孟子君臣觀再探－從古聖王賢相到「理分」

孟子對「堯舜」、「三代」及古聖王賢相的解釋，與其君臣觀構設基礎內在相連，據此限制和批判政治權力與君臣關係。但深究孟子引述「堯舜」目的，並非徵驗其事蹟之真偽。相反的，孟子通過新詮「堯舜」和古聖王賢相史迹，以道德價值約範政治權勢，毋寧是「道德政治」信念的「正名」實踐。孟子又承孔子思想，強調君臣互動「相對性」，且精煉其內涵，成為儒者對抗專制君權的堅實後盾。孟子拈出「大有為之君」與「不召之臣」的新君臣觀範式，根據道德判斷決定君臣權利義務，凸顯君臣互動關係「相對性」意義，乃在以價值「理分」涵蓋政治制度「權分」，「權分」必以「理分」為實質基礎，開展出政治制度「權分」與道德意義的「理分」辯證，最終依「理分」確立君臣關係「相對性」及互動標準。職是之故，本文將透過梳理孟子君臣觀淵源、君臣職務內容及「堯舜」和古聖王賢相詮釋，輔以先秦出土文獻為參照，指陳孔、孟君臣觀異同，說明孟子通過形塑堯與舜、湯與伊尹、文王、周公行事形象，界定政治領域的「君道」與「臣道」原則，有效連結「理分」概念與君臣關係的意義繫聯，解答孔子遺留如政權轉移標準和「理分」之根源問題。

關鍵字

孟子；堯舜；古聖王賢相；理分

並列摘要

Mencius through the examples of Yao, Shun, the ancient sages and sage kings critiqued monarchial autonomy and offered a new understanding of the relationship between Kings and ministers as well as virtue's role in the separation of power between the two. Yet after close inspection it is apparent that Mencius' intention was not in proving the historical truth of the acts of Yao and Shun, but on the contrary, he uses a new approach to explaining the significance of the acts of these ancient sages. Mencius sought to use these sages as concrete models of virtue, to set the standard for how kings and ministers should rule and how the power between them should be separated. Mencius also stays within the same tradition of thought as Confucius, in that he also emphasizes the importance of the relationship and interaction between a king and his ministers, denoting the rejection of an autocratic Monarch, which then was cemented into the tradition of Confucian thought. Mencius introduced the new king-minister relationship ideal of 「大有為之君」and「不召之臣」. This ideal is based upon the thinking that the delegation of power should be decided using virtue as a standard, and in stating this emphasizing the importance of the interaction between kings and ministers. Mencius used historical figures and the descriptions as concrete models, hoping to bring to light the necessity of using Li-Fen as the primary principle when delegating power. This thus gave rise to the argument supporting the use of Li-Fen as the standard when deciding the balance of power and more importantly rejecting the idea of an autonomous monarch. This paper takes a look at the basis for Mencius' ＂King-minister＂ relationship concept by thus elaborating upon Mencius' concept of the delegation of power by using Yao, Shun and the Ancient Sages and Sage kings in juxtaposition to the autonomous ruler. Through the addition of unearthed Xian Qin documents this paper offers new insights into the similarities and differences between Confucius' and Mencius' ＂King-Minister＂ concept. In doing so shedding light on the fact that Mencius used the model of the sages of old and their recorded virtuous deeds, to serve as the standard and basis in the delegation of power between kings and ministers. In doing so incorporating the importance of using Li-Fen as the primary principle in the separation of power, thus solving the problem which was originally touched upon by Confucius, of how power should be transferred to the next rules as well as how it should be delegated between rulers and their ministers.