頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 「張載能否言『心即理也』?」:以陽明與船山的對比詮釋為中心=Can Zhang Zai Be Said to Endorse the Doctrine of the Mind Is the Principle? Investigating the Contrasting Explanations of Yangming and Chuanshan |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 陳政揚; | 書刊名 | 經學研究集刊 |
| 卷 期 | 38 2025.05[民114.05] |
| 頁 次 | 頁19-47 |
| 分類號 | 125.14 |
| 關鍵詞 | 天人合一; 正蒙; 道心; 人心; 心統性情; Unity of the heaven and man; Zhengmeng; Original mind; Dao-shin; Physical mind; Ren-shin; Mind combines nature with emotion; Hsing tong hsin qing; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 「天人合一」是張載氣論的核心關懷。「心即理」則是宋明理學家發展天人合一論的高 峰。張載雖未能對「心即理」提出高見,但《正蒙》肯定「人心」可以合「天心」。故張載 氣論與陽明心即理說可否相互融通?為本文的研究動機。在研究方法上,首先以「心即理」 所含蘊的六組子題為基礎,比較陽明與張載的論點是否一致,依此指出張載可言「心即理 也」。其次,則以《張子正蒙注》批判「致良知」與「心即理」的論點,指出若依船山的詮 釋,應反對「張載能言『心即理』」。最後,經由對比兩種詮釋觀點,指出兩點:(01)《張子 正蒙注》雖是當代最受重視的《正蒙》注解本,但對「心即理」的理論態度,船山並不能直 接承繼張載的論點。(02) 在心與理的關係上,陽明與船山雖似各持正反兩論,但實為相異而 非互斥的理論。 |
| 英文摘要 | The “unity of Heaven and man” was the core topic in Zhang Zai’s Qi theory. The doctrine of “the mind is the principle” was the primary argument for the unity of Heaven and man among NeoConfucianists in the Song and Ming Dynasties. Although Zhang Zai could not provide insightful comments on the doctrine of the mind is the principle, his work “Zhengmeng” confirmed that a person’s mind can be united with the mind of Heaven.Therefore, this study proposesthe question as to whether the Qi theory of Zhang Zai is and the Yangming doctrine of the mind is the principle are compatible. Regarding the research methods, we used the six subthemes comprising the doctrine of the mind is the principle as the basis of this study and compared whether Yangming’s argumentsare consistent with those of Zhang Zai. Based on this comparison, we found that Zhang Zai endorsed the doctrine of the mind is the principle. Furthermore, based on Zhang’s Commentary of the Zhengmeng, which criticized the arguments of good conscience and the mind as the principle, we reported that Chuanshan’s interpretation contradicts the assertion that Zhang Zai endorsed the doctrine of the mind is the principle. Finally, by contrasting the two perspectives, we propose the following two arguments: (a) Although Zhang’s Commentary of the Zhengmeng received considerable attention during that time, Chuanshan could not directly accept Zhang Zai’s arguments because of Zhang’s attitude regarding the doctrine of the mind is the principle;and (b) regarding the relationship between the mind and the principle, although Yangming and Chuanshan seemed to hold contrasting opinions, theseopinions were not mutually exclusive. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。