【作者】 陈火青；

【导师】 陈本益；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 美学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 庄子文本产生之时并无今天的学科分际,西学东渐催生了本土的学科视域后,以美学视域去融合作为历史流传物的混沌文本,建构一种合理有效的“庄子美学”,是研究的追求。本文试图通过反思与还原,为庄子美学划界,以呈现出原本的庄子美学。吊诡是庄子的言说方式,当说“庄子美学”之时也就意味着在说“庄子的美学非美学”。这无疑增添了以学科的方式去言说庄子美学的难度。庄子思想的拱顶石是道,道是天地万物的本根与本体,道的特性是自然无为。人虽因有为背离了道,但是可以通过心性修养的工夫重新与道为一,于是人生与社会的诸多问题也因此迎刃而解。对于人生的关注,使得庄子哲学成为一种人生哲学。作为人生哲学的庄子哲学主要是道德哲学,这是学界颇为一致的看法。庄子的人生哲学有广狭两义。狭义上,它属于传统理论形态的“德性论”(美德论)的道德哲学。广义上,它是得道为德的道德(得)哲学。这也就是将道内化为人的一种精神境界。在与道为一的道德(得)境界中,庄子认为获得了一种“大美”,大美是自然无为的道德(得)精神之一。但是,“大美无美”,它是道德精神意义上的美,而不是现实的审美意义上的美,现实的美是末,是应否弃的对象。如果说这也是一种美学,那么它不过是道德精神意义上的美学,而不是审美意义上的美学。大美属于道(德),于是,大美即道,道是美(本质)。这实是以道的本质去淹没美的本质,泯灭了美与真、善的界域,也误置了其逻辑分位。之所以认为道是美,也因为把道的自然无为看作是自由,而自由是美的本质。但是,无论是从自由本身看,还是从人生自由以及审美自由来看,自然无为只是切中了自由的自然方面,却否定了自由的自为方面,最终实际上否定了自由。火美无美,从体验来看,就是修道体验不是审美体验。要得道为德,就必须做心斋坐忘、齐物安命等等“性修反德”的工夫。大美体验实际上正来自修道体验。只要加以比较,无论是在目的诉求上,直觉方式上,还是在体验对象上,这种心性修养体验与审美体验的差异是明显的。事实是,修道的工夫与境界根本容不下审美体验。大情无情,否定了审美之情。庄子还明确地反对文艺与美的创造。齐一美丑的价值,泯灭美丑的判断,无异于宣布了美学的无意义。回归本然状态的天人合一,让“天(物)—人(我)”关系变为“以天合天”的“天(物)—天(无我／物)”关系,是对审美的天人合一的倒置。庄子为了“明”道,虚构了不少的技艺故事。道是大全,技是小成,道是无为,技是有为。技造成了道的亏损,是修道工夫所要排除的内容,因此,技艺不能见道；如果从技艺出发来体道,那将是一个“遗技合道”的过程。庄子用合乎道的“大巧”或神技来取代技艺,也就是说用道的自然无为来改铸技艺,无为是无为了,但从此也就没有人为之技艺了,此即神技无技。神技经后世的理论转化后,实现了与技艺的统一,那时才显现出真正的技中见道或技进乎道的理论内涵。虽然庄子的思想未能成为审美意义上的美学,但它本身充满了“后效于”美学的潜在力量,后世尤其是魏晋六朝的文艺和美学在体悟庄子(与老子)的思想之后创造性地转化出具有道家思想特色的美学或文艺思想,可称为广义的庄子(道家)美学。在广义的庄子美学上,可以说实现了大美与美的统一,即道德精神意义上的庄子美学在后世有了与之对应的审美意义上的道家美学。魏晋玄学为庄子(道家)哲学向美学的转化扫平了实质性障碍,提供了哲学基础。王弼解决了道家美学无“情”无“象”的问题,郭象的独化玄冥与足性逍遥,将道家的形上之道落实为现象的本质,“任自然”风尚展示了一种可直接引入实践的超越而自由的精神境界。后世美学尤其是魏晋美学所做的这种转化与实现,大约体现在如下方面,一是将体验道的无差别的道德对象转化为体味美的显现了道的有选择性的审美对象,一是将“性修反德”的修养工夫转化为“澄怀味象”之类的审美关系,一是将“游心”的道德主体境界转化为“神思”之类的审美主体心境。在这种转化中,将转化前后的情形加以比较,可以清晰地看到庄子哲学与籍其后效力量所转化出的美学之间的界分,庄子哲学本身也得到一次透彻的呈现。总之,庄子思想本身是得道为德的道德哲学。在学科美学视域下,庄子大美无美的吊诡,使得庄子的美学非美学。如果说庄子哲学本身有美学,那也只能算是道德精神意义上的美学,而不是审美意义上的美学,它本身表现出反审美性。严格来说,审美意义上的庄子美学只不过是庄子思想“后效于”美学的一种潜在性与必然性,即一种后效美学,它可以视作是广义的庄子(道家)美学的一部分,因此,庄子的美学是后效美学。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a historical relic, Zhuangzi is a text of chaos before the subjects had been differentiated in China. So it is worthy to pursuit of constructing a reasonable and effective aesthetics of Zhuangzi. This paper would attempt to review and restore the aesthetic thought of Zhuangzi."Dialectic paradox" is the Zhuangzi’s way of speaking, so when we said "the aesthetics of Zhuangzi", it also means that "the aesthetics of Zhuangzi is non-aesthetics". It is undoubtedly difficult to discourse the aesthetics in perspective of subjects.The "Dao" is the core of Zhuangzi’s theory. According to Zhuangzi, Dao is the origin and the underlying principle of the "Tian-di", the world or heaven and earth and all things."Ziran-Wuwei" is the essential characteristic of Dao, Ziran means nature or the natural, and Wuwei is non-action or having no activity.Although deviating from the Dao because of having activity, someone would become one or uniformity with the Dao when he clarifies his mind, and all problems of life and society also would be smoothly solved. As a philosophy of life, Zhuangzi’s theory belongs to a Dao-de philosophy or philosophy of "Dao and virtue (attaining Dao)", which is a quite consistent view in academia. In a narrow sense, it belongs to the moral philosophy, which has a traditional theoretical form called "virtue theory"(virtue theory of moral philosophy). In a broad sense, it is the Daode philosophy of "attaining Dao and getting virtue". In Zhuangzi’s view, when Dao was internalized to became a kind of spirit, Damei (great beauty and its sense) would be won, which is one of the spirit of "non-action in face of nature"(Ziran-Wuwei). However, the great beauty isn’t beauty; if it is seen as a sort of beauty, it isn’t a sort of beauty in an aesthetical sense, but in the "Dao and moral" spiritual sense. The realistic beauty must be gotten rid of, because it only is the branch of true beauty. The so-called great beauty belong to Dao or De (attaining Dao), and then, in a customary view, the great beauty was equaled with the essence of beauty. This opinion drowned the ontology of beauty in the Dao’s, so it not only demolished the boundary between beauty and truth, and good, but also misplaced their logical points. Dao is the same as beauty in essence, it is another reason that Ziran-Wuwei is misapprehend freedom, and freedom is generally regarded as the essence of beauty. In fact, Ziran-Wuwei isn’t the freedom itself, or the freeness of life, or aesthetic freedom, it hits the natural aspect of freedom, but denies the self aspect of freedom, and eventually wipes out the freedom.Form the perspective of experience, the Damei isn’t beauty, it means that the experience toward Dao indeed differs from aesthetic experience. For getting Dao, people must practice the Daoism doctrine to go back to the nature virtue, there are the practices what are "the fasting of the mind","sitting in forgetfulness","leveling all things","contenting with the fate", and so on. The great beautiful experience actually rises from the experience of getting virtue. As long as to be compared, there are many obvious differences between this experience of meditation (mind cultivation) and aesthetic experience in their purpose, intuition, and object, etc. In fact, there is no room for the latter. The Daqing (innate feeling) has no feeling (human feeling, emotion), it negates the aesthetic feelings. Zhuangzi explicitly opposed to the creation of art and beauty. It was tantamount to say that the aesthetics wasn’t significance, because of equaling the value of beauty with ugliness, and cancelling aesthetic judgment. It is inverse that Zhuangzi turned the relationship of "Tian (you)—man (I)" which is aesthetic into the relationship of "Tian (nature)—man (nature)" which is the natural state by becoming One with the Dao.In order to display the Dao, Zhuangzi created many fables about the arts or technologies. In Zhuangzi’s view, the Dao is whole, but arts are parts, and the former has no activity, the latter have activity. The arts do certainly harm to the Dao, so that it have to be excluded in the process to clean the mind, and that it don’t show what is the Dao. Zhuangzi want to replace the arts with "fantastic arts"which is recast by the non-action of Dao, but there will be no artificial arts, namely that the fantastic arts have no arts. In later ages, the fantastic arts were mingled with the arts, thus the arts can show the Dao.Zhuangzi’s philosophy failed to become a kind of aesthetics in a subject sense, but it’s full of potential strength which would results in aftereffect in aesthetic field. The later aesthetic thoughts, especially in the Six Dynasties, create many Daoism aesthetic categories and taste based on the theory of Zhuanzi (and Laozi), which can be called the Zhuanzi’s (Daoist) aesthetics within extended scope. In this broad sense, the Zhuangzi’s aesthetics in the "Dao and moral" spiritual sense has a corresponding Daoist aesthetics in an aesthetical sense in later, so that it can be said to achieve the unification.The Xuan (dark learning) of Wei-jin Dynasties, clear the substantial obstaces, and paved the way for the transformation. Wang-bi solved the problem of the Daoist aesthetics without emotions and form. The theories of Guo-xiang, as Duhua-xuanming, what Guo-xiang called the theory of self-transformation, and Zuxin-xiaoyao, called the natural and freedom, turned the metaphysical Dao into the essence of phenomena. Living following the natural or impulse shows a direct practicable fashion of the transcendental spirit. The transformation in later, especially the Wei-jin, embodied in the following aspects, the first is the object, the second is the aesthetic relation, the third is the subject. Compared the situations of transformation, you can clearly understand the distinctions between Zhuangzi’s philosophy itself and the later aesthetics called the Daoist aesthetics in the broad sense. The Zhuangzi’s philosophy will be had a thorough presentation.In short, Zhuangzi’s thought itself is the Dao-de philosophy of "attaining Dao and getting virtue". In the perspective of aesthetics, the aesthetics of Zhuangzi is non-aesthetics because of the way of dialectic paradox. If Zhuangzi’s philosophy has a kind of aesthetics, it could just be regarded as the aesthetics of "Dao and moral" spirit, instead of the aesthetics within the scope of aesthetics, and certainly showed anti-aesthetic. Strictly speaking, Zhuangzi’s aesthetics only has the potential and necessity that would results in aesthetic aftereffects, and it is a part of the Daoism aesthetics in the broad sense. Zhuangzi’s aesthetics is a kind of aftereffect aesthetics.更多还原