庄子“小大之辩”与逍遥之旨

Zhuang Zi’s Argumentation over Smallness and Bigness and the Purport of Xiaoyao

庄子逍遥之旨是通过“小大之辩”的寓言揭示的,但历代学者对“小大之辩”的注解各异。郭象从庄子万物自足其性的思想出发,认为小大虽殊,但其逍遥是一样的。钟泰、支道林等则从人的境界处立论,但二者又有不同,钟泰认为“赞大而斥小”,支道林则认为小大皆未适逍遥。各家都企图立足庄子思想,揭示逍遥之旨。庄子之进路在于通过“小大之辩”,进而超越“小大之辩”,进入逍遥之境。

Zhuangzi’s purport of Xiaoyao is revealed through his fable of argumentation over smallness and bigness, and this has been interpreted mainly in three ways. Based on Zhuang Zi’s view that everything has its own individuality, Guo Xiang holds that the smallness is the same as the bigness. On the other hand, though both Zhong Tai and Zhi Daolin base their views on man’s mental state, they are different in specific issues. Zhong Tai speaks favorably of the bigness, while Zhi Daolin argues that neither the bigness nor the smallness alone can achieve the state of Xiaoyao. The author of the paper concludes that Zhuang Zi’s way is to achieve the state of Xiaoyao by making use of and then surpassing the argumentation over smallness and bigness.