| 摘要: | 本文旨在探討“朱子如何理解與詮釋”周濂溪、張橫渠、程明道與程伊川四大家，且尋索為朱子所重視、承襲與採納入其自身思想系統中而組成其思想之重要骨幹的四子之言。因而將論題的焦點集中在朱子學思形成的兩大關鍵：參悟中和與仁說之論議上，以及朱子對濂溪〈太極圖說〉、橫渠〈西銘〉的詮解上展開研究論析。 在參悟中和方面，朱子首重伊川「心一也，有指體而言，有指用而言」一語，蓋此語與橫渠「心統性情」說極為相似，朱子又對「心統性情」說詳加闡發，使其具有心兼性情與心主性情兩方面的意義。又對伊川「赤子之心發而未遠乎中」、「既思即是已發」、「靜中須有『物』始得」等觀點加以全面性的詮解，甚而對於「中」字的名義問題也有一妥善的安排。最終使得朱子自己中和新說的體悟所得能與伊川所遺留下來的文獻得到一較全面的印合。 在仁說方面，朱子承繼伊川「仁性愛情」之說，提出「愛之理」、「心之德」來定義「仁」，也就是「仁」字有偏言與專言兩種說法。前者 (愛之理) 是由「以愛論仁」一觀點發展而來，為仁、義、禮、智四者並舉下的「仁」。後者 (心之德) 則是指存在於人身上的“天地生物之心”，故包得四德，可為眾善之本。然而要體會此意義的『仁』則必須從形而下的 春生之氣無不通、惻隱之心無不貫來加以掌握。並藉伊川穀種之喻以說明之。但是朱子對於明道之「識仁」則直呼太高、學者難入，於是復提出「克己」以為求仁之方，並以之收攝伊川所論之「公」與明道所論之「一體」。此外，從朱子對明道〈定性書〉一文的詮釋亦可看出其以自身的義理系統來說明前賢的文獻。 朱子在思想較圓熟後又對濂溪的〈太極圖說〉、橫渠的〈西銘〉進行一詳盡的詮解，朱子以理釋太極，使二程之理與周子之太極重相銜接；又以無形表無極，以突顯理的超越性。並以伊川所指點的「理一分殊」來理解與詮釋〈西銘〉，「理一」是指萬物同一本源；「分殊」則是說明具體實踐上，必有小大之分，親殊遠近之別。且從“萬物化生的形上學觀點”這一切入點看出周、張的相通之處，即〈太極圖說〉中由太極 (理) 與陰陽、五行 (氣) 之交感妙合，化生萬物的說明，便是〈西銘〉『天地之塞 (氣)，吾其體；天地之帥 (理)，吾其性』一語所欲表達者。 最後，若就朱子積極地對北宋四子進行理解與詮釋之用心來說，一方面朱子個人的思想系統經此歷程終得以形成與完整，另一方面致力於融貫周、張、二程四家之說以確立道學的思想淵源，更穩立道統之說。 This thesis treats about how Chu Hsi understands and interprets the philosophy of The Four Masters－Chou Tun-i, Chang Tsai, Ch’eng Hao and Ch’eng I. The discourse is also a quest for The Four’s theory, which is respected, followed and adopted by Chu Hsi and makes up the backbone of Chu’s own philosophy. I will focus on two crucial elements forming Chu’s ideas: “meditating on equilibrium and harmony” and “the treatise on humanity”, and study Chu’s interpretation of Chou Tun-i’s Tai-chi t’u shuo and Chang Tsai’s Hsi-ming. In the idea of “meditating on equilibrium and harmony”, Master Chu emphasizes on words from Ch’eng I, ”comprehending the mind from substantial or functional view”, for its correspondence with Chang Tsai’s “the mind commands man’s nature and feelings”. Chu elucidates Chang Tsai’s view further by giving additional meaning that the mind both embraces and commands man’s nature and feelings. Moreover, he comprehensively interprets Ch’eng I’s points of “the mind of an infant performs without going against equilibrium”, “after thought is aroused refers to the state after feelings are aroused” and “keeping something in mind in the state of tranquility” and than gives definition to the character “chung”(equilibrium). Thus, Master Chu’s new idea about “equilibrium and harmony” can be answered to Ch’eng I’s heritage. In another idea of “the treatise on humanity”, Chu succeeds Ch’eng I ‘s theory that “love is feeling while humanity is nature” and develops the “the principle of love” and “the character of the mind” to define “the nature of humanity” which was divided into” separately speaking” and “collectively speaking”. “The principle of love” comes from”comprehending the nature of humanity through the manifestation of love” and represents humanity alone in the four elements of humanity, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom. “The character of the mind” drives at “the mind of Heaven and Earth” thus can include the four virtues and can be the root of all virtues. However, to realize “The nature of humanity” must be through the physical form of “The vital force of spring permeates four seasons and the feeling of commiseration permeates four feelings”. Master Chu also quotes Ch’eng I’s “the comparison to seeds of grain” to state his points while taking Ch’eng Hao’s “understanding the nature of humanity” as being easily misunderstood. Chu thus advances the idea of “Mastering oneself” as a way in search of humanity and subsumes Ch’eng I ‘s statement about “impartiality” and Ch’eng Hao’s “all things form one body” to convey his belief that “mastering oneself” first leads to “impartiality” and “humanity” and than one can acquire the experience of “forming one body with all things without any differentiation”. Besides, Chu’s interpretation of Ch’eng Hao’s essay Reply to Master Heng-ch’ü’s Letter on Calming Human Nature can be likely to see that Chu’s explanation toward ancestors’ literature is on the basis of his own philosophy. After Chu’s philosophy becomes mature, he explicitly explains Chou Tun-i’s Tai-chi t’u shuo and Chang Tsai’s Hsi-ming. Chu explains “Tai-chi” with “Principle” to combine the Ch’eng brothers‘ “Principle” with Chou’s “Tai-chi” and explains “lack of physical form” with “wu-chi” to emphasize the transcendence of Principle. Chu also comprehends and interprets Hsi-ming on the basis of Ch’eng I’s idea,”the oneness of principle and the distinctiveness of particulars”. “The oneness of principle” stands for the whole creation comes from the same source and “the distinctiveness of particulars” means the implementation differs from diverse relationships. Chu observes the ideas in common between Chou’s and Chang’s with viewpoint of metaphysics. Tai-chi t’u shuo describes that Tai-chi（Principle）, Ying-Yang and五行 (material force) interact and come into mysterious union and give birth to all creation, which corresponds to Hsi-ming’s indication “that which fills the universe I regard as my body and that which directs the universe I consider as my nature.” Finally, Chu Hsi’s positive and thorough research into The Four Masters of Northern Sung makes his own philosophy completely formed. He devoted himself to digesting The Four’s ideas to assert the root of Taoism and the orthodox line of transmission of the Confucian School was firmly established. |
