本文對劉勰《文心雕龍》與魏晉玄學的「自然」和型範觀念進行比較研究。老子 首先提出的道家學說中的「自然」範略，其真義即「自己而然」；但老莊的「自然」觀實質 上是一種物「自然」觀念，其理論的根本缺陷在於以物「自然」為法而匡限人類、主張無為 。魏晉玄學主要的「自然」論者，在理論上仍未擺脫老莊物「自然」觀念及其哲學目的之窠 臼，因此對體現社會等級關係型範的名教禮法及相應的道德規範，均持否定或消極的態度。 劉勰把道家的物「自然」觀念改造成了人、物各「自然」的重要理論，把「自然」論引入到 人類文學、同時也就是人的領域，因此形成了包括文學發生論、文學本質論等重要理論在內 的文學「自然」論。正因為劉勰「自然」論的哲學目的在於從積極的方面認識文學的本質， 追求文學的理想境界，因此他不但不否定型範，而且力主為文「徵聖」、「宗經」，其實質 是從作者 (聖 ) 與作品 (經 ) 兩方面樹立文學理想的典範。魏晉玄學與《文心雕龍》在型 範問題上的主張截然相反，其根源在於兩者「自然」觀的實質及其哲學目的的不同。

　　　　　This paper is a comparative study on the concept of ziran (nature) and norms in Liu Xie's Wenxin Diaolong 文心雕龍 and the metaphysics of the Wei and Jin dynasties. In the Taoist writings of Laozi, "spontaneousness" is put forward as the true meaning of ziran. However, the concept of ziran in Laozi and Zhuangzi is an objective one. The basic defects of this theory are its restriction of mankind and advocacy of nonaction. In the metaphysics of the Wei and Jin dynasties, the main advocators ofziran were unable on a theoretical level to break free from the limitations and philosophical purpose of Laozi and Zhuangzi's ziran concept. Consequently, their thinking stood opposed to the Confucian ethical code and the social norms it embodied. In his Wenxin Diaolong, Liu Xie transforms the objective ziran into a concept that places equal emphasis on mankind and the objective world, and introduces it into the realm of literature, producing such literary theories as the "theory of literal happening" and the "the ory of literal nature." Because the philosophical purpose of Liu Xie's ziran theory is to understand the nature of literature in its positive aspects and seek out literary ideals, he made no attempt to refute previous norms, and advocated that in writing one should "zheng sheng" (learn from the sages) and "zong jing" (emulate the Five Classics). In conclusion, the differing views on norms in the Wenxin Diaolong and the "dark learning of the Wei and Jin dynasties resulted from differences in ziran concepts a nd their philosophical purposes.