【作者】 乔松林；

【导师】 李振宏；

【作者基本信息】 河南大学 ， 专门史， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 韩非与老子思想的渊源关系,自从司马迁以来就引起人们的关注,近代以来的学术界论之者也不乏其人。但是,人们多是侧重一些概念的考察,或者从权术思想的角度将他们联系起来,很少关注他们在思想属性这个最根本点上的渊源关系。汉人将他们分属道、法两家,掩盖了他们学说体系在本质上的相同性,即都是“君人南面之术”。本文就是在前人研究的基础上,对老子学说的社会性价值取向以及韩非思想中对老学的批判与继承之处进行细致的考察,主要运用溯源研究的方法,梳理出二者的思想渊源关系,进而考察包括司马迁在内的汉代人对韩老关系的认识。在思想属性上:老子侧重于解决如何做一个侯王的问题;而韩非则用大量的笔墨强调君主的神圣性问题,强调君主权力的至高无上和独断专一,发展出一个不折不扣的君主专制主义思想体系,而且,二人的语言概念和论证方式也有很大的不同。尽管二者的思想主题在具体的展开过程中显示出巨大差异,但他们都是帝王之学,都是“君人南面之术”,都是如何驾驭群臣、治国理民、控制天下的学问。以君王为核心展开一套社会政治学说,是韩老思想最深刻的契合点。韩非对老子思想的继承和发展,就主要体现在这个方面。通过对韩老思想中道论、人性论、智论这三个重要概念的比较,可以看出,韩非思想中的重要部分都能在老子那里找到源头。道论方面:在道的本体层面上,韩非和老子都认为道是万物的本原;在规律之道层面上,韩非老子均强调道的规律性,并把之作为过渡阶段;在社会之道层面上,老子将自然界的规律作为法则,对人世间的社会秩序施以整顿和规范,而韩非则立足于人事,接过“执今之道,以御今之有”(《老子》十四章)的大旗,通过具体化和实用化,将老子之道发挥为自己的君道和治道,并着重阐述君主独一无二的地位和专制主义的君道理论。韩老之道在展开层次上具有相似性,具体论述虽有些差异,但落脚点却是一致的,都是服务于“君人南面”之目的。人性论方面:老子认为人的自然本性是存在的。?在这方面,韩非吸取了老子的思想,所不同者,老子认为人性是质朴的,而韩非认为人的自然本性是好利恶害。他们对人性的态度也是不同的,老子对人性的态度是复归之,即主张人要回复到质朴的自然本性;韩非的态度则是引导之、利用之。二者的手段虽然不同,但目的却是相同的,即通过对人性的引导,达到对民众的控制和社会的治理,进而成就帝王之业。智论方面:在反对“机巧”、“狡诈”之“智”上,韩非继承了老子的思想。在民智方面,老子推崇体道的大智慧,即他认为的理想状态是民众都像婴儿那样淳朴,没有机巧狡诈的小聪明,进而实现无为而治,而韩非则不希望民众有智慧,他的理想状态是君主一人拥有全部的智慧,尤其是政治智慧(这和君主是否有才能以及是否聪明是两回事),而臣民最好是普遍愚昧无知,这样才有利于君主统治。尽管韩老智论各有特点,但却指向了同一个终极目标,即君人南面之术的实现。通过文本比较,可以看出韩非精研《老子》,思想上也受到老子的影响,他的很多思想在老子那里都能找到源头,但韩非在受老子思想影响的同时,他对老子的思想也做了相当多的引申和发挥,乃至一些迎合己意的曲解。这也正说明了韩老思想在具体表现上有着很大的差异,而“君人南面”才是韩老思想最大的相同之处,也是他们共同的思想属性。因此,在考察韩老思想的时候,我们也应该从这个根本属性上着眼。站在今天的角度上,我们不能一味苛责韩非对老子的改造,相反,他对老子思想的抽象继承为我们当代文化建设提供了借鉴。任何时代的人们,在继承前代思想的同时,都在某种程度上改造着前代的思想。他们有权利这样去做,唯有如此,思想才能正常发展,才有历史。韩非如此,今天的我们亦如此。韩非之于老子,有着其当时的社会需求。我们之于中国传统文化,也要从我们面临的社会需要出发,进行取舍、改造。更多还原

【Abstract】 There was one issue that caught much attention of intellectuals since the era of Si Ma qian, a famous historian in Han Dynasty, that was, whether the thought of Master Lao was the origin and resource of that of Master Han Fei, and even now this topic still shows its power in academe. However, a great many researches on the review of the concepts or the relationship between them considering the power tactics flood comparing with the little attention of their essential relationship from the angles of their thought properties. People in Han Dynasty divided them into two different schools: Taoism and Legalist School. In fact, that division ignored the essential sameness of their systems of theory which both focused on the ruling strategies. This thesis makes meticulous inspection on practical value trend in the theories of Master Lao and the critical and developing aspects of the doctrines of Master Han Fei toward Master Lao by tracing the origin of the two so as to make a further research on the cognition of the people in Han Dynasty including Si Ma qian mentioned before.Master Lao focused his effort on the means to be a perfect ruler while Master Han Fei emphasized the holiness of a king and the supremeness and exclusiveness of the sovereign power which formed a complete monarchy thought system. Moreover, the language concepts and the reasoning methods of the two differ from one another. Both of their thought systems are about sovereign power strategies on how to make a perfect ruling social order regardless of the difference in their process of reasoning. Consequently the proof of their similarity lies in this which powerfully testifies the view that Han Fei inherits and develops the thought of Master Lao.From the analysis of the three important concepts in the thought systems in Master Lao and Han Fei: the reasoning on fundamental principles, the original properties of human beings and intelligence, the obvious impacts about the essential ?frame of the thought system from Master Lao on Han Fei can be easily felt.On the reasoning of the first concept, three facets are discussed respectively. As for the ontology of Tao, both of them claim that Tao is very origin of the world; as for the law of Tao, they stress the existence of the principles of Tao which can be used for further discussion. As for the aspects of practical reality, however there is some difference. Master Lao believes that the principles of nature is prior to realistic social order which is governed by the former while Master Han Fei emphasizes the importance of the guiding value of previous social reality to contemporary practice.Han Fei makes use of the abstract reasoning of Master Lao and develops his own standpoints which lay emphasis on the exclusive position of the ruler and reasonability of absolutism. Evidently, the thought of Han Fei is served for a better governing order for the ruling class. Regardless of some difference of their specific expatiation, the conclusions of them are the same, that is, to obtain perfect ruling strategies. On the second concept, Master Lao deems that the natural property of human beings is existent and modesty while Han Fei claims the essential properties of men are to be fond of benefits and abhor harm. Accordingly their attitudes toward human beings differ from each other. Mater Lao advocates that the social properties of men should be returned to natural condition and Han Fei believes the best way is to make use of the properties. Their goals are of the same in spite of the means they take, that is to achieve a best ruling social order to fulfill the sovereignty dream by proper instruction and conduction of the properties of men.On the third concept of intelligence, both of them oppose improper dexterity and subtilty. Master Lao praises great wisdom as original and pure as infants which will certainly brings a better social order without much government interference. However, Master Han Fei is for that the king possesses all the intelligence, especially political wisdom while the citizens do not have even a little wisdom. Han Fei believes that such ?a condition will be good for sovereignty. Hereby their aims are the same, that is, the perfect implement of the king.From the comparison of the texts, it is easy to find that Master Lao and his works make a great impact on Han Fei and his thought much of which can be found in Master Lao’s works. Furthermore, Master Han Fei interprets Master Lao’s thought in his own style sometimes with distortion, deepens and enlarges some of the previous one. Therefore there is much difference between their thought systems. In spite of the diversity, the same goals to achieve an ideal social order for the ruler are so strong that cannot be ignored. This is the ultimate sameness of their thought and also the common property of their thought. Thus the essential property should be considered and emphasized when making a review of their thought.Regardless of some distortion and improper interpretation, however, the inheriting action should not be severely criticized. On the contrary, the inheriting means Han Fei takes provide us much experience for contemporary cultural construction. People in any era will definitely make an innovation of the previous thought when inheriting. This is a common and proper way that the thought and history develops. Han Fei interprets and develops Master Lao’s thought in his own way out of the particular social demand. When facing the development of traditional culture, we should also make a careful consideration on the contemporary social needs.更多还原