李玄逸的四端七情论

Yi Hyeonil's Interpretation of the "Four Buddings" and "Seven Feelings"

在朝鲜中期的"四端七情之辩"中,李退溪与李栗谷之间虽未直接交锋,但他们对于"四端七情"的不同看法却分别为后世儒者所继承,而形成所谓"主理派"(岭南学派)与"主气派"(畿湖学派)之对垒。李玄逸是所谓的"主理学者",在"四端七情"的问题上继承退溪的观点。他撰有《栗谷李氏论四端七情辨》。李玄逸的辩驳文字,当中显现三重混淆:首先,他并未意识到,朱子以其理气二分、心性情三分的性理学架构来诠释孟子的"四端"说,其实偏离了孟子的基本观点。其次,他未意识到,在理气论及"四端七情"方面,李退溪的观点已逸出了朱子的性理学架构,反倒是李栗谷更忠于朱子的观点。最后,他也未意识到,当李退溪的观点逸出了朱子的性理学架构时,李退溪反而比李栗谷更接近孟子的基本观点。

The debate over the ＂four buddings＂ and ＂seven feelings＂（or the ＂Four-Seven Debate＂） is themost important intellectual dispute in the history of Korean Confucianism.This debate broke out at first betweenYi Toegye（1501-1571） and Ki Kobong（1527-1572）,and then between Yi Yulgok（1536-1584） and Song Ugye（1535-1598）.This then caused the confrontation between two Confucian schools,namely the so-called ＂li-centered school＂ and ＂ki-centered school.＂ As a representative of the ＂licentered school,＂ Yi Hyeonil wrote anarticle entitled ＂Criticism of Yi Yulgok＇s Views on the Four Buddings and Seven Feelings＂ and thereby defendedYi Toegye＇s points of view about the four buddings and seven feelings.Beside the preface and the postscript thisarticle includes 19 paragraphs.Each paragraph is composed of a text from Yi Yulgok＇s letters to Song Ugye and Yi Hyeonil＇s own remark thereupon.In this paper,I analyze Yi Hyeonil＇s remarks with the view of uncovering the three fold misunderstanding implicated in them.First,Yi Hyeonil was not aware that Zhu Xi＇s interpretation of the four buddings and seven feelings did not conform to Mencius＇ original position.Secondly,Yi Hyeonilneglected that Yi Toegye＇s interpretation of the four buddings and seven feelings could not fit within theparameters of Zhu Xi＇s learning,whereas Yi Yulgok adhered to Zhu Xi＇s stand point throughout.Thirdly,YiHyeonil did not realize that Yi Toegye＇s view on this topic was actually closer to Mencius＇ view,just because it could not fit within the parameters of Zhu Xi＇s learning.