直諫形式與知識分子——漢晉辭賦的擬騷、對問系列

Patterns of Expostulation and the Identities of Intellectuals--The Discourse of “Encountering Sorrow” in Han and Chin Rhapsodies

本論文不僅對比漢晉辭賦中諷諫書寫的時代差異，更重要的是為整個前中古的諷諫文學尋索出真正的來源－－屈騷，以及從戰國到魏晉前後數百年間知識分子如何藉助屈騷的直諫形式來成就自己面對政治社會的姿態。產生於知識分子成形的紛亂戰國，屈原「直諫」因此一開始就是在「賢人失志」的背景上，展現一種抗拒而不妥協、失望而不棄守的態度；「士不遇」第一次在屈原筆下成為知識分子獨立人格的表徵。這所謂「直諫」於是不能僅僅理解成是對於君王的勸諫或是對於社群的訓戒，反而偏重於透過知識分子自身所折射出的一切可能的怨懟、苦悶或是隱微的渴望與蒼茫的失落。這是個孤立而傲然的創作者，在激切、哀婉或嘲諷的語調間悴鍊自己持續的意志。「直諫形式」也因此超越言說策略作用於他人的目的性，說服自己多過於說服君王，啟發自我多過於改造社會。最後，在楚騷這一系列的直諫效應都變得趨向自我而內在－－重在想像作為一個「知識分子」的必要特質。如果承認屈原是中國文學史上第一個自覺地「發憤以抒情」的作者，那麼就必須承認他也是第一個自覺創作「諷諫文學」的作者，同時〈離騷〉、〈九章〉、〈遠遊〉等是首先站在相對於權勢的所謂知識分子的立場來抒情言志的文學作品。從屈原以下至於魏、晉，這個個人發憤抒情的文學系列，形成一個與世俗體系相距相持的態勢，成為文學世界中標幟知識分子必要之獨立的書寫場域。不遇在某種程度上適足以維持批判的眼光，而觸發一己屈伸於體制內外的多層次體驗。當王逸以怪物充斥的世界象徵錯置拘繫的痛苦；當阮籍以奇方異域開展大人先生的遠遊，交錯現實與虛構的神思想像，具體豐富了知識分子這個身分認同賴以存在的「直諫形式」。不論是藉助儒學或莊學來完成直諫環境中相對於「政統」的「道統」，共同祖紹屈原的直諫文學作品有成套明顯可辨的體式結構與成辭事典，包括獨白或對問兩大敘述模式、自傷自美或辯解譏嘲的語調，引證比對的史蹟人物或虛構想像的仙界太初，其中與知識分子身分認同密切相關的人物事典的運用，尤能深刻反應不同時期對於所謂知識分子互有出入的形象塑造。餓死的伯夷是否稱得上仁義；早夭的顏淵有沒有怨恨；剖心的比干算不算救國的忠臣；自沈的屈原算不算是風雅君子？這些辨難與重寫，反覆而仔細地剖析該堅持何種志節、如何可以笑傲世俗、如何才能忍受不遇的寂寞，一部直諫典型的構成史就是中國知識分子獨立人格的發展史。而建立知識分子自身的歷史，重點顯然不全是資料出處的問題，更重要的是一種可遇而不可求的「知音」的詮評，透過惺惺相惜的同情共感（探照出意志所往、哀怨所在或者是名價所重），「典型」的意義最後並不只是停留在具體事件上，而是一種超越時空的共鳴傳響，可以振動與繫連每一個真正的知識分子。從這個角度來看，不論是經籍、傳說，甚或是寓言、假說，所有匯聚在「典型」人物身上的多元描述，就是此起彼落的感知默會，當孔子眼中的伯夷流轉到史遷、阮籍筆下；當漁父從楚騷、莊子至於嵇康《高士傳》；當大人從司馬相如的翩僊至於阮籍、劉伶的沈醉……，歷代作者、讀者與典型人物於是共同處在一個更大的諷諫環境，透過形式的傳述與改寫，他們不只個別地相對於當代權勢、體制，也一起面對歷史－－銘刻一個不知名姓、未知生年的所謂「知識分子」的不朽姿態！

The main point of this essay is not only to compare the different patterns of exhortation from pre-Ch'in to Wei-Chin times, but also to trace the origin of the pre-medieval expostulation literature back to “Encountering Sorrow.” Arising from the Warring States Period, the expostulation of Ch'u Yuan, expressing the sorrow of banishment and the inability to realize one's goals, is the first creation of a genre which fostered the appearance of a Lyric Tradition for intellectuals, providing a pattern for writing resistance. This pattern therefore served as a means of persuasion of emperors, a means of admonishing people, and moreover was a reflection of the intellectuals’ aspiration and grief, their fondest hopes and their bitter disappointment. From Han to Wei-Chin, writers imitating the Sorrow Pattern (sao-t'i) constructed a series of discourses on Ch'u Yuan, simultaneously establishing aspects of the intellectuals’ independent situation. It did not matter, when they contrasted Tao and Power (shih) to indicate that morals were valued more than political power, whether they drew on Confucianism or on Chuang-tzu's Taoism; this writing brought both viewpoints together. The discourse exhibits a systematically dualistic orientation, for example by using monologue and dialogue, featuring both lament and eager utterance, bringing in paradigms from attested history and imaginary myth. With all these special pleadings and debates, all these over-written revisions, we can manifest the images of intellectuals in this article through their polycentric and abundant formations. The rewriting of Ch'u Yuan in the Wei-Chin rhapsodies consequently can be referred to as the rehashing of the intellectuals. These discourses contained detailed analyses about what kind of virtue could defend against the secular darkness, what kind of loyalty could fulfill the self's morality, and what kind of liege could endure the loneliness of banishment that seems never ending. In conclusion, we may say that Ch'u Yuan was the first scholar that was conscious to create the expostulating pattern, and the subsequent rhapsodies in the Simulated Sorrow Pattern (ni-sao-t'i) construct the typical expostulation literature, as well as the history of independent intellectuals.