從程朱、陸王對韓愈的「接受」反思學術史對韓愈的評價

Rethinking about the Evaluation of Han Yu in the Academic History from the “ Accepting ” of Cheng Zhu and Lu Wang

學術史論及唐代儒學，肯定韓愈復興儒學之功，並肯定道統說，雖強調韓愈思想為宋明儒學之發端，但對韓愈影響宋明儒學的情形著墨未深。考察程朱、陸王對韓愈的評價，皆肯定韓愈在唐代力主闢佛，宣揚儒學，提出延續道統，有宣揚儒學之大功。程朱、陸王雖主張為學應學道再學文，但仍肯定韓愈文章事業。亦認為韓愈功利心重，內聖外王之成就不足。學術史似過於強調韓愈對宋、明學術發展趨勢的影響，但程朱、陸王並未以追隨韓愈為目標，甚至評價遠不及王通，僅將韓愈視為唐代儒學重要人物，延續儒學慧命，不為異端所滅絕，韓愈對於哲學思想雖有部分關注，然相較北宋周、張諸子，明顯不足。學術史論韓愈對宋代儒學影響，恐有重新思考的必要。

When we discuss about the Confucianism of the Tang Dynasty in the academic history, we affirm that Han Yu who restored the Confucianism and affirmed the Confucian orthodoxy. We emphasize that Han Yu’s thought was the beginning of the Confucianism in the Song and Ming Dynasty, but we don’t pay attention to the influence of the Confucianism in the Song and Ming Dynasty. Investigating the evaluation of Cheng Zhu and Lu Wang, they affirmed that Han Yu excluded the Buddhism but propagated the Confucianism, and raised the Confucian orthodoxy. Although Cheng Zhu and Lu Wang advocated that we should learn principium fitst, but they affirmed Han Yu’s literature. They also thought that Han Yu valued utilitarian too much, and can’t achieve the inner sageliness and outer kingliness. In the academic history, we emphasize that Han Yu affected the academic development of Song and Ming Dynasty too much. Cheng Zhu and Lu Wang don’t follow Han Yu’s thought, and they thought that Han Yu was short of Wang Tung. They only thought that Han Yu was the important scholar in the Confucianism of the Tang Dynasty, because he continued the Confucianism. They thought that Han Yu paid attention to some philosophical thinking, but was not as good as Chou and Chang in the Northern Song Dynasty. When we discuss that the influence of Han Yu in the Song Dynasty, we must think it again.