宋代莊學中的重玄視域──以陳景元為線索

Abstract

隨著明代莊學研究的興盛，宋代莊學史研究逐漸退潮，轉往單論莊學家個案的研究取向。同時也在眾學者的努力下，逐步探究諸家個案的思想深度。本論欲以相對冷門的陳景元為研究對象，考察其重玄思想。並以其作為北宋著名道士學者的影響力為契機，進一步觀察宋代莊學中隱含的「重玄視域」。 陳景元的莊學，以老學為本，具備豐厚的老莊學與重玄學傳統。尤其他在繼承重玄道士成玄英的論述下，繼續以體用架構深化道論、性論議題，進行「雙遣」、「雙照」的表述形式。這些傳承基礎加上其所開展的創造性詮釋，適合與正值改革、轉型的宋代學術氛圍，進行對話交流。 過往雖已有學者嘗試進行疏通與連結，但礙於相關歷史資料有限、莊學著作時間爭議，以及對宋代莊學普遍「儒學化」的既定印象，使得他在宋代學術思想史、莊學史中的地位，仍易被限縮於章句、音訓與版本校勘之貢獻。 本論嘗試在最新的考訂成果上，綜合陳景元的老莊學與影響力進行考量。研究焦點轉由陳氏所推廣之「重玄學」，作為宋代莊學的觀看基點。藉由相互參看，探尋諸家莊學思想中潛具的重玄思維。研究之交涉對象，以新學、理學、道教三方人物為主，分別由「道論」、「性論」作主題式探討。這種以「重玄視域」切入的新視角，可擴充、深入學術思想史的幅度，觀看出宋代莊學「儒學化」以外不同的風貌。 透過重新探討重玄學特徵，本論將唐宋之間的重玄學緊密連結。依此循下探討，大抵得出以下論點：（一）陳景元的老學、莊學，皆具備「重玄視域」。（二）新學集團未必「以王安石思想為中心」，多數成員的體用、道氣關係，接近重玄學的道論，並有別於荊公。（三）南宋林希逸之道論，接近張載、程顥思想一系；性論接近程頤、朱熹一系。其道論、性論看似衝突，實則可以重玄思想整合。也唯有以「重玄視域」觀之，方能避免誤解其論「無極而太極」、「天地之性」的內涵。（四）道士褚伯秀承襲陳景元諸多觀點與用詞，並具備顯著的重玄視域，而不同於理學思想，應正視其道家、道教立場的莊學思想。 此外，論文亦點出陳景元在莊學所開拓的議題，例如改造郭象的「獨化論」，以將道「氣化生成」的玄妙作用顯題化；探討儒道關係之分合，以及對〈天下〉篇進行「道本儒末」的建構，提供給其他莊學家參考基礎，以闡發出不同於王安石、蘇軾立場的「莊子尊孔論」。

With the flourishing of Zhuangzi scholarship in the Ming Dynasty, the history of Zhuangzi scholarship in the Song Dynasty gradually ebbed and shifted to the research orientation of discussing the cases of Zhuangzi academic alone. At the same time, with the efforts of many scholars, the depth of thought of the cases has been gradually explored. In this dissertation, we would like to take Chen Jing Yuan, who is relatively a unpopular academic, as the object of study and aims to investigate his Chongxuan philosoph. Taking his influence as a famous Daoist academic in the Northern Song Dynasty as an opportunity, and further observe the “Perspective of Chongxuan” implied in Zhuangzi scholars during Song Dynasty. Chen Jing Yuan's Zhuangzi scholarship is based on Laozi scholarship, and has profound tradition of Lao-Zhuang scholarship and Chongxuan scholarship. In particular, he continued to deepen the issues of Dao theory and Nature theory by using Tiyong framework, in the form of “bilateral negative” and “bilateral positive”, while inheriting the viewpoint of Cheng Xuan Ying.These inherited foundations, together with his creative interpretations, are suitable for dialogue and exchange with the reforming and transforming academic atmosphere of the Song Dynasty. Although some scholars have attempted to untangle and connect, due to the limited historical data, the time controversy of writing, and the established impression of the general “Confucianization” of Zhuangzi scholarship in the Song Dynasty. The status is still easily restricted in the contribution of chapters, phonetic transcription, and edition proofreading. This dissertation attempts to synthesize the influence of Chen Jing yuan’s Lao-Zhuang scholarship with the latest results of research, and switched to the “Perspective of Chongxuan” as the basis for viewing Song Dynasty Zhuangzi scholarship. Through cross-referencing, we explore the potential Chongxuan thinking in various thinkers. The interactive subjects are mainly the three groups of New Learning, Neo-Confucianism, and Daoism, and discussed by the theme of “Dao theory” and “Nature theory”. This new angle from “Perspective of Chongxuan”, can expand and deepen the history of academic thought, and reveal the different styles beyond the “Confucianization” of Zhuangzi scholarship in Song Dynasty. By discussing the characteristics of ChongXue philosophy again, this dissertation deeply linked the ChongXue philosophy between the Tang and Song Dynasties. Based on this gradually discussed, the following arguments can be caught: (1) Chen Jing Yuan’s Laozi scholarship and Zhuangzi scholarship both have “Perspective of Chongxuan”. (2) The New Learning Academic Group is not necessarily centered on Wang Anshi's thought. Most members’ discussions on relationship of “Ti-yong” and “Dao-qi” are close to the Chongxuan, and different from Wang Anshi. (3) Lin Xiyi's Dao theory is close to the discussion of Zhang Zai and Cheng Hao, and his Nature theory is close to the discussion of Cheng Yi and Zhu Xi. The two theories seem to conflict, but they can be integrated with method of Chongxuan. Only from the perspective of Chongxuan, it will not misunderstand that he discusses the connotation of “Wuji er Taiji” and “Nature of Tiandi”. (4) The Daoist priest Chu Boxiu inherited plenty viewpoints and parlance from Chen Jing Yuan. His discussion distinctly has the perspective of Chongxuan, which is different from Neo-Confucianism. Therefore, the Daoist standpoint in his exegesis of Zhuangzi should be taken seriously. This dissertation also points out the topic that Chen Jing yuan has developed in Zhuangzi scholarship, such as adjusting Guo Xiang's “Independent Transformation theory ” to make explicitly the mysterious function of the Dao in “ Qi Transformation and Creation”. Subsequently, he discussed the similarities and differences between Confucianism and Daoism, and proposed “Daoism is primary while the Confucianism is secondary” in the Tianxia chapter. Those provide a foundation for reference by other Zhuangzi scholars to elaborate the “Zhuangzi honors Confucius” that differs from the theoretical types of Wang Anshi and Su Shi.