栗谷의 『老子』 讀法 妙處로서의 ‘道卽天道’
Yulgok, ‘Tao-Zeuk-CheonTao’, Remarkable Phrase in reading Lao-tzu
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Soon-eon, the commentary of Lao-tzu written by Yulgok, gave a significant influence on changing the heretical view of Neo-Confucianism in Josun Dynasty. Contemporary philosophers agree with the influence on this change of the heretical view about Lao-tzu. However, they point out that this way is based on the presumption that Yulgok interpreted Taoism from the point of view of Confucianism. They say that Neo-Confucianists who published the commentaries of Taoism judged Taoism from the perspective of Neo-Confucianism. In this article, by analyzing Tao-Zeuk-CheonTao intensively taken as a remarkable phrase in Yulgok's reading Lao-tzu, I'm going to prove Yulgok's Soon-eon is written to express a gap between Confucianism and Taoism that couldn't be clearly expressed by analyzing it fairly and philosophically, not from the point of view of Yi-Yu-Hae-Tao. That is to say, I'd like to express that Yulgok comprehended Lao-tzu accurately enough and he tried to deliver that at a fair position.
Abstract
Soon-eon, the commentary of Lao-tzu written by Yulgok, gave a significant influence on changing the heretical view of Neo-Confucianism in Josun Dynasty. Contemporary philosophers agree with the influence on this change of the heretical view about Lao-tzu. However, they point out that this way is based on the presumption that Yulgok interpreted Taoism from the point of view of Confucianism. They say that Neo-Confucianists who published the commentaries of Taoism judged Taoism from the perspective of Neo-Confucianism. In this article, by analyzing Tao-Zeuk-CheonTao intensively taken as a remarkable phrase in Yulgok's reading Lao-tzu, I'm going to prove Yulgok's Soon-eon is written to express a gap between Confucianism and Taoism that couldn't be clearly expressed by analyzing it fairly and philosophically, not from the point of view of Yi-Yu-Hae-Tao. That is to say, I'd like to express that Yulgok comprehended Lao-tzu accurately enough and he tried to deliver that at a fair position.
참고문헌 (31)
- "『순언』", ~
- "『노자』", ~
- "『주자어류』", ~
- "『율곡전서』", ~
- "『퇴계집』", ~
- "『율곡학연구총서』 (논문편)", ~
- 김학목, "율곡 이이의 노자" (2001), 예문서원
- 유성선, "순언" (2002), 국학자료원
- 금장태, "한국유학의『노자』이해" (2006)
- 김충열, "노장철학강의" (1999), 예문서원
- 김홍경, "노자 -삶의 기술, 늙은이의 노래" (2003), 들녘
- 徐復觀, "중국인성론사" (1995), 을유문화사
- 윤천근, "한국인의 철학" (1992), 외계출판사
- 이석명, "백서노자 -백서본과 곽점본·왕필본의 텍스트 비교와 해석" (2003), 청계
- 이종성, "도가철학의 문제들" (1999), 문경출판사
- 황의동, "율곡 사상의 체계적 이해 (1) 성리학 편" (1998), 서광사
- 高 亨, "老子正詁" (1943), 中國書店
- 陳鼓應, "老子註譯及評介" (1984), 中華書局
- 胡 適, "中國古代哲學史" (1919), 安徽敎育出版社
- D. C. Lau, "Lao Tzu Tao Te Ching" (1963), Penguin Books
- Victor H. Mair, "Tao Te Ching" (1990), Bantam Books
- 김길환, "율곡의 노자관", 한국학보, 5 (1976), 일지사
- 김낙필, "율곡 이이의 『순언』 에 나타난 유·도 교섭", 원불교사상, (20) (1996), 원광대 원불교사상연구원
- 금장태, "『순언』 과 율곡의 노자 이해", 서울대 동아문화연구소, 43 (2005)
- 이강수, "율곡의『순언』과 조선조의 도가 연구", 율곡사상연구, 13 (2006), 율곡학회
- 이선경, "修養의 관점에서 본 栗谷의 {순언}이해", 한국철학논집, (18), pp.71~91 (2006), 한국철학사연구회
- 이종성, "율곡의 노자관에 있어서 진리 체득의 문제", 인문학연구, 31(2) (2004), 충남대 인문과학연구소
- 이종성, "율곡과 노자", 율곡사상연구, 10 (2005), 율곡학회
- 정륜, "醇言(순언) 의 체용론적 구조", 범한철학, (27), pp.229~250 (2002), 범한철학회
- 김석중, "『순언』 을 통해 본 율곡의 노자 이해", 석사, pp.1994
- 김학재, "율곡의『순언』연구", 석사, pp.2002