摘要
北宋经筵史上分别由王安石、程颐发动过两次坐讲之争,这两次争论在以往研究中已经引起学者们广泛重视,被认为是思想史上"师道"意识凸现的标志性事件。但学者们对该事件的阐述,往往只注重观念层面的解释,很少进入制度史层面分析相关争论存在的深层原因。由于经筵制度的发展,到北宋中后期,经筵官被部分士大夫认为具有"以道正君"的崇高职责。但在北宋初期,经筵侍讲官在职官来源上,与以伎艺侍君、身份卑微的待诏官有着密切的联系,这使得另一部分士大夫对经筵侍讲官是否承担"师道"功能表示怀疑。这一隐藏于制度史深处的矛盾,是士大夫们就立讲、坐讲持不同意见的重要原因。可见,在观察某些与政治背景密切相关的思想史课题时,不可忽略制度因素的影响。
In the history of Classics Colloquium （＂经筵＂） in the Northern Song Dynasty, there had been two debates kindled by Wang Anshi and Cheng Yi respectively. The two debates have received extensive attention from scholars and are considered of the most symbolic to illustrate the sense of teacher＇s orthodoxy in the history of idea. However, scholars often interpret these two events from the perspective of idea and rarely explore the underlying reasons in terms of the history of institution. Due to the development of Classics Colloquium, in the mid to late Northern Song Dynasty, Participant in the Classics Colloquium shouldered the lofty responsibility of ＂correcting the emperor＇s behavior with Way＂ according to some official-scholars. But in earlier times, the official origin of participant in the Classics Colloquium was closely related to that of Expectant Official who entertained the emperor with drama and were of low status. This made other official-scholars hold skeptical whether participant in the Classics Colloquium performed the function of teacher＇s orthodoxy. The contradiction hidden behind the history of institution is one of the important reasons why official- scholars held different opinions of ＂stand while speaking＂ and ＂sit while speaking＂. This article then points out that when discussing certain questions of the history of idea which are closely related to the political context, we should not ignore the impact of institutional factors.
出处
《学术月刊》
CSSCI
北大核心
2013年第9期138-144,共7页
Academic Monthly
基金
复旦大学"985工程"三期人文学科整体推进重大项目"中古中国的知识
信仰与制度的整合研究"的阶段性研究成果
关键词
经筵
师道
待诏
观念与制度
Classics Colloquium, teacher＇s orthodoxy, Expectant Official, idea and institution
