There are six volumes of Sushi蘇軾 that has records related to Zigushen子姑神. Among them, 〈Zigushenji〉 is the record about Sushi’s observation of a shamanic ritual at a house in Huangzhou. Here, Sushi had a conversation with a spirit named Zigushen, and recorded the details of the conversation. This paper discusses three main points focusing on Sushi’s records. The first point is the discussion of the credibility of his story by comparing with five other works of his. The second point is the credibility analysis of the contents of the conversation with the spirit. The spirit claimed that she was a woman name Hemei during the Tang dynasty. And she described events during and after her life to Sushi in detail. She also wrote several poems after the conversation with Sushi. The third point is about how to explain this phenomenon if her words were truthful, and why Sushi slightly doubted the phenomenon. Considering these points, this work concludes as follows. Not all Zigushens in ancient Chinese literatures are Hemei, but the one in Sushi’s work is. The concreteness of the conversation and the phrases from the poems support the idea that it is not fictional. Modern Chinese scholars treat these ancient records as literary works. They argue that these fictions are of intellectuals expressing their concerns through ghost stories.However, this view is based on materialistic thinking. We can understand the mental world of ancient Chinese people, if these stories are treated, not just as literary works, but as records. There are thousands of similar stories in 《Taipingguangji太平廣記》, an ancient Chinese literature. Jiyun紀昀 of the Qing dynasty has also written many stories about shamanic rituals. His writings are relatively objective and detailed. This paper analyzes contents of Sushi’s work with Jiyun’s writings. Of course, not all phenomena of shamanic rituals are believable. Spirits can be deceitful, even when the conversation coincides with the reality. It is for this reason that Sushi was doubtful toward the Zigushen phenomenon.

‘The True Record of the Joseon Dynasty’ (1392-1863) is a historical document of the Joseon Dynasty which lasted 519 years with rulings of 27 kings in Korean history. This article examines this document to show how kings and bureaucrats of the Joseon Dynasty perceived works of Su Shi, a famous writer from the Song Dynasty. As a writer of the Song Dynasty, Su Shi had a negative view on the Goryeo Dynasty (918-1392) although his works were regarded as the best writings by the Goryeo and Joseon scholars. All the Joseon bureaucrats read and learnt Su Shi’s works. Naturally, the Joseon bureaucrats of the royal palace often cited Su Shi’s writings. Many of the Joseon bureaucrats memorized Su Shi’s “A suggestion recommendation to Shenzong Emperor.” This contained some details of bureaucrats’ suggestions to their emperor regarding state administration. For instance, one of the most cited phrase was that it was important duty of bureaucrats to raise their formal counsel to the emperor. Also, Su Shi was often cited when emphasizing the importance of various national events’ proceedings. Beside these, Su Shi’s view point and ideas had a great influence on Joseon bureaucrats. However, Since the Joseon Dynasty was the center of Neo-Confucianism, however, the idea of Su Shi was somewhat rejected. For this reason, some bureaucrats expressed their explicit objection against Su Shi’s works. On the contrary thinkers such as Wang Anshi and Zhu Xi, who were loyal to the kingship, were respected. It was found in this article that quotations of Wang Anshi and Zhi Xi were used much more frequent than Su Shi’s quotations in conversations between kings and their servants. In this regard, it can be said that the Joseon Dynasty bureaucrats knew about Su Shi’s works, but they had an antipathy toward his ideas.

문장을 보면 소식은 역사 인물과 그에 관련된 사건의 객관적 사실보다는 그런 사건이 일어나게 된 본질적인 문제인, 당사자의 내재적인 원인에 초점을 맞추고 있다. 소식은 역사인물론을 쓸 때 그 인물과 그 인물이 처했던 역사사건을 동시에 논한다. 이는 단순한 인물에 대한 품평이 아니라, 그 인물이 그 당시 상황에서 주어진 환경에서 정치적, 사회적, 군사적 역할을 어떻게 했느냐를 보았다는 것이다. 다시 말하면 인물론은 한 인물의 역사적 역할의 공과를 바탕으로 그 원인을 분석한 글이다. 소식의 이런 글들은 대체로 진부한 설교가 아니라 다양한 관점으로 심도 있게 파헤침으로써 기본적으로 “모든 문제는 당사자에게 있다 反求諸 身”는 관점을 갖고 사람을 평가했다.

진 나라 이전의 중국 문헌에서 발견되는 특징의 하나는 사람들이 상대방과의 대화중에 『시경』의 구절을 인용하는 것이다. 공자의 언행에 대한 기록이 많은 두 종류의 책이 있는데, 하나는 『논어』이고 다른 하나는 『공자가어』이다. 이 두 종류의 책에서 우리는 거의 100 개가 넘는 『시경』 인용 사례를 볼 수 있다. 공자는 왜 이처럼 많은 대화에서 『시경』을 말했을까. 이 모든 사례의 분석을 통해서 본 논문은 다음과 같은 결론을 내렸다. 첫째, 공자는 자기 말 과 자신의 논리에 권위를 더하기 위해서 『시경』을 인용했다. 둘째, 공자는 자신의 말에 별 의 미 없는 수사적인 효과를 위해서 『시경』을 인용했다. 셋째, 당시 『시경』은 문화적으로 또 문 명적으로 당시 사회의 정신적 결정체였다. 특히 지식인들의 중요한 정신적 공감대이며 문화 적 공통분모였다. 공자는 당시 귀족과 지식인들에게 귀중한 교재였던 『시경』에 깊이 공감했 다. 보수적인 사상을 가졌던 공자는 그렇기 때문에 그런 문명적 권위와 문화적 공통분모인 『시경』에 자신의 논리를 의존했던 것이다.

本文的悖论不同于逻辑学中的悖论，而是文学上的悖论，是指有些语句，表面看来内容具有相反性或矛盾性，深层的含义却更加准确合理。事物有表象与本质，语言仅表达事物的概念，不一定是真理或真实，因此，用语言表述事实容易陷入明显的局限。人们洞察事物真实面目后，有时更需要用悖论来揭示本质：不仅使用语言表达表层意味，更需要透过语言表层，运用悖论来表现更加深层的含义。在诸子百家中，老子比其他任何人都更多地使用悖论来展示自己的思想。这篇论文针对老子如何通过悖论提出治国方略进行研究。 『老子』的悖论总共三个类型。第一，我们所认知的现象，经常与事物的本质不一样。老子最典型的句子就是“大巧若拙”。老子用意义完全相反的词语来描述现象和本质，指出人们所认知的只是与本质恰恰相反的表象，以此来告诉君王必须准确地洞察国家现实。第二，老子强调“物壮则老”这一规律。这是中国自古就有的思想，它表明，事物达到极端的一面就会自然产生回归的反作用力，这是所有事物运行的自然循环规则。老子以此来劝勉君王不要追求过度的、做作性的治国方式，并说明这种背道而驰的治国方式将带来灾难性后果。第三，“无为而无不为”，这是老子五千言的最高命题。“无为”在文字上看“不做”，而最终追求的却是“无事不能成”。君王治理国家，所有的政策与措施就应该顺其自然，才能马到成功。这就是老子所希望的最高治国方略。 为了这种治国方略的实现，他进而要求君王积极地退让、谦虚、慈爱及俭约。让君王积极追求雌性的柔软性、婴儿般的赤子心、水流般的自然性、溪谷江海般的包容性。这是使君王和国家平安无事、长存永保的原则。因此老子的这些治国方略是极其现实的，也是非常积极的。在他的悖理语句里，正反两面词语的指向是非常明确的。正面意义的词语是指君王和国家的走向：君王必须成为真正的君王（“大方”、“大器”、“大音”、“大象”），而不是空壳般的君王。为了成为真正的君王，必须善于洞察，把握事物本来的真实面目（“大直”、“大巧”、“大辩”）。以此英明政策来管理国家，君王本人的理想人品（“上德”、“大白”、“广德”、“建德”、“质真”）就会与老百姓浑然一体。君王推动国家政策时，必须透彻地把握现实，用更准确更先进的原则（“明道”、“进道”、“夷道”)施行各种措施。必须以谦让朴素的态度包容天下，细心周到（“疏而不失”）地关怀老百姓。这样的国家就会永不衰亡（“大成不弊”、“大盈不穷”)。君王所希望的（“立”、“行”）国家不断地繁荣成长（“全”、“正”、“盈”、“新”、“得”），君王自己获得真正的成功（“明”、“彰”、“功”、“長”、“知”、“名”、“成”)。这没有任何勉强做作，全是自然而然发展繁荣（“无不为”、“无不治”)。这样的国家，是老百姓人人都幸福、温暖、安全（“民利百倍”、“民复孝慈”、“盗贼无有”)的国家。这就是王弼所谓“崇本息末”的“崇本”方略。 反面词语则集中表达了君王本身要持有的心态和力行的言行。老子要求君王不要做作（“企”、“跨”），不要伪善（“自见”、“自是”、“自伐”、“自矜”），不要过度的“有为”。君王不要顽固地执着，一意孤行（“无隅”、“晚成”、“希声”、“无形”)。君王要谦虚（“不武”、“不怒”、“不与”、“为之下”)，少做（“不行”、“不见”、“不为”），淳朴（“屈”、“拙”、“讷”、“曲”、“枉”、“洼”、“敝”、“少”)，甚至于愚钝（“不德”、“若谷”、“若辱”、“若不足”、“若偷”、“若渝”、“若昧”、“若退”、“若纇”)。这样他的政策松散而宽裕（“天网恢恢”），也不必处处标榜人伦价值（“绝圣弃智”、“绝仁弃义”、“绝巧弃利”）。如此进行“无为之治”，就是王弼所谓“崇本息末”的“息末”方策。 总而言之，老子的悖论具有以下三个要点。一是其悖论有“正言若反”、“物壮则老”、“为无为”三种类型。 二是老子所说的悖论的确拥有“崇本息末”的含义。三是老子所追求的理想的治国方略具有非常积极而值得肯定的意义与价值。