韓儒田艮齋之心性論

The Theory of Hsin and Hsing in Chun Gan Jae's Thought

10.29653/LS.199912.0001

蔡仁厚(Jen-Hou Tsai)

心 ； 性 ； 朱子 ； 儒學 ； Hsin ； Hsing ； Chu Shi ； Confucianism

鵝湖學誌

23期（1999 / 12 / 01）

1 - 20

繁體中文

本文研析一位與嚴復約略同時的名儒田愚艮齋(1841-1922)之心性論。艮齋爲李栗谷系下之傳人，堅守朱子學立場，故本文先論述儒學心性論之兩個基型（一曰心性是一、二曰心性爲二）以明其背景。其次則指述韓國儒學是朱子學，以明李朝儒學之線索與系別。而徒進入正論，以評述艮齋田氏之心性論。1.釋「性」：本然性與五行性2.釋「心」：心本性，心學性3.性爲心宰4.性體心用5.性師心弟6.性尊心卑此六義，皆屬朱子心性思想之申述，而評斥陸王心學處，則堅執朱子學立場，可勿論。文之末段，繼前言所列艮齋學行「六大端」之後，再約爲五句以爲綜評（請閱正文）。

This article consists of an analysis on the theory of Hsin and Hsing in the thought of Chun Gao Jae (Chun Won, 1841-1922), who is a famous Korean Confucian and a disciple of Yi Yulgok. In order to shed light on the background of his thought, I introduce the two archetypes of Confucianism, namely, viewing Hsin the same as Hsing and viewing Hsin as different from Hsing. Chu Shi takes the latter point of view. Secondly, I regard Korean Confucianism on the whole as the further development of the thought of Chu Shi. Thirdly, I elucidate the main theme of Chun Gan Jae's thought with six statements on the relation of Hsin and Hsing. They are basically the thesis uphold by Chu Shi. I shall skip Chun Gao Jae's criticism on Lu-Wang's approach in other discossions. The paper ends with a summary comment of Chun Gan Jae's approaches in five aspects.