• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.27
• /
• pp.171-200
• /
• 2016

This paper will analyze the filial piety based ethics of Daesoonjinrihoe (大巡眞理會) and the traditional filial piety of Confucianism (儒敎), Buddhism (佛敎) and Taoism (道敎) through comparing and contrasting their unique systems. The traditional Korean ethics regarding filial piety are in great need of reformation as the relationship between the parents and children should not be vertical or unilateral but parallel and reciprocal. However, there have not been sufficient in-depth studies on this specific ideology and alternative approaches. Regarding this prospect, one representative Korean indigenous new religion, Daesoonjinrihoe has emerged and directly engages in the collision between traditionalism and modernity. The modernity of Daesoonjinrihoe, enables the observation of how the filial piety based ethics have developed within a system of doctrine and thereby provides an exemplary model of traditional filial piety reimagined in accordance with modern sensibilities. A brief summary of comparative findings is as follows: First, Daesoonjinrihoe and Confucianism have taken serving parents with respect as an ethic within filial piety, but Confucianism engenders this ideal through the unilateral and unconditional sacrifice of younger people based on patriarchal feudalism whereas Daesoonjinrihoe has rejected such unilateral sacrifice and instead promotes mutual beneficience between parents and children. This difference occurs, in part, due to the filial piety of Confucianism rising in the midst of the feudal order whereas the ideology of Daesoonjinrihoe contains ideals such as "the reciprocation of favor for mutual beneficence (報恩相生)" and "respect for humanity (人尊)," both of which serve as key principles of the new religious world as envisioned by Daesoonjinrihoe. Second, filial piety in Buddhism and Taoism tends to be passive and inactive and is often expressed by praying for happiness and longevity for one's parents while they are alive and later praying for the heavenly rebirth of one's parents after they die. The filial piety of Daesoonjinrihoe also partially contains such ideas, however; they are extended much further and arrive upon novel and profound expressions. The spectrum of the filial piety in Daesoonjinrihoe expands to the extent children perform actions to resolve their parent's sins and pave a new road for their parents. This filial piety requires a cultivation practice from both parents and children. This system of dual cultivation was established because the world-view of Daesoonjinrihoe enables both parents and children to enjoy happiness and wealth both of which are achieved through the completion of religious objectives following cultivation practice. Third, Confucianism and Daesoonjinrihoe hold memorial services for ancestors with sincerity as an expression of filial piety. Filial piety in the Confucian context excludes ideas from Shamanism and thereby memorial services are held for impersonal entities, however; in the Daesoonjinrihoe context, memorial services are held for personal-entities. Accordingly, holding a memorial service for ancestors with sincerity has a greater sense of realism in Daesoonjinrihoe than it does in Confucianism. Fourth, while Confucianism and Daesoonjinrihoe both aim to requite the grace received from ancestors, the contents of grace and reciprocation of favors (報恩) are viewed differently. In Confucianism, since the ancestors existed previously and bestowed the gift of life to their children and indirectly, all of their descendents. Therefore, memorial services for ancestors are held to convey gratitude and filial piety. However, in Daesoonjinrihoe, ancestors not only bestowed the gift of earthly life to their descendents, in the spirit realm, ancestral spirits also spend sixty years accumulating the merit necessary to imbue each of their descendents with spiritual insight. Consequently, filial piety is expressed through memorial services as well as spiritual cultivation. Fifth, in Confucianism, achieving the fame and prestige indicative of success in the mundane world can be an act of filial piety as it would bring pride to one's ancestors, but in Daesoonjinrihoe, succeeding in religious objectives through spiritual cultivation is considered to be a higher form of filial piety. Sixth, Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism all observe filial piety as system of familial ethics based in morality. This is likewise true of Daesoonjinrihoe, however; Daesoonjinrihoe confers greater importance on filial piety as an essential form of ethics for religious redemption. This is due to the Daesoon interpretation that the absence of filial piety was the direct cause which led to the sickened state of the world and its collapse. Forgetting the grace of parents who have given the gift of life or the grace of ancestral spirits who have accumulated merit on behalf of their descendents are acts of ingratitude which are unacceptable during the period of Reordering of the Universe. Judging from these findings, Daesoonjinrihoe embraces parts of traditional filial piety as it exists in Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism, but it does so on the ground of its own unique culture. Through re-interpretation and re-creation, ideas regarding filial piety are being further developed. Namely, filial piety in Daesoonjinrihoe is regulations founded upon the reciprocation of favors for mutual beneficence and respect for humanity. Therefore, it is understood as a concept wherein one's own cultivation practice is performed in order to reach religious objectives, the perfection of personal character, and spiritual insight. This requires that even recipents of filial piety (i.e., parents) perform certain cultivation practices to enjoy happiness and wealth. Additionally, filial piety in Daesoonjinrihoe manifests a reinforced religious character and also serves as a system ethics which is soteriologically essential for salvation during the period known as the Reordering of the Universe.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.31
• /
• pp.199-235
• /
• 2018

Most of the new religions derived from Jeungsan have claimed that Jeungsan's religious thought reproduced Dangun [檀君] Thought in its original form. However, Daesoon Jinrihoe is the only religious order out of the many new religions within the Jeungsan lineage, which has constantly kept its distance from Dangun Thought since 1909 during the earliest period of proto-Daesoon Jinrihoe. Even a mere trace of Dangun cannot be found in the subject of faith or the doctrinal system of Daesoon Jinrihoe. In this context, this study aims to examine possible connections between Daesoon Thought and Dangun Thought in order to determine why other Jeungsanist religions frequently exhibit Dangunist features. Specifically, a major part of this study will be devoted to comparing and analyzing the narrative structure of Daesoon Thought and Dangun Thought as well as their respective motifs. In fact, Jeungsan does not seem to have ever mentioned Dangun in his recorded teachings, therefore, after his passing into the Heaven, most of the religious orders including Daesoon Jinrihoe derived from him did not pay any attention to Dangun Thought for almost for 40 years. These orders did not originally perceive Dangun as an object of belief. After Korea's liberation, Dangun became widely accepted as a pivotal role among the Korean people. As Dangun-nationalism claimed to unify Koreans as one great Korean ethnic society, the religious orders of Jeungsan lineage also climbed aboard this creed and their faiths or doctrines were acculturated to reflect this change. The reason for this has been attributed to following modern trends to increase success in propagation. In the meantime, Daesoon Jinrihoe was the only order that did not accept Dangun-nationalism because it was not a teaching given by the order's founder. And the two systems of thought have more dissimilarity than parallelism in terms of philosophical ideology. These seem to be the main reasons why Daesoon Jinrihoe did not adopt Dangun into its doctrine or belief system.