monarchical line of thought, the purpose of patronizing Confucian scholars was to have them adorn official government decrees using their knowledge of the Five Classics. The political application of the Five Classics and employment of Confucian scholars did not involve actually according with Confucianism. By playing this double game, the Han regime obtained the façade of the Five Classics and reduced the prestige of every school of thought, including Confucianism. However, Emperor Wu remained equivocal about Confucius’status, because his roles as the founder of Confucianism and the writer of the Five Classics could not be separated. This ambiguity in the policy towards Confucianism resulted in a stormy debate between the officials and Confucian scholars in the Discourses on Salt and Iron, held during the reign of Emperor Zhao, and it led to disagreements regarding the policy of appointing Confucians. Emperor Xuan, therefore, held the Pavilion of the Stone Canal Discussions, by which he reiterated the monarch’s intention took precedence over the meaning of the classics. Nevertheless, these discussions also resulted in the further employment of Confucianism and Confucian scholars, turning Confucianism from the official adornment into political orthodoxy.