《史记》庄子“散道德”辨正——兼论司马迁对庄子的态度问题

Discrimination to“Scattered Daoism”by Zhuangzi in Historical Records

《史记·老子韩非列传》太史公称“庄子散道德,放论,要亦归之自然”,于“散”字,三家并未出注。至清代桐城派方苞始称“散,推衍也”,而后注译《史记》者袭焉不改。在先秦语词中,“散”字无一例可以释为“推衍”或者“演绎”。根据当时文法,“散”字与“聚”“齐”“约”等词义相对,此处只能释为“判散”“涣散”等。不仅在文字训诂上,从先秦“道论”的发展来看,老子时关于“道”的认知以“生成论”为主,是高悬于天地万物之上的某种“实体”,在黄老学者的阐释中,“道”是关于国家治术的根本原理,而在《庄子》中,庄子学派有意回避了“生成论”,将“道”的阐释视野放在了事事物物中,即物见道,高扬事物的个性,“道”这一母体被判散了,黄老学的传统“道论”在此也断开一截,故司马迁称其为“散道德”。由此可进一步推知,司马迁对庄子的态度比较客观中立,推崇其不事王侯、高尚其志的品格,对其学术思想则尚存微言,而结合《史记》其他篇目看,司马迁与庄子实乃异代知音,有血脉相承之处。

According to The Biography of Lao Tzu and Han Fei in Historical Records,Zhuangzi“scattered”(san in Chinese)Taoism,dissoluted his opinion,but his essential point was nature.The annotators did not interpret about“scattered”.Until the Qing Dynasty,Philologist Fang Bao said it’s“deduction”.But his view was wrong.In the Pre-Qin Period,“san”means“lax”or“disperse”.Laozi regarded Daoism as the objective thing.but Zhuangzi said everything contained Daoism.Daoism was dispersed by Zhuangzi.The Huang-lao school’s Taoism was also affected.So Sima Qian said Zhuangzi dispersed Daoism.It can be further inferred that,Sima Qian’s attitude towards Zhuangzi is objective and neutral.He praised Zhuangzi’s spirit with lofty character,while Sima criticized his academic views.