钟吕内丹思想与《周易参同契》关系试析

钟吕内丹是五代宋初开一代风气之先的丹法系统 ,它以道教传统的天人合一思想为其理论基础 ,而这一思想基础更直接的来源则是汉代道教经典《周易参同契》。本文将《周易参同契》与钟吕内丹派经典《灵宝毕法》、《钟吕传道集》、《西山群仙会真记》等相比较 ,并参以其它内丹经典 ,深入分析了《参同契》对钟吕内丹道理论建构的重要影响 ,包括天道观、药物论、火侯说等。     

试论俞琰道教易学的内丹修炼学

俞琰（１２５３——１３１４）字玉吾，江苏吴郡人。自号“古吴石洞道人”、“林屋山人”、“洞天紫庭真逸”等，道号“全阳子”。乃宋末元初的著名易学家与道教内丹修炼家。其易学与道教内丹修炼相关的著作主要有：《周易参同契发挥》、《周易参同契释疑》、《易外别传》、《水中金诗》、《玄牝之门赋》等。其经学易方面的著作还有《周易集说》、《读易举要》等。对于易学与道教修炼的关系，早在东汉时期，便有魏伯阳的《周易参同契》对此作了专门的探讨。但此书所谈，一般认为讲的是炼外丹。自唐、五代以后，道教内丹修持渐趋兴盛，有不少…     

论《周易参同契》的文本系统

《周易参同契》是炼丹术理论的奠基性著作,由于资料的缺乏,对于这本书的文本组成与著者,历代学者有很多争议.对于这些问题的研究,应当以文本自身的内证为主.《参同契》的文本经历了各自独立、混编至重编三个时期.其主要组成部分即四言经文和五言经文并非出自一人之手,四言经文是对五言经文的进一步发挥和补充.对于《周易参同契》的经文主旨,简单地概括为外丹或内丹均不太合理,文本自身已经表明了内养性情和外用炉火的观念.     

《周易参同契》与我国炼丹术

《周易参同契》,世简称《参同契》,是东汉魏伯阳祖师所著。它是我国和世界上已被公认为现存炼丹术著作中最古的一部丹书。千百年来,人们从不同的角度去探讨和研究,养生家认为《参同契》的旨意是论内丹修炼的书;外丹家说《参同契》是论炉火烧炼的典籍;还有一种人认为《参同契》内、外丹兼并。本文所谈的炼丹术,专指外丹烧炼而言,试图从这一侧面来论述《周易参同契》的炼丹术对我国和世界科技史的重要贡献。我国现代著名化学专家袁翰青在其著《中国化学史论文集》中曾引证苏联学者涅克拉索夫“普通化学教程”里的话说:“中国学者魏伯阳的     

再论《太极图》与《周易参同契》“三五至精”思想之关系

清儒毛奇龄提出,《太极图》的第三层图,窃自于《周易参同契》之"三五至精图"。这一说法目前无法从版本学的角度予以验证。对此问题,我们试图从比较《太极图》与《周易参同契》和《悟真篇》这三部著作对于"三五"思想的不同表述入手做出回答。我们认为:首先,毛奇龄在论证《太极图》与《周易参同契》在"三五"思想上存在一定的渊源关系时,误将《悟真篇》的表述等同于了《周易参同契》的说法,论证极不严谨。其次,《太极图》的第三层图对五行思想的表述,与《周易参同契》和《悟真篇》对"三五"思想的表述,均有所不同。再次,《太极图》的第三层图与《太极图说》中"五行一阴阳也"的表述一致,从而体现出相当的原创性。从这个角度判断,我们认为《太极图》当出自周敦颐本人之手,与道教思想并无直接性的渊源关系。     

储华谷《周易参同契》注年代略考

明《正统道藏》太玄部收有储华谷的《周易参同契》注三卷。注者储华谷,身份不明,其它史料亦未见关于其生平的详细记载。本文拟对储华谷《周易参同契》注的注书年代进行考察,以就正于方家。 一、储华谷注《周易参同契》的时间上限为北宋     

《周易参同契》的著录和版本

《四库全书总目提要》收有《周易参同契》注本八种,明刊本《正统道藏》收注本十种(包括《明镜图》一卷),加上未收于上述两大巨型丛书的各家注本共四十余种。以上都说明这一著作在中国古代文献中的重要性。从目录学、版本学上加以探讨是很有必要的。本文首先要强调的是它在文化史上的意义,然后及于文献著录及版本。一、《周易参同契》的重要性《周易参同契》自唐宋以来受到学人重视,清代翻刻本无数。它的内容有三方面值得重视。首先,它对了解汉代学术思想是重要的。但它是一本有名的难懂的书。朱熹在他的《周易参同契考异》中说,此书“词韵皆古,奥雅     

南宋前道书引录《周易参同契》引文内容与现存诸本关系考

从《道藏》中检索出所有有关《周易参同契》的引文，然后去掉干扰、冗余信息，剩下的引文以年代为序重新辑录。再将这些引文与现存诸本(主要以《道藏》所存阴长生注《周易参同契》、容字号无名氏《周易参同契注》、彭晓《周易参同契分章通真义》以及朱熹《周易参同契考异》)一字一句逐文对校，找出与现存诸本之关系，然后进行统计。通过统计、分析，得出结论：南宋前道书所引《参同契》文本与现存阴注、容注更为接近，而与彭注、朱注距离较远。这似乎可以证实两点：一、《参同契》在历史上存在多个文本系统；二、阴注、容注确如陈国符、孟乃昌所论是《参同契》的早期注本。     

《悟真篇》丹法源流

《悟真篇》作者及其时代《悟真篇》是道教内丹丹法主要经典,著录于《文献通考》、《宋史艺文志》及《四库全书》之中,著者为北宋张伯端,是继《周易参同契》之后的丹经。书中以诗词形式总结了宋代以前内丹的正     

《周易参同契》作者新证(二)——从文本用韵看《参同契》为齐人所著

《周易参同契》全书均为韵语。古无韵书,《三百篇》即为韵书。孔子传《易》,亦不能改方音。所以,通过用韵来判断《周易参同契》作者的籍贯,是十分可靠的方法。为此,我们为传世本《周易参同契》作了厘定韵例、编制韵谱的工作,并从中分析出这部书用韵的特点。再根据已有的秦汉方音研究成果参校比勘,说明《周易参同契》一书具有十分明显的齐鲁方音的特点,进一步证明它应该是齐鲁作者所著。     

"Psychotherapy" versus "treatment"

Presents a comment on "Psychological treatments" by D. H. Barlow. Barlow proposed that we distinguish between the terms "treatment" and "psychotherapy." The author believes that not only is the distinction unnecessary, but that its implications could have negative consequences for the field of clinical psychology. It is the proposed distinguishing feature that treatments are "specifically tailored to the pathological process that is causing the impairment and distress" that is most problematic. Clinical psychology does not need a distinction that further exacerbates the split between researchers and practitioners.     

"Enmeshment" and "Fusion"

The paper examines two related concepts utilized by two different schools of family therapy. Any family seen to be "enmeshed" is also seen as "fused," and vice versa. The difference in the level of focus, on the "system containing the individuals" (structural) or the "individual in the system" (fusion), determines the difference in therapeutic approach of these two schools.     

"本体论"与"伦理学"--形而上学的两个向度

形而上学有两个密切相关的内在向度,就是本体论向度与伦理学向度.在哲学史上,哲学家们之所以在"追求形而上学"的同时,又总是"反形而上学",并非是人们的形上本性出了问题,而是因为人们总是将形而上学视为单纯的"一维性",总是用一个向度来取代或遮蔽另一个向度.而所谓的"后形而上学思想",也并不是消解了形而上学,而是指形而上学从"本体论向度"转向了"伦理学向度".     

“对的”与“好的”

什么是“对的”,和对它的证立,是道德哲学中具有争议性的核心问题,也是效用主义和道义论间的主要差异之所在。统合效用主义对于“好的就是对的”这个陈述有一套完整周延的说法。而道义论对这个问题的证立不够周延或没有足够的说服力。     

从"管制"到"平衡"--政府与公众理想关系模式的构建及其制度化

论文从行政民主的角度探讨政府与公众之间的理想关系模式及其制度化构建过程 ,将我国在改革之前的政府与公众模式概括为管制模式。论文指出 ,在制度变迁的过程中 ,这一模式日益受到挑战。而在新的制度环境下 ,我国政府与公众的关系模式应该是平衡模式。这一模式的制度化措施包括培育自主的市民社会 ,赋予公众以独立的活动空间 ;促进行政公开 ,建立一个开放负责的政府 ;推进行政法建设 ,抑制行政恣意     

PREFERRING "HOUSEWIVES" TO "FEMINISTS"

Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term "women". The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both "housewives" and "feminists". The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants'values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between them-selves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.     

"石狮"、"风水"与"吉祥"

谁都知道,在古老的中国,不管是衙门、宫殿、庙宇的门前,还是豪宅、大户人家的门口,人们都能看到摆着一对石狮。据说,这对石狮子在许多中国人的心目中,它不但是一种气派的象征,而且还是一种被人认为是好的“吉祥物”。如今,旧时的衙门没有了,但遗留下来的宫殿、庙宇的门前,其中有些石狮仍有保存。然而,想像不到的是,这号称“吉祥物”的石狮今天却开始“走”进某些党政机关的大门口,它们(石狮)在那里时时都在保护着这些政府要员“平平安安”、“吉祥如意”。这不仅使我联想起一些极端的报道,有些政府官员为升迁,请算命先生定位,用风水术为政府…     

"Us" and "Them":

Abstract: In the Aristotelian tradition, politics is a matter of public deliberation over questions of justice and injustice. The Bush administration's response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has been uniformly hostile to this notion, and it has instead promoted a jingoistic politics of self‐assertion by an America largely identified with the executive branch of its government. This is doubly disturbing, as the executive branch has sought to free itself from international law, multinational commitments, and domestic judicial regulation, even as it has sought to validate itself by demonizing its enemies. This essay draws out the disturbing echoes here of Carl Schmitt's work of the 1920s, in particular of Schmitt's conception of the sovereign as the ungrounded ground of the law and the political as the site of mortal conflict between friend and enemy. The essay argues that Schmitt's position in the twenties, for all of its evident problems, is superior to that of Bush, Wolfowitz, and Ashcroft in at least two senses: Schmitt condemns the idea of waging war for profit and recognizes that such wars will often be disguised as moral crusades waged against the “inhuman”; and he acknowledges that claiming to fight a war for humanity denies one's enemies their humanity, leaving them open to torture and even extermination.