论丁若镛对朱熹《中庸章句》心性说的批评

On DING Ruo-yong's Criticisms upon the Theory of Mind-nature in the Textual Study of Zhong-yong Written by ZHU Xi

“天命之谓性,率性之谓道,修道之谓教”是《中庸》的纲领,涉及到性、命、道、教等心性说的一系列概念,历来受到研究者的重视。朱熹沉潜反复数十年,汇通诸家而成《中庸章句》,成就最为杰出。朝鲜学者丁茶山诘难朱熹的《中庸》心性说,提出了颠覆性的意见。今由郭店楚简《性自命出》、《尊德义》等篇出土文献,而知朱熹之说更接近于《中庸》的本义,二氏之争终于尘埃落定。

The guiding principle of the Doctrine of the Mean （《中庸》）, so called “What Heaven confers is called the Nature; an accordance with this Nature is called the Dao （Way,道） ; the regulation of Dao is called Jiao （Education,教）”, has constantly received the respect of the researchers because of its relation to such concepts of the theory of mind-nature （心性说） as Nature （性）, Fate （命）, Dao （道） and Jiao （Education）. ZHU Xi, as an outstanding scholar, wrote the Textual Study of the Doctrine of the Mean （《中庸章句》） with great concentration after dozens of years＇ research. Ding Tasan, a scholar of the ancient Korea, rebuked ZHU Xi＇s theory of mind-nature and put forward the subversive point of view. Recently, according to the unearthed artifacts, e.g. Xingzimingchu （《性自命出》） and Zundeyi （《尊德义》） of Guodian Chu Bamboo Slips, we can conclude that ZHU Xi＇s theories is rather closer to the original meanings of the Doctrine of the Mean than Ding Tasan＇s. So the controversy between them ought to come to an end.