论文部分内容阅读
中国传统律学有着研究关键字的传统,“律母”、“律眼”即是这一传统的典型代表,但它忽略了另一关键字,即“类”字,它应当是中国传统律学的一个核心范畴。因为:第一,在中国古代法律中,如果没有“类”字及其蕴涵的分类方法、类型化方法,法律将变得繁复苛碎,就不可能出现较高水平的法律。第二,在中国古代律学作品中,如果没有“类”字及“类推解释”方法,就不可能出现高水平的律注作品。第三,在中国古代司法中,以“类”为基础的观念与方法始终居于主导地位。“类”字犹如一把打开中国传统律学大门的钥匙,其功能与作用不可替代。“类”理论及方法并非外来物,而是一种本土资源,早在战国时期荀子与墨家后学就发展出了比较系统的类理论,古人在编纂辞书、类书时也运用到了比较高超的分类技巧,它们对中国古代立法技术的提高有很大促进作用。当然,中国古代“类”理论及方法也有一定的局限性,这对中国古代法律及律学的发展产生了一定的消极影响。
Chinese traditional law has the tradition of researching keywords, “law”, “law” is the typical representative of this tradition, but it ignores another keyword, that is, “class” It should be a core category of Chinese traditional law. Because: First, in ancient Chinese law, without a “class” and its implication of classification, type of method, the law will become complicated and harsh, it is impossible to appear a higher level of law. Second, in ancient Chinese legal works, it is impossible to have a high standard of legal writing without the “class” and “analogy” methods. Thirdly, in the ancient Chinese judiciary, the concepts and methods based on “class ” always dominates. “Class ” word is like a key to open the door to traditional Chinese law, its function and role can not be replaced. “Class ” theory and method is not a foreign thing, but a kind of local resources. As early as during the Warring States period, Xunzi and Mohist School developed a systematic theory of class. The ancients also applied to the compilation of dictionaries and class books Classification techniques, they are on the ancient Chinese legislation to improve the technology has greatly contributed. Of course, the ancient Chinese theories and methods of “class” also have certain limitations, which have had a certain negative impact on the development of ancient Chinese law and law.