• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.131-164
• /
• 2012

This paper is to make a generalization of Keyongyegimunrok(經義記聞錄) by Namdang Han Wonjin(1682~1751) whose historical positions of philosophy were contained, and to examine its established periods and the summaries of Ligi-Simseong Doseol(理氣心性圖說, illustrated Account of principle, Vital force, and Heart-mind) given in Appendix of Chap. 6. Total seventeen explanatory diagrams cover over the theory of principle and material force, theory of Heart-mind, theory of cultivation. These explanatory diagrams were produced systematically and easily to understand the pursuits of study, so-called Ho-hak(湖學), since Namdang becoming a member of the Yellow River(黃江) school. The philosophical argumentations of Namdang was usually succeeded by the orthodox stream of Ki-ho(畿湖) School transmitted from Ii, Song Si-yeol, Gwon Sang-ha. Ligi-wollyu-do(理氣源流圖), Ligi-dongjeong-do(理氣動靜圖), irwon-bunsu-do(一原分殊圖, 4 diagrams) are diagrams equivalent to Ki-ho School's ontology. As Ki-ho School's theory of Heart-mind, there are Seongjeong-hoenggan-do(性情橫看圖), Seongjeong-sugan-do(性情竪看圖), Seongjeong-chonghwoi-do(性情總會圖), Oseonghoju-do (五性互主圖), Oseongchubon-do(五性推本圖), Simseongmyohap-do (心性妙合圖), Simseongiji-do(心性二岐圖), Jungyongcheonmyeong-do(中庸天命圖), Insim dosim-do(人心道心圖), focusing on Simtongseongjeong-do(心統性情圖), and last diagram is Wihakjibang-do(爲學之方圖), which adapted from the diagram established by Ii and Song Si-yeol. The significance of Keyongyegimunrok(經義記聞錄) is comprehensive of the pursuits of the Yellow River school's studies, and provides evidence of a leading figure in Ho-hak.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.189-214
• /
• 2009

The followings are the characteristics of Kyunghakkwan of Youngjae Oh Yunsang. First, he delves into Soju (小注: Small notes or commentaries) of Saseo-Jibju-Daejeon (四書集註大全: Compendium of the Commentaries of Four Confucius Canons). Frequently adding, "thinking," "thinking again," he enumerates his own theories critical of various scholars who left commentaries in Daehak-Janggu-Daejeon (大學章句大全: Compendium of the sentences and phrases in Daehak, one of the canon) and Jungyong-Janggu-Daejeon (中庸章句大全: Compendium of the sentences and phrases in Jungyong, another canon). Secondly, he quotes theories of Korean confucius scholars. Besides Lee Yulgok, he introduces mainly theories of Nongam Kim Changhyub and Namdang Han Wonjin. Thirdly, he researches into various canons. He diverts from the general trend of Chosun confucius studies which focuses on Saseo and explores Seokyung (書經: One of Five canons of Chinese Confucius Studies and the oldest history book). Fourthly, his Kyungseol, especially that of Jungyong, was recognized and accepted by his contemporary Giho School scholars. Finally, he shows skepticism even on Confucius's own ideas and begs to differ.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.38
• /
• pp.129-162
• /
• 2013

Noju Oh Hui-sang was a Confucian who was active during the reign of King Sunjo in late Joseon Dynasty and he also was a master of the Sallim faction. Though he is known as an eclectic Neo-Confucian, he had profound knowledge in the study of Confucian classics as well through succeeding the family study handed down by his father Oh Jae-sun and his oldest brother Oh Yun-sang. This thesis hereby examines Noju's Confucianism doctrine and its characteristics. Noju's Confucianism doctrine is characterized significantly with the following aspects. First, its analyses are detailed overall and it annotates chapters and verses mostly related to Neo-Confucian theories on interpretation of the Confucian classics. Second, it conducts in-depth study not only on Chu Hsi's annotation but also on the small commentaries (小注) in Compendium of the Commentaries on Four Chinese Classics (四書集註大全). In terms of Chu Hsi's theory, however, Noju interprets Confucian classics while supplementing shortcomings on Chu Hsi's theory rather than opposing it. For opinions of all philosophers and scholars on small commentaries, it expresses rather critical theories than supporting ones. Third, it quotes many theories not only of Chinese Confucians but also of Korean ones. It mainly introduces theories of Namdang Han Won-jin, including those of Yi Yulgok. Among them, it particularly has frequent quotations from Han Won-jin's Kyoungyigimunrok (經義記聞錄). Fourth, Noju actively acknowledges senior Confucians' theories many times in quoting them but he also daringly points out their errors when a theory is thought not to be appropriate. He indicates errors one by one in theories not only of Uam and Yulgok but even of Mencius. Fifth, it especially discusses Book of Changes (周易) in depth. It tends to criticize Chengzi's I-Chuan (易傳) but accept Chu Hsi's Benyi (本義). It roughly explains Book of Changes in general but seldom directly accounts for trigrams of it other than Qian trigram and it has detailed explanation especially on Xicizhuan (繫辭傳).