阳明良知学的两种型态及其对恶的处理

Two Types of Wang Yangming's Liangzhi Theory and Their Reaction to Evilness

阳明两大弟子钱德洪、王畿对四句教颇持歧解,后人因此持续对"无善无恶"进行若干辩论。黄宗羲较支持钱德洪,牟宗三则倾向于王畿。然考察《传习录》,另有一组渐顿、本体工夫的对比,即阳明"心即理"与朱熹"格物穷理"之说,而这其实才是阳明阐发良知学的基源问题。对照之下,钱德洪的理解显然近于此说,而较不契于阳明晚期以无善无恶说良知的说法。同时,阳明的良知除了心性本体之外,另有存有本体的意义。从对"恶"的处理来看,两者之间显见差异。从心性本体而言,恶的来源是外在的、后天的。但从存有本体而言,就不能说另有外来的障蔽;于是,恶便成为自身的异化。对此一问题,阳明本身并未有解,牟先生则藉由《大乘起信论》"依于一心有二门"的理论模型说解之。不过,我们认为《大乘起信论》之说与"无善无恶是谓至善"并不相同。同时,再比对钱、王之说,二人虽也有"心无一善"的说法,但前者乃是指"不心外求理",后者则是指"空洞无一物",显然对良知本体的理解颇不相侔。准此可知,阳明的良知教当有前后期之差异,而后期在道德之外,明显另具佛、道二家超越善恶、超越道德之意义。

Abstract： As two eminent students of Wang Yangming （ 1472-1529 ）, Qian Dehong （ 1496-1574 ） and Wang Ji have different under- standings on their teacher＇s four-sentence edification, which led to several debates on ＂ non-goodness and non-evilness. ＂ Huang Zongxi （ 1610-1695 ） supports the former whereas Mou Zongsan （ 1909 - 1995 ） inclined to the latter. Yet, by examining Wang Yang- ming＇s Chuan xi lu （ Instructions for Practical Living） , we can find there is a contrast between gradual and immediate enlightenment and ontology, i. e. , the contrast between Wang Yangming＇s view that ＂ the heart/mind is principle＂ and Zhu Xi＇s （ 1130-1200 ） adher- ence to ＂ studying things to plnmb into the principle,＂ which is the basic source for Yangnfing to explicate his liangzhi （ innate good- ness ） theory. Qian＇s understanding is comparatively in affinity with this but not in alignment with Yangming＇s assertion that the innate goodness does not have the distinction between goodness and evilness. In the mean time, besides the quality of heart/mind ontology, Yangming~ innate goodness also contains the quality of existential ontology. These two kinds of ontology will be apparently different when reacting to the issue of ＂evilness. ＂ From perspective of heart/mind ontology, ＂eyilness＂ originates from external and postnatal factors whereas in existential ontology, there will be no external barriers and thus ＂evilness＂ turns out to be a mutation of self. Yang- ruing himself did not give any interpretation to this issue whereas Mr. Mou comprehended it from the theoretical mode that ＂one heart/mind opens two gates＂ from Awakening Faith of Mahayana. But the theory in Awakening Faith of Mahayana is not commensurate with the argument that ＂without goodness and evilness is called supreme goodness. ＂ In the mean time, when comparing Qiang and Wang views, it can be seen that though both of them assert that ＂there is no one single goodness,＂ the former means ＂ not seeking princi- ple from the outside of the heart/mind＂ while the latter designates ＂vacuity without one single thing,＂ and thus their understandings on the innate goodness as the noumenon are much different. Thus it is evident that Yangmingg edification on innate goodness in his early years differ from that in his later years and in his later years, the innate goodness （ liangzhi ） has the meaning transcending good- ness and evilness as well as morality which characterizes Buddhism and Daoism.