對胡五峰哲學的當代詮釋之反省

Theoretical reflection on the modern interpretational systems toward Hu Hong's philosophy

本文討論對胡五峰哲學在當代詮釋系統的反省意見，當代詮釋意見的主要脈絡有二，其一為內地學者的概念範疇研究法，其二為牟宗三先生的哲學型態分系說。筆者主張，概念範疇研究法以胡宏學為性學傳統以有別於理學、心學、氣學傳統的分類方式，不易見出哲學理論的異同，也不易定位個別儒學系統的真正重點，不是一個好的分類系統，這主要是就朱漢民、王立新、向世陵三位教授的胡宏研究專著所進行的討論。至於牟宗三先生以其儒家道德形上學的圓教理論之建構以為分判宋明儒學系統的作法，認為胡宏學正是一「以心著性」的圓教系統，既能充分展現客觀面的本體宇宙學又能落實主觀面的主體自覺心，正是宋明儒學圓教型態的圓滿義。筆者以為，胡宏之學不過就是準確繼承先秦及北宋諸儒之學，牟先生過度地劃分論孟、易庸的理論角色，以致過度強調周、張、明道的義理不足，所以得出五峰學有以圓成超克之意境，牟先生據以為圓成超克的重點即在「以心著性」說，而筆者指出「以心著性」說即是一極為普通的「本體工夫論」的命題，不斷地發生在論孟、易庸、周張二程、及朱陸各家系統之中，並無特別的義理殊勝之處，是牟先生強以主體活動結構入形上理論，以致混淆活動與理論而以為有一「以心著性」之說之能圓成主客關系統的儒學圓教型態。若能正視哲學基本問題研究進路，則牟先生此一對胡宏學的過度強調及肯定之說，份量上應可放得較輕些。

Owing to his specific theoretical position in the modern study of the Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism the philosophy of Hu Hong (胡宏) is quite noticed these years. There are two significant interpretational trends among the modern studies, and in this article, the author tries to argue with these opinions via the methodological reflection to point out their mistakes. Lots of scholars in main land China suggest that his philosophy represent a new approach to create the Neo-Confucianism named Ｘing origin theory (性本論) which replace the other two approach Xin origin (心本) and Li origin (理本) to construct the Confucian philosophy. It will be explain in this article that why the categorical approach as illustrated by the Xin, Xing and Li origin theory is not available to play the role as being an effective interpretational theory for the study of Confucian philosophy. Another modern philosopher Mo Zong San propose the statement of “Xin evident Xing”(以心著性)to sum up Hu Hong's philosophy which means the universal principle has been proof to be true by the subjective mind. This will be critic as the wrongly combine the metaphysical problem with the practical theory in this article too.