前漢廟制論議と『禮記』祭法篇

Abstract

In this paper the author analyzes the ancestral temple system contained in the "Jifa" 祭法 chapter of the Liji, making clear that this system provided the framework of the controversy over the ancestral temple system during the Former Han dynasty, especially in the period of the reign of Emperor Yuan, and also makes a preliminary investigation of the formative period of the creation of the "Jifa." As is well known, there is a discrepancy in the interpretations of the ertiao 二祧 (two receptacles for the tablets of more remote ancestors) by Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 and Wang Su 王肅 in the description of the ancestral temple system in the "Jifa." Both err in interpreting Zuxiaomiao 祖孝廟 in this chapter as the ancestral temple of the great ancestor. Only Wang Yinzhi 王引之 correctly interpreted Zuxiaomiao as the ancestral temple of the ancestor five generations earlier, and interpreted ertiao as two receptacles for the tablets of ancestors six and seven generations earlier. Based on Wang Yinzhi's interpretation, the basis for the ancestral temple system contained in the "Jifa" is the following two principles. One, scrapping the ancestral temple of ancestors without the prescribed degree of consanguinity (the great ancestor included) and fixing the number of coexisting ancestral temples. Two, preserving the ancestral temple of the ancestors who rendered particularly distinguished services, and making them permanent temples called zu 祖, zong 宗 and the like. According to these two principles in this system, the number of coexisting ancestral temple of recent ancestors was set substantially at five. The main issue in the controversy over the ancestral temple system in the Former Han dynasty especially in the period of the reign of Emperor Yuan involved these two principles. The former principle clarified the problem of the absence of the great ancestor of Emperor Gaozu, and the latter principle, by making the ancestral temple of Gaozu permanent, created a system suited to the Han dynasty substantially making it possible for the ancestral temple of Gaozu to replace that of the great ancestor. The main issue in the controversy over the ancestral temple system in this period had not begun as an argument over restrictions on the total number of ancestral temples, so neither the theory of Zheng Xuan nor that of Wang Su could be brought to bear. When Liu Xin 劉歆 started his argument at the end of the Former Han dynasty by dealing with restrictions on the total number of ancestral temples, he also provided the impetus for distorting the meaning of Zuxiaomiao as the ancestral temple of the great ancestor, and the ancestral temple system contained in the "Jifa" had therefore accomplished its historical mission and sank into oblivion. As concerns the formative period of the "Jifa, " the wusi 五祀 (five sacrifices of the house) described by the "Jifa" are very different from the so-called wusi composed of shi 室 (center of a house), zao 竈 (a cooking stove), men 門 (a gate), hu 戶 (a door) and xing 行 (a road), so we can presume that formation of the "Jifa" is older than the formation of the so-called wusi. The Wusi Muzhu 五祀木 (five tablets for sacrifices of the house) and Bushi Daoci 卜筮禱祠 (divination and prayer) records of the Baoshan Chu tomb, the Rishu 日書 of Shuihudi Qin bamboo slips, the Shierji十二紀of the Lüshichunqiu, and other such materials show that at the end of the Warring States period the combination of so-called wusi had already appeared, so the formative period of the "Jifa" can be assumed to go back to the Warring States period.