摘要：在明代中期，王阳明建立了其心学的思想系统，并且经其弟子的大力提倡，阳明学空前繁荣，成为当时社会另一最大的学术流派。明末，阳明学进入第三期，周海门是其中代表人物之一。在《明儒学案》中，黄宗羲认为周海门是罗近溪的门人而将其列入泰州学派。本文根据以往学者的研究及引用众多的文献资料，证明周海门虽然在思想上受到罗近溪的影响，但是周海门之学主要是来自于王龙溪，而非罗近溪。此外周海门自认为是王龙溪的门人，其友人及弟子也都以周海门为王龙溪的弟子，故而本文认为黄宗羲将周海门作为罗近溪的弟子是有悖思想史的真实性的，周海门应被列入浙中王龙溪的门人。

周海门继承王阳明、王龙溪一脉的思想，以良知心体为核心构建其哲学思想。首先周海门以为太极即是心，心为万物的本原。此一思想并非是在宇宙生成论的意义上，以心为本原生成宇宙万物。而是指世界万物显示为存在离不开心体意向性的感知作用，只有通过心体的感知作用，世界万物才被揭示为存在。同时，周海门还强调心体的意向性作用赋予存在物以道德、审美的价值。然而，王阳明“心学思想”重点强调心体的实践意向对于实践活动的意义。故而，周海门的心物思想是对王阳明“心外无物”思想的进一步扩展。

周海门的心学思想来自于王龙溪，王龙溪心学思想的核心是“四无说”，“四无说”的核心是“无善无恶心之体”。周海门在王龙溪“心体无善无恶”思想的影响下，提出人性是无善无恶的，善恶是心体在作用状态时的特征，在心体本然的“虚无”状态是无所谓善恶的，故而人性是无善无恶，作用时有善有恶，善是心体的正确活动方向。他认为告子、荀子、扬雄等人的人性论只是论述了人性论的一部分，并没有讲到心性论的全体。为了维护王龙溪“心体之无善无恶”的思想，周海门又与许孚远进行了激烈的辩论，“心体之无善无恶”又可作另外的解释，即生命主体在道德实践时，心体自然感应万物而呈现道德价值，但是心体无“为善为恶”之心，若心体在道德实践时起为善为恶之念，则心体便会有所滞碍。故而，“心体之无善无恶”所体现的是心体周流万物而不滞的道德境界，王龙溪的“无善无恶心之体”也就是从这个角度来说。周海门对“无善无恶心之体”的解读显然超出了王龙溪的思想，他不仅以“无善无恶”为道德的圆熟境界，同时也解读为人的本性是无善无恶的。

周海门的修养理论与王龙溪一脉相承，强调即本体为功夫的修养理论，并且引用禅宗的参禅之法来彻悟良知本体，同时他还以为在即本体为功夫中还需要在一念之微上做为善去恶的功夫。周海门强调生命的真实感悟，在实践中理解道德理论的真实内涵，反对在思维上对道德理论作辨析。

明末，佛教有一段短暂的复兴，周海门与当时佛教界的重要僧人都有来往，其思想也深深地受到佛教的影响。他认为儒佛之心同，但是因为不同的因缘条件呈现不同的形式，不能根据二者形式上的矛盾而相互攻击。故而儒不应排斥佛教，但是也不必舍儒而入佛。佛教不必攻击儒家，也无需舍佛而入儒。

关键词：良知  人性  无善无恶  融合

A Study on the Philosophy of Zhou Haimen

Abstract: In the mid-Ming dynasty, Wang Yangming established the ideological system of mind. Strongly advocated by his disciples, Yang-ming school achieved unprecedented prosperity, which became another most important academic school. In late Ming dynasty, Yang-ming school developed into the third phase and Zhou Haimen was one of the representatives. In the book of Confucians in the Ming Dynasty written by Huang Zongxi, Zhou Haimen was listed in the school of Taizhou as the disciple of Lou Jinxi. Based on previous academic studies and more other documents, this paper discovered that the theory of Zhou Haimen mainly derived from Wang Longxi's philosophy rather than Luo Jinxi's philosophy though Zhou Haimen was influenced by Luo Jinxi in theory. Furthermore, Zhou Haimen considered himself the disciple of Wang Longxi as well as Zhou Haimen's friends and disciples. So, this paper believed it is contrary to the intellectual history that Huang Zongxi considered Zhou Haimen as Luo Jinxi's disciple. Zhou Haimen should be included in the school of Zhezhong as the disciple of Wang Longxi.

Zhou Haimen inherited the thought from which was passed from Wang Longxi to Wang Longxi and established his philosophy with the key concept Innate Knowledge. Zhou Haimen regarded Taichi as the mind and claimed that the mind is the substance of everything in the Universe. However, this proposition does not mean that the mind created everything in the Universe. Its real meaning is that everything was revealed as being by intentional perception of the mind. Only by the perceptive action of the mind, everything was revealed their being. Moreover, Zhou Haimen also emphasized that the intentional act of the mind endows everything the significance in morality. However, the philosophy of Wang Yangming emphasizes the intentional moral act of the mind is significant in practice activities. Therefore, the thought on the relation between the mind and the matter is the further expansion of the proposition that there is nothing outside the mind which was brought forward by Wang Yangming.

Zhou Haimen's thought of the Mind came from Wang Longxi. In Wang Longxi's thought, the theory of Four-not is the core ideas whose key points is that the original state of the mind does not have neither good and evil. Influenced by this theory, Zhou Haimen demonstrated that the human nature is neither good nor evil. He thought that being good or evil is the character of the mind when the mind is acting. However, when the mind keeps in its natural condition of nothingness, we cannot describe the mind is good or evil. So the human nature is neither good nor evil. When the mind is acting, it will show the condition of good or evil. But the condition of good is the just direction of the mind. Accordingly, Zhou Haimen thought that Gaozi、Xunxi and Yang Xiong had not discussed the whole of the theory on the mind but just discussed it in part. In order to vindicate Wang Longxi's proposition that the original state of the mind does not have neither good and evil,Zhou Haimen argued with Xu Fuyuan in Nanjing. He pointed out that Wang Longxi's proposition actually means that when a person is carrying out the moral practice, his mind naturally act toward the outside world and the act is showing the moral value raised by the Confucian school, but the idea of doing good or evil does not emerged in the mind. When the person is taking moral practice and the idea of doing good or evil emerged in his mind, the mind will cling to it and cannot intentionally act towards everything in the world freely. Therefore, the proposition describes a sophisticated moral state that the mind brings out its moral value in practice without obstruction. Zhou Haimen's explanation on the proposition that the mind does not have neither good nor evil is beyond Wang Longxi's thought. Zhou Haimen did not only regard the proposition as sophisticated moral state, but also understood it as that the human nature is neither good nor evil.

Inheriting Wang Longxi's theory, the cultivation theory of Zhou Haimen emphasized the moral cultivation theory of noumenon skills. He proposed the way cited from Zen to realize the original state of Innate Knowledge. Besides, Zhou Haimen also thought the work，that dispel the evil thought momently emerged from the mind is necessary. Zhou Haimen attached importance to personal moral practice. In the moral practice, the person can actually understand the true meaning of moral theory. Zhou Haimen opposed argument in moral theory but without actual awareness in moral practice.

In late Ming dynasty, there is a short recovery in Buddhism, Zhou Haimen had close and frequent intercourse with the famous monks in that period. His theory was deeply influenced by Buddhism. In his opinion , the mind in Confucianism has the same significance as in Buddhism. However, their styles are different on the ground of different conditions. Therefore, Buddhists and Confucians should not criticize each other according to contradiction in style. Confucians should not criticize Buddhism but do not need quitting from the Confucian school to embrace Buddhism. Similarly, Buddhist should not criticize the Confucian school but do not need quitting from Buddhism to embrace the Confucian school.

Key Words: innate knowledge   human nature   neither good nor evil   syncretize

导师:魏常海教授