湛门与王门之间的“良知良能之辩”

The Debate on“Innate Knowledge and Inborn Ability”between the School of Zhan and the School of Wang

明代中后期的“良知良能之辩”,首先发生在王阳明与黄佐之间,王阳明去世后又在张文海与何廷仁之间继起,而以湛若水与欧阳德之间的论辩收场。辩论的内容涉及良知与良能、知与行、良知良能与知能、良知良能与知行诸关系。湛门主张良知良能并重,批评王门舍良能而言良知;王门主张良知内含良能,为圣不在才能。直至明末清初,仍有学者在指责王学“只言良知,不言良能”的过错。故湛门与王门的“良知良能之辩”,值得学界去探讨与反思。

The debate on“innate knowledge and inborn ability”started in the middle and late Ming dynasty between Wang Yangming and Huang Zuo,continued between Zhang Wenhai and He Tingren after Wang Yangming died,and ended between Zhan Ruoshui and Ouyang De.Their debate is concerned with the relations between innate knowledge and inborn ability,knowledge and action,innate knowledge and inborn ability and knowledge and ability,innate knowledge and inborn ability,and knowledge and action.The school of Zhan Ruoshui advocated equal emphasis on innate knowledge and inborn ability,and criticized school of Wang Yangming for abandoning inborn ability and advocating innate knowledge;The school of Wang Yangming advocated both innate knowledge and inborn ability,and advocated that it was not ability that makes a saint.However,by the end of the Ming dynasty and the beginning of the Qing dynasty,some scholars has still criticized Wang Yangming for his fault of“talking merely about innate knowledge rather than about inborn ability”.Therefore,the debate between the school of Zhan Ruoshui and the school of Wang Yangming on“innate knowledge and inborn ability”is worthy of academic discussion and examination.