本文的宗旨，在於從東亞儒學的意義上考察15到19世紀《性理大全》在韓越的接受過程，比較兩國對《性理大全》的定位差異，藉此掌握韓越兩國儒學基調的異同。明永樂13年[1415]，胡廣等人奉永樂帝之命編纂《五經大全》、《四書大全》、《性理大全》三書。永樂17年[1419]，三《大全》被頒賜給朝鮮及交趾，使《性理大全》成為韓越性理學的重要讀物。三《大全》中，《性理大全》是唯一在韓越兩國皆產生「節要本」者，這似乎暗示《性理大全》與另外兩《大全》具有不同的存在方式與意義。相對於另外兩《大全》，《性理大全》與科舉的關係較為薄弱，使該書具有一種相對的「脫世俗性」。朝鮮因為如此而將《性理大全》視為三大全之首，越南則因此將《性理大全》視為三大全之末。藉由比較韓越對《性理大全》的定位，兩國儒學的基本質性差異也被顯題化：若說朝鮮儒學是「作為『心學』的儒學」，越南儒學可說是「作為『實學』的儒學」。

This essay aims to understand the impact of the East Asian diffusion of The Complete Works of Naturality and Truth （Xing Li Da Quan 性理大全， Naturality and Truth hereafter）. To this end， the essay discusses the processes of the adoption of Naturality and Truth in Chosun and Vienam and compares how the two versions of Essentials of The Complete Works of Naturality and Truth （Xing Li Da Quan Je Yao 性理大全節要， Essentials hereafter） were formed in the differing contexts of the two kingdoms. Naturality and Truth， together with The Complete Works of the Five Classics and The Complete Works of the Four Books， were revised by a team of scholars led by Hu Guang under the commission of Emperor Yongle in 1415. Four years later， the emperor further ordered these three works be given to Chosun and Vietnam， which subsequently became the foundation upon which Neo-Confucianism took shape in these two kingdoms. Nevertheless， only Naturality and Truth had Essentials in both kingdoms. Confucian scholars in both states were responsible for producing their own versions of Essentials， and Kim Chung-Kook （1485-1541）， a member of Jo Gwangjo faction， and Bùi Huy Bích （1744-1818）， a student of prominent scholar Lê Quý Đôn， were in charge of the editorial tasks in Chosun and Vietnam， respectively. Kim Chung-Kook and Bùi Huy Bích abridged Naturality and Truth in accordance to the needs of their own kingdoms， and their selective appropriations provide important materials for examining the Neo-Confucian thoughts in the two states， demonstrating the transformation of classical works in differing foreign contexts.