摘要：仁义内外问题本质上是道德与自我的关系问题。道德之于自我，基本上要经历一个由“外”到“内”的过程。但这个过程并不仅仅是单向的灌输和内化，因为在这个过程中，人逐渐发展出了对道德生活的理由和意义的理解，与此相辅相成的是，人也逐渐发展了自己的理智和悟性，并且反身理解这个自我，建立起人的主体性。经过这个过程，道德生活和自我都达到了一个新的境界，在这个境界中，道德成为内在于自我的。对自我的理解是对人性的理解的重要源泉。处于不同成长阶段和成长环境的人，对道德和自我以及人性的觉解往往呈现出不同的水平。
孔子对仁（人之为人）之觉解，是华夏民族道德和自我觉解之由外而内的历程中关键的一跃。孔子之后，先秦儒家在心性问题上展开了深入的探讨，一方面将孔子仁学所蕴涵的理论可能性充分地实现出来，另一方面，后学也并不是整齐划一地达到了孔子所达到的觉解高度，而是根据各自的觉解层次表达各自对人性的看法。在道德与自我/人性由外而内的觉解之路上，既有转进，又有徘徊。
孟子乃是对孔子所表现出来的仁之觉解有真切领会者。他通过对“心之官则思”、“大体/小体”、性善等观念的阐扬，将孔子仁之觉解所表现出来的那种道德主体性进一步确立为人性，将人对自我的觉解带到新的高度与深度。郭店简《性自命出》和荀子则仍然延续着“以生论性”的传统。《性自命出》从天赋之气性、自然生命之感物而动之性来理解人性，使这一传统得到了更加精致的表达。荀子对人性的看法则显得偏激而悲观，同时特别强调社会制度和秩序对人的规训。荀子的说法可能有其特殊的时代和社会针对性，以致他过于强调了这种外在规训，而忽视了人之内在主体性觉解的可能。
孟子和告子在仁义之内外问题上的分歧，是他们道德和自我觉解水平不同的表现。人性有其现成、被决定的一面，也就是告子所认识的“生之谓性”或“食色性也”这个层面。他所理解的仁和义，以其与这个层面的情感和欲望的顺或逆，而被感受为内在的或外在的。孟子并非不承认这个层面，但他对自我和人性的觉解有进于此，而至人之道德主体性这一自由层面。孟子所谓仁义“内”在，乃是相对于人之道德主体性而言的。
仁义内外问题，除了道德与自我/人性的关系这个层面的问题之外，还有另一重意蕴，那就是仁义两种原则在不同伦理生活领域之轻重主次的问题。郭店简《六德》篇在“门内之治恩掩义，门外之治义断恩”这一意义上所主张的“仁内义外”，是儒家的一种共识。现代社会生活方式同时朝全球化、公共化，和社群化、私人化两个相反的方向发展，儒家“内主仁，外主义”的仁内义外原则经过适当的解释，仍然不失为对我们伦理生活的一种有益指导。
关键词：先秦儒学 仁 义 内 外
Abstract: The issue of internality-externality of renyi essentially refers to the relationship between morality and human selves. For human beings, Morality basically goes through a process from being external to internal. This process, however, is not just a one-way indoctrination, because during it people gradually develop their understanding about the reason and meaning of morality on one hand, and their ability to reason and understand on the other hand, and consequently establish human subjectivity through self-reflection upon their ability. At the end of this process, the morality and the human selves both reach a new state, in which the former becomes internal to the later. Self-understanding is an important source of understanding about human essence. People at different stages of growth or living in different environment always exhibit different levels regarding to the understanding of morality, self/human essence and the relationship between them.
Confucius's innovation of the concept ren (humanity) was a critical leap in the process of morality internalization and human subjectivity establishing. Pre-Qin Confucians after the Master launched various exploration into human heart/mind and nature/essence, some of which fully realized the theoretical implication of Confucius's learning of ren, while others still stayed at relatively shallow understanding of morality and the self.
Mencius was the one who truly comprehended the Master's thought of ren. He developed the understanding of human subjectivity achieved by Confucius to a new level in the sense that he found the faculty of reason in human mind and took it as the source of human dignity. While The Guodian bamboo book Xingzimingchu(Human Nature Is Granted by the Destiny) and Xunzi were still continuation of the traditional approach of understanding human nature from the biological dimension. Xingzimingchu provided a detailed description of the human nature based on qi which is stimulated and activated by objects in environment. Xunzi held an extremely pessimistic view over human nature and put special emphasis on imposing social regulation on human nature. Xunzi may be too concerned about the increasingly disordered society then so that he overly stressed the external discipline while ignoring awakening moral subjectivity in human mind.
The disagreement between Mencius and Gaozi on the issue of internality-externality of renyi originated from their different levels of understanding about morality and their selves. There is a determinated biological dimension in human nature, on which Gaozi's understanding stayed. He took morality as internal or external according to it coinciding with or violating against his first-order desire and emotion. Mencius did not deny the determinated biological dimension of human nature but he realized that human beings can transcend this dimension to be free as moral subject. The internality of morality in Mencius's opinion was relative to the moral subjectivity.
Ren (benevolence) and yi (justice) are two fundamental principles and virtues in Confucian ethics. Although they are both applied to all different ethical contexts, ren is the leading principle and virtue in intimate life while yi the leading one in public life. The recent fierce criticism against Confucian ethics failed to understand it entirely and historically. The Confucian doctrine about applying different ethical practice to public and private life can still be relevant in this globalizing and at the same time differentiating world.
Key Words: Pre-Qin Confucianism Humanity Righteousness Internal Exter
导师：李中华教授
