首页 > 原站 > 全文通览 > 文章摘要 > 《文史哲》2015年第3期摘要 > 正文

《文史哲》2015年第3期摘要

儒佛因缘:宋明理学中的批判精神与排拒意识

日期: 2015-07-10 浏览:

儒佛因缘:宋明理学中的批判精神与排拒意识                                                    

丁为祥

摘要:宋明理学的崛起与来自佛老超越追求的压力始终存在着分不开、割不断的联系,但作为儒学,其与佛、老在人生价值观上的对立又使它不能不以辟佛排老标宗。这样一来,理学在吸取、借鉴其超越追求精神的同时也就不能不对佛、老二教表现出一定的排拒意识。如果说批判精神总体上体现着理学的一种超越、拓展之自我提升的指向,那么所谓排拒意识也就只能成为从儒学与佛老在价值观层面的对立到最后完全演变为理学内部“宗派意识”或“门户意识”的根源了。在理学从宋到明的发展中,随着其道统意识的不断强化,理学总体上显现出一种不断地将其对佛老的批判精神转化为理学内部之排拒意识的趋势,这就在一定程度上显现出理学自身理论规模的缩减与创造性资源的枯竭。在以往的研究中,人们往往以辟佛排老概括宋明理学的基本精神,但却没有看到其辟佛排老中所蕴含的排拒意识,更没有看到这种排拒意识对当今学术研究与学风建设的消极影响。

 

 

The Causation between Confucianism and Buddhism: the Critical Spirit and Rejective Consciousness in Neo-Confucianism                         

Ding Weixiang

Abstract: The rising of Neo-Confucianism had always closely related to the pressure from Buddhism and Taoism pursuing transcendence. Yet as Confucianism, it had to refute Buddhism and Taoism to declare its sect because of their antagonism on life values. Thus the Neo-Confucianism had to show certain rejection toward Buddhism and Taoism while absorbing and drawing their transcendent spirit. If the critical spirit pointed to self-transcendence, self-broadening, and self-promotion of Neo-Confucianism on the whole, the so-called rejective consciousness could only become the origin that Confucianism opposing Buddhism and Taoism on values, and finally changing into sectarianism within Neo-Confucianism. During the development from the Song Dynasty to the Ming Dynasty, Neo-Confucianism generally appeared a tendency of continuously transforming the critical spirit toward Buddhism and Taoism into the internal consciousness of rejection with the strengthening of its consciousness of Confucian orthodoxy, thus showed reduction of its theoretical scale and exhaustion of creative resource. In previous studies, rejection of Buddhism and Taoism was often concluded as the basic spirit of Neo-Confucianism, but both the rejective consciousness contained in, and the negative influence of this consciousness to today’s academic research and academic discipline are ignored.