汉文帝颁布遗诏薄葬短丧，后世士大夫对之多有破坏仁孝的批评。但短丧适应于亟待新君执政的现实需求，故又常常被援引以证明天子短丧的合理性。实际上，短丧才是天子为先君服丧的常制。汉至宋天子短丧与三年之丧反复的论辩，说明儒家丧礼设计重于人情伦理而欠缺对现实的考虑，这一欠缺恰好由短丧故例弥补。但短丧似乎始终欠缺情感和人伦的关怀与实现。因此后世天子服丧之制出现了内宫三年、外朝短丧的调和之制，以做到情礼相称。但坚持三年之丧，也许并不代表内心父子之情的存在。当丧亲之情被礼教导为需要以三年之丧来表达时，情的表达就经礼的桥梁而将伦理的圆满作为最终目的；实践礼的功用已不只是达情。反推实践礼的动机，也未必只是自然之情。 In Confucian view of funeral rite, the “three year mourning” seems to be an unalterable rite. According to the Confucian classics on rites, that a son accomplish “three year mourning” for his dead father is an emotion expression consistent with his grief,and meanwhile achieves the father-son ethics in Confucian value. However, in Han dynasty, the emperor Wen announced his will that he was against with the current social custom of having lavish burial and long-term mourning, thus inquiring his funeral to be frugal and mourning, short. The short-mourning is obviously discordant with the mourning rites in the classics of rites, and many official-scholars in the later dynasties criticized emperor Wen’s “creation” of short-mourning as having profound harm to ethics. However, it is undeniable that short-mourning is more suitable for the real need that the state affairs needs the new emperor to take office.Therefore, emperor Wen’s short-mourning will was often applied as an authoritative example to justify a new emperor’s enacting short-mourning. In fact, short-mourning was the mainstream in new emperors’mourning practice for the former emperor，also his father. The recurring debate of short-mourning and “three year mourning” in the history actually illustrates that the Confucian design of mourning rites emphasizes on the affection and ethics in kinship,but lacks the consideration of real needs,which produces practical problems that cannot be solved within the Confucian theory. While emperor Wen’s short-mourning rightly complements the confucian design. Although the short-mourning has the benefits on reality,compared to “three year mourning”, it still seem to be inadequate for expressing the affection and accomplishing ethics between father and son.In the statements of emperors insisting on enacting “three year mourning”, the father-son affection was touchingly expressed.Thus,through the debates on what should be the proper mourning rites for a new emperor, a new rite that reconciles real needs and rules in the classics of rites appeared: the emperor would enact short-mourning in public while “three year mourning” back in private arena. In this new mourning rite, the rite( li ) seems to be again consistent with personal affection.But this study wants to challenge that the action of insisting on “three year mourning” does not necessarily mean the existence of true affection in father-son relationship.After one accepts the instructions of the rite( li ) that “three year mourning” is the proper way to express grief, the purpose of the expressions of affection is then the accomplishment of ethics,bridged by the appropriate rites.Besides,the personal accomplishment of ethics often brings a person positive social assessment,hence the function of enacting rites may be no longer simply to express affection.In turn,the motivation of enacting rites is propably not the true affection in heart. In the historic events where the new emperors insisted on “three year mourning”, the consideration of factors other than affection,such as politics and social situation,is more clearly shown.Based on the analysis of those events, this study argues that enacting “three year mourning” (or other type of long-time mourning which involves extremely harsh mourning life as the sign of grief) does not prove the existence of true affection.In the texts of the classics on rites,the so called “rites correspond to affection”may exists,but in the practice of rites,it is just a possibility.