• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.23
• /
• pp.317-347
• /
• 2008

Huang Gan(1152 - 1220, pen-name Mian-zhai) was a famous scholar of Zhu-zi xue in the Southern Song period. Zhu-zi xue was also called Daoxue(道學), because it was based on the Cheng-Zhu xue(程朱學) and had very severe idea of Daotong(道統). Therefore, Zhu-zi xue emphasized practical movements of spreading Confucianism. The view of the Daotong(道統) developed in two aspects: protection of Confucianism and exclusion of Daoism Buddhism. Zhu Xi completed the idea of Daotong(道統), and his disciples, especially Huang Gan, continued his efforts. Zhu Xi's disciples searched the ultimate teaching of Confucianism through studying Four-books(四書). In due of their effort, Zhu-zi xue played a reading role in those academic fields. Huang Gan look upon himself as the successor to Zhu-zi xue. He expounded and missionized Zhu Xi's philosophical thought. In his later years, he accepted many students and passed the Zhu Xi's thought on to his students. He fostered "Jin-hua school(金華學派)"-He Ji(何基), the representative of this school. There is the relation of thought on the theory of knowledge and learning centering around Daotong between Huang Gan and Jin-hua school(金華學派). Especially, the most schools leading the academic society of Yuan period founded their thought on Huang Gan's. And it explained Huang Gan's historical influence and contributions to the Zhu-zi xue in the Yuan period.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.361-384
• /
• 2010

This paper focused on studies of Noneo Jilseo("論語疾書") written by Lee Ik, also known as his honored name, Seong Ho(星湖). Seong Ho(星湖) also had left 10 types of exegetical commentary other than Noneo Jilseo("論語疾書"). The reason for choosing Noneo Jilseo("論語疾書") was that the teachings of Kongzi(孔子) were contained in Noneo("論語"). Also when we understand the Analects of Kongzi(孔子) correctly, we will be able to understand other Confucian Canons accordingly. Seong Ho(星湖) recommended Zhuzi(朱子) pronounced Noneo Jipju ("論語集註") as a critical commentary on the Analects. That is because there are no writings that had considered pupils' opinions and all of the various situations as much as Noneo Jipju ("論語集註"). For this reason, Noneo Jipju ("論語集註") could play a role as an excellent text. However, it is not just quality of the book that matters. While reading the main body, there is an author's comment, saying "For now, I write down my skeptical point of view." With this short note, the author expressed that "Collected Annotation on the Analects" was not necessarily the best teaching. This is the consequence of 'doubt.' We should be skeptical about the Analects of Confucius. That is not to say that the Analects are unconditionally bad. Seong Ho(星湖) expounded that the beginning students should regard Noneo Jilseo("論語疾書") as their textbook, but do not cling only to the disciplines elucidated in the book. Seong Ho(星湖) had written Noneo Jilseo("論語疾書") in order to help people to understand Confucius correctly. Although this book was written during his early professional years, Seong Ho(星湖) had grasped the essence of teaching precisely. Then, what is the essence? That is 'Doubt.' Innate factors therein can be correctly understood through 'Doubt.' In this context, Seong Ho(星湖) had made such comment as "For now, I write down my skeptical point of view." To understand the opinions of Confucius correctly, this process that being doubtful about the text is necessary. The Analects of Confucius are just similar to a coded message. To know accurately about the code, it is necessary to start from 'Doubt' at the first. Such a "Doubt" shall be a key to decrypt the coded messages further.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.25
• /
• pp.251-292
• /
• 2009

In this thesis, the status of Pre-Chin Study of One Hundred Schools in the history of Korean thoughts, and in addition, the reception of $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu's ideology and the aspect of its development in Korea were examined. Moreover, the different understandings of $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu and their trend of the times were summarized through the intellectuals' collection of works from the end of Goryeo Dynasty and the beginning of Cho Sun Dynasty to 18-19 century. What was revealed through the study can be summed up as the followings. From the age of Three States to the middle part of Goryeo Dynasty, few intellectuals regarded other schools or philosophers among Study of One Hundred Schools as heresies and blamed them. However, since Mencius had been established as the legitimate classical scripture of Confucianism after the end of Goryeo Dynasty and the beginning of Cho Sun Dynasty, other Pre-Chin philosophers including $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu had started to be regarded and criticized as heresies. Intellectuals of Goryeo Dynasty and the early Cho Sun Dynasty made various estimates on $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu's doctrine of the evilness of human nature, but we can see the understanding of $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu became deeper. In the heyday of Neo-Confucianism in Cho Sun Dynasty, the intensity of the criticism on $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu by intellectuals rather tended to decrease, compared to that of the early Cho Sun Dynasty, which produced contrary evidence that the world view of Sung Confucianism, based on Mencius' doctrine of the goodness of human nature, had been already established. Also, even the intellectuals criticizing the evilness of human nature positively quoted $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu's other ideas in general. In 17th century, there were some arguments to conclude $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu as Legalism, but the general trend came to accept Study of One Hundred Schools constructively, challenging the authority of Sung Confucianism, or based on positive school. In 18th century, it can be confirmed that the understanding on $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu became broader, and particularly in the historical research of letters, $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu's original texts and annotations were used in many ways. In short, the intellectuals' criticism on $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu in Cho Sun Dynasty was always grounded on his argument of the evilness of human nature, and furthermore, on connecting it to Legalism, related to the Fenshukengru. On the other hand, it can be said that they generally accepted other ideas of $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu positively, except for the idea of the evilness of human nature. However, it's worth paying attention to the fact that those intellectuals who criticized $Hs{\ddot{u}}n$ Tzu could easily meet with the books of Study of One Hundred Schools, and relatively had an open attitude in terms of knowledge.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.29
• /
• pp.89-123
• /
• 2010

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.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.21
• /
• pp.199-254
• /
• 2013

대순사상은 인간의 행위와 정신적 틀, 즉 몸과 마음을 닦고 세상을 다스리며 백성을 평안하게 하는 도리를 설파하고 있다. 우주 공간의 질서와 깊은 연관을 맺는 이러한 도리는 인간 자신의 인지(認知)와 심신 수양의 내용을 포함하며, 사람이 사회와 우주자연과의 관계를 어떻게 처리해 나갈 것인지에 관한 문제도 다루고 있다. 따라서 대순사상을 인문이라는 관점에 입각하여 분석해 볼 필요가 있다. 이탈리아에서 시작된 서양의 인문주의와 비교해 볼 때, 중국 전통의 인문정신은 인류 개체의 창조력과 그 성과를 인정하고, 인격적 수양과 개선을 주장하며, 사회의 조화를 강조하는 한편, 인류가 반드시 천지인의 조화로운 관계 속에서 개체와 전체의 생존을 파악해야 함을 강조한다. 이러한 인문정신은 『전경』에서도 찾아볼 수 있다. 그 하나가 모악산과 단주(丹朱)에 대한 서술인데, 모악산은 산 즉 '간'(艮)괘이며 단주는 적색에 상응하니 곧 '리'(離)괘가 된다. 이 두 괘가 서로 조합하면 '비(比)'괘가 되며, 『주역』의 비괘와 연관하여 서로 간의 모순을 없애고, '바둑'을 두는 기법을 거울삼아 심성을 다스리며, 인격을 완성하고, 인신이 조화를 이루도록 하며, 사회를 안정시킬 것을 말한다. 대순 신앙의 최종 목표는 지상천국을 건설하는 것인데, 이런 목표를 실현하기 위해서는 인격수양을 그 출발점으로 삼아야 한다. 인격수양의 목표는 바른 도인이 되기 위한 것이며, 이를 위해서는 수도 공부를 해야만 한다. 수도는 춘추시기 노자 이래로 유구한 문화적 전통을 지닌 것이지만, 대순진리회는 한국사회 역사의 경향과 현실의 필요에 부응하여 수도 이론을 새롭게 수립하였다. 이를 살펴보면, 대순진리회는 수도자가 '성(誠), 경(敬), 신(信)'에 힘쓰는 품격 함양을 매우 중시한다. 또 도인들이 가정의 화목에 힘써야 하며, 솔선수범하는 도인으로서 사회의 모범이 되어야 한다고 말한다. 이렇게 볼 때, 대순진리회는 '인도'(人道)를 함양함을 강조하고 있으며, 이것은 전통적인 유가에서 말하는 '수신, 제가' (修身, 齊家)의 정신과 그 의미가 맞닿아 있다. 또한 중국 도교의 '선도(仙道)를 이루고자 하면 먼저 인도(人道)를 행하라'는 사상적 취지와도 일치한다. 대순진리회에서 수도의 최종 목표는 도통이다. 도통은 수도자가 매우 높은 경지에 이르게 되었을 때 가지는 특수한 능력과 정신의 경지이다. '도통'에 대한 기록은 『장자·제물론』, 『문자』의 「부언편>(符言篇) 등에서 찾아볼 수 있는데, 대순진리회가 말하는 도통은 중국의 도가 전통에 보이는 도통과도 연관되지만 강한 인륜수양(人倫修養)적 특색을 지니고 있다는 점에서 차이가 있다. 이것은 대순진리회가 가지는 중요한 인문적 함의라 하겠다. 대순진리회는 수도 공부로써 광제창생·보국안민·지상천국건설의 사회적 이상을 실현하고자 한다. 조화로운 사회적 관계를 수립하기 위한 토대는 대순진리회의 종지 첫 번째인 음양합덕이다. 음양합덕은 대순진리의 인문 취지의 이론적 기초를 형성하는 사상이다. 음양합덕의 철학적 사고는 종지 두 번째인 신인조화(神人調化)의 이상으로 이어진다. 신인조화는 『상서·순전』(尙書·舜典)의 신인이화(神人以和)에서 그 사상적 연원을 찾아 볼 수 있다. 다만 신인이화가 율려 조화의 '결과'를 표현한 것이라면, 신인조화에서 중시하는 것은 '과정'이며 인간과 신의 상호작용이라는 점에 그 특징이 있다. 신인조화를 이루기 위해서는 공부를 해야 하며, 그 배후에는 인본(人本)의 사상이 깃들어 있다. 그것은 종지 세 번째인 '해원상생'의 내용에서 더욱 명확하게 드러난다. 신인조화가 인간과 신의 관계를 조화롭게 하는 것을 말한다면, 해원상생은 인간과 인간의 관계를 조화롭게 하는 것을 말한다. 또 다른 한편으로는 긴 역사의 과정 속에서 맺힌 원을 풀어 우주의 기운을 잘 통할 수 있게 하고 인간 사회의 정상적인 교류를 이루도록 한다. 이러한 내용은 사회적인 인문적 관심과 배려를 다분히 포함하고 있는 것이다. 대순진리회의 종지 네 번째인 도통진경은 수도의 가장 높은 경지를 말하는데, 이러한 이념은 노장 일파의 도가 학자들이 말한 순박한 본성으로 회귀하자는 정신에서 그 원류를 찾을 수 있을 것이다. 또한 이는 한진(漢晉)시대 이래 중국 도교가 추구했던 '진경' 의 의미와도 합치된다. 그러나 시대와 환경이 다름으로 인해, 대순진리회의 '진경'은 사회생활의 의미까지 내포한다. 비록 대순진리회의 경전이 인본(人本)을 명확히 밝히고 있지는 않으나, 대순진리회의 요의(要義) 중 하나인 인존사상은 대순진리회의 인문정신을 말해주는 것이다. 인존사상의 직접적인 기능은 평안(平安)으로서 삶을 이롭게 하는 것이다. 대순진리회는 우주대원의 진리를 '도'라 하였는데 이러한 '도'는 중국의 도가에서 말하는 '도'와 동일하며, 여기에는 '안(安)'의 의미가 포함되어 있다. 대순진리회의 신조 중 '안심', '안신'은 마음을 정(靜)하게 하고, 몸을 편하게 하는 것으로 볼 수 있지만, 심신의 공포와 두려움을 떨쳐내어 안전과 보호를 얻는다는 의미도 있으므로 결국 평안이 전제가 된다. 이렇듯 대순진리회에서는 '평안에 대한 희구'를 근본으로 하여 신앙인들이 열심히 수도에 정진하고 있다. 대순진리회가 인류 평안을 기본으로 하는 종교라는 점에서, 반드시 세인들의 환영을 받을 것임을 믿어 의심치 않는다.