송시열(宋時烈)과 박세채(朴世采)의 퇴계설(退溪說) 비판(批判) -『퇴계사서질의의의(退溪四書質疑疑義)』 “논어(論語)” 분석을 중심으로- = Si-Ryeol Song and Se-Che Park`s Criticism of Toegye Theory -Focused on the Analysis of Toegyesaseojiluiuiui-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This article attempts to examine Si-Ryeol Song and Se-Che Park`s study of Confucian classics, by analyzing Toegyesaseojiluiuiui (退溪四書質疑疑義) recorded in Songjadaejeon (宋子大全) and Namgyejip (南溪集). Si-Ryeol Song judged that Toegye wrongly understands Zhuxi` science, and completely analyzed such a mistake. Unlike Si-Ryeol Song, Se-Che Park did not heavily criticize Toegye`s theory and had a standpoint to moderately accept it. Si-Ryeol Song and Se-Che Park considered that the academic tradition of the doctrines of Chu-tzu is connected from Confucius to Zhuxi, Yulgok and themselves, and judged that Zhuxi` science has an absolute value. Their argument prepared a decisive moment that the doctrines of Chu-tzu is settled in Joseon. To properly understand Se-Che Park`s study of Confucian classics in the seventeenth century, the diverse data remained in his anthology should be examined. The data include: Dapiyeogumun, Vol. 39, Dapmun Ganghaknonrye (答李汝九問, 卷第三十九, 答問 講學論禮), Dapchimmyeongjungmun, Vol. 41, Dapmun Ganghaknonrye (答沈明仲問, 卷第四十一, 答問 講學論禮), Dapiyeogumun, Yoejip Vol. 7, Dapmun Ganghaknonrye (答李汝九問, 外集卷第七, 答問 講學論禮), Dapchoesasonmun, Sokjip Vol. 14, Dapmun Ganghaknonrye (答崔士遜問, 續集卷第十四, 答問 講學論禮), and Dapgwonbinjimun, Sokjip Vol. 14, Dapmun Ganghaknonrye (答權賓之問, 續集卷第十四, 答問 講學論禮). I will explore the data some day or other.