「悟性修命」何以歸一：劉師泉工夫論的再考察

How to Achieve the Unity of“Enlightenment of Nature and Cultivation of Endowment”: Reconsideration of Liu Shiquan’s Theory of Self-Cultivation

古今學者多質疑劉師泉的「悟性修命」工夫論陷於支離，而新發現的佚文能夠帶來新的視角。從陽明學來看，工夫歸一的關鍵是基於統一的本體展開工夫論，使工夫的不同方面形成內在聯繫。實際上，劉師泉始終以良知作為工夫論的根據，而強調通過謹慎工夫擴充見在良知。在一些文本中，劉師泉將「悟性」視為工夫的目標或理境，這時「悟性」並非嚴格意義上的工夫，自然不會與「修命」構成二分工夫。而在另一些文本中，劉師泉認為「悟性」屬於工夫，而這時「悟性」與「修命」具有本質上的內在聯繫：「悟性」是從尚存的角度察識見在良知，這必然蘊含持續的對治工夫；「修命」是基於見在良知對治惡念，這必然蘊含對於見在良知的體證。總之，劉師泉雖然未能找到歸一的表述統攝「悟性修命」，但在實質上能夠證成「悟性修命」的歸一。

Many scholars, both ancient and modern, have questioned Liu Shiquan’s doctrine of“enlightening nature and cultivating endowment,”arguing that his account of self-cultivation is fragmented. However, newly discovered lost writings offer a fresh perspective. From the standpoint of the Yangmingism, the key to unifying all forms of cultivation lies in grounding them upon a single ontological basis, so that the various aspects of practice form an intrinsic coherence. In fact, Liu Shiquan consistently takes innate knowing as the foundation of his theory of self-cultivation, emphasizing the cautious and sustained effort to expand one’s present awareness of this innate knowing. In some of his texts, Liu regards“enlightening nature”as the goal or the ideal state of cultivation; in such cases,“enlightening nature”is not, in the strict sense, a type of self-cultivation, and therefore does not constitute a dualistic counterpart to“cultivating endowment.”In other texts, however, Liu treats“enlightening nature”itself as a form of practice—yet even then,“enlightening nature”and“cultivating endowment”are intrinsically connected in essence:“enlightening nature”involves discerning and realizing one’s present innate knowing from the standpoint of what remains obscured, and thus necessarily entails a continuous work of self-correction;“cultivating endowment,”in turn, means restraining evil thoughts on the basis of one’s present innate knowing, which necessarily implies a direct realization of that innate knowing. In sum, although Liu Shiquan did not succeed in formulating a unified expression that fully subsumes“enlightening nature and cultivating endowment,”he nevertheless, in essence, succeeded in demonstrating their essential unity.