《淮南子》提出「齊俗」之說以作為自身對「天下風俗的理想籌劃之道」問題的回應。然倘檢視所論，它實際兼有二種立場：一主多元並立，一屬統綜歸一；本文名前者為「尊異」，稱後者為「主一」。後世之主流觀點乃普遍以「尊異」定位《淮南》風俗立場，而視「主一」說為學人對其思想之誤讀。本文之目的要有三端：一則揭顯《淮南》風俗觀二說並見之現實；次則立基於對此現實之正視，進一步釐清二說之關係；末則追探《淮南》風俗觀的實踐之道，尤其聚焦詰問「無所宰制」的「主一」（統一風俗行動）籌劃在實踐上如何可能。本文認為，《淮南》風俗立場實係透過「主一」以保「尊異」，故純定位它作「主一」或「尊異」，恐都不免落於一偏。

The Huainanzi 淮南子 put forward the idea of “qisu 齊俗” (integrating customs) as a response to the issue regarding “the ideal way to coordinate different customs of the whole country.” However, an examination of the arguments advanced in the text reveals that it actually involves two stances: one concerns the coexistence of diverse customs, and the other is about the unification of customs under one umbrella; the former is referred to in this article as “respect for diversity” and the latter as “unification of customs.” In the mainstream view of later generations, the prevailing stance on customs in the Huainanzi is “respect for diversity,” and the concept of “unification of customs” reflects a misinterpretation of its ideas by scholars. The purpose of this article is threefold: first, to reveal the reality that the two stances on customs in the Huainanzi are concurrent; second, to further clarify the relationship between the two stances based on a proper examination of this reality; and finally, to explore the way in which these two stances were put into practice, with a special focus on the question of how “unifying customs” without domination could be implemented. This article argues that the Huainanzi’s stance on customs is to preserve “respect for diversity” through “unification of customs.” For this reason, to simply define the text’s stance as “unification of customs” or “respect for diversity” is likely to be biased.

《淮南子》;《鴻烈》;齊俗;風俗;劉安;漢代

the Huainanzi 淮南子; the Honglie 鴻烈; qisu 齊俗; customs; Liu An 劉安; Han Dynasty