理解之难--从《中庸》“喜怒哀乐未发”句看

How to Read a Classical Text: From the Reading of a Position from The Doctrine of the Mean

《中庸》第一章"喜怒哀乐未发谓之中,发而中节谓之和"句,尤其是前一句,历来为儒家思想家关注和讨论的重要命题,宋明理学家对其作了深入的思考和阐发,留下大量的论述。与现代学人往往望文生义、根据字面意思从人的心理状态上去理解这句话不同,古代哲学家是从形上学意义上去理解和阐发这句话的。小程子首先划清本体论与心理学的界限,强调作为本体之"中"根本就不是一种主观性状态。朱熹继承伊川反对心理主义和自然主义的阐释原则,深入阐释了未发之中的丰富意义,并且以功夫论来具体解决如何明体达用的问题。阳明秉承程朱在这个问题上的原则思路,严守《中庸》天人关系的圭臬,进一步强化前辈从本体论而非心理学去理解未发已发的立场。牟宗三从他接受的康德自律哲学的观点出发,批评朱子对未发句的阐释,却未能真正理解朱子的思想,原始材料掌握上的缺陷还在于其次。牟宗三对程(伊川)朱的批评是现代学者在现代性话语支配下以西方现代思想揣度古代思想的一个典型例子。

The two positions in the first chapter of The Doctrine of the Mean, "While there are no stirring of pleasure, anger, sorrow, or joy, the mind may be said to be in the state of equilibrium. When those feelings have been stirred, and they act in their due degree, there ensues what may be called the state of Harmony," have always been the important problems which attract the widespread attention and discussion of the ancient philosophers, especially the former. The ancient philosophers read the text metaphysically and ontologically, thereby revealed its deep and complicated meaning while some modern philosophers read the text literally and interpret it psychologically and naturalistically. The text loses its profound philosophical significance in the modern interpretation. The case poses us the question: how should we read the classical text.