有關〈老子指略〉作者問題的一些考察

Researches for the Author of 'Lao-tze Brief Discussion'

本文目的在於考察近代王維誠先生在《道藏》中發現的〈老子指略〉一文是否真為魏晉時代王弼著作之殘文。本文依據歷代公私書目對此文的著錄十分紛亂，甚至標明「作者不詳」的現象，認為此文散佚及遭篡亂的可能性極大。再者《老子》第三十八章的王弼注文極長，懷疑其中可能有〈老子指略〉的文字羼入。另外本文再從〈老子指略〉文本中的行文習慣及其中的思想觀念加以檢討，並綜合近人以及本文所提出的各種正反面的論證來看，認為：王維誠、嚴靈峰二人舉出許多證據，主張〈老子指略〉作者為王弼，雖有一定的說服力；然〈指略〉中以道家綜合各家之長的觀念，卻和王弼以孔子為最高聖人的儒家立場不一致。這是可能動搖傳統說法的一個有力證據。因此學者對此一問題仍應繼續保持某一程度上的存疑態度。但是本文並無意否定王、嚴二先生的結論，只是提出可能的反面證據以供學界參考。

This research concerns with the topic whether the author of ”Lao-tze brief discussion”(老子指略) is Wang-bi(王弼) or not. All evidences positive or negative available were rechecked. Mr. Wang wei-cheng(王維誠) and Yan ling-feng(嚴靈峰) presented many evidences support the positive claim, but this article pointed out a strong negative evidence that could ask to reestimate this issue. After inspecting bibliographies since Wei-dynasty, some appearances reveals that this book might be falsified during circulating age. This article also paid attention to the Wang-bi annotation for chapter 38 ”Lao-tze”. The annotation for this chapter was unreasonably long. Maybe some text of the ”Lao-tze brief discussion” was permeated into 38 chapter annotation.