清规还是国法:1946年北京白云观住持安世霖火烧案再研究  

Monastic Rules for Taoist vs Law: The Further Study of Fire Case of An Shiling the Abbot of White Cloud Taoist Temple in 1946

作　　者：付海晏[1] 

机构地区：[1]华中师范大学中国近代史研究所

出　　处：《南京社会科学》2016年第3期145-151,共7页Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences

摘　　要：1946年11月白云观住持安世霖、督管白全一被观内36名道士以清规名义焚死,这一惨案,毫不意外地成为北平乃至近代道教史上的重大社会新闻。反对者以清规名义处理安、白二人,实际上是长期以来白云观宫观内部矛盾冲突的结果,当反对者最早以清规、以司法诉讼、向社会局控诉等次第失败后,最后重新选择被安世霖废弃的传统清规条款处死安、白二人。尽管部分社会舆论怀疑此条清规的存在,尽管辩护律师强调焚烧老道案不仅仅是法律问题,也是宗教问题,强调道士行动的合理性,然而北平地方法院的判决尽管考虑到自首等情节,却否定了清规焚烧住持等合理性。An Shiling the abbot of White Cloud Taoist Temple and Bai Quanyi the Supervisor of White Cloud Taoist Temple were burned by the 36 Taoists of White Cloud Taoist Temple in the name of Monastic Rules for Taoist in November 1946. There is no doubt that this tragedy is a big social news in Peking Taoism history, even in Chinese modern Taoism history. The fact that opponents burned An and Bai in the name of Monastic Rules for Taoist is the result of long conflict among White Cloud Taoist Temple. At first these opponents tried to accuse them by Monastic Rules for Tao- ist or lawsuit. But they failed, so they choose to kill them by traditional Monastic Rules for Taoist which was abandoned by An Shiling. Some social opinions doubted the existence of the Monastic Rules for Taoist. Defiance counsel emphasized this case is not only a legal issue, but also a religious issue. The Peking local court considered they turn themselves in, but still denied its rationality of burning the abbot.

关 键 词：白云观 清规 国法 安世霖 

分 类 号：K25[历史地理—历史学]