新法家的“国家主义”形式法治观批判

兴起于清末民初民族危亡之秋的新法家,在复兴先秦法家学说的同时注重对其进行现代化改造与转化,力倡“国家主义”的“新法治主义”并以之为救时济世的有效手段;当代中国的法治建设实践则被某些学者视为“法家第三期”法治思想的展开.基于新法家思潮对法治建设的可能影响,有必要对其工具主义理性和形式主义法治观予以批判性反思,以重塑“实质法治”与“形式法治”、法治的内在目的与外在目标的合理关系,为“法治中国”蓝图的顺利实现提供理论支持.     

“儒家人治法家法治对立论”质疑——兼论先秦法律思想研究中的一个方法问题

<正> 一、“儒家人治法家法治对立论”的由来在我国,对先秦儒法两家法律观的研究和评价,有一种影响颇大、流传极广的观点,即“儒家人治法家法治对立论”。人治和法治并不是中国法律史上固有的概念,而是随着近代的“西学东渐”之风,由我国资产阶级学者从西方引进的。最先将人治和法治用到先秦儒法两家头上去的,要推梁启超。他在一九二二年出版的《先秦政治思想史》一书中,称儒家为“人治主义”、“德治主义”、“礼治主义”,称法家为“物治主义”或“法治主义”,以及“术治主义”和“势治主义”。     

论先秦儒法之争及对中国现代法治和谐社会的借鉴意义

先秦时期儒法之争萌发了中国传统法律文化的精义。儒家认为礼制是社会规范的最高准则,追求整个社会的道德教化和道德规范下的稳定秩序。法家主张严刑厉法,法律的平等适用。但儒法之争的实质,是人治下的治国模式选择的争论,是法律与道德关系论争的中国化实践。现代中国法治和谐社会的建设需要探求中国传统法律思想的精髓,秉承民族优秀法律精神。     

法家的法治主义：历史话语与当代使命

从《史记》到《四库全书》,法家学派的法治主义主张蒙受了众多史家的非难与谴责;近现代以来,法家的法治主义又遭受了来自西方的＂实质法治主义＂学说的侵袭。其实,法家的＂以法治国＂、＂严刑峻法＂等政治法律思想是中国原生态法治概念,亦是真正意义上的中国法治的本土资源。在当今多元政治思潮并立、社会经济充满激烈竞争的新战国时代及严峻的中国现实问题面前,法家的法治主义主张不失为当今中国法治建设道路的一种选择。     

“法治”与“专制”——韩非的“法治”思想评述

西方现代意义上的“法治”是近代资产阶级革命的产物,是封建君主专制的对立物。它的基本特点是宣传法律至上。提倡法制主义,任何人,包括国家的君主在内,都没有超越法律之上的特权。而本文所谈的“法治”则是中国春秋战国时期法家的主张,其基本内涵是提倡把法作为治理国家,巩固君主专制的重要手段。法是君主意志的体现,法的最高宗旨是维护皇权。也就是说,“法治”与“专制”达到了高度的统一。“法治”从属于“专制”,服务于“专制”。战国末期的韩非正是上述主张的典型代表人物。     

论儒家法思想对当代法治之借鉴意义

近代意义上的法治及法治理论主要是从西方社会传入中国,故近代以来中国在构建法治过程中深受西方法治的影响,而对中国传统法律精神及文化思想的借鉴和吸收不足。作为中国传统法律思想代表之一的儒家法思想中也有着其一以贯彻的理性和价值,可能超越特定时期特定统治阶级的利益而具永恒意义,因而可为任何文明秩序所借鉴,尤其可为当代中国的法治建设所借鉴。     

“少杀慎杀”的前提是“当判必判”

在很多学院派专家的眼里，礼教伦常的沿袭，是中国向法治社会转型之最大壁垒，譬如“杀人偿命”的朴素正义观等。于传统社会而言，法律秩序与伦理道德本就难分清楚；于现代法治社会来说，法律与道德必须有明确的分野。今天的中国，刑罚轻缓化图景已日趋鲜明，少杀慎杀，早就是司法实践中的一个价值取向。     

“法治”概念在当代中国的继受及其意义

“法治”在当代中国逐渐成为大家耳熟能详的概念.从中国具体法治实践看,无论在学界还是法律实践部门,尽管都在使用“法治”概念,但实际上是对大陆法系“法治国”或“法治主义”的继受,这对中国的法治建设产生了一定的积极意义的同时也带来了一定的消极影响.如何实现走出继受,建构起拥有自己发展个性的法秩序模式,成为摆在我们面前一个义不容辞的使命.     

论西方自然法的精神内涵

自然法思想起源于古希腊,其中包含着西方的古代自然主义法治观、中世纪的神学法治观和近代的理性主义法治观.在西方的法治思想与法治传统中自然法蕴含着公平、道德、理性、人权、自由等诸多精神的内涵,正是由于其丰富的观念造就了西方法理学范畴内最具持久,最富有生命力的法律思想.本文先是通过对西方自然法思想的起源与发展的阐述,然后进而阐述出表达出西方自然法中所蕴含的公平、道德、理性、人权、自由五方面的思想内涵.     

中国传统法律的宗教性特征

在法律社会学视角下,中国传统法律研究主要包括“德治”和“法治”两种研究范式;这 两种范式都过于强调法律的儒家化特征进而忽视了法律的官方表达与民间实践的区别,因此未能回 应西方学界认为中国不具有法律或法治的法律东方主义观点。事实上,中国传统法律的官方表达与民 间实践之间并不具有一致性,在儒家化法律表达之下实际上存在着大量的宗教性法律实践;正是基于 对法律宗教性特征的发现,中国传统法律的运行机制才能够摆脱法律儒家化的简单模式,形成了一种 哲学、道德、宗教和法律相融合的复杂互动模式,从而为从法律宗教性特征和复杂文化面向的视角回 应法律东方主义观点提供一种新的思想资源。     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Immigration,intermarriage and the changing face of Europe in the post war period

In this article we compare the propensity to intermarry of various migrant groups and their children who settled in Germany, France, England, Belgium and the Netherlands in the post-war period, using a wide range of available statistical data. We try to explain different intermarriage patterns within the framework of Alba and Nee's assimilation theory and pay special attention to the role of religion, colour and colonial background. We therefore compare colonial with non colonial migrants and within these categories between groups with ‘European’ (Christian) and non-European (Islam, Hinduism) religions. First of all, religion appears to be an important variable. Migrants whose faith has no tradition in Western Europe intermarry at a much lower rate than those whose religious backgrounds correspond with those that are common in the country of settlement. The rate of ethnic endogamous marriages in Western Europe are highest in Hindu and Muslim communities, often regardless if they came as guest workers or colonial migrants. Whereas differences in religion diminish the propensity to intermarry, colour or ‘racial’ differences on the other hand seem to be less important. This is largely explained by the pre-migration socialisation. Furthermore, the paper argues that the attention to institutions, as rightly advocated by Richard Alba and Victor Nee, needs a more refined and layered elaboration. Institutions, often as barriers to intermarriage, do not only emanate from the receiving society, but also—be it less formalized—within migrant communities. Especially religions and family systems, but also organized nationalist feelings, can have a profound influence on how migrants think about endogamy. Finally, strong pressures to assimilate, often through institutionalized forms of discrimination and stigmatization, not only produce isolation and frustrate assimilation (with resulting low intermarriage rates), but can also stimulate assimilation by 'passing' mechanisms. These factors, together with a more comparative perspective, are not completely ignored in the new assimilation theory, but—as this study of Western European intermarriage patterns stresses—deserve to be included more systematically in historical and social scientist analyses.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

Best practices for structuring a family court parenting plan evaluation under the 2022 AFCC Guidelines

Evaluation appointment orders provide enforceable scaffolding for conduct of family court parenting plan evaluations, and use of the evaluator's reports, feedback, file, and testimony. Unlike a contract, a stipulated or adjudicated appointment order is directly enforceable by the family court. It unambiguously positions the evaluator as the family court's appointee – answerable directly to the court and, in some jurisdictions, protected by quasi-judicial immunity from damages claims. A well-crafted appointment order governs the roles and expectations of the court, the evaluator, the parties, the lawyers, and the collateral witnesses. An appointment order mandates the legal duties, rights, powers, and responsibilities of the professionals, the parties, and the collateral witnesses. At minimum, an appointment order articulates the legal basis for the appointment, the purpose and scope of the evaluation, compensation of evaluator, and the duty of the parties to participate in the process. A written evaluation protocol or procedures statement discloses in advance the methods of investigation and assessment that the evaluator intends to use. Together, the appointment order and written protocol help the evaluator, lawyers, parents, and judge manage the complexity of the evaluation process.     

Illumination,Imagination, Creativity: Rājaśekhara,Kuntaka, and Jagannātha on <Emphasis Type="Italic">Pratibhā</Emphasis>

Sanskrit poeticians make the visionary faculty of pratibhā a necessary part of the professional poet’s make-up. The term has a pre-history in Bhartṛhari’s linguistic metaphysics, where it is used to explain the unitary perception of meaning. This essay examines the relation between pratibhā and possible theories of the imagination, with a focus on three unusual theoreticians—Rājaśekhara, Kuntaka, and Jagannātha Paṇḍita. Rājaśekhara offers an analysis of pratibhā that is heavily interactive, requiring the discerning presence of the bhāvaka listener or critic; he also positions pratibhā in relation to Bildung (vyutpatti) and practice. For Kuntaka, pratibhā, never an ex nihilo creation by a poet, serves as the basis for the peculiar forms of intensified insight and experience that constitute poetry; these may also involve the creative scrambling and re-articulation of the object in terms of its systemic composition. At times, Kuntaka’s pratibhā comes close to a strong notion of imaginative process. But the full-fledged thematization of the imagination, and of pratibhā as its support and mechanism, is best seen in the seventeenth-century debates preserved for us by Jagannātha. A link is suggested between the discourse of poetic imagination in Jagannātha and similar themes that turn up in Indo-Persian poets such as Bedil.     

Preventing Homelessness for System‐Involved Youth

Too many youth and young adults find themselves on the streets, couch‐surfing with friends, in emergency shelters or worse, after exiting the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. In some circumstances, youth have had court hearings until their exit from the legal system, but those hearings have not focused on long‐range plans of youth and emergencies youth may encounter. In other circumstances, there has been little or no planning prior to discharge, especially for young people who leave the juvenile justice system. Courts can and should prevent, alleviate or end youth homelessness for youth who appear before them through strategies that are enumerated in the recently‐passed NCJFCJ resolution. This article expounds on three of these strategies – coordinating transition and re‐entry plans, insisting on effective legal representation of youth, and utilizing sound judicial leadership. It also describes the concurrent efforts of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice and the American Bar Association's Homeless Youth Legal Network to remove legal barriers and improve outcomes for youth and young adults experiencing homelessness.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.