http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : ( Tee Boon Chuan ) (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
A Study of Tjhie Tjay Ing’s Views of Confucian Religion in Indonesia
( Tee Boon Chuan ) 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 2015 儒敎文化硏究(中文版) Vol.0 No.23
本文是對印尼孔敎界譽之爲印尼孔敎百科全書及“學師的學師”的孔敎精神領袖徐再英(Tjhie Tjay Ing)的孔敎觀硏究, 而集中評析他在2006年《儒敎基礎敎育嚮導課本》一書所表達的孔敎敎義觀。按本文的釋析, 徐再英是在前人歸納出來的“八誠箴規”(Delapan Pengakuan Iman)之敎義基礎上, 進一步予以經文闡釋與證說, 但這些努力成果都還未臻學理精純之境。這當中的學術原因, 旣有來自對伊斯蘭敎“六誠箴規”信條的借鑒、調整的不成功之客觀因素, 也有徐再英個人及印尼孔敎總體對傳統儒家的禮學體系不熟悉的主觀條件所導致。 This paper attempts to analyze how Tjhie Tjay Ing, an encyclopedic spiritual master of the Confucian religion in Indonesia, understood the Confucian tradition. This paper argues that Tjhie’s view of Confucian religion is not as sophisticated and systematic as he endeavors to show through his presentation of the doctrinal eight creeds of confucian rligion in his Fundamental Textbooks of Confucian Religion (2006). This is because his creeds are an unsuccessful imitation of the six creeds of Islamic religion. Furthermore, his book reveals an essential misunderstanding of the Confucian ritual systems. [Article in Chinese]
-
The Problem of Disseminating Contemporary Neo- Confucianism in Southeast Asia
( Tee Boon-chuan ) 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 2011 儒敎文化硏究(中文版) Vol.0 No.15
當代新儒家在東南亞(指島屿東南亞)有多少發展的潛能和空間? 這是本文想從“動力因”和“形式因”兩方面提出來探討的一個論題。從動力因的角度來看, 時下東南亞非華語文學界之涉外課題與硏究甚少且鮮會觸及儒家, 而華語文學界之儒家硏究則未如當代新儒家之重宋明理學、重心性之學(此當代新儒家之所以爲“新儒家”)以爲現代新外王之所本、所据, 故整體上仍无成爲當代新儒家意義之“聖學的學者”之可能。個中原委, 從形式因的角度來看, 不盡是劉述先以爲當代新儒家是“精神的儒家”而不爲其它“政治化的儒家”或“民間的儒家”所善解, 而是前者對外王(其政統、學統乃傳統禮學所說之“禮制”)的關注是“理論”的, 此旣與非華語文社會涉外關系時之偏重“禮儀”不同, 也與華語文社會對禮制之關心是“實踐”的相異, 致使雙方未易有共同之話語與心智。言下之意, 在當代新儒家未改其重“理論”、重“禮制”的取向之下, 或時下東南亞未改其重“實踐”、重“禮儀”的社會氛圍之下, 前者在后者被接收進而傳播、發展的潛能或未可容樂觀看待。 This essay explores the potential of disseminating Contemporary Neo-Confucianism in Southeast Asian academia from Aristotle’s perspective of efficient cause and formal cause respectively. From the first efficient cause perspective, the disagreement on the significance of Confucianism in comparative religio-philosophical studies in general (non-Mandarin academia) and Song-Ming Confucianism in Confucian Studies in particular (Mandarin academia) is taken as the cause of low potential of Contemporary Neo-Confucianism in the region. While from the formal cause perspective, the potential is also low because of the theoretical approach of Contemporary Neo-Confucianism toward ritual system in scientific and political areas compared with Southeast Asian academia which is more practical (Mandarin academia) and ceremonial (non-Mandarin academia) in several related areas. In a nutshell, the potential of disseminating Contemporary Neo-Confucianism is no more optimistic than the current conditions of insufficient efficient and formal cause in Southeast Asia. [Article in Chinese]
-
Southeast Asian Confucianism from an Islamic Studies’ Viewpoint
( Tee Boon-chuan ) 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 2008 儒敎文化硏究(中文版) Vol.0 No.10
本文旨在对东南亚儒教、儒学与伊斯兰教、伊斯兰学的发展水平与差距进行比对, 发现与后者教、学合一之关系相较, 东南亚儒教与儒学乃是一种脱钩的存在, 即“儒教”族群既不自觉其为儒教社会的一环, 而当地儒学又多属学术史意义之中国儒学史的研究, 故东南亚儒教与其儒学之涵意或构成为何, 均有待吾人发掘而后能明之。按本文过去的研究与了解, 儒学内容不外“心、礼、天”三项, 而此在东南亚均有其儒教之实践形式, 即“心”首先被新加坡理解为“把社群利益放在个人利益之上的思想”之意, 而印度尼西亚与马来西亚则以为是“共存共荣的平等思想”;在实践上, 前者把“礼”视为“社群利益”即“创立足够的共同价值观以及一个单一的国家观念”之大一统体制如何建立之事, 而后者则要求国家平等对待与保障华文教育(华教)与孔教的生存空间与权利, 可见彼此关注的是“礼制”而非“礼仪”之“礼”;由此一来, “天”因为大一统的意识而有“新加坡实在太小”、“才孜孜不倦地向其他的世界领导人宣扬他的理念”和另一由于保卫一己权益而有“服务华社, 解救华人的困境”之狭化之虞的两种理境之差别。唯上述儒教意义之儒学与当地学界纯属中国儒学史之儒学二种, 从伊斯兰学的角度来看, 均有对“心”或心性之学作为儒学之根基(点)之体认不深、对“心”外化而为“礼”、“礼”尽显而为“天”之联系(线)之认知不全及徒知“礼”有“礼制”而不知其另有“礼仪”之一面(面)而为知解不周之缺失。故儒教、儒学在东南亚之发展, 其首要之务在使教与学能如伊斯兰教、伊斯兰学那样合之一, 再逐一改进其“点不深、线不全、面不周”之缺失, 或未可否。 The paper aim to explore the current trend of both Confucianism practise in society and Confucian Studies in academia compared with Islam and Islamic Studies in Southeast Asia. From the local Islam and Islamic Studies’ point of view, the Confucianism practicing in Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia are irrelevant to the Confucian Studies because the latter’s subject matter is composed mainly of Confucianism in China from the ancient to modern times. Besides the disconnected Confucianism and Confucian Studies, both share the same concern about contextualizing Confucian ritual institution (‘lizhi’) into Southeast Asian condition while ignoring the importance of its foundational doctrine of Heart-Mind (‘xin’) and ultimate spirit of Heaven (‘tian’). In other words, the Confucianism and Confucian Studies were not on a par with Islam and Islam Studies today in Southeast Asian countries. [Article in Chinese]
KCI
KISS연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
