From the “Alternative School of Principles” to the Lay Buddhism: On the conceptual features of modern Consciousness-Only School from the perspective of the evolution of thought during the Ming and Qing Dynasties

Abstract

The best representatives of the self-reflection of xinxue 心学 (the School of Mind) and its development during the Ming and Qing Dynasties are the three masters from the late Ming Dynasty. The overall tendency is to shake off the internal constraints of the School of Mind by studying the Confucian classics and history. During the Qing Dynasty, Dai Zhen had attempted to set up a theoretical system based on Confucian classics and history, offering a theoretical foundation for a new academic movement that gradually suspended issues studied by the School of Mind. But the suspension of these issues does not mean they were resolved. For Peng Shaosheng, xinzong 心宗 (the Doctrine of Mind) has emerged from a bottleneck in the development of the Confucian yi li zhi xue 义理之学 (doctrine of meanings and principles): The only way to find the transcendent connection between the doctrine of meanings and principles and the Dao was through the internality of belief. In this case, the Lay Buddhists, represented by Peng Shaosheng, Wang Dashen and Luo Yougao, as lixue biepai 理学别派 (Alternative School of Principles), played the role that the School of Mind had undertaken in the late Ming Dynasty, thus becoming a shelter for the Confucian doctrine of meanings and principles. To a certain extent, the revival of weishixue 唯识学 (the Consciousness-Only School) during modern times was simply a continuance of the “Alternative School of Principles”. It took over the Lay Buddhist theme of the doctrine of meanings and principles of the Qing Dynasty and tried to construct a new pattern of learning for Confucian classics that matched up with the doctrine of meanings and principles, offering a model of integration for the reconstruction of the Confucian tradition.

摘要

明清之际对心学的检讨以及心学内部的发展, 以晚明三大师为代表, 其总的倾向是以经史之学的学问方式走出心学的内在性束缚。 到了清代, 戴震则尝试从独立的经史之学出发建设一种新的理论系统, 试图为这一逐渐搁置心学问题的新的学术运动提供理论基础。 不过, 心学的被搁置, 并不意味着心学所指涉问题的消失。 彭绍升的 “心宗” 已经突破了儒家义理学发展的瓶径: 义理学与道体的超越关联必须透过信仰的内在性来获得。 以彭绍升、 汪大绅、 罗有高为代表的居士佛教, 作为 “理学别派”, 承担起了在晚明由心学所承担的功能, 从而成为儒家义理学的寄身之所。 近代唯识学的复兴, 在一定意义上是对 “理学别派” 的继承。 不仅在义理学的意义上接过了清代居士佛学的主题, 更在清代朴学的传统上, 尝试重构一种与义理学配合的新的经学模式, 在唯识学的基盘上为重构儒学传统提供了一种极有意义的整合模式。