中唐以降「文」的危機與典範轉向

Abstract

本論文主要通過知識的發展與士的境況／條件兩重視角，探討中國古代具主導位勢的知識系統「文」在中唐以降發生的「典範」轉向。在中國古代，作為知識系統的「文」包含「遺文之學」和「屬文之學」兩個主要的子系統。而「屬文之學」的分化與獨立，是「文」的發展在進入中古時期後一個顯著的趨勢，並逐漸地成為與「遺文之學」分庭抗禮的子系統，各自依循自身內部的「典範」發展。本研究首先對這一發展進程進行了爬梳，並在此基礎上，進而關注「遺文之學」和「屬文之學」到了中唐以降發生「典範」轉向的動力因。這一動力因，則與身兼「知識分子」與「政治工作者」的「士」所面對的危機有關。 天寶十四載發生的「安史事件」，為唐帝國帶來方方面面的危機，部分有志之士對此提出了反省與批判，機鋒所向，尤在自身所屬階層及所掌握的知識系統。要言之，即「文」的內卷化，以及士與「文」的共同異化。對於這一危機有所識察且有志於「救療」的士人，並不僅僅逗留於反省與批判，而更關心如何通過自身的行動實踐，改善帝國與社會的現狀，使整個帝國共同體可以更好地持存。通過改革「遺文之學」與「屬文之學」的生產模式，以回應自身所處時代所面臨的問題，成為這一時期有志之士付諸實踐的一個主要行動。在「『文』以明道」的理念下，這一改革也促使「文」的兩個主要的子系統的生產模式發生變化。在「遺文之學」的研究上，從文本義理的詮解，轉向對於「道」的義理的詮釋；在「屬文之學」方面，則是由強調「屬文之藝」的表現，轉向對於「意」的經營與鍛鍊。在中唐出現的「文」的新動向，可以聯繫到後來宋帝國所發展出的新「典範」，體現出其於「文」的發展史上所具有的「典範」轉向的意義。 「明道」，是「文」的兩個主要的子系統在中唐所發生的變化的共同傾向。在中國古代，「道」往往指涉「善」的意向。所謂「明道」，即指使善顯現，得以被看見、被經驗。而「『文』以明道」所以可能，則在於文字本身作為符號所具有的傳播與溝通的性質，可以串連起異時、異域的作者與讀者，形成跨越時、空而相互連結的公共網絡：「文」型公共領域。一方面，通過對於「古之經典遺文」的研究，闡明「士」的夙昔典型孔子通過「文」的生產所欲開顯的「道」；另方面，則通過對於「士」之職分的反省與民瘼等的書寫，以對自身所屬階層成員形成影響，使其於政治工作上能夠回歸生民之意的滿足，為人民服務。對於這一時期的有志之士而言，在「明道」的意向上，從事「文」的生產不僅僅是知識內容本身的生產，更非謀取自身利益的工具，而具有政治行動的意義，即：對社會的合理運作產生積極的影響，使百姓過上好日子。此外，以「道」的開顯作為從事「遺文之學」研究與文章屬作的共同目的，也是對於孔子所確立的，以價值理性為主導從事「文」的生產這一傳統的復興。而就「文」本身而言，也有著以「道」為接榫，使兩個長期分化的子系統重新整合的意義。同時，也是歷史上往往起到影響社會發展方向的知識分子，在遭逢自身的現代困境與危機之際，通過改變知識生產活動以為「救療」的一個案例。

This paper mainly explores the Paradigm turn of “Wen”（文） since Mid-Tang, from the two perspectives of knowledge development and the conditions of Shi（士）. As the dominant knowledge system in ancient China, “Wen” includes two subsystems: “the knowledge of legacy books”（遺文之學）and “the knowledge of literature”（屬文之學）. The differentiation and independence of “the knowledge of literature” is a significant trend in the development of “Wen” after entering the medieval period and gradually became a subsystem that competed with “the knowledge of legacy books”, each developing according to its own internal Paradigm. This study first clarifies through this development process and then focuses on the efficient cause behind the Paradigm turn that occurred in “the knowledge of legacy books” and “the knowledge of literature” since Mid-Tang. This efficient cause is related to the crisis faced by Shi that are both “intellectuals” and “political workers”. The “An-Shi incident”（安史事件） that occurred in Tian-bao 14 brought various crises to the Tang Empire. Some ambitious Shi reflected on and criticized this, especially in their own class and the knowledge system they have mastered. To put it simply, it was the involution of “Wen” and the common alienation of Shi and “Wen”. For Shi who were aware of this crisis and were willing to “heal”, they did not just stay in reflection and criticism but were more concerned about how to improve the current situation of the empire and society through actions, so that the entire imperial community can survive better. Reforming the production mode of “the knowledge of legacy books” and “the knowledge of literature” to respond to problems faced by their own era became a major action for ambitious Shi during this period. Under the idea of manifesting the Way by “Wen”（「文」以明道）, this reform also prompted changes in the production mode of two major subsystems in “Wen”. In terms of research on “the knowledge of legacy books”, it turned from interpreting text semantics to interpreting the Way（道） itself; while in terms of “the knowledge of literature”, it turned from emphasizing performance related to literary arts to conceive meaning. The new trend in “Wen” that emerged in Mid-Tang can be linked to new Paradigm developed by later Song Empire, reflecting its meaning in the history of development of “Wen” is about Paradigm turn. “Manifesting the Way” is a common tendency for two major subsystems in “Wen” that occurred during Mid-Tang. In ancient China, what was referred to as the Way was an intention towards Good. Therefore, “manifesting the Way” refers to making Good appear, being seen and experienced. The reason why manifesting the Way by “Wen” is possible lies in the nature of communication and dissemination that symbols themselves possess as text, which can connect authors and readers from different times and places, forming a public network that spans time and space: a public realm constructed by “Wen”. On one hand, through research on ancient classic legacy books, it clarifies what Confucius wanted to reveal through production with “Wen”; on the other hand, through reflection on their own responsibilities as Shi and writing about people's livelihood problems, they influence members within their own class so that the members of this class’s political work can return to satisfying people’s needs and serving the people. For people with lofty ideals in the class of Shi during this period, engaging in production with “Wen” under the intention towards “manifesting the Way” is not only about producing knowledge itself but also has political action significance: positively influencing society’s reasonable operation so that people can live better lives. In addition, “manifesting the Way” as the common purpose for engaging in research on legacy books and writing articles is also revived Confucius' tradition of "wen" production dominated by value rationality. As for “Wen” itself, it also has significance for integrating two long-term differentiated subsystems under the idea of “manifesting the Way”. At the same time, it is also an example that intellectuals who often influence social development direction throughout history change their knowledge production activities as a means for healing when facing their own modern crises.