道之文

【作者】 李丽琴；

【导师】 杨乃乔； 邱运华；

【作者基本信息】 首都师范大学 ， 比较文学与世界文学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 本文所谓“道之文”的命题,所讨论的是关于“文学为何”(what literature is)的问题。这是作为思考“文之为文的终极依据在于道”的问题,在文学本论的层次得以成立的。在中国古代儒家的诗学观念中,“文”的观念始终与“道”连在一起。“载道”已约定俗成地成为儒家文学观念的代名词。可是,我们发现,在相同的儒学背景中,不同时代的儒士对“道之文”的言说,却存在着此时当下关注点的不同,以及由此产生的对文道关系的新的创造性理解。那么,在每一个时代,导致当下儒士对文道关系做出与前人不同的差异性理解的原因是什么呢?在比较文学的跨文化、跨学科的研究领域中,我们经由伽达默尔哲学诠释学的理解视域和蒂里希的信仰(终极关切)视域,透视经学信仰视域中不同时代的儒士对文道关系的不同理解,并据此发现他们对“道之文”的言说与其经学信仰之间的某种联系。这样,“道之文”的命题,就是在所谓“文丧道弊”的时代,作为关乎信仰根基的“文”与“道”,在历代儒士的视域中有怎样的理解的问题。本文通过对刘勰、韩愈和朱熹的“道之文”观念及与其经学信仰的关系的论述,发现“道之文”作为儒士的生命信仰的意义,论证历代儒士对“道之文”的言说,是其经学信仰在自己时代的诗学表现的观点。具体论证过程如下:引论部分综述本文论题及学术界对这一论题的研究现状,论证在经学信仰的言说方式中对文道关系的研究进行“言语更新”的可能性。第一章论证“道之文”与儒士的经学信仰的关系。在生命信仰的意义上,中国古代儒家的“安身立命”所追寻的,其实就是蒂里希所说的“终极关切”。“终极关切所在”也就是“安身立命之所”。作为“经”的体悟者和阐释者的古之儒者,其在信仰上对“经”的接受和对圣人之道的皈依,是其作为“儒”之为“儒”的终极依据。在这一意义上,“道之文”就作为“道”之万千种“显显者”中的一种,成为儒士自身精神向导的找寻,并且是儒士为自己的心灵觅见的最终的安居之所。第二章论述经学信仰与刘勰对文道关系的理解。在经学“中衰”的魏晋时代,士人对“经”的本体地位的“提问”,以及由此引发的儒士信仰根基的动摇,促使刘勰思考诗学层面“离本弥甚”的现状,其“文以原道”的诗学观念,乃是在儒家和道家视域的融合中,以“道”为“原”,以“经”为“源”,对其经学信仰作本体依据的追寻。第三章论述经学信仰与韩愈对文道关系的理解。唐代经学思想的凝滞以及佛、老对儒学的渗透,终致唐儒普遍的“外儒内佛”和“外儒内道”的价值取向,而诗文创作实际与“诗教”观的背离,促使韩愈思考“文”与“道”两个方面的“纯正”问题。其“文以明道”的思想,对“文”的写作者提出了“显明”“古道”的要求,这不仅标志着对作品阅读、认识、理解和阐释的完成,也意味着读者自身视域的改变与更新。在经学信仰的意义上,“文以明道”的观念,是韩愈驳斥“异端”行动的诗学显现。第四章论述经学信仰与朱熹对文道关系的理解。佛、老两家均有其自身恃以安身立命的终极之道,宋儒面临的时代课题,就是当面临佛教的精神境界和信仰力量的冲击和威胁之时,如何能够在经学训释和生活习俗水平上的那种对儒学伦理道德的理解和遵循之外,回应佛教的挑战。在所有关于“太极”、“理”、“道”和“性”的讨论中,均显示了宋儒在儒学终极关切建构中,对儒家仁义之道的终极合理性加以论证的努力。而当朱熹提出“彻上彻下一理而已”之时,“理”,即已作为儒家“仁义之道”最终极的形上基设,为儒士觅到“浩浩大化”之中的仁义“安宅”,儒士自此具有了“宽裕雍容之气”,儒学的终极关切也即此得以建立。而朱熹“文道合一”的观念,是其终极关切在诗学层面的自然显现。此处所谓“道”,不是“无”,也不是“空”,乃是朱熹所设定的形而上的仁义之道,其本身是隐而不显的,能以显现的只是“文”而已。换句话说,“文”不过是“道”的显现标志之一而已,它们虽同为一个整体,但二者并非同一而毫无差别。毕竟,文是文,道是道,标志只能是标志,我们不能即此误将标志视为道体,“显显者”之得以显现的根据实在于道体。即以文而言,道为文的根本,文只是道之显现的枝叶,仅为标志而已。所以,文道之间虽有合一的关系,但道本文末的关系同样不容颠倒逆置。在未理会道理之前、在“心”未有所见之前即以作文,这“文”便不能作为“道”的“显显者”,而只能是徒具“华妙”的空言,并不能据以通达“道真”。在此,“文”成为仁义之道的自觉显现者,儒家的道德文章、礼仪节文也自此有了真正意义上的形上依据。结语部分对全文的论证体系和“道之文”命题中深蕴的现实关怀做出总结。在儒士看来,人之所以为学的原因,正在于去除“物欲”对本心的蒙蔽,经由传道明心以唤醒心灵中固有的仁义之道。这是使自己的生命融入其中,领会到圣贤书背后的时代精神和灵魂,获得一种心灵转向的过程;由此,我们或许应该有所思考,如何在我们自己的时代,真正使圣贤的智慧得以发扬光大,在众声喧哗中,觅见自己的自家安宅?更多还原

【Abstract】 Since the topic“The ontology of form is Tao”is considered to belong to the category of Jing, the Confucian concept of form has long been misinterpreted and criticized. In their beliefs of Jing, Confucian scholars believe that the issue of form and Tao is primarily concerned with“what literature is about”, rather than“how to write literary works”. The former is related to the more philosophical side of literature and the latter to stylistics. Moreover, we have found various interpretations and views regarding form, Tao and their relationship, existed in the past dynasties. Then, what are the beliefs behind the different understandings?When we turn to the crosscultural study of the Comparative Literature, we may discover that the expression of the Confucian scholars’beliefs in Jing of poetry writing could be rather different from the conventional opinions about the Confucian literary concept. In other words,“The ontology of form is Tao”reflects the Confucian faith to Jing and its expression in poetics. .Apart from introduction and epilogue, the dissertation is divided into four chapters. Chapter 1 discusses Confucian scholars’understanding and interpretation of Jing, and the proposition“The ontology of form is Tao”.“A place to settle down”is pursued by Confucian scholars and it is regarded as their ultimate concern, a concept first mentioned by Tillich, a famous German theologian) . When Confucian scholars got to know Jing, they willingly took it as their belief, as their ultimate concern. This means for Confucian scholars,‘The ontology of form is Tao’became a spiritual guide. Moreover, Jing is the ultimate place pursued by Confucian scholars to put their souls.The second chapter talks about some Confucian scholars’understanding and illustration of Jing and“Tao is the ontology of form”,presented by Liu Xie in Wei and Jin Dynasty. With the decline of Jing and the emergence of social crisis in the late Dong Han Dynasty, intellectuals started to think about what the ontology of form really is, which disturbed the original beliefs in Jing. In XuanXue, Liu Xie revealed the absence of ontology in poetics and made the statement“The Tao is The ontology of form”in his paradigm. He regarded Tao as the ontology of form and Jing as the origin of form. We take his theory as the foundation for the ontology of Confucian scholars’faith to Jing.The third chapter deals with Confucian intellectuals’interpretation of Jing and the theory that“The Ontology of form is Tao”to verify that Tao is loaded in writings, presented by Han Yu in Tang Dynasty. Buddhism and Taoism became more prevalent in Tang Dynasty and they had been penetrating into the Confucianism which was stagnant at that time. The influence resulted in the combination of Confucianism either with Buddhism or with Taoism. Reflecting on the deviation of most poems from the traditional Tao in his time, Han Yu presented his theory of pure Confucianism, the idea of“The form is an indication of Tao.”The purpose of the theory is not only to accomplish reading and interpretation, but also to bring changes to the readers’vision of the world. The understanding of Jing for Confucian scholars, represented by Han Yu, emphasized the purity of Confucian Tao in poetry writing and refuted deviationism.Chapter 4 focuses on Confucian intellectuals’understanding and illustration of Jing and the proposition“the form could fully represent Tao”, which was brought out by Zhu Xi in Song Dynasty. The challenge from Buddhism and Taoism drove the Confucians scholars in Song Dynasty to further develop the ontology of the Confucian Tao. Zhu Xi believed that the world is nothing more than a Li (“理”). The Li had been regarded as an Absolute Presupposition for Confucianism. In Zhu Xi’s view of poetics,“The form fully reflects Tao”, Tao itself is hidden in the secular world. For the poetics, the form is the only way to present Tao. In other words, the form is one of the representatives of Tao. After all, a representative is nothing more than a representative, i.e. it is wrong to take the form, the representative of Tao, as Tao itself. So, if we write before comprehending Tao, the form can only be colorful verbalism, unable to express Tao. This is why the Confucian scholars in Zhu Xi’s time took the Confucian Tao as the metaphysical foundation for poetics.Towards the end of the dissertation, the author proposes life concern as the purpose of learning or study. In the course of learning, Jing may constantly have a great influence on Confucian intellectuals’life, which kept them away from the temptations of the world. We believe Jing helps us understand the true meaning of life and brings peace into our heart and spirit.更多还原