河濱愼後聃의 『대학』 해석과 그 의미

Abstract

This study presents a discussion about the characteristics and meanings of Daehakhuseol by Habin Shin Hu-dam through analysis. The conclusions can be summarized as follows:First, it is a divided work of Gobondaehak. It was a unique approach not found among the scholars before him that he made no distinction between Gyeong and Jeon, established a separate chapter for Gyeokmulchiji, and put an emphasis on the Seongui chapter for interpretation. Second, he criticized the Gyeokmulchiji theory by Zhu-Xi and found the correspondence for “Mul” of “Gyeokmul” in “Mul” of “Mulyubonmal” and “Ji” of “Chiji” in “Ji” of “Jiji.” It was a unique view not found among the scholars before him that he defined distinguishing between the Chaseo of Myeongdeok and that of Shinmin as Gyeokmul and pursuing the principle of Jiseon and devoting oneself to knowledge as Chiji. Third, he included all of the 14 phrases from Chapter 1 to 4 that Zhi-Xi saw according to the variations of Gobondaehak in the Seongui chapter and interpreted them with a focus on the Seongui of Paljomok. Fourth, he made valuable achievements such as interpreting Gyeokmulchiji anew by examining Jaui and analyzing correspondence relations and conducting analysis of the logical structure of the Seongui chapter. Fifth, unlike the Noron School scholars of the days that separated and alienated theories different from that of Zhu-Xi and attempted to make his theory as the established one, Habin broadly embraced theories of Chinese scholars in late Ming Dynasty and early Qing Dynasty and of his master Seongho and sought after rational interpretations. He especially accepted the theories of various scholars in Saseojujaidongjobyeon critically by Lee Pae-rim and accordingly expanded the perspective of interpretation considerably. Those characteristics of Habin's interpretation of Daehak have the following meanings in the history of the study of Confucian classics: first, he inherited the spirit of taking Gogyeong and exploring Bonji among the previous Geungi Namin School including Yun Hyu. Second, he had certain influence on the future generations of scholars including Jeong Yak-yong by trying new interpretations with Gobondaehak he accepted along with Dongmun Lee Byeong-hyu in the Seongho School. Third, he influenced the theory of Jeong Yak-yong with his theory that was the first one that took Gobondaehak and did not distinguish between Gyeong and Jeon among Joseon scholars. Fourth, he presented a unique theory not found among the scholars before him with the newly separated and established Gyeokmulchiji chapter and new interpretations of Gyeokmulchiji and had certain influence on Jeong Yak-yong. Fifth, his perspective of interpretation with a focus on the Seongui of Paljomok placed more emphasis on action than knowledge and was in line with the thinking of practical science that emphasized actual acts and works beyond conceptual play. Sixth, he chose the interpretation method of inheriting the Seongho study and closely analyzing logical structures by examining meanings and analyzing correspondence relations. Seventh, he critically accepted various theories and thus considerably expanded the perspective of interpretation beyond the general academic tradition of respecting and believing on the established theories of Zhu-Xi in the former half of the 18th century.