FaceBook pڭ
第 47  期

一般論文
General Article

  (395)
王船山論《大學》的格物致知 ──以《讀四書大全說》為中心
Wang Chuan-shan on the Study of the Nature of Things in Pursuit of Knowledge in Daxue (The Great Learning) ──Using Du Sishu Daquan Shuo (Thorough Explanation for Reading the Four Books) as the Center
作者 蔡家和
Author Chia-he Tsai
關鍵詞 仁義禮智致知格物知行
Keywords benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, realizing the knowledge, investigating things, knowing and cultivating
摘要 本文對於船山的「格物致知」義,做一說明,本文以《讀四書大全說》為題材之根據,蓋因為船山的《四書》學,範圍廣大,故吾人把題目縮小在《大學》的研究上,且只論格物致知的意思,而且文本放在《讀四書大全說》,如此便容易聚焦。文中把船山對於格物致知的意思做一歸納,於第二節處,吾人談船山的兩端一致之運用,用於《大學》上,知中有行,行中有知,故言格物致知,不只是知,亦有行於其中,非格物致知與誠意割裂為二。第三節處,吾人談格、致,格物致知雖為一貫,但還是兩個工夫,不可混淪為一,格物與致知可謂不離不雜。第四節處,吾人把船山的格物義做一解說,非格盡天下所有之物,此可對陽明之質疑做一回辯。第五節處,吾人對於船山的致知義做一解釋,並把仁義禮智之性體的「智」,與致知之心「知」分別開來,此船山本著伊川「釋氏本心、聖人本天」之說而做的分判,此看出船山當時重程朱學,而反對陸王之學。
Abstract This study explains Chuan-shan’s study of the nature of things in pursuit of knowledge. Du Sishu daquan shuo (Thorough Explanation for Reading the Four Books) is used as the basis of the topic; since Chuan-shan’s study of the four books has a great scope, I have limited the topic to Daxue (The Great Learning), and only on the study of the nature of things in pursuit of knowledge. The focus on the text Du Sishu daquan shuo also allows for easier focus. This paper summarizes Chuan-shan’s ideas on the study of the nature of things in pursuit of knowledge. Section 2 discusses the usage of Chuan-shan’s dialectical unanimity between two extremes in Daxue, where there is action in knowledge and knowledge in action. Thus, it is said that the study of the nature of things in pursuit of knowledge is not only knowledge but also contains action. The study of the nature of things in pursuit of knowledge is not split into two from sincerity of the will. Section 3 discusses the nature and pursuit; although study of the nature of things in pursuit of knowledge is a consistent idea, it involves two processes that cannot be confused as one. Study of the nature of things and pursuit of knowledge are neither distinct nor mixed. Section 4 explains Chuan-shan’s conception of the study of the nature of things; he does not seek to study everything in the world, and this could serve as a response to the doubts of Yang-ming. Section 5 explains Chuan-shan’s conception of the pursuit of knowledge, separating “wisdom” from “benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom” from “knowledge” in “pursuit of knowledge.” Here, Chuan-shan makes this distinction based on Yi-chuan’s saying that “Buddhists are based on heart, the Confucian sages are based on Heaven.” This shows that at the time of the writing Chuan-shan supported the Confucianism of Cheng and Zhu and opposed that of Lu and Wang.
劉宗周與黃宗羲《春秋》學比較析論
/ 劉德明    Te-ming Liu
1
漢樂府〈薤露〉、〈蒿里〉之原型與流變
/ 劉德玲    De-ling Liu
75
桃源夢魘──論莫應豐《桃源夢》的 「惡托邦」書寫
/ 鄒文律    Man-lut Chau
103
六○年代香港現代主義迷思——以〈長廊的短調〉、〈攜風的姑娘〉和〈化石〉為例
/ 鄭蕾    Margaret, Lei Zheng
163
© 2017 NCU Journal of Humanities. All Rights Reserved.