• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.42
• /
• pp.233-258
• /
• 2014

This article investigates the concept of the xing(性) used by Hu Hong. Hu Hong's philosophical system considered to top priority for xing is called xingbunlun(性本論), and he suggested the characteristics of xing as follows. First, Hu Hong regarded xing as the fundamental of whole world and related to the specific individual things, so he constructed the concept of xing in the perspective of ontology. Namely while xing is ti(體) the root of all the world, it is the realization of the uniqueness of the individual things. Also he considered xing which of the ontological aspect developed various psychological aspect contained xin (心), qing(情), yu(欲), etc. Seond, As Hu Hong regulated that wei fa(未發) is xing and yi fa(已發) is xin, he defined the ideal relation between xing and xin as xingtixinyong(性體心用). And he considered that the sage and the ordinary peoples are equal in the xing's aspect of wei fa, but they are not equal in ability of the xin in the aspect of wei fa. Hu Hong thought that the only sage realized the ideal relation between xing and xin in this world, because he keep his mind silent. So Hu Hong suggested the possibility of moral cultivation to the ordinary peoples, expressing that human nature realized the function of the mind(成性), in order that they realized ideal relation by following ren(仁). Third, unlike the traditional notion, Hu Hong understood the meaning of xing in the aspect of ontology. He interpreted the shan(善) of xingshan(性善) as the meaning of exclamation, which implied that "the innate goodness of human nature(性善)" meant "Human nature is good." Because Hu Hong thought that the meaning of xing transcended the relative concept of good and evil, and accepted the whole world affirmatively. In the opinion of Hu Hong, as the concept of xing had two ways of intentionality; likes and dislikes(好惡), things formed relationship with other in this world. Then the concept of good and evil of the ethical value judgement occurred.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.63
• /
• pp.141-168
• /
• 2016

This paper studies Zhu Xi's critical comprehension about the theories of gewu zhizhi of senior Confucian scholars, focusing on the Daxue Zhangju, Daxue huowen, and Daxue huowen yulei of Zhuzi yulei. Zhu Xi described in depth the theory of gewu zhizhi of Sima Guang, disciples of the Cheng Yi(Lu Dalin, Xie Liangzuo, Yin Ch'un, Yang Shi), scholars of Hu-Xing province(Hu An-guo, Hu hong), Li Dong in the Daxue huowen and Daxue huowen yulei, by his understanding through a criticism of the theory of gewu zhizh, thereby formulating a theory of gewu zhizhi on the basis of Cheng Yi's theory. Through this criticism of senior Confucian scholars, Zhu Xi explained that the theory of gewu zhizhi was departed from a positive affirmation of things. Zhu Xi claimed that the crux of gewu zhizhi was a thorough understanding like a sudden release achieved by accumulating Li of things. This plan of Zhu Xi with respect to "Supplementary Chapter on the Gewu Zhizhi" showed that the theory of gewu zhizhi which was set up by himself corresponded to the theory of Cheng Yi's, and it was based on the Confucian tradition firmly.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.48
• /
• pp.225-252
• /
• 2012

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).