《東坡易傳》中的「同」「異」論辨

The Differentiation of the “Similarities” and “Differences” in “Dong-Po's Commentary of The Classic of Changes”

宋代文豪蘇軾的《易》學專著──《東坡易傳》，奠基於王弼《周易注》、《周易略例》和孔穎達《周易正義》的基礎上發展，發揮宋《易》義理派之精神。本書以儒學為宗，同時揉合諸家之學，以《易》為聖人明道之器，著眼於一切近人事、人情者立論。蘇軾在《東坡易傳》中對於「尚同」或「一道德」之策有所批判，筆者以為這些辯證「同」、「異」的論述隱含豐富的義理思想及作者人生觀，甚值得討論，而且，由這類性質的論說亦可窺得蘇軾思想之面貌。本文以《東坡易傳》為主要文本，就其於《易》注中所開發的「同」、「異」辨說為內容進行討論。本文之開展如下：首先，對於《東坡易傳》一書反「尚同」的背景及論述作一介紹；其次，以《東坡易傳》的卦爻注釋和解《易》方法進行說明；再次，由「求其所齊之端」討論《東坡易傳》中「同而異」、「和而不同」的主張於現實世界、治政理念、文藝創作中的體現。

Dong-Po's Commentary of The Classic of Changes, Song dynasty literary giant Su Shi's treatise on The Classic of Changes, is written on the basis of Wang Bi's Changes of Zhou with Annotations and Brief Examples of The Changes of Zhou as well as Kong Ying-Da's Changes of Zhou with Annotations. It demonstrates the spirit of the meaning sect of The Classic of Changes studies in the Song dynasty. It takes Confucianism as its central idea and at the same time blends learnings of various schools into it. It regards The Classic of Changes as the device that saints uses to illustrate the way and argues about all the things related to human affairs and human relationships. In this book, Su Shi criticizes the policies of “emphasizing similarities” and “unifying morals.” I deem that these arguments discriminating and authenticating “similarities” and “differences” are worth investigating because they contain rich reasoning thoughts and the author's view of life. Also, arguments of this kind offer a glimpse on Su's thought. In this article, I take Dong-Po's Commentary of The Classic of Changes as the main text of study and discuss the differentiation of “similarities” and “differences” in it. The discussion process is as follows. First of all, I introduce the background and discourses of opposing “emphasizing similarities” in Dong-Po's Commentary of The Classic of Changes. Secondly, I explain the annotations of the hexagram lines and the methods of interpreting The Classic of Changes in this book. Then I illustrate the embodiment of its claims “being similar but different” and “being harmonious but not ganging up” in the real world, governing philosophies, and literary and artistic creations.