從「即物」到「極物」──郭象《莊子注》之語言思維及其表詮型態

An Analysis of Guo Xiang's Concept of Language and Method of Interpretation

元康時期玄學家郭象，在融攝了過去各種注《莊子》的觀點之後，以「適性逍遙」、「獨化」等概念鋪演其獨特的視野，對於「遊外冥內」、「迹本合一」之渾然境界的闡述，更將玄學的發展推向另一層高峰。本文嘗試釐清郭象如何為語言賦予新的價值，說明他在改變「無」之內涵的同時，也連帶改變了「言」與「意」、「名」與「實」之間的關係，由「本／末」、「精／粗」難以對應的縱向坎陷，轉為強調「以此明彼」之橫向再現的困窘。透過郭象混淆主客的詮釋方法及極度簡約的論證模式，挖掘他如何思索語言效度、用言立場等議題，進一步推判郭象所定義的「卮言」、「應言」或「謹言」，均與體道者願與人間世溝通的心念相勾連，他對語言的觀照已經超越了否定性的懷疑，由不斷卸除表達形式的磨滅之路再度繞回，在承認「忘言」為個人修養之方的前提下，將語言妥適地放入自己的思想體系中，從而給予聖者發聲的正當性，並找到一個安頓經典的位置。

Guo Xiang 郭象, a metaphysician during the Wei and Jin dynasties, created a philosophical theory of absolute relativism, restating Zhuangzi's concept of spiritual freedom. This took the development of metaphysics to another level; and perhaps because of this, Guo Xiang's discoveries and new conceptions concerning language and thought have been given sparse attention, being often generalized into an overall theory, and thus, remaining unacknowledged and not considered as the groundwork of his philosophical method and interpretation. Hence, a study from the angles of the essence, law, patterns, and levels of language has yet to be realized on the subject matter. This paper intends to re-clarify the position and meaning that Guo Xiang has given to language. Aside from analyzing his views on symbols, phrases, and writings, as well as presenting this philosophy in a more focused and well-rounded manner, this article also hopes to further scrutinize Guo Xiang's mode of expression. By looking into his inner law of knowledge and seeking the associations in between, I hope to discover all the possibilities regarding the classical view of language. Meanwhile, this project also explores whether Guo Xiang could surpass his doubt for language, and proves that while agreeing that wang yan 忘言 (nothing needs to be said if you truly understand or released from the cage of language) was the approach to self-cultivation, he could still allow for the existence of classic literatures, which reveals that speech and silence were no longer contradictory within his ideological system.