東晉「沙門敬拜王者論爭」所反映的禮制觀念和政治秩序

The Concept of Ceremonial Rituals and Political Order as Reflected in the“Debate over Whether a Monk Should Bow Before an Emperor”from the Eastern Jin Dynasty

東晉「沙門敬拜王者論爭」之性質，可視為朝廷「禮議」，其旨在釐定儒家經典未曾提及的沙門與王者相見禮儀，具體而言即是「拜禮」。東晉一朝「拜禮」爭議頻現，顯示了時人藉由禮儀規範以實現對君臣尊卑關係再確認的意圖，「沙門敬拜王者論爭」既處於此一議禮脈絡之中，其意義故遂不止於儒、釋對諍等傳統理解，而更具有從禮制觀念和政治秩序相連動的視域作重新觀照的可能。由此入思，本文先指出是次論爭癥結為「在三之義」，涉及沙門在國家秩序下的身分為何之問題；繼則分別考察雙方最具代表性的觀點──桓玄的「資生之德」論和慧遠的「方外之賓」說，揭示二者如何轉化時人認可的禮制觀念以建構各自論述，進而深入探析其論述策略背後的政治秩序意涵。

The nature of the“Debate over Whether a Buddhist Monk (śramaṇa) Should Bow Before an Emperor”(the“Debate”) during the Eastern Jin Dynasty can be understood as an“argument over court rituals.”The purpose of the“Debate”was to determine the codes of behavior of a monk during an audience with an emperor, which had not been expounded by the Confucian Classics. To be more specific, the discussion revolved around the“bowing rituals.”Disagreements and contentions about the“bowing rituals”frequently occurred during the Eastern Jin dynasty. Such frequent occurrences demonstrated that people at that time intended to reaffirm the power relations and social hierarchies between emperors and their ministers through ceremonial ritual protocols. Since the“Debate”occurred within the context of“argument over court rituals,”its implication transcends the traditional view of Confucian-Buddhist debates, and signals a possibility to reexamine the“Debate”from the interrelated perspectives of ritual concepts and political order. Keeping this complexity in mind, this paper begins its investigation by pointing out that the crux of the“Debate”lies in“zai san jhih yi,”which broaches the issue of the identity of monks in a nation’s political order. Furthermore, this paper analyzes two representative approaches to the“Debate”—Huan Xuan’s theory of“zih sheng jhih de”and Hui Yuan’s idea of“fang wai jhih bin”—and reveals how Huan Xuan and Hui Yuan transformed the generally accepted concept of ceremonial rituals so as to construct their own discourses. In doing so, this paper explores the political significance underlying the narrative strategies employed by Huan Xuan and Hui Yuan respectively.