| 摘要: | 本論文旨在比較周海門《聖學宗傳》與彭際清《居士傳》兩本學術史著作。《聖學宗傳》旨在建立以陸王心學為正統的學術史觀，收錄之人以心學家為主，有強烈的宗陸抑朱傾向。又由於周海門有援佛入儒思想，故也收錄幾位對佛教接受度高的大儒。全書人物大抵依照時間順序及師生授受排列，且有通過張九成，將程、朱視為心學家的意圖。在思想方面，《聖學宗傳》以闡發心學為主，故屢屢以心學立場對傳主的論學資料進行斷章取義，使得理學家的理學色彩薄弱許多。又從儒佛關係來看，海門對佛採取寬容態度並加以援用，而強調在日用中實踐，尋求身心性命之安頓。《居士傳》編纂以儒佛無異、三教合一為宗旨，書中收錄，不僅是在家居士，更是兼通儒佛的人。且書中雖有明顯弘揚淨土的意圖，但兼容各家各派，沒有強烈的門戶之見。在思想方面，際清崇尚華嚴圓融思想，故以此為依據，致力會通禪淨，以淨土為歸，主張念佛，並提倡儒佛無異，尤其強調佛教的經世精神。整體而言，二書雖皆主張會通儒佛，但《聖學宗傳》心學取向十分明顯，佛學只是附庸；《居士傳》則認為儒佛地位相當，沒有差異。本論文擬通過上述研究，說明海門、際清的儒佛觀以及二者異同，將儒佛會通的議題藉由學術史的研究來呈現，由是看出擅長會通儒佛士大夫在儒家、佛家學術史分別呈現的樣貌，以及突破以往學術史研究多半集中儒家內部的藩籬，溝通儒佛兩家的學術史。;This dissertation aims to compare the two intellectual books, Zhou Haimen’s Shengxue zongzhaun with Peng Jiqing’s Jushizhuan. Shengxue zongzhaun establishes an orthodox academic viewpoint based on Lu Wang’s philosophy of Mind. It includes mainly Mind scholars and advocates Lu while devaluing Zhu. In addition, Zhou Haimen also includes some Confucianism scholars that highly accept Buddhism due to his intention to introduce Buddhism into Confucianism. The characters in the book are mostly arranged in time or in teacher-student order. By including Zhang Jiucheng in the book, Zhou Haimen manifests his intention to consider Cheng and Zhu to be Mind scholars. As for the philosophy part, Shengxue zongzhaun chiefly illustrates and carries forward the Mind philosophy, so it often takes a part for the whole toward other composers’ theories with his Mind perspective, making the Neo-Confucianism of Cheng-Zhu fade away. From the aspect of the relationship between Confucianism and Buddhism, Zhou Haimen assumes an embracing attitude toward Buddhism. He cites from it, and emphasizes real practice in daily life to find physical and spiritual peace. Jushizhuan was edited with an aim of “no difference between Confucianism and Buddhism,” and “merging Confucianism, Buddhism, with Taoism altogether.” The book includes not only householders, but people who are exceled at both Confucianism and Buddhism. Although the book tends to promote Pure Soil education, it includes various different factions without preference. Regarding his philosophy, Jiqing advocates Avatamsaka Sutra, so based on it, he endeavors to fuse Zen with Pure Soil education, and to return to Pure soil education. He also advocates to read mantra, claims that Confucianism and Buddhism are the same, and especially emphasizes on the Statecraft spirit of Buddhism. Overall, though both two books maintain to fuse Confucianism with Buddhism, but Shengxue zongzhaun has a stronger tendency toward the Mind philosophy while Buddhism being a complement. On the other hand, Jushizhuan suggests that Confucianism and Buddhism are at the same level, and there is no difference between them. The dissertation plans to explain Haimen’s and Jiqing’s Confucianism and Buddhism viewpoints, and their differences through the research mentioned above. Furthermore, the dissertation aims to present the fusion issue of Confucianism and Buddhism through intellectual books research. By doing so, readers can see how scholars excelling at fusing Confucianism and Buddhism present differently in Confucianism and Buddhism intellectual books. Besides, this dissertation can break through the convention that previous intellectual books usually concentrate on Confucianism, and can bridge the gap between intellectual books of Confucianism and Buddhism. |
