本文欲談論夏炘之《述朱質疑》一書中所談及的兩個重要內容：一是對於「朱陸異同」的看法，另一是夏炘在此議題上的延伸出對「朱子早年思想」的釐清。在《述朱質疑》一書中，夏炘基本上認同前人對陸王之學的批評，因此也反對「朱陸同」，然而針對陳建《學蔀通辨》一書中的「朱子早年同於陸子之禪」不甚滿意，而延伸至他對「朱子早年學說」的一些釐清與捍衛。其中包含了他對前人論述「朱陸異同」的一些修正，以及對王懋竑《朱子年譜》的反對。因此，在《述朱質疑》一書中夏炘花了許多篇幅強調朱子「早年思想非僅有佛老」，且回歸聖學的時間點早於王懋竑《朱子年譜》的記載。筆者針對上述層面一一論述之，並於文末中評析夏炘的論述效力，以及《述朱質疑》此書的貢獻處。
This paper aims to investigate two cruxes of Jia Xin's ”Sort Some Questions of Zhu Xi” (”Shu Zhu Zhi Yi”). One is the argument proposed by Jia Xin concerning ”the similarities and dissimilarities between Zhu and Lu,” and the other is how, deduced from the previous argument, Jia Xin accurately clarifies the issue of ”the young Zhu Xi.” In ”Sort Some Questions of Zhu Xi” (”Shu Zhu Zhi Yi”), he tacitly sides with those who critique Liu Xiang Shan and Wang Yang Ming and overtly disapproves ”the similarities and dissimilarities between Zhu and Lu.” However, Jia Xin defies the assertion concerning ”the coincident influences of Buddhism on the young Zhu Xi and Liu Xiang Shan” advocated in Chen Jian's ”The Clarification of the Veiled Theories” (”Xiao Bu Tong Bian”), and takes the position to defend and expound the ”the young Zhu Xi.” In his work, he amends the previous critiques on ”the similarities and dissimilarities between Chu and Lu,” and criticizes Wang Mao Hong's ”Chronological Biography of Zhu Xi” (”Zhu Zi Nian Pu”). Accordingly, he makes an effort to emphasize that the thinking of the young Zhu Xi is not confined to Daoism and Buddhism, and Zhu Xi's assimilation to Confucianism is earlier than the recordation of Wang Mao Hong's ”Chronological Biography of Zhu Xi” (”Zhu Zi Nian Pu”). In this paper, I will elucidate those issues mentioned above one by one, followed by my evaluation on the validation of Jia Xin's arguments, as well as the merits of ”Sort Some Questions of Zhu Xi” (”Shu Zhu Zhi Yi”).
