晦齋 李彦迪의 『大學』해석에 관한 연구

Abstract

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.