摘要
自《墨子·非儒》对儒家思想提出诸多批评以来,得到儒家诸多回应。孟子攻击墨子"无君无父,是禽兽也",荀子虽不如孟子之激烈,却真正从思想根源对墨子之批评进行了回应。而这种批评与回应也不应仅视为门派之争。以儒家最为注重的丧服制度为例,墨子作《节葬》从服制和丧期两个角度批评儒者,而荀子《礼论》则做出相应的回应。可见,墨、荀在此问题上存有较大差异。究其根本,墨子将"节用"之思想归结为"利",进而言"义","义"和"利"相容相待;反观荀子,则将"节"之思想归结为"礼",进而言"中","中"和"礼"为表里。墨、荀皆认同"节",但在此问题上却是完全不同的思维方式,这也从根源上说明了儒、墨争讼不已的原因。
Since Mozi criticized Confucianism in Against Confucianism( 《非儒》),Mencius regarded Mozi as"a man who has reduced to a lower animal for he neglects sovereign and parents". Following with Mencius,Xunzi was also against Mozi. Although Xunzi’s response was not so bitter,it really responded Mozi’s criticism from the ideological roots. For example,the funeral system that has given the priority in Confucianism was criticized by Mozi for the funeral garments and mourning period in Simplicity in Funerals( 《节葬》) while Xunzi debated him with Discourse on Ritual Principles( 《礼论》). Obviously,there are great differences between Mozi and Xunzi on this issue. In essence,Mozi concluded the thought of Economizing Expenditures to Profit,and further to Righteousness.What is more,the relationship between Profit and Righteousness is compatible with each other. In contrast,Xunzi summed up the thought of Economizing Expenditures into Ritual,then Zhong( 中). And Ritual is the external aspect and Zhong is internal aspect in the relationship of them. Therefore,Mozi and Xunzi both agreed with"saving"( 节),but their thinking ways were totally different on this issue,which explained the reason why Confucianism and Mohism have been arguing endlessly.
出处
《国际儒学论丛》
2019年第1期40-54,248,共16页
International Tribune of Confucian Studies
关键词
墨子
荀子
丧服制度
节、利、礼
Mozi
Xunzi
Funeral System
Saving
Profit
Ritual
