明代大儒陳白沙學宗自然，歷來學者對其思想的評價以明末的黃宗羲為代表，但本文認為劉蕺山對白沙的批評也不應被忽略。本文擬就黃宗羲的評語論述白沙學的主要內容，並從黃宗羲對白沙自然觀念的定位帶出劉蕺山的批評，藉以說明白沙自然境界之限度。當中也論及古今一些學者對白沙說的批判。本文認為，必須以黃宗羲及劉蕺山的評價相觀並看，才能得白沙自然之學之實。

Huang Zongxi's commentary on the great Ming Confucian scholar Chen Baisha and his learning of nature is well-known; Liu Jishan's, on the other hand. has received less attention from scholars. This article first examines Huang Zongxi's commentary and points out its weaknesses. Second, through examining Liu Jishan's criticism of Chen Baisha, we reveal the limitations of Chen's theory. Finally, the article discusses other comments on Chen's theory from both ancient and modern scholarship. We conclude that Liu Jishan's critique is as important as Huang Zongxi's in the evaluation of Chen Bai- sha's learning of nature.

陳白沙；自然；靜坐；致虛

Chen Baisha；nature；sitting meditation；void