Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/55229
Title: 明代中後期河南及陜西的地方理學發展及其敘述 = Development of neo-confucianism and its recorded presentations from mid-Ming to early Qing Henan and Shaanxi Provinces
Authors: Chen, Guanhua (陳冠華)
Advisors: Zhu, Honglin (CC)
Keywords: Neo-Confucianism -- China -- History
Issue Date: 2015
Publisher: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Abstract: 本論文從南北學術交互激蕩的視角,考察明代中後期河南、陜西兩地的理學發展過程,旨在探討兩個議題:(一)明代中期以降北方理學新舊學說競逐,新思想傳入與傳承的歷史;(二)晚明清初北方理學歷史敘述的差異所在。本文以河南、陜西為研究區域,分序編、上編、下編三編漸次論述明代中後期北方理學發展之歷史。序編三章。第一章利用地方志書梳理明代北方山東、山西、河北、河南、陜西的理學發展情況,指出這些區域從明代中期起,地方學者因回應南方新學術之興起而改變了地方學術面貌,其中河南、陜西一批學者同聲相應、同氣相求,最引人矚目。第二章主要從晚明清初持續涌現的諸多理學歷史著作開始回顧河南、陜西理學歷史,分析它們在學風陡轉下不同的地方理學敘述策略。清初政治上學術尊朱的壓力強化,及學者群體學術趨向的自我轉變,導致河南學者對明代中期河南理學史的敘述走向分化。孫奇逢(1584-1675)《理學宗傳》、《中州人物考》和湯斌(1627-1687)《洛學編》致力顯揚陽明學的價值,強調其在河南理學傳承中歷史地位;到耿介(1623-1693)《中州道學編》則極力消除陽明學在河南傳播的痕跡,抹殺明代中期以來王學對河南理學的影響,呈現出一種「去陽明化」的取向。在陜西,明末馮從吾(1556-1627)《關學編》中強化了陜西學者間的師承關係,創立起一種多元并存的關學傳承譜系的敘述方式。《關學編》的敘述方式在清初得以推廣,成為其後關學敘述的載體與模式。李顒(1626-1705)擔憂關學絶續,毅然講學,其門人王心敬(1656-1738)不顧朝廷尊朱闢王的潮流,接續《關學編》前後擴充關學人物,撰出《關學續編》,將馮從吾、李顒和他們的門人列入其內,證明關學包容程朱陸王,一脈相承、淵源不絶。這些因時制宜而前後相異的歷史敘述,也說明有必要重新審視明代中期以降的河南、陜西的理學發展。第三章回顧近現代明代思想史研究提供的思考角度和討論範式,反思明代北方理學歷史研究之不足. 上、下兩編從南北學術互動激蕩的角度,分別探索明代中期以降河南、陜西 兩地理學傳播與發展的歷史。上編以河南為中心討論明代中後河南學者南下講學 與陽明學北傳河南的過程。其中,第四章以明代中期河南學者崔銑(1478-1541)、 何瑭(1474-1543)、王廷相(1474-1544)為例,闡述他們先後南下與湛若水 (1466-1560)、王守仁(1472-1529)或其門人論學的歷史,指出他們在南京在河 南著述論辯,抵制新學術,但因他們缺乏嚴格的講會組織和動人的講學魅力,不 足以在河南發揮長久影響。第五章以明代中期以來尤時熙(1503-1580)及其門人 孟化鯉(1545-1597)、三傳王以悟(1571-1638)等為個案,展現陽明學北傳、轉 化,進而在河南扎根的過程。第六章追蹤在尤時熙等影響下,明末河南澠池張信 民(1561-1633)、新安呂維祺(1587-1641)繼承理學志業,開展地方講學,建構 河南地方學統的歷程。
下編以陜西為中心研討明代中後期陜西學者的講學活動與地方理學復興的歷史。其中,第七章以新舊學風交替下的陜西學者呂柟(1479-1542)、馬理(1474-1556)為中心,分析呂柟在南京跟陽明後學鄒守益(1491-1562)論學,及在鄉傳學的情形,以及馬理對陽明學的抵制。本章認為呂柟在陜西講學效果不彰,馬理抱持經學傳統,反對講學,加之嘉靖末年關中地震,致使陜西理學傳承遭受重創。第八章以馮從吾(1556-1627)為例,從其吸收南北兩京學術風氣,在陜西興復書院講學的經歷,論述明末陜西講理學之復興與關中理學傳統的塑造的歷史過程。至明末清初因學風轉向,種種梳理河南、陜西明中期以後理學傳衍系譜的著述,紛紛採用不同的敘述策略闡釋北方理學歷史。 透過以上述析,本論文可得出以下結論與認識。在明代中期學術思想變化的脈絡下,明代中後期北方(河南、陜西)理學之發展,是南方新學興起,南北學術互相激盪的結果,由此可突破《明儒學案》對明代「王門」、「北方王門」、「諸儒」的區隔與分野,揭示出明代中後期南北學者對話交流的歷史過程。明代理學新說興起初期在河南、陜西引起一致的負面回響,但這回應因兩地學術之差異而程度有別,南北學術激盪實塑造著北方的理學發展進程。此點在本文對明代中後期陽明學北傳的的歷史考察中得到驗證。本文認為,研討學術思想的傳播與發展應兼顧歷史現場的時、地、人三重因素的變化。在明代中後期的不同時刻北方士人社群上對陽明學的態度前後各異,陽明學傳入河南、陜西的時間有先後,其命運不盡相同,學術思想傳播的內容與過程也具有地域差異。在河南,陽明學經過三代學者的講學運動之轉化、變通,實現在地化,成為地方理學傳統的一部分;在陜西,由於舊學學者抵制及學術斷層,陽明學於明末才得以傳入,故其扎根不深。明代陽明學在北方發展過程不同,對地方理學傳統的影響各異,因此呈現相異的地域理學特色,它是明代中後其南北學術交流激盪的結果。明代中後期北方地方理學的發展,是當時明代整體的理學思想變遷的產物,對其發展的歷史敘述則受後世學風轉向的左右。清初獨尊程朱的學風轉向,程朱、陸王之別成為學術爭論熱點。本論文分析了河南、陜西明末清初學者對地方理學的種種歷史敘述,學者因個人的學術取向、歷史認識及社會政治壓力而採取不同的書寫方式。這這些著述不足以反映明代中後期北方理學發展的歷史實情,一方面提示我們返回明代中後期的歷史現場,另一方面則為我們反思二十世紀八、九十年代出現的洛學討論及「關學熱」提供了極佳的觀察角度與思考維度。
From mid-Ming on, the dominance of the Cheng-Zhu brand of Neo-Confucianism was shaken, giving way to the flourishing of the "new learning" of Wang Yangming (1472-1529). Wang Yangming and Zhan Ruoshui (1466-1560) imparted their new doctrines to the public by discussion of learning. They were so effective that northern scholars saw a huge threat in their doctrines and rose to challenge them. This thesis is a study of how Neo-Confucianism was developed and transformed in Henan and Shaanxi provinces and how its recorded presentations changed over times in the context of intellectual contacts and debates of noted scholars from the south and the north in mid-Ming times. The thesis consists of three parts. Part One includes three chapters which offer the intellectual background of northern Ming China, clarifying existing scholarship of earlier and modern times. Chapter One seeks out the development of Neo-Confucianism in northern China from early Ming on. Chapter Two examines works complied in late Ming and early Qing times which record Neo-Confucianism in Henan and Shaanxi since mid-Ming. The presentations in such works vary from one to another; they shed lights on the divergent intellectual trends since mid-Ming in the two provinces, when the Wang Yangming school of thought succeeded in spreading its doctrines to the north and became a local tradition there. Yet, Confucian scholars in early Qing showed different attitudes toward this legacy. In Henan, Sun Qifeng (1584-1675) and Tang Bin (1627-1687) tried to bring back Wang Yangming’s doctrines by compiling their works on the local history of Ming Neo-Confucianism.But their fellow provincial Geng Jie (1622-1693) made an effort to erase the traces that Wang’s Henan followers left. Shaanxi is another story. Li Yong (1627-1705) and Wang Xinjing (1656-1738) accepted the late Ming Neo-Confucian tradition there, and continued to revive the “Guan learning”, which means Neo-Confucian learning of Shaanxi. These critical and contrasting positions encourage us to re-examine the Neo-Confucianism transmitted in northern China from mid-Ming to early Qing. Chapter Three reviews modern scholarship on the topic and discusses the research approaches.
Part Two and Part Three take development of Neo-Confucianism in Henan and Shaanxi as examples, and analyze their regional differences. Part Two demonstrates that, ever since mid-Ming, Henan scholars continuingly debated the Confucian learning typical of south China that was mainly occasioned by the northward spread of Wang Yangming’s doctrines to Henan. Chapter Four focuses on Cui Xian (1478-1541), He Tang (1474-1543) and Wang Tingxiang (1474-1544), who wrote and argued over Confucian doctrines with southern counterparts in Nanjing and in Henan. However, their influence was weak,and their resistance failed. Chapters Five and Six explore the cases of You Shixi (1503 -1580), Meng Huali (1545-1597), Wang Yiwu (1557-1626), Zhang Xinmin (1561-1633) and Lü Weiqi (1587-1641), a successive effort of three generations to introduce Wang Yangming’s learning to the north. I examine the paths they took to keep close with southern Yangming scholars while maintaining their own intellectual independence. I also explore the conditions that helped them transform the intellectual landscape of Henan -- converting and combining with ancient local Neo-Confucian traditions. Part Three traces the Neo-Confucianism developed, interrupted and revived in Shaanxi. Chapter Seven elaborates Lü Nan (1479-1542)'s and Ma Li (1474-1556)’s cases. Lü Nan advocated discussion of learning while Ma was against it. Ma stood strong, changed the intellectual climate, so Wang Yangming’s learning did not prevail in Shaanxi before late Ming. Feng Congwu (1556-1627) started his intellectual journal by visiting and discussing with Yangming scholars in Nanjing and Beijing. He ended up returning to Shaanxi to revitalize Neo-Confucianism in the name of Guan Learning, which is fully dealt with in Chapter Eight. In short, this thesis finds that the development of neo-Confucianism in the north since mid-Ming owes a great deal to the communication of thoughts between northern and southern scholars of the time. Northern scholars challenged their southern counterparts in various occasions. But southern thoughts did deeply shape the neo-Confucianism trends in the north giving rise to a new local tradition of Confucianism which triggered new representations of the history of Confucianism in the north at the beginning of the Qing dynasty.
Description: PolyU Library Call No.: [THS] LG51 .H577P CC 2015 Chen
vi, 469 pages
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/55229
Rights: All rights reserved.
Appears in Collections:Thesis

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
b28641590_link.htmFor PolyU Users208 BHTMLView/Open
b28641590_ira.pdfFor All Users (Non-printable)3.67 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

Page view(s)

93
Last Week
6
Last month
Checked on Aug 14, 2017

Download(s)

30
Checked on Aug 14, 2017

Google ScholarTM

Check



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.