王通與道統——王通學在宋代地位之變化及時代意義

Wang T’ung and the Confucian Orthodoxy:the Reception History of Wang T’ung’s Philosophy and the Significance during the Sung Dynasty

葛世萱(Shih-Hsuan Ke)

指導教授 ： 何澤恒

國立臺灣大學/文學院/中國文學研究所/博士(2013年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2013.01707

摘要

本文所關注之焦點是王通在道統中地位之升降，亦即後代儒者，特別是宋代儒者如何對其評價的問題。宋儒面對佛老興盛的社會現況，故非常重視對儒家正統之討論，但彼此對「道統」於孟子之後的繼承卻產生了不同的意見，這些不同的意見集中在荀子、董仲舒、揚雄、王通及韓愈五人身上。觀察他們的「道統」論述，可以發現王通於宋初時確立於「道統」之中，其後地位逐漸動搖，而理學發展成熟後，程頤以其兄程顥直承孟子之統，於是孟子以後的漢、唐諸儒，包括王通，便全數被排除於「道統」之外了。
北宋中期「理學」之統的確立，自然是「道統」觀念變化的一項重要指標，但細觀宋初學者之說，尤其是柳開、石介已然就「道」、「文」之兩種立場切入，並呈顯出王通入列與否之兩種不同論述，可見當時對「文」的考量已開始動搖王通之統緒地位。同時，宋初將王通立於「道統」中的學者（包括經學家、理學前驅者及佛僧），亦多兼具古文家之雙重身分；而他們的「道統」序列與論述，往往亦兼及「文」與「道」的關係。可見「文」、「道」關係乃為當時學者相當關注的議題，而宋初儒學復興運動與古文運動之發展密切相關，亦已是學界公認的事實。既然北宋初期學者對「文」之定義具有多重性，文化、經學與政治、文學領域往往兼而及之，使「道統」與所謂「文統」之重疊性極強。因此，「文統」與「道統」間的離合關係，道�文關係之發展如何影響王通的儒學地位，乃本文之第一項重要關懷。
其次，王通地位在南宋中期之再起，是本文所注目的第二個現象。然與北宋不同的是，南宋朱熹與陳亮之辯，及永嘉學者對王通的推崇，皆已是理學發展之內部議題。且雖伊、洛理學之統拒斥王通，朱熹對其之審視與評價仍可說相當全面與公允。永嘉學者固以「重事功」故標舉王通，而朱熹對王通之關注，除了欲與永嘉學者辯論之外，也仍有其學術上之內在原因。畢竟道統說之濫觴為孟子，其原初理論本就以「經世」為理想；而儒家經學之立，原本也與政治有著緊密的關係。因此，王通思想重「致用」，又有「續經」之作，他在北宋初期至南宋中葉儒學地位之升降趨勢，與宋朝學者對政治之關切程度，亦都是亟待進一步釐清的問題。
於是本文由兩端分說：其一為對王通本人思想之探討，其二為宋人對王通應否納入「道統」之意見。第一部份旨在說明王通經學、政治、哲學等各方面之主張，並嘗試釐清一些目前尚存疑議之細部考據問題。由於王通其人、其書之真偽等相關考據已有相當豐富的前人成果，故於此僅綜合整理、羅列前人之研究結果，惟就其中仍有疑義與不足的部分再行補充論述。另一方面，則以其著作《中說》為中心，全面地探討王通思想，包括其「三經皆史」之經史觀，及其政治學說、哲學觀點所展現出的儒、道融合色彩，思索其儒學與所謂「異端」（佛道思想）之交涉，及與當代其他學門（包括文學、經學、史學）間的交互關係。於釐清王通學說之價值與特色後，才能進一步觀察宋人對王通之詮釋與切入角度，分析王通學說本身與宋人所理解、想像之落差。除了補足學界對此相關論述之不足，這部分亦為本文據以論述之背景知識，以便於後文繼續推衍、比較宋代學者對王通應否納入「道統」之理論差異及其時代意義。
第二部分則專門討論王通在宋代「道統」中之地位變化，包括此變化所呈顯出的「道統」觀念歧異，及其與宋代經學、文學、政治與哲學思想發展間的關係。首先，將探索宋代學者認同王通之背景因素，除了上溯、思索晚唐學者皮日休等人對宋初學者的影響外，亦就《中說》一書在宋代科舉中之地位變化，觀察王通學在宋代社會中之流傳情形。本文特別蒐羅與王通相關之〈策問〉考題，檢視、歸納其出題者、內容重心與出題時間，發現出題者與其時間點都有特別的群聚現象，頗能與當時之學術風氣、時代背景相互呼應；由此可證，政治、社會之現實氛圍，對宋人詮釋王通及其重視程度確有具體影響，故王通學實足資為觀察有宋一朝之時代脈絡的特別視角。
其次，則針對宋初涵括王通之五家「道統」說法作細部比較。不僅探討其理論差異，也將每位學者之意見與其學思背景合併討論，由他們對王通之價值評判與其對儒家「正統」之定義，來觀察宋代「道統」定型以前的演變情形。而由於學者們所選取之評價角度實有「道」與「文」兩種切入點，且在評價王通之儒學地位時，對其「文」之臧否亦明顯地早於理學家所秉持之「道」的評判；可見早期古文運動的發展確實對王通「道統」地位造成影響，而這個部分尚少為學者提及。因此，宋代初期之文�道關係、「文統」與「道統」之重合與疏離對王通「道統」地位的影響，即成為本文重點議題之一。
最後，再回歸「道統」本身之學術、經世意義來論，關懷重點即為王通思想與理學之關係，及王通思想中強烈的經世企圖，這兩者如何影響宋人對王通之「道統」定位。若以宋代之學術發展來看，王通所以能夠進入宋初道統，與當時疑經、疑傳之學術風氣亦有密切關係，而這股學術風潮其實是從中、晚唐一直延續至此。雖然他最後被排除於「理學之統」外，但理學家對王通的看法卻並非就純粹一筆抹煞。於觀察其書在宋代科舉中之地位變化，及其如何藉此影響廣大士人群體，並嘗試理解不同領域學者們（文學家、理學家、心學家、永嘉學者等）對王通之詮釋，可以發現王通學並不如一般所設想般被宋代學者漠視，反而經常成為他們藉以詮釋己說之人物典型。然而，不可忽視的是，這些學者的關注往往已非王通學說本身，而是其說、其人如何印證、契合己說。
總而言之，本文經由對以上王通相關議題之探索，除了進一步梳理宋代儒學復興運動與古文運動間之發展細節，同時亦能全面整理宋人對王通之意見與詮釋，觀察王通學在宋代之流傳情形及其與時代變化之相互呼應，終得以再明確地評價王通的儒學地位。

關鍵字

王通 ； 《中說》 ； 道統 ； 文統 ； 古文運動 ； 理學 ； 三經皆史

並列摘要

This dissertation is concerned about the changing position in the Confucian Orthodoxy of Wang T’ung during the Sung Dynasty. The Sung Confucianists emphasizd the Confucian Orthodoxy when they faced the prosperity of Buddhism and Taoism.But they had different opinions about how the five Confucianists in the Han and Tang Dynasty inherited Mencius,who were Xun-zi, Dong Zhong-Shu, Yang Xiong, Wang T’ung and Han Yu.The position of Wang T’ung was steady at the beginning of the Sung Dynasty,but wavered gradually. Finally, all the five persons were rejected by the Neo-Confucianism scholar,Cheng Yi.
The Neo-Confucianism Orthodoxy had influended the Confucian Orthodoxy,but schalors during the beginning of the Sung Dynasty had also considered about the literary issues at the same time.This was the great point wavered the status of Wang T’ung in the Confucian Orthodoxy.Since The revival of Confucianism and the ancient prose movement were intently related,how the connection of the Confucian Orthodoxy and the literary orthodoxy had effected the Confucian posion of Wang T’ung was very considerable.
The Confucian status of Wang T’ung was revival at the middle of the Southern Sung Dynasty.Different from the Northern Sung,the debate between Zhu Xi and Cheng Liang was issue inside the Neo-Confucianism.Great value of Wang T’ung from the schalors in Yongjia school was also the same.Feats was the reason why the schalors in Yongjia school valued Wang T’ung.In fact,the original meaning of the Confucian Orthodoxy from Mencius had included the ideal of statecraft. The study of Confucian classics had established closely related to the politics.Statecraft was an important part of Wang T’ung’s philosophy,and he had also made his own “Continued Classics”.So the changing of Wang T’ung’s Confucian position can possibly reflected how the Confucianists concerned about politics in the Southern Sung Dynasty.
The first part of this dissertation is the study of Wang T’ung’s philosophy.His theory of Confucian classics,politics and metaphysics were explained as much as possible.Some shortages of former evidential studies about Wang T’ung and his books were trying to inferenced.Then,according to “Zhong-shuo”, his theory of“the three Classics are all History”,and the claims of politics and metaphysics were discussed.After comprehensively analyzing Wang T’ung’s philosophy,the characteristics and value of his thoughts were clarified,and the result revealed great fusion of Confucianism and Taoism in his philosophy.All the topics above will become the background knowledge of those following discussions.
The second part of this dissertation is to comprehend why Wang T’ung’s Orthodoxy position had changed,which including to anylize the differences of the definition of the Confucian Orthodoxy,and to observe how the development of the study of Confucian classsics,literature,politics and philosophy in Sung Dynasty were interacted each other.First of all was discussions about the ideological background of these Sung intellectuals.The inferences of the late Tang Dynasty intellectuals like Pi Rixiu and Sikong Tu were noticed.Secondly,this dissertation also pay attation to the status of “Zhong-shuo” in the system of imperial examatation in Sung Dynasty,especially through those tse wen political questions.Generalizing the authors ,contents and times of tse wen could confirm that atmosphere of society and politics really inference how intellectuals commented Wang T’ung in Sung Dynasty.According to this,how intellectuals valued Wang T’ung was a great point of view to analyzing the schalorship progress of Sung Dynasty.
By comparing the Confucian Orthodoxy theories of the five intellectuals(Liu Kai, Zhiyuan Sun Fu,Shi Jie,,Qisong) at the beginning of Sung Dynasty, relationship between the Confucian Orthodoxy and the literary orthodoxy was confirmed to effected the Confucian status of Wang T’ung.Although the Neo-Confucianism scholars in the northern Sung Dynasty rejected Wang T’ung from the Confucian Orthodoxy ,his metaphysics of Tao and the ideal of statecraft were still emphysized by some of them,especially Cheng Yi ,Zhu Xi and the schalors in Yongjia school.It looks like the values of Wang T’ung ‘s theory were not all nagitive at that time,and he still represented some kind of the Confucian foretype.Even though,the explainations of Wang T’ung’s philosophy were not focused on Wang T’ung himself anymore.Instead of that,the intellectuals during the Sung Dynasty were more concerned about how Wang T’ung’s concepts could support their own theories.
In conclusion,through out all the discussions above,not only some indistinct details of the developments between the revival of Confucianism and the ancient prose movement were revealed and reconsidered,but also Wang T’ung’s position in Chinese intellectual history was revalued again.

並列關鍵字

Wang T’ung ； “Zhong-shuo” ； the Confucian Orthodoxy ； literary orthodoxy ； the ancient prose movement ； Neo-Confucianism ； “the three Classics are all History”

參考文獻

余英時：《朱熹的歷史世界：宋代士大夫政治文化的研究》（上）、（下）（台北：允晨文化，2003年6月初版）

余英時：《論戴震與章學誠——清代中期學術思想研究》（台北：東大圖書股份有限公司，1996年）

李威熊：〈王通擬經、續經及其「儒風變古」思想析論〉（《國文學誌》第15期，2007年12月，頁1-30）

陳志信：〈從文以載道到文道合一〉（《鵝湖月刊》第233卷第5期，總號第281，1998年11月，頁33-47）

束景南：《朱熹年譜長編》（上海：華東師範大學出版社，2001年）