葉適之學於朝鮮的反響－以朝鮮儒者田愚為主

The Reaction to Ye Shi's(葉適)Learning in Joseon: Focus on the Joseon Confucianist Jeon Wu(田愚)

10.29419/SICL.202307_(56).0007

任洧廷(Im Yu-jeong)

葉適 ； 永嘉事功學派 ； 田愚 ； 朱子學 ； 中庸 ； 守護正道 ； Ye Shi (葉適) ； Yongjia learning(永嘉學派) ； Tian Yu(田愚) ； Zhu Xi's Learning(朱子學) ； Doctrine of the Mean(中庸) ； Protecting the correct path of Confucianism(守護正道)

中國文學研究

56期（2023 / 07 / 01）

253 - 292

繁體中文;英文

葉適（水心，1150-1223）是永嘉事功學派的代表人物，反對「以心性為宗」的學術，批判道學空言理論，故強調學術要有實際效益，更進而注重國計民生，提倡商業政策及貨幣的流通。然而，因為朝鮮儒學的主流是朱子學，鑽研葉適學術的朝鮮儒者不多，若干朝鮮儒者談葉適，論及有關實務政策之內容。雖然如此，朝鮮末期儒者田愚（艮齋，1841-1922）比前代的任何朝鮮儒者多談葉適之學，對葉適的經學思想有較深的瞭解，對葉適之學提出了不少看法。田愚對葉適學術兼有正面、負面評價。因為田愚在以性理學為主的傳統環境下長大，悉心鑽研朱子學，所以他對葉適的經學表示批判性見解。他批判葉適的《中庸》論，也批評葉適貶低曾子，由此論證朱子學的四書體系及道統說的合理性。但另外一方面，田愚援引葉適的言說，採取葉適對禪學的批判，以補強自己心性論的論據，也部分肯定葉適的言說有益於儒者的修身之學。而田愚著眼於事功學派葉適的學問，部分動機似乎起因於他所處的時代環境。田愚所處的時代是歷史的轉換時期，面臨亡國危機的朝鮮末期知識分子強調功利為主的富國強兵論，如此的趨勢導引事功之學的興起及朱子學的危機。如此的情況下，強力保護朱子學傳統的田愚需要維護朱子學的價值。田愚以此為契機，探究葉適之學的具體論辯，或批評其謬誤，或藉以補充自己的見解，盡力達成「守護正道」的任務。

Ye Shi(葉適, 1150-1223) was a representative scholar of the Yongjia school(永嘉學派), who opposed the academic approach of "emphasizing the mind and nature" and criticized the theoretical concepts of Neo-Confucianism. He emphasized that academic pursuits should have practical benefits and further focused on national affairs and people's livelihood, advocating commercial policies and for the circulation of currency. However, because the Joseon Confucianism mainstream followed Neo-Confucianism, there were few Joseon Confucian scholars who studied Ye Shi's academic approach. Only a small number of Joseon Confucian scholars who discussed Ye Shi focused on his ideas to practical policies. The late Joseon dynasty Confucian scholar Jeon Wu(田愚, 1841-1922) devoted more attention to Ye Shi's academic approach than any previous Joseon Confucian scholar and had a deeper understanding of Ye Shi's thought. Jeon Wu offered numerous opinions on Ye Shi's academic approach, both positive and negative. Because Jeon Wu grew up in a traditional environment dominated by Neo- Confucianism and also studied Zhu Xi's works, he held a critical view of Ye Shi's study of Confucian classics. He criticized Ye Shi's interpretation of the "Doctrine of the Mean" (中庸) and also criticized Ye Shi for underestimating Zengzi (曾子), using this as evidence to demonstrate the rationality of Zhu Xi's Four Books system. However, Jeon Wu also cited some of Ye Shi's statements and borrowed his criticism of Zen Buddhism to strengthen his own arguments, thereby partially conceding that Ye Shi's words could be of benefit to Confucian scholars' self-cultivation. Jeon Wu's focus on Ye Shi's academic approach seems to have been partly determined by the historical environment in which he lived. Jeon Wu lived during a transitional period in history and witnessed crises facing the Joseon dynasty. Due to this historical climate, intellectuals in the late Joseon dynasty emphasized the pragmatism of wealth and military strength, leading to the rise of the Practical Learning and bringing crisis to Neo-Confucianism. Under these circumstances, Jeon Wu, who vigorously protected the Neo-Confucian tradition, was compelled to uphold its values. Taking this opportunity, Jeon Wu explored specific aspects of Ye Shi's academic approach, criticized its fallacies, or used it to supplement his own views as he strove to fulfill his task of "protecting the correct path of Confucianism."