本文探討「山林自然」概念兩種分歧的態度。一從海德格(Martin Heidegger) 親近山林自然主張的態度，高舉山林自然的療癒作用，並提出「放讓」（Gelassenheit，或譯「泰然任之」）的觀念。並且，間接或直接地思考納粹德國戰敗。另一則是從策蘭(Paul Celan) 與阿多諾 (Theodor W. Adorno) 對海德格的批評切入，不同於親近山林自然，強調暴力與殘酷。

面對歷史災難，海德格藉由東方的《莊子》「無用之用」(Notwendigkeit des Unnötigen) 思想承接德意志民族的「困苦」(Not)。本文藉此反思，《莊子》山林自然思想究竟是逃逸歷史災難以或是提供一種走出困苦的出路。

There are two kinds of approaches to the Nature. Martin Heidegger proposed that we need get close to the nature, and highlight nature has its healing power. Through the idea of calmness, he introspected the defeature of Nazi Germany. From the other side, Paul Celan and Theodor W. Adorno criticize Heidegger’s approach, and stress violence and cruelty of nature.

Face the historical disaster, Heidegger undertook trauma of the German nation with the aid of Zhuangzi’s conception. In this paper, I try to introspect that Zhuangzi’s thought of nature is a way to escape historical disaster, or provide a way out of trauma experience.