「內在和」與「外在和」：錢穆〈中庸新義〉「中和」說的淵源與價值

Abstract

〈中庸〉在漢代原為《禮記》中的一篇，在宋代程朱一系學者的推闡與表彰下，躍升為與《論語》、〈大學〉、《孟子》並列的經典，並且象徵了「孔子──曾子──子思──孟子」一系的「道統」之傳。相應地，這些先秦以來的經典也衍生了不少細緻的學術議題，其中〈中庸〉的「中和」說即是顯著的例子。〈中庸〉「中和」說出自於該篇首章，朱熹《四書章句集注．中庸章句》採取了「體用」、「性情」之分的進路予以詮解。這樣的思維與看法也為現代學人所繼承與推闡。然而，在這些學人的〈中庸〉詮釋當中，錢穆發表於1955年的〈中庸新義〉是值得注意的作品，乃因其對〈中庸〉「中和」的詮釋實大異於程朱理學以來奠定的「體用」式的理解，並以「天平」與「砝碼」譬況了「中和」的意蘊，重視差異性萬物彼此的交感與協調，而非個體天命之性的發揚。細言之，錢穆的「中和」論，必須以物我交感的不斷調適變動中來進行理解，世間「外物」必然來感，「喜怒哀樂」必然要發，兩者不相妨害，方能造就「和」，則此「和」非但僅限於內在人心的平衡狀態（內在和），也已經是物我間並存時擁有的平衡狀態（外在和）。總之，在錢穆的詮釋下，喜怒哀樂「中節與否」的判斷，已經不純然在未發之「中」，而在已發之時，是否能夠與外物達致和諧共存的狀態，但此種說法想當然爾遭受到了徐復觀等學者的嚴正批評。細繹錢穆〈中庸新義〉與其他古典注疏、現代詮釋之異同，本文認為錢穆的「中和」解讀仍不失為進一步理解〈中庸〉「中和」說的蹊徑，乃因無論是《禮記》一書的內證，還是古代別異於程朱的「中和」之說，皆有與其貼近與呼應之處，並非盡如徐復觀所說是「加在古人身上，作思想史的說明，則幾無一而不引起混亂」。更值得注意的是，在錢穆〈中庸新義〉的詮釋下，和過往「體用論」詮釋典範正好相反，價值所重乃在於「和」而不在於「中」，可以說對於「中和」的詮釋提供了另一種詮釋空間。

Zhong Yong(Doctrine of the Mean) was originally a chapter in Category of Li in Han dynasty. In Sung dynasty, under Cheng-Zhu school scholars` promotion, Zhong Yong became a classic along with Analects, The Great Learning and Mencius, and it also symbolized the lineage of Dao from Confucius, Zengzi, Zisi to Mencius. These pre-Qing classics correspondently extended many detailed academic issues. Among these issues, ＂Zhong He＂ (equilibrium and harmony) theory is a significant one. ＂Zhong He＂ theory came from the first chapter of Zhong Yong, Zhu Xi interpreted it through the division of ＂body-use＂ and ＂character＂. Such opinion is also succeeded and promoted by contemporary scholars. However, among these scholars` interpretations, Zhong Yong Xin Yi (New Meaning of Doctrine of the Mean),published by Chien Mu in 1955, is worthy of note because his interpretation is different from ＂body-use＂ understanding proposed by Cheng-Zhu school scholars, and he also uses ＂balance＂ and ＂weight＂ to paraphrase ＂Zhong He＂, emphasizing different things` sympathy and coordination rather than promoting individual`s natural character. In detail, Chien Mu`s theory should be understood in the dynamic process of sympathy between things and I. External ＂things＂ must come and stir pleasure, anger, sorrow, or joy. When these two wouldn’t interfere with each other, they could reach the status of ＂He＂ (harmony). This ＂He＂ is not just confined in inner harmonious status, but also the external harmonious status between things and I. In Chien Mu`s interpretation, the judgment of whether pleasure, anger, sorrow, or joy ＂act in their due degree＂ lies not just in the no stirring ＂Zhong＂ (equilibrium), but in stirred phase, seeing if it can exist with other things in perfection. Chien`s opinion drew harsh criticisms from scholars like Xu Fu-Guan at that time. After compared with other classical annotations and modern interpretation, this article believes that Chien`s opinion is also a good way to understand ＂Zhong He＂ theory in Zhong Yong. No matter the inner evidence in Category of Li, or other ＂Zhong He＂ theories different from Cheng-Zhu school, we can find some supportive instances, not just like Xu Fu-Guan`s saying ＂put illustrations on ancient people and cause chaos.＂ What`s more, Chien Mu`s Zhong Yong Xin Yi, contrary to the previous interpretation model of ＂body-use＂ theory, put emphasis on ＂He＂ rather than ＂Zhong＂. It can be said that he provided another interpretation space for ＂Zhong He＂.