为“心学”正名:《驳吕留良四书讲义》卮言  

Rectify the Names of the “School of Mind”:Comments on A Refutation on Lv Liuliang’s Interpretation on the Four Books

作　　者：王胜军[1] Wang Shengjun(Chinese Culture Academy,Guizhou University,Guiyang,Guizhou 550025)

机构地区：[1]贵州大学中国文化书院,贵州贵阳550025

出　　处：《嘉兴学院学报》2020年第2期5-13,共9页Journal of Jiaxing University

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目(17ZDA013)。

摘　　要：朱轼等所纂《驳吕留良四书讲义》一书尽管有其强烈的政治意图,持论未尽公允,但其从一个侧面展示了在王学被大批判以及宋明心性之学衰微的情形之下,清初官方对"心学"传统的坚守以及"心学"与道统建构之间密不可分的关系,说明"吕留良案"在文字狱层面之外还有其更值得探求的"心学"意义。在传统语境中,"心学"不与陆王之学对等,而是包含陆王之学在内的整个宋明理学的指称,并且可以上溯为尧舜禹相授受的道统,是华夏先民的生活方式和文化信仰的最高哲学概括。考察这一广义"心学",对于认识中国文化的特质、启示当前的文化复兴不无裨益。Although A Refutation on Lv Liuliang’s Interpretation on the Four Books compiled by Zhu Shi and other people has strong political intentions and biased arguments, it indicates to some extent that in the context that Yangmingism was widely criticized and the school of mind developed in the Song and Ming dynasties declined, the authority of the early Qing dynasty still adhered to the tradition of this school of mind and its inseparable relationship with the construction of orthodoxy, which illustrates that there is still deep meaning worthy of exploring in the case of Lv Liuliang apart from the aspect of literary inquisition. In the traditional context, the school of mind is not equivalent to Lu and Wang’s thoughts, but refers to the whole neo-Confucianism in the Song and Ming dynasties including Lu and Wang’s thoughts. It can be traced back to the tradition of knowledge impartment from Yao to Shun and then to Yu and is the highest philosophical summary of the life style and cultural beliefs of Chinese ancestors. Examining the school of mind in the broad sense is of great benefit to understanding the characteristics of Chinese culture and inspiring the current cultural revitalization.

关 键 词：心学 四书讲义 吕留良 朱轼 道统 

分 类 号：G649.29[文化科学—高等教育学]