The Critic on Mohism in the History of Korean Thoughts Centered on the Theory of Rejecting Heterodoxy

한국사상사에서의 묵가(墨家) 비판 - 벽리단론(闢異端論)의 전개 양상을 중심으로 -

As above, as theoretical basis of critiques against School of Mohism, the researcher summarized the positions of the elder Confucian scholars including Meng Zi. In the body of text, taking it as promises, the researcher examined the critiques against Mo Tzu and School of Mohism as well focusing on the aspects and development of the theory of rejecting heterodoxy which had been introduced and strongly argued from the end of Goryeo kingdom to the late Joseon period. The summary of the body of this text is as follows: In the old literatures prior to Goryeo Kingdom, the researcher couldn't find any cases that either the School of Mohism or Mo Tzu including the Hundred Schools of Thought had been rejected explicitly. Having reached the end of Goryeo and the beginning of Joseon period, Meng Zi's viewpoints on the theory of rejecting heterodoxy had begun to emerge and come into play with the progress of accepting Neo-Confucianism, and, these critiques against Yang Zhu and Mo Tzu being given, the scholar-literati circle had started rejecting Buddhism and Lao Tzu. Basically the contents of the critiques against the School of Mohism in the early period of Joseon were in succession to Meng Zi's theory of rejecting heterodoxy and the views and thoughts of the elder Confucian scholars including Han Yu rather than any specific critiques against Mo Tzu' ideology itself. Until entering the middle of Joseon period, the critiques against the School of Mohism had been used as a tool to promote Confucianism in an affirmative manner, while arguing strongly against the viewpoint of Han Yu in the first place. Particularly, not only the original text of the Mo Tzu's writings were directly quoted, although it was partial, but also the contents of the critiques against the School of Mohism had been developed and stretched to the extent of their entire ideological system. Having approached to the late period of Joseon, the critiques against the School of Mohism had begun to be linked to those critiques against the study of state examination or of sentence patterns including Catholic Church, furthermore the critics raised their harsh tones against the irregularities of the society at large like the issue of corruptions of the government officials of those days instead, although they still had firmly stood on the ground of the theory of rejecting heterodoxy. Those scholars that belonged to the School of Practical Learning, in particular, said in justification of the School of Mohism arguing that the major ideologies of Mo Zi had usefulness in the real world, also they even evaluated that Meng Zi ' critiques against the School of Mohism were immoderate. To sum up, characteristics of scholars in the Joseon period to understand and critique the School of Mohism are that ideologies of Mo Tzu were mostly used as a tool for the sake of critiques against heresies in other sectors of society based mainly on Meng Zi's theory of rejecting heterodoxy, rather than opposing views against the ideologies or philosophies of the School of Mohism itself. Meanwhile, however, on the plus side, the critics praised Mo Tzu's individual efforts in order to put his ideology of peace into practice apart from the ideological system of the School of Mohism. Also, having reached the late period of Joseon, the researcher was able to have discovered the fact that the writings of Mo Tzu had been used as historical materials in order to ascertain historical truths of Confucian Scriptures, rather not having it regarded as an ideology text.

이 글은 선유(先儒)들의 묵가에 대한 비판을 개괄하고, 이를 전제로 하여 고려말부터 시작하여 조선조 후기에 이르는 묵가 비판의 전개 양상을 고찰한 것이다. 우리나라 고려 이전의 문헌에서는 묵가나 묵자를 비롯한 제자백가를 명시적으로 배척한 사례가 보이지 않는다. 여말선초에 이르면 성리학의 수용과 더불어 맹자의 벽이단론의 관점이 부각되기 시작하면서 양주와 묵적에 대한 비판을 전제로 불교와 노자를 배척하기 시작하였다. 조선조 지식인들의 묵가에 대한 이해와 비판 양상의 특징은 묵가의 이념 자체에 대한 비판보다는 주로 다른 이념이나 부조리에 대한 비판의 도구로 활용되었다는 것이다. 여기에는 여말선초의 불교와 노자, 중후기의 문장학(과거학), 서학(천주교), 나아가 관료들의 부패 등이 포괄된다. 내용면에서 본다면, 묵가의 십대 주장 가운데 「겸애」와 「절용」(절장, 비악)에 대한 비판이 주를 이루고 있으며, 조선 중후기에 이르면서 「명귀(明鬼)」와 「천지(天志)」에 대한 비판이 포함되고 있다. 주목할 만한 점은 중국사상사에서와 마찬가지로 침략전쟁을 반대하는 평화 이념이 반영된 「비공(非攻)」이나 운명론을 부정하는 「비명(非命)」에 대한 비판은 보이지 않는다는 것이다. 이것은 유가의 인문주의적이고 현실주의적 측면에서 볼 때 적극적으로 비판할 여지가 없었던 데 연유하는 것으로 생각된다. 한편 묵가 이념과는 별도로 묵자 개인의 묵수(墨守)와 관련된 행위에 대해서는 대체로 긍정적인 평가를 하고 있다. 또한 후기에 이르면서 묵자서는 이념서가 아니라 유교 경전 내용을 고증하기 위한 사료로서 활용되고 있음을 확인할 수 있다.