• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.121-156
• /
• 2015

Memorials in Joseon Dynasty created a arena where the intellectual and political power met. This thesis traces the process of a certain political faction's rebuilding of the political structure of the elite groups by leading the intellectual controversies through memorials, especially those about the evaluations of Pak Setang(朴世堂) and I Gyeongseok(李景奭). This is what happened: Song Siyeol(宋時烈) submitted a memorial which disputed I Gyeongseok's petition, which provoked complete controversies around the memorials between Noron(老論) and Soron(少論). This led to the academic censorship against Sabyeonrok written by Pak Setang. The analysis of act of writing and submission of memorials by Noron and the role of the Kim Family of An-dong(安東 金門) specifically is the main topic here. The members of Soron ceaselessly criticized Song Siyeol, while the Kim Family strongly defended him. The trigger of the strife was a letter written by Kim Chang-Heup(金昌翕), a member of the Kim Family and the Kims played a significant role in the background during the process of political fights using memorials. The series of memorials criticized or supported certain political figure or his writings, but the opinions of Noron and Soron were directly opposite to each other. Even though the expressed difference was the result of the existing political factions, however, it also caused the new power structure of elite groups. The expressions and logics used in the arguments also have its significance. The Noron's memorials evaluated the contemporary people and their writings based on Chu-Hsi and Song Siyeol, who was regarded as a identical figure of Chu-Hsi. The arguments and writing strategies in this regard gained political strength enough to reorganize the intellectual society by changing alignment of political parties, and this led to the rebuilding of academic environment afterward.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.103-128
• /
• 2008

King Jeongjo had lost his father, Sado-Seja(Prince Sado) by Noron(Older Faction). Especially those who tried to kill Sado-Seja and king Jeongjo consisted of king's family-in-law of king Youngjo and Sado-Seja. Therefore king Jeongjo's first goal was to strengthen his kingship than other things because he could gain the throne overcoming the strong hinderance of Noron and king's family-in-law. King Jeongjo requested his subjects to be "Kukbyon-In"(國邊人: a person for king) pointing out the harm of the king's family-in-law and "Tangpyong-Dang"(蕩平黨: the strongest faction consisted under the rule of king Youngjo). For the purpose, king Jeongjo built up "Gyujang-Gak". Gyujang-Gak was spoken to contain and protect the writings of earlier kings superficially, but in reality, it was an apparatus to gain and train the friendly subjects for king Jeongjo. Like that, it was the most important for king Jeongjo to suppress the king's family-in-low and to win Neo-Confucian lterati over to himself's side. Until now, the politics of Joseon Dynasty had been mainly explained on the point of view of "Seonghak-Non"(聖學論). "Seonghak-Non" means that Neo-Confucian lterati were treated as real hero, not kings in the political space of Joseon Dynasty and the role of factions were recognized important. But king Jeongjo denied these ideological stream and tried to change that political system. King Jeongjo wanted to strengthen the throne through the method which insisted the king as a hero in politics. For the purpose, king Jeongjo criticized the Neo-Confucian literati's viewpoint about politics and learning at that time and anticipated to be sole leader of politics and learning on that critique. King Jeongjo aimed to destroy the dignity of "Salim"(山林: Neo-Confucian Sages) with attacking their wrong behaviors. King Jeongjo also criticized the period of king Injo when the regime of "Sarim"(士林: pure Neo-Confucian lterati) faction fully appeared as the starting period when the factional harms were getting worse. King Jeongjo wanted to previously block the oppositions to win subjects over to himself's side with criticizing the period of king Injo and to take away the initiative from his opponents with insisting "Salim-Muyongnon"(山林無用論: a theory ignoring Neo-Confucian Sages). King Jeongjo's critique was not limited just on the system of factional politics. "Seonghak-Non" eventually took root in Neo-Confucianism. Therefore king Jeongjo criticized Neo-Confucianism. He insisted that the essence of Chinese Classics was pragmatical learning, not Neo-Confucianism. Through that critique, king Jeongjo aimed to destroy the ideological base of his opponents. However, king Jeongjo failed to be a sole leader of his subjects in the both boundaries of politics and learning even though he criticized the Neo-Confucian lterati's viewpoint about politics and learning. Because he abruptly died leaving his reformational scheme behind as well as his loyal subjects guarding himself against Noron Byeok-Pa(老論 ?派: the opposing party in Older Faction) were gone behind himself. The politics of Joseon Dynasty returned to more powerful politics for king's family-in-law after king Jeongjo's death.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.41-155
• /
• 2024

Among the records that attest to the period from July to August of 1863, when Suwun was believed to have transmitted the orthodox lineage to Haewol, the oldest documents are The Collection of Suwun's Literary Works (水雲文集), The Collection of Great Master Lord's Literary Works (大先生主文集), and The Records of Dao Origin of Master Choe's Literary Collection (崔先生文集道源記書, hereafter referred to as The Records of Dao Origin). The records regarding Suwun in these three documents are considered to have originated from the same context. The variances embedded in the three documents have led to arguments about which documents accurately reflect the fact of orthodox lineage transmission. Additionally, these variances highlight the necessity of a review regarding the characteristics of early Eastern Learning, such as its faith and organizational systems. Accordingly, by thoroughly examining these three documents, it is possible to elucidate the chronological order, establishment-date, accuracy, descriptive direction, and characteristics of the faith system of early Eastern Learning as these are reflected in each document. If successful, this examination would provide a clearer description of the developmental process of Eastern Learning from 1860 to 1880, facilitating a more in-depth analysis of the significance embedded in various forms of discourse on the movement's orthodox lineage transmission. In comparing the three documents and contrasting them with related sources, the results of the textual examination assert that the documents within the lineage of The Collection of Suwun's Literary Works, given they lack a clear record of the event regarding Haewol's orthodox lineage succession, may be the first draft of The Collection of Great Master Lord's Literary Works and The Records of Dao Origin, as these texts distinctly include that record. This reflects that Haewol's succession was not precisely recognized within and outside of the Eastern Learning order until the time when The Collection of Great Master Lord's Literary Works and The Records of Dao Origin were published. This is further attested to by the fact that during the late 1870s, when various Yeonwon (fountainhead) factions of Eastern Learning began to converge around Haewol, and his Yeonwon became the largest organization within Eastern Learning. At that point, the order's doctrine was reinterpreted, and its organization was reestablished. In this regard, it is necessary to view Eastern Learning after Suwun-especially the orthodox lineage transmission to Haewol-from a perspective that considers it more as competing forms of discourse than as a historical fact. This view enables a new perspective on Haewol's Eastern Learning, which forms a distinct layer from Suwun's, shedding light on the relationship between Haewol and the new religious movements in modern-day Korea.

• Journal of Life Science
• /
• v.17 no.6 s.86
• /
• pp.791-797
• /
• 2007

We studied the inhibitory effect of solvent fractions from doenjang on mutagenicity using Salmonella typhimurium TA100 in Ames test. We also investigated the effect of solvent fractions from doenjang on the growth of tumor cells and the production of interleukin-2 (IL-2). The treatment of dichlorormethane and ethylacetate fractions (2.5 mg/assay) from doenjang to Ames test system inhibited aflatoxin B$_1$ (AFB$_1$) induced mutagenicity by 96% and 97%, respectively, and showed a higher antimutagenic effect than other solvent fractions. In case of N-methyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguamidine (MNNG) induced mutagenicity, the ethylacetate fraction showed the highest inhibitory effect (by 75%) among the other sol-vent fractions, although the inhibitory effect was not stronger compared to AFB$_1$ induced mutagenicity. The treatment of dichloromethane and ethylacetate fractions markedly inhibited the growth of Yac-1 (by 80% and 94%, respectively) and sacroma-180 cancer cells (by 60% and 96%, respectively) after 4 days of incubation at 37${\circ}$C. To elucidate the immunological mechanism of antitumor activity of doenjang, spleen cells of Balb/c mouse were exposed to the dichloromethane and ethyl-acetate fractions for 24 hours at 37${\circ}$C . The culture supernatants following the treatment of djchloromethane and ethylacetate factions to spleen cells increased the production of IL-2. These results indicated that the anticarcinogenic effect of doenjang was mediated by the production of IL-2.