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 : XING LIJU (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
XING LIJU,LIN XI 계명대학교 한국학연구원 2016 Acta Koreana Vol.19 No.2
This article examines a thesis by Namdang, a Confucian scholar in Chosŏn Korea, on the natures of humans and non-human living beings, using Zhu Xi’s li (理) - qi (氣) theory. Regarding the sameness or difference between li and qi, Zhu Xi formulated different opinions in his early and later life and was also at times inconsistent in his works of a certain period. To a certain extent, Zhu Xi’s thoughts lacked coherence, which led to subsequent debates. In seeking to develop Zhu Xi’s li-qi theory, Namdang put forward his original thesis of Trichotomous Nature, which significantly enriched Zhu Xi’s ideas. The “nature transcending the appearance of things” (K. ch’ohyŏnggi 超形氣) refers to a pure xing (K. sŏng 性; nature), concerned with only li without considering the influence of qi from the perspective of a unitary source (K. irwŏn 一原; one source). At this stage, everything shares the same li and xing. The “nature originated from temperament” (K. in’gijil 因氣質) demonstrates the shared nature for the same species as well as the difference in nature across species, thus being an endowmentdependent li. At this stage, for the same species, they share the same li, qi, and xing, while for varying species, there is a difference in li, qi, and xing. The “nature mixed with temperament” (K. chapkijil 雜氣質) considers the xing of pure qizhi (K. kijil 氣質; physical temperament) in which all creatures differ. It is thus a concept that demonstrates the particularity in all things, with varying differences in li, qi, and xing.
-
( Xing Liju ) 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 2010 儒敎文化硏究(中文版) Vol.0 No.14
本論文的硏究目的在于通過朱子的理氣同異論來考察人物性同異論爭中同論代表人物巍岩與異論代表人物南塘的基本主張, 幷比較二者的差異性。 關于理氣的同異問題, 朱子不僅初年和晩年的學說不一致, 而且在他同一時期的論述中也有很多不一致的地方。面對諸多弟子的質疑, 朱子的回答却是模棱兩可。因此, 朱子學缺乏一定的整合性, 這也爲以后的論爭埋下了伏筆。 巍岩幾乎沿用了朱子學的理論, 他認爲人與万物從一原上來講, 都稟賦了上天所賦之理, 天命、五常、太極與本然之性不過是因理的所指不同而有名稱的差異而已, 卽它們是沒有彼此、本末、偏全和大小的同一存在的異名, 指的都是本然之性。本然之性不受分殊處氣質的偏全制約而存在, 這就打開了人與物共同稟賦了本然之性而自在的局面。 而南塘旣沿用了朱子學理論, 又提出了自己獨創的“性三層說”, 開創了三分法思維的先河。卽他認爲, 性有超形氣之性、因氣質之性和雜氣質之性。這其中, 關于雜氣質之性, 二者沒有異議, 他們都認同其爲氣質之性。爭議在于超形氣之性和因氣質之性。 巍岩認爲, 超形氣之性與自己所說的一原, 卽天命、太極、五常、本然是相同的。他接受南塘所使用的“超形氣”三字, 但堅決反對南塘將天命歸屬于“超形氣”而將五常歸屬于“因氣質”, 從而區分天命與五常的做法。如此一來, 就是“懸空說理”。而且將南塘的因氣質和雜氣質都歸結爲氣質之性, 尤其是對于南塘視因氣質之性爲本然的觀点, 巍岩更認爲是犯了“認氣爲理”的錯誤。如此用二分法的思維來看性三層說, 則只會走向分岐。 This paper is research for Oeam(巍岩) Lee Gan( 李柬, 1677-1727)) and Namdang(南塘) Han Wonjin(韩元震, 1682-1751)’s Dispute about Sameness and Difference between Nature of Human being and Thing with Zhu Xi(朱熹)’s recognition of Li & Qi’s Sameness and Difference. This Lee Gan & Han Wonjin’s Dispute of Human being & Thing Nature’s Sameness and Difference is important on Korean Neo Confucianism. There are some trouble points that were much to be desired or not decided in Zhu Xi’s early and last recognition for Li & Qi’s Sameness and Difference. So, These points caused problem on Neo Confucianism’s rationale coordination. Lee Gan insisted that Human being and Thing are clothed with Li(理), so Human being and Thing Nature have same Pure & Good nature. But Han Wonjin suggested that Human being and Thing are not same nature on His theory of three class’ Nature which are nature of transcendental material& physical, issuing in material& physical, mixing material& physical. [Article in Chinese]
-
XING Liju 장로회신학대학교 2014 ASIA‒PACIFIC JOURNAL OF THEOLOGICAL STUDIES Vol.2 No.-
China and South Korea established diplomatic ties about twenty years ago, and the relations between the two countries are becoming more and more closer. Both governments have, without exception, emphasized the relevance and importance of the humanistic tradition. Humanistic tradition is a core component in the advanced part of human culture, namely the advanced values and norms. Its focus is reflected in respecting, caring about, and loving people. In short, it is a culture that values the human beings. The two countries have a deep cultural relevance and commonality. Neither culture has been singular but rather complex. And cultural development of each or both civilizations is superposed on these variations of each other. Even if so, the exchange of culture between China and Korea was achieved mainly in Chinese characters and Confucian culture as the representatives of the Central Plains in China. These aspects of Chinese culture played a crucial influence on Korean culture. Because China and South Korea are part and parcel of the Confucian culture, broadly speaking, the two countries have similar cultural tradition, cultural structure, cultural value, and cultural psychological formation. On this traditional cultural basis, with a very interactive, cooperative, and mutual enhancement, the bilateral cooperation for building a global vision has great potential. Faced with the impact of the Western culture, China and South Korea in East Asia need to revitalize and promote the traditional Confucian culture, and ultimately need to make a unique contribution to the world culture by some spiritual heritage of the Confucian culture. Therefore, I particularly want to emphasize the following three elements in exchange of humanistic tradition between China and South Korea: “Gan er sui tong 感而遂通” (To share each other’s feeling then commune with each other) as the basis or prerequisite, “He er butong 和而不同” (To lead a life in harmony but acknowledge the other’s difference) as the principle, and “Yun zhi jue zhong 允執厥中” (Truly to catch the truth or take the middle) as the method.
KCI
eArticle연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
