憨山德清(1546-1623)是晚明振興佛教的四大和尚之一，是一位極有學問又著作豐富的高僧。在他傳世的許多著作裡，《道德經注》和《莊子內篇注》一向為學林所注重。憨山認為在他以前的人所作的《老子》和《莊子》注疏，都是「人人老莊，非老莊老莊」也。因此，他自己的《道德經注》及《莊子內篇注》，應該可算是單憑道家經典本身來解釋老莊的一種新嘗試。 本文集中在《莊子內篇注》，來探討生活在晚明「三教合一」的文化環境中的憨山，用佛教詮釋學為其主要工具的注疏工作。雖然憨山自詡他的「以莊解莊」是一種創新，可是除了他自己對於《莊子》的直接體認外，《莊子內篇注》也併入了不少從《莊子》注疏傳統取來的、久為學者視以為的看法。這些看法包括對於《莊子》的一些基本假定，以及用儒家和佛教的概念解說此書的某些策略。就是「以莊解莊」這一詮釋策略，也有其歷史，它是自宋朝以來，許多把《莊子》當作散文文學作品來研究的方法學之一部分。本文認為，憨山融合傳統看法與他自己的創見而寫出《莊子內篇注》，在此書的注莊傳統中，有其不可磨滅的貢獻。

Hanshan Deqing 憨山德清 (1546-1623) was one of the four eminent monks who sparked the revival of Buddhism in the Late Ming. One of the most learned men and prolific authors of his age, he left to posterity an enormous body of writings ranging from exegeses on sutras and classical texts, “dharma words,” discursive and descriptive essays, inscriptions, prefaces, colophons, autobiography, letters, and poetry. Among his collected works are important commentaries on the Dao de jing (aka Laozi) and the Zhuang-zi, one of which alone would have won him a place in Chinese intellectual history. Hanshan regarded the previous exegeses on the Laozi and Zhuangzi as the exegetes’ own Laozi and Zhuangzi, not what the texts’ original authors would have produced (人人老莊，非老莊老莊). His own commentaries can thus be seen as an effort to interpret the Daoist canons without imposing external frameworks. Focusing on the Commentary on the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi 莊子內篇, this paper attempts to deconstruct Hanshan’s commentarial work in the contexts of Hansha’s essentially Buddhist hermeneutic practice, Late Ming culture (especially in the aspect of the “synthesis of the three teachings” [三教合一]), and the long tradition of exegeses on this Daoist classic. Despite Hanshan’s claim to originality in “using the Zhuangzi to interpret the Zhuangzi” (以莊解莊), his commentary actually incorporates elements long-existing within the Zhuangzi commentarial tradition with his own ideas about life, culture, and spiritual cultivation as well as his own direct encounter with the Daoist text. The traditional elements include some basic assumptions about the Zhuangzi and the strategies of interpreting this text with reference of Buddhist and Cofnucian ideas. Even the strategy of “using the Zhuangzi to interpret the Zhuangzi” has a history of being a part of the methodology of those scholars since the Song Dynasty who have viewed the Zhuangzi as a great work of pose literature. This paper argues the Hansha’s sophisticated synthesis of traditional interpretations with his original insights is an important event in the history of commentaries of the Zhuangzi.