• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.43
• /
• pp.81-105
• /
• 2014

For a lack of books on tea ceremony, 'Dongdasong (東茶頌)' by Buddhist priest Choui occupies a prominent position. Along with 'Dabu (茶賦)' by Yi Mok (李穆: 1471~1498) and 'Gida (記茶)' by Yi Deok-ri (李德履: 1728~ ?), Dongdasong forms the three peaks of tea work. These books are all based on Tea Classic (茶經) by Ryukwoo (陸羽). Assuming that Tea Classic serves as introduction (起), Dabu is development (承), Gida for turn (轉) and Dongdasong for conclusion (結). Dongdasong is inextricable from Dasinjeon (茶神傳). Dasinjeon is the abstract of Jangwon's Darok (茶錄). The keyword of Dasinjeon is 'tea deity (茶神).' Extracting key concepts of Darok as his perspective, Choui established his own philosophy on tea ceremony. In the process of making into his philosophy, he reorganized the system by introducing the principle of 'subtle combination (妙合),' one of traditions in Korean thought, which is characterized by not separating spirit and material. It is 'subtle combination' that does not make a division between spirit and material, which are undeniably different things. Subtle combination is a relation of two things' being one and one thing's being two. Choui's philosophy on tea ceremony can be assessed as valuable inheritance from traditions of Korean thought.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.131-164
• /
• 2012

This paper is to make a generalization of Keyongyegimunrok(經義記聞錄) by Namdang Han Wonjin(1682~1751) whose historical positions of philosophy were contained, and to examine its established periods and the summaries of Ligi-Simseong Doseol(理氣心性圖說, illustrated Account of principle, Vital force, and Heart-mind) given in Appendix of Chap. 6. Total seventeen explanatory diagrams cover over the theory of principle and material force, theory of Heart-mind, theory of cultivation. These explanatory diagrams were produced systematically and easily to understand the pursuits of study, so-called Ho-hak(湖學), since Namdang becoming a member of the Yellow River(黃江) school. The philosophical argumentations of Namdang was usually succeeded by the orthodox stream of Ki-ho(畿湖) School transmitted from Ii, Song Si-yeol, Gwon Sang-ha. Ligi-wollyu-do(理氣源流圖), Ligi-dongjeong-do(理氣動靜圖), irwon-bunsu-do(一原分殊圖, 4 diagrams) are diagrams equivalent to Ki-ho School's ontology. As Ki-ho School's theory of Heart-mind, there are Seongjeong-hoenggan-do(性情橫看圖), Seongjeong-sugan-do(性情竪看圖), Seongjeong-chonghwoi-do(性情總會圖), Oseonghoju-do (五性互主圖), Oseongchubon-do(五性推本圖), Simseongmyohap-do (心性妙合圖), Simseongiji-do(心性二岐圖), Jungyongcheonmyeong-do(中庸天命圖), Insim dosim-do(人心道心圖), focusing on Simtongseongjeong-do(心統性情圖), and last diagram is Wihakjibang-do(爲學之方圖), which adapted from the diagram established by Ii and Song Si-yeol. The significance of Keyongyegimunrok(經義記聞錄) is comprehensive of the pursuits of the Yellow River school's studies, and provides evidence of a leading figure in Ho-hak.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.29
• /
• pp.33-54
• /
• 2010

Woodam(愚潭) Jeong Si-han(丁時翰, 1625-1707) played an important role in the formation and development of the Toegye School. This writing explores the way Woodam understood the thought of Toegye(退溪, 1501-1570) as presented in The Book of Four-Seve Demonstration(四七辨證) The 17th century that Woodam lived in was the period in which monism and dualism coexisted. Woodam's understanding of Toegye's thought can be summarized as follows: 1) Woodam followed Toegye's li(理)-qi(氣) defense and his view on the origin of nature and emotion, acknowledging Toegye as the orthodox transmitter of Zhu Xi's teachings, 2) Woodam considered that the difference between the past and the contemporary teachings was simply caused by the difficulty of comprehending the character "li (principle) ". Thus he criticized Yulgok(栗谷, 1536-1584)'s claim that "that which rises is qi (material force), and that which gives rise to qi is li," and followed instead Toegye's views of the entivity, dynamism, and ultimacy of li and its substantial function. Yet, Woodam further developed Toegye's thought and asserted that "in the midst of the marvelous unity of li and qi, li is always dominant and qi is always ancillary." 3) Woodam criticized Yulgok's thought and advocated Toegye's doctrine of the mutual motion of li and qi(理氣互發說), thereby following Toegye's insistence that difference can be observed in sameness and sameness can be observed in difference, that integrative thinking is needed to constructively embrace both analytic and synthetic judgments. In conclusion, Woodam understood profoundly and correctly Toegye's views on the relationship between li and qi and between nature and emotion, and explained them more concretely. In so doing, he endeavored to live the life by the teachings of Toegye.