When discussing Yao Shun's abdication, close people either believe or doubt, or give different explanations. These views are enlightening, but it is difficult to draw conclusions. We have investigated the views of Yao and Shun's abdication in the pre-Qin period, and found that although the attitudes of Confucianism, Mohism, Legalism and Taoism towards Yao and Shun's abdication are not consistent, even diametrically opposed, they also imply a lot in common and have certain unity. ?
Both Confucianism and Mohism regard Yao and Shun as saints and strongly advocate them. The Confucian concept of abdication obviously runs through the thought of destiny, and advocates that "heaven and sages are sages, heaven and sons are sons", which is why "Tang Yuchan, following the Yin and Zhou Dynasties, agreed" (On Mencius and Zhang Wan). Although Xunzi dismissed the legend of Yao and Shun's abdication as secular words and false and shallow words in Zheng Lun, it actually inherited Mencius' idea of opposing the imitation of "good names" in the real society, and while overcoming the contradiction between Confucianism and the real society, it concealed the thought of destiny in order to avoid misleading in political propaganda. Therefore, the Confucian view on Yao and Shun's abdication can be called "the theory of abdication by destiny". Mohism's view of abdication is very rich in Shang Xian's political thoughts, and its ideological basis is that "the ancients ruled by Saint Wang Zhiguo and Shang Xian ruled by virtue. Although those who work in agriculture and industry can do this, ... "(on Mozi Shang Xian) and so on. And advocated that "whoever elects the sages of the world should be regarded as the son of heaven" ("Mozi ditto"). Moreover, Mohism put the abdication system into practice, and the succession of its leader "Giant" was carried out in strict accordance with the abdication system. Therefore, Mohism's view of abdication may be called "Shang Xian's theory of abdication". ?
Legalists and Taoists are both critics and opponents of the theory of abdication. Han Feizi, a master of legalism, said in Yi Shuo: "The so-called sage and wise man in ancient times ... forced him to kill the king for profit. Shun forced Yao, Yu forced Shun, Jie and Zhou. These four kings, men and ministers killed their kings, are famous all over the world. " Han Feizi focuses on criticizing Shun Yu's failure to become a minister in forcing regicide. Taoism's criticism of the theory of abdication is different from that of legalists. By praising Xu You and others, it criticizes and opposes Yao Shun's condescending behavior of taking pleasure in the world. 》)。 In Taoism's view, the monarch's creation of the world is not only admirable, but also an "insult" forced by others, not the way of the monarch. The implication is that not only officials should not be subject to the world, but kings should also not let the world be subject to people, and everything should be natural. France and Taoism oppose the theory of abdication because the key they consider is that they are worried that future generations will follow suit. "Everyone follows the path of Yao and Shun, and there are chaotic ministers and fathers" ("Han Feizi's Loyalty and Filial Piety"), "The foundation of chaos must be born between Yao and Shun, and it will last for thousands of years" ("Zhuangzi Geng Sang Chu"), which is really a masterpiece. ?
There is no need to say much about the story of Yao Shun's abdication. Although Taoism is a critic and opponent of the theory of abdication, it does not deny the story of Yao and Shun's abdication. While praising others, it also affirmed the inheritance relationship between Yao Shun and Yu. Han Feizi, a representative figure of Legalism, described the living environment of Yao Shunyu in five articles, and thought that it was a good thing for the king to let the world "be kept in prison, leaving officials to work". This shows that Han Feizi also admitted that the story of Yao Shunyu's demise did happen. Although the attitudes and explanations of the pre-Qin philosophers are different, it is not difficult to find that there seems to be a gradual relationship between the concepts of Yao and Shun of Confucianism, France and Taoism. They all paid full attention to the negative and misleading effects of political propaganda, and tried to overcome this effect by criticizing abdication theory and expounding the inheritance relationship between Yao Shunyu. In fact, they all affirmed the story of Yao Shun's abdication to varying degrees or from different angles.