[[alternative]]Interpretation and Context Reconstruction of Contemporary Zhang Zai Academic

[[abstract]]張載的爭議從理學史一路而下到當代，從來沒有少過。他究竟是「理學宗師」？還是「氣學之祖」？「唯物論／唯氣論」者？還是「即存有即活動」的正宗儒家「道德的形上學」？這些爭議與標籤，可能與張載文本具有的開放性或特殊結構，容許不同解讀有很大關係。張載的特殊性格，使他成為理學與反理學、唯物論與形上學，乃至形上學與當代氣學間對話的一個重要場域。本文從張載在儒學史的研究概況與遭遇的問題談起，主要內容致力於呈現1949後大陸、港台與海外張載學的重要研究成果。晚近大陸張載學已非「唯物論」一詞能概括，他們希望擺脫西方哲學的詮釋框架，重構中國哲學的思維方式；批判港台新儒家的心性論模式，過於集中探討天道性命之學，相對忽視宋明理學與原始儒學在政治社會文化實踐上，有一脈相承的共相。理學史上張載以躬行禮教著稱，港台儒學高度聚焦於天道論、心性論，對於與政經社會文化密切相關的張載禮學，顯得相當疏離。相較之下，大陸對闡發張載天道性命之外其他多元面向，如教育思想、政治理論、禮學等較能關注。21世紀後大陸張載學由唯物論氣學走向客觀、超越的形上學，隱約之間，一種同一性與中心性傾向，背後所隱含的國族、文化認同的意圖相當明顯。近年來港台的張載研究，反而由心性論走向氣學的脈絡。牟宗三作為當代張載學最重要的對話對象，其援用康德哲學格義建構出來的新儒家心性之學，貢獻不容抹滅。但在面對心學系統之外，不論是程朱理學，或張載、王夫之氣學，都出現幅度不小的貶抑或改造。親近新儒家的張載研究者從朱建民開始，即展開不同程度的修正之路。唐君毅高看「氣」的詮釋，最常被使用來修正牟宗三對張載氣化論的過度貶抑。隨著歷史條件的轉移，晚近臺灣學界對張載氣學的論爭，研究旨趣已逐漸移轉至如何突破心性主體，建構出一種新的主體範式。氣與身體、物質的意義重新被檢視，並成為新的焦點。張載與王夫之的儒家氣學，在此一新的主體範式的建構中則扮演了重要的橋樑角色。[[abstract]]Controversy on Zhang Zai has continued from Neo-Confucianism history to modern time. Was he "the master of Neo-Confucianism" or "founder of study of Qi"? With unique personality, Zhang Zai became the critical medium between Neo-Confucianism and anti-Neo-Confucianism,materialism, metaphysics, metaphysics and modern study of Qi. This study aims to present important contemporary research findings of study of Zhang Zai after 1949.Study of Zhang Zai in China intended to break through the interpretation framework of western philosophy and reconstruct thinking of Chinese philosophy, which could not be generalized by "materialism"; they criticized theory of mind of neo-Confucianism of Hong Kong and Taiwan which overly focused on theory of supernatural. In history of Neo-Confucianism, Zhang Zai was well-known by his emphasis on Confucian code of ethics.Confucianism of Hong Kong and Taiwan highly focused on theory of supernatural and theory of mind and they neglected theory of rites which is associated with politics, economy, society and culture. On the other hand, China tended to concern about multiple dimensions of Zhang Zai, such as educational thoughts and political theories. Nevertheless, after the 21st century, study of Zhang Zai in China changed from study of Qi of materialism to objective and transcendental metaphysics. It seemed that the underlined intention of national identity of homogeneity and centralization was significant. Study of Zhang Zai in Hong Kong and Taiwan, in recent years, changed from theory of mind to study of Qi. Mou Zongsan, as the most important theory provider of modern study of Zhang Zai, constructed theory of mind of neo-Confucianism by Kant's philosophyand the contribution was significant. However,besides system of philosophy of mind, Cheng-ZhuNeo-Confucianism or study of Qi of Zhang Zai and Wang Fu-zhi were relatively degraded or modified. Zhang Zai researchers of Hong Kong and Taiwan, launched from Jue Jien-ming, practiced different degrees of modification. Tang Chun-i overestimated Zhang Zai’s "Qi" and tended to be applied to correct the over devaluing of Mou Zongsan on theory of Qi. In recent years, in academic circle of Taiwan, research on Zhang Zai's study of Qi has successively changed to breakthrough of subject of mind and construction of new subject model. Meanings of Qi and bodies and materials were reviewed and became new focus. Study of Qi of the Confucian school of Zhang Zai and Wang Fu-zhi played critical role as medium in the establishment of the new subject model