論先秦儒家的「聖人觀」及其道統意識—以《論語》、《孟子》、《中庸》為焦點

本文在方法論上嚴謹依循「澄清概念」、「釐清判準」，以及「建構系統」三條原則，透過對先秦儒家原典的全面分析，探討「聖」、「聖人」及「聖人之道」等重要概念的豐富內涵，闡明「君子之道」與「聖人之道」之間適當的義理關係，並藉由先秦儒家「聖人觀」的基本理解進一步釐清其人性論與其「道統意識」的確切指涉，從而對先秦儒家之「道」展開系統性的界說。為了達成這些研究目的，本文著手回應下述四項核心問題：一，先秦儒家所謂的「聖」及「聖人」到底實指什麼？換言之，「聖人」的標準何在？二，如何界定「君子」（「君子之道」）與「聖人」（「聖人之道」）之間的適當關係？三，能否藉由先秦儒家「聖人觀」的分析反思其共通的「道統意識」？四，先秦儒者所主張的「聖人觀」與其人性論能否取得意義上的融貫？經由本文對《論語》、《孟子》以及《中庸》之「聖人觀」的解析，以及對先秦儒家「道統意識」的重新界定及再詮釋，我們得出以下三點結論。其一，有關儒家「聖人」的定位問題，「聖人」是在某君子離世以後作為後世君子所敬仰和追念的道德典範而獲得的尊稱；它既是對君子一生道德事蹟的肯認與嘉定，也是作為後世君子所學習與效法的垂世典範。其次，「聖人之道」與「君子之道」不是彼此對立，各自為政的兩個概念，而實為一對相互證成、交相輝映的概念：「君子之道」以達成「聖人之道」為其終極目的，「聖人之道」必須藉由「君子之道」的具體開展而呈現其意義。具體來說，「聖人之道」透過聖人教化的形式構成一連接異代儒者的「意義場域」，而在此特殊的意義場域中，君子或聖人之徒將以歷代聖人的道德事功及人格典範為其自身行道的參照系。此「意義場域」之所以可能，關鍵在於先秦儒家一貫主張的「聖凡同心」之要義——每個人都有可能透過自身的立志和實踐而與「聖人之道」相契合，而「聖人之道」亦有義務光照每個人的成聖之路。如此一來，「聖人之道」與「君子之道」即為同一個「道」的兩種面向，而這兩種面向經常是相互交涉的——沒有「君子之道」對「聖人之道」的期許與追求，「聖人之道」將淪為空洞懸浮的理念；沒有「聖人之道」的範導作用，「君子之道」將難以完成其自身的拓展。其二，本文承接前面對先秦儒家「聖人觀」所展開的分析，試圖藉由一個概念的提出凸顯先秦儒家「聖人觀」的共同意識與關懷，並且將散漫於各先秦儒家經典的「聖賢論述」統合在一嚴謹的理論架構之中。這個概念即為「道統意識」。先秦儒者的「道統意識」所關切的不是某種外顯的道統譜系，而是潛存於每個經驗主體心性中的「成聖」欲求，以及聖人透過其道德事功及人格典範對後世君子所發揮的積極範導作用；一言以蔽之，其所關切的是儒家傳統內部的「精神與件」。進而言之，「道統意識」一方面以道德主體自我的進德修業為基點，另一方面又能夠跨出個人修身的狹隘場域而往返於歷代聖人及聖人之徒所共同營造和維繫的廣闊場域。因此，「道統意識」包含共時性及歷時性兩個層面，它涉及的不單是個人在其當下場域與他人之間的互動關係，而是能夠超越時空的限制與歷代的古聖先賢建立的適當而諧和的關係，從而獲得精神上的相通性及契合性。其三，本文將焦點轉向「道統意識」理論之證成，即探討以「人之道」為顯揚對象的「道統意識」能否與先秦儒家的人性論取得融貫性的解釋。我們的結論是，先秦儒者在探討人性問題的進路及側重點上雖不盡相同，但是基本認同「人性向善」，而「人性向善」與「道統意識」兩個概念之間又有著明確的承繼關係：個人一旦肯定「人性向善」，並以實現「善」要求自己，他其實就已具備作為君子或聖人之徒的條件，從而也就有意識的融入到「聖人之道」的大化流行之中、有義務妥善處理自己與異代聖人之間的互涉關係。

關鍵字

先秦儒家；聖人觀；聖人之道；道統意識；人性向善

並列摘要

Adhering strictly to the threefold research methodology of “defining key conceptual terms”, “clarifying the basis of propositions for value judgement” and “reconstructing the philosophical system”, this thesis engages in a comprehensive study of Pre-Qin Confucian texts with the intention of achieving the following objectives: (1) examine and elucidate the rich intellectual content of important concepts such as “sagely” 聖, “the sage” 聖人 and “the Way of the sages” 聖人之道; (2) explicate the appropriate conceptual relationship between “the Way of the Junzi” 君子之道and “the Way of the Sages” in the Confucian context; (3) reevaluate the fundamental Confucian tenets regarding human nature and the “transmission of Dao” based on our understanding of the Confucian “View of the Sage” 聖人觀, culminating in the advancement of a coherent and systematic explanation as to how the Confucian Dao should be properly realized. In order to achieve these objectives, this thesis seeks to answer four main questions. First and foremost, what is actually connoted by seemingly abstract concepts such as “sagely” and “the Sage”? In other words, what are the criteria for one to be recognized as a Sage in the Confucian sense? Secondly, how should we interpret the intricate conceptual relationship between the Junzi and the Sage? Thirdly, is it plausible for us to reflect on the awareness of the transmission of the Dao 道統意識 shared amongst Sages and Junzi (or Sage-disciples) based on our understanding of the Confucian “View of the Sage”? Last but not least, is the Confucian “View of the Sage” consistent with its view of human nature? If so, how do these two propositions cohere with each other? Based on a critical study of the Confucian “View of the Sage” as represented in The Analects of Confucius, The Mencius and The Doctrine of the Mean, followed by a thorough reassessment of the problematic Confucian concept of the “transmission of Dao”, we reached the following three conclusions. First, regarding the proper definition of the term “Sage” in Confucian philosophy, we understand it to be an honorable title conferred by succeeding generations of Junzi upon a Junzi who has passed on. In this sense, such a title is not merely a product of exalting the Junzi’s outstanding character or life’s work. More significantly, it signifies a mutual recognition within the wider Confucian community of this particular Junzi as an exemplar of morality not only worthy of respect and reverence, but also serving as inspiration and mentor to future generations of Junzi or Sage-disciples. Moreover, Junzi (or the Way of the Junzi) and the Sage (or the Way of the Sages) are not two self-sufficient and unrelated concepts within Confucian philosophy. They are in reality a pair of mutually justifying and reciprocally illuminating concepts: on the one hand, the Way of the Junzi posits the Way of the Sages as its ultimate end, on the other, the Way of the Sages fulfils its purpose insofar as the Way of the Junzi is manifested adequately in the world of experience. In more explicit terms, the Way of the Sages actualizes itself in the form of an “intentional field” 意義場域, which unites Confucians from different generations through the medium of Sage Teachings. In this unique “intentional field”, aspiring Junzi or Sage-disciples model their own pursuit of Dao on past Sages by studying their chronicles, achievements and personalities. More importantly, such an “intentional field” is tenable because Pre-Qin Confucians unanimously accept the fundamental notion that “the sagely and the profane share a common mind-heart”. On one end of the spectrum, every individual has the innate capacity to accord himself with the Way of the Sages through steadfastness of will and commitment to practice; on the other end, the Way of the Sages (through the medium of Sage Teachings) has the obligation to illuminate each individual’s path toward sagehood. Therefore, the Way of the Junzi and the Way of the Sages are in truth two closely-related and intertwining aspects of the Confucian Dao: Without postulating the Way of the Sages as the ultimate end to which the Way of the Junzi works tirelessly toward, the former would be reduced to nothing but an otiose concept; similarly, without the Way of the Sages playing an instrumental facilitating role in the manifestation of the Way of the Junzi, that the latter could validate its own realization would be nearly inconceivable. Secondly, building upon findings from preceding sections, we seek to highlight the common themes and ideas expounded in the three main Pre-Qin Confucian texts with regards to the Confucian “View of the Sage” and integrate these scattered and isolated narratives within a systematic theoretical framework, by introducing a novel concept known as “awareness of the transmission of the Dao” 道統意識. Even though the object of awareness is the historically problematic concept of Dao-tong 道統, our understanding of this concept departs from the traditional emphasis on the canonization and sanctification of certain unique individuals under a fixed genealogy (this is also the reason why we elect to translate 道統意識 as “awareness of the transmission of the Dao” and not “awareness of the genealogy of the Dao”). Instead, two things are most imperative to such a form of awareness: (1) the inborn potential and latent desire to attain sagehood which resides within every individual’s mind-heart; (2) the active facilitating role played by past sages in guiding Junzi or Sage-disciples of the present toward the ultimate goal of sagehood, through the mediating forms of outstanding moral accomplishments and exemplary personality models. In a nutshell, the “awareness of the transmission of the Dao” is most concerned with the inner spiritual dimension of Confucian tradition. Furthermore, even though such a form of awareness is essentially grounded on the moral agent’s independent pursuit of a moral life, it is also able to transcend the relatively limited “intentional field” of each individual moral agent, and move freely within the shared “intentional field” jointly created and preserved by successive generations of Sages and Sage-disciples. Hence, our notion of the “awareness of the transmission of the Dao” comprises of both synchronic and diachronic dimensions. In other words, it is not only interested in how moral agents interact with one another in their present form of existence (synchronic dimension), but also the proper way in which Sages and Sage-disciples across different timeframes accord and relate with one another, as exemplified by a strong sense of communion and shared identity (diachronic dimension). In the final part of the thesis, we turn our attention from the founding of a new theory to its justification within the entire Confucian theoretical framework. We compare the “awareness of the transmission of the Dao” proposition (which epitomizes the Confucian Dao) with the Confucian view of human nature, and examine whether both propositions are logically consistent. Our conclusion is that Pre-Qin Confucians hold the basic view that “human nature is inclined toward goodness” 人性向善, and that this view of human nature shares a direct correspondence with the “awareness of the transmission of the Dao” proposition: Once an individual holds firm to the belief that “human nature is inclined toward goodness”, and consequently dedicates himself or herself to the realization of specific acts of goodness, he has in fact satisfied the conditions of Junzi or Sage-disciple. As a Junzi or Sage-disciple, he or she then consciously partakes in the continual manifestation and transmission of the Way of the Sages, in which case he or she is obligated to maintain an emotional and intellectual attachment to the Sages of the past.

並列關鍵字

Pre-Qin Confucians ； View of the Sage ； Way of the Sages ； Awareness of the transmission of the Dao ； Human nature as inclined toward goodness

參考文獻

姚際恆著、簡啟楨輯點《禮記通論輯本》第二部，臺北：中央研究院中國文哲研究所，1994年。

王開府《儒家倫理學析論》，臺北：臺灣學生書局，1986年。

牟宗三《名家與荀子》，臺北：臺灣學生書局，1973年。

牟宗三《中國哲學十九講》，臺北：臺灣學生書局，2002年。

牟宗三《圓善論》，臺北：臺灣學生書局，1985年。

國際替代計量

論先秦儒家的「聖人觀」及其道統意識—以《論語》、《孟子》、《中庸》為焦點

全文下載

主題瀏覽