(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

2019-07-16T02:01:50Z

Slui:

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

2019-07-16T02:00:43Z

Slui:

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

2019-07-16T01:59:21Z

Slui:

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

2019-07-15T00:48:33Z

Slui:

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

2019-07-14T10:17:10Z

2019-07-11T00:57:43Z

2019-07-08T06:52:07Z

Slui:

(Translation) 李珥答成浩原(壬申)

2019-07-05T06:49:25Z

Slui:

{{Primary Source Document3
|Image = 이이율곡전서답성호원1.jpg
|English =
|Chinese = 李珥答成浩原(壬申)
|Korean = 이이 답 성호원(임신)(''Yi I Dap SeongHowon(Imsin)'')
|Genre = [[Literati Writings]]
|Type = Letter
|Author = 李珥
|Source = '''IMG.''' [http://bit.ly/2XyzYcR Korean National Assembly Library (국회전자도서관)]
'''TXT.''' [http://db.itkc.or.kr/dir/item?itemId=BT#dir/node?grpId=&itemId=BT&gubun=book&depth=5&cate1=Z&cate2=&dataGubun=%EC%B5%9C%EC%A2%85%EC%A0%95%EB%B3%B4&dataId=ITKC_BT_0201B_0080_010_0100&viewSync=OT Korean Classics and Literati's Collection of Writings (한국고전종합DB)]
|Year = 1572
|Key Concepts=
|Translator = [[2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop (Advanced)#Participants | Participants of 2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop (Advanced Translation Group)]]
|Editor =
|Translation Year = 2019
}}
[[File:Backward.png|right|40px|link=2019_JSG_Summer_Hanmun_Workshop_(Advanced)#.282019.29Primary_Sources_for_Korean_Studies]]

=='''Introduction'''==

=='''Original Script'''==

{|class="wikitable" style="width:100%; background-color:#ffffff;"
!style="width:25%;"|Image || style="width:25%;"|Text || style="width:50%;"| Translation
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원1.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)1|400px]]
||
答成浩原壬申

聖賢之說。或橫或豎。各有所指。欲以豎準橫。以橫合豎。則或失其旨矣。心一也而謂之道謂之人者。性命形氣之別也。情一也而或曰四或曰七者。專言理兼言氣之不同也。是故。人心道心。不能相兼而相爲終始焉。四端不能兼七情。而七情則兼四端。道心之微。人心之危。朱子之說盡矣。四端不如七情之全。七情不如四端之粹。是則愚見也。人心道心。相爲終始者。何謂也。今人之心。直出於性命之正。而或不能順而遂之。閒之以私意。則是始以道心。而終以人心也。或出於形氣。而不咈乎正理。則固不違於道心矣。或咈乎正理。而知非制伏。不從其欲。則是始以人心。而終以道心也。蓋人心道心。兼情意而言也。不但指情也。七情則統言人心之動。有此七者。四端則就七情中擇其善一邊而言也。固不如人心道心之相對說下矣。且情是發出恁地。不及計較。則又不如人心道心之相爲終始矣。烏可强就而相準耶。今欲兩邊說下。則當遵人心道心之說。欲說善一邊。則當遵四端之說。欲兼善惡說。則當遵七情之說。不必將枘就鑿。紛紛立論也。四端七情。正如本然之性氣質之性。本然
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원2.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)2|400px]]
||
之性。則不兼氣質而爲言也。氣質之性。則却兼本然之性。故四端不能兼七情。七情則兼四端。朱子所謂發於理發於氣者。只是大綱說。豈料後人之分開太甚乎。學者活看可也。且退溪先生旣以善歸之四端。而又曰。七者之情。亦無有不善。若然則四端之外。亦有善情也。此情從何而發哉。孟子擧其大槪。故只言惻隱羞惡恭敬是非。而其他善情之爲四端。則學者當反三而知之。人情安有不本於仁義禮智而爲善情者乎。此一段當深究精思善情旣有四端。而又於四端之外有善情。則是人心有二本也。其可乎。大抵未發則性也。已發則情也。發而計較商量則意也。心爲性情意之主。故未發已發及其計較。皆可謂之心也。發者氣也。所以發者理也。其發直出於正理而氣不用事則道心也。七情之善一邊也。發之之際。氣已用事則人心也。七情之合善惡也。知其氣之用事。精察而趨乎正理。則人心聽命於道心也。不能精察而惟其所向。則情勝慾熾。而人心愈危。道心愈微矣。精察與否。皆是意之所爲。故自修莫先於誠意。今若曰四端理發而氣隨之。七情氣發而理乘之。則是理氣二物。或先或後。相對爲兩岐。各自出來矣。人心豈非二本乎。情雖萬般。夫孰非發於理乎。惟其氣或揜而用事。或不揜而聽命於理。故有善惡之異。以此體認。庶幾見之
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원3.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)3|400px]]
||
矣。別紙之說。大槪得之。但所謂四七發於性。人心道心發於心者。似有心性二岐之病。性則心中之理也。心則盛貯性之器也。安有發於性發於心之別乎。人心道心皆發於性。而爲氣所揜者爲人心。不爲氣所揜者爲道心。

'''附問書'''

霖陰不止。想惟道況淸和否。傾仰不自已。前稟別紙。乞答示何如。今看十圖心性情圖。退翁立論。則中閒一段曰。四端之情。理發而氣隨之。自純善無惡。必理發未遂而揜於氣。然後流爲不善。七者之情。氣發而理乘之。亦無有不善。若氣發不中而滅其理。則放而爲惡云。究此議論。以理氣之發。當初皆無不善。而氣之不中。乃流於惡云矣。人心道心之說。旣如彼其分理氣之發。而從古聖賢皆宗之。則退翁之論。自不爲過耶。更望於此痛加血戰。極意消詳。以解鈍澁之惑。千萬至祝。心之虛靈知覺。一而已矣。而有人心道心之二名。何歟。以其或生於形氣之私。或原於性命之正。理氣之發不同。而危微之用各異。故名不能不二也。然則與所謂四端七情者。同耶。今以道心謂之四端可矣。而以人心謂之七情則不可矣。且夫四端七情。以發於性者而言也。人心道心。以發於心者
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원4.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)4|400px]]
||
而言也。其名目意味之閒。有些不同焉。幸賜一言。發其直指。何如。人心道心之發。其所從來固有主氣主理之不同。在唐虞無許多議論時。已有此說。聖賢宗旨。皆作兩下說。則今爲四端七情之圖。而曰發於理發於氣。有何不可乎。理與氣之互發。乃爲天下之定理。而退翁所見。亦自正當耶。然氣隨之理乘之之說。正自拖引太長。似失於名理也。愚意以爲四七對擧而言。則謂之四發於理。七發於氣可也。爲性情之圖。則不當分開。但以四七俱置情圈中。而曰四端。指七情中理一邊發者而言也。七情不中節。是氣之過不及而流於惡云云。則不混於理氣之發。而亦無分開二岐之患否耶。幷乞詳究示喩。未發之體。亦有善惡之可言者。甚誤。喜怒哀樂之未發。謂之中。中也者。大本也。安有善惡之可言耶。衆人之心。不昏昧則必散亂。大本不立。故不可謂之中也。幸於一瞬之閒。或有未發之時。則卽此未發之時。全體湛然。與聖人不異矣。惟其瞥然之際。還失其體。昏亂隨之。故不得其中耳。其所以昏且亂者。由其拘於氣質故也。若曰拘於氣質而不能立其大本則可也。若曰未發之時。亦有惡之萌兆則大不可。蓋其或昏
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원5.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)5|400px]]
||
昧。或散亂者。不可謂之未發也。

'''心性情圖'''

程子曰。人生氣稟。理有善惡。此曉人深切。八字打開處也。其所謂理者。指其乘氣流行之理。而非指理之本然也。本然之理固純善。而乘氣流行。其分萬殊。氣稟有善惡。故理亦有善惡也。夫理之本然。則純善而已。乘氣之際。參差不齊。淸淨至貴之物及汚穢至賤之處。理無所不在。而在淸淨則理亦淸淨。在汚穢則理亦汚穢。若以汚穢者爲非理之本然則可。遂以爲汚穢之物無理則不可也。夫本然者。理之一也。流行者。分之殊也。捨流行之理。而別求本然之理。固不可。若以理之有善惡者。爲理之本然則亦不可。理一分殊四字。最宜體究。徒知理之一而不知分之殊。則釋
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원6.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)6|400px]]
||
氏之以作用爲性而猖狂自恣是也。徒知分之殊而不知理之一。則荀，揚以性爲惡。或以爲善惡混者。是也。昨書以爲未發之時。亦有不善之萌者。更思之。尤見其大錯。吾兄之不識大本。病根正在於此。未發者。性之本然也。太極之妙也。中也。大本也。於此亦有不善之萌。則是聖人獨有大本。而常人無大本也。孟子性善之說。爲駕虛之高談。而人不可以爲堯舜矣。子思何不曰君子之喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中。而乃泛言喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中耶。千萬不是。切宜速改。
右議論閒有先賢所未發者。不遇吾兄。未易辨論至此。於此相合。則無所不合矣。今世之所謂學者。豈無聰明才辯之人哉。可語此事者。殊不多見。見此論而不怪笑者。亦鮮矣。
||
(translation)
|}

=='''Discussion Questions'''==
#
#

=='''Further Readings'''==

*
*

=='''References'''==
<references/>

=='''Translation'''==

==='''(sample) : Jaeyoon Song'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 1 : Yishu Ma'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:
聖賢之說。或橫或豎。各有所指。欲以豎準橫。以橫合豎。則或失其旨矣。心一也而謂之道謂之人者。性命形氣之別也。情一也而或曰四或曰七者。專言理兼言氣之不同也。是故。人心道心。不能相兼而相爲終始焉。四端不能兼七情。而七情則兼四端。道心之微。人心之危。朱子之說盡矣。四端不如七情之全。七情不如四端之粹。是則愚見也。

Translation:
The words of the sages, some are horizontal and some are vertical. Each of them has pointed objects. If you intend to use the vertical to regulate the horizontal, use to horizontal to suit the vertical, then you might lose the purport of the sages' words. The minds are one but we call it the mind of the Way and the mind of humans, it is the difference of the mind, the life, the physical existence, and the qi. The emotions are one, but some are called the four sprouts and some are called the seven emotions. This is talking about the differences of the principle and the qi specifically. Because of this, the human mind and the mind of the Way, they cannot combine with each other but can be the other's beginning and ending. The four sprouts cannot encompass the seven emotions, but the seven emotions can encompass the four sprouts. The mind of the Way is subtle. The human mind is perilous. That's what the teachings of Master Zhu are all about. The four sprouts are not as full as the seven emotions. The seven emotions are not as pure as the four sprouts. This is my humble opinion.

==='''Student 2 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

人心道心。相爲終始者。何謂也。今人之心。直出於性命之正。而或不能順而遂之。閒之以私意。則是始以道心。而終以人心也。或出於形氣。而不咈乎正理。則固不違於道心矣。或咈乎正理。而知非制伏。不從其欲。則是始以人心。而終以道心也。蓋人心道心。兼情意而言也。不但指情也。七情則統言人心之動。

==='''Student 3 : Younès M'Ghari'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

有此七者。四端則就七情中擇其善一邊而言也。固不如人心道心之相對說下矣。且情是發出恁地。不及計較。則又不如人心道心之相爲終始矣。烏可强就而相準耶。今欲兩邊說下。則當遵人心道心之說。欲說善一邊。則當遵四端之說。欲兼善惡說。則當遵七情之說。不必將枘就鑿。紛紛立論也。四端七情。正如本然之性氣質之性。本然之性。則不兼氣質而爲言也。氣質之性。則却兼本然之性。故四端不能兼七情。七情則兼四端。

[Here] there are 7 [of these]. As for the 4 inklings, I advanced towards the center of the 7 sentiments, chose one of its good aspects and [here] I discussed [it]. It is really not a conflict [that we have] between the human mind and the mind of the way. And the sentiments are aroused that way. If they are not thought over, then it is neither the human mind and the mind of the way encompass one another from the end to the beginning.

==='''Student 4 : King Kwong Wong'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

朱子所謂發於理發於氣者。只是大綱說。豈料後人之分開太甚乎。學者活看可也。且退溪先生旣以善歸之四端。而又曰。七者之情。亦無有不善。若然則四端之外。亦有善情也。此情從何而發哉。孟子擧其大槪。故只言惻隱羞惡恭敬是非。而其他善情之爲四端。則學者當反三而知之。人情安有不本於仁義禮智而爲善情者乎。此一段當深究精思善情旣有四端。而又於四端之外有善情。則是人心有二本也。其可乎。
That which Master Zhu called aroused from the Principle and aroused from the Material Force are just general outlines. How did he expect later people divide them too much? It is appropriate that scholars actively read them. Moreover, Mister T'oegye (Toegye) reduces goodness to the Four Beginnings. And yet he also says that among the Seven Sentiments there does not exist something not good. If so, then outside of the Four Beginnings there also exist good sentiments. From where are these sentiments aroused? Mencius raises the general ideas, thus he only speaks of being compassionate, being ashamed of evil deeds, be respectful, and being able to discern right and wrong. As to other good sentiments out of the Four Beginnings, then scholars should apply the general principles and know them. How are human sentiments not based on Benevolence, Righteousness, Propriety, and Intelligence and not be good sentiments? This phrase should be deeply investigated and finely thought out. As to good sentiments, they have the Four Beginnings, and yet out of the Four Beginning, there also exist good sentiments. Then it means Human Mind has two foundations. Can it be so?

==='''Student 5 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

大抵未發則性也。已發則情也。發而計較商量則意也。心爲性情意之主。故未發已發及其計較。皆可謂之心也。發者氣也。所以發者理也。其發直出於正理而氣不用事則道心也。七情之善一邊也。發之之際。氣已用事則人心也。七情之合善惡也。知其氣之用事。精察而趨乎正理。則人心聽命於道心也。不能精察而惟其所向。則情勝慾熾。而人心愈危。道心愈微矣。精察與否。皆是意之所爲。故自修莫先於誠意。今若曰四端理發而氣隨之。

==='''Student 6 : Stacey Lui'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

七情氣發而理乘之。則是理氣二物。或先或後。相對爲兩岐。各自出來矣。人心豈非二本乎。情雖萬般。夫孰非發於理乎。惟其氣或揜而用事。或不揜而聽命於理。故有善惡之異。以此體認。庶幾見之矣。別紙之說。大槪得之。但所謂四七發於性。人心道心發於心者。似有心性二岐之病。性則心中之理也。心則盛貯性之器也。安有發於性發於心之別乎。人心道心皆發於性。而爲氣所揜者爲人心。不爲氣所揜者爲道心。

The Seven Emotions manifests in Material Force (ki) and Principle (li) is mounted on it. Thus Principle and Material Force are two entities. One precedes and one comes after. They face one another as two branches and each has emerged individually. How is it that the human mind has two origins? Even if emotions are multiple vessels, what does not manifest from Principle? It is only that some Material Force is covered and intercepted. Some are not covered and heed orders orders from Principle. The difference there is in good and evil is thereby this embodiment [庶幾見之矣]. What is said in the appendix has been obtained through a general understanding. However, that which is called the Four Beginnings manifests from Nature. That the human mind and moral mind manifest from the mind is like an error of having two branches of the natural mind. The Principle of the mind's core is nature. The vessel of [盛貯性] is the mind. How is there a difference in the manifestation from nature and the manifestation of the mind? The human mind and moral mind are all manifested from nature but that which Material Force covers is considered the human mind. That which is not covered by Material Force is considered the moral mind.

==='''Student 7 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

心性情圖

程子曰。人生氣稟。理有善惡。此曉人深切。八字打開處也。其所謂理者。指其乘氣流行之理。而非指理之本然也。本然之理固純善。而乘氣流行。其分萬殊。氣稟有善惡。故理亦有善惡也。夫理之本然。則純善而已。乘氣之際。參差不齊。淸淨至貴之物及汚穢至賤之處。理無所不在。而在淸淨則理亦淸淨。在汚穢則理亦汚穢。若以汚穢者爲非理之本然則可。遂以爲汚穢之物無理則不可也。夫本然者。理之一也。流行者。分之殊也。

Diagram of Heart, Nature, and Sentiment

Master Cheng said: "Human life is endowed with material force. Principle has good and evil." This penetrates deeply into man(?). The Eight Characters unfold this place(??). What is called principle, is the principle which rides on qi and spreads(?). It does not refer to ''li zhi benran''. ''benran zhi li'' is originally pure and good, and it rides on qi and spreads(?). It splits into ten thousand different parts. The endowed qi has good and evil; therefore principle also has good and evil. Of course ''li zhi benran'' is purely good, and nothing else. The limit(?) of riding on qi is that it is uneven.(?) The peaceful arrives at worthy things, and the foul arrives at lowly places. [Yet] there is nowhere that principle is not. So, when it is in the peaceful, principle is also peaceful. When it is in the foul, principle is also foul. It is like using the foul to ???, then ?? foul things ???. The root is one with principle; what spreads is the many parts.

==='''Student 8 : Q'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

捨流行之理。而別求本然之理。固不可。若以理之有善惡者。爲理之本然則亦不可。理一分殊四字。最宜體究。徒知理之一而不知分之殊。則氏之以作用爲性而猖狂自恣是也。徒知分之殊而不知理之一。則荀，揚以性爲惡。或以爲善惡混者。是也。昨書以爲未發之時。亦有不善之萌者。更思之。尤見其大錯。吾兄之不識大本。病根正在於此。

This is neglecting the principle whose flows and goings manifest in actuality and seeking an innate principle alternately. This cannnot be. In this case, it will also not be possible to speak of the innateness of the principle that is present both in what is good and what is bad.

==='''Student 9 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

未發者。性之本然也。太極之妙也。中也。大本也。於此亦有不善之萌。則是聖人獨有大本。而常人無大本也。孟子性善之說。爲駕虛之高談。而人不可以爲堯舜矣。子思何不曰君子之喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中。而乃泛言喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中耶。

==='''Student 10 : Yeonjae Ra'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

千萬不是。切宜速改。右議論閒有先賢所未發者。不遇吾兄。未易辨論至此。於此相合。則無所不合矣。今世之所謂學者。豈無聰明才辯之人哉。可語此事者。殊不多見。見此論而不怪笑者。亦鮮矣。

I think this statement is utterly unreasonable, so (you) should correct it as fast. The discuss argued on the right side(of the letter) has unrevealed thing by ancient sages. If we haven’t met you before, it would not be easy to give discriminating consideration to this. If to this matches each other, there is nothing could not be matched. Nowadays among so called scholars, how there is no one who are not be intelligent and talented? (However) those who can refer to this things, we could not discover them in many ways. Also, there would be rare person those who are not laughing weirdly at this discussion.

==='''Student 11 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 12 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 13 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 14 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

[[Category:2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop]]
[[Category:Advanced Translation Group]]

(Translation) 李珥答成浩原(壬申)

2019-07-05T06:48:45Z

Slui:

{{Primary Source Document3
|Image = 이이율곡전서답성호원1.jpg
|English =
|Chinese = 李珥答成浩原(壬申)
|Korean = 이이 답 성호원(임신)(''Yi I Dap SeongHowon(Imsin)'')
|Genre = [[Literati Writings]]
|Type = Letter
|Author = 李珥
|Source = '''IMG.''' [http://bit.ly/2XyzYcR Korean National Assembly Library (국회전자도서관)]
'''TXT.''' [http://db.itkc.or.kr/dir/item?itemId=BT#dir/node?grpId=&itemId=BT&gubun=book&depth=5&cate1=Z&cate2=&dataGubun=%EC%B5%9C%EC%A2%85%EC%A0%95%EB%B3%B4&dataId=ITKC_BT_0201B_0080_010_0100&viewSync=OT Korean Classics and Literati's Collection of Writings (한국고전종합DB)]
|Year = 1572
|Key Concepts=
|Translator = [[2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop (Advanced)#Participants | Participants of 2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop (Advanced Translation Group)]]
|Editor =
|Translation Year = 2019
}}
[[File:Backward.png|right|40px|link=2019_JSG_Summer_Hanmun_Workshop_(Advanced)#.282019.29Primary_Sources_for_Korean_Studies]]

=='''Introduction'''==

=='''Original Script'''==

{|class="wikitable" style="width:100%; background-color:#ffffff;"
!style="width:25%;"|Image || style="width:25%;"|Text || style="width:50%;"| Translation
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원1.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)1|400px]]
||
答成浩原壬申

聖賢之說。或橫或豎。各有所指。欲以豎準橫。以橫合豎。則或失其旨矣。心一也而謂之道謂之人者。性命形氣之別也。情一也而或曰四或曰七者。專言理兼言氣之不同也。是故。人心道心。不能相兼而相爲終始焉。四端不能兼七情。而七情則兼四端。道心之微。人心之危。朱子之說盡矣。四端不如七情之全。七情不如四端之粹。是則愚見也。人心道心。相爲終始者。何謂也。今人之心。直出於性命之正。而或不能順而遂之。閒之以私意。則是始以道心。而終以人心也。或出於形氣。而不咈乎正理。則固不違於道心矣。或咈乎正理。而知非制伏。不從其欲。則是始以人心。而終以道心也。蓋人心道心。兼情意而言也。不但指情也。七情則統言人心之動。有此七者。四端則就七情中擇其善一邊而言也。固不如人心道心之相對說下矣。且情是發出恁地。不及計較。則又不如人心道心之相爲終始矣。烏可强就而相準耶。今欲兩邊說下。則當遵人心道心之說。欲說善一邊。則當遵四端之說。欲兼善惡說。則當遵七情之說。不必將枘就鑿。紛紛立論也。四端七情。正如本然之性氣質之性。本然
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원2.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)2|400px]]
||
之性。則不兼氣質而爲言也。氣質之性。則却兼本然之性。故四端不能兼七情。七情則兼四端。朱子所謂發於理發於氣者。只是大綱說。豈料後人之分開太甚乎。學者活看可也。且退溪先生旣以善歸之四端。而又曰。七者之情。亦無有不善。若然則四端之外。亦有善情也。此情從何而發哉。孟子擧其大槪。故只言惻隱羞惡恭敬是非。而其他善情之爲四端。則學者當反三而知之。人情安有不本於仁義禮智而爲善情者乎。此一段當深究精思善情旣有四端。而又於四端之外有善情。則是人心有二本也。其可乎。大抵未發則性也。已發則情也。發而計較商量則意也。心爲性情意之主。故未發已發及其計較。皆可謂之心也。發者氣也。所以發者理也。其發直出於正理而氣不用事則道心也。七情之善一邊也。發之之際。氣已用事則人心也。七情之合善惡也。知其氣之用事。精察而趨乎正理。則人心聽命於道心也。不能精察而惟其所向。則情勝慾熾。而人心愈危。道心愈微矣。精察與否。皆是意之所爲。故自修莫先於誠意。今若曰四端理發而氣隨之。七情氣發而理乘之。則是理氣二物。或先或後。相對爲兩岐。各自出來矣。人心豈非二本乎。情雖萬般。夫孰非發於理乎。惟其氣或揜而用事。或不揜而聽命於理。故有善惡之異。以此體認。庶幾見之
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원3.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)3|400px]]
||
矣。別紙之說。大槪得之。但所謂四七發於性。人心道心發於心者。似有心性二岐之病。性則心中之理也。心則盛貯性之器也。安有發於性發於心之別乎。人心道心皆發於性。而爲氣所揜者爲人心。不爲氣所揜者爲道心。

'''附問書'''

霖陰不止。想惟道況淸和否。傾仰不自已。前稟別紙。乞答示何如。今看十圖心性情圖。退翁立論。則中閒一段曰。四端之情。理發而氣隨之。自純善無惡。必理發未遂而揜於氣。然後流爲不善。七者之情。氣發而理乘之。亦無有不善。若氣發不中而滅其理。則放而爲惡云。究此議論。以理氣之發。當初皆無不善。而氣之不中。乃流於惡云矣。人心道心之說。旣如彼其分理氣之發。而從古聖賢皆宗之。則退翁之論。自不爲過耶。更望於此痛加血戰。極意消詳。以解鈍澁之惑。千萬至祝。心之虛靈知覺。一而已矣。而有人心道心之二名。何歟。以其或生於形氣之私。或原於性命之正。理氣之發不同。而危微之用各異。故名不能不二也。然則與所謂四端七情者。同耶。今以道心謂之四端可矣。而以人心謂之七情則不可矣。且夫四端七情。以發於性者而言也。人心道心。以發於心者
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원4.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)4|400px]]
||
而言也。其名目意味之閒。有些不同焉。幸賜一言。發其直指。何如。人心道心之發。其所從來固有主氣主理之不同。在唐虞無許多議論時。已有此說。聖賢宗旨。皆作兩下說。則今爲四端七情之圖。而曰發於理發於氣。有何不可乎。理與氣之互發。乃爲天下之定理。而退翁所見。亦自正當耶。然氣隨之理乘之之說。正自拖引太長。似失於名理也。愚意以爲四七對擧而言。則謂之四發於理。七發於氣可也。爲性情之圖。則不當分開。但以四七俱置情圈中。而曰四端。指七情中理一邊發者而言也。七情不中節。是氣之過不及而流於惡云云。則不混於理氣之發。而亦無分開二岐之患否耶。幷乞詳究示喩。未發之體。亦有善惡之可言者。甚誤。喜怒哀樂之未發。謂之中。中也者。大本也。安有善惡之可言耶。衆人之心。不昏昧則必散亂。大本不立。故不可謂之中也。幸於一瞬之閒。或有未發之時。則卽此未發之時。全體湛然。與聖人不異矣。惟其瞥然之際。還失其體。昏亂隨之。故不得其中耳。其所以昏且亂者。由其拘於氣質故也。若曰拘於氣質而不能立其大本則可也。若曰未發之時。亦有惡之萌兆則大不可。蓋其或昏
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원5.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)5|400px]]
||
昧。或散亂者。不可謂之未發也。

'''心性情圖'''

程子曰。人生氣稟。理有善惡。此曉人深切。八字打開處也。其所謂理者。指其乘氣流行之理。而非指理之本然也。本然之理固純善。而乘氣流行。其分萬殊。氣稟有善惡。故理亦有善惡也。夫理之本然。則純善而已。乘氣之際。參差不齊。淸淨至貴之物及汚穢至賤之處。理無所不在。而在淸淨則理亦淸淨。在汚穢則理亦汚穢。若以汚穢者爲非理之本然則可。遂以爲汚穢之物無理則不可也。夫本然者。理之一也。流行者。分之殊也。捨流行之理。而別求本然之理。固不可。若以理之有善惡者。爲理之本然則亦不可。理一分殊四字。最宜體究。徒知理之一而不知分之殊。則釋
||
(translation)
|-
| [[File:이이율곡전서답성호원6.jpg|border|李珥答成浩原(壬申)6|400px]]
||
氏之以作用爲性而猖狂自恣是也。徒知分之殊而不知理之一。則荀，揚以性爲惡。或以爲善惡混者。是也。昨書以爲未發之時。亦有不善之萌者。更思之。尤見其大錯。吾兄之不識大本。病根正在於此。未發者。性之本然也。太極之妙也。中也。大本也。於此亦有不善之萌。則是聖人獨有大本。而常人無大本也。孟子性善之說。爲駕虛之高談。而人不可以爲堯舜矣。子思何不曰君子之喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中。而乃泛言喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中耶。千萬不是。切宜速改。
右議論閒有先賢所未發者。不遇吾兄。未易辨論至此。於此相合。則無所不合矣。今世之所謂學者。豈無聰明才辯之人哉。可語此事者。殊不多見。見此論而不怪笑者。亦鮮矣。
||
(translation)
|}

=='''Discussion Questions'''==
#
#

=='''Further Readings'''==

*
*

=='''References'''==
<references/>

=='''Translation'''==

==='''(sample) : Jaeyoon Song'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 1 : Yishu Ma'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:
聖賢之說。或橫或豎。各有所指。欲以豎準橫。以橫合豎。則或失其旨矣。心一也而謂之道謂之人者。性命形氣之別也。情一也而或曰四或曰七者。專言理兼言氣之不同也。是故。人心道心。不能相兼而相爲終始焉。四端不能兼七情。而七情則兼四端。道心之微。人心之危。朱子之說盡矣。四端不如七情之全。七情不如四端之粹。是則愚見也。

Translation:
The words of the sages, some are horizontal and some are vertical. Each of them has pointed objects. If you intend to use the vertical to regulate the horizontal, use to horizontal to suit the vertical, then you might lose the purport of the sages' words. The minds are one but we call it the mind of the Way and the mind of humans, it is the difference of the mind, the life, the physical existence, and the qi. The emotions are one, but some are called the four sprouts and some are called the seven emotions. This is talking about the differences of the principle and the qi specifically. Because of this, the human mind and the mind of the Way, they cannot combine with each other but can be the other's beginning and ending. The four sprouts cannot encompass the seven emotions, but the seven emotions can encompass the four sprouts. The mind of the Way is subtle. The human mind is perilous. That's what the teachings of Master Zhu are all about. The four sprouts are not as full as the seven emotions. The seven emotions are not as pure as the four sprouts. This is my humble opinion.

==='''Student 2 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

人心道心。相爲終始者。何謂也。今人之心。直出於性命之正。而或不能順而遂之。閒之以私意。則是始以道心。而終以人心也。或出於形氣。而不咈乎正理。則固不違於道心矣。或咈乎正理。而知非制伏。不從其欲。則是始以人心。而終以道心也。蓋人心道心。兼情意而言也。不但指情也。七情則統言人心之動。

==='''Student 3 : Younès M'Ghari'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

有此七者。四端則就七情中擇其善一邊而言也。固不如人心道心之相對說下矣。且情是發出恁地。不及計較。則又不如人心道心之相爲終始矣。烏可强就而相準耶。今欲兩邊說下。則當遵人心道心之說。欲說善一邊。則當遵四端之說。欲兼善惡說。則當遵七情之說。不必將枘就鑿。紛紛立論也。四端七情。正如本然之性氣質之性。本然之性。則不兼氣質而爲言也。氣質之性。則却兼本然之性。故四端不能兼七情。七情則兼四端。

[Here] there are 7 [of these]. As for the 4 inklings, I advanced towards the center of the 7 sentiments, chose one of its good aspects and [here] I discussed [it]. It is really not a conflict [that we have] between the human mind and the mind of the way. And the sentiments are aroused that way. If they are not thought over, then it is neither the human mind and the mind of the way encompass one another from the end to the beginning.

==='''Student 4 : King Kwong Wong'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

朱子所謂發於理發於氣者。只是大綱說。豈料後人之分開太甚乎。學者活看可也。且退溪先生旣以善歸之四端。而又曰。七者之情。亦無有不善。若然則四端之外。亦有善情也。此情從何而發哉。孟子擧其大槪。故只言惻隱羞惡恭敬是非。而其他善情之爲四端。則學者當反三而知之。人情安有不本於仁義禮智而爲善情者乎。此一段當深究精思善情旣有四端。而又於四端之外有善情。則是人心有二本也。其可乎。
That which Master Zhu called aroused from the Principle and aroused from the Material Force are just general outlines. How did he expect later people divide them too much? It is appropriate that scholars actively read them. Moreover, Mister T'oegye (Toegye) reduces goodness to the Four Beginnings. And yet he also says that among the Seven Sentiments there does not exist something not good. If so, then outside of the Four Beginnings there also exist good sentiments. From where are these sentiments aroused? Mencius raises the general ideas, thus he only speaks of being compassionate, being ashamed of evil deeds, be respectful, and being able to discern right and wrong. As to other good sentiments out of the Four Beginnings, then scholars should apply the general principles and know them. How are human sentiments not based on Benevolence, Righteousness, Propriety, and Intelligence and not be good sentiments? This phrase should be deeply investigated and finely thought out. As to good sentiments, they have the Four Beginnings, and yet out of the Four Beginning, there also exist good sentiments. Then it means Human Mind has two foundations. Can it be so?

==='''Student 5 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

大抵未發則性也。已發則情也。發而計較商量則意也。心爲性情意之主。故未發已發及其計較。皆可謂之心也。發者氣也。所以發者理也。其發直出於正理而氣不用事則道心也。七情之善一邊也。發之之際。氣已用事則人心也。七情之合善惡也。知其氣之用事。精察而趨乎正理。則人心聽命於道心也。不能精察而惟其所向。則情勝慾熾。而人心愈危。道心愈微矣。精察與否。皆是意之所爲。故自修莫先於誠意。今若曰四端理發而氣隨之。

==='''Student 6 : Stacey Lui'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

The Seven Emotions manifests in Material Force (ki) and Principle (li) is mounted on it. Thus Principle and Material Force are two entities. One precedes and one comes after. They face one another as two branches and each has emerged individually. How is it that the human mind has two origins? Even if emotions are multiple vessels, what does not manifest from Principle? It is only that some Material Force is covered and intercepted. Some are not covered and heed orders orders from Principle. The difference there is in good and evil is thereby this embodiment [庶幾見之矣]. What is said in the appendix has been obtained through a general understanding. However, that which is called the Four Beginnings manifests from Nature. That the human mind and moral mind manifest from the mind is like an error of having two branches of the natural mind. The Principle of the mind's core is nature. The vessel of [盛貯性] is the mind. How is there a difference in the manifestation from nature and the manifestation of the mind? The human mind and moral mind are all manifested from nature but that which Material Force covers is considered the human mind. That which is not covered by Material Force is considered the moral mind.

七情氣發而理乘之。則是理氣二物。或先或後。相對爲兩岐。各自出來矣。人心豈非二本乎。情雖萬般。夫孰非發於理乎。惟其氣或揜而用事。或不揜而聽命於理。故有善惡之異。以此體認。庶幾見之矣。別紙之說。大槪得之。但所謂四七發於性。人心道心發於心者。似有心性二岐之病。性則心中之理也。心則盛貯性之器也。安有發於性發於心之別乎。人心道心皆發於性。而爲氣所揜者爲人心。不爲氣所揜者爲道心。

==='''Student 7 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

心性情圖

程子曰。人生氣稟。理有善惡。此曉人深切。八字打開處也。其所謂理者。指其乘氣流行之理。而非指理之本然也。本然之理固純善。而乘氣流行。其分萬殊。氣稟有善惡。故理亦有善惡也。夫理之本然。則純善而已。乘氣之際。參差不齊。淸淨至貴之物及汚穢至賤之處。理無所不在。而在淸淨則理亦淸淨。在汚穢則理亦汚穢。若以汚穢者爲非理之本然則可。遂以爲汚穢之物無理則不可也。夫本然者。理之一也。流行者。分之殊也。

Diagram of Heart, Nature, and Sentiment

Master Cheng said: "Human life is endowed with material force. Principle has good and evil." This penetrates deeply into man(?). The Eight Characters unfold this place(??). What is called principle, is the principle which rides on qi and spreads(?). It does not refer to ''li zhi benran''. ''benran zhi li'' is originally pure and good, and it rides on qi and spreads(?). It splits into ten thousand different parts. The endowed qi has good and evil; therefore principle also has good and evil. Of course ''li zhi benran'' is purely good, and nothing else. The limit(?) of riding on qi is that it is uneven.(?) The peaceful arrives at worthy things, and the foul arrives at lowly places. [Yet] there is nowhere that principle is not. So, when it is in the peaceful, principle is also peaceful. When it is in the foul, principle is also foul. It is like using the foul to ???, then ?? foul things ???. The root is one with principle; what spreads is the many parts.

==='''Student 8 : Q'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

捨流行之理。而別求本然之理。固不可。若以理之有善惡者。爲理之本然則亦不可。理一分殊四字。最宜體究。徒知理之一而不知分之殊。則氏之以作用爲性而猖狂自恣是也。徒知分之殊而不知理之一。則荀，揚以性爲惡。或以爲善惡混者。是也。昨書以爲未發之時。亦有不善之萌者。更思之。尤見其大錯。吾兄之不識大本。病根正在於此。

This is neglecting the principle whose flows and goings manifest in actuality and seeking an innate principle alternately. This cannnot be. In this case, it will also not be possible to speak of the innateness of the principle that is present both in what is good and what is bad.

==='''Student 9 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

未發者。性之本然也。太極之妙也。中也。大本也。於此亦有不善之萌。則是聖人獨有大本。而常人無大本也。孟子性善之說。爲駕虛之高談。而人不可以爲堯舜矣。子思何不曰君子之喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中。而乃泛言喜怒哀樂之未發謂之中耶。

==='''Student 10 : Yeonjae Ra'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

千萬不是。切宜速改。右議論閒有先賢所未發者。不遇吾兄。未易辨論至此。於此相合。則無所不合矣。今世之所謂學者。豈無聰明才辯之人哉。可語此事者。殊不多見。見此論而不怪笑者。亦鮮矣。

I think this statement is utterly unreasonable, so (you) should correct it as fast. The discuss argued on the right side(of the letter) has unrevealed thing by ancient sages. If we haven’t met you before, it would not be easy to give discriminating consideration to this. If to this matches each other, there is nothing could not be matched. Nowadays among so called scholars, how there is no one who are not be intelligent and talented? (However) those who can refer to this things, we could not discover them in many ways. Also, there would be rare person those who are not laughing weirdly at this discussion.

==='''Student 11 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 12 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 13 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 14 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

[[Category:2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop]]
[[Category:Advanced Translation Group]]

(Translation) 成俔文明論

2019-07-04T07:00:18Z

Slui:

{{Primary Source Document3
|Image = 성현 용재총화(문명론).jpg
|English =
|Chinese = 文明論
|Korean = 문명론(''Munmyeongnon'')
|Genre = [[Literati Writings]]
|Type =
|Author = 成俔
|Source = [http://db.itkc.or.kr/inLink?DCI=ITKC_GO_1306A_0090_000_0010_2004_001_XML Korean Classics and Literati's Collection of Writings (한국고전종합DB)]
|Year =
|Key Concepts=
|Translator = [[2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop (Advanced)#Participants | Participants of 2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop (Advanced Translation Group)]]
|Editor =
|Translation Year = 2019

}}
[[File:Backward.png|right|40px|link=2019_JSG_Summer_Hanmun_Workshop_(Advanced)#.282019.29Primary_Sources_for_Korean_Studies]]

=='''Introduction'''==

=='''Original Script'''==

{|class="wikitable" style="width:90%; font-size:110%; color:#002080; background-color:#ffffff;"
!style="width:40%;"|Classical Chinese || style="width:60%;"| English
|-
|
我國與中朝不類。我人讀書。有音布釋口訣。故人未易學。中朝所言皆文字。無音釋口訣。故其學易就。我人奸巧多疑。常不信人。故人亦不信我。中朝人純厚無疑。雖與外人交賣。而不甚爭詰。我人雖臨小事輕躁喧鬧。故人多而不能就。中朝人靜默無言。人雖少而事易成。我人多食飮。苟失一時。枵腹無所措。細民貸於富屋。猶糜費而不知節用。以至於困。貴者多列酒食而不知厭。若起軍兵。則飛輓過半。行者出數里之程。而輜重塞途。中朝人不多食。一時所食只一燒餠。猶可度朝夕。不必啖飯。軍卒掛乾粮於馬鞍。以備飢餒。行者雖千萬里之遠。只齎銀錢。求飯卽食。求酒卽飮。求馬卽騎。求僕卽率。居有宇而宿有婦。故無難行之處。我人居官者。有早飯朝飯晝飯。或有無時會飮。侵軼僕隷。務要盛饌。句小失差。必加鞭扑。中朝人居官者雖公卿大夫。其家美備。飯肉一器。送于其司而饋之。我人出使外方者。則官吏迎送于境。先備酒食。其入邑也。邀留數日。大開宴席。務祟沈酗。無日蘇醒。因此得疾而廢者無算。其送別也。張幙於佳山勝水之間。挽袖不放。終日不已。故拙者耗敗官資。而日就頹廢。能者多營助利。而因售己私。官家日蕭。吏民日瘁。而不勝其苦矣。中朝人出使者。萬騎前導。節鉞輝煌。可謂盛矣。其入邑也。官吏拜于堂下。使人入房。只啖豚蹄糲飯。與伴從同宿一榻。明日卽行。官吏出五里之外。餞三杯而送之。官吏欲修人情。私備酒食。稱下程而饋之。故使不留連。官無費物。而州縣常足也。我國人物。奴婢居半。故雖名州鉅邑。而軍卒鮮少。中朝則人皆國人。戶皆精兵。雖小小僻邑。數萬之衆。可以猝辦。我人輕佻不定。民不畏吏。吏不畏士。士不畏大夫。大夫不畏公卿。上下相陵思相傾軋。中朝則下民畏吏如豺虎。吏畏公卿大夫如鬼神。公卿大夫畏上如天。故莅事則能就。出令則易從也。
||
(translation)
|-
|}

=='''Discussion Questions'''==
#
#

=='''Further Readings'''==

*
*

=='''References'''==
<references/>

=='''Translation'''==

==='''(sample) : Jaeyoon Song'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 1 : Yishu Ma'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

-As this article takes China as an idealized model, how did people during the 15th-16th century Joseon understand their own culture? Are there any other literati writings which could give us further information?

==='''Student 2 : Samuel Sai Hay Chan 陳世熙 진세희'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

What do you think is the point of 成俔 tried to make in the essay? Is his depiction of China and Korea fair and trustworthy? If not, what is the reason of him depicting the two countries in such ways?

==='''Student 3 : Younès M'Ghari'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

Were the author's representations towards China and Korea widely spread among Korean scholars? Even across the opposite political factions of the time?

What would have been the king's reaction if he could have read this text?

Who compiled this text, when and for what purpose? What kinds of texts precede and follow it in that compilation?

==='''Student 4 : King Kwong Wong'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:
Why did Sŏng Hyŏn (Seong Hyeon) write an essay comparing the Chosŏn (Joseon) people and the Chinese people? What did he want to achieve with this writing?

==='''Student 5 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 6 : Stacey'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

What were the motivations behind this piece? Do you think the author is equally critical and reverent of Choson and Ming China, respectively, or is he idealising one in order to create a greater contrast?

Describe the relationship between China and Choson during the time of this text.

==='''Student 7 : Russell Guilbault'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:
# Seong Hyeon's criticism of the social/political organization of Joseon, compared to the Ming, seems to me to echo Gim Siseup's emphasis on the importance of 'myeongbun' 名分. Both Seong Hyeon and Gim Siseup believe a strictly enforced system of distinctions between various social ranks & positions is necessary for a country to be properly governed. I'd like to do some more looking into how important this concept was & how widely it circulated among literati during this period.

==='''Student 8 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 9 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 10 : (Kanghun Ahn)'''===
----

How accurate are Song Hyon's observations of China vis-a-vis the real China at the time?

Is it really a good rhetorical strategy to draw upon such a black and white logic to criticize one's own society?

Was it really prevalent, among Choson literati, to utilize the idealized portrayal of China in order to criticize Choson society?

==='''Student 11 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

==='''Student 12 : (Write your name)'''===
----

*Discussion Questions:

[[Category:2019 JSG Summer Hanmun Workshop]]
[[Category:Advanced Translation Group]]

장서각위키 - 사용자 기여 [ko]

(Translation) 1636年 外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1713年 崔壽學 原情 1

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1543年 李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 萬曆22年 鎭川 立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年 鎭川 立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年 鎭川 立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年 鎭川 立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年 鎭川 立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年 鎭川 立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年 鎭川 立案

(Translation) 1636年 外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1636年 外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年 外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年 外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年 外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年 外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1543年 李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年 李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年 李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年 李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年 李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年 李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1079年 高麗禮賓省牒

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年 金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1079年 高麗禮賓省牒

(Translation) 徐命膺 北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺 北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺 北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺 北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺 北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺 北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺 北學議序

(Translation) 崔鳴吉 丙子封事第一

(Translation) 崔鳴吉 丙子封事第一

(Translation) 李珥 答成浩原(壬申)

(Translation) 李珥 答成浩原(壬申)

(Translation) 成俔 文明論

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1713年崔壽學原情 1

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1543年李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

(Translation) 萬曆22年鎭川立案

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1636年外藩蒙古書信

(Translation) 1543年李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1543年李彦迪諭書

(Translation) 1079年高麗禮賓省牒

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1792年金憙訓諭敎書

(Translation) 1079年高麗禮賓省牒

(Translation) 徐命膺北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺北學議序

(Translation) 徐命膺北學議序

(Translation) 崔鳴吉丙子封事第一

(Translation) 崔鳴吉丙子封事第一

(Translation) 李珥答成浩原(壬申)

(Translation) 李珥答成浩原(壬申)

(Translation) 成俔文明論