《주서분류(朱書分類)》 학문(學門)을 통해 본 사양재 강호보(四養齋 姜浩溥)의 격물궁리관(格物窮理觀)-조선후기 주자학적 격물궁리 전통의 균열과 관련하여-

Abstract

This study aims to examine how the late Joseon Neo-Confucian scholar Sayangjae Kang Ho-bo (1690–1778), who was affiliated with the Noron faction, incorporated quotations from Zhu Xi related to Gewu-Qiongli into the Hak section of Juseo Bunryu. Through this analysis, the study seeks to illuminate his perspective on Gewu-Qiongli (格物窮理) and to explore how an orthodox Neo-Confucian scholar responded to the intellectual challenges against Zhu Xi’s doctrines in the late Joseon period. The Juseo Bunryu edited by Sayangjae, comprising 84 volumes in its first edition and 54 volumes in its revised edition, represents the culmination of the effort by late Joseon Noron scholars to establish the legitimacy of Zhu Xi’s scholarly tradition. At the same time, it reveals that the authority of Neo-Confucianism was being challenged both within and outside the scholarly community during that period. In the late Joseon era, some scholars advocated a study of Gewu that had diverged from Jiwu-Qiongli, a shift that was encouraged by alternative intellectual systems such as Yangming learning, evidential learning, and Western learning. In order to protect the orthodox tradition, which was at risk of being dismantled by heterodox doctrines, it became necessary to reaffirm the essence of Gewu-Qiongli study within Neo-Confucianism. Against this backdrop, during his diplomatic mission to Beijing, Sayangjae visited a Catholic church and reflected on the potential harms that could arise if a Confucian scholar devoted to Qiongli study were to engage with Western learning. Consequently, in the process of compiling the Juseo Bunryu to establish Neo-Confucian orthodoxy, he deliberately minimized the element of “inquiry” inherent in the concept of Qiongli. The Hak section of the Juseo Bunryu predominantly emphasizes the inseparability of Zhujing-Hanyang (主敬涵養) and Gewu-Qiongli in the context of ‘unity between knowledge and action’. This not only demonstrates that the methodology of Gewu- Qiongli should never be reduced to a mere expansion of knowledge, but also highlights its inherent caution against the superficial acquisition of knowledge. Considering that Sayangjae was wary of the growing trend of leaning toward Western learning during his diplomatic mission to Beijing, it can be inferred that his decision not to establish Gyeokmulgungni as an independent section within the Hak section of Juseo Bunryu was a deliberate attempt to underscore that the Neo-Confucian pursuit of Gyeokmulgungni is an inquiry into truth that is inseparably linked to the recovery of one’s moral nature and the practice of ethical action.