CAJ | 학술논문

刘炫撰著《孝经述议》以注解和发明《古文孝经孔传》，力排众家，不主郑氏，尤其对当时流行的东晋南朝人之注解做了回应。从某种程度上说，此书在《孝经》学史上综合了南北思想，成为走向唐代经学统一时代的先导，可谓是《孝经》学发展的一大转折点。《古文孝经孔传》对《孝经》的解释有着浓重的法家色彩，将《孝经》解释为饱含刑名治术之书，此正与曹魏时期的名理之学及博通风气相合，同时亦与曹魏以重典治国相应。以此为线索可推测该书之成书当在曹魏时期，而《孝经述议》对颇富法家意味的《古文孝经孔传》不但未予以批评，反而能予以高度认同，也正是因为两者均成书于从分裂走向统一、需要强调法治以整合社会的历史时代。魏晋南北朝时期正是律法儒家化的时期，儒、法关系与当时的忠孝之辨、仁孝之辨紧密结合在一起，成为三大主题。《孝经》本身论述忠孝关系，且有专门关涉律法的《五刑章》，故成为当时士人关注的重要典籍。刘炫对这三大主题都做了回应，他主张忠先于孝、仁大于孝，此正与其主张不孝之罪在三千刑律之内的立场一致。而刘炫的解释也凸显出历史上对《孝经》的解释呈现出礼仪化和刑法化两种不同的趋向，这体现出了法律的儒家化和儒家经学对法家思想的吸收之两重面向。
류현찬저《효경술의》이주해화발명《고문효경공전》，력배음가，불주정씨，우기대당시류행적동진남조인지주해주료회응。종모충정도상설，차서재《효경》학사상종합료남북사상，성위주향당대경학통일시대적선도，가위시《효경》학발전적일대전절점。《고문효경공전》대《효경》적해석유착농중적법가색채，장《효경》해석위포함형명치술지서，차정여조위시기적명리지학급박통풍기상합，동시역여조위이중전치국상응。이차위선색가추측해서지성서당재조위시기，이《효경술의》대파부법가의미적《고문효경공전》불단미여이비평，반이능여이고도인동，야정시인위량자균성서우종분렬주향통일、수요강조법치이정합사회적역사시대。위진남북조시기정시율법유가화적시기，유、법관계여당시적충효지변、인효지변긴밀결합재일기，성위삼대주제。《효경》본신논술충효관계，차유전문관섭율법적《오형장》，고성위당시사인관주적중요전적。류현대저삼대주제도주료회응，타주장충선우효、인대우효，차정여기주장불효지죄재삼천형률지내적립장일치。이류현적해석야철현출역사상대《효경》적해석정현출례의화화형법화량충불동적추향，저체현출료법률적유가화화유가경학대법가사상적흡수지량중면향。
Liu Xuan composed Xiaojing shuyi （descriptive comments on the classic of filial piety） in order to promote Kong＇s Commentary on the Xiaofing in Old Text. To some degree from the perspective of the developmental history of the studies on Xiaofing, his book was a great turning point; it combined and absorbed the learnings of southern and northern areas. Therefore this book can be seen as a signal of uniting the Classic studies during the Tang Dynasty. The explanation of Xiaojing in Kong＇s Commentary was full of legalism thoughts. Xiaojing became a book filled with content related to punishment and legal systems. This explanation coordinated with the learning of name-principle which was popular during the Cao-wei Dynasty, and also with the Cao-wei legal policy. Accordingly, it implies that the publishing time was not at the beginning of the East Jin Dynasty, but in the Cao-wei Dynasty. Liu Xuan＇s Shuyi did not criticize the legalism tendency in Kong＇s Commentary, and even agreed with this tendency, which was reasonable as both of the two books were produced in an era during which Chinese nation were going from separation to unity, and emphasizing legalism was helpful in such an era. The period from Wei Jin to the Six Dynasties is a time of adapting the legal system into Confucianism. The three pairs of categories, Confucianism and legalism, loyalty and filial piety, benevolence and filial piety, interacted into each other. Xiaojing itself discussed the relation between loyalty and filial piety, and accordingly Xiaojing was inevitably held in great esteem by the scholars in that period. Through analyzing Liu Xuan＇s interpretation to ＂Five Punishments＂ of Xiaojing, it reveals that the discussions about the relationship between the three pairs of categories were presented in the book. In his viewpoint, loyalty is more important than filial piety, benevolence can include filial piety, and the punishment of non-filial piety must be under control of the legal system. Liu Xuan＇s interpretation shows that there existed two directions concerning the interpretation to Xiaojing in history, which reflected two diametrically different orientations ： one is legal Confucianization; the other is infusing legalism into Confucian Classics while interpreting them. Kong＇s Commentary was not composed during the beginning of the East Jin Dynasty, but in the Cao-wei Dyansty.