• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.42
• /
• pp.71-103
• /
• 2014

Park Se-dang (朴世堂, 1629-1703) is a figure rebuked as a "disturbing enemy of the Confucian canon" (斯文亂賊), having composed the Namhwagyeong Joohaesanbo (南華經註解刪補), the sole commentary on every chapter of the Zhuangzi (莊子) in Joseon Dynasty. This article purports to articulate the significance of Park Se-dang's composition of the Namhwagyeong Joohaesanbo within Joseon Dynasty in the 17th century, through the comparison between him and Zhu Xi (朱熹, 1130-1200), the founder of Neo-Confucianism, the mainstream ideology of Joseon Dynasty, in their recognition of the Zhuangzi. Since Neo-Confucianism attained an absolute status as the canonical doctrine in Joseon Dynasty, the other thoughts, including the thoughts of the Laozi and the Zhuangzi, could not be discussed without their relationship with it. Park Se-dang's recognition of the Zhuangzi does not deviate far from Zhu Xi's recognition of it. While his composition of the Namhwagyeong Joohaesanbo might be said to have inherited and deepened Zhu Xi's recognition, it can also be seen as an attempt to escape from Neo-Confucianism in some aspects. Due to this complication, when the faction of the Noron (老論, a faction separated from the Seoin in the Joseon Dynasty, the hard-liners) rebuked him as a "disturbing enemy of the Confucian canon," they did not mention neither his Shinjoo Dodeokgyeong (新註道德經, New Commentary on the Laozi) nor his Namhwagyeong Joohaesanbo. In his Namhwagyeong Joohaesanbo, Park Se-dang does not think that the Zhuangzi is in diametrical opposition to Confucian thoughts. Firstly, he emphasizes that Zhuangzi faces the actual world with ultimately positive concern, though from a critical perspective. Secondly, he seeks common grounds between the thoughts of Zhuangzi and Confucians, proving that Zhuangzi emphasizes human relationships between father and son or between king and subject. Thirdly, he illuminates Zhuangzi's theory of human nature from a new perspective in order to reestablish Confucian theory of human nature. Fourthly, he attempts to apply Zhuangzi's thoughts in order to overcome contemporary consumptive political feuds, including the splits of political factions or the disputes about ritual proprieties (禮訟論爭). Park Se-dang's composition of Shinjoo Dodeokgyeong and Namhwagyeong Joohaesanbo was a complementary measure for Confucianism, his proper mainstay being Confucianism. He attempted to escape, not from Confucianism itself, but from the absolutism of Neo-Confucianism. In the 17th century Joseon Dynasty, when Neo-Confucianism was becoming dogmatized and absolutized as a canonical doctrine and a dominant ideology, Park Se-dang's composition of Namhwagyeong Joohaesanbo was a very innovative attempt, which shows that he established himself as a pioneer to escape Neo-Confucianism, having consolidated his own unique and progressive academic province, differentiating himself from traditional Confucian scholars in his objective.

• 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.43
• /
• pp.9-32
• /
• 2014

Until now, the studies researching the Taoism theories of Joseon Dynasty have mainly dealt around the latter half of Joseon Dynasty. The reason for that was because the 5 cribs of a book Lao Tzu and the 2 crib of a book Changzi were produced after the Imjin-Year Korean-Japanese War(壬辰倭亂,Imjin Waeran). Therefore this thesis extracted the mentions about Taoism from about 200-year history records from Jeong Do-Jeon's Theory, which was the theoretical foundation for early days of Joseon's foundation and the history book King Taejong's Annals(太宗實錄) contained in The Annals of Joseon Dynasty(朝鮮王朝實 錄) and analyzed the extracted historic data as the first work contemplating how the Taoism theories were developed during the first half of Joseon Dynasty. From the analysis, this study drew out the findings as follows. Jeong Do-Jeon and Gwon Geun sharply criticized the Taoism for that it pursued for the techniques of longevity for oneself without moral. They tried to establish the identity of neo-Confucianism on the foundation criticizing the Taoism and the Buddhism. Since then, the Taoism was transformed through the 3 stages in The Annals of Joseon Dynasty. The first stage was the stage transformed 'Lao Tzu' as the witchcraft master of long-live, the technique of the taoist hermit and the super god in Taoism, and regarded the Taoism as heresy and excluded the Taoism. Second stage was the stage trying to see the book Lao Tzu as the core of Taoism theory separately from the 'Hermit Witchcraft' and the 'Taoist gods' the target of fortune-pursue religion beyond from the primary discussion of exclusion. Third stage was revealed as the respects on the art of politics and the art of living described in the book Lao Tzu. That is, the Taoism theories in the first half of Joseon Dynasty was developed with various spectrums from the early days of Joseon's foundation to 15~16 centuries beyond Joseon's strong suppression against the Taoism and the Buddhism in early days. That is the point that the Taoism in the first half of Joseon Dynasty can't be simply interpreted in the neo-Confucianism. During the firs half of Joseon Dynasty, the warm attitude toward the Taoism was created differently from the attitude against suppressing it as a cult, which had been created in the early days of Josen's foundation, and there appeared the changes accepting the art of living and the art of politics theoretically integrating with the Confucianism theories. That is, the book 'Lao Tus' became accepted as the Confucian country's arts of living and politics from a cult book pursuing for immoral log and immortal life. Such acception is revealed as the appearance actively interpreting the books about Laoism in the latter half o Joseon Dynasty.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.130
• /
• pp.247-276
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this paper is to explore how Zhang Zai(張載)''s Gi-Hak(氣學) and Wang Shou-Ren(王守仁)''s Sim-Hak(心學) are interrelated, which differs from prior positions viewing the two as separate, unrelated philosophies or ones standing in contrast to each other. By direct comparing the notions Tae-Heo(太虛) and Yang-Ji(良知), I tried to explain that ontological structures of Gi-Hak and Sim-Hak are interrelated ; and by comparing Dae-Sim(大心) and Chi-Yang-Ji(致良知), I made an argument that Gong-Bu-Ron(工夫論) of Gi-Hak and Sim-Hak corresponds to each other. Zhang Zai''s the doctrine of Tae-Heo can be seen as a respond to Jeok-Myeol-Ron(寂滅論) in Buddhism ; therefore, understanding Sim-Hak in terms of Gi-Hak, that is, interpreting the fundamental meaning of Yang-Ji as Tae-Heo, can free Yang-Myeong-Sim-Hak(陽明心學) from the unceasing criticism by Ju-Ja-Hak(朱子學) that it is a 'Buddhistic heresy'. This study could be highly significant in that it enables us to read the tradition of Zhang Zai not only from the viewpoint of u-Ja-Hak, but even from ang-Myeong-Sim-Hak tradition. I interpreted Yangming School of Mind as a developmental succession of Neo-Confucianism, and understood Zhang Zai''s Gi-Hak as a theoretical pioneer of Wang Shou-Ren''s Sim-Hak.