• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.38
• /
• pp.275-302
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to investigate Chu Hsi's theory of Ge Wu by analyzing the $L{\ddot{u}}$ shi daxuexie (呂氏大學解) in the Critique of Adulterated Learning (雜學辨). Critique of Adulterated Learning was written by Chu Hsi(朱熹) for the purpose of criticizing the confucian scholars who inclined to Taoism and Buddhism. Chu Hsi criticized $L{\ddot{u}}$ Pen-chung(呂本中)'s theory of Ge Wu Zhi Zhi, especially focusing on his understandings based on the Buddhist tendency. $L{\ddot{u}}$ Pen-chung considered Ge Wu Zhi Zhi as the processes of emerging Liang Zhi of the Subject to discipline by investigating the Li of things. He said "Regard an awakening as the standard of Ge Wu Zhi Zhi", as he payed more attention to the mind of the Subject rather than a long process of accumulation of Li. In comparison with him, Chu Hsi considered enormous each step to accumulate Li as more important to reach the completions of knowledge. Especially, while grasping Li, he considered they should have an understandings of things from the routines to the origins of the principles - that is from the principles of things to the reasons of things are. Chu Hsi approached to the Ge Wu in the meaning of political theory in his early days. However, Chu Hsi expands the width of his thought with a theoretical tool of 'Li-i fen-shu (理一分殊)' in the course of criticizing $L{\ddot{u}}$ Pen-chung's theory of Ge Wu Zhi Zhi. In that sense, His criticism of $L{\ddot{u}}$ Pen-chung(呂本中)'s theory was not only the process of struggling against Buddhist philosophies, but also the process of deepening of his philosophy.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.297-327
• /
• 2009

Kant proposed three principles of moral philosophy(Categorical Imperative) and Supreme moral principle in The Fundamental principles of Metaphysics of Ethics : Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law ${\cdots}$ etc. Kant's three principles of moral philosophy(Categorical Imperatives) imply that the idea of universality, freedom, and the kingdom of ends. We contrast Chu Hsi's Moral Philosophy with Kant's three principles of Categorical Imperatives. In conclusion Chu Hsi's moral rules be equal to kantian categorical imperative. These rules implicate principle of universalization, impartiality, and the kingdom of ends. But Chu Hsi believe in reality of the human mind and it's nature. Human mind and it's nature is comprised of benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom. Benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom(四德) is the origin of morality. Chu Hsi's philosophy of LI(理) is metaphysics of Tao-Te(道德) or ontological-metaphysical Ethics. Everyone has created with LI. LI is potentiality of Human beings and the good. Chu Hsi's moral philosophy is distinguished from the traditional theory of the substance and modern scientism(phenomenalism)

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.45 no.1
• /
• pp.4-15
• /
• 2012

Sam-Tai-Ji has been used as one of the korean traditional symbol patterns including the emblem of the Seoul olympic. Despite Sam-Tai-Ji included in 태극(Tai-Ji:太極), it has been interpreted widely as Sam-jae(三才)theory called Tian(天), Di(地) and Ren(人), or Tian, Di and Ren harmony thought(天地人 調和思想) by some religion groups and some intelligent people without exact philosophical poofs. For this reason, this research on Tai-Ji(太極) pattern follows. Although Joseon dynasty selecting Confucianism as a ruling principle, it accepted Buddhism, Taoism and Shamanism by applying them to royal tombs not officially but privately. For example, If Confucianism has to be expressed in the public places, Er-Tai-Ji(二太極) pattern having an expressing type of Li-Ben-Lun(理本論) was employed, in the private places like royal tomb construction, Er-Tai-Ji(二太極) pattern having an expressing type of Qi-Ben-Lun(氣本論) was employed. To figure out clear identification of Sam-Tai-Ji(三太極) and Er-Tai-Ji(二太極), this research was conducted to study on the change process of Tai-Ji(太極). It has been considered that Tai-Ji(太極) pattern has something to do with universe in these countries such as Korea, China and Japan. In Tai-Ji(太極) pattern, Sam-Tai-Ji had been used more widely than Er-Tai-Ji(二太極) untill the Han Dang dynasty. The meaning is also indicated as Yin-Yang-Te(陰陽德) in the books like "Hanseo(漢書)" "Yulryeokji(律曆志)". But, in the chinese history, there was a change of the pattern into white spot Er-Tai-Ji(二太極) in "KoTaiJiDo(古太極圖)". It had been interpreted as "Yin-Yang and vitality(陰陽生氣)." since Song Dynasty when Confucianism settled down. In this process, unlike Wu-Ji(無極), Li(理) means immateriality. So Yin-Yang(陰陽) and Li(理) were expressed with the form of Er-Tai-Ji(二太極). Therefore, Sam-Tai-Ji(三太極) is the pattern that stands for Yin-Yang-Te(陰陽德). It means that Yin-Yang(陰陽) gives a life to all the living things, grows them along with Te(德). It developed and flourished in Taoism and Buddhism accepting spirit existence. It is the universe view that Qi(氣) is an entity.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.38
• /
• pp.63-96
• /
• 2013

$L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) was one of the famous philosophers during the Southern Song period, and is called one of DongNamSanXian(東南三賢) together with ZhuXi(朱熹) and ZhangShi(張?). With his profound knowledge transmitted and uphold by JiaXue(家學), $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) established his learning system, interacting with scholars of those days. Principally, $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙)'s XinLun(心論) was based on Mengzi(孟子)' theory of LiangXin(良心) and BenXin(本心). $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) explained the meaning of such a conscience through ChuXin(初心) and Inner NeiXin(內心). According to $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙), ChuXin(初心) arouses when one encounters external things, and this one's intention enables us to make the right judgments over the outside objects. NeiXin(內心) means LiangXin(良心) and BenXin(本心) that recovered the ability of moral awareness. The important significances of $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙)'s XinLun(心論) are XinWai WuDao(心外無道), and XinWaiWuTian(心外無天). Through these, $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) emphasized that Tian(天), Dao(道), and Li(理) are one. $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) arranged a meeting of EHuSi(鵝湖寺), and exerted efforts to negotiate the academic differences between ZhuXi(朱熹) and LuJiuyuan(陸九淵). However, compared with LuJiuyuan(陸九淵) who asserted FaMingBenXin(發明本心), $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) put the emphasis on DaoWenXue(道問學) with self-awareness of conscience. Meanwhile, $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) valued much of Jing(敬) like ZhuXi(朱熹). But, to $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙), Jing(敬) meant WuJianDuan(無間斷) of ChunYiBuZa(純一不雜) DaoDeXin(道德心), and implied the same as Cheng(誠). $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙) stressed the reading and pursuit of study, however, he also asserted that Li(理) could be understood and realized through self-awareness of one's mind and its reflection, and working without interruption. $L{\ddot{u}}Zuqian$(呂祖謙)'s academic tradition of the XinXueDe XueFeng(心學的 學風), which reveals through compromise and confrontation with ZhuXi(朱熹), can be said that it will have a significant meaning of idealism of dispute in the Southern Song period.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.385-406
• /
• 2010

Lee Byeong-hun was introduced to Hanjuhak when he was taught by Myeonwoo Gwak Jong-seok. It is assumed that Hanjuhak circles had a certain influence on formation of his ideas in that they had liberal tendency at that time. Lee Byeong-hun accepted Geummungyonghak developed by Gang Yu-wee of China and participated in Confucian Science Movement while excluding Confucianism. After he accepted western civilization and the ideas of Gang Yu-wee, no traces of Hanjuhak was found in his writing, but it is assumed that Hanjuhak might work as a nutritious element for his ideas. He thought that religious nature of Confucianism could be revived only when he left Neo-confucianism which changed Confucianism into a philosophy by insisting reason instead of God. So, he respected Confucius as a religious founder and left such concepts as reason and respect which were considered important in Neo-confucianism and valued disposition and faith in "Jungyong", a doctrine of the Mean. He considered Confucianism as religious and joined in religious practices such as praying and reciting scriptures. He insisted that filial piety indicates a filial son of the Heaven when interpreting the following passage: Shun (Chinese leader) is a filial duty, which is assumed that he was influenced by Christianity. He respected Confucius as the only religious founder and God as the God to make Confucianism a religion. It is believed that he considered only Confucius as a founder instead of traditional Confucian sages as religion such as Buddhism and Christianity has one founder. God he thought is related with the God in Christianity and furthermore accepted reincarnation of Buddhism which is contrary to Confucian ideas. According to "Gyeongseol" by Lee Byeong-hun, it was believed that he was engaged in religion based on a faith that Confucianism is a religion rather than he pursued Confucianism as a religion to find out a way of its survival.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.185-222
• /
• 2014

Nog-Moon Yim Seong-Joo(녹문 임성주) is a philosopher of late Choseon Dynasty of the 18th Century. He concluded that the debates between the school of Ho and that of Rack originated from the seclusion of Li(理) and Ki(氣), and theorized the new Li and Ki theory according to his own perspective. The prime point of Nog-Moon's Philosophy is said to be Li-Ki dongshil(理氣同實), Mind and Nature ilchi(心性一致) ; he proves his prime potints based on his pure and clean Ki substance. Thus Li-Ki is reduced to monism from dualism, and Mind-Nature(心 性) is reduced to mind. Since the basis of the existence of Mind is Ki(氣), Nog-moon's theory of Substance is concluded to be Ki-monism. Nog-Moon presents his great philosophy of Ki monism suggested by Jeong Myeong-Do's monistic methodology; he explains the universality of Substance and the diversity of Phenomenon with the logical structure of ilwonbunsu(一原分殊). The characteristics of Nog-Moon's philosophy is that ilwon(一原) and bunsu(分殊) are bonnyeon(本然) identical, which means Substance and Function(體用) are identical, or bonmalilchi(本末一致). It means Mind and Nature are bonnyeon(本然) identical, Ki and Mind and Nature are identical. With the expression of seongrihak (性理學) Gijil(氣質) is not different from bonnyeon(本然). Therefore 1 define the philosophy of Nog-Moon had been built on the context of a sage.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.53
• /
• pp.63-100
• /
• 2017

In this article, I researched Nam Dae-nyeon's(1887~1958) thought of Neo-confucian theories, interpretation of confucian canons, and evaluation of historical figures. First, from the side of Neo-confucian theories, he asserted that Qi(氣) had behaviors and Li(理) had not. About his teacher Jeon Wu's(田愚) theories, he thought that those were in tradition of Confucius(孔子) and Mencius(孟子), but not emphasized presidence of mind. And he criticized the theory of mind was Li(理). Second, from the side of interpretation of Confucian canons, Nam Dae-nyeon's study centered on Four Books(四書). This showed he was in tradition of Neo-confucianism. Through this studies he emphasized the importance of Confucian Ren(仁) and Filial piety(孝), self-consciousness as gentry(士). Third, from the side of evaluation of historical figures, Nam Dae-nyeon evaluated many Chinese and Korean scholars, for example, Qu Yuan(屈原), Lu Zhong-lian(魯仲連), Zhen De-xiu(眞德秀), Lu Long-qi((陸?其), Zhang Lu-xiang (張履祥) of China, and Jeong Mong-ju(鄭夢周), Zho Kwang-jo(趙光祖), Yi Hwang(李滉), Yi Yi(李珥), Jeon Wu(田愚) of Korea. And his criteria for evaluation of historical figures was fidelity and insight.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.109-129
• /
• 2012

At this point, in Confucianism's schools debated about analysis for early theory and latterly it of nature between human and animal in Nongam Kim Changhyob's Confucianism. Oh Heeshang argued early theory about Shanguzaezungyongmunmok, written by Kim Changhyob, and establishment of theory about Yokuonyudozaelonshabyonnokbyon, written by him. Kim Changhup, brother of Kim Changhyob, argued so early theory about Shanguzaezungyongmunmok. O Yubong, student of Kim Changhyob, argued establishment of theory about Sobyon and Zabzee, written by Kim Changhyob. While, Yim Songzu argued early theory and establishment of theory about Zabzee. As a result, presenting researchers argued the same as. That is, they interpret early theory about difference of nature between human and animal in Kim Changhyob. they interpret about the same of nature between human and animal in it. However, Kim Changhyob wrote difference of nature between human and animal in Shanguzaezungyongmunmok. While, he wrote difference it and the same it in Yokuonyudozaelonshabyonnokbyon. He thought the same li between human and animal. However, he thought difference hyongki them. Furthermore, He wrote difference it and the same it in Zabzee. Therefore, they had depended on Kim Changhyob. As a result, posterity scholars interpreted early theory and establishment of theory about his theory. they depended on his authority. However, he changed himself theory.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.28
• /
• pp.387-415
• /
• 2010

This article examines Zhu Xi(朱熹)'s theory of I-Qing(易經) present in Yi Xue Qi Meng. Zhu Xi aims to establish a novel Confucian theory of I-Qing, examining the study of I-Qing in Han Dynasity and the Taoist theory of I-Qing. To this end, he embraces Shao Yong(邵雍)'s theory of Xian Tian. Adapting the notion of Xian Tian(先天) as developed by Shao, he completes the Image-Number(象數) Theory of Hetu-Luoshu(河圖洛書). While discussing Hetu Luoshu, Zhu Xi argues that the Image and Number are not merely a form of prognostication, but a medium that reveals the principles of the nature and the sagely ways of mind. In addition, by studing I-Zhuan(易傳) in authoring Yi Xue Qi Meng, Zhu Xi maintains that the notions of Image and Number as he understands were to be approved by Confucius. This leads to the unification of Sho Yong's Tai-Ji(太極), Zou Dun Yi(周 敦頤)'s Tai-Ji, and Tai-Ji in Hetu. Through this work, Zhu Xi attempts to construct a systematic philosophy that straddles ontology and value theory, while identifying Li (理) with Xiang (象) and Shu (數). The Image-Number Theory of Hetu-Luoshu has replaced numerous theories of Image and Number at the time of Zhu Xi. Based on this theory, he restores the method of divination as presented in Xi CI Zhuan(繫辭傳). By successfully applying his theory of Image and Number to interpreting a number of recorded examples of divination during the Spring and Autumn period and the Warring States period, Zhu Xi demonstrates that his theory is not only an abstract metaphysical theory, but also can function as an adaptable method of divination.

• Journal of Korean Medical classics
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.1-16
• /
• 2000

대태극적내용화재인신내응장하처간작태극적문제진행료고찰(對太極的內容和在人身內應將何處看作太極的問題進行了考察), 득도료여하결론(得到了如下結論). 1. 태극최조재주역계사전중유공자장태극제시위팔괘생성적기본원리(太極最早在周易繫辭傳中由孔子將太極提示爲八卦生成的基本原理), 지후(之後), 량한도당대적저일기간내(兩漢到唐代的這一期間內), 인위태극시창조만물적원시적혼돈지기(認爲太極是創造萬物的原始的混沌之氣), 중앙원기(中央元氣), 몰유분화위음양적기적개념(沒有分化爲陰陽的氣的槪念), 당시피해석위우주간최초적혼연일체적원기적사상점료주류(當時被解釋爲宇宙間最初的渾然一體的元氣的思想占了主流). 2. 주돈신작태극도설(周敦?作太極圖說), 최초제시료무극적개념(最初提示了無極的槪念), 지후(之後), 이주자위대표(以朱子爲代表), 송대적성리학자장태극해석위만물중적궁극지리(宋代的性理學者將太極解釋爲萬物中的窮極之理), 최초장태극해석위리(最初將太極解釋爲理). 3 한동석계승료금일부적삼극설(韓東錫繼承了金一夫的三極說), 이삼극적변화원리설명료태극(以三極的變化原理說明了太極).. 손일규(孫一奎), 조헌가(趙獻可), 장개빈등주장명문설(張介賓等主張命門說), 견지명문위태극(堅持命門爲太極), 인위저명문위우태극적본체수기작용적신장지간(認爲這命門位于太極的本體水起作用的腎臟之間), 동통제수화(同統制水火), 추동인체생명력적원천(推動人體生命力的源泉), 인차여철학상소론급적태극적개념유류사지처(因此與哲學上所論及的太極的槪念有類似之處). 4. 황원어주장적중기위태극설(黃元御主張的中氣爲太極說) 인위태극내창조생명적근원지기(認爲太極乃創造生命的根源之氣), 창조지후야불단공급생명(創造之後也不斷供給生命) 력적중기구유태극적속성(力的中氣具有太極的屬性). 재저일점상가이해석위수토합덕지공적위치(在這一点上可以解釋爲水土合德之空的位置), 대차환유대진일보적고찰(對此還有待進一步的考察). 5. 소동진주장적비위태극설인위비위십토(邵同珍主張的脾胃太極說認爲脾爲十土), 위생명통일적기초(爲生命統一的基礎), 인차응파타인위시무극위타(因此應把?認爲是無極爲妥). 6. 소강절주장적심위태극설인위만물중매일물도시일개태극(邵康節主張的心爲太極說認爲萬物中每一物都是一?太極), 구유태극적속성(具有太極的屬性), 심재오행중속화(心在五行中屬火), 위발동광명지처(爲發動光明之處), 인차이삼극적원리래간(因此以三極的原理來看), 이오토장태극수진행분열(以五土將太極水進行分裂), 지칠화적황극적위치급통치병주재만물적군주지위(至七火的皇極的位置及統治幷主宰萬物的君主之位). 7. 당종해주장적미분지란위태극지설(唐宗海主張的未分之卵爲太極之說), 장태극비유위계란적원시물질(將太極比喩爲鷄卵的原始物質), 란핵등(卵核等), 단정자여란자상결합(但精子與卵子相結合), 상미진행분열적상태위원시적혼륜지물(尙未進行分裂的狀態爲原始的渾淪之物), 위장분화위음양지처(爲將分化爲陰陽之處), 인차본인인위장기정위태극적상법최위첩절(因此本人認爲將其定爲太極的想法最爲貼切).