荀學的他者與自我——〈非十二子〉與〈解蔽〉的互涉結構

Otherness and Self of Xunzi: The Interrelated Structure of“Against the Twelve Masters”and“Undoing Fixation”

荀子的〈非十二子〉是一種儒學意識型態的體現，其在道統中對儒學的他者形成了強烈的排他性，也由此篇形塑了荀子激進批判性格的特質。然而在此明確的儒學意識與排他性中，荀子思想卻又具有統合性特質，亦即其涵攝了戰國時期諸家思想，而建構了具有多元認識論的系統，這就形成了荀子有著既排他又包容的矛盾。要釐清這個問題，必須理解到：對他者批判的確是《荀子》中很重要的一個部分，但不能將其所有的批判皆視為對儒學他者的敵意與消解的企圖。亦即荀子他者評述主要集中在〈非十二子〉與〈解蔽〉二篇，然而兩者應該視為互涉但具有理論層次的結構，而不能將之置於同樣的向度去詮釋。也就是說，〈非十二子〉是建基在作為意識型態之「道」的不可融通性中，企圖藉由消解他者以建構自我的批判性建構；而〈解蔽〉則是以〈非十二子〉所確立之儒學邊界為基礎，針對做為方法之「術」的可轉化性以指出儒學他者的限制以進行包容性統合。是以即便荀學中可能有著儒學他者包括法家、道家、黃老與名家的涉入，但這並不意味著其脫離了儒學的典範；因為其以〈解蔽〉作為方法對他者的吸納與轉化，是建立在〈非十二子〉所確立的儒學邊界為前提之上的。

The“Against the Twelve Masters”in Xunzi is a kind of Confucianism ideology, it critical others intensely in Confucianism orthodox, thereby imbuing Xunzi’s character with a radical and critical disposition. Nonetheless, amidst this explicit Confucian consciousness and exclusivity, Xunzi’s philosophical framework also harbors an integrative facet. This denotes its incorporation of diverse philosophical schools from the Warring States period, culminating in the establishment of a comprehensive system boasting a pluralistic epistemology, thus resulting in a dialectic where Xunzi is simultaneously both exclusive and inclusive. To elucidate this matter, it is imperative to discern that while the critique of the“other”constitutes a pivotal component of Xunzi’s discourse, not all of his critiques should be construed as animosity towards, or dissolution of, Confucian counterparts. In other words, the contemplation of alterity in Xunzi predominantly converges in the treatises“Against the Twelve Masters”and“Undoing Fixation”. Nevertheless, these two should be perceived as interrelated yet theoretically distinct frameworks, rather than being interpreted within the same dimension. In essence,“Against the Twelve Masters”is rooted in the irreconcilability of the“Dao”as an ideological construct, endeavoring to formulate its own critical framework by negating the“other”. Conversely,“Undoing Fixation”builds upon the Confucian demarcations established by“Against the Twelve Masters”, concentrating on the malleability of the“Art”as a method. Its aim is to delineate the constraints of Confucian counterparts by spotlighting the convertibility of methods, in an endeavor to effectuate an inclusive amalgamation. Consequently, even though Xunzi’s doctrines may encompass the assimilation of Confucian counterparts such as Legalism, Daoism, Huang-Lao, and the School of Names, it does not entail a departure from the Confucian paradigm. This is because its absorption and transformation of counterparts through the methodology of“Undoing Fixation”is contingent upon the Confucian delineations established by“Against the Twelve Masters”.