中國美學傳統的核心是什么?答案似乎離不開"道"與"文"。這兩個范疇的關系究竟如何?主流的回答也許是"文以載道"。然而,這一觀點嚴格說來尚不是真正的美學思想,因為該觀點將"文"予以工具化,遮蔽了"文"與"道"的內在美學聯系。更有說服力的也許是劉勰提出的、但未引起足夠重視的"道之文"。弄清楚這一概念的來龍去脈及其內在邏輯,也許能夠準確把握中國美學傳統的核心思想。"道之文"是什么樣的"文"呢?從歷史、哲學、美學、符號學等多元視角重估作為藝術哲學的"文"論的意義,審視"文"之起源及其與中國美學的關系,探討"文"與"道"之內在聯系,可以對兩者的本質與功能進行重新解釋和概念化,得出"道之文"是"文""道"一體的內在超驗和人化自然,既是經驗的能指,又是超驗的所指。兩者的相互作用深刻影響了中國的哲學和美學思想,賦予了華夏文藝不同于其他文化傳統的獨特之處。

Dao and wen are two core categories in Chinese aesthetic tradition. The mainstream understanding of the relationship between these two categories is conveyed by the saying that "wen is the vehicle for Dao". This view, however, is not an aesthetic thought per se in this strict sense, because it has reduced wen to a tool and thus obscured the inherent aesthetic relationship between wen and Dao. Perhaps Liu Xie’s under-researched idea of "the wen of Dao"(the pattern of Dao) provides a more persuasive description to this relationship. This article re-evaluates the significance of the discourse on wen as an aesthetic category from the perspectives of history, philosophy, aesthetics and semiotics, examines the origin of wen and its connections with Chinese aesthetics, and explores the internal relationship between wen and Dao, so as to reinterpreting and re-conceptualizing the nature and function of both concepts. "The pattern of Dao" is a form of immanent transcendence and humanized nature resulting from the integration of wen and Dao. It is both a signifier of experience and a signified of transcendence. The interaction between wen and Dao has deeply influenced Chinese thought on philosophy and aesthetics, rendering Chinese literature and art distinct from other cultural traditions.