我在這篇文章中分析王陽明哲學中可能蘊含的兩組概念，分
別是「內在─超越」與「外在─超越」，並將指出王陽明把內在性與外在性都收攝到內在性的良知主體。儒家哲學關於內在超越的討論首見於當代新儒家，他們對這組觀念的不同見解乃源於他們對儒學與宗教關係的處理。徐復觀堅持自先秦之後，儒家即轉為內在人文主義而拒絕宗教神祇，因而也拒絕了超越性。唐君毅與牟宗三則主張人文宗教在倫理生活的重要性，也嘗試由內在超越的立場來理解儒學中的宗教性。總而言之，徐復觀是聚焦於人的內在性，而唐、牟則由內在超越來深化儒學。我認為王陽明的良知學即是把具有宗教向度（天理）的超越性與倫理生活的外在性，都由內在性的道德主體來主宰。對王陽明哲學而言，內在性的重點在於良知證明它先行於宗教情境與倫理情境。

I will in this article to analyze two sets of concepts in Wang YangMing（王陽明）’s philosophy, namely “immanence-transcendence” and “internality-externality.” The former set has been discussed by three representative figures of
contemporary Neo-Confucianism: Tang JunYi（唐君毅）, Mou ZongSan（牟宗三） and Xu FuGuan （徐復觀）. They share different views on the relationship between Confucianism and religion. Xu insists that ever since the pre-Qin period, Confucianism’s emphasis is always on immanent humanism and refutes religious deity and transcendence. Tang and Mou, on the contrary, reiterate the importance of “religious humanism” in ethical life; and at the same time they also try to reinterpret the affinity of Confucianism and religion from the view of immanent transcendence. Overall speaking, Xu’s attempt is to focus on one’s “immanence,” while Tang and Mou deepen Confucianism by suggesting the concept of “immanent transcendence.” For Wang, the point of
“immanence” is to keep the conscience（良知，liangzhi）further proving itself rather than to find meanings of religious and ethical situations.