再论“两种阳明学”——近代日本阳明学的问题省思

Re-discussion on “Two Kinds of Yangming School” :Reflecting on Problems of Modern Japanese Yangming School

按沟口雄三的"两种阳明学"之说,日本阳明学与中国阳明学属于完全"异质"的不同形态的阳明学。据此,则阳明学唯有特殊形态的阳明学,而阳明学的普遍性被抽离于历史之外。显然,沟口先生的问题意识源自近代日本。而近代日本至少有四种形态的"两种阳明学":中国的与日本的,右翼的与左翼的,前近代的与近代的,国家主义的与个人主义的。1896年吉本襄创刊的《阳明学》以及1906年东敬治创刊的《王学杂志》(后改名为《阳明学》)属于右翼阳明学、国家主义阳明学的典型形态;1910年石崎东国创立的"大阪阳明学会"以及机关杂志《阳明》(1919年改名为《阳明主义》)则属于"民间阳明学",而有别于国家主义的"官方阳明学"。须指出,阳明学在与异域文化的接触和交流过程中,其形态可以是多样的、"特殊的"。然而,阳明学的思想义理却有其自身的"普遍性",如果我们只是强调阳明学历史形态的复数性、多样性,则不免导致偏激的历史相对主义。

According to Mizoguchi's"Two Kinds of Yangming School",Yangming Schools in Japan and in China are heterogeneous in form.In this line,Yangming School exists in special forms,with its commonness being removed from history.This viewpoint obviously originated from modern Japan in which there are at least four forms of"Two Kinds of Yangming School".They are Chinese and Japanese,right-wing and left-wing,pre-modern and modern,nationalist and individualist.It should be noted that with increasing contacts and exchanges with different cultures,Yangming School can be diverse and"special"in form.However,there are still things in common in its theory.Only emphasizing the pluralistic diversity of Yangming's historical patterns would inevitably lead to extreme historical relativism.