牟宗三論江右王門之劉兩峰、劉師泉與王塘南

MOU Zongsan's Discussion of the Thoughts of LIU Liangfeng, LIU Shiquan and WANG Tangnan of the Jiangyou School

黃敏浩(Wong, Simon Man-ho)

牟宗三 ； 江右王門 ； 劉兩峰 ； 劉師泉 ； 王塘南 ； Mou Zongsan ； Jiangyou School ； Liu Liangfeng ； Liu Shiquan ； Wang Tangnan

鵝湖學誌

67期（2021 / 12 / 01）

99 - 138

繁體中文

黃宗羲《明儒學案》以江右王門為陽明學之嫡傳。牟宗三的看法剛好相反，認為江右派除了少數幾位以外，基本上違離王學而走上另一條思想的道路。雖然如此，牟宗三花了好些篇幅討論江右派之聶雙江、羅念庵、劉兩峰、劉師泉和王塘南，而最後繼之以劉蕺山，似乎認為江右派是逐漸走上「以心著性」之路而大成於劉蕺山。本文基本上肯定牟宗三對江右派之性格及其歸向之睿識，但也認為他對劉兩峰、劉師泉與王塘南（還有黃洛村）思想的解釋當中有些問題值得檢討。本文之作，便是要展示牟宗三的睿識，及檢討當中有關江右派思想形態如何確定的問題。

Huang Zongxi (1610-1695), in his The Records of Ming Scholars, held that the Jiangyou School represented the orthodox teaching of Wang Yangming (1472-1529). However, Mou Zongsan (1909-1995) had an opposite view and opined that, except a few members, the thought of the School deviated from that of Yangming. Mou had lengthy discussions on the thoughts of the important thinkers of the School like Nie Shuangjiang (1487- 1563), Luo Nienan (1504-1564), Liu Liangfeng (1490-1572), Liu Shiquan (1492-1578) and Wang Tangnan (1522-1605), and argued that the School gradually developed into ＂Manifestation of human nature through the mind＂, the system of which was fully established by Liu Zongzhou (1578-1645). This essay agrees with Mou on the deviation of the Jiangyou School from Yangming's teaching, but it has reservation on some of his judgement on the Jiangyou scholars and the character of the School.

1. （明）王時槐(2015).王時槐集.上海:上海古籍出版社.
2. （明）王龍溪(1970).王龍溪全集.臺北:華文書局股份有限公司.
3. （明）王龍溪(1970).王龍溪全集.臺北:華文書局股份有限公司.
4. （明）王龍溪(1970).王龍溪全集.臺北:華文書局股份有限公司.
5. （明）黃宗羲(1973).明儒學案.臺北:世界書局.
6. 牟宗三(1979).從陸象山到劉蕺山.臺北:臺灣學生書局.
7. 林月惠(2005).良知學的轉折—聶雙江與羅念庵思想之研究.臺北:臺大出版中心.
8. 侯潔之(2012).晚明王學由心轉性的本體詮釋.臺北:政大出版社.
9. 陳儀(2017).王塘南思想研究.臺北:政大出版社.
10. 劉述先(1986).黃宗羲心學的定位.臺北:允晨文化實業股份有限公司.
11. 韓曉華(2013)。論牟宗三先生對王塘南「透性研幾」的詮釋。當代儒學研究，15

1. (2024)。江右王門定位再思考──以牟宗三的評判為中心。鵝湖月刊，590，41-52。