台北大学中文学报.PDFVIP

臺北大學中文學報 第 4 期 135 2008 年 3 月 頁 135 ～164 荀子心偽論之詮釋與重建∗ 周德良∗∗ 摘 要 先秦諸子之歷史評價，少有如荀子這般「每況愈下」。《史記》記稱 荀子「最為老師」，且「三為祭酒」，猶與孟子合併一傳。自揚雄評荀子 與孟子是「同門而異戶」，唐韓愈評荀子之「性惡」說為「大醇小疵」， 至宋代後，「遂詆其言為異端之說，擯其學於道統之外」；荀子儼然淪為 孔孟儒家中之「歧途」者。 歷史批評荀學缺失，主要原因有二：其一，荀子倡「性惡」之說， 違悖孔孟心性大義；其二，荀子崇尚禮義，且堅持「性惡」之說，不顯 主體性，價值根源失落，形成外在的權威思想。 本文以荀子「心」之概念出發，分析詮釋荀子「心偽論」之理論系 統：首先，分析荀子「性惡」說之內容與宗旨目的；其次，詮釋荀子言 「心」與「偽」之內涵意義；再者，建構荀子學說之價值主體在於「心」， 「聖人」乃是「塗之人」之「心」充分之彰顯，而「禮義法度」之「偽」 則是聖人具體落實的客觀規範。由此論證，荀子並非於儒家之外別立系 統者，而是繼孔子之後將「聖人」之「心」具體化為「禮義法度」之實 踐者。 關鍵詞：荀子、心、偽、性、聖人、禮義法度 ∗ 收件日期：2007/12/03 ，修改日期：2008/03/05 ，接受日期：2008/03/08 ∗∗ 淡江大學中文系專任助理教授 136 臺北大學中文學報 第 4 期 To interpret and re-establish Xunzi `s theory of “xin-wei-lun” ∗ ∗∗ Chou Te-Liang Abstract There were few literators like Xunzi (荀子) before Chin Dynasty (秦朝), whose historical appreciation was progressively worse. In Shih-chi ( 《史記》) , he was praiseworthily comment as “the greatest teacher”, and had the honor of being “appointed as libate (祭酒) for times”. Since Yang-Xiong (揚雄) criticized that he was schismatic with Mengzi (孟子) , and Han-Yu (韓愈) commented on his “xing’e” (性惡) as “a stain on a pure masterpiece” (大醇小 疵) , after Sung Dynasty (宋朝), they “abused his lecture as heterodox , and abandoning his ism out of orthodoxy” , Xunzi (荀子) had just like turned into a “unbecoming person” (歧出) of the Confucianists (儒家) . There were two reasons for that Xunzi (荀子) had been criticized : one was his “xing’e” (性惡) , which infringed Confucianism; and the other was, whil