神統與聖統——鄭玄王肅「感生說」異解探義

Descendants of Shang-t’i or Huang-t’i: Cheng Hsuan, Wang Shu, and the debate over the origins of Imperial authority

本文由鄭玄、王肅諸多經注異義中，選取「感生」一事討論，意欲從二者信與不信「感生」的態度上，探索其中所蘊涵的內在意義，並對其產生的緣由，稍作必要的解說，以明其所以然。經學史上所謂今古文之爭，自然是劉歆（？－23）所挑起的，除了早期和其父劉向（前79－8）爭《左傳》、《穀梁傳》的優劣，而以為「左丘明好惡與聖人同，親見夫子」，故謂《左傳》優於《榖梁傳》，且「數以難」其父劉向外，又在西漢哀帝建平元年（前6）請「建立《左氏春秋》及《毛詩》、逸《禮》、《古文尚書》皆列於學官」，哀帝令「與五經博士講論其義」，由於「諸博士或不肯置對」，劉歆受到冷淡的對待，無法遂其所願，於是移書責讓太常博士，譏剌他們是「專己守殘，黨同門，妒道真」，譴責他們只知結黨，不知公義，只見私意，不見聖人的大道理，於是引起博士們的激烈反應，劉歆於是「為眾儒所訕，懼誅，求出補吏」（《漢書•楚元王傳附劉歆傳》），雖暫時平息眾怒，然而今古文之爭從此表面化，此後激烈的對立論爭不斷，直到東漢鄭玄(127－200)以博覽融通的高識，古今兼綜的態度，遍注群經，才結束了西漢末以來的爭論。這是由於鄭玄能以「經學」作為獨立的學問研究，在今古文的取捨上，能把握住精要，因此經注閎通簡要，能得古今文的精華，大為學者所尊尚，因而人稱「經神」；加上他的人格清高不俗，不以祿利為意，更為後人所稱美，所以其學自此風行，幾遍天下，形成「鄭學」。

Study of the Classics after the Wei and Chin dynasties included what has come to be known as the Cheng-Wang Debate, referring to Cheng Hsuan (tzu K'ang-ch'eng, 127-200 A.D.) and Wang Shu (tzu Tz'u-yung, 195-256 A.D.). This debate was enjoined by a ku-wen scholar (Wang) and a chin-wen scholar (Cheng), and their divergent annotations of the Classics led to continual disagreements among later scholars. In regard to the divergent views held by Cheng and Wang, many scholars have offered profound insights, but only a few have discussed why Cheng and Wang disagreed in their interpretations of the Classics. In this essay we will explore the meaning of these divergent interpretations and seek the reasons for the contrasting viewpoints held by Cheng and Wang. This essay takes as its topic of discussion the phrase “kan sheng shuo”. According to my research, the phrase “kan sheng shuo” stems from the problem of sovereign power. Cheng Hsuan believed in “kan sheng”, thought that the ruler's authority (wang ch'uan) came from heaven (t'ien shen), and that the ruler was the earthly embodiment of the heavenly five elements. Wang Shu did not believe in “kan sheng”. In his view, rulers were descendants of the Yellow Emperor, and their possession of sage morality (sheng te) granted them support or legitimacy as rulers. One reason that Cheng and Wang held divergent viewpoints was that their academic backgrounds were different. Although both were familiar with ku-wen and chin-wen, Cheng was more deeply influenced by chin-wen, whereas Wang was more profoundly influenced by ku-wen. Another reason for their differences is that they lived in different times. Cheng lived during a period when order was giving away to disorder; his times were quite turbulent. Therefore he advocated the transferral of political authority through a relatively closed system. Wang, on the other hand, lived in an era tending toward order, with only limited political turbulence. He therefore advocated a more relaxed approach in the transferral of political authority based on wisdom and morality, rather than a strict hereditary system.