| 摘要: | 同處於魏晉動亂時代的嵇康與向秀，對《莊子》也各有理解。首先，嵇康解莊是「得之於心」，以其心去解莊，得意忘言無需註釋，而向秀以注莊來解釋個人在面對社會禮教和國家權力的壓力下的解脫之道，兩人解莊的態度不同，也反映兩人面對政治權力的不同態度。嵇康有服食養生之事，且所作〈養生論〉諸篇，皆反映嵇康對長生之渴望，然其得罪鐘會、拒絕山濤、力挺呂安之舉卻與養生背道而馳，故其所養者乃養精神、養生理卻對生存之道疏於著力，侃言「越名教而任自然」實則在司馬氏的高壓統治下，相當任性，雖得《莊子》「養生主」之神髓，卻疏於材與不材間的生存判斷，劉勰評論他「師心以遣論」良有矣也！然嵇康對莊子的不注之解，正是因他以飽滿情感和生命實踐來解莊的。至於向秀，他更從《莊子》發展出「獨化」理論，凡物皆無待而獨化，亦不相生，此本為高妙的玄學純理，但若套進社會卻很不現實，將世間物與物對照的二元論轉成獨化的一元論，忽略物與物相生相成、相刃相靡的現實與人需要「調適而上遂」的努力，故只對《莊子》的哲學概念有所提升，但之於《莊子》所重的人生關照就很空洞了。最終，善養生的嵇康為挺呂安遭司馬昭所殺，而向秀的獨化轉成求生，投入晉室的懷抱，在在都顯示出個人理念與行為的矛盾，這是因為生死命題至難至大使個人產生思想與行為的異化，最終嵇康懷抱著儒家精神赴向刑場，而向秀所則改容投晉，故本文比較嵇康、向秀兩人的中心價值來對照其生命最後的出路。
Living in the turbulence of the Wei-jin Dynasty, Xi Kang and Xiang Xiu approached the Zhuangzidifferently.Xi“comprehended”the book, not feeling the need to flaunt his understanding through any commentary. On the other hand, Xiang annotated the book to show people the way to liberation when faced with the restrictions of propriety and State power. In fact, their different approaches to the Zhuangzirevealed their different attitudes toward political power. Xi Kang's desire for an eternal life was indicated in his taking elixirs to prolong his life and in his writing of articles on how to maintain health and long life like “On Health Cultivation.”However, his offense to Zhong Hui, his rejection of Shan Tao's recommendation for an office, and his support of Lu An actually endangered his own life. While he advised people to cultivate body and mind, he was oblivious to survival. As he observed, “one should break free from the restraints of proprietyand the human law to follow the law of nature.”This impolitic way of life was hazardous under the dictatorship of the Si Ma Family. Though Xi utterly grasped “The Secret of Caring for Life”in the Zhuangzi, he failed to make sensible decisions in order to survive. In a word, Xi demonstrated his understanding of the Zhuangzi via his passionate feelings and actual practice. As for Xiang Xiu, he developed from the Zhuangzi the concept of “lone transformation,”according to which everything originatesand develops on its own, not caused by or dependent on anything else. As a pure metaphysical concept that replaces dualistic with monistic worldview, it is inadequate to explain the social phenomena, where all is interdependent and interconnected. In addition, Xiang also brushed aside the human effort that should be put to “manage to practicethe Way.”Accordingly, he elaborated merely the philosophy but not the respect and caring for life conveyed in the Zhuangzi. In the end, Xi Kang, who was concerned with health and prolonged life, was killed by Sima Zhao due to his support of Lu An. On the contrary, Xiang Xiu, who preached lone transformation, submitted himself to the Jin dynasty for the sake of survival. Both of their choices exposed their betrayal of their beliefs. This paper aims to compare Xi Kang's and Xiang Xiu's beliefs and their poignant decisions on matters of life and death. |
