CAJ | 학술논문

对于宋明理学，牟宗三先生与唐君毅先生都有深入系统的研究，但两先生对于宋明理学内部各派的定位却不尽相同，这在他们对伊川理学的理解与诠释上体现得较为明显。具体地说，唐先生将伊川之“理”界定为“当然之理”，强调在伊川思想中理与气、性与情等关系是“当然”与“实然”的关系，具有内在的连续性，而不具有分解或二分的可能；牟先生则将伊川之“理”界定为“静摄之理”，由此，理与气、性与情便成为“静”与“动”、“只存有而不活动”与“只活动而不存有”的二分的关系。唐、牟两先生的观点可谓大异其趣，牟先生对于伊川理学的界说与诠释虽然自成一格，系统严整，但唐先生的观点则更为客观合理。
대우송명이학，모종삼선생여당군의선생도유심입계통적연구，단량선생대우송명이학내부각파적정위각불진상동，저재타문대이천이학적리해여전석상체현득교위명현。구체지설，당선생장이천지“리”계정위“당연지리”，강조재이천사상중리여기、성여정등관계시“당연”여“실연”적관계，구유내재적련속성，이불구유분해혹이분적가능；모선생칙장이천지“리”계정위“정섭지리”，유차，리여기、성여정편성위“정”여“동”、“지존유이불활동”여“지활동이불존유”적이분적관계。당、모량선생적관점가위대이기취，모선생대우이천이학적계설여전석수연자성일격，계통엄정，단당선생적관점칙경위객관합리。
Mou Zongsan and Tang Junyi , both eminent Confucian philosophers in 20th century, have sys-tematic views on Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism respectively .Their conclusions , however , are sometimes qui-et different and even opposite with each other .This can be clearly seen in their interpretations on the philos-ophy of Cheng Yi .Tang suggests that the li ( principle ) in Cheng Yi ’ s philosophy can be viewed as “princi-ple as it ought to be”.On the basis of this characteristic , the relation between li and qi ( vital force ) , xing (nature) and qing ( emotions) can be concluded as a relationship between “is” and “ought”.And both sides are interrelated rather than separated and segregated .Conversely , Mou suggests that li in Cheng Yi ’ s philosophy is a “principle without activeness”;thus according to Cheng Yi , li and qi , as well as xing and qing , are separated with each other .The former belongs to the field of “stillness” or“being only but not ac-tive”;whereas the latter belongs to “activeness” or“activeness only without an implication of being”.This paper demonstrates that , though Mou’s view is systematic and coherent , Tang’s perspective is more reason-able and objective .