性理學과 實學, 그 根本思考의 同異性에 대한 考察

윤사순(Youn Sa Soon)(尹絲淳) 한림대학교 태동고전연구소 2003 泰東古典硏究 Vol.19 No.-

Whether to regard Sung-li-hak (Neo-Confucianism: Learning of Nature and Principle) and Shilhak (Practical Learning) as two phases of a continuous development or disparate philosophies has been an unresolved question since the 1950s until today. The differentiation between the two philosophies may be enabled by a comparison of their basic concepts and premises Such is the objective of this paper, and to make the approach clear I take the thoughts of Yi Hwang and Cheong Yak-yong as the representatives of the two philosophies. Considering that Neo-Confucianism is called at times Practical Learning, we need to review the usages of the term Practical Learning which are quite different in the two philosophies. In case of Yi Hwang, the term Practical Learning is oriented toward the practicality centering on morality as opposed to Buddhism which is considered an empty discipline. In comparison, later Practical Learning considers Neo-Confucianism an empty displine, and in doing so it exhibits an even more practical, governance for the people based on law. Therefore, the two philosophies should not be confused on the mere ground of the term Practical Learning. Cheong Yak-yong refutes the basic assumptions and beliefs posited on the ground of the concepts deployed in Yi Hwang s Neo-Confucianism such as Heaven, li, chi, the mind, nature, and emotion. That is, he denies that Heaven is li. that sung(nature) is li, that one li divides into all things, that the mind integrates sung(nature) and jung (emotion), or that sung(nature) rises to become jung(emotion). As the result, in his thoughts appear new views on the universe, the humanity, or morality. This leads us to the conclusion that Practical Learning is an altogether different philosophy from Neo-Confucianism. Living at a time when concrete Neo-Confucianist studies were at their height, Cheong Yak-yong founded his early academic career in the Neo-Confucianist atmosphere, like many other Confucianist scholars of his time. He thus did not simply dismiss major Neo-Confucianist theories, but made frequent references to them. In this sense, some may argue that Cheong Yak-yong s thoughts do not differ very much from Neo-Confucianism. However, we need to remember that the implicit objective of his discourse on Neo-Confucianism was not a further development of Neo-Confucianism. Rather, his discourse aims at ending once and for all the misunderstandings and disputes about the existing Neo-Confucianist theories. Therefore, his thoughts render materials that help differentiate fundamentally Neo-Confucianism and Practical Learning. What we should not overlook as well are that Confucianism before the rise of Neo-Confucianism, namely, the notions of primitive Confucianism were accepted by both Neo-Confucianists like Yi Hwang and scholars of Practical Learning like Cheong Yak-yong, and that the formation of the school of Practical Learning took place gradually, and not suddenly with Cheong Yak-yong s solitary efforts. These facts allow us to realize that Neo-Confucianism and Practical Learning are distinct on the philosophical level, but not exactly separable from each other. The author s belief is that it is inappropriate to conceptualize the flow of philosophical development in such simplistic terms as continuity or discontinuity, for such an approach is liable to cause misunderstanding. Therefore, the rise of Practical Learning from the soil of Neo-Confucianism may be appropriately understood as a phenomenon of a change in the way of thinking by man as a subject, which took place according to the historical environment. In other words, it was a fresh philosophy (on the universe, the humanity, and morality) arrived at by such scholars as Cheong Yak-yong, based on the concepts and premises that were newly posited from an almost entire revision of the basic notions of Neo-Confucianism, i.e.,

신유학의 정좌법과 심신수렴의 유교치료

신현승 ( Hyun Seung Shin ) 한국동서철학회 2016 동서철학연구 Vol.0 No.80

유학(특히 신유학)은 인간의 몸과 마음의 관계, 마음의 작용과 기능, 마음의 수양법등에 대해 매우 적극적 관심을 가진 동아시아의 가장 주요한 전통 인문학이었다. 더불어 유학의 성격 그 자체는 치료적(therapeutic)이며 ‘치유적’이라고 할 수 있다. 그리고 그 치유법으로서 정좌라고 하면 중국 송대의 신유학자들이 제시한 심신 수양방법의 하나로 마음을 고요히 가라앉히고 적연부동(寂然不動)의 태도를 가짐으로써 자신의 본성을 깨닫는 것을 가리킨다. 즉 신유학(Neo-Confucianism, 도학을 포함한 송대 이후의 유학)의 심신수렴(心身收斂) 혹은 심신 수양법으로 널리 알려진 것이 정좌(靜坐)였다. 신유학의 탄생에 기여한 북송오자(北宋五子) 가운데 이정(二程) 형제가 정좌의 중요성을 설파하였고, 신유학의 집대성자 주희(朱熹)도 정좌의 유교 수양법에 대해서는 매우 긍정적이었다. 이 정좌의 수양방법은 비단 신유학(성리학과 양명학 등)에서 뿐만 아니라, 불교나 도교에서도 좌선(坐禪)이나 양생(養生)의 방법으로 제시되고 있다. 그 때문에 이 수양방법은 지나치게 불교의 선학적(禪學的) 성격이 강하다는 유교계 안팎에서의 비판도 끊이지 않았다. 따라서 이 논고에서는 신유학의 정좌에 대하여 그 유교치료적 의미를 살펴보았다. 다시 말해 신유학의 정좌법과 마음 그리고 몸 등에 관한 다양한 논의, 신유학의 주요한 심신 수양법인 정좌의 양상, 신유학자들의 심신수렴과 치유적 의미, 그리고 청대 고증학의 융성 이전에 명대 유학사 혹은 명대 양명학사의 마지막을 장식하는 저명한 유학자 즙산 유종주(劉宗周)의 정좌설과 심신의 치유적 의미, 즙산 정좌설의 특징, 심신의 치유와 정좌의 관계 등에 관한 논의를 전개하였다. Confucianism (Especially, Neo-Confucianism) was the most important traditional humanities in East Asia with very active interests in the relationship between the human body and mind, action and function of the mind, and method of cultivating the mind. In addition, the nature of Confucianism itself is therapeutic and curative. Also, Jingzuo (quiet sitting) as a therapy is one of the methods of psychosomatic moral culture proposed by Neo-Confucian scholars in the Song dynasty of China, which refers to realizing one’s own nature by calming oneself and having an attitude of ‘unmoved in absolute stillness’. In other words, Jingzuo was widely known as a method of psychosomatic convergence or psychosomatic moral culture in Neo-Confucianism (Confucianism after the Song dynasty including Daoxue). Of the Beisong-Wuzi (five great thinkers of Beisong) who contributed to the birth of Neo-Confucianism, Ercheng (the Cheng brothers) taught the importance of Jingzuo, and compiler of Neo-Confucianism, Zhu Xi, too, was very positive about the Confucian method of moral culture of Jingzuo. This method of moral culture is suggested as a method of sitting-in Zen meditation or taking care of one’s health not only in Neo-Confucianism (Zhuxiism and Yangmingism, etc.) but also in Buddhism or Taoism. Accordingly, there has been constant criticism that this method of moral culture is too Zen Buddhist in and out of the world of Confucianism. Thus, this paper focused on investigating the Confucian therapeutic significance of the Jingzuo method and psychosomatic convergence in Neo-Confucianism. In other words, the first part of the main discourse of this study reviewed the Jingzuo method and various discussions about mind and body in Neo-Confucianism, the aspects of the Jingzuo method, an important method of psychosomatic moral culture in Neo-Confucianism and Neo-Confucian scholars’ psychosomatic convergence and its curative significance. In addition, the second chapter discussed eminent Confucianist, Jishan Liu Zongzhou’s Jingzuo theory and meaning of psychosomatic healing, characteristics of Jishan Jingzuo theory and Liu Zongzhou’s discourse about the relationship between psychosomatic healing and Jingzuo, who made a finale of the history of Confucianism in the Ming dynasty the history of Yangmingism in the Ming dynasty before the prosperity of Kaozhengxue in Qing dynasty.

근대 아시아의 서구문명 대응과 역사학 일본적 유학의 성립과 그 의미

구태훈 ( Tae Hoon Koo ) 수선사학회 2012 史林 Vol.0 No.42

This thesis examines how neo-Confucianism in Japan was accepted and developed in the Japanese society in 17th century, and how Yamaga Soko formed his own ethos appropriate for the Japanese society. In the process of this study, it was intended to naturally expose the features of Japanese society and the characteristics of Kogaku in the 17th century. The Japanese society in the 17th century, that is, the first half of Edo period, was at the time when the Confucian theory made its appearance, which is against neo-Confucianism. The tendency is obviously different from that of Chosun or China. However, this academic tendency is on the assumption of accepting and developing neo-Confucianism. I paid attention to the ethos of Soko among other Kogaku scholars. Soko is a scholar who criticized neo-Confucianism in earnest and formed his own ethos. He was fully aware of the necessity of Confucianism matching the culture and history of Japan. Soko``s confrontation with neo-Confucianism was inevitable. Examination of Soko``s ethos is one of useful methods of studying the process of Japanization. The mid 17th century was the period when the Japanese society was established. The society of Japanese samurai who were the statesmen had a distinctive political system different from that of Chosun or China. In the 17th century, secularism made its appearance, and the atmosphere to admit human desires as they were was formed in the mid 17th century. While merchants came into economic power, mammonism prevailed. In particular, Japan supremacy started to take root. Neo-Confucianism was deflected and experienced the process of resistance and troubles while passing through the prism of the Japanese society in the 17th century. The first half of 17th century was the period of learning and understanding neo-Confucianism, and the mid 17th century was the period that scholars raised question about the ethos of neo-Confucianism. As a result, neo-Confucianism could not develop into a ethos system, but was disintegrated. The disintegration process of neo-Confucianism is described as the process of Japanizing Confucianism in the history of Japan. Yamaga Soko was the first person who criticized neo-Confucianism in Japan. Soko was a scholar who had an academic background different from other Confucianists. He made Bushido an object of criticism, and Bushido is a traditional value of Japan, and made an attempt to find out ``unique Japanese things`` in the process of emphasizing that samurai of Japan are fundamentally different from statesmen of Chosun and China. While Soko subjectively understood the social order of Japan, he tried to present studies and logics appropriate for Japanese and the Japanese society. In the process, Soko criticized neo-Confucianism which is an academic study originated from other country.Soko excluded discussion out of the doctrines of Confucius who was a``sage``. He criticized that neo-Confucianism, the method of moral culture in the doctrines of Wang Yang-ming, and the method of self-discipline in Buddhism were not useful for real life. Soko``s study did not jump to the world of idea beyond the real world, and did not go deep into metaphysical discussions. Soko``s interest was based on the dimension of specific ``日用卑近``. As described above, Soko``s learning is called `` Kogaku``, which was developed by Ito Jinsai and Ogyu Sorai.

안향(安珦)의 성리학(性理學) 전파(傳播)와 조선성리학(朝鮮性理學)의 정향(定向)

손흥철 ( Son Heung Chul ) 퇴계학부산연구원 2018 퇴계학논총 Vol.31 No.-

이 논문에서 필자는 성리학을 고려에 전파한 회헌(晦軒) 안향(安珦. 1243∼1306)의 업적과 조선성리학에 끼친 학문적 영향을 연구하였다. 안향은 원(元)의 연경(燕京)에 갔을 때 성리학(性理學)에 심취하였고, 직접 주자서(朱子書)를 가지고 돌아와 성리학 연구와 교육에 열중하였다. 그 후 주자 성리학은 조선의 건국이념이 될 정도로 학문적, 역사적 의미를 지니게 되었다. 이에 회헌은 “동방주자(東方朱子)”로 칭송된다. 그러나 현재 그가 남긴 학문적 자료가 매우 적다. 따라서 이 논문에서는 그동안의 연구를 토대로 회헌의 시대인식과 성리학의 도입 과정을 비교 검토하고, 현재 전하는 자료를 통하여 회헌의 학문정신을 재조명하였다. 그리고 중국에서 성리학의 확산과정과 원나라에서의 성리학연구의 특성을 알아보았다. 다음으로 회헌의 학문정신과 교육관을 연구하였다. 회헌은 교육이 국가를 바로세우는 가장 중요한 사업이라고 강조하였다. 끝으로 회헌이 전파한 성리학이 조선의 건국이념이 되었고, 회헌의 성리학으로부터 조선성리학의 발전과정이 이미 준비되었음을 확인하였다. 그리고 회헌으로부터 서원(書院)의 문화가 시작되었다는 것도 확인하였다. 이상의 연구를 통하여 회헌의 시대정신과 그의 학문 진흥의 정신이 21세기 오늘의 시대에도 필요함을 확인하였다. 그리고 안향의 교육관을 통하여 국가와 백성의 정신적 문화적 발전을 위해 학자와 교육자의 헌신적 자세가 필요함을 확인하였다. In this paper, I studied the works of Hoeheon(晦軒) Anhyang(安珦. 1943-1306), who spread the study of Neo-confucianism to Goryeo(高麗), and the academic effects on Joseon‘s Neo-confucianism. When he went to the Yanjing(燕京) of Won(元) Dynasty, he became absorbed in Neo-confucianism and returned to Goryeo Dynasty with a book written by Zhuxi(朱熹), and he was absorbed in the study and education of Neo-confucianism. After that Neo-confucianism was then given academic and historical significance to the extent that it became the founding ideology of Joseon. Hoerheon is praised as “The eastern Zhuzi(朱子)”. But now, he has very little academic data. Accordingly, this paper reviews the introduction of Hoeheon's era perception and Neo-confucianism based on the previous studies, and reinvents Hoeheon's academic spirit through the current materials. In China, we studied the spread of Neo-confucianism studies and the characteristics of Neo-confucianism studies in the Won(元) Dynasty. Next, I studied the academic spirit and educational perspectives of Hoeheon. Hoerheon stressed that education is the most important project to establish a country correctly. Lastly, it was confirmed that Neo-confucianism, which was introduced by Hoeheon, became the founding ideology of Joseon, and that the development process of Joseon Neo-confucianism was already prepared from Hoeheon's Neo-confucianism. It also confirmed that the culture of Seowon(書院) started from Hoeheon. Through the above research, it was found that the spirit of the era and the spirit of his academic advancement were also necessary in today's 21st century. Through Anhyang's educational office, it was confirmed that the dedicated attitude of scholars and educators was necessary to develop the spiritual and cultural development of the nation and its people.

연구논문 : 기호성리학 연구의 과제와 전망

이영자 ( Young Ja Lee ) 충남대학교 유학연구소 2011 儒學硏究 Vol.24 No.-

본고에서는 기호성리학에 대한 정의를 밝히고, 기존의 연구 성과물에 대한 동향 및 과제에 대해 논의해 보았다. 그 결과 기호성리학의 연구 동향에는 다음과 같은 문제점 및 특징이 있다. 먼저 기호성리학의 범주를 논의하는 과정에서 드러난 이분법적 카테고리의 문제다. 기호성리학을 영남학파와 대별되는 기호학파의 성리학으로 정의하는 이분법에는 문제가 있을 수 있다. 둘째, 기호성리학의 인물별 연구 성과를 보면 한원진, 이간, 임성주, 송시열 등 일부 학자에 편중되어 있다. 아직까지 연구가 제대로 진행되지 않은 학자도 많아 연구물의 빈익빈부익부는 더욱 심화될 것으로 보인다. 기호유학자 중 아직 발굴되지 않은 학자들에 대한 연구가 시도된다면 기호성리학은 지금보다 훨씬 질적으로나 양적으로 풍성하게 발전할 수 있을 것이다. 마지막으로 기호성리학의 주제별 연구에서는 대체로 인물성동이론이나 미발심체순선유선악논쟁, 명덕주리주기논쟁 위주로만 연구되는 경향이 두드러졌다. 이러한 굵직한 논쟁 이외의 논쟁도 발굴할 필요가 있다. 지금까지 분석한 바에 따르면, 기호성리학의 전개양상은 너무도 다양하여 이를 연구하는 학자 간 관점에도 차이가 많다는 점이 특징적이다. 이러한 이견은 기호성리학이 갖는 ``개방성과 다양성``이라는 특성에서 기인한다. 그러나 이러한 특성은 영남학과 기호학의 화합과 발전, 세계 속의 한국 유학(성리학)으로 발돋움하기 위해 꼭 필요한 것이다. 한국의 성리학, 곧 세계의 성리학으로 발전하기 위해서는 기호성리학에 대한 다양한 관점의 논의들이 이전처럼 계속해서 활발하게 진행되어야 할 것이다. 지역학의 특수성이 투철하면 할수록 그 지역성을 벗어나 보편적인 세계화로 통하게 되듯이, 기호성리학의 발전이 곧 한국 성리학의 발전이 되고, 세계 속의 한국 성리학 으로 거듭날 수 있을 것이다. 그리고 더 나아가 현대사회의 주류로 재부상할 수 있을 것이다. The study intended to reveal the definition of Giho Neo-Confucianism and discuss the trend and task regarding previous research results. As a result, the following problem and characteristic showed in the trend of Giho Neo-Confucianism research. First, it is the problem of dichotomic category which was revealing the course of discussing the category of Giho Neo-Confucianism. The point is that the dichotomy of defining Giho Neo-Confucianism as Neo-Confucianism of Giho school which is separated from Youngnam school can have problem. Second, viewing the research result of Giho Neo-Confucianism for each individual, it focuses on partial scholars such as Han Won Jin, Lee Gan, Lim Sung Joo, Song Shi Yeol, Choi Ik Hyun, Lee Hang Ro, and etc. Because there are many scholars who are not researched, it seems that researches will still have such concentration. If researches on scholars who are not discovered yet are attempted among Giho Confucian scholars, Giho Neo-Confucianism will develop much more abundantly in quality and quantity than now. Finally, regarding research of Giho Neo-Confucianism for each subject, it showed conspicuous tendency of having discussions generally focusing on InMulSungDong-Yiron, MiBalSimCheSoonSunYooSunAk, or MyungDukJooRiJooKi. Other discussions aside to such centering discussions are necessary for discovery. According to the analysis until now, because the progress of Giho Neo-Confucianism is so diverse, its characteristic is that there is much difference in the viewpoints among scholars who study them. Such different view results from the characteristic of ``openness and diversity`` of Giho Neo-Confucianism. However, such characteristic is really necessary for harmony and development of Youngnam school and Giho school, and for Korean Confucianism (Neo-Confucianism ) to step up in the world. For Korean Neo-Confucianism to develop as world`s Neo-Confucianism, diverse discussions with different viewpoints should be actively held continually like the past. As regional studies become universally globalized breaking away from the region the more thorough its distinct characteristic is, the development of Giho Neo-Confucianism will become the development of Korean Neo-Confucianism, and it will be able to be reformed as Korean Neo-Confucianism in the world. And, furthermore, it will be able to rise up as the main stream of modern society.

일반논문 : 조선후기(朝鮮後期) 지식인(知識人)의 청대(淸代) 건가고증학(乾嘉考證學)에 대한 인식(認識) 연구(硏究) -한송논쟁(漢宋論爭)을 中心으로-

정신남 ( Chennan Ding ) 연세사학연구회( 구 연세대학교 사학연구회 ) 2015 學林 Vol.36 No.-

본고는 조선후기 지식인들의 청대 乾嘉考證學에 대한 인식을 밝히는 데 목적을 두고 있다. 乾嘉考證學은 청대학술의 정체성을 대변할 수 있는 일종의 독립적인 학문체계로서 고증학적 방법론과 그 독자적인 理致, 즉 乾嘉新義理學을 겸비한 학문이다. 乾嘉新義理學派학자들은 정밀한 고증방법을 이용하여 몇 개의 유교 핵심어를 재해석함으로써, 송대이후 주자성리학의 권위를 해체하여 독자적인 자신의 理致體系구성을 시도하였다. 그리하여 건가고증학 학자들은 스스로가 漢代漢學의 정수를 계승했다 여겼기에 정주계통의 성리학을 옹호하는 宋學者들과 치열한 한송논쟁이 벌어졌다. 이 논쟁은 조선학계까지 큰 파장과 논란을 일으켰다. 조선지식인들은 청대한학, 즉 乾嘉考證學과 漢代漢學을 엄격하게 구분하였다. 그들은 한나라의 한학이 경전의 보존과 전승, 주석의 정확성에 대해 기여한 것을 긍정적으로 평가하였다. 그러나 건가고증학과 현실 간의 괴리, 문헌적인 명물훈고에만 주력하는 건가고증학의 폐단에는 비판적인 시선을 지니고 있다. 주자성리학을 숭상하는 조선지식인들은 당시 건가고증학이 청대학계에서 극단적으로 성행하여 성리학이 더 이상 절대적 권위를 유지할 수 없는 상황이 학술의 쇠락으로 이어질 수 있음을 걱정하였다. 그리고 그들은 건가고증학의 고증성과를 인정하면서도 新義理學派학자들의 理致上의 반주자적인 의도까지 간파하며 극심한 경계를 드러내고 있었다. 조선 지식인이 건가신의리학파 학자들에게 혹평을 가했던 것은 고증이 밝혀낸 결과가 성리학의 권위, 곧 조선의 사상체제를 동요시킬 수 있기 때문이었다. 특히 건가고증학의 반주자적 성향으로 인해, 조선에서 건가고증학의 수용은 쉽지않았다. 조선지식인들의 건가고증학에 대한 학술상의 대응은 ‘漢宋折衷’의 형태로 제기되었는데, 이것은 조선 문화 내에서 유교 경세정신의 부활을 도모하는 데 있어 건가고증학을 절충 겸용하려고 시도한 것이라고 할 수 있다. This study aims at clarifying understanding of Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing, Qing Dynasty of China by intellectuals in the late Chosun dynasty Korea. Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing, as an independent academic system representing academic features of Qing Dynasty, is knowledge combined with philology methodology and unique argumentation philosophy, i.e. the new philosophy of Qianlong-Jiaqing. Intellectuals with the background of new argumentation of Qianlong-Jiaqing used rigorous research methods and expounded several key words in Confucianism, trying to undermine the authority of Neo-Confucianism since Song Dynasty, and to establish an argumentation philosophy system with a special feature. At that time, the controversy between Philology and Neo-Confucianism broke out between the intellectuals of Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing (Han) who regarded themselves as inheritors of the knowledge in Han Dynasty essence and called their knowledge “Hanxue” and the intellectuals who supported Neo-Confucianism. The controversy spread to Korean academia and sparked a huge debate. The author firstly introduces the historical background and the necessity of the research, then expounds previous research as well as the view angle and research method of this thesis. The end of 18th century and the first half of 19th century is a transitional period from pre-modern to modern, in which period Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing, as one branch of Confucianism, occupied an important place in academic history of both China and Korea. As for research perspective and method, the author classifies Korean intellectuals’ understanding of Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing, then focuses on their specific knowledge, with controversy between Philology and Neo-Confucianism centered. Korean intellectuals strictly separate Sinology of Han Dynasty and Qing Dynasty, i.e. Qing knowledge represented by Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing. They acknowledged the preservation and inheritance of the essence and the accuracy of the notes of Sinology of Han Dynasty. However, they fiercely criticized the disadvantage of detachment from reality and buried in philological research. For those Korean intellectuals who advocate Neo-Confucianism, it was an academic decline and times anxiety since prevalence of Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing was contributing to the authority decline of Neo-Confucianism. In addition, even though the Korean intellectuals acknowledge the achievement of new argumentation school, they showed vigilance since the clear anti-Zhu zi trend on argumentation. The reason why Korean intellectuals criticized new argumentation school was they, as the ruling class of the country with the ruling ideology of Neo-Confucianism, could not stand the power of Neo-Confucianism, i.e. Korean ideology challenged by Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing on the basis of research results. It is not an easy task to introduce Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing into Korea because of its anti-Neo-Confucianism trend. Korean intellectuals proposed Compromise of Han and Song in face of the prevalence of Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing. It is a comeback of exploration of Confucianism spirit in Korean culture, and a try to compromise Neo-Confucianism and Philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing. In conclusion, this study illustrates Korean intellectuals’ specific knowledge of philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing, at the same time, on the basis of it, expounded the detailed information of compromise of Philology and Neo-Confucianism proposed by them in order to introduce the philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing. The purpose of the study is to be of some assistance on the future research on Korean’s reception history of philology of the Qianlong-Jiaqing.

원 간섭기 성리학 수용의 일 단면 -최문도(崔文度)를 중심으로-

고혜령 ( He Ryung Koh ) 한국중세사학회 2005 한국중세사연구 Vol.0 No.18

This paper examines a scholar during the days when Neo-Confucianism from the Yuan Dynasty was first adopted late in the Goryeo Dynasty. People say that Neo-Confucianism was generally relevant to newly rising officials from the countryside, small and medium-sized landowners or Kwago(科擧), the highest level state examination to recruit ranking officials. When we pay attention to the different groups of people who studied Neo-Confucianism, however, we can see that classes from different backgrounds also studied Neo-Confucianism The people who accepted Neo-Confucianism in the last Goryeo Dynasty were from not only the rising class but also from existing powerful families or scholars who did not apply for Kwago. In this paper I will focus on Choi Moon-doh (1292-1345) to consider one aspect of Neo-Confucianism. He served as Soogwi(宿衛), an official rank in the Yuan dynasty. Choi Moon-doh`s family was a powerful family who had served as high officials, carrying on the family line. His father, Choi Sung-ji, who passed Kwago, raised up to Chansungsa(贊成事) supporting the King C uingsun(忠宣王)and also played a great role in introducing the calendar of Yuan Dynasty. Choi Moon-doh was sent to Yuan to serve as Soogwi, but had been interested in Neo-Confucianism through studying the works of Ju Don-i(주돈신), Jung Ho(程顥), Jung Ei(정신) and Joo Hee(朱熹). After coming back to Goryeo, he was recognized as a scholar of Neo-Confucianism through interchange with Lee Jae-hyun(李齊腎), Choi Hae(崔瀣) and Lee Kok(李穀) who were prominent at that time. Also Uwi Moon-doh, who played an important part in the acceptance of Neo-Confucianism, stood at the head of popularizing the exercises of Neo-Confucianism by setting up the family shrine(家廟), and promoting the spread of Too-ho(投壺). The family shrine and Too-ho were continuously kept, even in the Chosun Dynasty, as a fundamental formality and amusement of the literati. In this paper, we may glance at the diversity of people who accepted Neo-Confucianism late in the Goryeo Dynasty through the activity of Choi Moon-doh and other scholar`s consciousness on his view of Neo-Confucianism. In addition, it was revealed that Neo-Confucianism was not an exclusive possession of the new literati class but it was spread to a wide-range of classes in the process of cultural exchanges between Goryeo and Yuan. It is unfortunate however that it was not easy to reveal the level of his understanding of Neo-Confucianism owing to the lack of concrete historical material.

베트남 儒學思想 形成過程의 特徵 - 麗末鮮初 儒學 鼎立過程과의 比較를 통하여

최복희 한국유교학회 2009 유교사상문화연구 Vol.35 No.-

본 논문은 조선과 베트남 사회에서 성리학 사상이 도입되는 과정에서의 유사한 역사적 정치적 배경을 지적하고, 수용의 과정에서의 다른 점을 분석하려는 시도이다. 작은 결론으로 필자는 베트남과 조선에서 성리학의 성격의 공통점과 차이점을 정리해보았다. 첫째, 조선과 베트남 공히 성리학은 통치철학으로 도입되었다. 통치세력에게 있어서 성리학은 통치이데올로기로서 왕조의 정치력을 강화하기 위한 이념의 전파와 의례 장악의 수단이었다. 특히 통치세력이 실제로는 유교적 신념을 형성하지 못하면서 단지 수단으로 여겨졌다는 점이 공통적인 정황이었다. 둘째, 베트남과 조선의 경우 모두 조정의 정치적 의도에 의한 문화 수용으로 이루어졌기 때문에, 처음에는 문화양식으로서의 예로만 주목되었다는 점이 공통점이었다. 그러나, 이것은 양자 사이의 차이를 만드는 계기가 되었다. 조선의 경우에는 성리학은 예의 측면에서 일상공간에서 문화적 신념과 양식으로 구체화되었던 반면, 베트남의 경우에 성리학은 향촌의 유력한 기존 지도자들이 전통 관습들을 고수하고자 하는 경향이 강하였기 때문에 사회적으로 잘 받아들여지지 못하였다. 베트남에서 예의 성리학적 개념은 잘 인지되지 못하여 형식적인 수준에서 이해되었으며, 특히 상대적으로 강한 전통관념과 불교사상은 성리학을 베트남 사회가 받아드리는데 큰 장애가 되었다. 셋째, 조선과 베트남은 모두 고대의 공맹(孔孟)의 유학이 일찍부터 전래되었고, 그 후 통치세력의 필요에 의하여 성리학적 통치이념이 도입되었다. 이후, 성리학적 통치이념은 양국 통치세력들의 정치적 이해관계를 위해 적극적으로 채택되었다. 이러한 공통의 역사적 도입과정에도 불구하고, 조선의 성리학은 이전부터 유학의 이론적이고 실천적인 토대를 형성해온 반면, 베트남의 경우 전통적 유학이 베트남 고유의 강한 전통과 관습의 벽을 넘어서지 못하였다. 이러한 도입 초기의 차이는 양국 간 성리학적 특성의 차이로 이어졌다. 넷째, 조선과 베트남에서 모두 성리학 사상은 불교사상을 견제해야 하는 과제를 지니고 있었다. 하지만 상이한 전통과 관습은 그 과제의 상이한 결과를 야기하였다. 조선의 경우에 성리학이 통치철학과 도덕규범의 강력한 정치사회적 이론으로 성립하는 동안 불교는 점차 종교적 역할의 수준에 머물게 되었다. 그러나, 베트남의 경우, 사찰이 출세간의 신성한 영역뿐만 아니라, 조정 관료들의 정치활동 공간 기능을 했던 예처럼, 이미 불교가 입세적 성격을 강하게 가지고 있었기 때문에 현실주의적 사회가치인 유학이 새롭게 차지할 수 있는 이념적이고 사회적인 공간이 남아있지 않았다. 오히려 베트남 사회에서는 유학의 가족윤리와 예(禮) 사상보다 불교의 자비의 윤리가 더 자연스럽게 받아들여졌다. This paper studies the common and different characteristics of the neo-Confucianism between Vietnam and Chosun by analyzing the similarities and differences in the historical and political backgrounds of the ideological formation of those two different forms of the neo-Confucianism. With this academic work, this paper concludes in four terms. Firstly, in both Vietnam and Chosun, the neo-Confucianism was introduced as a ruling philosophy. For the ruling groups in both countries, the neo-Confucianism was regarded as an effective ideological and ethical means to consolidate the its domination power over the country. The ruling groups in both countries only dealt with the neo-Confucianism as an ideological means for political aims while failing to establish it as a form of religious belief. Secondly, in both countries, the neo-Confucianism was adopted as 'courtesy(禮)', a Confucian culture pattern to dominate people by the ruling group in its initial time. This led to make some differences in the neo-Confucianism between Vietnam and Chosun, however. Whereas the neo-Confucianism was materialized as a form of cultural belief and mode in the Chosun society, the Vietnamese one was hardly accommodated in its society for leaders in its local communities strongly held fast to their traditional values and customs. In addition, the neo-Confucian notion of courtesy was not clearly conceptualized, but its form was only considered in the Vietnamese intellectual field. In particular, the relatively powerful traditional values and Buddhism functioned as a heavy obstacles for the neo-Confucianism to permeate into the Vietnam society. Thirdly, the traditional Confucianism was introduced into both Vietnam and Chosun in their early history. Afterwards, the neo-Confucian ruling ideology was imported by the ruling groups for their political interests in both countries. Despite their common historical background, the Chosun Confucianism had its own pre-constituted theoretical and practical foundation while the social base of the Vietnam one was significantly weaker than the social influence of its tradition and customs. This initial difference resulted in each country's unique characteristics of the neo-Confucianism. Lastly, the neo-Confucianism in both countries was given a fundamental task to check the traditional Buddhism. However, different traditions and customs resulted in different effects. In Chosun, while the neo-Confucianism developed as a powerful politico-social theory of the ruling philosophy and the moral criteria, the general role and effects of the Buddhism was limited within a religious level. Unlike Chosun, there was very little ideological or social space left for the newly introduced neo-Confucianism, which was very realistic, because the Vietnam Buddhism had a wordly success-oriented tendency in Vietnam. For example, a Vietnam Buddhist temple was functioning not only as a sacred area of Buddhism, but also an actual sphere for the political elite's negotiations. Rather, in the Vietnamese society, the Buddhist moral idea of benevolence was more popular and acceptable than the Confucian family ethics and thought of courtesy.

여성주의 시각에서 본 성리학 - ‘여성주의적 성리학’은 가능한가? -

김세서리아 한국유교학회 2023 유교사상문화연구 Vol.- No.91

In this paper, I attempt to reexamine Neo-Confucianism, which often produces female-oppressive and male-centered norms, to a neo-Confucian thinking that secures space for women. By rearranging the Neo-Confucian meanings of ‘Overcoming my personal desires and returning to the rite is Ren.(克己復禮爲仁)’ and ‘One can learn to become a sage(聖人可學)’, we seek to newly understand desire, individuality, otherness, rite, and female subject matter of Neo-Confucianism. To do this, I first examine the positions of Confucian scholars of Ming and Qing Dynasty in China who criticize the Neo-Confucian interpretation of ‘Overcoming my personal desires(克己復禮)’. Pointing out the limitations of their interpretive approach, we find feminist meaning embodied in Neo-Confucian interpretation of ‘Overcoming my personal desires(克己復禮)’. In addition, as we examine ‘Sage-Becoming’ from a gender perspective, we observe the meaning of resistance and subversion of women. By doing so, I discuss the relationship between women and Neo-Confucianism in relations to: the otherness inherent in Neo-Confucianism, the Productivity of rite related to subject formation, and the dual nature of neo-Confucianism through which it produces a point of resistance. In particular, we reexamine the relationship between neo-Confucianism and feminism by focusing on the process in which neo-Confucian norms and gender norms produce a hybrid subject of women-sage, its meaning and effect. 이 논문에서는 흔히 여성억압적이고 남성중심적인 규범을 산출하는 이론 근거로서의 성리학을 넘어서 여성의 공간을 확보하기 위해 성리학적 사유를 가로지르는 작업을 시도한다. ‘극기복례위인(克己復禮爲仁)’과 ‘성인가학(聖人可學)’의 성리학적 의미를 재배치하여 성리학의 욕망, 개체성, 타자성, 예, 여성 주체 문제를 새롭게 이해하고자 한다. 이를 위해 우선 극기복례에 대한 성리학적 해석을 비판하는 명청대 유학자들의 입장을 고찰하고, 이들 해석 방식이 산출하는 한계를 지적하는 속에서 극기복례에 대한 성리학적 해석에 내재하는 여성주의적 의미를 발견한다. 또한 ‘성인가학(聖人可學)’을 젠더적 관점에서 고찰하는 속에서 여성의 성인-되기가 보여주는 저항과 전복의 의미를 살펴본다. 그리하여 여성과 성리학의 관계를 성리학에 내재하는 타자성의 측면과 주체 형성과 관련한 예의 생산성 문제, 그리고 성리학의 양가성과 그것이 산출하는 저항의 지점을 논의한다. 특히 성리학적 규범과 젠더규범 사이에서 발생되는 양가성이 여성-성인이라는 혼종의 주체를 산출하는 과정과 그것의 의미, 효과에 주목함으로써 성리학과 여성주의의 관계를 재조망 한다.

송 · 원시기 성리학과 여성

민병희(Min, Byoung-hee) 한국역사연구회 2018 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.109

Neo-Confucianism has long been criticized as the main cause for the suppression of women in East Asian societies. Despite the popular notion that Confucianism is anti-feminist, it has been rarely explored how a Confucian tradition affected women’s life in the particular society in the specific historical context and why Confucians in the society made such choices and the society accepted the choices. In the Song dynasty, Neo-Confucians started a large scale social, political, cultural, intellectual movement through which they intended to transform and improve the society according to their agenda. All the theory and practice in Neo-Confucianism served for the purpose. Therefore, the questions of how Neo-Confucianism dealt with the issues of women and why they did so should be also understood in the context of the agenda. Women"s status in the Song was paradoxical. On the one hand, foot-binding and Neo-Cofucianism, the two major symbols of female subjugation in Chinese history became widespread. On the other hand, women enjoyed unprecedented property rights and Neo- Confucian patriarchal agnatic principle barely changed legal and institutional systems in the society. Ironically, Neo-Confucian patriarchal ideology was legalized and institutionalized under the Mongol rule through contingencies. Neo-Confucianism is premised on the metaphysical theories and depends on the Classical authority. However, we cannot find a particular effort to develop a systemic theory on feminity and women per se in Neo-Confucianism. Neither existed the fixed set of rules which they should observe for the revitalization of patriarchal agnatic principle from the Confucian tradition. In fact, Neo- Confucianism pays little attention to the issues of women. They dealt with the issues of women only in terms of the arrangement of the female members of family in the grand agenda of the literati society. The role, status, and virtue of women were defined only by the need, utility and desire of literati males within the purview of the literati family strategy and the blueprint of the ideal literati society. The subject of women in Neo-Confuican ideology should be analyzed in terms of class as much as of gender. What strikes us most in the Neo-Confuican attitude and perspective towards women is not misogyny but the conceptual and categorical absence of women as a gender. Outside the family in which women are arranged for the Neo-Confucian grand agenda, women are completely missing.