阳明四句教及四有四无说论争之现代诠释

作为中国哲学史上一大公案，关于阳明四句教及四有四无说的论争一直聚讼纷纭。实际上，四无乃龙溪实持之说，四有则为龙溪虚立之名。天泉证道之后问题发生了转换，不再是四有四无之争，而是以“四无”及“无善无恶”为中心的两层质疑：龙溪四无说是否违背阳明宗旨？阳明“无善无恶”说是否违背儒家正道？依牟宗三之“共法说”，阳明、龙溪不但不是“禅”，而且还对传统儒学有重大贡献，是儒学义理圆熟和发展过程中的一大环节。阳明、龙溪等能突破长期以来的禁忌，发挥这种“无”的智慧，从而将传统儒学推进到义理更为圆熟的新境界。这也是儒家学说自身发展的必然要求。阳明“无善无恶”、龙溪“四无说”的独特创新之处和巨大贡献在于此，而他们备受误会和责难的深层原因亦在于此。

Modern Annotations to Wang Yangming's 4-Sentence Teaching and to Dispute Over 4-Being and 4-Not-Being Saying

As a controversial issue in Chinese history of philosophy, the dispute over Wang Yangming＇ s 4-sentence teaching and 4-being and 4-not-being saying has been perpetual. As a matter of fact,4- not-being was actually put forward by Wang Longxi, yet ＂d-being＂ occurred voidly in contrast. But after Wang Yangming＇ s explanation on Tianquan Bridge, the dispute shifted to what with ＂4-not-being＂ and ＂not being good and not being evil＂ as the centre ： Was Wang Longxi＇ s 4-not-being saying against Wang Yangming＇ s aim？ Was Yangming＇ s saying of ＂not being good and not being evil＂ against the orthodox law of Confucianism？ According to Mr. Mu＇s ＂doctrine of shared law＂, the two Wangs not only were by no means ＂dhyana＂ but also made great contribution to traditional Confucianism,serving as a big link in the perfection and development of confucianist universal truths. The two Wangs and others broke through the long-term taboo, gave full play to the wisdom of ＂not-being＂ and consequently brought traditional Confucianism into a new realm of more perfect universal truths. Such was the inevitable demand in the development of confucianist teaching itself. And that is where the unique innovation and the qreat contribution of Yangming＇ s ＂not being good and not being evil＂ and Longxi＇ s 4-not-being saying lay and where the deep cause resided, which began the misunderstanding and censure they were under.