顧涇陽、高景逸的脩身知本說－以李見羅為參照系

由於顧、高二子皆曾批評李見羅，學界因此多以為李見羅對他們僅止於階段性的影響，鮮少留意三人的義理承續關係。本文據誤傳亡佚的《大學質言》以及由之確立成書於晚期的《大學說》，比較分析後發現顧、高的「脩身」、「知止」說實為承繼見羅《大學》詮釋而來的一脈發展，而格致義的發揮則是反省見羅止脩工夫所得出的不同修正。就承繼處而言有二：其一，他們皆用「脩身」賅攝八目以對應「知止」的詮釋，使《大學》所有工夫皆不外其範圍而成為一大脩身系統，內返止性改在「天下家國之身」的實踐活動中同步進行。其二，出於救正無善無惡之弊的共同意識，李、顧、高三人皆以「止至善」提領良知，並以之為工夫起點，強調良知本於天理、實踐本於至善之性的意義。就修正處來說，見羅以止脩宗旨詮釋「知本」，確立了工夫的方向；涇陽直言見羅身本心末之說未免主張太過，主張身心應並立於本，將「致知」提起來作為「知止」與「脩身」的樞紐；景逸則批評見羅偏執止脩而輕忽格致，指出身另有軀殼私意的一面，並據此反對涇陽格本末之說，認為必須以「格物」為工夫來收攝「致知」，經由長期工夫才能達到「形性混融」的理境。

關鍵字

知本；脩身；顧涇陽；高景逸；李見羅

並列摘要

Since Gu Jingyang and Gao Jingyi both criticized Li Jianluo, those in academic circles mostly thought that Li Jianluo only had a periodical influence on Gu and Gao, and little attention was paid to the inheritance and continuation of the Gu's, Gao's, and Li's theories. However, according to the misinformed missing book Daxue zhi yan and Daxue shuo, written in later periods, Gu's and Gao's theories of ＂self-cultivation＂ and ＂knowing where to stop＂ were inherited from Li Jianluo's interpretation of Daxue. The development of the nature to acquire knowledge was their correction to and reflection on Li Jianluo's practice aiming at absolute perfection in cultivating one's moral character. There are two points coming from Luo. Firstly, they all used ＂self-cultivation＂ to unify the eight items to correspond to the interpretation of ＂knowing where to stop,＂ so that all efforts in Daxue were within its scope and became a system of self-cultivation. The reform of internal reflection was carried out synchronously in the practice of ＂the great incarnation of the void.＂ Secondly, out of the common consciousness of correcting shortcomings of the state of having neither good nor evil, Li, Gu, and Gao all made conscience the lead of ＂stopping at perfection＂ and took it as the starting point to emphasize the significance of conscience as the essence of nature and practice as the essence of perfection. In terms of correction, Li Jianluo interpreted ＂self-knowledge＂ with the tenet of aiming at absolute perfection in cultivating one's moral character and established the direction of practice; Gu Jingyang stated outright that Li Jianluo's theory of putting the fundamental practice before the incidental mind went too far. He advocated that the mind and practice were both fundamental and referred to ＂extension of knowledge＂ as the hub of ＂knowing where to stop＂ and ＂self-cultivation.＂ Gao Jingyi criticized Li Jianluo's bigotry aiming at absolute perfection in cultivating one's moral character. He pointed out that the body also had the meaning of outer form, and accordingly opposed Guo Jingyang's theory of no efforts which were required for studying the nature. In his opinion, ＂extension of knowledge＂ should be achieved by studying the nature, and only through a long period of time could the ＂mixed form and nature＂ be reached.

並列關鍵字

knowing the essence ； self-cultivation ； Gu Jingyang ； Gao Jingyi ； Li Jianluo

參考文獻

宋•朱熹：《四書章句集注》，臺北：大安出版社，1999 年。

Google Scholar

宋•朱熹：《朱子全書》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2002 年。Zhu, X. (2002). Zhuzi quan shu [The complete works of Zhuzi]. Shanghai: Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House. (Original work published in the Song dynasty)

Google Scholar

明•王守仁：《王陽明全集》，上海：上海古籍出版社，1997 年。Wang, Y.-M. (1997). Wang Yangming quan ji [The complete works of Wang Yangming]. Shanghai: Shanghai Classics Publishing House.

Google Scholar

明•李材：《見羅先生書》，《四庫全書存目叢書》，臺南：莊嚴文化有限公司，1995 年，據無錫市圖書館藏明萬曆刻本影印。

Google Scholar

明•李材：《見羅先生正學堂稿》，明萬曆辛丑愛成堂刊本。

Google Scholar

主題瀏覽