朱子窮理工夫論的外在超越性

The External Transcendence in Zhu Xi’s Theory of Self-Cultivation of Probing Principle

目前對朱子所論之「理」是否能「動」的探討，多仍貼合牟宗三先生所擘設的「即存有即活動」之模式為說，由此落入同一套以「內在超越」為理論基礎的圓善觀點。不過，在探討圓善如何可能的議題上，容或有不同的解釋方案。論者探討朱子之窮理工夫，多忽視其論「理」之超越依據：天。然而，我們不宜忘記朱子延續程頤的立場，鄭重提出「聖人本天，釋氏本心」，可窺「天」在其學說中位居要角，是吾人理解朱子理學的鎖鑰。更值注意的是，對於「天」的見解差異，據陸象山自述可知，恰是其與朱子學分道揚鑣的關鍵。兩相對較可發現，朱子所論之「天」頗有超越實體的意味；其對圓善之設想，應是以對超越實體的證知為基礎與起點，具有不容忽視的外在超越性。

Current scholarly discussions concerning whether Zhu Xi’s“principle”(理) can“move”or“act”largely remain within the framework of“being qua activity”(即存有即活動) established by Mou Zongsan. Hence, these discussions continue to follow the same theoretical paradigm grounded in“immanent transcendence”and its corresponding conception of the highest or the perfect good (圓善). However, alternative interpretive approaches may offer different ways of exploring the question of how the perfect good is possible. Scholars examining Zhu Xi’s method of probing principle often overlook the transcendent foundation of his discourse on“principle”—namely, Heaven (天). Yet it is crucial to note that Zhu Xi inherited Cheng Yi’s theoretical position and reverently proposed that“the sage takes Heaven as his foundation, while the Buddhist takes the mind as his foundation.”This statement reveals that“Heaven”occupies a pivotal role in Zhu Xi’s philosophical system and serves as the key to understanding his Neo-Confucianism. In particular, according to Lu Xiangshan’s own account, the divergent views on“Heaven”highlighted the significant discrepancy between his philosophical ideas and the study of Zhu Xi. By presenting a comparative analysis, this study suggests that Zhu Xi’s conception of“Heaven”substantially embodies the implications of a transcendent reality. His vision of the perfect good should be understood as the foundation and origin of the cognitive apprehension of transcendent reality. Accordingly, his approach to the perfect good possesses the dimension of external transcendence that should not be overlooked.