傅山的忠孝论

成复旺
中国人民大学

傅山出生于李贽“荣死昭狱”后五年，几乎与李贽是同时代人。朝廷禁毁李贽著作的敕令看来并未完全奏效，傅山至少读过李贽的《藏书》与《焚书》。但他所处的已经是一个“神州荡覆，宗社丘墟”的时代，“华夷之辨”已经成为时代的第一主题。他的坚贞雄迈的性格，使他既接受了明中叶以来、以李贽为代表的势头强劲的革新思潮，又矢志不渝地持守着对于父母之邦的赤子之心；并把这两方面结合起来，反思了历代世儒在忠孝问题上的实际表现。他揭示了汉儒只言而不行的“纯学者”态度的虚伪，更批判了宋儒不辨华夷、不分善恶、“食人之食”即“死人之事”的主张的荒谬。他以人的真实性情为忠孝的内在依据，提出“礼”也必须“剺而正之”。他以故国及其“蒸民”为忠的根本对象，反对仅仅忠于君王个人。如此等等，都是对忠孝传统的有力传承与发展，不仅远胜于某些正统儒者的老生常谈，对于今天的“国学热”亦不无参考价值。

Fu Shan’s Theory of Filial Piety and Loyalty

CHENG, Fuwang
Renmin University of China

Fu Shan, a near contemporary of Li Zhi, was born five years after the latter “honorably died in prison.” Although there was an imperial order to destroy Li Zhi’s writings, Fu Shan was acquainted with Li’s works A Book to Hide (Cang shu) and A Book to Burn (Fen shu). However, Fu Shan’s own period was no longer a time when “China was in turmoil, when the ancestor’s temples and tombs were to be destroyed.”  The main issue of his time was the “difference between Chinese and barbarians.” His personality was composed of two tendencies.  Firstly, his firm frankness enabled him to accept the vigorous pursuit of intellectual reform since the middle period of the Ming dynasty, of which Li Zhi was an important exponent.  But Fu Shan was also devoted to the land of his fathers with utmost sincerity.  He thought about the practical expressions of filial piety and loyalty as exemplified by the great Confucian scholars. He exposed the hypocrisy of the attitude of Confucian scholars from the Han Dynasty whose “pure scholarship” was only words without actions. He even more criticized the scholars of the Song dynasty who did not distinguish between Chinese and foreigners and between good and evil, as they presented the nonsensical sentence “a meal of eating human beings” would only be “a matter of dead people.”  He thought that the inner basis of filial piety and loyalty is the true feeling of a person, pointing to the fact that rites (li) also imply “correctness.” He held that the objects of loyalty (zhong) are the fatherland and its people (zheng min), and he rejected the view that one should only be loyal to one’s king. These and other tenets are a powerful continuance and development of the traditional values of filial piety and loyalty, and they are not only far surpassing the platitudes of some of the orthodox Confucian scholars, they are also valuable insights in the view of today’s “feverish pursuit of Chinese studies” (Guoxue re).