朱子对 “涵养德性” 的理论建构与核心意义

——二程涵养思想的继承、分化与时代指向

On Zhu Xi’s Theoretical Construction and Core Significance of “Nourishing Virtuous Nature”: With a Concurrent Discussion of the Inheritance, Differentiation, and Epochal Orientation of the Cheng Brothers’ Thought on Nourishment 

一、引言

     “涵养德性” 是宋明理学工夫论的核心命题，也是儒家实现 “内圣外王” 理想的基本实践路径。这一范畴由二程正式发端，经朱子系统性重构、扩充与完善，成为贯穿德性养成、道德教育、政治治世的根本性纲领。

                        I. Introduction

   “Nourishing virtuous nature” is a core proposition in Neo Confucian theories of moral effort from the Song and Ming periods, and it is also a basic practical path through which Confucianism pursues the ideal of “inner sagehood and outer kingship.” This category was formally initiated by the Cheng brothers and was subsequently reconstructed, expanded, and perfected by Zhu Xi into a systematic program running through the cultivation of virtue, moral education, and political governance.
      二程兄弟体贴出 “天理” 二字，确立理为宇宙本体与道德终极依据，首次将 “涵养” 明确为德性修养的核心工夫，提出 “涵养须用敬，进学则在致知” 的经典范式，为后世儒学定下 “居敬穷理” 的基本实践框架。但受各自学术气质与思想侧重的限制，二程的理论存在显著分野：程颢偏向即本体即工夫的自然诚敬，程颐侧重严肃收敛的主敬工夫，且二者均未完整解决涵养如何贯通动静、未发已发，如何与致知实践深度耦合的技术问题，理论架构相对粗疏，落地性不足。
     The Cheng brothers discerned the two words “heavenly principle” and established principle as the ontological substance of the cosmos and the ultimate ground of morality. They were the first to identify “nourishment” explicitly as the core moral effort in the cultivation of virtue, proposing the classical formula, “Nourishment must use reverence; advancing in learning lies in the extension of knowledge.” This fixed the basic practical framework of “abiding in reverence and exhaustively probing principle” for later Confucianism. However, limited by their respective scholarly temperaments and emphases, the Cheng brothers’ theories diverged significantly. Cheng Hao inclined toward a natural sincerity and reverence in which substance and effort are identified, while Cheng Yi stressed a solemn, self-restraining effort of holding reverence. Moreover, neither fully resolved the technical problem of how nourishment should connect activity and stillness, the unaroused and the aroused, or how it should be deeply coupled with the practice of extending knowledge. Their theoretical architecture remained relatively rough and insufficiently practicable.
     朱子身处南宋学术大分化的时代，陆九渊心学主张 “发明本心”、偏向简易顿悟，部分儒者沉溺空疏的静坐体悟，忽视人伦日常的践履；佛老之教盛行，其 “空谈心性”“屏弃人伦” 的修养路径，不断解构儒家以天理为核心的德性基础；同时，二程之后的理学传人，多偏于一端，要么专务涵养而忽视穷理，要么偏重穷理而缺乏涵养根基，工夫实践支离破碎。有鉴于此，朱子在二程的基础上，整合张载 “心统性情” 的思想、李侗 “默坐澄心，体认天理” 的传教，以 “敬” 为贯通线索，将涵养德性从单一的修养技术，提升为支撑整个儒家德性伦理、重塑士风、抵御异教的核心理论，完成了理学工夫论的体系化建构。
    Zhu Xi lived in an age of great academic differentiation in the Southern Song. Lu Jiu yuan’s school of mind advocated “illuminating the original mind” and inclined toward a simple, sudden enlightenment; some Confucians indulged in empty quiet-sitting and neglected daily ethical practice. Buddhism and Daoism flourished, and their cultivation paths of “empty speculation about mind and nature” and “abandoning human relationships” continuously eroded the Confucian virtue foundation centered on heavenly principle. At the same time, after the Cheng brothers, later Neo Confucian transmission often leaned to one extreme: some devoted themselves solely to nourishment while neglecting the investigation of principle, while others overemphasized the investigation of principle without laying a firm foundation in nourishment, with the result that moral practice became fragmented. In view of this, Zhu Xi, building on the Cheng brothers, integrated Zhang Zai’s teaching that “the mind governs nature and feelings” and Li Tong’s instruction to “sit quietly, clarify the mind, and recognize heavenly principle.” Taking “reverence” as the unifying thread, he elevated the nourishment of virtuous nature from a single technique of self-cultivation into a core theory supporting the whole Confucian virtue ethics, reshaping the literati ethos, and resisting heterodox teachings. In this way, he completed the systematic construction of Neo Confucian moral effort.
     本文依托理学原典与后世学术研究，首先梳理二程与朱子涵养思想的联系与区别，再从德性体系的内在逻辑、道德教育的实践价值、矫正时代学风的现实需要、辟卫儒家正统的理论使命四个层面，逐层深入剖析朱子强调涵养德性的根本原因，阐明其理论的精深所在与时代价值。
    Relying on original Neo Confucian texts and later scholarly research, this article first examines the continuities and differences between the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi on moral nourishment. It then analyzes, level by level, the fundamental reasons why Zhu Xi emphasized nourishing virtuous nature from four perspectives: the internal logic of the virtue system, the practical value of moral education, the practical need to correct the academic ethos of the age, and the theoretical mission of defending Confucian orthodoxy. In doing so, it clarifies the depth of his theory and its significance for his times.
     二、思想溯源与理论分野：二程论 “涵养德性” 及其对朱子的影响
     朱子的涵养德性思想，直接脱胎于二程的 “敬” 学工夫。二程共同确立了 “主敬” 为涵养的核心，但二人的理论指向存在明显差异，成为朱子思想的两大源头，朱子在取舍、整合二者的基础上，完成了理论的系统化建构。
II. Intellectual Origins and Theoretical Divergence: The Cheng Brothers on “Nourishing Virtuous Nature” and Its Influence on Zhu Xi
  Zhu Xi’s thought on nourishing virtuous nature grew directly out of the Cheng brothers’ moral effort of “reverence.” The Cheng brothers jointly established “holding reverence” as the core of nourishment, but their theoretical orientations clearly differed and became two major sources of Zhu Xi’s thought. By selecting from and integrating both, Zhu Xi completed a systematic theoretical construction.
   2.1 二程涵养德性的基本论述
     二程以 “天理” 为形上基石，主张德性是天理在人身上的落实。天命之性粹然至善，但人受气禀之拘、物欲之蔽，本然的善性无法自动彰显，必须通过涵养工夫变化气质、去其旧染之污，才能复明天理，实现性情皆顺乎天理的道德境界。但兄弟二人的涵养路径截然不同。
  2.1 The Cheng Brothers’ Basic Exposition of Nourishing Virtuous Nature
  Taking “heavenly principle” as their metaphysical cornerstone, the Cheng brothers held that virtue is the concrete realization of heavenly principle in human beings. The nature endowed by Heaven is purely and entirely good, but because human beings are constrained by their endowed vital energy and obscured by material desires, their original good nature cannot manifest itself automatically. Only through the effort of nourishment can they transform their physical nature, remove accumulated defilements, and thereby recover and illuminate heavenly principle, attaining a moral state in which both feelings and nature conform to heavenly principle. Yet the two brothers’ paths of nourishment were quite different.
   2.1.1 程颢：以诚敬存浑然德性，偏重本体境界之贯通
     程颢的哲学以 “仁” 为核心本体，主张 “仁者浑然与物同体”，将仁心定位为与天地万物贯通的道德本体。在他看来，德性的本质是对本然仁心的自觉持守，涵养德性无须刻意用力、防检私欲，只需先通过反身体悟，证得自身与万物同体的仁心本体，再以 “诚敬” 持守此本体，让内心充实和乐，自然能屏退私意杂念，不使本心迷失。
   2.1.1 Cheng Hao: Preserving the Undifferentiated Virtuous Nature through Sincerity and Reverence, with Emphasis on the Continuity of Substance and Realm
    Cheng Hao’s philosophy took “benevolence” as its core substance, maintaining that “the benevolent person is undifferentiated and forms one body with all things.” He identified the mind of benevolence as the moral substance continuous with Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things. In his view, the essence of virtue is the conscious preservation of the original mind of benevolence. To nourish virtuous nature, one need not deliberately exert effort or guard against selfish desire; one only needs first to realize through reflective self-awareness the substance of the benevolent mind that forms one body with all things, and then to preserve this substance with “sincerity and reverence,” allowing the mind to become full and harmonious. In this way, selfish thoughts naturally recede and the original mind is not lost.
       程颢区分 “诚”“敬” 之关系，提出 “诚者天之道，敬者人事之本”，将 “敬” 视为连接人道与天道的工夫，认为敬是诚体的发用，只要以诚敬持守仁体，便可直接贯通本体与工夫，无须额外的穷索或约束。他在《识仁篇》中说：“学者须先识仁。仁者，浑然与物同体，义礼智信皆仁也。识得此理，以诚敬存之而已，不须防检，不须穷索。” 在这一逻辑下，涵养德性是一种即本体即工夫的境界化实践，偏重内在的本体体悟，忽视后天的事理学习与日常行为的刻意规范，简易直接，但容易流于禅学式的顿悟体悟。
   Cheng Hao distinguished the relationship between “sincerity” and “reverence,” proposing that “sincerity is the Way of Heaven, while reverence is the root of human affairs.” He regarded “reverence” as the effort connecting the human Way with the Way of Heaven, holding that reverence is the functioning of the substance of sincerity. As long as one preserves the substance of benevolence with sincerity and reverence, one can directly link substance and effort, without any additional investigation or restraint. In his essay “On Understanding Benevolence,” he said: “The learner must first understand benevolence. The benevolent person is undifferentiated and forms one body with all things; rightness, ritual propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness are all benevolence. Once one understands this principle, one simply preserves it with sincerity and reverence; there is no need for guarding or investigation.” Under this logic, nourishing virtuous nature is a realm oriented practice in which substance and effort are identified. It emphasizes inner realization of the substance and neglects the study of affairs and principles after birth as well as the deliberate regulation of daily conduct. It is simple and direct, but easily slides into a Chan-like sudden realization.
    2.1.2 程颐：以主敬为涵养之要，敬义夹持以实德性
程颐是理学涵养工夫的实际奠基者，提出了影响后世千年的经典命题：“涵养须用敬，进学则在致知”，明确划分涵养与致知的边界，确立二元并进的工夫框架。
   2.1.2 Cheng Yi: Taking Holding Reverence as the Key to Nourishment, and Supporting Virtue through the Mutual Reinforcement of Reverence and Rightness
     Cheng Yi was the actual founder of the Neo Confucian effort of nourishment. He put forward the classical formulation that influenced later generations for a millennium: “Nourishment must use reverence; advancing in learning lies in the extension of knowledge.” This clearly demarcated the boundary between nourishment and the extension of knowledge and established a dualtrack framework of moral effort.
    第一，明确 “敬” 的核心定义。程颐将 “敬” 界定为 “主一无适”，即心有主宰、专一不放逸，摒弃一切私意杂念，保持内心严肃凝重、警觉不放逸的状态。他强调 “敬只是持己之道”，即一种内在的自我收敛、自我把持的工夫，不同于佛教的静坐空心，而是要时刻警省自身，端正心术，不被外物牵引、私欲迷惑，以此守住本然的善性。
    First, he clarified the core definition of “reverence.”Cheng Yi defined “reverence” as “holding to oneness without distraction,” meaning that the mind has a master, remains concentrated and free from dissipation, rejects all selfish thoughts, and maintains a state of inner solemnity, vigilance, and restraint. He stressed that “reverence is simply the way of holding oneself,” that is, an inner effort of self-collection and self-mastery. Unlike Buddhist quiet-sitting with an emptied mind, it requires one constantly to awaken and examine oneself, rectify the orientation of the mind, and avoid being pulled by external things or deluded by selfish desire, so as to preserve the originally good nature.
       第二，主张敬义夹持，涵养与致知相辅相成。程颐认为，单纯的内在涵养不足以成就完备的德性，必须配合外在的格物致知：涵养以 “敬” 来肃省心性，防止内心放逸，为穷理扫清主体的遮蔽；致知则是通过研读圣贤经典、研讨古今人物事迹、应接日常事务，穷究事物的当然之理与所以然之故。他指出：“敬只是持己之道，义便知有是有非。顺理而行，是为义也。若只守一个敬，不知集义，却是都无事也。” 只有将主敬的内在收敛，与集义致知的外在穷理结合起来，内外并进，才能真正使天理内化为人的稳定德性，避免涵养沦为空疏的静默守心。
   Second, he advocated the mutual reinforcement of reverence and rightness, holding that nourishment and the extension of knowledge complement each other. Cheng Yi believed that inner nourishment alone is insufficient to achieve complete virtue; it must be coordinated with external investigation of things and extension of knowledge. Through “reverence,”nourishment purifies and awakens the mind and nature, prevents the mind from dissipation, and clears away subjective obstructions for the exhaustive investigation of principle. Through the extension of knowledge, one studies the classics of the sages, examines the affairs of ancient and modern figures, and engages in daily matters, thereby exhaustively investigating the normative principles of things and their underlying reasons. He pointed out: “Reverence is only the way of holding oneself; rightness is knowing what is right and wrong. Acting in accordance with principle is rightness. If one only holds to reverence and does not know how to accumulate rightness, then there is really nothing accomplished.” Only by combining the inner self-restraint of holding reverence with the outer investigation of principle through accumulating rightness and extending knowledge, and by advancing both internally and externally, can heavenly principle truly be internalized as stable human virtue and can nourishment be prevented from degenerating into empty, silent self-guarding.
        第三，以变化气质为涵养的根本目标。程颐继承张载 “天地之性” 与 “气质之性” 的区分，认为天地之性纯然至善，但人降生以来，气禀有清浊、偏正的差异，浊气、偏质会遮蔽天理的彰显，产生不善之行；涵养德性的过程，就是通过主敬的持续收敛，不断变化气质，革除气质中的渣滓，消弭物欲之蔽，使本然的天地之性得以渐渐显现，落实为现实的道德品质。
     Third, he took the transformation of physical nature as the fundamental goal of nourishment. Cheng Yi inherited Zhang Zai’s distinction between “the nature of Heaven and Earth” and “the nature of physical endowment.” He held that the nature of Heaven and Earth is purely good, but from birth human beings differ in the clarity or turbidity and the balance or imbalance of their endowed vital energy. Turbid vital energy and unbalanced qualities can obscure the manifestation of heavenly principle and produce unwholesome conduct. The process of nourishing virtuous nature is thus one in which, through the continuous self-restraint of holding reverence, one constantly transforms one’s physical nature, removes the dregs within it, and dissolves the obscurations of material desire, so that the originally good nature of Heaven and Earth gradually appears and is realized as actual moral character.
        2.2 朱子对二程涵养思想的继承与系统性整合
      朱子高度推崇二程的涵养理论，尤其将程颐的 “主敬” 说奉为正统，同时清晰察觉二人的理论局限，对二者进行取舍、补全与体系化整合，彻底重构涵养德性的理论架构。
    2.2 Zhu Xi’s Inheritance and Systematic Integration of the Cheng Brothers’ Thought on Nourishment
     Zhu Xi held the Cheng brothers’ theory of nourishment in high esteem and especially revered Cheng Yi’s doctrine of “holding reverence” as orthodox. At the same time, he clearly perceived the theoretical limitations of the two brothers, and therefore selected from, supplemented, and systematically integrated their ideas, thoroughly reconstructing the theoretical architecture of nourishing virtuous nature.
      2.2.1 继承：坚守主敬传统，确立内外并进的基本逻辑
     朱子完全认同二程以 “敬” 为涵养核心的主张，盛赞程颐 “涵养须用敬，进学则在致知” 之语，称 “程先生所以有功于后学者，最是‘敬’之一字有力”，将 “敬” 视为贯通一切道德活动的核心纲领。
    2.2.1 Inheritance: Upholding the Tradition of Holding Reverence and Establishing the Basic Logic of Simultaneous Inner and Outer Advancement
    Zhu Xi fully agreed with the Cheng brothers’ view that “reverence” is the core of nourishment. He highly praised Cheng Yi’s saying, “Nourishment must use reverence; advancing in learning lies in the extension of knowledge,” and declared that “the reason Master Cheng has rendered such service to later learners is above all the single word ‘reverence,’ which is most powerful.” He regarded “reverence” as the core program running through all moral activities.
     其一，承接程颐 “主一无适” 的核心定义，将 “敬” 提炼为圣门工夫的第一义。朱子进一步发挥 “敬” 的内涵，将其规定为三重不可分割的属性：一是收敛专一，即约束身心，不怠惰、不放纵，一心专注于理所当为之事，不被私意杂念、外物诱惑所牵引；二是贯穿动静，无事时敬存于内心，有事时敬贯穿于应事接物之中，不偏废、无间断；三是表里合一，内在的敬畏之心，必然表现在外在的端庄举止、合礼言行上，内心的诚敬与外在的礼仪完全统一。
    First, he inherited Cheng Yi’s core definition of “holding to oneness without distraction” and refined “reverence” into the foremost principle of the Confucian school’s moral effort. Zhu Xi further developed the meaning of “reverence,” defining it in terms of three inseparable attributes. The first is self-restraint and concentration: one restrains body and mind, avoids indolence and self-indulgence, focuses single-mindedly on what ought to be done according to principle, and is not pulled away by selfish thoughts or external temptations. The second is continuity through activity and stillness: when there is nothing to do, reverence abides within the mind; when there are affairs to handle, reverence runs through one’s response to affairs and contact with things, without one-sided neglect or interruption. The third is the unity of inner and outer: the inner mind of awe and reverence necessarily manifests in outward dignified bearing and ritually proper speech and conduct, so that inner sincerity and reverence are completely unified with external ritual propriety.
      其二，保留二程 “敬义夹持”、涵养与致知相辅相成的基本逻辑。朱子主张，涵养是致知的主体前提，致知是涵养的内容补充，二者交相发，不可偏废：惟有通过主敬涵养，使心保持虚明专一的状态，才能真正穷究事物之理；惟有通过格物致知明彻天理，涵养才有真实的内容支撑，不至于沦为空泛的静坐。
   Second, he preserved the basic logic of the Cheng brothers’ “mutual reinforcement of reverence and rightness” and the complementarity of nourishment and the extension of knowledge. Zhu Xi held that nourishment is the subjective precondition for the extension of knowledge, while the extension of knowledge supplements the content of nourishment. The two stimulate each other and neither may be neglected. Only through nourishing by holding reverence, by keeping the mind empty, luminous, and concentrated, can one truly investigate the principle of things; only through investigating things and extending knowledge so as to understand heavenly principle clearly can nourishment have real content to support it and avoid degenerating into empty quiet-sitting.
       2.2.2 分化：弥补二程粗疏之失，构建贯通全幅的成熟工夫
      朱子认为，二程的涵养思想开创有余，但精密不足，存在三大明显缺陷：一是程颢的涵养偏重本体体悟，忽视后天的下学工夫，容易流于近禅的顿悟；二是程颐虽提出主敬致知的二分框架，但未厘清敬与动静、未发已发的复杂关系，没有明确涵养在不同情境下的实践规范；三是二人均未将涵养与心性论深度绑定，缺少形而下的主体支撑，工夫缺乏坚实的落地基础。
       2.2.2 Differentiation: Remedying the Roughness of the Cheng Brothers and Constructing a Mature Effort Covering the Entire Scope
     Zhu Xi believed that the Cheng brothers’ thought on nourishment was more pioneering than precise, and that it had three obvious defects. First, Cheng Hao’s nourishment overemphasized realization of the substance and neglected the subsequent effort of lower learning, so it easily degenerated into a sudden enlightenment resembling that of Chan Buddhism. Second, although Cheng Yi proposed the twofold framework of holding reverence and extending knowledge, he did not clarify the complicated relations between reverence and activity or stillness, or between the unaroused and the aroused, and he did not specify the practical norms of nourishment in different situations. Third, neither brother deeply bound nourishment to a theory of mind and nature, and they lacked concrete subjective support, so their effort lacked a solid foundation for implementation.
       有鉴于此，朱子依托 “中和新旧说” 的学术转变，整合张载 “心统性情” 的心性论，对涵养工夫进行系统性重构，实现三重关键突破：
    In view of this, Zhu Xi relied on the academic shift reflected in his “old and new theories of equilibrium and harmony,” integrated Zhang Zai’s theory of mind and nature that “the mind governs nature and feelings,” and carried out a systematic reconstruction of the effort of nourishment. He achieved three key breakthroughs.
     第一，贯通未发已发，赋予涵养完整的实践形态。朱子严格区分未发与已发的不同状态：“思虑未萌、事物未至之时” 为喜怒哀乐之未发，此时心寂然不动，性体浑然具足；及其感物而动，喜怒哀乐之情发露，心进入感而遂通的状态，即为已发。他提出，主敬工夫必须覆盖这两种状态，形成双重涵养逻辑：未发时的静中存养，通过静坐收敛身心，保持内心敬畏虚静，不使私意杂念侵入，持续呵护性体的本然明觉；已发时的动中省察，在应事接物、情感发动之际，敬仍然贯穿其中，随事检点、念念省察，及时校正言行的偏差，将省察作为涵养的延续，实现动静交养，无时不涵养，无时不省察。
    First, he connected the unaroused and the aroused states, giving nourishment a complete practical form. Zhu Xi strictly distinguished the different states of the unaroused and the aroused. “When thoughts have not yet arisen and things have not yet arrived” is the unaroused state of pleasure, anger, sorrow, and joy, in which the mind is still and unmoved, and the substance of nature is wholly complete. When the mind is stimulated by things and begins to move, the feelings of pleasure, anger, sorrow, and joy are expressed, and the mind enters the state of being stimulated and penetrating all things; this is the aroused state. He proposed that the effort of holding reverence must cover both states, forming a twofold logic of nourishment. In the unaroused state, one engages in preservation in stillness: through quiet-sitting, one collects body and mind, keeps the mind reverent, empty, and still, prevents selfish thoughts from intruding, and continuously protects the original luminous awareness of the substance of nature. In the aroused state, one engages in reflection in activity: when responding to affairs and things and when feelings arise, reverence still runs through them; one examines matters as they occur and reflects on every thought, promptly correcting deviations in speech and conduct. Reflection is thus treated as a continuation of nourishment, realizing the mutual nourishment of activity and stillness, so that there is no moment without nourishment and no moment without reflection.
第二，以 “心统性情” 为涵养提供坚实的主体支撑。朱子借鉴张载的思想，明确心、性、情的体用关系：性是心之体，是天理赋予人的本然之性，湛然至善；情是心之用，是性感物而动产生的具体情感、念虑；心是人的形体主宰，统摄性情、贯通动静。这一结构，明确了涵养的作用主体：涵养的本质，就是用 “敬” 来肃省心体，使心始终保持湛然虚明、专一不放逸的状态，从而贞定性体的本然之善，节制情感、言行，使其不逾越天理的边界，将涵养从单纯的行为工夫，上升为有明确心性本体支撑的实践理论。
    Second, he used the doctrine that “the mind governs nature and feelings” to provide firm subjective support for nourishment. Drawing on Zhang Zai’s thought, Zhu Xi clarified the substance function relations among the mind, nature, and feelings. Nature is the substance of the mind, the original nature endowed by heavenly principle, absolutely clear and wholly good. Feelings are the functioning of the mind, the concrete emotions and thoughts produced when nature is stimulated by things and begins to move. The mind is the master of the human person, governing nature and feelings and connecting activity and stillness. This structure clarified the agent of nourishment: the essence of nourishment is to use “reverence” to purify and awaken the substance of the mind, so that the mind always remains clear, empty, luminous, concentrated, and free from dissipation. In this way, it stabilizes the original goodness of the substance of nature, restrains feelings, speech, and conduct, and prevents them from overstepping the boundaries of heavenly principle. Nourishment is thereby elevated from a merely behavioral effort into a practical theory supported by a clearly defined ontology of mind and nature.
       第三，衔接小学大学，搭建阶次分明的涵养落地路径。朱子弥补二程缺少教育实践落地的空白，将涵养德性贯穿于小学、大学两个阶次的教育全过程：小学阶段侧重涵养践履，通过洒扫应对、孝悌忠信的日常行为训练，养成诚敬的习惯，做 “培壅根本” 的工夫；大学阶段侧重涵养本原，在小学的基础上，穷究事物之理，将已养成的诚敬习惯，转化为自觉的天理体认，由行而达于知，由习惯而升华为德性自觉。
      Third, he linked elementary learning and greater learning, constructing a clearly staged path for implementing nourishment. Zhu Xi filled the gap left by the Cheng brothers, who lacked concrete implementation in educational practice, by making nourishing virtuous nature run through the whole educational process in the two stages of elementary learning and greater learning. At the elementary stage, emphasis was placed on nourishment through practice: through daily behavioral training in sprinkling and sweeping, responding to elders, filial piety, fraternal respect, loyalty, and faithfulness, one formed the habit of sincerity and reverence and did the work of “cultivating and nourishing the root.” At the greater learning stage, emphasis was placed on nourishing the source: on the basis of elementary learning, one exhaustively investigated the principle of things and transformed the already formed habit of sincerity and reverence into conscious recognition of heavenly principle, moving from practice to knowledge and from habit to virtuous self-awareness.
      2.3 二程与朱子涵养思想的核心差异
       三者的思想差异，可从五个维度具体辨析：
      其一，核心内涵层面。程颢主张诚敬合一，偏重自然和乐的本体境界，无刻意防检；程颐以主一无适为核心，主张严肃收敛的内在把持，刻意约束身心；朱子整合二者，主张敬贯动静、未发已发，兼顾内在收敛与外在践履。
     2.3 Core Differences among the Cheng Brothers and Zhu Xi on the Thought of Nourishment
    The differences among their thought can be analyzed concretely along five dimensions.
      First, in terms of core connotation. Cheng Hao advocated the unity of sincerity and reverence, emphasizing the natural, harmonious realm of substance without deliberate guarding. Cheng Yi took “holding to oneness without distraction” as the core and advocated a solemn, self-restraining inner mastery, deliberately constraining body and mind. Zhu Xi integrated both, advocating that reverence runs through activity and stillness, and through the unaroused and the aroused, taking into account both inner self-restraint and outer practice.
       其二，实践路径层面。程颢主张先识仁体，以诚敬存之，不须防检穷索，偏重本体体悟；程颐坚持主敬涵养与格物致知二分并进，偏重下学工夫；朱子则构建未发存养、已发省察、格物致知、日常践履闭环式连续工夫，覆盖道德实践的全流程。
      Second, in terms of practical path. Cheng Hao advocated first recognizing the substance of benevolence and then preserving it with sincerity and reverence, without guarding or investigation, thus emphasizing realization of the substance. Cheng Yi insisted on the parallel advancement of the twofold path of nourishing through holding reverence and investigating things to extend knowledge, thus emphasizing the effort of lower learning. Zhu Xi constructed a closedloop, continuous effort encompassing preservation in the unaroused state, reflection in the aroused state, investigation of things and extension of knowledge, and daily practice, covering the entire process of moral practice.
      其三，与致知的关系层面。程颢偏重本体体悟，忽视致知，认为诚敬存仁即可自明天理；程颐将涵养视为穷理之基，致知视为涵养之实，二者平行并进；朱子明确涵养为先、致知为辅，二者交相发，涵养作为主体前提为穷理提供认知基础，致知则充实涵养的义理内容。
    Third, in terms of the relationship with the extension of knowledge. Cheng Hao emphasized realization of the substance and neglected the extension of knowledge, believing that preserving benevolence with sincerity and reverence would naturally clarify heavenly principle. Cheng Yi regarded nourishment as the foundation for investigating principle and the extension of knowledge as the substance of nourishment, with the two advancing in parallel. Zhu Xi clearly gave nourishment priority and made the extension of knowledge auxiliary, holding that the two stimulate each other: nourishment, as the subjective precondition, provides the cognitive basis for investigating principle, while the extension of knowledge enriches the intellectual content of nourishment.
       其四，动静关系层面。程颢偏重静中体证，未明确贯通动静的技术逻辑；程颐侧重静中存养、动时省察，但未详细阐发二者关联；朱子以敬为贯通核心，主张无分无事有事，时时涵养省察，实现动静统一。
     Fourth, in terms of the relationship between activity and stillness. Cheng Hao emphasized realization in stillness and did not clearly articulate the technical logic for connecting activity and stillness. Cheng Yi stressed preservation in stillness and reflection during activity, but did not elaborate their interrelation in detail. Zhu Xi took reverence as the unifying core and maintained that regardless of whether there are affairs or not, one should constantly nourish and reflect, thereby achieving the unity of activity and stillness.
       其五，教育落地性层面。二程均未涉及具体教育方案，程颢偏向精英化的本体体悟，程颐未明确阶次划分，笼统强调变化气质；朱子则设计出小学涵养践履、大学涵养本原的完整阶次，结合童蒙教育与高等学术，让涵养工夫具备可操作性。
    Fifth, in terms of educational implement ability. The Cheng brothers did not address concrete educational plans. Cheng Hao inclined toward an elite oriented realization of substance, while Cheng Yi did not make clear stage divisions and generally stressed the transformation of physical nature. Zhu Xi, by contrast, designed a complete sequence of stages, with elementary learning focusing on nourishment through practice and greater learning focusing on nourishing the source. He combined childhood moral education with advanced scholarly learning, making the effort of nourishment practically operable.
      三、理论逻辑内核：涵养德性在朱子德性伦理体系中的核心地位
      朱子将涵养德性视为儒家成德之教的根本、圣学工夫的纲领，这一定位并非主观臆断，而是源于其德性伦理体系的内在逻辑：从心性本体到道德实践，从认知工夫到人格养成，涵养德性是贯穿所有环节的基础前提，连接天理与现实德性、沟通内在心性与外在实践的关键枢纽。
   III. The Inner Logic of Theory: The Core Position of Nourishing Virtuous Nature in Zhu Xi’s Virtue Ethics System
     Zhu Xi regarded nourishing virtuous nature as the root of the Confucian teaching on attaining virtue and the guiding program of the sage learning effort. This orientation was not a subjective assertion but arose from the internal logic of his virtue ethics system. From the ontology of mind and nature to moral practice, and from cognitive effort to the formation of personhood, nourishing virtuous nature is the foundational precondition running through all links, the key pivot connecting heavenly principle with actual virtue and linking inner mind and nature with outward practice.
        3.1 涵养德性是复性成德的根本性奠基
       朱子的德性伦理体系，以 “性即理” 为形上基石，主张天命之性纯粹至善，圆满具足仁义礼智的全体道德法则；但现实中，人降生以来，便受到先天气禀之偏、后天物欲之蔽的双重遮蔽，本然的天命之性无法自动显现，必须通过修养工夫变化气质、去其旧染之污，才能复明本然的善性，将潜在的道德本性，转化为现实的稳定德性。
   3.1 Nourishing Virtuous Nature as the Fundamental Foundation for Recovering Nature and Achieving Virtue
      Zhu Xi’s virtue ethics system takes “nature is principle” as its metaphysical cornerstone. It holds that the nature endowed by Heaven is purely and utterly good, fully endowed with the complete moral norms of benevolence, rightness, ritual propriety, and wisdom. In reality, however, from birth human beings are doubly obscured by innate imbalances in their endowed vital energy and by acquired material desires, so the originally good nature endowed by Heaven cannot automatically manifest. Only through the effort of self-cultivation can one transform one’s physical nature, remove accumulated defilements, recover and illuminate the original good nature, and transform potential moral nature into actual, stable virtue.
      在朱子看来，变化气质、复明天理的关键，既不是单纯的格物穷理，也不是短期的刻意克己，而是长期不间断的涵养德性。这是因为，气质的惯性极为顽固，私欲的滋生无时不有，惟有通过主敬涵养，时刻收敛身心，使心保持 “虚明纯一” 的状态，才能持续呵护本然的善端，防止私意杂念乘虚而入；惟有先做涵养的 “培壅根本” 工夫，将善端存养成熟，后续的格物致知、克己复礼才有坚实基础。
     In Zhu Xi’s view, the key to transforming physical nature and recovering heavenly principle is neither merely investigating things and exhaustively probing principle nor short-term deliberate self-mastery, but long term, uninterrupted nourishment of virtuous nature. This is because the inertia of one’s physical endowment is extremely stubborn, and selfish desires arise at every moment. Only through nourishment by holding reverence, by constantly collecting body and mind and keeping the mind in a state of “empty, luminous, and pure oneness,” can one continuously protect the original sprouts of goodness and prevent selfish thoughts from entering when the mind is unguarded. Only by first doing the work of “cultivating and nourishing the root” and allowing the sprouts of goodness to mature can the subsequent efforts of investigating things and extending knowledge, and of mastering oneself and returning to propriety, have a solid foundation.
      他在《答胡广仲》中说：“然须是平日有涵养之功，临事方能识得，若茫然都无主宰，事至然后安排，则已缓而不及于事矣”，强调如果没有预先的涵养，心无主宰，临时再去辨义理、制私欲，必然为时已晚，无法做出正确的道德抉择。在《朱子语类》中，他又以栽培植物为喻，指出涵养如同种植花木，必须逐日浇灌、无间断，才能使善端慢慢生长，变化气质的渣滓；若缺少涵养，只凭一时的格物穷理，就如同只种花、不浇水，种子无法生根发芽，善端终究会被气质私欲消泯。质言之，涵养德性是复性成德的基础性前提，没有涵养，一切道德工夫都是空谈。
    In his “Reply to Hu Guangzhong,” he said: “Thus it is necessary to have the achievement of nourishment in ordinary daily life; only then, when affairs arise, can one recognize them. If one is completely without a master and only arranges things after they arrive, then one is already too late and cannot keep up with affairs.” He stressed that without prior nourishment, the mind has no master, and if one tries to discern principle and restrain selfish desire only at the last moment, one will inevitably be too late and unable to make correct moral decisions. In Classified Conversations of Master Zhu (Zhu zi Yulei), he also used the analogy of cultivating plants, pointing out that nourishment is like planting flowers and trees: one must water them day by day without interruption in order for the sprouts of goodness to grow slowly and to transform the dregs of one’s physical nature. If one lacks nourishment and relies only on a momentary investigation of things and principle, it is like planting flowers without watering them; the seed cannot take root or sprout, and the sprouts of goodness will ultimately be extinguished by physical nature and selfish desire. In short, nourishing virtuous nature is the basic precondition for recovering nature and achieving virtue; without nourishment, all moral effort is empty talk.
     3.2 涵养德性是 “居敬穷理” 交相发的主体保障
    朱子德性伦理的核心工夫纲领，是继承程颐而来的 “居敬穷理”，他明确提出 “学者工夫，唯在居敬、穷理二事”，二者构成相辅相成、双向互动的辩证关系。其中，居敬涵养是穷理的主体条件，穷理是涵养的内容支撑，二者交相发，共同推进德性的完善。
   3.2 Nourishing Virtuous Nature as the Subjective Guarantee for the Mutual Stimulation of “Abiding in Reverence and Exhaustively Probing Principle”
      The core program of moral effort in Zhu Xi’s virtue ethics is “abiding in reverence and exhaustively probing principle,” inherited from Cheng Yi. He explicitly stated: “The learner’s moral effort lies only in the two matters of abiding in reverence and exhaustively probing principle.” These two form a dialectical relationship of mutual support and twoway interaction. Among them, abiding in reverence and nourishing is the subjective condition for probing principle, while probing principle is the content support of nourishment. The two stimulate each other and jointly advance the perfection of virtue.
      一方面，涵养是穷理的必备前提。朱子指出，心是认识天理的主体，人本心具有认知天理的潜在能力，但如果心散漫放纵、被私欲遮蔽，处于杂乱纷纠、昏昧沉浊的状态，就无法专一于穷理，即使阅读圣贤经典、观察事物，也难以明彻其中的义理。惟有通过主敬涵养，收敛身心，摒除私意，使心恢复其虚明专一的本然状态，才能具备穷理的主体条件，真正做到 “即物而穷其理”。他反复强调：“不涵养则无主宰…… 才放下或困睡，这事便无人做主，都由别人，不由自家”，如果离开涵养，心无主宰，格物致知就失去了认知的主体依托，不可能真正穷尽天理。
   On the one hand, nourishment is the necessary precondition for probing principle. Zhu Xi pointed out that the mind is the subject that cognizes heavenly principle, and the human original mind has the latent capacity to cognize heavenly principle. However, if the mind is dissipated, indulgent, and obscured by selfish desire, and if it is in a chaotic, confused, dull, and turbid state, it cannot concentrate on probing principle; even if one reads the classics of the sages and observes things, it will be difficult to see their principles clearly. Only through nourishment by holding reverence, by collecting body and mind and expelling selfish thoughts, and by restoring the mind to its originally empty, luminous, and concentrated state, can one possess the subjective condition for probing principle and truly “investigate principle by going to things.” He repeatedly stressed: “Without nourishment, there is no master... As soon as one lets go or becomes drowsy, this matter has no one to take charge of it; it is all controlled by others and not by oneself.” If one departs from nourishment, the mind has no master, and the investigation of things and extension of knowledge loses its cognitive subjective support, making it impossible truly to exhaust heavenly principle.
      另一方面，穷理是涵养的内容补充。朱子反对脱离穷理、空守一心的涵养方式，认为如果只讲主敬涵养，不通过格物致知来明辨事物的当然之理，涵养就会沦为空洞的静坐，没有真实的义理内容，甚至会流入佛老的空心守寂。只有通过穷理，明晰天理的具体内涵，才能准确地在日常实践中约束自身的言行、矫正情感的偏差，使涵养落到实处，将穷理所得的天理，不断存养、内化于心，转化为稳定的道德信念。
      On the other hand, the probing of principle is the content supplement to nourishment. Zhu Xi opposed a mode of nourishment that departed from probing principle and merely guarded the mind in emptiness. He held that if one only spoke of nourishment through holding reverence and did not clearly discern the normative principles of things through investigating things and extending knowledge, nourishment would degenerate into empty quiet-sitting, lacking real intellectual content, and might even slide into the Buddhist and Daoist practice of guarding empty stillness. Only through probing principle and clarifying the concrete meaning of heavenly principle can one accurately restrain one’s speech and conduct in daily practice, correct deviations in feeling, and make nourishment truly effective. Then the heavenly principle obtained through probing principle can be continuously preserved, internalized in the mind, and transformed into stable moral conviction.
       在这一互动逻辑中，涵养是连接居敬与穷理的关键枢纽，确保二者不偏废、无割裂，形成 “涵养→穷理→涵养→力行” 的完整闭环，不断推进德性由潜在的本性，转化为自觉的道德品质。
      Within this interactive logic, nourishment is the key pivot connecting abiding in reverence and probing principle. It ensures that the two are not onesidedly neglected or artificially separated, and it forms a complete closed loop of “nourishment → probing principle → nourishment → vigorous practice,” continuously advancing virtue from latent nature to conscious moral quality.
       3.3 涵养德性是贯通 “修德是本” 与 “进德修业” 的桥梁
      朱子继承儒家 “修德是本” 的核心宗旨，主张道德是为学、处世、经世的根本，一切学问、事业、实践，都必须以修德为前提；而涵养德性，正是实现修德、推进进德修业的核心桥梁，将内在的道德存养，转化为外在的道德实践。
     3.3 Nourishing Virtuous Nature as the Bridge between “Cultivating Virtue as the Root” and “Advancing in Virtue and Cultivating One’s Undertakings”
   Zhu Xi inherited the central Confucian tenet that “cultivating virtue is the root,” holding that morality is the foundation of learning, conducting oneself in society, and ordering the world. All learning, undertakings, and practice must take the cultivation of virtue as their precondition. Nourishing virtuous nature is precisely the core bridge for realizing the cultivation of virtue and advancing in virtue and undertaking, transforming inner moral preservation into outer moral practice.
      首先，涵养是修德的下手处。朱子认为，修德的本质是存养本然的善性、克除不合理的私欲，而涵养是最直接、最日常的实践路径。人在未应事接物时，通过静坐收敛、居敬存养，呵护性体的本然之善；在应事接物时，通过省察克制，时时照管言行，不使不合天理的意念萌发。这种无时不涵养、无时不省察的工夫，就是 “修德是本” 的具体落地，将抽象的修德要求，转化为可操作的日常实践。
    First, nourishment is the starting point of cultivating virtue. Zhu Xi held that the essence of cultivating virtue is preserving and nourishing the originally good nature and eliminating unreasonable selfish desires, and nourishment is the most direct and most daily practical path. When one has not yet responded to affairs or come into contact with things, one collects oneself through quiet-sitting, abides in reverence, and protects the original goodness of the substance of nature. When responding to affairs and things, one reflects and restrains oneself, constantly watching over speech and conduct so that thoughts that do not accord with heavenly principle do not arise. This effort of constant nourishment and constant reflection is the concrete implementation of “cultivating virtue as the root,” transforming the abstract demand of cultivating virtue into operable daily practice.
      其次，涵养是进德修业的动力支撑。“进德修业” 语出《周易・乾卦》，指不断增进道德、修治事业，朱子将其解读为德性持续扩充、不断实践的过程。他提出，进德不是凭空实现的，必须依靠长期的涵养积累：通过涵养，使心体持续保持虚明，对天理的感知愈发敏锐，能够在日常事务中精准辨别是非、顺理而行；同时，涵养养成的诚敬习惯，会转化为道德实践的坚定意志，使人能够长期践行天理规范，不为外物诱惑、私欲动摇，将内在的德性修养，外化为经世济民的事业，实现 “内圣” 向 “外王” 的贯通。
    Second, nourishment is the motivational support for advancing in virtue and cultivating one’s undertakings. The phrase “advancing in virtue and cultivating one’s undertakings” comes from the Qian hexagram in the Book of Changes, meaning the continuous increase of virtue and the diligent ordering of one’s affairs. Zhu Xi interpreted it as a process of continuously expanding and practicing virtue. He proposed that advancing in virtue is not achieved out of thin air but must rely on long term accumulation through nourishment. Through nourishment, the mind substance is continuously kept empty and luminous, and its perception of heavenly principle becomes ever sharper, so that in daily affairs one can precisely distinguish right from wrong and act in accordance with principle. At the same time, the habit of sincerity and reverence formed by nourishment is transformed into firm will for moral practice, enabling one to practice the norms of heavenly principle over the long term, unmoved by external temptation or selfish desire, and to externalize inner moral cultivation into undertakings that order the world and benefit the people, thereby realizing the continuity from “inner sagehood” to “outer kingship.”
      质言之，涵养德性是连接 “修德” 与 “进德修业” 的关键纽带：它既是修德的日常实践，又是进德修业的主体保障，确保一切事业活动不脱离道德的根本，实现德性与事业的统一。
   In short, nourishing virtuous nature is the crucial link connecting “cultivating virtue” with “advancing in virtue and cultivating one’s undertakings.” It is both the daily practice of cultivating virtue and the subjective guarantee for advancing in virtue and undertaking, ensuring that all activities and undertakings do not depart from the root of morality and realizing the unity of virtue and enterprise.
        四、现实实践指向：涵养德性与人格教育、矫正南宋士风学弊
      朱子强调涵养德性，不止于纯粹的理论建构，更有强烈的现实针对性：其一，从道德养成的规律出发，涵养是培育完善人格的必经路径；其二，当时南宋学术界、士大夫群体的学风士风存在严重偏弊，需要以涵养工夫进行矫正，重整儒家的道德实践传统。
   IV. Practical Orientation: Nourishing Virtuous Nature, Personality Education, and the Correction of Southern Song Scholarly and Literati Ethos

      Zhu Xi’s emphasis on nourishing virtuous nature was not confined to purely theoretical construction; it also had a strong practical orientation. First, from the perspective of the laws of moral formation, nourishment is the necessary path for cultivating a perfected personality. Second, the academic and literati ethos of Southern Song society suffered from serious imbalances and defects that needed to be corrected through the effort of nourishment, so as to restore the Confucian tradition of moral practice.
      4.1 人格教育之基：构建小学大学贯通的德性养成阶次
     朱子将道德教育的目标定位为 “学以成圣”，即复明人本然的天命之性，培育完备的圣贤人格。他依据人的认知发展规律，将教育划分为小学、大学两个贯通的阶次，将涵养德性作为连接两个阶次的核心纲领，设计出一套循序渐进、从行到知的完整人格培养方案。
  4.1 The Foundation of Personality Education: Constructing a Connected Sequence of Virtue Formation from Elementary Learning to Greater Learning
        Zhu Xi defined the goal of moral education as “learning in order to become a sage,” that is, recovering and illuminating the original nature endowed by Heaven and cultivating a complete sage personality. Based on the developmental laws of human cognition, he divided education into two connected stages, elementary learning and greater learning, and made nourishing virtuous nature the core program linking the two stages. In this way, he designed a complete personality cultivation plan that proceeds step by step from practice to knowledge.
       4.1.1 小学阶段：涵养践履，养成圣贤坯模
      朱子极度重视小学教育，将其视为大学教育的根本前提，指出小学阶段的核心任务，是涵养践履，养成诚敬的日常习惯，打下德性的基础。在他看来，儿童的认知能力尚未发展，无法进行抽象的义理思辨，因此小学教育不传授高深的义理，只教导日常生活中的具体道德规范：事亲如何孝敬、事长如何恭顺、交友如何诚信、洒扫应对如何合乎礼节、日常作息如何端庄合礼。
   4.1.1 Elementary Learning: Nourishment through Practice and Forming the Mold of a Sage
   Zhu Xi attached extreme importance to elementary education, regarding it as the fundamental precondition for greater learning. He pointed out that the core task of the elementary stage is nourishment through practice, forming the daily habit of sincerity and reverence and laying the foundation of virtue. In his view, children’s cognitive capacity is not yet developed, so they cannot engage in abstract speculative reasoning about principle. Therefore, elementary education does not transmit lofty philosophical principles; it only teaches concrete moral norms in daily life: how to serve parents with filial reverence, how to serve elders with respectful obedience, how to be sincere in friendship, how to conform to ritual propriety in sprinkling, sweeping, and responding to others, and how to keep one’s daily bearing and rest dignified and ritually proper.
       这一阶段的涵养工夫，重点在于 “养正”，即通过反复的行为训练，让儿童在不知不觉中养成端正的习惯，潜移默化地熏陶性情，收敛身心，默默存养善端。朱子在《大学章句序》中说，小学之教，是 “教之以洒扫、应对、进退之节，礼乐、射御、书数之文”，通过这些简易的日常事务，让儿童在具体的实践中学会收敛身心，养成诚敬的习惯。他比喻说，小学的涵养工夫，就像塑造圣贤坯模，虽然尚未穷究义理，但已经打下坚实的德性基础，长大后进行大学的格物致知工夫，才不会偏离道德的根本；如果缺少小学的涵养，儿童从小没有养成诚敬的习惯，长大后学习义理，心会散漫放纵，无法将道德内化，终究难以成就德性。
  The nourishment effort of this stage focuses on “nourishing what is correct.” Through repeated behavioral training, children unconsciously form proper habits; their dispositions are imperceptibly cultivated, their bodies and minds are collected, and the sprouts of goodness are silently preserved. In his Preface to the Great Learning in Chapters and Verses, Zhu Xi said that the teaching of elementary learning is “to teach them the rules of sprinkling and sweeping, responding and deferring, and the arts of ritual, music, archery, charioteering, writing, and arithmetic.” Through these simple daily affairs, children learn in concrete practice to collect their bodies and minds and to form the habit of sincerity and reverence. He used the analogy that the nourishment effort of elementary learning is like shaping the mold of a sage. Although one has not yet investigated principle and meaning, one has already laid a solid foundation of virtue, so that when one grows up and undertakes the greater learning effort of investigating things and extending knowledge, one will not deviate from the root of morality. If one lacks the nourishment of elementary learning, and children do not form the habit of sincerity and reverence from an early age, then when they grow up and study principle and meaning, their minds will be dissipated and indulgent, and they will be unable to internalize morality, ultimately finding it difficult to achieve virtue.
       4.1.2 大学阶段：涵养本原，点化德性、穷理致知
       大学是小学阶段的深化，朱子提出，大学的任务是 “教之以穷理、正心、修身、治国、平天下之道”，在小学养成的诚敬行为习惯基础上，进一步涵养本原，将日常的行为习惯，提升为自觉的德性认知，实现行与知的统一。
   4.1.2 Greater Learning: Nourishing the Source, Transforming Virtue, and Exhaustively Probing Principle to Extend Knowledge
      Greater learning is the deepening of the elementary stage. Zhu Xi proposed that the task of greater learning is “to teach the way of exhaustively probing principle, rectifying the mind, cultivating the person, ordering the state, and bringing peace to all under Heaven.” On the basis of the habits of sincerity and reverence formed in elementary learning, one further nourishes the source, elevating daily behavioral habits into conscious cognition of virtue and realizing the unity of practice and knowledge.
      大学阶段的涵养，不再局限于外在的行为训练，而是直接从心体上存养，“半日读书，半日静坐”，通过静坐来观喜怒哀乐未发之气象，存养本然的性体；通过读书穷理，深究事物中的天理，将平日涵养所积累的心中之理，加以扩充、贯通，明确德性背后的形上根据。此时的涵养，已经从被动的行为训练，转化为主动的心性体证，将小学阶段养成的诚敬习惯，与天理的认知深度结合，使德性从自然的行为习惯，转化为自觉的道德信念，再将这一信念外化为治国平天下的实践，完成人格的完善。
     The nourishment at the greater learning stage is no longer confined to external behavioral training, but directly preserves and nourishes the mind substance. “Spend half the day reading and half the day in quiet-sitting”: through quiet-sitting, one observes the unaroused state of pleasure, anger, sorrow, and joy and preserves the originally good substance of nature; through reading and probing principle, one deeply investigates heavenly principle in things, expands and connects the principle accumulated in the mind through daily nourishment, and clarifies the metaphysical basis behind virtue. At this point, nourishment has already shifted from passive behavioral training to active verification of mind and nature. The habit of sincerity and reverence formed in elementary learning is deeply combined with the cognition of heavenly principle, so that virtue is transformed from a natural behavioral habit into a conscious moral conviction. This conviction is then externalized into the practice of ordering the state and bringing peace to all under Heaven, completing the perfection of personality.
      在朱子的教育逻辑中，小学涵养践履、大学涵养本原，二者是同一涵养工夫的不同阶次，前后衔接、缺一不可：小学为大学提供行为基础，大学为小学提供义理支撑，通过持续涵养，将日常的道德践履与高深的义理思辨贯通，循序渐进地培育出完善的德性人格。
   In Zhu Xi’s educational logic, elementary learning’s nourishment through practice and greater learning’s nourishment of the source are different stages of the same effort of nourishment. They are connected before and after, and neither can be omitted: elementary learning provides the behavioral foundation for greater learning, while greater learning provides the intellectual and principled support for elementary learning. Through continuous nourishment, daily moral practice and profound philosophical speculation are integrated, and a perfected virtuous personality is cultivated step by step.
      4.2 矫正时弊之策：对治南宋学风士风的支离偏枯
     朱子所处的南宋学术界、士大夫群体，学风士风扭曲分裂，存在两种极端偏弊，严重冲击儒家的道德实践传统，朱子将涵养德性视为对症之药，双管齐下进行矫正。
    4.2 A Strategy for Correcting Contemporary Abuses: Remedies for the Fragmentation and One-Sidedness in Southern Song Scholarly and Literati Ethos
    In the Southern Song academic world and among the scholar-official class in which Zhu Xi lived, the academic and moral ethos was distorted and divided, with two extreme abuses that seriously impacted the Confucian tradition of moral practice. Zhu Xi regarded nourishing virtuous nature as the proper remedy and applied it to correct both.
       4.2.1 破 “尊德性而道问学” 的两极分裂
      当时的南宋学术界，以陆九渊为代表的心学一派，主张 “发明本心”“尊德性”，轻视读书穷理、日常践履，认为只需通过内省顿悟，便可直接体认天理，成就德性；而另有部分儒者，偏重道问学，沉迷于文字训诂、空谈义理，忽视内在的心性涵养与日常的道德实践，将格物致知变成了纯粹的知识求索，与自身的身心道德脱节。  

   4.2.1 Breaking the Twofold Division between “Honoring Virtuous Nature” and “Following the Path of Inquiry and Study”
      In the Southern Song academic world, the school of mind represented by Lu Jiu yuan advocated “illuminating the original mind” and “honoring virtuous nature,” disparaging the reading of books, the exhaustive investigation of principle, and daily moral practice. It held that through inner reflection and sudden enlightenment alone, one could directly recognize heavenly principle and attain virtue. At the same time, another group of Confucians overemphasized the path of inquiry and study, indulging in philological exegesis and empty speculation about principle while neglecting the inner nourishment of mind and nature and daily moral practice. They turned the investigation of things and extension of knowledge into a purely intellectual pursuit divorced from their own moral person.
      朱子认为，这两种极端的病根，在于缺少完整的涵养工夫：陆派心学只重内省，忽视下学践履，其所谓的 “发明本心”，没有日常涵养的行为基础，容易流入禅学的空疏顿悟；而重知识者只重穷理，缺少心性涵养的主体支撑，获得的义理无法内化于心，知识与道德完全脱节。
      Zhu Xi believed that the root of these two extremes lies in the lack of a complete effort of nourishment. Lu’s school of mind emphasized only inner reflection and neglected lower learning and practice, so its so-called “illuminating the original mind” lacked the behavioral foundation of daily nourishment and could easily slide into the empty, vague sudden enlightenment of Chan Buddhism. Those who overemphasized knowledge valued only the probing of principle and lacked the subjective support of mind and nature nourishment, so the principles they acquired could not be internalized in the mind, and knowledge and morality were completely separated.
      他提出，涵养德性是对治这一分裂的关键：涵养兼内外、贯动静，既不脱离日常人伦，也不忽视内在心性；既重视未发时的内在存养，又重视已发时的外在省察；将尊德性的内在修养与道问学的外在穷理耦合进同一工夫，形成内外并进、知行统一的实践逻辑，弥合当时儒学内省与外求、践履与认知的分裂。
     He proposed that nourishing virtuous nature is the key to remedying this division. Nourishment encompasses both inner and outer and runs through activity and stillness. It neither departs from daily human relations nor neglects the inner mind and nature. It values both inner preservation in the unaroused state and outer reflection in the aroused state. It couples the inner cultivation of honoring virtuous nature with the outer investigation of principle in following the path of inquiry and study within one and the same effort, forming a practical logic of simultaneous inner and outer advancement and the unity of knowledge and action, thereby healing the split in contemporary Confucianism between inner reflection and outer inquiry, and between practice and cognition.
      4.2.2 纠 “重内轻外”“重静轻动” 的实践偏弊
      两宋之际的湖湘学派等学术流派，承袭程颢后学的偏失，片面强调 “默坐澄心”“体认未发气象”，将涵养等同于静坐，只重视静中的内在体认，轻视动时的日常省察；只重视体悟天理的本体境界，忽视日常人伦事务的道德践履，主张 “只去静中体认天理”，完全割裂动静、未发已发的辩证关系。
     4.2.2 Correcting the Practical Abuse of “Valuing the Inner over the Outer” and “Valuing Stillness over Activity”
      Academic schools such as the Huxiang school during the Northern Southern Song transition inherited the one-sided errors of Cheng Hao’s later followers. They one-sidedly emphasized “quiet sitting and clarifying the mind” and “recognizing the unaroused state,” equated nourishment with quiet-sitting, valued only inner realization in stillness, and slighted daily reflection in activity. They valued only the realization of the substance of heavenly principle and neglected moral practice in daily human affairs, advocating that one should “only recognize heavenly principle in stillness,” thereby completely severing the dialectical relationship between activity and stillness, and between the unaroused and the aroused.
      朱子一针见血地指出这种涵养方式的致命缺陷：“今人都是偏枯，理会内事，便外事都不管”，若只偏重静中涵养，忽视动时省察，就会导致 “平日涵养本原，却临事用不着” 的荒唐结果 —— 平日里空守一心、静坐体认，一旦遇到实际事务，心体依然散乱，无法将体认的天理落实为正确的道德抉择。
      Zhu Xi sharply pointed out the fatal flaw of this mode of nourishment: “People today are all one-sided and withered; when they attend to inner matters, they pay no heed to outer affairs.” If one only emphasizes nourishment in stillness and neglects reflection in activity, this leads to the absurd result that “in ordinary daily life one nourishes the source, yet when affairs arise it is of no use.” One may idly guard the mind in stillness and realize things in quiet-sitting, but once one encounters actual affairs, the mind substance remains scattered and confused, and one cannot translate the heavenly principle one has realized into correct moral decisions.
      有鉴于此，朱子以自己贯通动静、未发已发的完整涵养理论，力纠这一偏弊：他明确提出，“敬” 贯穿动、静的全部状态，“无事时敬在里面，有事时敬在事上，有事无事，吾之敬未尝间断也”；涵养不止是未发时的静中存养，更是已发时的动中省察；学者需要在日常的应事接物、待人处世中持续省察自己的言行，矫正情感的偏差，在实践中巩固涵养的效果；通过涵养德性，将静中的存养与动中的省察结合起来，让士大夫们回归儒家 “下学上达”、日常践履的实践传统，矫正当时空疏枯寂、脱离实际的学风士风。
   In view of this, Zhu Xi used his complete theory of nourishment, which connects activity and stillness and the unaroused and the aroused, to forcefully correct this abuse. He explicitly stated that “reverence” runs through all states of activity and stillness: “When there is nothing to do, reverence is within; when there are affairs, reverence is in the affairs. Whether there are affairs or not, my reverence is never interrupted.” Nourishment is not only preservation in stillness in the unaroused state, but also reflection in activity in the aroused state. Learners need constantly to examine their speech and conduct in daily interactions and dealings with others, correct deviations in feeling, and consolidate the results of nourishment in practice. Through nourishing virtuous nature, one unites preservation in stillness with reflection in activity, allowing scholarofficials to return to the Confucian practical tradition of “lower learning and higher advancement” and daily practice, thereby correcting the empty, sterile, and realitydetached scholarly and moral ethos of the time.
      五、理论卫道使命：涵养德性为抵御佛释异学的儒家壁垒
      自魏晋以来，佛老之学盛行，对儒家的核心价值、实践路径形成了严峻的理论挑战：佛教主张 “见性成佛”，提倡静坐空心、泯除杂念，否认现实人伦的道德价值；道教主张 “守气养性”，轻视人伦事务、脱离社会现实。二者的心性修养理论，在形式上与儒家的涵养工夫相似，但其本质目标、实践路径完全背离儒家的人伦天理，严重冲击儒家的德性伦理基础。朱子强调涵养德性，有着清晰的儒释之辨的理论自觉，以涵养的儒家本质属性，划清与佛老的界限，辟卫儒家的正统地位。
    V. The Mission of Theoretical Defense: Nourishing Virtuous Nature as a Confucian Bulwark against Buddhism and Daoism

      Since the Wei and Jin periods, Buddhism and Daoism had flourished and posed severe theoretical challenges to core Confucian values and practical paths. Buddhism advocated “seeing one’s nature and becoming a Buddha,” promoted quiet-sitting with an emptied mind and the elimination of distracting thoughts, and denied the moral value of real human relations. Daoism advocated “guarding the vital energy and nourishing one’s nature,” slighting human affairs and separating itself from social reality. The mindandnature cultivation theories of these two traditions are formally similar to the Confucian effort of nourishment, but their essential goals and practical paths completely depart from the Confucian heavenly principle realized in human relations, seriously undermining the foundation of Confucian virtue ethics. Zhu Xi’s emphasis on nourishing virtuous nature reflected a clear theoretical selfawareness of the ConfucianBuddhist distinction. By stressing the distinctly Confucian nature of nourishment, he drew a clear boundary with Buddhism and Daoism and defended the orthodox status of Confucianism.
      5.1 分判儒释修养的本质差异
      朱子早年曾 “出入佛老” 十余年，对佛老的心性修养理论有深入了解，回归儒学后，他清晰辨别儒家涵养与佛老修养的本质差异，指出二者在实践目标、实践内容、实践场域三个维度完全对立。
   5.1 Distinguishing the Essential Differences between Confucian and BuddhistDaoist Cultivation
     In his early years, Zhu Xi immersed himself in Buddhism and Daoism for more than a decade before eventually returning to Confucianism, and he acquired a deep understanding of their theories of mindandnature cultivation. After returning to Confucianism, he clearly distinguished the essential differences between Confucian nourishment and BuddhistDaoist cultivation, pointing out that the two are completely opposed in three dimensions: practical goal, practical content, and practical field.
      其一，实践目标迥异。佛氏的修养，以 “心空” 为终极目标，主张 “但能心空，即是见性”，要求人们泯灭对现实人伦、事理的执念，破除一切世俗的道德规范，追求空心寂灭的境界；而儒家的涵养德性，目标是 “存天理，去人欲”，存养的是仁义礼智的天命之性，变化气质、复明天理，以成就合乎人伦天理的德性人格，二者的价值目标完全相反。
    First, their practical goals are utterly different. Buddhist cultivation takes “emptiness of mind” as its ultimate goal, advocating that “if one can only empty the mind, this is seeing one’s nature.” It requires people to extinguish their attachments to real human relations and the principles of affairs, to break through all worldly moral norms, and to pursue a state of empty mind and tranquil extinction. By contrast, Confucian nourishment of virtuous nature aims at “preserving heavenly principle and eliminating human desire.” What it preserves and nourishes is the nature endowed by Heaven, consisting of benevolence, rightness, ritual propriety, and wisdom. Through transforming one’s physical nature and recovering heavenly principle, it aims to achieve a virtuous personality that conforms to human relations and heavenly principle. The value goals of the two are completely opposite.
      其二，实践内容不同。佛氏的修养，“空其心而不理于理”，只强调静坐澄心、消除思虑，不探究事物中的天理，也不以具体的道德礼仪规范约束自身；儒家的涵养德性，以 “敬” 为核心，同时配合格物致知、复礼实践，“穷理” 与 “存心” 并行，通过外在的礼仪规范、日常的道德践履，辅助内在的心性存养，将内在的敬与外在的礼完全统一，有明确的义理内容与道德规范。
Second, their practical contents are different. Buddhist cultivation “empties the mind and does not attend to principle.” It only emphasizes quiet-sitting, clarifying the mind, and eliminating thought, and it does not investigate heavenly principle in things or restrain oneself through concrete moral and ritual norms. Confucian nourishment of virtuous nature takes “reverence” as its core and is simultaneously coordinated with the investigation of things, the extension of knowledge, and the practice of returning to ritual propriety. “Exhaustively probing principle” and “preserving the mind” proceed in parallel. Through external ritual norms and daily moral practice, it assists the inner preservation of mind and nature, completely unifying inner reverence and outer propriety, and it has clear intellectual content and moral norms.
       其三，实践场域有别。佛氏主张脱离尘世、隐居山林，摒弃日常人伦事务、家庭责任、社会义务，在与世隔绝的环境中静坐修心；儒家的涵养德性，必须在日常人伦中完成，“不必离世绝俗，只就日用间做功夫”，在事亲、事君、交友、应物的日常事务中，持续省察言行、存养善端，在现实的社会人伦关系中成就德性，而非逃避尘世。
   Third, their practical fields are different. Buddhism advocates leaving the dusty world, secluding oneself in mountains and forests, abandoning daily human affairs, family responsibilities, and social obligations, and practicing quiet-sitting in an environment cut off from the world. Confucian nourishment of virtuous nature must be completed in daily human relations. “One need not leave the world or cut oneself off from ordinary life; one simply does the work in the midst of daily affairs.” In serving parents, serving rulers, making friends, and responding to things, one continuously examines one’s speech and conduct, preserves the sprouts of goodness, and achieves virtue within real social and human relationships rather than fleeing from the world.
       5.2 以涵养的贯通性辟卫儒家正统
      朱子发现，佛氏的静坐修养工夫，在形式上与儒家的未发涵养高度相似，当时许多儒者分不清二者的本质区别，误将佛氏的空心静坐当成儒家的涵养，最终背离儒家的道德根本；而他自己所构建的贯通动静、兼顾涵养省察、耦合涵养致知的完整涵养理论，正是从实践层面彻底区隔儒释、捍卫正统的关键壁垒。
  5.2 Defending Confucian Orthodoxy through the Comprehensiveness of Nourishment

      Zhu Xi observed that the Buddhist quiet-sitting practice is highly similar in form to the Confucian nourishment of the unaroused state. Many Confucians of his time could not distinguish their essential difference and mistakenly took the Buddhist practice of emptying the mind in quiet-sitting as Confucian nourishment, ultimately deviating from the moral foundation of Confucianism. The complete theory of nourishment that Zhu Xi himself constructed—one that connects activity and stillness, attends to both nourishment and reflection, and couples nourishment with the extension of knowledge—was precisely the key bulwark for thoroughly separating Confucianism from Buddhism at the practical level and defending orthodoxy.
       一方面，朱子以 “敬” 的贯通性，对抗佛氏的 “空寂”。他提出，儒家的主敬涵养，不是消极的空心守静，而是贯穿动静、有无的全幅实践：在未发时，敬是一种 “戒慎恐惧” 的警觉状态，不是让心空无一物，而是让心保持专一、敬畏，不被私意杂念侵入；在已发时，敬贯穿于应事接物的全过程，时刻照管言行，依理而行；这种 “必有事焉” 的积极涵养，与佛氏 “不思善、不思恶” 的空心静坐有着本质区别，从根本上消解了佛氏修养的理论迷惑。
   On the one hand, Zhu Xi used the comprehensive connectivity of “reverence” to counter Buddhist “empty stillness.” He proposed that the Confucian nourishment of holding reverence is not a negative practice of emptying the mind and guarding stillness, but a fullrange practice that runs through activity and stillness, presence and absence. In the unaroused state, reverence is a vigilant state of “caution and apprehension”; it does not make the mind empty of all content but keeps the mind concentrated and reverent, preventing selfish thoughts from entering. In the aroused state, reverence runs through the entire process of responding to affairs and things, constantly watching over speech and conduct and acting according to principle. This positive nourishment of “necessarily having something to attend to” is essentially different from the Buddhist quiet-sitting of “not thinking of good and not thinking of evil,” and it fundamentally dissolves the theoretical confusion of Buddhist cultivation.
       另一方面，朱子将涵养与格物复礼绑定，彻底锚定儒家的人伦底色。他强调，儒家的涵养德性，绝对不脱离格物致知和复礼实践：格物致知，是通过研读儒家经典、研讨古今事务，明辨人伦之天理；复礼，是依据儒家的礼仪规范，约束自身的言行，将天理落实为日常的行为实践。这一工夫路径，将心性修养与现实人伦、社会道德秩序紧密结合在一起，从根本上划清了与佛氏 “屏人伦、空一心” 的界线，证明惟有儒家的涵养德性，才能在现实社会中维持道德人伦、成就理想人格，成功辟卫儒家的正统地位，消解佛释异学对儒家的理论冲击。
    On the other hand, Zhu Xi bound nourishment to the investigation of things and the practice of returning to ritual propriety, thereby thoroughly anchoring the Confucian foundation in human relations. He stressed that Confucian nourishment of virtuous nature absolutely cannot be separated from the investigation of things, the extension of knowledge, and the practice of returning to ritual propriety. Investigating things and extending knowledge means studying the Confucian classics and examining ancient and modern affairs so as to understand clearly the heavenly principle in human relations. Returning to ritual propriety means restraining one’s speech and conduct according to Confucian ritual norms and translating heavenly principle into daily behavioral practice. This path of effort closely integrates mindandnature cultivation with real human relations and the social moral order. It fundamentally draws a clear line against the Buddhist stance of “discarding human relations and emptying the mind,” and demonstrates that only Confucian nourishment of virtuous nature can maintain moral human relations and realize the ideal personality in real society, thereby successfully defending Confucian orthodoxy and dispelling the theoretical impact of Buddhist and Daoist heterodoxies on Confucianism.
       六、结语
      朱子对 “涵养德性” 的理论建构，是对二程思想的系统性继承、整合与理论超越：他承接程颐 “主敬涵养” 的核心命题，摒弃二程的偏失，以 “敬” 为贯通核心，串联未发与已发、内在心性与外在实践、小学日常践履与大学穷理尽性、涵养与致知，构建出一套完整、精密、可落地的德性修养体系。
    VI. Summary
     Zhu Xi’s theoretical construction of “nourishing virtuous nature” represents a systematic inheritance, integration, and theoretical transcendence of the Cheng brothers’ thought. He inherited Cheng Yi’s core proposition of “holding reverence and nourishing,” discarded the Cheng brothers’ onesided errors, and took “reverence” as the unifying core. By linking the unaroused and the aroused, inner mindandnature and outer practice, the daily practice of elementary learning and the exhaustive investigation of principle and nature in greater learning, and nourishment and the extension of knowledge, he constructed a complete, precise, and practicable system of virtue cultivation.
       朱子之所以将涵养德性提升为儒家德性伦理、道德教育的核心纲领，有着三重由内而外的深层逻辑：
      There are three deep logics, from inner to outer, behind why Zhu Xi elevated nourishing virtuous nature into the core program of Confucian virtue ethics and moral education.
      第一，内在德性养成的本体逻辑：涵养德性是复性成德的根本前提，是居敬穷理的主体保障，能够持续存养本然的善性，收敛身心、变化气质，将潜在的天命之性，转化为现实的稳定德性；
    First, there is the ontological logic of inner virtue formation: nourishing virtuous nature is the fundamental precondition for recovering nature and achieving virtue, and it is the subjective guarantee for abiding in reverence and exhaustively probing principle. It can continuously preserve the originally good nature, collect body and mind, transform physical nature, and turn the potential nature endowed by Heaven into actual stable virtue.
       第二，道德教育的实践逻辑：涵养德性贯穿小学、大学的全部教育过程，通过循序渐进的行为训练、心体存养，将外在的道德规范，逐步转化为内在的道德信念，培育完善的圣贤人格；
     Second, there is the practical logic of moral education: nourishing virtuous nature runs through the entire educational process from elementary learning to greater learning. Through stepbystep behavioral training and preservation of the mindsubstance, it gradually transforms external moral norms into internal moral conviction and cultivates a perfected sage personality.
       第三，应对时代挑战的现实逻辑：对内可以矫正南宋学术界重内轻外、重顿悟轻践履的空疏学风，重整儒家下学上达的实践传统；对外可以通过儒家独特的人伦涵养路径，区别于佛老异教的空心修养，辟卫儒家以天理为核心的道德正统，维持儒家的人伦价值秩序。
     Third, there is the realistic logic of responding to the challenges of the age: internally, it can correct the Southern Song academic world’s empty and vague scholarly ethos that valued the inner over the outer and sudden enlightenment over practice, and restore the Confucian practical tradition of lower learning and higher advancement; externally, through the uniquely Confucian path of nourishment within human relations, it can be distinguished from the empty cultivation of Buddhism and Daoism, defend the Confucian moral orthodoxy centered on heavenly principle, and maintain the Confucian order of human relations and values.
      总而言之，朱子的涵养德性思想，将儒家的心性修养理论，从空疏的境界体悟、粗疏的修养技术，改造为一套有本体、有工夫、有实践、有教育阶次的完整道德实践体系；这一理论，不仅深刻塑造了元明清之后的儒家道德教育传统，成为后世儒者修身养性的基本路径，更以其强调日常践履、重视主观道德自觉、主张内外并进的实践特质，为当代社会的公民道德建设、人格教育，提供了可资借鉴的传统资源，具有跨越时空的理论价值与实践意义。
     In sum, Zhu Xi’s thought on nourishing virtuous nature transformed the Confucian theory of mindandnature cultivation from vague realization of realms and rough cultivation techniques into a complete moralpractice system with ontology, effort, practice, and educational stages. This theory not only profoundly shaped the Confucian moral education tradition after the Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties, becoming a basic path for later Confucians’ selfcultivation, but also, through its practical characteristics of emphasizing daily practice, valuing subjective moral awareness, and advocating simultaneous inner and outer advancement, provides traditional resources worthy of reference for contemporary civic moral construction and personality education. It possesses theoretical value and practical significance that transcend time and space.

朱熹，朱子，二程，程颢，程颐，涵养德性，主敬，敬义夹持，未发已发，心统性情，格物致知，宋明理学，工夫论，儒释之辨，德性伦理，儒家教育