The Idea of Law in Classical Chinese Legalist Jurisprudence
Author:Eric C.lp (The University of Hong Kong)
Article in Global Jurist , January 2009
Abstract
Being one of the most eminent schools of jurisprudence in Eastern Philosophy, Classical Chinese Legalism has a lot to offer to the understanding of the underlying forces which shaped East Asian legal systems even to the present day. I will comprehensively reconstruct the Legalist idea of law in three dimensions, (1) law and society, (2) law and politics, and (3) law and morality. I will refute the overtly negative and simplistic conventional readings that suggest that Legalism is merely a Legal Positivist blueprint of authoritarian statecraft. The long–neglected connections between Legalism and the cosmic order have grounded law on a particular political morality. Despite being plagued by some difficulties, the Legalistsrsquo; contributions to social theory, anthropology, and procedural values are signicant, even to researchers in a global era.
KEYWORDS: Chinese Law, Legalism, Han Fei, law and the cosmic order, China, jurisprudence
1.Introduction
The impressive existence of a massive body of penal-oriented codified laws in Imperial China is unchallengeable. Traditional Chinese Law was the product of a bitter compromise between the influential and competing ideologies of Confucianism and Legalism, resulting in hybrid roles of being both the guardian of the cosmic order, and a secular institution of social control. Classical Legalism constituted one of the most important philosophical traditions in ancient Chinarsquo;s lsquo;Spring and Autumnrsquo; and lsquo;Warring Statesrsquo; Periods . Despite the element of law in its name, the school was primarily noted for its advocacy of effective statecraft as a means to shape an extremely orderly society and create a strengthened State.
What distinguishes Legalism from its contemporaries is its highly practical orientation. A number of fajia adherents had assumed State chancellorships and experimented successful reforms. The Qin Dynasty which unified China and created a two thousand year-old imperial State, had in fact adopted Legalism as its official ideology. However, the Legalists, if not also the prestige of law, declined altogether with this short-lived regime. Virtually no succeeding dynasty ever expressly declared its policies as fazhi (rule by law), and none of the subsequent mainstream schools of thought focused on the study of law and jurisprudence. Many ideas of the fajia, good or bad, were simply dismissed due to the prevalence of State Confucianism, which is in theory at odds with Legalist tenets.
Legalism was considered as the only classical philosophical tradition in China to have a deep understanding of law. Yao compared the “law” studied by the Legalists with the contemporary common understanding of law. He contended that law for the fajia is constructed on State-strengthening policies and used as an objective standard of human behavior. This was foreign to the other branches of ancient Chinese philosophy. Even though Legalism did not develop as a standalone intellectual movement in most of Traditional Chinarsquo;s history, its impact on the course of development of the countryrsquo;s history and philosophy should not be overlooked. Indeed, many classified the guiding ideology of the Imperial Chinese State as lsquo;Confucian in outlook, Legalist in substancersquo;. Fu has advanced the argument that Chinese politics, whether traditional or modern, is inherently Legalist. According to him, ruling elites were more than prepared to manipulate Confucian rhetoric skillfully to justify the Legalist ends of upholding the pricy of power. He further described the Legalists, who lived one thousand and eight hundred years earlier, as being lsquo;more Machiavellianrsquo; than Machiavelli himself; and Legalismrsquo;s everlasting influence on Chinese politics had far exceeded the degree of Machiavellirsquo;s on Western political discourse.
It is without doubt that the fajia has substantially contributed to a significant portion of the very principles that shaped the legal and political structures inherited by the numerous dynasties of Traditional China. State Confucianism as a political ideology distinguished itself from Classical Confucianism by incorporating heavy Legalist and Daoist elements. Therefore, the reevaluation of Classical Legalism is beneficial not only to the understanding of legal history in the Chinese State, but also to the answering of the question of whether the rule of law has indigenous roots in the Far East. However, inquiries into Legalist jurisprudence, as opposed to political theory, are currently underdeveloped, not only in the West, but also in the East. Most literature on the subject was contributed by political scientists and philosophers predominantly interested in the ontology, metaphysics, and statecraft of Legalism.
2. The Place of Law in the Theory and Practice of Classical Legalism
Law occupies a central position in the theory and practice of Classical Legalism,but emphases vary. The term lsquo;fajiarsquo; was first employed by Sima Tan, an early-Han historian, in his discussions of the groupings of Legalist writers among the six mainstream philosophies in the Pre-Qin period. He and his son, Sima Qian, the lsquo;Grand Historianrsquo; as he was called,one of the greatest scholars of history in Traditional China, concluded that the closeness of personal relationships and statuses in the social hierarchy were of no relevance to the Legalists, because for them, everything ought to be determined before the law once and for all.Legalist philosophy mandates that the supremacy of authority should be centralized in the hands of the Ruler.While other philosophical movements tend to justify the exercise of political power as the execution of heavenly will, the Legalists disagreed. Many of them suggested that laws, social order, and military power are nothing but means to the exer
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
中国古代法家的法律理念
作者：Eric C.lp （香港大学）
文章刊载于 《全球法学家》（2009.4）
摘要：
作为东方哲学中最著名的法理学流派之一，中国法家为东亚法系发展至今提供了很多的潜在力量。我将从三个方面概括的重现法家的法律思想：（1）法律与社会；（2）法律与政治；（3）法律与道德。我会反驳公开否定法家和将法家简单传统的解读为以权力为蓝本的治国之道。法家和公共秩序之间的联系被长期忽略，使得法家被置于一种特殊的政治道德智商。尽管被一些困难所困扰，法家对社会理论、人类学、程序方面的价值是非常明显的，甚至造就了一些全球时代的研究者。
关键词：中国法律，法家，韩非，法和公共秩序，中国，法学
1.引言
毋庸置疑，在帝制的中国编撰了很多关于沉重的肉刑的法律，这令人印象深刻。传统的中国法律是儒家和法家影响力和意识形态竞争之间痛苦的妥协的产物，导致这个混合的产物既是公众秩序的守护者，又是社会控制的一个世俗机构。在春秋战国时期，法家是最重要的传统哲学之一。尽管以法命名，但这个学派主要倡导通过有效的治国之道作为一种手段来塑造一个非常有秩序的社会，创造一个强大的国家。
法家和同时代其他学派的区别在于它具有高度的实践性。一批法家的追随者认为法家不仅假设并且有成功的改革试验。秦统一中国，两千多年帝制的延续，都吸收了法家的行政观念。然而，如果法家没有如此有威望的法律，则肯定会被这个短命的政体拒绝。几乎没有一个成功的王朝曾经明确宣布其法制政策，也没有后续的主流学派侧重于研究法律和法学。很多法家的观点，无论好坏，只是单纯的反驳当时盛行的儒家思想，这在理论上是与法家的原则有关。
在中国，法家是唯一对法律有深刻理解的的传统古典哲学。YAO的“法”的研究与当代法律研究的共识相比。他主张法律对法家来说是国家加强政策构建的人们行为的一个客观标准。这与中国其他古代哲学是相分离的。尽管在中国传统历史中，法家没有发展成一个独立的思想运动，但它对于国家历史和哲学里程碑式的冲击是不容忽视的。事实上，许多中国的朝代的指导思想都是“外儒内法”。FU认为，中国的政治，无论是传统的还是现代的，本质上都是法家。据他说，统治集团准备操纵儒家巧妙地修辞手法来证明法家崇尚权力的结束。
毫无疑问，法家实际上确立了一个使法律、政治结构发展成型的原则，被传统中国的很多朝代所继承。作为意识形态的儒家，吸取了古典儒家、法家和道家的思想元素。因此，重新评价古典法家不仅仅有利于理解中国法制史，也有利于回答法治在远东是否具有本土根源的问题。然而，法家法学的研究，相对于政治理论而言，无论是西方还是东方，都是欠缺的。关于这一主题的文献大多数是由政治科学家和哲学家在本体论、形而上学的主要兴趣，和法家治国。
2.古典法理论与实践中的法律地位
法律在古典法家理论和实践中居于中心地位，但侧重点不同。最先使用“法家”一词的是汉初历史学家司马谈，在他的论述中，把法家归类为先秦时期的六种学说之一。他的儿子司马迁，被称为“太史公”，是中国古代最伟大的历史学家之一，他认为法家打破了“亲亲尊尊”的社会结构，一切都以法律的形式被确定下来。法家认为，至高无上的权力应该掌握在统治者手中。其他的哲学运动倾向于证明政治权利的行使是为了执行神的意志，法家反对这种观点。他们中的许多人认为，法律、社会秩序和军事力量只不过是统治者权力行使的手段。他们认为法律应该是一个维持君主权威的核心的政治工具。然而没有统一的法家协会组织。一些法家的提倡者们曾经彼此认识。不同于儒家、道家和墨家，法家的知识并不是来源于任何大师或是一代一代的门徒教导。法家的理论是通过自我反省和实际的适用过程中特定的政策环境形成的。
古典的法家长久以来受到尖锐的批评。中国古代杰出的历史学家像司马迁、班固和苏轼批判他们因为太严苛缺乏人性化，尤其是他们放弃教育和苛待人民的建议。据称，这些法家思想最终促成了秦朝的覆灭。皮伦布姆指责法家将过度的“严格的法律和严厉的惩罚”合法化。韦利，称呼法家为现实主义者，因为“他们认为法律应该取代道德”。他观察到，几乎所有法家的著作都是以政治意见的形式，专注于让统治者接纳他们的哲学去征服其他国家，成为霸主。陈观察到，法家除了统治者之外，不接受权威，也没有先例可循。根据他的说法，法家是通过加强法律对国家和人口实现直接控制，以慷慨的奖励和严厉的惩罚来支持。法家的主要兴趣在于力量的积累，对别的国家的征服，统一的思想和武力的使用，至关重要的是在中国历史上建立了严密的生活和思想体系。在法家的概念中，法律是由国家强制实施的规则体系。一般来说，法家法学感兴趣的是有效的治理而不是回答问题的形而上学。人们相信，法律是唯一有效的控制社会、禁止不良行为的方法，而不是仪式和规范。
3.先驱
早期的法家思想的存在可以追溯到管仲和子产的思想。管仲通常严格的不被认为是法家的一员，但他是法家的一个先驱。他是一位强硬路线政策的实践者，他在齐国齐桓公时任宰相。在齐桓公的支持下，管仲发起了一系列旨在加强国家对社会权力管理的政策。这些改革包括军事统治的模式，以及社会阶层的重组。将社会制度的管理职责从世袭官僚主义，改革为国家高效的对经济和市场进行控制，市场物价和税收均由国家调控。因此，齐国逐渐成为了一个强大的霸权主义国家。
子产是郑国的政治家。和管仲一样，他发起了革命，通过严格的重新界定土地界线，限制贵族特权，通过大胆的在铁器上可出新颁布的刑法来加强国家的权威，并采取了严厉而宽松的政策，以有选择的方式确保遵守。法家早期是以一种特别的方式，追求执政精英的权力最大化，不为他们的四人特权，但加速国家实力的增长。在这样一个历史起点上，尽管精心制作，法家的理论仍不足以构成一个哲学的法律传统。
从李悝的开拓思想开始，法家就产生了更大的一致性。李悝在魏国任魏文侯相，在汉书中被列为十法家第一。李悝在系统的思考过一系列春秋时期的理论和积攒了法律编纂的经验后，编写了具有里程碑意义的《法经》著作。这是中国第一部成文法典，这部著作为后续的朝代法典的编纂做了一个模范。李悝指出在魏国开始改革后，要提高农业种植和灌溉质量并且控制成本价格，这些政策的最终结果当然是把权力集中到统治者的手中。这一时期的法家仍然是用一套不成文的指导方针，旨在建立有纪律的社会和成为一个霸权主义国家。吴起是当代的李悝，他是魏国军事改革的推动者，后来在楚国楚悼王统治时期担任宰相。吴起还精简了官僚制度，限制继承的贵族头衔不超过三代，并大大的扩大了军队。楚悼王死后，他被迫害致死，而法家的改革被立即停止了。韩非子是最终也是最重要的法家人物，他批判性的评论说：楚国的没落是因为吴起的改革被停止，而秦国的强大是因为任命了商鞅。
商鞅，另一位政治家，为未来法家的丰硕思想做出了巨大的贡献。商鞅来自于魏国，是秦国著名的政治家和学者。在秦孝公的支持下，商鞅进行了大量的改革，使秦国从落后的政权转变为军事强国和集权国家。贤能的统治机构代替了旧贵族。尽管有一些修改，他的改革和他的许多的法家的前辈类似。商鞅的政策为帝国在非常短的时间内最终同意其他国家奠定了基础。与商鞅同时代的慎到，作为一个高级官员，在齐国所支持的教育机构中推广法家思想。慎到反对和批判儒家思想关于圣王和天才的想法，将法家传统与道教背景结合。他特别强调“势”，字面上指的是权力，正统性和感召力，对任何成功的通知中后来说都是最重要的。申不害最初来自于郑国，也同样有道家黄老道家背景。但必须强调的是，黄老道家不同于古典道家，尤其是他们关于法律、宇宙和社会秩序的观点。他是同一时期韩昭侯统治下韩国的丞相，提出了经世致用的整治政策，即君主用手段来控制和调整自己的官僚。
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
资料编号：[26575]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word
以上是毕业论文外文翻译，课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
