바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

Korea Journal

  • P-ISSN0023-3900
  • E-ISSN2733-9343
  • A&HCI, SCOPUS, KCI

ISSN : 0023-3900

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.53 No.3

Citation Share

The Duality of Citing Zhu Xi in the Annotations of the Daodejing during the Joseon Dynasty

Korea Journal / Korea Journal, (P)0023-3900; (E)2733-9343
2013, v.53 no.3, pp.29-47
https://doi.org/10.25024/kj.2013.53.3.29
김윤경 (성균관대학교)
김윤경. (2013). . Korea Journal, 53(3), 29-47, https://doi.org/10.25024/kj.2013.53.3.29

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the characteristics of five Joseon dynasty annotations of the Daodejing, a sutra of Daoism. The Joseon dynasty was a country that adopted Zhu Xi’s Neo-Confucianism as its state ideology; as a result, Daoism and Buddhism were considered heresies. In order to investigate how the Daodejing, a book of heresy, was understood in Joseon, this article will focus on how Zhu Xi was cited in the annotations of the Daodejing. The way Zhu Xi was cited in these books can simultaneously reveal the annotators’ thoughts about both Laozi and Zhu Xi. Two conclusions were drawn from this study. First, the annotators from the Joseon dynasty understood dao as a metaphysical system of Neo-Confucianism and Zhouyi 周易 (Book of Changes). In so doing, they attempted to ascertain the common characteristics between Confucianism and Daoism. Secondly, there were two different purposes in the citations of Zhu Xi in the annotations of the Daodejing: to seek new alternative systems of thought using Zhu Xi’s authority and to defend the academic conformity of Neo-Confucianism by reinterpreting Laozi’s thoughts in the perspective of Neo-Confucianism.

keywords
Daodejing, Zhu Xi, Daoism, duality, heresy

참고문헌

1.

Bak, Se-dang. n.d. Sinju dodeokkyeong 新註道德經 (A New Commentary on the Daodejing).

2.

Cheng, Xuanying 成玄英. n.d. Laozi yishu 老子義疏 (Commentary on the Daodejing).

3.

Hong, Seok-ju. n.d. Jeongno 訂老 (Corrections for the Daodejing).

4.

Seo, Myeong-eung. n.d. Dodeok jigwi 道德指歸 (Interpretations of the Daodejing).

5.

Wang, Bi 王弼. n.d. Laozi zhu 老子注 (Commentary on the Daodejing).

6.

Yan, Zun 嚴遵. [n.d.] 1994. Laozi zhigui 老子指歸 (Essential Meaning of the Daodejing). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.

7.

Yi, Chung-ik. n.d. Chowon damno 椒園談老 (Chowon Yi Chung-ik’s Commentary on the Daodejing).

8.

Yi, I. n.d. Suneon 醇言 (Pure-Minded Words).

9.

Zhu, Xi 朱熹. [n.d.] 1984. Zhuzi yulei 朱子語類 (Classified Conversations of Zhu Xi). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.

10.

Jo, Min Hwan, trans. and anno. 2009. Dodeok jigwi (Interpretations of the Daodejing). Seoul: Yemun Seowon.

11.

Kim, Hak Mok. 1999. Bak Se-dang-ui noja (Bak Se-dang’s Interpretations of the Daodejing). Seoul: Yemun Seowon.

12.

Kim, Hak Mok. 2001. Hong Seok-ju-ui noja: jeongno (Hong Seok-ju’s Interpretations of the Daodejing: Corrections for the Daodejing). Seoul: Yemun Seowon.

13.

Kim, Youn-Gyeong. 2009. “Hagokhak-ui noja haeseok-e gwanhan yeongu” (A Study of the Hagok School’s Interpretation of the Daodejing). PhD diss., Sungkyunkwan University.

14.

Legge, James, trans. 1891. The Sacred Books of China: The Texts of Taoism. London: Oxford University Press.

Korea Journal

논문 투고 OA 정책