摘要
成玄英《庄子疏·序》中所谓"依子玄所注三十(三)篇,辄为疏解",一直被视为成玄英为郭象《庄子注》作疏的依据,似乎仅郭象《庄子注》是成玄英所遵循的"疏不破注"之"注",而郭象无注,成玄英却作疏的文本则被视为"无注之疏"或认为成玄英"只解经不解注".其实不然,成玄英《庄子疏》是以郭象三十三篇本《庄子》版本为参考,在内容上则汇集了唐及魏晋时期诸家《庄子注》于一身.他在众家《庄子注》的基础上,作了更为详尽而具体的阐发,可视为一部"集释"之书.郭象《庄子注》仅是众多《庄子注》中的一个,当无郭象注而成玄英为之作疏时,这并非是"无注之疏",极有可能存在其他人的《庄子注》.总之,成玄英赞同郭象所删减、编排的《庄子》版本,这对于当时普遍流行的五十二篇本《庄子》来说,已经是一个重大突破.
In Cheng Xuanying's preface to Zhuangzi Shu,the so-called"thirty chapters annotated by Zixuan are often interpreted as the basis for Cheng Xuanying's interpretation ofGuo Xiang's Zhuangzi Zhu".It seems that only Guo Xiang's Zhuangzi Zhu is the"Annotation"that Cheng Xuanying follows,which"does not break the Annotation",while Guo Xiang's noannotation while Cheng Xuanying's sparse text is regarded as"the annotation without annotation"or Cheng Xuanying's"interpretation of the classics without annotation".In fact,ChengXuanying's Zhuangzi Shu is based on the thirty-three versions of Zhuangzi by Guo Xiang.Interms of content,it integrates the notes of Zhuangzi by various scholars in the Tang and Wei JinDynasties.On the basis of the notes of Zhuangzi,it makes a more detailed and specific explanation,which can be regarded as a Book of"collective interpretation".The Zhuangzi notes byGuoxiang is only one of the numerous Zhuangzi notes.When Cheng Xuanying wrote the noteswithout Guoxiang's notes,it is not"the notes without notes".It is very likely that there areother people's Zhuangzi notes.In short,Cheng Xuanying agreed with the edition of Zhuangziedited and edited by Guo Xiang,which was a major breakthrough for the 52 widely popularversions of Zhuangzi at that time.
作者
杜文君
Du Wenjun(Linyi University Central China Normal University)
