王安石學派「引《莊》解《老》」探析

The Exploratory Analysis of “Citing Zhuangzi to interpret Laozi” in Wang An-shi School

根據全面性的考察，王安石學派在將《莊子》嫁接到《老子》的詮解過程中，大致歸納出有三個進路：其一，是學者們習慣在注解《老子》章句時，直接摘錄《莊子》書中的一大段文字或幾句話，與老子學說相合觀，以此作為理論上的呼應或論點的總結；其二，是以《老子》某章與《莊子》某篇意旨或某寓言之寓意相比況，〈齊物論〉、〈養生主〉、〈胠篋〉、〈應帝王〉等各篇中的思想宗趣以及〈天地〉、〈山木〉篇中的寓言，皆被運用來詮釋《老子》各章意旨而達到相互參照的效果。其三，則是徵引莊子學說中專屬的術語與老子思想相互訓。諸如：「真宰」、「真君」、「無我」、「喪我」、「至人」、「神人」、「以人滅天」、「以故滅命」、「反以相天」等術語皆被用來與老子學說相證解，藉以達到莊、老會通的目的。此種種下注腳的方式，在老、莊同屬為一條義理血脈的思維架構下，多數能更加凸顯出老子思想的內在底蘊。但也有少數幾個例子，因為義理取向的不同，導致在證說的過程中，頗有借題發揮的嫌疑。凡此，本論文皆有深入的探究，希望能對王安石學派「引《莊》解《老》」的概況，勾勒出一個理解的輪廓。

According to the comprehensive examination of the process citing Zhuangzi to interpret Laozi in Wang Anshi School, it can be induced in three ways: the first way is scholars were used to quote the whole paragraph or few sentences from the book Zhuangzi directly while interpreting the contents of the book Laozi to echo the Studies of Laozi’s Philosophy for the conclusion or the theoretical arguments; The second way is scholars make the comparison between the significance of chapters selected from Laozi and Zhuangzi. The thought and the fable in each chapter of the book Zhuangzi including Qiwulun (On levelling all things), Yangshengzhu (The Preservation of Life), Qujia (Opening Trunks, or A Protest against Civilization), Ying diwang (The Normal Course for Rulers and Kings), Tiandi (heaven and earth), Shanmu (The trees on the mountain) were all being used to interpret Laozi’s ideas and to echo one another. The third way is scholars cite the specific ideas and terms from the Studies of Zhuangzi’s philosophy to compare with the thought of Laozi and to criticize each other such as zhenzai (True Ruler), zhenjun (Perfected Lord), wuwo (no-self), sangwo (lost myself), zhiren (Perfect Man), shenren (Holy Man), yi ming mie tian (Destroying heaven’s secret due to the human behavior), yi gu mie ming (Destroying life due to the accidents), fan yi xiang tian (Returning to nature). Overall speaking, by classifying the thoughts of Laozi and Zhuangzi under the same theoretical framework, the arrangement of the footnotes would show even more the inner part of Laozi’s thought. However, there are still few cases put Zhuangzi and Laozi in different category bases. The authors might make use of the subjects under discussion to put over their own ideas. The study is aimed to have an in-depth analysis and to draw a comprehensible outline about “Citing Zhuangzi to interpret Laozi” in Wang Anshi School.