- 期刊
從程顥文道觀與詩作特徵檢視後代文人批評
A Review of later critiques of the Chen Brothers' poetry: From Chen Hao's Literature-Dao Correlation Theory and Features of his Poetry
摘要
近世文論著作，在論及宋詩發展狀況之處，對於理學的態度多視為文學的對照面，並在這樣二元的分判中進行理解，而部分理學家提出「作文害道」的觀念，重以後人批評「洛學興而文字壞」的現象，益發鞏固這種將文學與道學分裂的詮釋模型，如此一來，詩人之作與理學家之作似成為區分宋詩的標準之一，並且各自表現、代表其在「被」分類下之特質。這種理解方式雖有益於快速掌握宋代詩歌面貌，卻容易忽略藝術與道德之間的互通關係，並且造成評價與實際之扞格。職此，本文透過觀察程顥之文道思想與實際創作，輔以程頤之觀念與態度為參照，指出文道並不必然呈現互斥的二元關係，相反的，在程顥的論述中，更多呈顯二者體用、表裡一元的間架模式，並以「樂」作為連結道德本質與藝術表徵的樞紐，這種觀點雖仍強調「道」的核心指導，但也同樣肯定「文」的重要性，使得文道成為一元的整體，如此一來反而更加擴大了宋詩的發展面向。因此，本文指出不宜以「枯燥」、「偈語」等評語推諸理學詩之共同特徵；而從兩人對於文道關係的理解來看，程顥「文為道顯」與程頤「文以載道」的觀點並不一致，是以後世將二程文學觀並論的評價方式亦不免顯得未覈其實。
並列摘要
When discoursing upon the development and history of Song Poetry, modern researchers often wedge Dao in a narrow position of the stark contrast to Literature, thereby adopting the Dualistic Pre-comprehension as their methodology. Furthermore, warnings such as ＂Literature is harmful to Dao＂, which was proposed by some of the Neo-Confucianist, and critiques such as ＂the rise of Luo school leading the decline of poetics＂, further consolidate the dualistic structure. Consequently, Song Poetry has for centuries been divided into a dichotomy between Literature and neo-Confucianism, the two seemingly different realms that are introduced at first. Such methodology may help grasp the historical development of Song poetry, yet it tends to overlook the correlation between Arts and Cultivation, and even cause misunderstandings. In such regard, this paper aims at providing an argument indicating that literature and Dao are not always conflicting. Taking Chen Brothers' theories as the example, this paper focuses mainly on Chen Hao's poems and Literature- Dao Correlation Theory, and then use Chen Yi's as a comparison. Chen Hao comported himself as Monist in his statement and regarded ＂Happiness＂ as the ideal state for both self-cultivation and artistic expression. Although he emphasized on the supremacy of Dao, he also affirmed the importance of aesthetic expression. In this way, he did not only make literature and Dao monolithic but also expand space for further development of Song Poetry. On this ground, this paper will point out, when approaching neo-Confucian poems, it is inappropriate to use terms such as ＂baldness＂ or ＂Buddhists chant＂ to describe them. Furthermore, from the different points of view Chen Brothers held toward Literature and Dao, of which ＂Literature is the appearance of Dao＂ by Chen Hao and ＂Literature is used for conveying Dao＂ by Chen Yi, we will realize the interpretations of later critiques, which tied Chen Brothers' Literature-Dao Correlation Theories together, is inadequate.