Procedural Changes of Zhuzi(朱子)'s Theory of ZhongHe(中和) and the Theory of Jing(敬)

주자(朱子)의 중화설(中和說) 변천과정과 '경(敬)'공부론(工夫論)

In this paper, the writer examined the procedural changes of Zhuzi(朱子)'s theory of ZhongHe(中和), and also investigated the evaluations thereof made by the later generations. In the stage of ZhongHeJiuShuo(中和舊說), Zhuzi(朱子) ignored the theory of Lidong(李?), which was traditional theory argued by DaoNam School(道南學派). He met Zhangshi(張?) of HuXiang School(湖湘學派) and followed the school's philosophy, 'XianChaShiHouHanYang(先察識後涵養)', meaning what you should do first prior to making great efforts in self-cultivation is to examine the past, when desiring to know yourself. Even though Zhuzi(朱子) had learned the method of moral cultivation from Lidong(李?), he was fascinated by such method of moral cultivation as 'XianChaShiHouHanYang(先察識後涵養)' advocated by HuXiang School(湖湘學派) through discussion with Zhangshi(張?). This tells that he only recognized the fact that there were no achievements WeiFa(未發), but only the achievements YiFa(已發). In the stage of ZhongHeXinShuo(中和新說), he realized the mistakes committed in the time of ZhongHeJiuShuo(中和舊說), and put emphasis upon the achievements in the time WeiFa(未發). Zhuzi(朱子) had explained the relationships among mind, nature, and emotional bond as by his theory, 'XinTongXingQing(心統性情)', meaning that mind controls humans' original nature. Also he followed self-cultivation of Respect, no longer believing the Huhong(胡宏)'s XianChaShiHouHanYang(先察識後涵養). Such a method of self-cultivation means that his method of moral cultivation centered on the achievements YiFa(已發), which was originated from HuXiang School(湖湘學派), had been changed into the method of moral cultivation with a focus on the achievements WeiFa(未發), which was theory argued by DaoNam School(道南學派). However, Zhuzi(朱子)'s theory of ZhongHe(中和) that had seemed perfect began to be discussed and polished again during Joseon Period through the debates between Ligu(栗谷) and Niuxi(牛溪) in the 16th century, and through the debates between Youan(尤庵) and Yuxuan(寓軒) in the 17th century, also through the HuLuoLunZheng(湖洛論爭) represented by Nantang(南塘) and Weiyan(巍巖). Since Zhuzi(朱子)'s theory of ZhongHe(中和) had some flaws, it had to put through such debates as mentioned above. Those debates were generated because imperfections were found in the theory of ZhongHe(中和) by Zhuzi(朱子).

본 논문은 주자(朱子)의 중화설(中和說)의 변천과정을 살펴보고 후대의 평가에 대해서 살펴본 것이다. 주자(朱子)는 중화구설(中和舊說)의 단계에서 도남학파(道南學派)로 내려오는 이동(李?)의 학설을 무시하고, 장식(張?)을 만나 호상학파(湖湘學派)의 '선찰식후함양(先察識後涵養)'을 따르게 된다. 그는 이동(李?)으로부터 수양법(修養法)을 배웠지만 장식(張?)과 만나 토론하면서 호상학파(湖湘學派)의 '선찰식후함양(先察識後涵養)'의 방법론(方法論)에 매료되게 된다. 이는 미발(未發)은 없고 모든 것이 발(發)한 이발(已發)의 때만을 인정하는 것이었다. 중화신설(中和新說)의 단계에서는 중화구설(中和舊說) 때의 잘못을 깨닫고 다시 미발(未發)의 때를 중시하게 된다. 심(心) 성(性) 정(情)의 관계도 심통성정(心統性情)이라는 것으로 적립하게 된다. 또한 호굉(胡宏)의 '선찰식후함양(先察識後涵養)'으로부터 벗어나 '경(敬)'의 수양법(修養法)을 내세운다. 이러한 수양(修養) 방법은 호상학파(湖湘學派)의 이발(已發)위주의 수양법(修養法)에서 도남학파(道南學派)의 미발(未發)위주의 수양법(修養法)으로 바뀐 것을 의미한다. 이렇듯 완벽해 보이는 주자(朱子)의 중화설(中和說)은 조선(朝鮮)에 들어와서 16세기 율곡(栗谷)과 우계(牛溪)의 논쟁을 통해, 17세기 우암(尤庵)과 우헌(寓軒)의 논쟁을 통해, 18세기 남당(南塘)과 외암(巍巖)의 호락논쟁(湖洛論爭)을 통해 다시 논의된다. 주자(朱子)의 중화설(中和說)은 미비점을 가지고 있었기 때문에 위와 같은 논쟁을 겪게 된 것이다. 이러한 논쟁은 주자(朱子)의 중화설(中和說)이 미비점을 안고 있기 때문에 벌어진 논쟁이다.