期刊目錄列表 - 62卷(2017) - 【師大學報】62(2) 九月刊(本期專題:域外漢學)
Directory

朝鮮金正喜古文《尚書》考辨對清人學說的接受與轉化
作者:陳亦伶(香港浸會大學中國傳統文化研究中心博士後研究員)

卷期:62卷第2期
日期:2017年9月
頁碼:93-110
DOI:10.6210/JNTNU.2017.62(2).05

摘要:
本文旨在探究於中國引起巨大論爭的古文《尚書》真偽之辨中,明清學者的研究成果傳到韓半島後,融合當地政治需求與文化思潮,朝鮮對清人研究成果的吸收與轉化,展開的論爭在經學史上之意義。朱子學是朝鮮開國之初奠立國家一切禮儀準則的圭臬,而朱子學視「人心惟危,道心惟微。惟精惟一,允執厥中」十六字心法為上古三代聖王修心之法,但載錄這十六字心法的〈大禹謨〉篇,竟出於晚出古文《尚書》。若辨證晚出古文《尚書》為偽,那麼遵奉朱子學為至高無上真理的朝鮮,便得承擔文化思想崩解帶來的衝擊。朝鮮文人試圖在漢學與宋學中尋求平衡點,使得朝鮮時代在這場論爭中,最後採取與中國不同的對應方法,為了保全受朱子思想影響深遠的朝鮮文化,最終未能屏棄古文《尚書》。

關鍵詞:金正喜、《尚書》、《書經》、辨偽、韓國經學

《詳全文》 檔名

參考文獻:
    1. 南宋•朱熹,《晦庵先生朱文公文集》,收入朱傑人、嚴佐之、劉永翔點校,《朱子全書》(上海市:上海古籍出版社,2002)。
    2. 南宋•黎靖德(編),《朱子語類》(北京市:中華書局,1986)。
    3. 清•段玉裁,《古文尚書撰異》,收入《續修四庫全書》本,第46冊(上海市:上海古籍出版社,1995)。
    4. 文炳贊,〈阮堂禮學思想的來源—《禮堂說》與凌廷堪《復禮(下)》〉《商業文化(學術版)》,12期(2008),頁190。
    5. 毛文芳,〈禮物:金正喜與燕京文友的畵像交誼及相涉問題〉,《漢文學論集》,42輯(2015),頁9-40。
» 展開更多
中文APA引文格式陳亦伶(2017)。朝鮮金正喜古文《尚書》考辨對清人學說的接受與轉化。師大學報62(2),93-110。https://doi.org/10.6210/JNTNU.2017.62(2).05
中文Chicago引文格式陳亦伶,〈朝鮮金正喜古文《尚書》考辨對清人學說的接受與轉化〉,《師大學報》,62卷2期(2017):頁93-110。https://doi.org/10.6210/JNTNU.2017.62(2).05
APA FormatChen, I-L. (2017). Joseon scholar Kim Jeong Hui’s study of Gu Wen Shang Shu on the acceptance and regeneration of Qing Dynasty’s theory. Journal of National Taiwan Normal University, 62(2), 93-110. https://doi.org/10.6210/JNTNU.2017.62(2).05
Chicago FormatChen, ​I-Ling. “Joseon Scholar Kim Jeong Hui’s Study of Gu Wen Shang Shu on the Acceptance and Regeneration of Qing Dynasty’s Theory.” Journal of National Taiwan Normal University 62, no. 2 (2017): 93-110. https://doi.org/10.6210/JNTNU.2017.62(2).05

Journal directory listing - Volume 62 (2017) - Journal of NTNU【62(2)】September (Special Issue: Overseas Sinology)
Directory

Joseon Scholar Kim Jeong Hui’s Study of Gu Wen Shang Shu on the Acceptance and Regeneration of Qing Dynasty’s Theory
Author: I-Ling Chen (Centre for Chinese Cultural Heritage, Hong Kong Baptist University, Post-Doctoral Research Fellow)

Vol.&No.:Vol. 62, No. 2
Date:September 2017
Pages:93-110
DOI:10.6210/JNTNU.2017.62(2).05

Abstract:
Since ancient China, the falsification of Shang Shu has triggered overwhelming debate in the study of Confucianism. Relevant research by the scholars of the Ming and Qing Dynasty, later spread to the Korean Peninsula and integrated with local political and cultural ideology, had been absorbed and transformed by Joseon scholars. This study probes into what the Joseon scholars’ debate concerning Chinese studies on the falsification of Shang Shu means to the development of Chinese and Korean research on the study of Confucianism by adopting a Korean Study on Confucian Classics, the Korean Literary Collection in Classical Chinese, and Annals of Joseon Dynasty as primary references. The doctrine of Zhu Xi was the norm of etiquette when Joseon was founded. In the chapter “Counsels of the Great Yu” in Gu Wen Shang Shu, there is a maxim stating that “The mind of man is restless, and its affinity to conscience is delicate. Be discriminating, be uniform, that you may sincerely conform to the doctrine of mean.” The doctrine of Zhu Xi regards that quote as the method of mental cultivation for three ancient holy emperors: Yao, Shun, and Yu. If Gu Wen Shang Shu was proven to be falsified, the Joseon society that considers the doctrine of Zhu Xi as the supreme truth will incur a severe effect that may quash its cultural beliefs. Because of the eclecticism that intended to seek a balance between Hang Studies and Song studies, the Joseon Dynasty had chosen a different standpoint than China in the debate on Gu Wen Shang Shu to defend Joseon culture, which has been profoundly influenced by the doctrine of Zhu Xi.
 

Keywords:Kim Jeong Hui, Shang Shu, Shu Jing, Distinguish, Korean Study on Confucian Classics