• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.313-350
• /
• 2010

This article studies criticism leveled at Yulgok scholarship by the Toegye School in the northern Gyungbuk region. The Toegye School (Yulgok School) was formed both by theoretical contention and constructive criticism with its counterparts. Accordingly, the main intellectual traits of the Toegye School may not be fully appreciated by inquiring into its theoretical structure and context only; rather, this study proposes that a sound understanding of the Toegye School must be accompanied simultaneously with an analysis on aspects of the altercation with the Yulgok School of the time. In this regard, this article primarily aims to shed light on the Toegye School's theoretical context through surveying the criticism leveled by the Toegye School in the northern Gyungbuk region, which hold steadfast adherents to the discipline among other regions, against the Yulgok scholarship. Embracing the Confucian ethic, the philosophical principles of the Toegye School based on autonomy of 'Li'(理), i.e. ethical objectivism, basically aimed at reaching the state of self-manifestation. Namely, the main objective of the Toegye School was to anchor the way how the school understood existential form and cause of the universe to an ethical foundation in a crystal clear way and, accordingly, this belief in which the Toegye School gave a priority to 'Li' rather than 'Gi'(氣) must have given an advantageous position in terms of theoretical clarity over its counterparts. Furthermore, the crux of the Confucian ethical world view in the Toegye School's modes of inquiry could berevealed by the Toegye's 'Libal(理發)-theory'. From this point of view, the fundamental criticism that could be waged by the Toegye School was against Yulgok scholarship's gross misconception of perceiving 'Gi' as 'Li.' Scholars and commentators in the Toegye School severely disapproved of the possibility of ethical objectivism of Yulgok scholarship.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.33
• /
• pp.305-334
• /
• 2008

This paper is intended to present the philosophical thoughts of Yu Won-Ji who was one of famous scholars in The School of Toegye. He criticized Yi I(Yulgok) and Jang Hyeon-Gwang(Yeohyeon) because they regarded Li and Ch'i as one. Yi was considered an actual founder of their theoretical and political rival party called the School of Yulgok. Jang also refused to accept Toegye's theory and had developed his own theory, which emphasized the unity of Li(principle) and Ch'i(material force). Therefore Yu might well exclude Yi I(Yulgok) and Jang Hyeon-Gwang and criticize their theories severely. First, he was convinced that Toegye's doctrine(Li-Gi-Ho-Bal-Seol) was a orthodox theory accurately succeeding to Jhu Xi's learning. Secondly, he criticised Yi I(Yulgok) for looking upon Li and Ch'i as one thing. Thirdly, he regarded Jang's doctrine as same with Yulgok's. Fourthly, he thought it is necessary to criticize Jang's theory in order to preserve Toegye's learning and establish the theoretical identity of the Toegye School.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.27
• /
• pp.447-468
• /
• 2009

Jeong Si-Han(1625-1707), one of the main representatives of Toegye School in The mid-Korea Dynasty, seeking to live in seclusion of his life engaged in research work, respected by scholars for generations. He, Together with Yi Hyeon Il(1627-1704), carried out a systematic study of Toekye's Interpretation of the "Four Buddings" and "Seven Feelings". In this paper, from a comparative point of view, The author studied Jung Sihan's Li-Qi Theory, Four-Seven Theory, Human Mind and Mind of the Dao. Although his theory of interpretation about Li-Qi Theory, Four-Seven Theory, is the tendency of compromise Toegye and Yulgok's thought, but from the master and servant and upper and lower relationship between Li-Qi and Four-Seven Theory, Jung Sihan preferred the thought of Toegye. The characteristics of Human Mind and Mind of the Dao is Emphasis on Zhu Xi's theory about human mind of "is-to-be"

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.52
• /
• pp.107-130
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to catch the characteristics of the Hanju Yi Jinsang (寒洲 李震相, 1818~1886)'s thought of the 'Li(理)' through Hanju's view on the Ido-seol(理到說), the Toegye Yi Hwang(退溪 李滉, 1501~1570)'s latter Mulgyuk(物格) theory, and to establish the foundation for identifying the aspects of development about Toegye School's concept of Li from Toegye's Ido-seol. The Ido-seol was criticized for regarding Li - the immovable principle - as 'living thing'. Toegye School's scholars tried to solve this problem by translating the 'word' correctly. Hanju also translated the word 'Do(到)', the verb of 'Ido', as meaning of 'perfectly understood' based on his translation of the word 'Gyuk(格)' as 'Ku(究)'. On the other hand, he also regarded the principle-application structure of Li and the its characteristic the 'Li as Hwalmul(活物)' as the main point of Toegye's Neo-confucianism thought his methodology 'Three viewpoints[三看法]'. Before Hanju, scholars dose not have more opinion from the translation of the word, and it is too difficult to identifying their scholarly identity through their viewpoints on Ido-seol. On the other hand, Hanju thought that the lack of the idea for comprehensive approach between Xin(心) and Li(理) will cause the misunderstanding the relationship between Xin and Li. In this reason, he evaluated Toegye's Ido-seol based on the concept of 'One principle and its manifoldness[理一分殊]'. Consequently, he concatenated the characteristic of Xin which includes all things with concept of Mulgyuk, and emphasized that Xin which penetrates the principle of all things has the characteristic of 'One principle(理一)'.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.29
• /
• pp.33-54
• /
• 2010

Woodam(愚潭) Jeong Si-han(丁時翰, 1625-1707) played an important role in the formation and development of the Toegye School. This writing explores the way Woodam understood the thought of Toegye(退溪, 1501-1570) as presented in The Book of Four-Seve Demonstration(四七辨證) The 17th century that Woodam lived in was the period in which monism and dualism coexisted. Woodam's understanding of Toegye's thought can be summarized as follows: 1) Woodam followed Toegye's li(理)-qi(氣) defense and his view on the origin of nature and emotion, acknowledging Toegye as the orthodox transmitter of Zhu Xi's teachings, 2) Woodam considered that the difference between the past and the contemporary teachings was simply caused by the difficulty of comprehending the character "li (principle) ". Thus he criticized Yulgok(栗谷, 1536-1584)'s claim that "that which rises is qi (material force), and that which gives rise to qi is li," and followed instead Toegye's views of the entivity, dynamism, and ultimacy of li and its substantial function. Yet, Woodam further developed Toegye's thought and asserted that "in the midst of the marvelous unity of li and qi, li is always dominant and qi is always ancillary." 3) Woodam criticized Yulgok's thought and advocated Toegye's doctrine of the mutual motion of li and qi(理氣互發說), thereby following Toegye's insistence that difference can be observed in sameness and sameness can be observed in difference, that integrative thinking is needed to constructively embrace both analytic and synthetic judgments. In conclusion, Woodam understood profoundly and correctly Toegye's views on the relationship between li and qi and between nature and emotion, and explained them more concretely. In so doing, he endeavored to live the life by the teachings of Toegye.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Educational Facilities
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.101-112
• /
• 2005

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.50
• /
• pp.113-138
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this research is to establish the foundation for understanding the appearance of development, inheritance and acceptance of Toegye Yi Hwang(退溪李滉, 1501~1570)'s theory after his life by examining Udam Jeong Sihan(愚潭 丁時翰, 1625~1707)'s view on the Ido-seol(理到說), the Toegye's latter theory. After Toegye, Ido-seol was translated as 'The principle of matters reaches the human mind'. Galam Yi Hyunil(葛庵 李玄逸, 1627~1704), the contemporary scholar with Udam, criticized this translation for applying the directivity and motility to 'Li', the immovable principle. However, Udam agreed with the conventional interpretation of Ido-seol and understood it as the consilience of mind which got the entire principle(體) of 'Li(理)' and contained the application(用) of all things. He extended this concept as the level of 'sameness between objects and self [物我爲一]' based on his former theory, the exquisite interpretation of 'application of Li'. The meaning of 'sameness between objects and self[物我爲一]' is not amalgamation but applepie order of matter's principle in mind. The Udam's viewpoint is differ from Galam who tried to overcome the structural limit of Ido-seol by transforming 'Do(到)', the predicate of 'Ido(理到)', into 'Jin(盡)'. It means that he tried to interpret 'Ido(理到)' on the more essential aspect. His view can be the useful tool for understanding the Toegye's neo-Confucianism system with 'Li(理)' as central figure. It suggested that Udam's theory of the principle and the applecation of 'Li' can be the important theory to investigate the formation of Toegye schools' though and its development.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.121-153
• /
• 2018

The eight most prominent students of Lee Jin Sang discussed and developed the doctrines of the Master while discussing with the surrounding Toegye scholars. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between the doctrines of Toegye and the doctrines of Hanju in their discussions. First, the two were originally aimed at the same scholarship, so they discussed in a friendly atmosphere and some of the Toegye scholars participated in Hanju group. but at a certain point, they were a violent atmosphere of confrontation. Next, I tried to clarify the confrontation between Juli and Jeugli. And I tried to explain that they had different thoughts about domination of li. In addition, I looked at the meaning of excessiveness and compromise, the key words to criticize others and defend oneself. Finally, I explained that the ultimate difference between the two schools is in the methods of mind cultivation.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.49-61
• /
• 2019

This study aims to examine the spatial recognition of the characters who visited Anuisamdong(安義三洞) in the past and left it in the literature. Thus, the school's relationship between people identified in the relevant literature was analyzed and the elements of landscape were extracted. The results were as follows; First, The figures who authored the literature on Anuisamdong were related to scholars living in Anuihyun(安義縣), along with the Yeongnam confucian genealogy. Starting with Jung, Yeo-Chang(鄭汝昌) in the 15th century, a relationship centered on Nammyeong School(南溟學派) in the 16th century was formed. At that time, people had toured the Anuisamdong regardless of the academic background. In the 17th century, Nammyeong School were in conflict with Toegye School(退溪學派), so Toegye School's influence had no record. In the 18th century, the proportion of Nammyeong School, Toegye School, and Kiho School(畿湖學派) appeared similar as they evolved into the Yeongnam School(嶺南學派). After the 19th century, the proportion of patriots who participated in the anti-Japanese movement was higher than that of schools. Second, The main places used in the literature related to Anuisamdongwere the order of Wonhakdong(猿鶴洞), Hwrimdong(花林洞) and Simjindong(尋眞洞). There are a total of 21 major elements used for the related literature, of which Suseungdae Rock(搜勝臺), Morijae House(某里齋), Nongwaljeong Pavilion(弄月亭), Sasundae Rock(四仙臺) and Cheoksuam Rock(滌愁巖) were the main subjects. Elements of Wonhakdong have been in the spotlight since the 16th century, focusing on Suseungdae Rock. Although the elements of Hwarimdong have been increasing gradually since the 18th century, the ratio of Simjindong to Wonhakdong and Hwarimdong was relatively small. Third, The relationship between the figures who visited the Anuisamdong and the spatial recognition of the Anuisamdong was divided into landscape awareness, emotional awareness and symbolic recognition. The Anuisamdong's scenic view is mostly identified by its description of the waterscape and topographical landscape, which people may have perceived as a scenic site centered on the valley view at the time. The mutual influence of Nammyeong School and Toegye School in the 16th and 17th centuries led to a scene in which the major figures of each school recognized pleasure as a culture of training, and a feeling of longing for the traces of past ancestors as the 18th century travel culture and the 19th century chaotic situation. In addition, the symbolic expression that usually appears is likely to have been recognized as a unworldly place, as the location of the immortal world is confirmed.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.36
• /
• pp.229-264
• /
• 2009

This paper aims for a study on the theory that mind is Li(principle). The method of research is laid emphasis on searching for the historical development of the perception Theory in late Cho-Sun. First of all, I investigated a meaning of the perception theories of Ho-Rak school, that were criticized in the Cho-Sun academic world. The next, I investigated the theory of Li-ju-Ki-ja that was raised by Yi Sang Jung. He thought that Li is supervisor and Ki is assistance. And he put a construction on the Perception Theories of Toegye school. Yi Jin sang's theory of perception is the result of criticism against Ho-Rak school, and a fresh and in-depth construction of Yi Sang Jung's perception theory. His viewpoint was contradiction to the theory of Sim si Ki(the theory that Mind is made of Ki). And he rediscovered the human conscience that was born endowed from Heaven.