從現存的史料看來，要確定禪讓制度曾否在中國史上存在，恐怕離定論甚遠。但在學術史上，禪讓是儒家學派的一項重要政治理念，卻是一項業經確定的事實。這反映在戰國近晚，出現了大量對中國禪讓制度的討論，尤其是儒家內部不同子學派，對禪讓問題各自有不同的主張，都足以證明禪讓制度，引起先秦儒家學者的充分關注。同時，先秦主要學派對儒家禪讓說，都有或多或少的反應，從有類似觀點的墨家，到採取徹底反對態度的法家；從似對讓天下表現極不關心的道家，到以為政治應屬循環的陰陽家，仍然會對儒家禪讓觀作出反響。這些學術觀點，正是構成「百家爭鳴」現象的一些主要內容，也是學術史上其中一項極熱鬧的學術記錄，這正是本文的寫作目標與重心所在。

Judging from existing historical data, it is impossible to determine whether the “Abdication system” has existed in Chinese history. However, abdication theories are important political ideas of Confucian schools in late Warring States Periods, it is an established fact in the intellectual history. There has been a lot of discussion of the Chinese abdication system, especially the different schools within Confucianism, and each of them has different opinions on the issue, which are sufficient proof of the abdication theories drew the full attention of Confucian scholars. At the same time, the main schools of Pre-Qin had more or less responding to the Confucian abdication theories, for example, the Mohist shared similar views to the legalist who adopted a radically opposing attitude; and the Taoists who seemed not so concerned about the issues to the idea that politics should be a cycle of “Yin” 陰）and “Yang”陽）, all of them would still reverberate on Confucian abdication theories. These academic viewpoints are some of the main contents that constitute the phenomenon of “contention of diversified thoughts” 百家爭鳴）, and they are also one of the most fruitful academic discussions in academic history. This is precisely the goal and focus of this article.

禪讓; 儒家子學派; 墨家; 道家; 法家

Abdication theories; sub-school of Confucianism; Mohist; Taoism; Legalist