熊十力體用不二之《易》外王思想

Hsiung, Shih Li's I-Ching practical-theory of unity in essence and action

10.7065/MRPC.200305.0133

楊自平 (Zu-Ping Yang)

熊十力 ； 易經 ； 外王 ； 體用不二 ； 乾元 ； 仁體 ； Hsiung ； Shih Li ； I-Ching ； practical-theory ； unity in essence and action ； Chien-Yuan ； Jen

哲學與文化

30卷5期（2003 / 05 / 01）

133 - 155

繁體中文

In this article, I will discuss I-Ching theory of Hsiung, Shih Li. Huang Li-hsing had also discussed the same topic before, however I think some of this opinions were questionable. For instance, Huang criticised Hsiung for using his own private views in explaining the classics, and was of opinions that Hsiung's opinions could not form a complete system. On this issue, I will discuss the inadequacy of Huang's criticism from three angles, i.e. (1) Hsiung's stand on the motivation behind Confucios authorship of I-Ching, (2) To analyse the core of “unity between essence and action””, in subsequently re-examine Huang's criticism on Wang Chuan-shan, (3) To study the contents and foundations of Hsiung's theory, its meanings and value, in order to appreciate its prommence and distinction. On the other hand, the weakness in Hsiung's contention are (l) he distorted the original meaning of “Shih-chi’’ in “Si- Tze”, (2) his ideology of revolution and democracy has a misallocated structure and meaning, while at the same time he failed to explain properly the balance between democracy and equality. However, Hsiung's ideology's academic values are (l) he emphasized the idea of ‘Ren-ti’, especially he explained ‘Chi‘using action, although his stand was close to Cheng, Ming Tao's advocated monism, (2) Hsiung's theory insisted that equality, revolution and democracy are based on the concept of structural level. The above two points were the characters of Hsiug's practical-theory.

In this article, I will discuss I-Ching theory of Hsiung, Shih Li. Huang Li-hsing had also discussed the same topic before, however I think some of this opinions were questionable. For instance, Huang criticised Hsiung for using his own private views in explaining the classics, and was of opinions that Hsiung's opinions could not form a complete system. On this issue, I will discuss the inadequacy of Huang's criticism from three angles, i.e. (1) Hsiung's stand on the motivation behind Confucios authorship of I-Ching, (2) To analyse the core of “unity between essence and action””, in subsequently re-examine Huang's criticism on Wang Chuan-shan, (3) To study the contents and foundations of Hsiung's theory, its meanings and value, in order to appreciate its prommence and distinction. On the other hand, the weakness in Hsiung's contention are (l) he distorted the original meaning of “Shih-chi’’ in “Si- Tze”, (2) his ideology of revolution and democracy has a misallocated structure and meaning, while at the same time he failed to explain properly the balance between democracy and equality. However, Hsiung's ideology's academic values are (l) he emphasized the idea of ‘Ren-ti’, especially he explained ‘Chi‘using action, although his stand was close to Cheng, Ming Tao's advocated monism, (2) Hsiung's theory insisted that equality, revolution and democracy are based on the concept of structural level. The above two points were the characters of Hsiug's practical-theory.

1. (1989)。十三經注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
2. (1986)。朱子語類。臺北:文津出版社。
3. (1988)。原儒。臺北:明文書局。
4. 明王夫之(1996)。船山全書。湖南:嶽鹿書社。
5. 明王夫之(1996)。船山全書。湖南:嶽鹿書社。
6. 皮錫瑞(1974)。經學通論。臺北:河洛出版社。
7. 皮錫瑞。經學歷史。
8. 岑溢成(1995)。熊十力的《春秋》學與清代今文經學。當代儒學論集：傳統與創新，臺北:
9. 黃黎星(1998)。熊十力易學思想評述。中國文化月刊，224，1-22。
10. 熊十力(1984)。讀經示要。臺北:明文書局。
11. 熊十力(1984)。讀經示要。臺北:明文書局。
12. 熊十力(1987)。乾坤衍。臺北:學生書局。
13. 熊十力(1990)。十力語要。臺北:明文書局。

1. 林世榮(2008)。熊十力《易》學辨僞證論。興大人文學報，40，39-81。