“分封”与“郡县”之辨的复杂意蕴  

The Complex Implications of the Differentiation between “Fiefdoms” and “Counties”

作　　者：彭新武[1] PENG Xinwu(School of Philosophy,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China)

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学哲学院,北京100872

出　　处：《河北大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2022年第5期8-15,共8页Journal of Hebei University(Philosophy and Social Science)

基　　金：教育部哲学社会科学重大攻关项目“我国古代治国理念研究”(18JZD023)。

摘　　要：历史表明,分封制所期望的“血亲屏藩”是一把双刃剑,始终存在着“内讧”的危险。虽然自秦代起郡县制成为历代王朝的基本定式,但一个疆域庞大的帝国单一依靠郡县制存在着极大的管理困难,故而,既能维护中央集权统治又能兼顾“亲亲”之道的“两制并存”和“两制综合”的出现便成为必然。关于分封与郡县的争论,还经常涉及“公”或“私”的伦理评判,尽管争论者观点各异,但其中他们对历代君主莫不以“公天下”的名义而成就一己之“私”的揭露是深刻的。纵观郡县与分封的历史演绎,在君主专制下,唯有君臣权势悬殊,才能上下相安;而实行分封制又必然导致君臣彼此猜忌、对抗与仇杀。因此,如何把握集权和分权的关系就显得尤为重要。History has shown that the “consanguinity barrier” desired by the system of fiefdoms is a double-edged sword, which includes the danger of “internal strife”.Although the system of counties has been the basic rule since the Qin Dynasty, there are great difficulties in managing a large empire with a single county system.Therefore, the emergence of “coexistence of two systems” and “synthesis of two systems”,which could maintain centralized rule while taking into account the “affection for one’s kin”,became inevitable.The debate over fiefdoms and counties also often involved ethical judgments of “public” or “private”.Despite the different views of the debaters, they have exposed the fact that the monarchs of the past dynasties have always achieved their own “selfishness” in the name of the “public world”.Throughout the history of fiefdoms and counties, it is clear that under the despotism, the only way to have peace between the top and the bottom is to have disparity of power between the ruler and the ministers, while the implementation of fiefdoms is bound to mutual suspicion, confrontation and hatred between the ruler and the ministers.Hence, it is particularly important to deal with the relationship between centralization and decentralization.

关 键 词：亲亲之道 两制综合 公天下 集权 分权 

分 类 号：D691[政治法律—政治学]