李翱性情思想新詮

A New Interpretation of Li Ao's Thought of Nature and Emotion

洪明超(Ming-Chao HONG)；文碧方(Bi-Fang WEN)

性善情惡 ； 動靜 ； 寂然不動 ； Good Nature and Evil Emotion ； Moving and Stillness ； Jiranbudong

哲學與文化

50卷3期（2023 / 03 / 01）

149 - 163

繁體中文;英文

目前學界對李翱思想的研究主要偏向於追溯其思想淵源以及探討其對宋明理學的影響，而對其思想中存在的眾多矛盾，則往往試圖通過引入外部思想資源來解決，這種進路缺乏對李翱思想本身獨立性的關注。性情關係是解索李翱思想的關鍵，其性與情並非源流或體用關係，而是因果關係，如此理解才可以避免性善與情惡的矛盾。進而通過對其思想中「動—靜」，「不動—動」和「感—寂」三對範疇進行重新反思，便可明白性與情各自的性質和作用。在此基礎上，李翱的工夫論也可以獲得新的理解，其「寂然不動」並沒有「靜」的意味，其工夫論亦不以「靜」為主旨，心「知」才是核心。

The study of Li Ao's thought in the present academic circle mainly focuses on tracing back the origin of his thoughts and discussing his influence on Neo-Confucianism. Many contradictions in his thought are often attempted to be solved by introducing external ideological resources. This approach neglects the independence of Li Ao's thoughts. The relationship of nature and emotion is the key to understand his thought, and it is not the the relationship of source-flow or ti-yong, but of causality, by which the contradiction between good nature and evil emotion can be avoided. Furthermore, by rethinking the categories of "moving-stillness", "unmoving-moving" and "gan-ji", we can understand the feature and function of nature and emotion respectively. On this basis, Li Ao's theory of cultivation can also be re-understood. His theory of "jiranbudong" does not have any meaning of "stillness", and his theory of cultivation does not take "stillness" as its gist, but "zhi" of mind is the core.

1. 劉振維(2005)。論李翱「復性」說之蘊義暨其與朱熹「人性本善」的理論關聯。哲學與文化，32(7)
   連結：
2. 韓麗華(2015).回歸誠明——李翱《復性書》研究.成都:巴蜀書社.
   連結：
3. （唐）李翱(1993).李文公集.上海:上海古籍出版社.
4. Barrett, T. H.(1992).Li Ao: Buddhist, Taoist, or Neo-Confucian?.London:Oxford University Press.
5. 卞孝萱,張清華,閻琦(1998).韓愈評傳.南京:南京大學出版社.
6. 李小山(2009)。西北大學。
7. 李曉春(1997)。試論李翱的人性論。蘭州大學學報，25(1)
8. 張躍(1994).唐代後期儒學.上海:上海人民出版社.
9. 陳來(2004).宋明理學.上海:華東師大出版社.
10. 陳弱水(2009).唐代文士與中國思想的轉型.桂林:廣西師範大學出版社.
11. 勞思光(2005).新編中國哲學史（三卷上）.桂林:廣西師範大學出版社.
12. 馮友蘭(2011).中國哲學史（下）.北京:商務印書館.
13. 黃愛平(2013).李翱研究.新北:花木蘭文化出版社.