英语翻译罗钦顺举出儒家经典中"博我以文"等语指出,儒学本来内在地具有博学于文的一面,如果以内外划分学术的 正与不正,把学问之道完全归于内心反省,这至少与孔子以来的整个燔学传统不

英语翻译罗钦顺举出儒家经典中"博我以文"等语指出,儒学本来内在地具有博学于文的一面,如果以内外划分学术的 正与不正,把学问之道完全归于内心反省,这至少与孔子以来的整个燔学传统不
英语翻译
罗钦顺举出儒家经典中"博我以文"等语指出,儒学本来内在地具有博学于文的一面,如果以内外划分学术的 正与不正,把学问之道完全归于内心反省,这至少与孔子以来的整个燔学传统不合.
罗钛顺的批评特别集中在格物问题上,他引用了戊寅原著《人学古本旁注》中的表述,并加以批评,这些引述对我们了解《大学古本旁注》本来面貌有一定帮助.他所引述的《大学古本旁注》语有：
物者,意之用也.
格者,正也.正其不正以归于正也.
意用于事亲,即事亲之事而格之,正其事亲之事之不正者,以归于正,而必尽夫天理.
罗钦顺指出,阳明的宗旨是通过对《大学》的再解释.排除研究外部亊物的干扰而使学问完全转为内向性的活动.这种把阳明的格物定义说成为了否定外部的看法,与甘泉对阳明的理解是一致的.他认为阳明的本意要纠正"溺于外而遗其内".何实际上走向"局于内而遗其外",而后者正是掸学的特色.他更对《朱子晚年定论》详细考察,指出阳明把许多朱子早年的书信也都当成晚年定论的错误.与湛若水一样,他也指出,如果把格物解释为正其不正以归于正,便与本文的诚意、正心等条目形成重复.这样一来《大学》的其他条口都成为多余的了.
对罗钦顺批评阳明做了详细认真的答复.他首先表示,他之所以不用朱子《大学》改本而尊信旧本,是因为旧本为孔门所传,这其中并不是出于内或外的选择.他说"学岂有内外".

英语翻译罗钦顺举出儒家经典中"博我以文"等语指出,儒学本来内在地具有博学于文的一面,如果以内外划分学术的 正与不正,把学问之道完全归于内心反省,这至少与孔子以来的整个燔学传统不
Luo Qinshun cited " Confucian classics;
Bo I to the "
language points
out,while Confucianism was inherently has learned in the text,
if
divided
by the academic and not just,the road to learning to inner reflection,
at least it
and
Confucius since
the whole
burnt
learn
traditional
incompatibility.
罗钛顺的批评特别集中在格物问题上,他引用了戊寅原著《人学古本旁注》中的表述,并加以批评,这些引述对我们了解《大学古本旁注》本来面貌有一定帮助.他所引述的《大学古本旁注》语有：
Luo Taishun's criticism is particularly concentrated in
the
standard
issue,he
cited Wu
Yin
original
"people" in the ancient marginal expression,and criticize,
these quotes to
our understanding of
"University"
ancient
marginal original
appearance have
some help.He quoted "marginal"
language in a
university
based:
物者,意之用也.
Content,meaning and.
格者,正也.正其不正以归于正也.
Lattice,
is also.Is not
positive to
attribution is
also.
意用于事亲,即事亲之事而格之,正其事亲之事之不正者,以归于正,而必尽夫天理.
Meaning for
dear dear thing,that thing and
lattice,is it not
dear
thing is,to be
positive,and will do,justice.
罗钦顺指出,阳明的宗旨是通过对《大学》的再解释.排除研究外部亊物的干扰而使学问完全转为内向性的活动.这种把阳明的格物定义说成为了否定外部的看法,与甘泉对阳明的理解是一致的.他认为阳明的本意要纠正"溺于外而遗其内".何实际上走向"局于内而遗其外",而后者正是掸学的特色.他更对《朱子晚年定论》详细考察,指出阳明把许多朱子早年的书信也都当成晚年定论的错误.与湛若水一样,他也指出,如果把格物解释为正其不正以归于正,便与本文的诚意、正心等条目形成重复.这样一来《大学》的其他条口都成为多余的了.
Luo Qinshun points out,
the purpose
is to explain the Yangming through the "University".
The interference
of the
external
things
out and
make
knowledge
completely turn
inward
activity.The standard definition Yangming said became negative external views,is consistent with the understanding of Wang Yangming's oasis.
He thinks
his
intention to
correct
" indulge the outer left in which ".What actually to " in the inner and outer " Relic Bureau;
Shan,while the latter is
the
speciality.
He is more
to "Zhu Xi" the verdict of detailed investigation,points out that many of the early Ming Zhu Xi's letters as the verdict of error.
And Zhan
Ruoshui,he also points
out,if you are not in the explanation to it,
with
the
sincerity,is heart.Other entries repeat the formation of a "University" that have become redundant.
对罗钦顺批评阳明做了详细认真的答复.他首先表示,他之所以不用朱子《大学》改本而尊信旧本,是因为旧本为孔门所传,这其中并不是出于内或外的选择.他说"学岂有内外".
On Luo Qinshun's criticism of Yangming do detailed reply.First he said,he was not Zhu Xi "University"
to the letter and respect the old old,
because
this is his preaching,which is not from inside or outside the selection.He said "
learn
how internal and
external
".
要是是对的麻烦赞一下啊~亲