Back to results list
Show full item record
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||程敏政 (1445-1449) 及其學術思想: 明代陽明學興起前夕的學術風氣研究
Cheng Minzheng (1445-1449) ji qi xue shu si xiang : Ming dai Yangming xue xing qi qian xi de xue shu feng qi yan jiu
|Other Title:||Cheng Minzheng's (1445-1499) scholarship and the intellectual landscape and climate for the rise of Wang Yangming's philosophy||Authors:||Ho, Wei Hsuan
|Degree:||Ph.D.||Issue Date:||2013||Abstract:||明代學術最重要的轉折在於陽明學的興起。關於陽明學興起的原因，大部分學者認為與明初偏向內在修養的學術風氣有關，但事實上，在此學風之外，成化、弘治年間另有一股以博學考據、經世致用為主的修正朱學的思潮，也在學術主流之中。然而，目前學界對此博考經世之風的研究仍不夠充份，如此不但未能完整體現明代前期思想史全貌，對陽明學興起的解釋亦顯得單向而平面。因此成、弘年間的學術思想仍有很大的探究空間，而程敏政正是這個時期值得研究的重要人物。 程敏政是當時公認的博贍代表，其諸多禮制考證日後皆成為明廷定制，影響深遠；他同時又極為關注理學問題，以二程（程顥，1032-1085、程頤，1033-1107）直系後裔自詡，學尊程朱，不但於朱（朱熹，1130-1200）陸（陸九淵，1139-1193）異同問題上提出創見，更對程朱理學心性修養問題有所鑽研。值得注意的是，程敏政雖有意於理學，但他卻以博學考據的方法嘗試解決理學問題，有意鎔當時兩股主流學風於一爐，這種做法可謂是十五世紀後期思想界的一個特色；他又是王陽明（守仁，1472-1529）會試時的座師，在某些學術觀點與陽明的主張亦有近似之處。是以若能深入梳理程敏政的生平與學術，釐清其與陽明之間的學術淵源，不但能填補十五世紀後期思想史研究的空白，更能為陽明學的興起提供更豐富多元的解釋。
Since the late Song dynasty, Neo-Confucianism of the Cheng-Zhu brand (Cheng-Zhu Lixue 程朱理學) had become dominant state ideology and greatly influenced the academia and the history of Chinese philosophy. This school, however, was challenged by Wang Yangming’s (1472-1528) School of Mind learning (Yangming Xinxue 陽明心學) in the 1500s, which reflected a huge diversion in the philosophical world as well as the social realities of mid Ming China. Scholars in general agreed that the change brought by Wang began from early Ming Confucian learning which especially emphasized on moral cultivation. However, there was another important trend of thought and scholarship, advocated by scholar-officials like Qin Jun (丘濬, 1421-1495) and Yang Shouchen (楊守陳, 1425-1489), which cherished broad learning, empirical investigation, and statecraft learning as a remedy to the deficiencies of the Cheng-Zhu school. This trend as a background of Wang Yangming’s rise is not much studied. Cheng Minzheng (程敏政, 1445-1499), an eminent figure in the imperial Hanlin Academy (Hanlin Yuan Xuesh,翰林院學士) who was also Wang Yangming’s examiner (Zuoshi 座師) in the 1499 metropolitan examinations, was an advocate of merging the learning of the schools of Zu Xi (朱熹, 1130-1200) and Lu Jiuyuan (陸九淵, 139-1193), a stand that was to be characteristic of Wang himself. Cheng was regarded as the most erudite scholar of his times, especially versed in textual criticism. He was also much concerned about the subject of Lixue, but attempted to solve Lixue problems by means of extensive textual study. Cheng’s scholarly style actually epitomized a large part of the scholarly world before Wang’s rise. The question is: Why it was Wang rather than Cheng who would become the paramount and most charismatic scholar in the Ming dynasty? To unravel the background and climate of Wang Yangming’s rise, it is therefore necessary to analyze the thought and scholarship of Cheng Minzheng. Yet, modern research on Cheng is scarce. There is not much in-depth study of his times as well. This seven-chapter thesis provides a comprehensive analysis of Cheng’s scholarship and relationships, comparing his thought with his contemporaries’ and tracing the change of the intellectual trend of his times. The findings would fill the gaps mentioned above and add a significant chapter to the intellectual history of Ming China.
In the main part of this thesis, a detailed biography of Cheng Minzheng is reconstructed in Chapter Two. It shows that many officials made a clean break with Cheng after he died because he was severely disgraced at the end of his official career. Chapter Three gives an account of his circles of acquaintances and his academic and literary views as a versatile Cheng-Zhu school scholar. It also shows that he sometimes deviated from the doctrines of Cheng-Zhu school because of his independent thinking. Chapter Four discusses Cheng’s memorial for the list of canonization in the Confucian temple (Kongmiao 孔廟). Cheng proposed to expel a number of earlier Confucians honoured in the Confucian temple by reversing the erstwhile criteria of canonization that emphasized on classical exegesis. He held personal conduct of a Confucian as the sole standard that counted. His view eventually prevailed in the Jiajing period (嘉靖, 1522-1566). Chapters Five and Six analyze the two masterpieces of Cheng’s — Daoyi Bian (道一編) and Xinjing Fuzhu (心經附註) (Zhen Dexiu’s (1178-1235) Xinjing (心經) is also discussed in Appendix to elucidate Cheng’s works.). These two books purported to prove that although the thoughts of Zhuxi and Lu Jiuyuan about learning differed at the beginning, they eventually reconciled with each other in their final years. In short, the thesis finds that Cheng Minzheng was attempting to fuse the two main intellectual trends represented by the philosophies of Zhu Xi and Lu Jiuyuan as a means to restore the genuine teaching the Cheng-Zhu school. That is, he argued for a way of learning that relies mainly on the doctrine of “honoring the virtuous nature but also to be aided by the doctrine of following the path of knowledge.”（尊德性為主輔之以道問學）Nevertheless, because of his subjective and arbitrary views in conducting evidential studies, his inflexible methods of self-cultivation, and his defiled fame as a suspect of corruption, his scholarship and advocacy gradually withered and was eventually superseded by Wang Yangming’s.
|Subjects:||Hong Kong Polytechnic University -- Dissertations
Philosophy, Chinese -- 960-1644
|Pages:||viii, iv, ii, ii, 390 p. : ill. ; 30 cm.|
|Appears in Collections:||Thesis|
View full-text via https://theses.lib.polyu.edu.hk/handle/200/7237
Citations as of May 22, 2022
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.