An Comparative Study on the Interpretation of Chapter 20 of Juongyongjanggu: Focusing on Ju-hee and Wang-buji

Abstract

Chapter 20 of Juongyongjanggu has been criticized not only for the problem of sentence division but also for the interpretation of the concepts contained in it. This paper compares and analyzes the interpretation of Ju-hee and Wang-buji related to the ‘three good ways’, ‘three knowledges, three practices’, and ‘three closer’ among the main concepts shown in Chapter 20. Ju-hee used the dual perspective of categorical interpretation and graded interpretation in connecting and interpreting the ‘three good ways’ and the ‘three knowledges, three practices’ according to a perspective on knowledge and practices. This causes the complexity of interpretation, which has become one of the important problems in the history of Juongyong interpretation. There are many people who raised questions about Ju-hee’s interpretation, but this paper examined Wang-buji’s opinion from a relatively perspective. In the interpretation of Chapter 20 of Jungyongjanggu, it is believed that the reason why Ju-hee interpreted it from two perspectives is to emphasize the character of knowledge and practice. On the other hand, Wang-buji rejects Ju-hee’s inter-pretation and provides his own interpretation by his ideological diagram that emphasizes the unity of knowledge and practice, and the priority of “practice” Although he accepts most of Ju-hee’s views in the interpretation of the Saseo, he is not following Ju-hee’s view in this matter.