| 摘要: | 本文以洪大容的對清觀之於朝鮮思想史、中朝交流史的定位為主要論點，欲探求洪大容在文集《湛軒書》發行前的影響力，與現今研究中被賦予的劃時代意義是否相符，以及學界如何將洪大容納入「實學」與「北學」的範疇。
根據《韓國文集叢刊》收錄之《湛軒書》的版本來源，洪大容文集最初是由五代孫洪榮善將既存的15冊稿本重新編輯，1939年時再由新朝鮮社以14卷7冊的鉛印本發行。而從現今洪大容的留存藏本狀況來看，在鉛印本《湛軒書》出版前僅有抄本流傳，新朝鮮社在洪大容著作的整體出版歷程中可謂集大成者。經由1939年著作的發行，洪大容順勢被納入復興「朝鮮學」版圖，在近代學界的研討中亦被賦予「北學先驅」等定位。
而反觀洪大容著作的實際流傳情形，以著作的保存狀態推論作品的重要度，在留存抄本中是以「燕記」類藏本為多數，可知1765年的赴清之行在不同世代間應皆具備一定程度的影響力。回朔到文本內容的考察，洪大容在《燕記》中所體現的對清觀，即是其藉由「清國人物」、「西洋文物」、「清國社會」等面向的書寫，傳達出與清人交友的珍惜感、以開闊胸襟接納清國事物的精神，並間接為朝鮮固守的華夷論的帶來了消解。繼而在洪大容與朴趾源的對清觀方面，雖常被學界以北學派統稱進而探討，但兩人所主張的華夷論其實不盡相同。洪大容在「人物均」的基礎上提出「華夷一也」的對清觀；朴趾源則站在「人物莫辨」的觀點上，認為朝鮮不應受限於華夷之分，即便清國是夷狄也有其可學之處的「進夷狄而師之」主張。
This article takes Hong Taeyong’s view of Qing in the history of Korean thought and the history of Qing-Korean exchanges as the main argument. To explore Hong Taeyong’s influence before the release of “Damheonseo”. Is it consistent with the epoch-making significance given to it in current research, and how the academic circle accommodated Hong Taeyong into the categories of " Silhak" and " Bukhak".
According to the source of the edition of "Damheonseo" included in "Korean Collected Works", The book was originally edited by Hong Taeyong's five generations of Sun Hong Rongshan from the 15 existing manuscripts. In 1939, it was published by Shinjoseonsa in 14 volumes. And judging from the current situation of Hong Taeyong’s writing preservation, it was only circulated by the manuscripts before the printed version of "Damheonseo". Shinjoseonsa as an integration character in the overall publishing process of Hong Taeyong's works. After the publication of the work in 1939, Hong Taeyong was included in the territory of reviving "Korean Studies", and he has been given the position of "Pioneer in Bukhak" in the research of modern academia.
Looking back and observing the actual circulation of Hong Taeyong’s works, and infer the importance of the work based on its preservation status, the "Yeongi" type is the majority among the preserved manuscripts. It can be seen that the trip to the Qing Dynasty in 1765 should have a certain degree of influence in different generations. Back to the investigation of the text content, Hong Darong’s view of Qing in "Yeongi" is written by the aspects of "Characters of the Qing Dynasty", "Western Cultural Relics", and "Society of the Qing Dynasty". That conveys the cherishment of making friends with the Qing people, and the spirit of accepting things in the Qing Dynasty with an open mind, indirectly brought about the dissolution of the Hua Yi theory that Korea adhered to. However, about Hong Taeyong and Park Jiwon's view of Qing. Although they are often referred to and discussed by the Bukhak Schoolers in academia, the Hua Yi theory they advocate is actually different. On the basis of "equality of characters", Hong Taeyong proposed the concept of "equal between Chinese and barbarians". On the other hand, Park Jiwon stood on the view that "characters do not need to be distinguished", and believed that Korea should not be limited to the distinction between Chinese and barbarians. Even if the Qing state is a barbarian, there are things to learn from the idea of "advance to barbarians and learn from them". |
