「當代道教」研究方法之反思：朝向道教口述歷史的觀點

Rethinking the Research Method of Contemporary Daoism: Toward the Perspective of Daoist Oral History

二十世紀後半葉是中國宗教史劇烈改變的一個時期，也是中國宗教正式邁向現代化、全球化的關鍵時期，近當代國家的政教分立與世俗化、現代化的脈絡之下，並未導致傳統道教的沒落，反而使寬鬆、具備包容性的道教社群在改革開放後獲得發展契機，建構新的神聖共同體，開展出道教的多元能動性。當代的道教研究正在起步進行，也是提供學術界理解現代中國宗教的重要管道。本文探討許多當代宗教研究方法，但是道教的範疇模糊、廣泛、隱晦，涵蓋於社會的各層面，滲透在日常生活中的各面向，與民間宗教之間有著綿密而曖昧的連帶關係，同時在幅員廣大的中國，各區域道教實踐與恢復的狀況殊異，這些因素直接關係到我們在中國宗教復興過程當中，究竟如何去檢視道教。從本文的回顧與分析中可知，我們無法用一個單一標準去度量道教的恢復過程，因此較適合採用另一種策略，即是透過口述歷史的方法，從道教信仰者或實踐者個人的生命歷程，去觀察在不同階層、區域、性別的道教實踐，在1949至2016年這六十多年期間遭逢什麼樣的處境與轉變。從這些多元而廣泛的訪問當中，去導出新穎而多元的觀點。 The second half of the 20th century was a period of vigorous change for religion in China. It was also a crucial period when Chinese religions took formal steps in the direction of modernization and globalization. Modern national trends of secularization and the separation of church and state did not, however, lead to a decline in traditional Daoism; to the contrary, these trends led the relaxed and inclusive Daoist community to treat the period following China's Reform and Opening policies as an opportunity for development, and thus a new sacred community that expanded upon Daoism's pluralistic activities was established. Modern Daoist studies are currently getting off the ground, and they serve as an important conduit via which the academic world is able to understand present day Chinese religion. This essay explores numerous modern methods of research into religion. However, the category of Daoism is blurry, broad, and indistinct. Daoism encompasses all layers of society, penetrates into all aspects of daily life, and is inextricably but ambiguously linked to folk religion. Moreover, within China's vast landmass there are distinct regional variations in Daoism's practice and restoration. These factors directly influence the process of Chinese religious resurgence and the question of how, precisely, we should look upon Daoism. This essay's review and analysis inform us that it is impossible to use a single standard to measure Daoism's process of recovery. It is therefore more appropriate to employ a different strategy, namely the method of oral history. Within the life stories of Daoist practitioners and Daoist faithful, we are able to observe the practice of Daoism in terms of different social strata, regions, and genders, as well as observe the various challenges and changes that faced Daoist religionists during the sixty-plus years between 1949 and 2016. New, diverse perspectives emerge from within these varied and broad-ranging interviews.