甘泉先生论乃师“静坐”说  

Gangquan on his Teacher’s Theory of Meditation

作　　者：叶蓬[1] YE Peng(Institute of Urban Culture,Guangzhou Academy of Social Sciences,Guangzhou,Guangdong 510450,China)

机构地区：[1]广州市社会科学院城市文化研究所,广东广州510450

出　　处：《河北师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2023年第4期80-87,共8页Journal of Hebei Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

摘　　要：湛甘泉先生的“随处体认天理”与乃师陈白沙先生的为学思想是一致的,与作为乃师为学方法的一个重要方面的“静坐”说并无实质性的冲突。甘泉先生在《答余督学》中对“静”的批评不是对乃师的“静坐”说的批评,而是为了在朱子后学的攻击境遇中与“为静而静、荒忽寂灭”的禅宗划清界限。与乃师对“静坐”说的全方位理解不同,早期甘泉先生倾向于将“静坐”仅仅理解为思想层面而非行为或制度层面的为学方法,以“随处体认天理”加以补充,致仕之后则更为强调“静坐”作为整体性的为学方法的作用,对其理解的全面性与“随处体认天理”更为趋同。因之,学界某些认为甘泉先生背叛师门之说难以令人苟同。Zhan Ganquan’s(湛甘泉)idea of“appreciating the Heavenly principles everywhere”is consistent with the thought on learning of Chen Baisha(陈白沙),his teacher.There is no substantial conflict between Ganquan’s idea and his teacher’s theory of“Meditation,”an important aspect of his method of learning.Ganquan’s criticism of“meditation”in Da Yu Du Xue(《答余督学》)is not to the Meditation method of his teacher,but to draw a clear line with Zen Buddhism under the criticism of Zhu Xi’s(朱子)followers,which is“quiet for the sake of quietness,desolate and tranquil extinction.”Different from his teacher’s all⁃round interpretation of the Meditation method,Ganquan,at his early years,tends to understand“meditation”as a learning method only at the ideological level rather than at the behavioral or institutional level,supplemented by“appreciating the Heavenly principles everywhere.”After becoming an official,he emphasizes the role of“meditation”as a holistic learning method.His comprehensive understanding gets closer to“appreciating the Heavenly principles everywhere.”Therefore,I do not agree with the arguments holding Gangquan betrays his teacher.

关 键 词：“静坐” “随处体认天理” 敬 自得 自然 通 

分 类 号：B248.99[哲学宗教—中国哲学]