• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.63
• /
• pp.169-193
• /
• 2016

This thesis aims at examining the world of pacification in Zhuzi(朱子)'s Daxuezhangju("大學章句"). He said that it was necessary to understand others through Xiejuzhidao(?矩之道) as Shu(恕) for the completion of pacification. The Shu(恕) in it is not an active one but a passive one. It's because one doesn't need to be very active in order to realize the world of pacification. Too much initiative can rather cause loss. Then Shijing("詩經") was quoted, all of which told about that it should be properly followed to understand others through Xiejuzhidao(?矩之道) as Shu(恕). Zhuzi(朱子) explains the reasons for frugality. The modern society is a capitalistic. Yet, not all kinds of capitalism are right. Think about the trash island on the Pacific Ocean. In Daxuezhangju("大學章句"), frugality is suggested as a good way. As the way of frugality, the most important goal of a king is to get rid of the vassals who exploit people. And at the last part, there's warning that petty and crafty men should be appointed. It says that even when everything has been fulfilled, if a petty and crafty man is appointed to take charge of it, the nation can be lost, so a king must give noble men important positions. The world of pacification in Daxuezhangju("大學章句") has not been studied as much as Gewuzhizhi(格物致知). This thesis is expected to offer the chance for more researches on it.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.129-154
• /
• 2014

The study examined Daxuezhalu written by ShiTan Li Shen-Yi. Three different editions of Daxuezhalu were looked into, one of which in Shitanji("石灘集") could be considered methodical, if not perfect. In addition, Guojirucangben("國際儒藏本" as goudou(句讀) and correction was made on its wrong contents through dainjiao(點校) by WangXinzhu(王心竹). For these reasons, Daxuezhalu in Shitanji was used as the basis for the study and Guojirucangben as a supplement. Explanatory notes were added to Daxuezhangjuxu("大學章句序") in Daxuezhalu, but consent cannot be given to some of them, which include the author's opinion that views Jing(敬) as essence of Xiaoxue("小學") and Daxue("大學"), and the unique interpretation of Zhangju(章句), which can be attributed to the fact that the author didn't revise Daxuezhalu after writing it at the age of 37. However, the explanatory notes on xin(心), xing(性), qing(情), zhi(志) and yi(意) in An(按) toward the end of Daxuezhangjuxu are considered unique. The followings in Jingwen(經文) were examined as questionable. ShiTan(石灘) reflected on the ways to reach zhishan(至善) as in the table that shows Sangangling(三綱領), which may be viewed as distinctive. The review of zhizhijie('知止'節) reveals that ShiTan(石灘) followed Zhuzi(朱子) on the issue of whether to relocate zhizhijie('知止'節) through his interpretation for leaving it where it was. The same was applied regarding tizhi(體制) in chuanwen(傳文) by following Zhuzi(朱子)'s argument on Daxuezhangju("大學章句"). While the tendency to divide it into zhi(知) and hang(行) was seen, there was difficulty in thorough understanding with all the comments being in goujie(句節). It is considered overreaction that he argued in favor of shen(?) without any comments on Gewuzhizhibuwangzhang("格物致知補忘章"), although he mentioned characters, jin(謹) and shen(?) unlike Zhuzi(朱子).

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.387-416
• /
• 2014

This article explored the duplicity relation between the Daxue/Zhongyong of Confucianism and the Yonghobigyeol of Taoism, which was advocated by Bongwoo Gwon Tae-hoon, who was a Confucian scholar and the progenitor of Sundoism. The view of Bongwoo Gwon Tae-hoon was that the Confucian scriptures that contain the mind control method handed down from Confucius are Daxue, Zhongyong and Zhouyixicichuan (周易繫辭傳). His another view was that Zhuzi (朱子) intentionally did not expose the original object of Confucian mind control method in the interpretation of Sangangling (三綱領) of Daxuezhangju (大學章句) annotated by him, since he was invoked by the contemporary logic of Sung Period (宋代). Bongwoo Gwon Tae-hoon added a new annotation on Daxue Sangangling and tried to disclose the original object of Confucian mind control method through new interpretation by explaining the implied meaning of character '中' (zhong) of Zhongyong Yunzhijuezhong (允執厥中) by way of Iljungron (一中論). In addition to this new interpretation, Bongwoo Gwon Tae-hoon took the Yuanxiangfa (原象法), which Confucius compiled as the extract of Yijing (易經) from Zhouyixicichuan (周易繫辭傳), as the core of Confucian metaphysical philosophy study. He suggested Yuanxiangfa as a methodology to reach the ultimate target of study together with the Yonghobigyeol of Taoism and paid attention to the close relationship between the two. Bongwoo Gwon Tae-hoon verified the original object of Daxue by new interpretation on Daxue Sangangling, left an analytical thought on the consistency among Daxue, Zhongyong and Xicichuan (繫辭傳) and the study method of Igyohabil (異敎合一), where he integrated the principle of Taoism and Confucianism. Bongwoo Gwon Tae-hoon left a new topic to Korean world of thought, which is as important as the Seondanhosuron (禪丹互修論) of Cheonghaja Gwon Geuk-jung (靑霞子 權克中) in Joseon Period.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.34
• /
• pp.39-62
• /
• 2009

In this paper, the researcher investigated the standpoint of Lee EonJeok(李彦迪), also known as HoeJae(晦齋), with regard to interpretation of Daxue("大學"), through Daxuezhangjubuyi("大學章句補遺") and XuDaxuehuowen("續大學或問"). It is true that HoeJae accommodates a fairly large portion of interpretations made by Zhuzi, however, he strived to pass over Zhuzi's Daxuezhangju by attempting a new interpretation on the Gewuzhizhi(格物致知). The greatest reason that HoeJae couldn't admit Zhuzi's view was derived from the differences in interpretation of Gewuzhizhi. The differences between Zhuzi and HoeJae concerned with Gewuzhizhi is that, while Zhuzi perceived the objects thereof from the perspective of Li(理) of things(事物), HoeJae considered the root and branch, the beginning and end of the physical world(萬物) and also all events(萬事) as the subjects of Gewuzhizhi. Meanwhile, having the chapter, dubbed, 'Weyoubenmo'(物有本末), and the chapter, 'ZhiZhi'(知止) also as expositions of Gewuzhizhi, HoeJae was able to avoid such critiques as that he complemented or added new topics to the sutra. In addition, he could have clarified the stepwise elucidations of Sangangling(三綱領) and Batiaomu(八條目) edited and compiled by Zhuzi(朱子). And the issues in the chapter of Tingsong(聽訟) lies on the extended line of theory of Gewuzhizhi. In the end, it suggests that the differences between Zhuzi and HoeJae are arisen from the discrepancies of interpretation on Gewuzhizhi. HoeJae proposed his ideology concerned with Zhizhizhuyi(至治主義) through his book, XuDaxuehuowen, and he stressed that Ren(仁) must be foundation in order to Pingtianxia(平天下). Furthermore, HoeJae emphasized that Ren which is the founding virtue in order for Pingtianxia must be begun with such very basic behavioral practices, known as, Xiao(孝), Ti(弟), and Ci(慈), and that such desirable states would be accomplished through relationships with others, not merely through self-endeavors or by self-ego.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.33
• /
• pp.359-384
• /
• 2008

Making Daxue("大學") which was originally the 43rd chapter of Liji("禮記") independent, Zhuzi(朱子) had reedited it into Daxuezhangju("大學章句") and in this process, he had added 134 letters thereto. Those 134 letters that added were concerned with gewuzhizhi(格物致知) and Zhuzi(朱子)'s such interpretation had made a great deal of contribution to the later interpretations of Daxue("大學") conducted by those scholars who followed him in a later age. Zhuzi(朱子) had interpreted gewu(格物) as to make a exhaustive study on principles of things or noumena that exist between heaven and earth. If gewu(格物) taking it for granted, denotes thorough investigation of the principles of things, it is considered that qiongli(窮理) is a more appropriate expression. Meanwhile, however, Zhuzi(朱子) argues that the reason for dubbing it gewu(格物), not calling it qiongli(窮理), is to see a thing as it is in itself. This is to emphasize that investigation of things and extension of knowledge gewuzhizhi(格物致知) is shixue(實學), not a xuxue(虛學). Zhizhi(致知) is a step through which my knowledge is being culminating in the most comprehensive and profound fashion. Specifically, Zhizhi(致知) is the phase to seek zhenzhi(眞知) having put together all knowledge gained through gewu(格物). In this true understanding, there is no room for one's own free will to intervene; zhenzhi(眞知) becomes the same as universal knowledge. The things accumulated in quantity through gewuzhizhi(格物致知) are to be changed by means of huoranguantong(豁然貫通). If we put gewuzhizhi(格物致知) as the quests of basic and general subjects, meanwhile, huoranguantong(豁然貫通) corresponds to more profound and sophisticated learning. Huoranguantong(豁然貫通) is a phase in which my principle and the universal principle become unified, and so, this is the phase where the standards in my mind will attain universality. That is to say, this means that the standards in my mind and the universal standards grow into one. Then, what is the ultimate purpose of gewuzhizhi(格物致知)? The ultimate purpose of gewuzhizhi(格物致知) is to reach zhishan(至善). If gewuzhizhi(格物致知) seeks zhishan(至善), those universal standards in my mind that attained through huoranguantong(豁然貫通) shall also be the criteria of that zhishan(至善). Viewing it from this perspective, it can be said that Zhuzi(朱子)'s gewuzhizhi(格物致知) contains both epistemological and logical aspect.