宋代理学家与《老子》的关系及其历史意义  

Relationship between Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianist Scholars and Lao Tzu and Its Historical Significance

作　　者：许晓晴 XU Xiaoqing(School of Marxism,Jimei University,Xiamen 361021,China)

机构地区：[1]集美大学马克思主义学院,福建厦门361021

出　　处：《集美大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2023年第4期33-39,共7页Journal of Jimei University：Philosophy and Social Sciences

摘　　要：宋明时期注《老》群体愈发庞大,但宋代少见为《老》作注的理学家,在对老子思想“明斥暗合”的主基调中,惟见吕祖谦和林希逸两人注《老》。面对佛道两家思想,宋代理学家对道家老子的态度,整体呈现出一个演进的过程:从接纳《老子》,到在批判中予以吸收或严厉批判,再到汇通儒老而注《老》。吕祖谦、林希逸《老子》注本的问世,标志着南宋时期理学界内已经出现“为《老》正名”的先声。In the Song and Ming Dynasties,the group of people who annotated Lao Tzu increasingly expanded,but few Neo-Confucianists annotated Lao Tzu in the Song Dynasty.And in the tone of“explicit denouncement and implicit agreement”for Lao Tzu s thoughts,only the annotations of Lao Tzu by Lu Zuqian and Lin Xiyi can be found.In both Buddhism and Taoism,the attitudes of Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianist scholars toward Taoism and Lao Tzu evolved over time:from accepting Lao Tzu,to absorbing it amid criticism or severely criticizing,and finally to commenting on it by integrating knowledge of Confucianism and Lao Tzu s thoughts.The publication of Lu Zuqian and Lin Xiyi s commentary on Lao Tzu marked the first words on“restoring the name of Lao Tzu”among Southern Song Neo-Confucianists.

关 键 词：宋代理学家 《老子》 明斥暗合 汇通儒老 

分 类 号：B244[哲学宗教—中国哲学]