“理之用”还是“心之用”?——退溪和栗谷对物格注的争论及其回响

Is It the Function of the Li or the Xin? The Debates and Responses about Zhu Xi’s Interpretation of Wuge Between Tuixi and Ligu

朱子《大学章句》曰:"物格者,物理之极处无不到也",退溪早年认为"理岂能自至于极处",晚年则主张"先寻个理所以自到者"。为了解决"理自到"与"理无情意,无计度,无造作"之间的矛盾,退溪依据朱子"理必有用,何必又说是心之用"的说法,提出"无情意、造作者"是理之体,"随寓发见而无不到者"是理之用。栗谷学派则从"理无为而气有为"的立场,批评退溪违背了"体用一源"的原则。退溪后学一面批评栗谷"物理到极处"的说法是分物理与极处为二,一面接着《四书大全·大学或问·补亡章》小注的讨论,认为"心之用"实为"心所管之理呈露于本地",重申理到是"理之用"的观点。退溪和栗谷两派对物格注的争论体现出朱子理学思想存在的内在张力以及朱子学发展的多元化理路。

In his Commentary on the Great Learning,Zhu Xi said: "Wuge( 物格) is that the farthest point of the thing’s Li has not reached nowhere. "So firstly Tuixi thought "How Li itself reached the farthest point",finally he changed his idea to that "find why the Li itself can reach the farthest point ". Thus Tuixi must solve the contradiction between his idea that "the Li itself can reach the farthest point"and Zhu Xi’s thought that "the Li lacks volition or plan,and has no creative power ",according to the book of Sishudaquan( 《四书大全》),there is a small commentary: "Since the Li must has the function,why must we say it is the function of the Xin ",Tuixi proposed that what lacked volition or plan was the essence( 体) of the Li,but what manifested and can reach anywhere was the function( 用) of the Li.The school of Ligu debated that since the Li lacked volition and the Qi had volition,Tuixi violated the principle that Essence and Function derive from one and the same root( 体用一源). The successor of the school of Tuixi pointed out that the function of the Xin actually was the manifestation of the Li supervised by the Xin,that is,what can reach is the function of the Li. The debates of the two schools of Tuixi and Ligu reflect the inner tension and the diversification of the development of Zhu Xi’s theory.