文武
關於與「文武」標題相近或相同的條目頁，請見「文武 (消歧義)」。文和武的概念是中國哲學和政治文化中的重要組成部分，描述了朝廷中民事和軍事領域的對立和互補。文武之別涉及到了刑事處罰、行政控制、社會秩序的創造和再生產、教育和道德改造等方面的討論[1]。
該概念最早形成於春秋和戰國時期，並在公元前三世紀至二世紀期間逐漸完善。然而由於西方學者對儒學在先秦和早期秦漢當中重要性認識的不準確，以及將儒學的本質看作是和平主義的誤解，前者直到最近才受到西方學者的過多討論[2]。約翰·費爾班克的觀點為第二點提供了一個例子：「儒家不尊重戰爭……訴諸戰爭（「武」）就等於承認追求「文」（文明或文化）的過程破產了。 因此，這應該是最後的手段……這就是中國傳統的和平主義傾向……通過文擴張……是自然而正確的； 而吳國的擴張、暴力和征服是絕不可寬恕的。」[3]
歷史
編輯Attested in Shang dynasty oracle bones, the earliest uses were in the posthumous epithets of certain Shang ancestors, the first recorded – conveniently, for both – being Wen Wu Ding.[4] The most common use case of wen in the epigraphic record is in appellations to dead ancestors, where it shared semantic space of general positive eulogy with precisely the words huáng (（中文）) and liè (（中文）). Any bases for why one was selected over another are not apparent.[5]
The posthumous names of the Zhou dynasty (1046–256 BCE) founders, King Wen and King Wu, represent the two terms as standing in the "father-and-son" relationship.[6] Wen and Wu became the most popular posthumous names of regional lords during the Zhou dynasty, but Wen in particular saw no usage until nearly the end of the Western Zhou, when central power was significantly weakened, suggesting the possibility of royal exclusivity akin to a ritual trademark.[7]
The first archaeologically attested use of wen and wu as common terms outside of posthumous epithets or as synecdoche for the Zhou founders dates to the Spring and Autumn period, where a ruler of the state of Qin used them to describe some of his positive qualities while asserting his assidiousness in acting as a responsible lineage head.[8] In the transmitted literature, the terms occur at the earliest strata of the earliest texts, the Shijing and the Shangshu, but the precise meaning of wen in particular is indeterminate from context.[9]
Shuoyuan, compiled by Liu Xiang (77–6 BCE, Han dynasty), gives a classical example of the terms' balancing against each other:
King Cheng enfeoffed Bo Qin [the Duke of Zhou's son] as the Duke of Lu. Summoning him, he addressed him, saying: "Do you know the Way of acting as the ruler over the people? ... Should you possess wen but lack wu, you will have no means to awe those below. Should you possess wu but lack wen, the people will fear you but not draw close. If wen and wu are implemented together, then your awe-inspiring virtue will be achieved."[10]
參見
編輯參考文獻
編輯- ^ McNeal (2012)，第8頁.
- ^ McNeal (2012)，第1-6頁.
- ^ Yuan-kang Wang, Harmony and war: Confucian culture and Chinese power politics. Columbia University Press, 2011:14. Quote from John K. Fairbank, "Varieties of the Chinese Military Experience," in Chinese Ways in Warfare, ed. Frank A. Kierman Jr. and John K. Fairbank (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1974), 7–9.
- ^ Falkenhausen (1996)，第11頁.
- ^ Falkenhausen (1996)，第6–7頁.
- ^ McNeal (2012)，第13-14頁.
- ^ Falkenhausen (1996)，第8, 15頁.
- ^ Falkenhausen (1996)，第5頁.
- ^ Falkenhausen (1996)，第2, 19頁.
- ^ McNeal 2012，第15頁, translating from Jundao chapter of the Shuoyuan. The source translates wen and wu respectively as "the civil" and "the martial". The words are returned to original here to clarify the interaction of the terms without overloading them with additional meaning.
書目
編輯- Falkenhausen, Lothar von. The Concept of Wen in the Ancient Chinese Ancestral Cult. Chinese Literature: Essays, Articles, Reviews (CLEAR). 1996, 18: 1–22. JSTOR 495623. doi:10.2307/495623.
- McNeal, Robin. Conquer and Govern: Early Chinese Military Texts from the Yi Zhou shu. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. 2012.
拓展閱讀
編輯- Kern, Martin. Ritual, Text, and the Formation of the Canon: Historical Transitions of "Wen" in Early China. T'oung Pao (Leiden: Brill). 2001, 87 (1/3): 43–91. JSTOR 4528866.
 | 這是一篇中國哲學相關的小作品。您可以透過編輯或修訂擴充其內容。 |