心性與道體：「中國哲學」詮釋的兩種路向──從楊儒賓《五行原論》談起

The Nature of Mind and the Substance of Dao: Two Ways of Interpreting “Chinese Philosophy” with Yang Rubin’s Wuxing Yuan Lun as the Point of Departure

本文由評介楊儒賓《五行原論》切入，彰顯和疏解當代「中國哲學」詮釋方面心性論的與道體論的兩種路向。牟宗三先生通過引進德國觀念論特別是康德哲學詮解儒家心性義理，賦予中國傳統思想的「內容真理」以某種理性的形式和客觀的「學統」，此方面功不可沒。可是，嚴分主客、經驗與超經驗、形而上與形而下的理論前提，理性主義觀念論的進路，道德理想主義視域和「道德的形上學」的理論建構，都有可能對於中國傳統精神義理形成某種割捨、歸約和窄化的限制。道體論的詮釋恰恰關涉到突破此類限制，嘗試「還原」中國傳統思想那種一多相容、動靜並蓄、道器不二、即真即俗的理境；那種自然天道本身即具有某種道義性價值和意味的，心物之間共時共生共融共彰的，「唯物」與「唯心」雙譴的，整體有機論和生存論的「源初（原初）圖形」；那種涉身的、經驗的、活潑潑的、「不離日用常行內」的思維方式和生活景觀。此方面楊儒賓教授《五行原論》的相關探討及其所展開的視域值得特別關注。

"Starting with a review of Yang Rubin’s 楊儒賓Wuxing yuan lun五行原論(Original Meaning of Five Phases), this paper highlights and elaborates on two of the main doctrines used in interpretations of “Chinese philosophy,” namely the “nature of mind”心性 and the “substance of Dao”道體. Mou Zongsan牟宗三, whose German idealist and especially Kantian influences led him to develop a decidedly rationalistic reading of these doctrines, has sought to endow the “content of truth” of Chinese traditional thought with a rational form and more objective “tradition of learning.” Although Mou’s contributions should be duly recognized, it is argued by the author of this paper that Mou’s Kantian tendencies–of strictly dividing subject and object, sensible and supersensible, and metaphysical and physical, as well as the general approach of rationalism, with Mou’s limited horizon of moral idealism and theoretical construction of “moral metaphysics”–all run the risk of diluting, narrowing, and disfiguring the true spirit of the Chinese tradition. In contrast, by taking the doctrine of the substance of the Dao as its point of departure, this paper offers an interpretation that is meant to break through such restrictions and to “restore” the traditional thoughts residing at the heart of Chinese philosophy: that the one and the many are compatible; that the dynamic and the static co-exist; that the Dao and its particular instruments or vehicles are never separate; and that absolute and conventional truths always interpenetrate. As the natural way of Heaven itself manifests, at different times, so too do specific moral values and meanings as well as the co-existence of mind and object. On a correct reading of the Chinese tradition then, “materialism” and “idealism” are doubly negated, and the “primordial” pattern of the Whole or absolute totality and the particular existent are shown to cohere. The way of reason and the contours of life are essentially personal, can be grasped only in lived experience, and are therefore “inseparable from daily practice.” For this reason, Yang Rubin’s discussion on the original meaning of five phases and the field of vision it opens up merit special attention."