網站導覽關於本館諮詢委員會聯絡我們書目提供版權聲明引用本站捐款贊助回首頁
書目佛學著者站內
檢索系統全文專區數位佛典語言教學相關連結
 


加值服務
書目管理
書目匯出
對牟宗三以「覺悟說」詮釋朱陸之爭的方法論反思=A methodological reflection on the interpretation of the dispute between Chu Hsi and Lu Xiang-Shan by MouZong-Sang through his intuitivism
作者 杜保瑞 (著)=Duh, Bau-ruei (au.)
出處題名 國文學報
卷期n.53
出版日期2013.06
頁次149 - 174
出版者國立臺灣師範大學國文學系
出版者網址 http://140.122.115.142/ntnu-web/index.php
出版地臺北市, 臺灣 [Taipei shih, Taiwan]
資料類型期刊論文=Journal Article
使用語言中文=Chinese
附註項作者為國立臺灣大學哲學系教授。
關鍵詞方法論=Methodology; 朱陸之爭=The dispute between Chu Hsi and Lu Xiang-Shan; 牟宗三=Mou, Zong-Sang; 覺悟=Intuitivism; 頓悟=an insight model
摘要 本文討論牟宗三先生於《從陸象山到劉蕺山》書中對朱陸之爭的意見,本文之作採地毯式逐章逐節討論的模式,聚焦於第二章的後段。在該書第二章後半段的討論中,牟先生愈發能認識朱熹學說的要點,因此就愈發地將象山之說轉入覺悟、頓悟等近禪之型態來詮釋,雖然,這正是為反駁朱熹以象山是禪的攻擊。本文之作,即是要指出,並不存在牟先生所說的朱熹認知型的理論模式,牟先生討論的結果,只是嚴重地犧牲了朱熹文本的哲學意旨而已。

This article focuses on discussing the interpretation of the dispute between Chu Hsi and Lu,Xiang-Shan by Mou, Zong-Sang in his book of “From Lu, Xiang-Shan to Liu Ji-Shan”. In Mou, Zong-Sang’s opinion, he always supports Lu Xiang-Shan and opposes Chu Hsi. But his criticizing opining are all basing on Lu’s original talking only with a Neo-Confucianism linguistic transformation. At the later part of Chapter 2 in this book, it seems that when he finds more and more reasonable points in Chu Hsi thinking, then he jump into intuitivism in order to defend for Lu, Xiang-Shan, and thus made himself falling into Zen Buddhism’s theoretical style. Therefore, Mou suggests some passive points to define Chu Hsi’s thinking which including “learning from the base and reaching to the top”, and “an acquired efforts”. Then he creates some other positive theories to describe Lu, Xiang-Shan what are “intuitivism”, “an insight model”, “conscience arising autonomy”, “sanctity innately”. Besides, Chu Hsi had once criticized Lu, Xiang-Shan as having a bad personal character, but Mou did never taken serious with it. Mou, Zong-Sang argues that Chu’s practical theory is a kind of knowledge orientation, however, Lu’s is individual’s innate willing, therefore, Chu’s critic will be useless. This article will point that there dosen’t exist so-called Chu Hsi’s theories suggested by Mou, and those theories belonging to Lu Xiang-Shan said by Mou are also existed in Chu’s philosophy. Mou, Zong-Sang’s understand about the dispute between Chu and Lu seriously hurts the correct meaning of Chu Hsi philosophy.
目次一、前言 150
二、以下學上達說批評朱熹 151
三、以後天積習說批評朱熹 154
四、以本心呈現說詮釋象山 156
五、以覺悟說詮釋象山 159
六、以頓悟說詮釋象山 161
七、以內聖之學詮釋象山 163
八、為象山氣質粗暴做辯護 166
九、結論 169
ISSN10196706 (P)
點閱次數399
建檔日期2014.07.24
更新日期2020.01.22










建議您使用 Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) 瀏覽器能獲得較好的檢索效果,IE不支援本檢索系統。

提示訊息

您即將離開本網站,連結到,此資料庫或電子期刊所提供之全文資源,當遇有網域限制或需付費下載情形時,將可能無法呈現。

修正書目錯誤

請直接於下方表格內刪改修正,填寫完正確資訊後,點擊下方送出鍵即可。
(您的指正將交管理者處理並儘快更正)

序號
396722

查詢歷史
檢索欄位代碼說明
檢索策略瀏覽