後死有責：從《陽明先生文錄》到《王文成公全書》的師教衍變

The Responsibility of those who Live on: the Evolution of Wang Yangming’s Teaching from The Literary Record of Master Yangming to The Complete Works of Master Wang Wencheng

本文論證由於王陽明生前的政治因素，與歿後門人對其思想定位不同，導致文集版本變遷與內容的差異，並探討其中所蘊含的意義，而最終的《王文成公全書》則是錢德洪個人所認定的陽明精神。陽明生前受到當時新舊派政爭因素的干擾，廣德本《陽明先生文錄》不收錄〈朱子晚年定論序〉與〈大學古本序〉，直至嘉靖十二年（1533）黃綰序刊本則是恢復陽明所謂「近稿」的原始面貌。爾後，由於嘉靖十三年（1534）時黃綰等門人因朝廷政爭波及，致使錢德洪與黃省曾在校訂《陽明先生文錄》時，亦有來自政、學兩個方面的干擾，可證之其刪掉黃綰討論纂修《明倫大典》與有關張璁的信件。陽明歿後，門人對於如何定義「良知說」有種種異見？其中又以「致知」問題為要。由於錢德洪在面對羅洪先質疑〈大學古本序〉改序問題時，選擇刪掉最末一語「乃若致知則存乎心悟，致知焉盡矣！」的做法，證明此句的爭議性。往後門人弟子們各自提出對此句的解釋，聶豹與王畿圍繞「致知」的討論亦因此而起，成為當時學術注目的焦點。隆慶年間，錢德洪編撰《文錄續編》，透過註解陽明文字的做法，彰顯其晚年文字的深意──企圖定義陽明「晚年」師教為何。錢氏針對聶豹學說所引發師教不一的問題，於《王文成公全書》裡刪掉一段陽明稱讚聶豹的文字，企圖消解其重要性。錢德洪在增添的《年譜》文字裡，強調靜坐不是陽明致良知的教法，再次批判聶豹。最終，經過錢德洪清理過的《王文成公全書》呈現出的是歸於一致的師教。

 

This article demonstrates that political factors during Wang Yangming’s lifetime, along with his disciples’ divergent views on his thought after his death, led to changes in the editions of his collected works over time. This essay further examines the implications of these changes, with the final version, the Collected Works of Master Wang Wencheng, reflecting the spirit of Wang Yangming as determined by Qian Dehong. The Literary Record of Master Yangming was produced in Guangde amidst the turmoil of old and new political infighting during Wang’s lifetime, and therefore did not include his “Preface to Later Master Zhu’s Settled Discourse,” and his “Preface to the Old Version of the Great Learning.” The 1533 edition with Huang Wan’s preface was intended to follow the original format of Wang’s “recent drafts.” However, in the following year, Huang Wan and other disciples were involved in court factional disputes, causing political and scholarly factors to influence the editing of the Literary Record of Master Yangming by Qian Dehong and Huang Xingzeng. This is evident from the removal of Wang’s letters pertaining to Huang Wan’s discussion of the Great Canon for Clarifying Human Relations as well as references to Zhang Cong. After Wang’s death, his disciples took up various positions on the meaning of his “Explanation of ‘Moral Knowledge,’” in which the interpretation of the “extension of knowledge” was a particular concern. In the face of Luo Hongxian’s suspicions about the authenticity of the “Preface to the Old Edition of the Great Learning,” Qian Dehong cut out the last sentence, “Since the extension of knowledge takes place within the awakening of the mind, then the extension of knowledge is completed within it,” proving that this line was controversial. Later disciples and followers each took up this sentence and offered their own explanations, and the exchanges between Nie Bao and Wang Ji on “the extension of knowledge” grew out of this debate and emerged as a highlight within scholarly circles of the day. During the Longqing reign (1567-72), Qian Dehong edited the Supplement to the Literary Record, in which he annotated Wang’s writings in order to clarify their deeper meaning, with an eye to defining Wang’s own teachings “late in life.” In response to Nie Bao’s theories which triggered divergences in Wang’s legacy, in the Collected Works of Master Wang Wencheng, Qian cut out sections in which Wang praised Nie Bao, in hopes of diminishing Nie’s significance. In Qian’s revisions of Wang’s “Chronology,” he emphasized that Chan meditation was not part of Wang’s teachings on moral knowledge, in a further refutation of Nie Bao. In the end, through Qian Dehong’s revisions of the Collected Works of Master Wang Wencheng, the master’s legacy was restored to unity.