「無」、「有」之義與老子思想系統之釐定－《老子》首章義理新詮

Meanings of ＂the Lack＂ and ＂the Being＂ and Clarification of Laozi Thinking System: New Interpretation of Argumentation in the First Chapter of Laozi

郭鶴鳴(Ho-ming Kuo)

《世新中文研究集刊》 13期 (2017/07) Pp. 1-15

摘要

本文依「以經解經」之法，據四十章「天下萬物生於有」論證第一章當讀為「無，名天地之始；有，名萬物之母。故常無，欲以觀其妙；常有，欲以觀其徼」。並指出老子所論，乃是「主觀立場之指導性談論」，目的在貞定「君王當依法治理」之政道原則，其所謂「道」繫屬於「價值領域」；而一般學者之詮釋，則以為老子之說乃「客觀角度之描述性發言」，其意在指示天地萬物存在、運作之客觀規律，其所謂「道」籠罩整體「實存世界」。然而實存世界之道不可能「失道」，不可能「不道」，亦不可能「大道廢」。由此可知此類詮釋混淆「價值領域」與「實存世界」，於《老子》一書皆屬誤讀誤解，須予重新釐定，而此一思想系統之重新釐定，即由「無」與「有」之義蘊開始。

並列摘要

Based on the method of ＂interpretation of canon by canon＂ and ＂all things in the world are produced by being＂ of Chapter 40, this study interprets Chapter 1 as ＂the nameless is the origin of heaven and earth; the namable is the mother of all things. Therefore constantly without desire, there is the recognition of subtlety; but constantly with desire, only the realization of potentiality＂. It argues that the statement of Laozi is ＂subjective instructional statement＂. The purpose is to define the authority principle of ＂emperor’s governance by laws＂. ＂Dao＂ is associated with ＂the field of value＂; according to the interpretation of general scholars, theory of Laozi is ＂objectively descriptive statement＂. The purpose is to suggest the objective regulation of existence and operation of all beings. ＂Dao＂ includes the whole ＂physical world＂. However, Dao in physical world cannot be ＂Shi Dao＂, ＂Pu Dao＂ or ＂Da Dao Fei＂. Thus, this kind of interpretation mixes up ＂field of value＂ and ＂physical world＂. It is the error in reading and comprehension of Laozi and it must be re-clarified. The clarification of thinking system is based on meanings of ＂the lack＂ and ＂the being＂.