唐君毅、牟宗三二先生论罗近溪之学

On Tang Junyi and Mu Zongsan's Respective View of Luo Jinxi's Theory

罗近溪作为明代泰州一脉代表人物,与王龙溪并称为"二溪",其学以阳明学为根基,为王门正宗。唐君毅、牟宗三对近溪之评价略有差别:牟先生从本体论评断近溪学之地位,前期对其推崇极高,认为是最圆融之王学之境界,后期则将近溪之特色收缩为功夫实践上的表现,故仅置于泰州门下为一大家。唐先生的评价则从工夫论入手,认为近溪之工夫论之特出之处,既能显良知良能之平常日用之自然,又能不放失而谨守敬畏之意,仁智合一,语义圆足,其评价前后一贯,甚至后期更为推崇。然近溪固然有进于龙溪四无说之只立先天正心之学,工夫上却只较龙溪更细密而切近。近溪重心体之明与智,实仍偏向阳明之心学,与伊川朱子持敬之论实有距离。

Luo Jinxi was the representative figure of the Taizhou branch of philosophy in Ming Dynasty.Equally famous as Wang Longxi, Luo’ s philosophy took its root in Yangming theory and was regarded as the orthodox branch of the Wang school.There were several differences between Tang Junyi and Mu Zongsan’ s view of Jinxi：judging from the perspective of ontology, Mr Mu thought highly of Jinxi’ s theory at his early days, viewing it as the most harmonious state of the Wang school of philosophy, while at his latter days, his appreciation for Luo a-bated to only valuing his performance in the practice of Gongfu, thus categorizing it under the Taizhou branch;Tang’ s opinion of Luo’ s theory focused on the cultivation theory, which remained constant, with a growing trend of appreciation.In his view, Jinxi’ s cultivation theory was prominent in that it showed an perfect integration of benevolence and intelligence, promoting in a mild way the fine qualities in daily life on the one hand, and with-out being so undisciplined as to indulge the violation of the established rules on the other hand.Jinxi’ s theory, though in want of consummation in theory of cultivating one’ s moral character compared with Longxi’ s theory of“four voidness”, was more meticulous and adaptable in the theory of cultivation.Thus it born a similar nature with the Yangming theory instead of Yichuan and Zhuzi’ s theory of“Chijin”.