浙中王門季彭山 (1483-1563) 援《六經》參究良知學，以《易傳》陽剛陰柔之理，對理氣心性作一新解，以此提出「龍惕說」針砭同門「主自然無與於工夫」者。此說一出，立刻引起的王門諸子彼此之劇辯。根據彭山所言，其中獨排眾議，首位肯認此說者，即主張「歸寂說」之聶雙江(1487-1563)。然時雙江思想尚未底定，實未理解陽明良知之教，也就無法明辨彭山與師說之別者，故彭山自言「雙江深信『龍惕說』」乃言過其實者，這一點從雙江提出歸寂思想之後，對「龍惕說」隻字未提看來，亦可爲徵。此議題向來囿於文獻而無人措意，今以《龍惕書》及其他相關文獻探討此一公案，擬藉此議題的深掘，期能闡明「龍惕說」之內涵及其意義，並釐清「雙江深信『龍惕說』」此一公案之原委，而這些研究成果亦可展現王學發展的面向，且爲日前雙江思想研究作一補充。

Ji Ben, a scholar of the Yangming School of Zhezhong, approached an interpretation of innate knowledge in accordance with the Six Classics, igniting fierce debate and creating a stir among his contemporaries. Starkly opposed to the mainstream understanding of moral practice based on the original mind-and-heart, Ji Ben appropriated from the Classic of Changes the notions of sturdiness of the continuous, yang lines, and meekness of the broken, yin lines, to propose the doctrine of longti. This doctrine provoked dissension among followers of Yangming. Ji Ben asserted that Nie Bao differed from others in acknowledging his viewpoint. However, this might have been nothing more than Ji Ben's wishful thinking. As Nie Bao's thoughts were still at an embryonic stage back then, he could not have fully understood the teachings of Wang Yangming, much less recognized the difference between the positions of Yangming and Ji Ben. Moreover, after Nie Bao proposed the doctrine of "returning to quietness," he made no mention of the doctrine of longti, casting further uncertainty over Ji Ben's claim. The doctrine of longti has largely been overlooked due to lack of literature on the topic. This study aims to delve into Ji Ben's claim, benefiting from the insight offered by scrutiny of the Book of Longti. While delineating the development of the Yangming School, this paper also hopes to supplement research into Nie Bao's thought.