日本陽明學與石門心學

The Comparison between the Sekimon Shingaku 石門心學 and Yomeigaku 陽明學 in Japan

本文旨在比較日本石門心學與陽明心學兩個同樣講求「心學」的學派之異同，經過本文的分析，可知二者不僅非吳越同舟，更是同床異夢，同調少而異趣多。在同調方面，諸如二者在思想淵源上均可追溯到孟子，又在對本土神道的接受上，二者均是肯定，只是石門心學更偏重神道的信仰；又如二者均非德川學術上的主流，在1790年的寬政異學上，都被視為異端而受排斥等等。在異趣方面，諸如二者的心學思想內涵，石門心學比較接近朱子的心學，並未走到王陽明基於良知學的本體論心學；在三教論上，中江藤樹以後的陽明學者明顯排斥佛老，但石門心學認為三教本異而同源；在四民平等的觀點上，陽明學者顯然是分歧的，有持四民階級平等觀者，亦有持武士階級論者。至於石門心學，雖唱四民異業而同道，但是一種基於「職分倫理」的平等觀，離去除四民階級的觀念尚有一間未達；而在學問觀念上，石門心學是個講道團體，比陽明學者更接近一般庶民，是一種筆者稱之為「生活主義的心學」，故重視「口語的聽聞學問」，而不是陽明學者的「讀書的文字學問」。此外，陽明學在德川時代（中末期）被視為反亂之學，帶有政治改革意味的心學，對下級武士階級深具吸引力，此與作為民間教化之學的石門心學，專務於庶民教育、推廣社會教化運動之學，性質自然不同。本文在結論中指出，兩個心學派在明治維新以後強調「國家道德」的前提下，有漸合流的趨勢。

This paper compares two philosophical schools in Japan: Sekimon Shingaku and Yomei Shingaku. Although both are commonly seen as schools focusing on Shingaku (mind studies), this article demonstrates that there are great differences in their core discourses. First, although both schools are based on Mencius's philosophy and both accepted Shintoism, Sekimon Shingaku embraced Shintoism more. Meanwhile, neither school was mainstream among the philosophies of the Tokugawa Period, and they continued to be treated as heterodox even after 1790, when the government adopted a more tolerant policy toward the different schools. However, if one compares their core tenets, Sekimon Shingaku was actually closer to Zhu Xi's mind studies and had not developed as much as Wang Yang Ming's philosophy in the area of ontological discourse. Regarding the issue of the union of the three religions (Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism), Yang Ming scholars after Nakae Toju rejected Buddhism and Daoism, while Sekimon Shingaku scholars claimed that the three religions shared the same origin. With respect to the concept of hierarchy in Japanese society, Yang Ming scholars varied among themselves significantly. Some believed in egalitarianism, but others supported the hierarchical samurai system. Sekimon Shingaku scholars, on the other hand, emphasized that all classes in a four-class society would have to follow the same Dao (moral principle). Their egalitarianism was based on 'vocational norms,' and they had no intention of abolishing the concept of hierarchy. The Yang Ming School was usually regarded as radical and was sometimes involved in political reforms, which attracted lower-class samurai. In that sense, the Yang Ming School was the opposite of Sekimon Shingaku, whose scholars dedicated themselves to educating commoners and promoting popular education in society as a whole. In conclusion, this paper suggests that the differences between these schools of mind studies became blurred after the promotion of 'national morality' during the Meiji Restoration.