史权、史责与史家

Historical Right, Historical Responsibility and Historians

白志伟(Chi-Wei Pai) ； 蔡礼政(Li-Chen Tsai)

《正覺學報（簡體版）》 3期 (2011/12) Pp. 73-124

https://doi.org/10.29667/JTE.201112.0002

摘要

史家的范围是史学中极少人探讨的议题，虽然此议题是极为重要的议题。本文以史权作为史家的特征，以界定史家的范围。史权的内容众说纷纭，本文认为从种种事实中选择与诠释部分事实，以显示其知识与价值的权力，即称之为史家之史权。史权的发生，系因为史家所接触的事实过于庞大，无法一一记述，必须于无量的事实中择要而记述。本文对于「史，掌官书以赞治」提出不同的看法，认为史权是与史官参与统治权截然不同的，而且对于史权的施行有所妨碍，以清楚界定史权的内涵，并且澄清史家的真正特征。史责则与史权是彼此相对应而存在，既有史权则史家必然有史责须要负担。史责并不是由任何人对于史家课以责任，而是由于有儒家所信受「大一统」的因果法则，不断地运作于法界之中，所产生的必然现象。史家施行史权，其实就是以其身口意行书写其心中的法则，即是史家书法之史权。大一统的史责有其一定的阶位，概略可分为三个阶层：第一阶位是小缘威仪戒行；第二阶位是唯一且大一统的因果法则；最高阶位是因果法则的终极根源—第八识如来藏心。此三阶位是史家施行史权时，不应该或没有能力抵触的史责。依据史权的特征，本文发现新闻工作者、媒体工作者，皆是符合史权特征的史家，乃至可以扩充到人人皆是史家，十法界有情皆是史家。因为十法界有情都是历史主体，所以都有史权以身口意行书写法则，而不得不负起应负的史责，故形成十法界。十法界中，四圣法道的贤圣是真史家，其余六凡业道众生皆是假史家，是史家范围的收缩。

關鍵字

史家 ； 史权 ； 史责 ； 书法 ； 七圣戒 ； 五通 ； 五明 ； 大一统 ； 曲笔 ； 名教 ； 如来藏 ； 双重标准 ； 权力制衡 ； 新闻工作者 ； 媒体 ； 舆论学

並列摘要

Although it is extremely important, the scope of historian is a topic that very few people explore in historiography. Using historical right as the characteristic, this article defines the scope of historian. Among many different definitions on the content of historical right, this article thinks the right to manifest the knowledge and value of some facts, which are selected among various facts, is the historical right of historian.The occurrence of historical right is under the truth that all facts that a historian encounters are huge and countless. With limited capability, one should select only some of all facts, but not all, and record them. This article brings up a different view on the topic about ”the historian managing the official document to help the governing of a country” and thinks the historical right defined by the author and the governmental power of an official historian are completely different; furthermore, it will hinder the execution of historical right. With this view, this article clearly defines the content of historical right and makes the real characteristic of historian clear.Historical responsibility exists according to the existence of historical right. With the historical right, a historian should take the responsibility for the history which he manifests. The historical responsibility is not given to a historian by anyone; it is a definite phenomenon generated by the continuous operation of the ”grand unified” cause-and-effect rule in the dharma-realm. The execution of historical right by a historian is in fact to write the rules in his mind; it is the historical right of a historian.Generally there are three layers for the grand unified historical responsibility: The first is the precepts of personal conduct; the second is the unique and grand unified cause-and-effect rule; the highest layer is the root of cause-and-effect rule—the eighth consciousness Tathagatagarbha. All three layers are the historical responsibility that should not be violated when a historian performs his historical right. According to the characteristic of historical right, this article finds both news reporters and media reporters are the historians who conform to the characteristic of historical right. Furthermore, everyone and even all sentient beings of ten dharma-realms are the historians too. It is because every sentient being often dharma-realms is the subject of history; everyone has the historical right to write the rules with one's body, speech and mind, and take the historical responsibility; therefore the ten dharma-realms are built. Among the ten dharma-realms, the sages and saints of four noble dharma-ways are the true historians. The sentient beings of the left six ordinary karmic ways are false historians. This is a reduced scope of historian.

並列關鍵字

historian ； historical right ； historical responsibility ； writing the rules ； seven noble precepts ； five supernatural powers ； five kinds of mastery ； grand unification ； distortion of the facts ； ritual teaching ； Tathagatagarbha ； two different criteria ； balance of power ； news reporter ； media ； theory of public opinion