唐君毅先生的朱子學詮釋之省察──以心性論為焦點

Reflection on Tang Chun-I's Studies of Zhu Xi －Focus on the Theory of Mind and Nature

本文從唐先生對「心為氣之靈」一詞的詮釋轉變為起點，探討其詮釋重心轉移的原因何在。蓋唐先生原初的理解著重在「氣」字上，故不免提出批評意見。然稍後確立朱子亦有超越乎動靜存亡之上的「未發之心體」一概念，其意義是「心」於寂然未發之時，內具理於其中而為吾人之「性」，於是說朱子論「心」存在著心性論的角度與宇宙論的角度兩種觀點，並將「氣之靈」之說安立在宇宙論的論述之中，同時又認為其歸宗之義乃是心性論觀點下具超越意義的「心體」。如此一來，其所詮釋的朱子便產生理論的不一致，所以唐先生最終試圖以心性論的觀點統合「氣之靈」之說，強調此說亦可重在「靈」字上來理解，意在由靈字上指，以見心之具性理，而可超越乎氣。是以筆者認為其說法調整的關鍵就在於他肯定了朱子亦有超越意義的「心體」之說。藉此問題的探討，大致可以歸納出幾點唐先生的詮釋觀點，其重要者有三：「心為貫通理氣之概念」、超越意義之「心體」與「心本具理以為性」。前兩說衡諸朱子的文獻恐怕較難成立，但後一說卻能尋得文獻的佐證，並足以標誌其與牟宗三先生的朱子學詮釋之系統性差別，即心與性理的關係是「先天本具」抑或「後天當具」，而唐先生此說不僅有助於解明朱子文獻中某些令人費解的概念或說法，更能啟發我們對朱子學的再思考，因而頗具研究價值與意義。

This essay originates from Tang Chun-I's changing interpretation of Zhu Xi's theory of “the Mind is Cleverness of Chi” and discusses the kepoint of Tang's shifting ground.Tang's initial comprehension emphasized on “Chi” which results in him being critical to Zhu's idea. Yet he later ascertained Zhu's transcendent concept “the unaroused substance of Mind” and transferred his emphasis on “Lin” to reinterpret “Ling of Chi”. This essay indicated the most important viewpoint of Tang ─“the precreated Nature in Mind” which distinguishes from Mou Tsung-san's “postcreated nature in Mind” in his interpretation of Zhu Xi's theory.Tang Chun- I's points contribute to explaining some of the obscure concepts or statements in Zhu's documents. It inspires people to rethink and is highly valued in academic field.