朱熹與荻生徂徠之思想比較－－以「天心」為線索

Comparative Studies between Zhu Xi and Ogyu Sorai: Taking “Heart of Heaven” as a Clue

作為理學之集大成者的朱熹和反理學的古學派思想家荻生徂徠，兩者的思想歷來被默認為是互相對立的，然而本文通過考察兩者對「天心」的思考以及相關問題，試圖對這一點做出修正。朱熹論及「天心」，一是沿襲古典儒學的人格神成分的天，二是以「天地之心」而論之，對於後者，朱熹主要是在天地創生萬物的「生生」之框架下進行理解的，並且側重於「天命之謂性」的規律性與秩序含義。與之相比，徂徠更強調天的超越性，所以「天心」亦不可能同於「人心」，但是，聖人還是能夠在一定程度上洞察天意，從而領會到生死流轉之中的「生生」才是「天心」。並且在個體層面上，徂徠將「知天命」作為君子的必要條件，這種確定性的「知」，與朱熹區分「氣命」（福善禍淫等等）與「理命」、並以後者為必然的理解是一致的。朱熹與徂徠，兩人從不同的前提與立場出發，最終卻得出了相似的結論。

"Regarding Zhu Xi, the most famous neo-Confucian, and Ogyu Sorai, the anti-neo-Confucian philosopher in Edo period, the thoughts of both are usually seemed as opposite. However, by investigation of their consideration about “Heart of Heaven” and related concepts, I argue that this kind of prejudice requires revision, at least partly. For Zhu Xi,“Heart of Heaven” inherits some characteristics of emotional God in classics, on the other hand, the focus has been transferred to “Heart of Heaven and Earth”, which is comprehended in the context of Heaven creates everything in the world persistently. By contrast, Ogyu Sorai takes emphasis on the transcendental aspect of Heaven, and rejects any analogical consideration between “Heart of Heaven” and “human being’s mind”. Nonetheless, Ideal Man of Confucius, almost seemed as superman by Ogyu Sorai, couldstill apperceive Heaven’s intention in some extent, thus realize the “persistent creating” being more fundamental than endless cycle. Furthermore, it is necessary to being a gentleman as to “acknowledge the mandate of Heaven.” Such a knowledge is so absolute, that reminds us Zhu Xi’s consideration that there are two kinds of destinies, one is based on qi 氣, the other is originated from li 理, which should be pursued than the former. As a result, we can see that two philosophers in different styles, based on almost opposite presumptions, finally achieved the similar conclusion."