正祖 經學의 淸代 學說 受用 樣相에 對한 一考察 -『弘齋全書』 『經史講義 書』와 『欽定書經傳說彙纂』의 比較를 中心으로-

Abstract

The Book of Documents, or Shang Shu 尙書, is originally official and political records of ancient China, which shows the history of dynasties of Wu 虞ㆍXia 夏ㆍShang 商ㆍZhu 周. This old document had been regarded as a ruling precedent in Chosŏn Korea as well as Chinese successive empires. In the midst of cultural policy of mass compilation and publication conducted by the first emperors of Qing China in 17th - 18th Century, Emperor Kangxi tried to revise and substitute Cheng and Zhu‘s Neo-Confucian interpretation of Shang Shu and published Heumjeong-seogyeong-jeonseol-hwichan 欽定書經傳說彙纂, almost a century ahead of King Cheong Jo, and at the contemporary of 閻若璩(1636~1704)’s Sangseo-gomun-sojeung 尙書古文疏證, the milestone of newly fashioned bibliographical study of Qing China. King Cheong Jo, who also was an advocator of Neo-Confucianism, was facing a Chosŏn scholar’s challenge to establish new interpretation on Shang Shu against orthodox commentaries of the early Song Confucians, under the influence of new scholarly trends of Ming and Qing China, which was a similar circumstance that Kangxi himself faced a hundred years ago. In the favor of the Qing emperor, Cheong Jo consulted with the book Heumjeong- seogyeong-jeonseol-hwichan when he discussed Shang Shu with his official-scholars in the court, and his collection consists of 14 volumes of the Kangxi‘s book is existing now at Yonsei University. Heumjeong-seogyeong-jeonseol-hwichan mainly follows the explanations on Cai Shen蔡沈’s Commentaries on Shang Shu 書集傳, but with critical modification and revision under the title of 集說 and 附錄 in order to complement historical investigation, which was said to be the weakness of Cai’s commentary. Cheong Jo also didn’t followed Cai‘s interpretation recklessly. He tried to understand his commentary in accordance with Zhu’s thought because Cai wrote his commentary upon the command of his master Zhu. Coherence in understanding of the ancient book was what King Cheong Jo valued most, so he didn't allow inconsistencies found in Cai‘s interpretation. Still, even though he criticized some parts of the commentary, his intention was to improve Cai’s doctrine, and ultimately to settle Neo-Confucian interpretation on Shang Shu.