近代陽明學在東亞國家有復甦的現象，先由日本再回傳到中國、韓國，而往往近代陽明學者或喜好陽明學的知識分子在提倡陽明學時，為因應國家存亡之秋或轉型為國民道德之精神時，陽明學被一些知識分子鼓吹為具有高度的革命行動精神。不過這樣被高度吹捧而具有革命行動精神的陽明學，往往與良知學精神出入甚大，特別是日本陽明學發展的現象。本文即以此問題為出發點，探索近代東亞陽明學的復甦現象過程中，知識分子所倡導的陽明學內涵似存在著「以假亂真」的情形，而從「修養」與「行動」兩觀念及其關係著手，正可清晰地掌握這個真假的細微之辨。由本文的分析可知，中國與韓國維新或革命的知識分子在推崇陽明學之際，仍然高度重視「修養的純粹性」之課題，至於在明治維新以前的日本陽明學者論及陽明學時，也不脫離「修養的純粹性」的傳統。但在維新前後的日本即出現特有的「擬似修養的純粹性」（如吉田松陰，1830-1859）乃至現代還有強調以死亡為前提的「行動」學者（如三島由紀夫，1925- 1970）來看待陽明學的知行合一，而其關鍵原因在於天皇神聖觀的信仰，本文由此指出這類學者所提倡的陽明學是「日本陽明學」而不是「中國陽明學」。

Recent years have seen a revival of Yangming Learning in East Asia, beginning in Japan and spreading to China and Korea. In response to national crises or in efforts to encourage a national spirit of morality, Yangming Learning has been promoted by some scholars and intellectuals as a movement of revolutionary action.There are significant discrepancies, however, between this promoted form of Yangming Learning and the conscience philosophy, particularly with regard to the development of Yangming Learning in Japan. Motivated by this issue, this study explored the revival of Yangming Learning in East Asia and the ”obscurity of truth with falsehood” in the form of Yangming Learning promoted by intellectuals. To distinguish between these subtleties, we began by studying the abstractions of ”self-cultivation” and ”action”, and the relationship between these concepts.The results of this study showed that when promoting and practicing Yangming Learning, reform or revolutionary intellectuals in China and Korea still placed great emphasis on the ”purity of self-cultivation”; adherents of Yangming Learning in Japan prior to the Meiji Restoration also held firmly to this belief. Prior to and after the Restoration; however, there were proponents of ”quasi self-cultivation” (such as Yoshida Shōin, 1830-1859) and suicidal actions (such as Yukio Mishima, 1925- 1970) who saw Yangming Learning as a philosophical context for their practices. The main reason for this was the belief in the divinity of the Emperor. This study seeks to clarify that the schools of thought promoted by these scholars is ”Japanese Yangming Learning”, rather than ”Chinese Yangming Learning”.