六朝子學之變質：以《金樓子》為探討主軸

Abstract

在中國學術史的討論範疇中，六朝子學相較於六朝文學、玄學、史學、經學，向來頗受冷落。儘管歷代史志之中多立有「子部」，但人們對於「子學」的印象卻始終停留在先秦諸子；對於「六朝子學」的理解，則侷限於少數幾本注《老》、注《莊》之作，以及特定幾部子書之中，所關注之議題則集中於所反映的玄學思想。本文之寫作即在探討六朝子學相較於先秦、兩漢時期之子學，究竟有何異同？理解先秦諸子所奠定的子學傳統，經歷了兩漢以迄魏晉、南北朝，其間發展之變化。

研究方法方面，可分為兩大部分： 第一、以一種較為全面的眼光考察傳統子學之定位及其演進歷程。分別從各時期「子家的寫作態度與目的，與其內在精神風格」，「子書的性質與撰作體例」作分析，對照當時外在的環境因素，作一綜合比較，以呈現自先秦以迄六朝，子學發展之內在軌跡。並從中觀察六朝子學在此一子學發展歷程中的轉型與變質。

第二、藉由對蕭繹《金樓子》的深入閱讀與分析，探討此書之學術特質，以此印證由輯佚資料顯示出的六朝子學確實有異於傳統諸子，六朝子學之新風確實存在。前人對於《金樓子》的評價並不高，然而藉著分析此書的「寫作意向」、「思想內涵與特質」、「關注議題與表現形式」，可發現此書雖無甚高論，但卻能充分且具體地反映六朝子學之變質情形。

接續而下，本文嘗試分析現象背後的原因，即：何以六朝子學會發生變質而有異於先秦、兩漢時期之諸子？分別就「六朝子家之心態轉變」與「六朝學風的發展」兩部分，為六朝子學之變質原因提出可能的解釋。

在上述討論之後，鑑於歷來學者對蕭繹《金樓子》評價多不甚高，故於此釐清此書的成就與地位。畢竟《金樓子》經歷了時代的淘選得以存於今日，我們不必因此給予過度的讚許，卻也應該公允地重新考察其內容，作出客觀的評價。

Abstract

Compared Zi Xue with literature, historiography or Jing Xue in the field of early Chinese intellectual history, Zi Xue is usually cold-shouldered. Even though, there is always "Section of the Philosophers (Zi)"for Zi Xue, but Zi Xue before the Qin Dynasty. Furthermore, the cognition of Zi Xue in early Chinese history is limited to a few annotated writings, such as "Laozi" or "Zhuangzi"and specific writings of Zi. Besides, issues which have been deeply concerned focus on Xuan Xue. The main thrust of this thesis is to investigate what the differences between Zi Xue in early Chinese history and before the Qin Dynasty, and interpret the tradition of Zi Xue which had been established before the Qin Dynasty. With the passing of time, how did this tradition transform?

The research method of this thesis can be divided into two parts as below:

First, this thesis observes the position of Zi Xue and innovation of it with a comprehensive survey. These viewpoints would be included: "Attitude and purpose of writing Zi Xue, and its spiritual inbeing", "Essence and style of Zi Xue." Compared with academia in early Chinese history, the inner track of Zi Xue would be presented with a comprehensive comparison. Moreover, the transformation and metamorphosis would be concentrated also.

Second, the academic character would be analyzed with reading and analyzing "Jin Lou Zi" intensively. In this way, a totally different style and features of Zi Xue in early Chinese history would be proved due to collected data. The totally different style and features of Zi Xue does exit. Nevertheless, the academic evaluation of "Jin Lou Zi" was not so high, but this book can reflect the metamorphosis of Zi Xue in early Chinese history.

Afterwards, this thesis tries to analyze the reason hiding behind phenomenon. Why Zi Xue in early Chinese history would differ from Zi Xue before the Qin Dynasty and in Han Dynasty? The possible reason would be addressed in the view of "Changing mindset of the scholars in Zi Xue's field in early Chinese history"and"Academic climate in early Chinese history. With demonstration above-mentioned, in consideration of the low academic evaluation of "Jin Lou Zi", this evaluation should been revised. After all, this book survives form the elapse of time. We may not to regard it greatly, but fairly by investigating it.