《鶡冠子》的道法思想─從「天」、「地」、「人」、「命」「四稽」談起

Abstract

《鶡冠子》曾陷偽書之說、加以文字脫謬、少有佳注，故歷代鮮有研究。近年出土文獻雖然證明了《鶡冠子》為戰國後期作品、同時也出現可供參考對照的其它經典、對其時思想有更多認識，但與之而起的研究主要著重於《鶡冠子》與《黃帝四經》的相似之處、或者黃老學說的議題，較少研究作品是單純以《鶡冠子》思想內涵為主的，相當可惜。在此考量下，本文主旨為解析《鶡冠子》一書中的主軸──道法思想，並簡單處理其與《黃帝四經》的關係，以求貢獻於《鶡冠子》的思想內涵解析、以及對其學派歸屬與思想史意義有所交代。 《鶡冠子》以「道」作為思想體系的主軸，延續著先民們對於認識活動議題的關注，在《老子》之後發揚了「道」在共同生活中的秩序功能，並提出更豐富的論述，展現了重「物」、重「異」、以及強調道用的特色。《鶡冠子》提出「道」與「一」的「同」、「異」開展、「空」、「無不備」的哲學意含、以及「天」與「氣」的靜態性質和動態流動論述，藉由這三條軸線處理萬物開展議題。延續著萬物開展的論點，《鶡冠子》提出「四稽」以論說「天徵其文、地顯其理、人發其道、君制其命」，說明「道」會滯留於此四「稽」，而聖人藉由稽考「四稽」而對「道」以及這個世界有更深刻的認識，並且發揮成「聖生道」、「道生法」的主張，論述了一套初於認識終於治理的道法思想。就內容來說，道法思想利用「道」、「法」、「令」的靜態描述與動態運作，說明了統治者藉由「法」表現為「神」、「明」的近遠動態認識能力，其中包括藉由「四稽」的內涵以及眾多的認識活動主張，說明聖人能掌握一些認識公式、認識「道」的內涵、認識所處的世界、並且進一步「生法」、出制成「法」與「令」、表現為具有指導價值的「則」與「繩」，並利用「法」與「是」的互訓說明了對應議題、並得以安養萬物，在這些意義下論述了「法」的豐富內涵，這便是《鶡冠子》道法思想的主要結構。 就《鶡冠子》的文本外部關係來說，本文簡單地比較其與《黃帝四經》的「道生法」論點，說明後出的《鶡冠子》提出了更豐富的道法思想，不但論述了另一條「聖生道」的軸線，同時也在道物關係以及認識活動議題上提出了更多的細緻說法，與《黃帝四經》的道法思想有諸多差別。進一步解析這些細緻說法時，本文發現了這些突出的豐富論點多數是援引於《老子》、或者戰國時代的其它經典、反而是與《黃帝四經》關係較遠的。在這些研究成果下，本文主張「道法思想」與「黃老學說」應當為兩條不同的發展軸線，主張該將《鶡冠子》視為在「黃老學說」發展軸線之外的「道法思想」論述，反省了學界將《鶡冠子》視為黃老學派的看法。 《鶡冠子》這套道法思想藉由抽象之「道」提高了實際之「法」的位階，提供了由封建進入帝國的統治基礎，這是「法」在政治史中的重要意義；另一方面，道法思想也反映了戰國時期人們對於抽象世界與具體世界、自然世界與人事世界之對應想像，因此道法思想是試圖尋求一些「認知公式」，是著重於認識活動議題的；而《鶡冠子》的道法思想也展現了戰國時期的思想匯集特色、援引了許多共同論說的思想議題、並重新組合一套具有自身特色的思想作品，雖然身處黃老學說發展軸線之外，卻也應該參與了戰國後期的黃老學說共同制定，這便是《鶡冠子》在思想史中的意義。

He Guan Zi was once thought as apocryphal. Due to obstacles such as erroneous scripts and the lack of quality annotations, it has rarely been studied by past scholars. Even though recent excavated literature proved that the book was a work of the later Warring States period, discovering also other scriptures for reference to further understand the ideas of that time, past literature concentrate more on the similarities between He Guan Zi and The Four Texts of the Yellow Emperor or issues of the Huang-Lao school of thought, than on He Guan Zi itself, which is most unfortunate. With such concerns, the objective of this study is to analyze the main structure of He Guan Zi, which consists of Tao-Fa thought. Its relation between The Four Texts of the Yellow Emperor will also be concisely illustrated in order to achieve a deeper comprehension of the content of He Guan Zi and give an account for its position and significance in intellectual history. “Tao” (道) is the underlying basis of He Guan Zi. It does not suspend the ancient concern for cognitive activities and it succeeds Tao Te Ching in highlighting the function of “Tao” to maintain order in communal life, offering an even richer discourse, displaying its emphasis on “Wu,” (物) “Yi,” (異) and the application of Tao. He Guan Zi presents us with the “Tong” (同, sameness) and “Yi (異, distinctness)” of “Tao” and “Yi” (一, oneness), unfolding the philosophical implications of “Kong” (空) and “Wu Bu Bei” (無不備), and offers a discourse of the static and dynamic attributes on “Tian” (天，the heavens) and “Chi” (氣). Discussing the issue of the unfolding of nature with the three aforementioned lines of arguments, He Guan Zi offers “Four Ji” (四稽, the four inspections) to argue that “the Heavens manifests its principles, the Earth reveals its sympathy, Humans employ their will, and the Emperor establishes his decree” and proves that “Tao” lingers in the four inspections. Thus by inspecting the “Four Ji,” saints may reach a deeper understanding about “Tao” and the world, and by utilizing the thinking of “the Sacred forms Tao” and “Tao forms the Law,” a system of thought which begins with cognition and ends with governance is generated. Concerning its content, Tao-Fa thought uses the static description and dynamic operation of “Tao,” “Fa” (法, law), “Ling” (令, order or decree) to explain that rulers use “Fa” to express their cognitive ability of close and far actives by “Shun” (神) and “Ming” (明). Further, with the content of “Four Ji” and more claims about cognitive activity, together they elucidate the idea that the saint can grasp some cognitive formula to understand the content of “Tao” and the world. The saint can then further generate law, make “Fa,” “Ling,” and state “Ze” (則, principle) and “Sheng” (繩, rope or restraint) which is valuable to leadership on practical terms. The inter-explanations between “Fa” and “Shi” (是) are used to explain corresponding issues and the nurture of all beings. It is in these contexts a discourse of the rich profundity of “Fa” is given, constituting the main structure of the Tao-Fa thought of He Guan Zi. As to the external textual relations of He Guan Zi, after a concise comparison to the argument of “the Tao forms the Law” in The Four Texts of the Yellow Emperor, this essay illustrates the idea that He Guan Zi offers richer Tao-Fa thought; the book not only offers another discourse, “the Sacred forms Tao,” but also provides a more detailed argument about the Tao-object relation and cognitive activity, in which He Guan Zi is very much distinct from the Tao-Fa thought of The Four Texts of the Yellow Emperor. In an attempt of further analysis on these more detailed arguments, this essay exposes the fact that much of the exceptional and rich propositions in He Guan Zi were quoted from Tao Te Ching or from other classics from the Warring States period, implying a less close relation with The Four Texts of the Yellow Emperor. With the fruits of this research, this essay argues that “Tao-Fa thought” and “Huang-Lao thought” should be distinguished, so that He Guan Zi may be understood also in the context of the former instead of the latter perspective alone. This essay therefore gives a second thought on the academic world’s perspective, which believes He Guan Zi belongs to the Huang-Lao school of thought. The Tao-Fa thought of He Guan Zi uses the abstract “Tao” to elevate the rank of the practical “Fa,” offering a political legitimate basis for feudal China to become an empire. This is the significance of “Fa” in political history. On the other hand, Tao-Fa thought is also a reflection of how people in the Warring States period think of the correspondence between the abstract world, the practical world, the natural world, and the world of human conduct. Hence, Tao-Fa thinkers attempt to discover some “cognitive formulas” which concern matters of cognitive activities. The Tao-Fa thought of He Guan Zi also colorfully illustrates the syncretism of thought in the Warring States period; common discourses and issues of thought of that time were quoted frequently and eventually reconstructed into a product with its own ingenuity. Although external to the context of the development of Huang-Lao thought, He Guan Zi ought to have joined in the mutual establishment of Huang-Lao thought in the later Warring States period. Thus is the significance of He Guan Zi in the history of thought.