【作者】 李伏清；

【导师】 陈卫平；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 中国哲学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 儒学是一个博大精深的体系,除却孔孟宋明心性天人合一之学的一脉潜通外,还有为理学家所斥为“异端”的非正统儒学,后者彰显的仍是儒家的精神。如唐代的韩愈和柳宗元,虽表现为路径上辟佛、心性“道统”论和统合儒释、天人不相预论的不同,在实质上,两者殊途同归,都是中唐儒学重要的组成部分。韩愈学说备受关注,柳宗元思想却被搁置的历史现实,使得我们重新认定柳宗元在儒学史上的地位颇有必要。另外,“唐宋”变革日益成为当今学术界热门的话题之一,具体在思想文化领域,反映了唐宋之间的因承性和断裂性以及唐代前后两期思想的显著差异性。前唐承接汉学,中后唐开启宋学的事实,表明中后唐在思想史上有着非同寻常的地位和意义。因此,我们研究处于中后唐时期的柳宗元在复兴儒学方面所做出的贡献,由此反映中后唐儒学与宋明儒学之间的历史联系颇有意义。唐代的学术环境大体上为“末学驰骋,儒道不举”。在佛道二教尤其是佛教强大势力的冲击和儒学内部经学僵化、文学浮靡而失却世用之弊的双重压力下,如何实现“汉皇改运”后“儒学独尊”的地位,以满足整顿社会风气和应对佛道挑战的需求,成为唐朝士人们共同思索的问题,即儒学复兴成为中唐重大的时代问题。这一课题具体而微地表现为四个方面的选择:首先,如何选择对待佛教的态度,是以儒统合佛教,还是以儒家的基本精神构建道统来辟佛;其二,如何重归儒学的基本价值:人道原则,就天人关系而言,即孔子以降孟学路线和荀学路线的选择;其三,儒家经典如何重新获得活力:是我注六经还是六经注我,即章句训诂与义理诠释的选择;其四:如何重现儒学的教化功能:“以文掩道”与“文以明道”的选择。柳宗元一生以“明道”为志向,以复兴儒学的高度自觉,对以上问题做出了矜创性的解答,由此形成了与儒学在宋明再度复兴的历史联系。首先,“统合儒释,宣涤疑滞”。鉴于中唐佛教的高度中国化及其影响的深刻性,中唐儒士开辟了以儒统合佛教的道路。这一路线存在着一定的必要性、紧迫性和现实可能性。具体而言,韩愈、李翱表面上辟佛而无多创见,在实质层面融佛而又多有造诣。而柳宗元在儒学的视野下,既表现出对佛教的认同,又表现为对佛教的批判。于前者,柳宗元基于中唐佛教高度世俗化的现实,认为在“孝道”、仁义、礼法和戒律等方面,佛道“不与孔子异道”,佛教理论有“与《易》、《论语》合”之处。同时,柳宗元以儒家“入世”的品格来消释佛教的“出世”色彩,发挥佛理的优越性。于后者,柳宗元批评时禅“流荡舛误”、“迭相师用”、“妄取空语”、“脱略方便”、“言体而不及用”等弊病,折射出守礼法、尊经崇圣、修身养性等儒家思想主张。此外,还从学风的角度,对佛教进行了深刻而全面的批评,体现了儒家经学、文学的主张。总体上,柳宗元以儒学为主导思想,不离“复兴儒学”这一重任,主张“统合儒释”。可见,韩柳表异实同、殊途同归。然而,以“仁”、理为基点的道学,公开视佛教为异端,以辟佛为己任,这样,韩愈就被他们重视列为“道统”,而柳宗元则被搁置一旁,甚至被斥为“异端”。其次,以“天人不相预”的天人观重归儒学的基本价值——人道原则。在孔子那里,天人关系这一基本的哲学问题,蕴含着孟子天人合一的路线和荀子天人相分的路线,孟荀天人观实则殊途同归,都在于彰显“人道原则”。前者经过两汉阴阳五行说的比配和发展,走向了天人感应论。这一理论在伸长人道原则的同时,又将儒学基本价值淹没于神学的迷雾之中。柳宗元将荀子——王充天人相分的路线贯彻下来并加以推进,其一,发展了“自”论思想,将自然说贯彻于宇宙论和人生观、价值观;其二,提出了“天人不相预”的观点,从宇宙论的角度还原“天”的“自然”性,全面而又深刻地批评两汉天人神学目的论,将传统的“人道原则”从神学呓语的奴役下解放出来。其三,发展了孔孟荀的圣人观,将性“朴”论发展为人性“自然”论,认为人性是“明”和“志”的辩证结合,发展了“大中之道”,提出了“圣人与人无异”的观点,是人道原则在理想人格中的体现。其四,与其理想人格紧密关联的是“至公”的社会理想,将基于儒学人道原则的民本思想发挥为“利民”和“民利”、“民役而非役民”的“利安元元”的主张。总体上,柳宗元承继了被以后宋明理学视为异端的荀子天人相分路线,这使得他与发挥孟学天人合一路线的宋明理学家拉开了距离。再次,“由我而得”、借圣立言的解经范式革命。在佛教义疏经学的影响、刺激和启发下,在疑古思潮悄然兴起之际,日益陷入泥淖、遮蔽儒道的中唐儒家经学内部宜时而行的解经范式变革破茧而出。以啖助、赵匡、陆淳为开创者,以柳宗元、吕温为推进者的新《春秋》学派主张,一方面“解构”、超越传统章句学,另一方面又从经学和史学两个领域发起了对“义理”的追求,主张以“大中之道”为支柱,重新“解释”传统经传,“六经注我”,由“我”明“圣人之心”,发明“微言大义”,以此建构新的理论体系,使儒学经典重新获得生命力,充分彰显儒道的政教世用性。在阐释与发展儒学内在价值的同时,高扬主体意识和理性精神,充分体现了主体的创造力。另外,柳宗元发展了“舍传求经”、严格区分经传以及疑古、辨伪的方法。可以说,新《春秋》学派推进的解经范式的变革,较之以钦定《五经正义》为标志的唐初经学复兴的经学研究范式,是一场颠覆性的变革。可见,新《春秋》学派的主张与宋明经学主张在很多方面表现出一致性。因此,我们可以将宋学的生命上溯至中唐。最后,“文以明道”的文学主张。在儒学传统中,“文”“道”本为一体。“文”蕴含着“尊经”、“崇圣”、“复古”的思想,包含教化之意,存在显化儒道教化的可能。与异化了的注疏章句经学遗失了儒道一样,走向极端的六朝骈文遮蔽了儒道,其弊病都在于失去了辅时济世、经世致用的品格,备显空虚,没有内容。在唐宋复兴儒学的时代课题下,文学革新与经学变革有如一卵双胎。柳宗元从“文”与“明道”、“取道之源”与“旁推交通”、“为学”与“为文”、“志”与“言”、“术”与“心”、“文采”与“明道”和“古文”与“古道”等方面,发展了“文以明道”的主张而别于宋代“文以载道”的思想。我们通过对唐之前的文道观、唐代文道观和宋明文道观的考察可以发现,其间存在着一条主线,即儒学视野下的文道合一观,然其中又有重道轻文和文道并举之差别。唐宋文道观意在力纠“技之文”之弊、发明儒道的教化功能,既是儒学视野下的文学变革运动,也是儒学复兴运动的重要组成部分。实际上,传统儒家的文道观念本身内蕴着向道偏重的倾向,这点在唐代早期古文运动和两宋道学中表现尤为清晰。唐代的柳宗元和韩愈与宋代的欧阳修和苏轼等人在承继前人文道思想的同时又表现为对重文轻道、重道轻文思想的修正,主张“文”和“道”的辩证统一。我们从以上可见,柳宗元在复兴儒学方面做出了不可泯灭的贡献,对后学尤其是宋学产生了一定的影响。我们不能因为理学家基于特定的历史背景搁置柳宗元的思想而忽略柳宗元在儒学复兴方面所作出的贡献。更多还原

【Abstract】 Confucianism is a extensive and intensive system,not only contains the theory of Hsxin-hsing T’ien-jen-he-yi tuns through it,but also contains heterodox Confucianism reviled by Li-hsüeb-ch’ia,which shows the spirits of Confucianism all the same.For instance,Han Yüand Liu Tsung-yüan,although differ in the respective theory of refuting Buddhism and Hsxin-hsing Tao-tung,introjecting Buddhism and T’ien-jen-pu-hsiang-yü,virtually,they reach the same goal by different routes,both are the important part of Mid-Tang’s Confucianism.But the historical fact that Sung-Ming’s Confucianism attaches importance to Han Yü’s thought,but lays by Liu Tsung-yüan’s theory makes it necessary to re-ascertain Liu Tsung-yüan’s position in Confucianism’s history.In addition,The transform of Tang-Sung is one of hot topics in today’s academia,embodied in the thought-culture field,which reflects the continuity and rupture between Tang and Sung,as well as the distinct difference between Tang’s early and late completely different phases.The fact that Pre-Tang carries on the Han Learning,Mid-late Tang unseals the Sung Learning tells us that Mid-late Tang is very significant in the thought history.So,it is significative to study Liu Tsung-yüan’s contribution of reviving Confucianism so to reflect the historical relation of Confucianism between Mid-late Tang and Sung-Ming.Mo-hsüeh chi-chen and Ju-tao pu-chüis the general picture in Tang dynasty’s academia.Exteriorly,Buddhism and Taoism,especially Buddhism had strongly challenged and influenced Tang’s thought field.Interiorly,Ching-hsüeh(Studying the Classics)has lost vigor,and Literature has been showy,which both lost practicality. Under such pressure of exterior and interior,Confucianism is increasingly debility. Thus,how to come true Ju-hsüeh’s Du-tsun’s after Hang-huang Gai-yun,to settle for the requirement of neatening social vogue and answering Buddhism and Taoism’s challenge,is the common problem that Ju-shih think deeply,namely,Confucianism’s renaissance becomes the important time-problem desiderated to solve in Tang dynasty. which embodies following four aspects’ choice:First,how to treat Buddhism,in Confucianism’s visual threshold to conform Confucianism and Buddhism,or to construct Tao-tung so to resist Buddhism by Confucianism ’s traditional elementary spirits;Second,in the aspect of T’ien-jen-kuan-hsi(Relationships between Heaven and Man),how to return Confucianism’s basic value? the humanistic principia(Jen-tao yüan-tse),namely the school choice of Mencius or Hsün Tzǔafter Confucius;Third, Confucian classics how to obtain new vital force,Wo-chu-liu-ching or Liu-ching-chu-wo,namely,the choice of Chang-chüHsün-ku(Ju-shih studied the Classics and recorded some annotation or comments by words,vocabularies,sentences and chapters)or Yi-li Ch’üan-shih,(Obtaining the principles or philosophy in the classics by interpretation);Fourth,how to recur Confucianism’s social moralize function and instruction,the choice of Yi-wen-yan-tao(literature to veil the Tao)or Wen-yi-ming-tao(literature to clear the Tao).In the highly consciousness of Confucianism’s renaissance and ideal of Ming-tao striving his entire life,Liu Tsung-yüan has answered these problem reasoningly and creationarily,thereout, which has formed the historical relation of Confucianism s renaissance between Tang and Sung-Ming.Firstly,Tung-he-Ju-Shih,Hsüan-ti-yi-chih.On account of Buddhism’s Chung-kuo-hua(Chinalized)and profundity influence,Ju-shih has carved out a way of Yi-Ju-Tung-he-Fo-chiao(the conformity of Buddhism and Confucianism in the field of Confucianism vision).Such thought is necessary、hot and practical potentiality. Han Yüand Li Ao are against Buddhism professedly and have no creative idea,but introject it virtually and have some attainments.But Liu Tsung-yüan,in Confucianism’s visual threshold,not only approbates but also criticizes Buddhism.As to the former,based on the actuality of Buddhism’s highly Shih-Su-hua(secularized), he deems that Buddhism’s Tao has some comparability to Confucianism,such as Filial piety,Humanity and Righteousness,Ceremony and Mitzvah.Meanwhile,he clears up Buddhism’s supermundane spirits by Confucianism’s secularism,so to exert the advantages of Buddhism’s theory.As to the latter,he criticizes the disadvantages of Zen’s(Ch’an’s)vogues at that time,such as Liu-dung-chüan-wu, Die-hsieng-shih-yung,Wang-ch ’ü-kung,yan,Tuo-lüe-fang-p ’ien,Yan-ti-pu-chi-yung and so on,which reflects Confucianism’s opinions,such as comply by Ceremonies, revering classics and saints,cultivating bodies and hearts.Moreover,Mr.Liu criticizes Buddhism deeply and roundly from the aspects of Hsüeh-feng(the Studies of Classics and Writing),manifesting his Confucian view on the Classics Studies and Literature.Totally,Liu Tsung-yüan doesn’t deviate from the heavy task to revival Confucianism,dominating by Confucianism,and affirms Tung-he-Ju-Shih.So,it is obvious that Mr.Han and Mr.Liu’s thought is highly consistency at the essential layer, just differ in surface,they reach the same goal by different routes.However,the NewConfucianism affirms Jen(Virtues)and Li(Principle),regards Buddhism as heterodoxy in public,and takes the task of refuting and criticizing Buddhism.So,He pays attention to Han Yü,but lay aside Liu Tsung-yüan. Secondly,Liu Tsung-yüan proposes an opinion of T’ien-jen-pu-hsiang-yüto return Confucianism’s basic value——Jen-tao yüan-tse(principle of humanism). Confucius’ thought,on T’ien-jen-kuan-hsih which is a basic problem in China’s philosophy,interiorly implies two tendencies:one is Mencius’ school of T’ien-jen-he-yi,another is Hsün Tzǔ’s school of T’ien-jen-hsiang-fen,and both reach the same goal by different routes,just try to advocate Jen-tao Yüan-tse.The former makes for T’ien-jen-kan-ying-lun(That is Telepathy between Heaven and Man)after the correlation of man with the view of Ying-Yang and Five Elements,which has lost the Jen-tao Yüan-tse under the mysterious fogs,though also affirmed it.Liu Tsung-yüan follows and develops the way of T’ien-jen-hsiang-fen which Hsün Tzu and Wang Chung affirmed,which outspreads from following four aspects:First,he has developed the thought of Ts’i(all things by self),and carried it through cosmology, philosophy and axiology;Second,Mr.Liu puts forward a viewpoint of T’ien-jen-pu-hsiang-yü,after refuted Han dynasty’s theory of theological teleology thoroughly and roundly,and reduced T’ien’s natural quality from the angle of Cosmology,thus,liberating the tradition’s Jen-tao yüan-tse from theological crazy talk.Third,he succeeded the sage or saint viewpoint of Confucius,Mencius and Hsün Tzu and Hsün Tsu’s theory of Hs’ing-pu,and develops the Jen-hs’ing-ts’ih-j’an-lun (means Human Essence is formed by human being itself but not congenital or by God) in the respect of historical view,thinks that Human Essence is a dialectic unity of Ming(Intelligence)and Chih(Will),develops the theory of Ta-ch’ung-chih-tao,and proposes a theory of Sheng-jen-yü-jen-wu-yi(which means sages and everyman are the same),which is the embodiment of humane principle in ideal personality.Fourth, closely related with the ideal personality is the social ideal of Ch ’ih-k’ung.Based on Confucianism’s thought of Ming-p’en(a political view that civil is the fundamental and principal part of a country),Liu Tsung-yüan advocates a view of Li-an-yüan-yüan(which requiring the rulers bring benefit and safety to people),which is a dialectic integration of Li-ming and Ming-li,is Ming-yi-er-fei-yi-ming(the relationship between official and populace is populace employed official,so ruler should service civil but not contra).In all,Liu Tsung-yüan has carries on Hsün Tsu’s way once deemed as Heterodoxy by Sung-Ming Li-hsüeb,which results in some distance between he and Li-hsüeb-ch’ia who exerts Mencius’ school of Confucianism.Thirdly,Mr.Liu propels the transformation of the Classics Studied ways of You-wo-er-te(That means the Principle attained by myself),Ch’ie-sheng-li-yan(to express one’s thought nominally sage’s).Based on the influence,stimulating and enlightening of Buddhism’s Yi-shu-ching-hsüeh,and the spirits of Doubting the Classics,the mid-Tang dynasty’s Confucian classics studies which has been down-falling increasingly and whose Tao has been shaded,is faced with a instant problem——Confucian classics how to recover vitality,videlicet,it is inevitable to carry through a change of the way how to study the Confucian Classics at a suitable time in Confucianism’s interior,the New Ch’un-ch’iu School in Mid-Tang which is inaugurated by T’an Chu,Chao Kuang and Lu Chun,propelled by Liu Tsung-yüan and L’u Wen,on one hand,have deconstructed and surPassed the traditional Chang-chüHsün-ku Hsüeh,on the other hand,then pursuit for Yi-li in two fields:the Confucian classics studies and historiography by Ta-chung-chih-tao.They advocate that Ju-shih should re-annotate the traditional Classics and Commentaries,use the method of Liu-ching-zhu-wo,to clear the heart of sages’,to find out Wei-yan-ta-yi(which means to understanding the spirit implied in the classic text and not sticking to the text itself,especially the exegesis or commentary,namely Chu-shu Chung-chü,so to discover and understand the ideas and spirits of Confucius beyond or implied the classic text books.)so to construct a new theoretic system and make Confucian classics obtained new vires,so to show the practicability of Ju-Tao.They have explained and developed the inner values of Confucianism and at the same time evaluated highly the subjective consciousness and the sPirit of rational.,which has adequately presented the subject’s creativity.At the same time,Liu Tsung-yüan carries on the new method of Classics studies——She-chuan-chiu-Ching(studying the classics by text itself without consulting their commentaries),asserts to strictly differentiate Ching(classics,texts)and Chuan(commentaries);has developed the methods of Doubting Classics and Verification forge Classics,which highly identified with the Sung studies’ thought of Yi-Ku Jie-Ching.This change of InterPretation of the Classics is a subversive transformaton,compared with texts’ revive of early Tang dynasty whose symbol is Wu-Ching-Ch’eng-Yi authorized by emperor,it is obvious that there is a consistency of The New ch’un Ch’iu school of Mid-tang and Sung-Ming’s Ching-hsüeb at many aspects.So we can retrospect the Sung Leaning’s life to The Mid-Tang dynasty.The last but not least,how to recur Confucianism’s social moralize function,he sparkplugs Wen-yi-ming-tao.Wen and Tao is an inner unity in Confucianism’s tradition.Wen implies the thought of Tsun-Ching,Chung-Sheng and Fu-Ku,contains the meanings of instruction,exists the potentiality of unfurling moralise.Just as the dissimilated Chang-chüHsün-ku Ching-hsüeh has lost Ju-tao,the P’ien-wen of Liu-chao has tended towards extremity,and also covered Ju-tao,one of the big shorts is losing the characteristics of Fu-shih-ji-shih,Ching-shih-chih-yung(namely the spirits of social practicability),and mostly such articles run short of contents or spirits and look inane.On the time problem of Confucianism’s renaissance in Tang-Sung Dynasty,is one germ cell two embryos of literature’s renovation and Ching-hsüeb’s transformation.Liu Tsung-yüan develops the view of Wen-yi-ming-tao at the aspects such as Wen and Ming-tao,Chu-tao-chih-yüan and Pang-tui-ch’iao-tung,Wei-hsüeb and Wei-wen,Ch’ih and Yen,Shu and Hsin,Wen-ts’ai and Ming-tao,Ku-wen and Ku-tao,and so on,which is different from Sung’s thought of Wen-yi-tsai-tao.Through the seeing about the view of Wen-tao of dynasties before Tang,Tang and Sung-Ming,we can find out that there is a masterstroke,namely a unity of Wen and Tao in Confucianism’s field of vision,but has difference of Chung-tao-ching-wen (Prefer Tao to Wen)and Wen-tao-ping-chü.The view of Wen-tao in Tang-Sung intent to rectify the deviation of Chi-chih-wen(p’ien-wen)and advocate Ju-tao’s instruction, which is literature’s transform as well as an important part of the movement of Confucianism’s renaissance.In fact,the traditional Confucianism’s viewpoint of Wen-tao implies a tendency of leaning to Tao.Which is very clear in Pre-Tang’s movement of Ku-wen and Sung’s Tao- hsüeb.Liu Tsung-yüan and Han Yüin Tang dynasty,Ou-yang Hsiu and Su Shih in Sung dynasty,they succeed antecessors’ thought of Wen-tao,at the same time,correct the thought of Chung-wen-ching-tao and Chung-tao-ching-wen,in all,assert a dialectic unity of Wen and Tao.From the above discussed,we can come to a conclusion that Liu Tsung-yüan has made great contribution to Confucianism’s renaissance and has impacted later learning especially the Sung Learning in some degree.So,we couldn’t ignore Liu Tsung-yüan’s contribution of Confucianism’s renaissance on account of Li-hsüeh-chia’s laying aside based on the given historical background.更多还原