關洛之學是宋代理學的正源與主流；而在關洛之間，又存 在著明顯的承繼與轉進關係。由於《伊洛淵源錄》對理學源流的重塑， 給張載關學以洛學「羽翼」者的定位。由此之後，濂、洛、關、閩便 成為理學中一個固定的排序，而張載關學也被進一步邊緣化了。其 實，從理學崛起之實際歷史來看，沒有張載以「太虚」對邵雍、周敦 頤「太極」說的揚棄與超越，就不可能有二程對「天理」沿形上本體 方向的「體貼」；沒有張載的雙重人性建構及其誠明兩進的修養路徑， 也就不可能形成程顥「只心便是天」之主體擔當精神與程頤「萬物只 是一理」的普遍性拓展。至於二程的不同思路及其走向，說到底不過 是對張載天人合一思路的承繼與轉進而已。只是由於朱子對程頤思 想的追溯與對《太極圖說》的詮釋，從而改變了理學的原有次第。這 不僅遮蔽了道學崛起的歷史，同時也改變了理學發展的邏輯。

Guan-Luo Zhi Xue is the origin and the mainstream of Neo-Confucianism; And there are evident inheritance and transition between Guan Xue and Luo Xue. However, because the reshaping of Neo-Confucianism in “Yi Luo Yuan Yuan Lu” positioned Zhang Zai’s Guan Xue as the “subsidiary” of Luo Xue, Lian, Luo, Guan and Min then became a fixed order in Neo-Confucianism, and Zhang Zai’s Guan Xue was further marginalized. In fact, seen from the history of the rise of Neo-Confucianism, it is impossible to form the metaphysical-noumenon oridented “Consideration” of “Tian Li” for Cheng Brothers without the sublation and transcendence of Shao Yong and Zhou Dunyi’s theory of “Tai Chi” by Zhang Zai’s “Tai Xu”； And it is also impossible to form the subjective spiritual responsibility of Cheng Hao’s “Zhi Xin Bian Shi Tian” and the generalized development of Cheng Yi’s “Wan Wu Zhi Shi Yi Li”. As for the different thoughts and trends between Cheng Brothers, they are nothing more than the inheritance and transition of Zhang Zai’s “Tian Ren He Yi”. Just because of Zhu Xi’s retrospect on Cheng Yi’s thoughts and his interpretation of “Theory of Tai Chi”, the original order of Neo-Confucianism was changed. Thus, not only the history of the rise of Neo-Confucianism was hidden, but also the logic of its development was disturbed.