經典詮釋與理論轉移－－中國哲學經典詮釋之三大變例

Canonical Interpretation and Theoretical Shift-----Three Anomalies of Canonical Interpretation in Chinese Philosophy

從理論發展的角度看，孔子有一些道德概念可被發展成心性論，但他本人卻沒有成型的心性論。又如孟子有一些有關心性的論旨，但他本人卻沒有成型的「心性與天道相貫通」的形上學。尋求「了義」或「本義」除了掌握經典傳統中的理論基型（包括基本概念與基本論旨）之外，也要確定某一被詮釋的經典所包含的理論或可被理論化的論說是否經過詮釋後滿足一些理性的條件。這些條件包括「內部融貫性」、「架內指涉的相應性」及「完備性」等，其中「內部融貫性」更是掌握「了義」或判別有效詮釋的一個至為重要的必要條件。經由此一判準，我們往往可以判定某一經典被詮釋為包含某一理論之說法是否合理，以及是否有理論（的理性）重建及理論（的典範）轉移的問題。本文的目的，主要是就中國哲學史上三次經典詮釋的個例，以說明違反「內部融貫性」而產生理論轉移或歧變的問題。本文將分別以僧的〈物不遷論〉、張載的「理氣論」及王陽明的「心外無物說」為例，說明理論轉移的問題。

From a perspective of theoretical development, Confucius did not have a well- established theory of mind and nature, though some of his ideas of morality could be developed into such a theory. Based on the same kind of observations, we can say that Mencius did not have a well-established theory of moral metaphysics, though some of his ideas could be elaborated for such a theory. In order to search for the original meaning of a traditional classic, in addition to the investigation and understanding of the basic ideas of the text, some criteria of interpretation, such as inner coherence, referential correspondence, and comprehensiveness, have to be observed. Through the criterion of inner coherence we can decide which interpretation is more reasonable and know whether there is a problem of theoretical reconstruction and shift in some cases. Through the principle of inner coherence this article aims at investigating three anomalous cases of interpretation in Chinese philosophy. We conclude that there is a theoretical shift in Seng Chao's theory of 'immutability of things', Chang Tsai's theory of 'Li and Ch'i', and Wang Yang Ming's idea of 'nothing external to the mind'.