自然之性和仁义之性——程颢人性论的两重性
|
摘要
程颢的人性论是学界研究的难点,有多种观点并存。要正确理解程颢的人性论,需要结合他所面临的辟佛与弘扬儒学的文化背景。为了批判佛性论,他吸取告子"生之谓性"说以肯定人的自然之性。他继承并发展孟子的性善论,使其在理论上更加完善。程颢对自然之性和仁义之性皆持肯定态度。然而,自然之性和仁义之性毕竟有所不同,前者杂气禀而有善恶,后者不杂气禀而至善。未能处理好两者的关系,是程颢人性论的不足之处。
CHENG Hao's theory of human nature has been a difficult point in academic research, for which there are multiple points of view existing. To understand his theory of human nature correctly, it is necessary to combine the cultural background of criticizing Buddhism and developing and expanding Confucianism he was facing. In order to criticize the theory of Buddha nature, he absorbed Gaozi's doctrine of"life as what is called nature"to affirm the intrinsic nature of human beings. He inherited and developed Mencius' s theory of original goodness of human nature and made it more perfect in theory. Cheng held a positive attitude towards the intrinsic nature and the nature of benevolence and righteousness. However, both the intrinsic nature and the nature of benevolence and righteousness are different after all, because the former is impure of distinct goodness and evilness while the latter is pure of the supreme goodness. Failure to deal with the relationship between the two is the deficiency of Cheng's theory of human nature.
CHENG Hao's theory of human nature has been a difficult point in academic research, for which there are multiple points of view existing. To understand his theory of human nature correctly, it is necessary to combine the cultural background of criticizing Buddhism and developing and expanding Confucianism he was facing. In order to criticize the theory of Buddha nature, he absorbed Gaozi's doctrine of"life as what is called nature"to affirm the intrinsic nature of human beings. He inherited and developed Mencius' s theory of original goodness of human nature and made it more perfect in theory. Cheng held a positive attitude towards the intrinsic nature and the nature of benevolence and righteousness. However, both the intrinsic nature and the nature of benevolence and righteousness are different after all, because the former is impure of distinct goodness and evilness while the latter is pure of the supreme goodness. Failure to deal with the relationship between the two is the deficiency of Cheng's theory of human nature.
引文
[1]侯外庐,邱汉生,张岂之.宋明理学史[M].北京:人民出版社,1997:168.
[2]葛瑞汉.二程兄弟的新儒学[M].程德祥,等译.郑州:大象出版社,2000.
[3]陈来.宋明理学[M].北京:三联书店,2011:97.
[4]唐君毅.中西哲学思想之比较论文集[C]//唐君毅全集:第2册.北京:九州出版社,2016:319.
[5]钱穆.朱子学提纲[M].北京:三联书店,2005:5.
[6]赖永海.中国佛性论[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2010:3.
[7]潘桂明.中国佛教思想史稿·宋元明清近代卷:上[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2009:8.
[8]大乘起信论校释[M].真谛,译,高振农,校释.北京:中华书局,2016:45.
[9]赖永海.楞严经[M].刘鹿鸣,译注.北京:中华书局,2012:79.
[10]赖永海.圆觉经[M].徐敏,译注.北京:中华书局,2010:40.
[11]徐洪兴.唐宋间的孟子升格运动[J].中国社会科学,1993(5).
[12]程颢,程颐.二程集:上册[M].北京:中华书局,1981.
[13]黎靖德.朱子语类[M].北京:中华书局,1994:2425.
[14]劳思光.新编中国哲学史:三卷上[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2005:152.
[15]牟宗三.心体与性体:中[M].长春:吉林出版集团,2013:136.
[16]郭晓东.识仁与定性——工夫论视域下的程明道哲学研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2006:92.
[17]王国维.王国维学术经典集:上[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,1996:15.
[18]杨伯峻.孟子译注[M].北京:中华书局,2008:197.
[19]黄宗羲,全祖望,等.宋元学案:卷14[M].北京:中华书局,1986:579.
(1)蒙培元指出“:《起信论》为中国佛教各大宗派的心性论奠定了最重要的理论基础,也深深地影响了理学心性论。此后的佛教宗派(唯识宗有所不同)从不同程度和不同方面发展了它的理论,其中以三论、天台、华严诸宗最为明显。”参见蒙培元:《中国心性论》,台湾学生书局1990年版,第242页。赖永海指出“:此论为中土之天台、华严、禅宗所共同崇信,故研究中土佛性论,不能不提到它。”参见赖永海:《中国佛性论》,江苏人民出版社2010年版,第12页。潘桂明说:“佛教学派和宗派虽然众多,但是真正能够持续久远、影响深广的,则是以《起信论》为理论背景的‘真常唯心论’系统,如天台、华严和禅等宗派。”参见潘桂明:《中国佛教思想史论稿·宋元明清近代卷》(上),第1-2页。
(2)潘桂明说“:《圆觉经》和《楞严经》在宋代佛教界具有特殊地位,深受禅僧和士大夫禅者的重视。”又说“:《圆觉经》和《楞严经》在宋代已成为禅僧和士大夫共同尊奉的基本经典,成为他们之间相互交往的重要媒介。”又说“:《圆觉经》和《楞严经》则继承《起信论》传统,并在新的社会历史条件下,取代《坛经》的思想影响,成为中国佛教的最终理论形态。”参见潘桂明:《中国佛教思想史论稿·宋元明清近代卷》(上),第312-315页。
(1)参见《孟子·告子上》。
[2]葛瑞汉.二程兄弟的新儒学[M].程德祥,等译.郑州:大象出版社,2000.
[3]陈来.宋明理学[M].北京:三联书店,2011:97.
[4]唐君毅.中西哲学思想之比较论文集[C]//唐君毅全集:第2册.北京:九州出版社,2016:319.
[5]钱穆.朱子学提纲[M].北京:三联书店,2005:5.
[6]赖永海.中国佛性论[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2010:3.
[7]潘桂明.中国佛教思想史稿·宋元明清近代卷:上[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2009:8.
[8]大乘起信论校释[M].真谛,译,高振农,校释.北京:中华书局,2016:45.
[9]赖永海.楞严经[M].刘鹿鸣,译注.北京:中华书局,2012:79.
[10]赖永海.圆觉经[M].徐敏,译注.北京:中华书局,2010:40.
[11]徐洪兴.唐宋间的孟子升格运动[J].中国社会科学,1993(5).
[12]程颢,程颐.二程集:上册[M].北京:中华书局,1981.
[13]黎靖德.朱子语类[M].北京:中华书局,1994:2425.
[14]劳思光.新编中国哲学史:三卷上[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2005:152.
[15]牟宗三.心体与性体:中[M].长春:吉林出版集团,2013:136.
[16]郭晓东.识仁与定性——工夫论视域下的程明道哲学研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2006:92.
[17]王国维.王国维学术经典集:上[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,1996:15.
[18]杨伯峻.孟子译注[M].北京:中华书局,2008:197.
[19]黄宗羲,全祖望,等.宋元学案:卷14[M].北京:中华书局,1986:579.
(1)蒙培元指出“:《起信论》为中国佛教各大宗派的心性论奠定了最重要的理论基础,也深深地影响了理学心性论。此后的佛教宗派(唯识宗有所不同)从不同程度和不同方面发展了它的理论,其中以三论、天台、华严诸宗最为明显。”参见蒙培元:《中国心性论》,台湾学生书局1990年版,第242页。赖永海指出“:此论为中土之天台、华严、禅宗所共同崇信,故研究中土佛性论,不能不提到它。”参见赖永海:《中国佛性论》,江苏人民出版社2010年版,第12页。潘桂明说:“佛教学派和宗派虽然众多,但是真正能够持续久远、影响深广的,则是以《起信论》为理论背景的‘真常唯心论’系统,如天台、华严和禅等宗派。”参见潘桂明:《中国佛教思想史论稿·宋元明清近代卷》(上),第1-2页。
(2)潘桂明说“:《圆觉经》和《楞严经》在宋代佛教界具有特殊地位,深受禅僧和士大夫禅者的重视。”又说“:《圆觉经》和《楞严经》在宋代已成为禅僧和士大夫共同尊奉的基本经典,成为他们之间相互交往的重要媒介。”又说“:《圆觉经》和《楞严经》则继承《起信论》传统,并在新的社会历史条件下,取代《坛经》的思想影响,成为中国佛教的最终理论形态。”参见潘桂明:《中国佛教思想史论稿·宋元明清近代卷》(上),第312-315页。
(1)参见《孟子·告子上》。