庄生非知道者——王船山庄学思想的另一面相
邓联合
摘要:王船山晚年所著《庄子通》、《庄子解》积极评价庄子之学,并着力会通儒道,但这并非船山庄学思想的全部面相。因为除此二书,在其他著作中船山还写下了他随机评说庄子的大量言论,将这些言论与其庄学专书结合起来作一综观,可发现一旦脱离《庄子》文本而转到其他语境下,船山对庄子实际是以批评为主的。在他看来,由于庄子只求个体的逍遥而逃避人伦物理,故其学必然产生纵欲放诞之弊,乃至最终同流于利欲小人;而从历史上看,作为老子后学,庄子思想对王道纲常的危害亦甚为深重且绵延不绝。除了指斥庄子其人其学,船山还把批评矛头指向历史现实中士大夫群体所表现出的庄学化的人格特征:惟思一己之自安自适而弃绝其应有的道义担当。相较于此前的宋明道学,船山之辟庄虽于学理上并无根本性的突破,且存在着前后矛盾之处,但却体现出了其历经磨难的醇儒品格和坚贞的遗民心理。
“Zhuang Zi Is Not the One Who Attains the Tao”: the Other Face of Wang Fuzhi’s View of Zhuang Zi
Deng Lianhe
Abstract: Although Wang Fuzhi gave positive assessment of Zhuang Zi’s learning in An Explanation of Zhuang Zi and Comments on Zhuang Zi during his late years, and tried to build communication between Confucianism and Taoism, that is not his full view of Zhuang Zi. Except for the two books above, he also left a large amount of random comments in other writings. While taking all the books and comments together, we can find that once transferring from the text of Zhuang Zi to other contexts, Wang Fuzhi’s evaluations of Zhuang Zi were mainly criticism. In his view, since Zhuang Zi only pursued the individual transcendence and evaded the human ethics as well as laws of things, his learning must be resulted in over-indulgence, and even associated with greedy and base persons finally; historically, as the follower of Lao Zi, Zhuang Zi’s thought had been harmed the political order and social ethics deeply and continuously. Besides, Wang Fuzhi also blamed the tendency toward Zhuang Zi among the scholar-officials in history and reality that only considering one’s own easiness and abandoning the responsibilities one should bear. Compared with the previous Taoism in the Song and Ming Dynasties, although Wang Fuzhi’s criticism of Zhuang Zi did not provide fundamental breakthrough in academics, and showed inconsistency somehow, his view expressed a strong Confucian character as well as the constant mentality of an adherent of the Ming Dynasty.