정다산丁茶山과 오규 소라이[荻生徂徠]의 경학經學 및 경세학經世學의 비교 연구사 검토 - 국내연구 중심

Abstract

Studies from the Kogaku school that were best represented by three scholars, Jinsai, Sorai and Shundai all of whom lived in the period of Tokugawa Shogunate were introduced to Joseon via the country’s governmental delegation, which was dispatched to Japan three times in he 18th century, as those studies were praised as ‘distinguishable Confucianism’ on one hand and criticized as ‘heterodoxy’ on the other hand. Dasan, the then great scholar of Joseon quoted annotations from Chinese scholars and arguments from the three scholars of the Kogaku school more than 200 times in his life-time masterpiece 『Nonneo Gogeumju』 . This was an epoch-making beyond scholastic mainstreams of that time. Such characteristics found in 『Nonneo Gogeumju』 provided a new approach to the scholarship of Dasan. Since then, there were lots of comparative researches on the above three Japanese scholars’ and Dasan’s studies of Confucian classics and Managing a State or a World on the basis of similarities shared by those studies, especially pragmatism or anti-Sung-Confucianism. This study had the purpose of examining ways in which previous local researches considered studies by Dasan and Ogyu Sorai of the Kogaku school and accomplishments that were made from the consideration. The examination found that the previous studies largely had two focuses, ➀the study of Confucian classics: comparative researches on annotations attached by Dasan, Zhu-zi, Sorai and Dai-zhen to the Four Books and then their discussions regarding benevolence, human nature and the way and ➁the study of Managing a State or a World : the meaning and significance of Dasan’s pragmatic studies and Sorai’s studies of Kogaku in the history of exchanges and thoughts in the 18th century. Discourses on Dasan and Sorai are underway in both Korea and Japan as of 2014 while they are still influenced by dichotomy between restoration and conservativeness or between modernity and progressiveness. Here, it’s undeniable that the sticking to modernity rather forced the two scholars’ studies to be respectively named pragmatic and Kogaku. This researcher thinks it’s time to discuss Dasan or Sorai in terms of his thoughts and times as we recognize that he was a figure who had limitations as a human being and who was under restrictions levied by scholarship itself and his times.