• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.115-151
• /
• 2017

With Seopa Ryu-Hee's Chunqiugwalyebulyu as the main research subject. this paper is to clarify characteristics in classification of the book's introductory remarks and its academic values. This book is a sort of synthetic collection of introductory remarks classification that defines standardized introductory remarks based on fundamental principles of Chunqiu introductory remarks. Seopa presented two fundamental principles for classifying Chunqiu introductory remarks. First, he clearly defined the nature and the system of the book Chunqiu, which was to present the background of classifying Chunqiu introductory remarks. Second, he declared that writing style and righteousness in Chunqiu serves as standard for classifying the introductory remarks. Seopa classified introductory remarks by type in accordance with these fundamental principles of introductory remarks in order to lay the groundwork for right interpretation of Chunqiu. Further, he was convinced that this classification of introductory remarks would block any chance of the book's wrong interpretation and at the same time, be able to remove the rationale behind distorted theories. This book can be appraised to have significant academic values in that it attempted standardization in classifying Chunqiu introductory remarks through systematic and synthetic analysis on various introductory remarks.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.67
• /
• pp.345-378
• /
• 2017

In the scriptures of "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$(春秋)", the expression method of '$Ch{\bar{u}}n-w{\acute{a}}ng-zh{\bar{e}}ng-yu{\grave{e}}$(春王正月 : It's spring. It's the first month regulated by the king.)' was used as Jì-yuè-fǎ(紀月法 : the rules to determine the first month(正月)), the month of winter solstice was regarded as the first month of a year, and three years since then were named as $Ch{\bar{u}}n$(春 : spring). With regard to this "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$"Wáng-lì("春秋"王曆 : the calendar regulated by the king of $Zh{\bar{o}}u$(周) dynasty in "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$"), depending on whether Confucius(孔子) changed and recorded the names of the months and the season or not, there were three different arguments; the theory that 'Confucius changed the names of both the months and the season'(孔子改月 改時說), the view that 'Confucius changed the name of the season, not the names of the months'(孔子不改月 改時說), and then the theory that 'Confucius changed neither the names of the months nor the name of the season'(孔子不改月 不改時) since Song(宋) dynasty. The first view was taken by $Hh{\acute{u}}-{\bar{a}}n-gu{\acute{o}}$(胡安國) and $C{\grave{a}}i-ch{\acute{e}}n$(蔡沈), and the second theory was mentioned by Chéng-yí(程?) and Zhū-zǐ(朱子). The advocates of the third view had become remarkable since Ming(明) dynasty, and one of representatives was Wàng-yáng-míng(王陽明). All of them based their arguments on ancient scriptures and Confucian legal books, and there were cases of taking the same records as the support for different opinions. Confucius' so-called 'Chūn-qiū-bǐ-fǎ(春秋筆法 : the method to describe historical facts by making clear discrimination between right and wrong)' and '$Sh{\grave{u}}-{\acute{e}}r-b{\grave{u}}-zu{\grave{o}}$(述而不作 : the attitude to succeed virtuous men's achievements and only explain and describe them not creating and adding new contents)' could come from thoughts of $Z{\bar{u}}n-w{\acute{a}}ng$(尊王 : to respect the king with the virtues of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom and sincerity). Therefore, even though Confucius is assumed to have been the writer of "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$(春秋)", whether he actually changed and recorded the names of the months and the season in the calendar used in "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$" is doubtful. These theories on Confucius's intervention in the calendar of "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$" hadn't been discussed as conflicting in reality until Tang(唐) dynasty.