CAJ | 학술논문

自20世纪初古史辨运动兴起，易学界受科学主义思潮影响，多视“经”为卜筮记录，“传”为哲理新创，“经”与“传”必须分别而观，不可以以“经”释“传”，亦不可以以“传”解“经”。本文列举九个论点，论证《易记》为政治典册，蕴含义理；《易传》义理之精义即多承继自“经”。《周易》“经’’“传”关系，一如父母子女之关系。父母之基因为子女所承继，“经”之基因亦为“传”所传承。“经”与“传”固有区别，就像父母子女各具独立人格。我们当然不应混“经”“传”为一，但亦不宜认“经”“传”为绝无关系之两种文献。
자20세기초고사변운동흥기，역학계수과학주의사조영향，다시“경”위복서기록，“전”위철리신창，“경”여“전”필수분별이관，불가이이“경”석“전”，역불가이이“전”해“경”。본문열거구개론점，론증《역기》위정치전책，온함의리；《역전》의리지정의즉다승계자“경”。《주역》“경’’“전”관계，일여부모자녀지관계。부모지기인위자녀소승계，“경”지기인역위“전”소전승。“경”여“전”고유구별，취상부모자녀각구독립인격。아문당연불응혼“경”“전”위일，단역불의인“경”“전”위절무관계지량충문헌。
Since the arising of the Gu shi bian or Debates on Ancient History movement from the beginning of 1920s on, influenced by the ＂scientific＂ spirit, the academic circle of the studies of Changes had tended to argue that the ancient Text （i. e. , judgments and line statements） of the Classic of Changes were but individuated records of divination and the Commentaries on it were attributed to philosophical creation and thus they should be distinguished respectively other than be mutually interpreted. This paper illustrates nine points to demonstrate that the ancient Text was a political document which conceives meanings and principles, and the subtleties of the meanings and principles of the Commentaries were by large inherited from the Text. The association between the Text and Commentaries just likes that between parents and children. As the genes of the parents are inherited by their children, the Text＇s genes were also succeeded by the Commentaries. Nonetheless, the Text and Commentaries differ intrinsically as parents and children possess independent personalities respectively. So, we should neither amalgamate them into one nor separate them into two documents without any relevance.