印度電影 Movie kya hai ?

我向許博抱怨，以後用這種不能我自己翻譯，必須找專有譯文，然後送我當生日禮物，雖然只要一個多小時，我可是會生氣。

祝願許博升等順利，學術成就豐碩，我們已經認識二十多年了。悠悠人世。

摘要

     筆者試圖說明莊子藉由叔山無趾對孔子的評斷：「天刑之，安可解」來說明孔子形象在莊書中的理論意義。 本文以為就孔子自稱「天之戮民」，乃是違逆天道而受桎錮的人，不能如遊於方外者一樣，遊乎天地之間，他對「遊於方外」的價值觀及其生命形態有著充份的理解，但他不願是那樣的生命。在莊子的描繪中，孔子是自己決定不願走上逍遙路的，故曰「天刑之，安可解」。 這解釋與郭象跡冥論的孔子形象完全相反。由於跡冥論的論點，近人牟宗三、高柏園皆有承續，因此，本文後半段又與跡冥論斟酌。本文反對跡冥論的理由是：一、它與原文不合；二、道德主體是不能「齊是非」的，因而也不可能是逍遙。 關鍵字：莊子，孔子，天刑，天之戮民，逍遙，跡冥論

Abstract

    The author tries to interpret Chung Tzu’s comments on Confucius, based on the judgement of  Shu-Shan the Toeless, “ 'It is the punishment inflicted on him by Heaven. How can he be freed from it?”,  and to explain Confucius’ image in Chuang Tzu.In this thesis, I think Confucius identified himself as “the person in the way of the world under the condemning sentence of Heaven”, who is inprisoned by Heaven, inferior to the outsiders walking around heaven and earth freely. He can recognize the outsiders’ value and life style; he preferred not,yet. In Chung Tzu’s description, Confucius had never a happy excursion, so the latter got Shu-Shan the Toeless’s judgement.

In fact, my concept is different from Guo-Xiang’s interpretation about Chung Tzu. By Self-So Congnition and Its Trace ( Xing Ji Lun) of Guo-Xiang, Prof. Mou Tsung San and Kao Po-yuan both have developed their owan theory well. Therefore the latter half of my thesis discusses what is the difference between mine and theirs. Why this thesis objects Guo-Xiang’s Self-So Congnition and Its Trace is that Guo’s copy is not original text of Chung Tzu. Secondarly, the morality subject can not be fair to everything. Moreover, Guo-Xiang’s thought can not aprroch the level of having a happy excursion.