梁啓超宗敎觀的內在矛盾和悖論

張乃禹(Zhang Naiyu) 중국어문학연구회 2015 중국어문학논집 Vol.0 No.90

The inner contradiction of Liang Qichao’s religious ideas reflected in two aspects, one is the attitude to religion and religious choice has experienced several changes, show some confused and tangled in a religious affiliation; two is the Buddhist conception of rationality in logic there are certain contradiction and paradox. Liang Qichao on the Confucian attitude from follow and support into opposition and criticism, is the inner conflicts constantly struggle results. The reason why Liang Qichao indulging in Buddhism, Liang Qichao attempts to use the Buddhist jurisprudence “epistemology” to explain the nature of the Buddhism thought of Western learning, full of passion; frustrated besides politics also to some extent make Liang Qichao want to find self comfort and relief from Buddhism, which believes in Buddhism, nihilism has produced great influence on the China intellectuals, Liang Qichao is no exception. In fact, contradiction of Liang Qichao religious affiliation, in addition to the psychological motive of saving the nation from subjugation, the fundamental reason lies in the “shear continuously, the reason also disorderly” perplexing religious sentiment. Liang Qichao from the point view of epistemology, “the five skandhas theory” as the core of epistemology to prove “without my theory”, showing a certain rational spirit, but the essence is between faith and reason of Buddhism in the contradictory attitude of the true reflection of Liang Qichao. Argument that contains psychology and rational contents of Buddhist teachings, not at the same time that faith and reason, reason and emotion can be harmonious organic fusion, cannot directly explain the Buddhist belief accords with rationality, contradiction between faith and reason can not overcome.

한말 유학자의 위기의식과 근대문명 담론 비판 - 艮齋 田愚의 梁啓超 비판을 중심으로 -

김건우 한국유교학회 2015 유교사상문화연구 Vol.61 No.-

This paper is an analysis of the writings of Jeonwu, who was a Confucian scholar and criticized the scholarship of Liang Qichao of China at the time of great changes on the threshold of modernity, when the shock of Western civilization was shaking all the systems and institutions of the Joseon society to its foundations. As a distinguished thinker, politician, writer and journalist representing modern China, Liang Qichao had a great impact on Chinese people with his vast output of editorials and writings, as well as on the Confucian intellectuals of Korea at the end of the Korean Empire(1897~1910), who were engaged in the patriotic enlightenment movement. One of the harsh critics of Liang Qichao would be found in Jeonwu, a Confucian scholar at the time, who left to posterity the largest number of critical reviews of the discourse of the Chinese man of letters. To be sure, most of the Confucian scholars in Korea at the end of the Korean Empire were in agreement on their disapproving stance on the ideas and theories of Liang Qichao. Most of them, however, remained just sporadic occurrences and perhaps no one ever challenged Liang Qichao’s thoughts and pointed out their potentially harmful consequences as much as Jeonwu did. An analysis is made of Jeonwu’s criticism of the ideas of pragmatism and utilitarianism, freedom and equality, the people’s rights and nationalism that he found in Liang Qichao’s discourses. Particularly, Jeonwu singled out the ideas of equality and the people’s rights as two major threats that would undermine the moral principles he conceived. He understood that the concept of equality was an attempt to see the relationship of the ruler and the ruled, father and son, and husband and wife on equal terms, and as such, a misleading and malicious idea that would overthrow the Confucian order. Jeonwu criticized that behind these ideas were the motive to put the people under the tyranny of the government. His intention was to keep the Confucian order by underlining the duty and role, rather than the rights, of the individual as the agent of moral practice. The ideas of Liang Qichao were a result of his struggle to see a modern civilized country established in China, by means of creating sinmin(新民) in urgent circumstances of the invasion of the Great Powers of the world. As a Confucian scholar, on the other hand, Jeonwu was concerned with preserving the values and purity of Confucianism and understood Liang Qichao as a figure who forsook the moral principles of humanity by giving the first priority to the wealth and power of the nation. 본 논문은 새로운 서구문명이 조선의 유교사회를 뿌리 채 뒤흔들었던 변혁기에 유학자 艮齋 田愚가 중국 梁啓超의 학술을 비판한 글을 분석했다. 양계초는 방대한 저술로 중국인들에게 큰 영향을 미쳤을 뿐만 아니라 구한말 우리나라에 소개되어 애국계몽 유교지식인에게도 지대한 영향을 끼쳤다. 한편 양계초의 담론을 비판하는 글을 가장 많이 남긴 구한말 유학자로 간재 전우를 들 수 있다. 물론 한말 유학자들 중에는 양계초 학설에 대해 비판적인 입장을 취한 경우도 있지만 대개는 단편적인 수준에 머물렀고, 전우만큼 양계초의 학설과 그 폐해를 지적한 경우는 드물다. 본 논문은 우선 신문매체와 불편한 관계를 맺고 있던 전우의 위기의식에 대해 살펴보았다. 전우는 당시 신문을 유교의 인륜을 무너뜨리는 불온매체로 인식하여 위기의식을 가졌으며, 자신을 비롯하여 전통 유학자들에 대한 허위보도와 조롱, 비판에 대해 심각한 우려를 표명하기도 했다. 특히 양계초의 담론 중 종교, 實利主義와 實行主義, 자유·평등과 민권, 국가주의에 대한 전우의 비판을 분석하였다. 양계초의 사상은 열강의 침략이라는 상황에서 新民을 만들어 근대 문명국가를 수립하려고 했던 고심어린 결과물이었다. 君臣·父子·夫婦 관계가 평등하다는 양계초의 자유·평등에 대해 전우는 유교적 질서를 顚倒시키는 邪說이라고 보았다. 그리고 전우는 양계초 논설의 본질이 결국 국민들에게 정부의 압제를 받게 하려는 속셈이라고 비판하였다. 개인의 권리보다는 도덕실천의 주체로서 각자의 본분을 강조함으로써 유교적 질서를 확립하려고 한 것이다. 전통 유학자 입장에서 철저하게 유교의 가치와 그 순수성을 보전하려는 전우는, 富強을 최고 가치로 삼아 인륜을 저버리는 인물로 양계초를 인식했다.

중국근대유학의 이상사회론 - 『대동서(大同書)』와 『신중국미래기(新中國未來記)』를 중심으로 -

김봉곤(Kim, Bong-gon) 영남퇴계학연구원 2021 퇴계학논집 Vol.- No.28

이글은 강유위의 󰡔대동서󰡕와 양계초의 󰡔신중국미래기󰡕를 통해 근대중국유학의 변용과 이상사회 추구론을 분석한 글이다. 20세기 초 중국유학의 전반적인 퇴조 하에 강유위는 󰡔대동서󰡕를 통해 대동사상과 이상정치론을 제시하였고, 양계초는 󰡔신중국미래기󰡕를 통해 중국의 미래를 전망하였다. 이 때문에 󰡔대동서󰡕와 󰡔신중국미래기󰡕에 관해서 주로 강유위나 양계초의 정치, 사상, 문학적 측면 등의 고찰이 이루어졌지만, 전통유학과의 상관관계, 특히 유교적 경세론이 집약되어 있는 󰡔대학(大學)󰡕과의 관련성을 충분히 검토하지 못한 한계를 갖는다. 이에 󰡔대학󰡕의 삼강령, 팔조목과의 비교검토를 통해 근대중국에 있어서 개인의 덕목과 경세론이 어떻게 변용되어갔는가를 검토하였다. 강유위와 양계초는 남송 대 주희에 의해서 제시된 󰡔대학(大學)󰡕의 ‘삼강령(三綱領)’과 ‘팔조목(八條目)’에 대해서 각각 서로 다른 견해를 제시하였다. 강유위는 주희의 견해를 수용하여 󰡔대학󰡕의 삼강령을 ‘명명덕(明明德)’, 신민(新民) ‘지어지선(至於至善)’으로 파악하고, 평천하의 기본을 ‘혈구지도(絜矩之道)’라고 하여 󰡔대동서󰡕의 ‘불인지심(不忍之心)’과 연결지었다. 다만, 팔조목 중 ‘성의’를 수신의 기본으로 한 것은 양명학을 수용한 것이다. 이에 비해 양계초는 󰡔신민설󰡕에서 ‘명덕(明德)’에 대해 시민들이 공유해야 할 덕성, 즉 민지民智), 민덕(民德), 민권(民權) 등으로 해석하였다. ‘신민(新民)’에 대해서도 외부로부터 새로운 지식을 배워 국민의 기질을 변화시키는 것으로 이해하였다. 양계초는 󰡔대학󰡕의 명덕에 대해서 민주 공화국 체제에 필요한 시민적 덕성이나 시민적 권리로 이해하였고, 신민에 대해서도 개인이나 국가가 자유와 평등, 대등한 권리를 갖을 수 있도록 기질을 변화시키는 것으로 해석한 것이다. 강유위가 제시한 이러한 󰡔대동서󰡕의 이상사회는 거란세, 승평세의 소강을 거쳐 이루어지는 태평세로서, 전 인류를 대동의 경지에 이르게 하는 것이다. 강유위는 이러한 이상사회를 달성하기 위해서는 가족과 사회, 국가의 경계를 허물어뜨리는 것이 필요하다고 보았고, 거란세, 승평세, 태평세를 거쳐 궁극적으로는 국가 칭호와 국경을 없이 통합된 공정부(公政府) 수립을 주장하였다. 그러나 이러한 강유위의 견해와는 달리 20세기 초 상황은 현실적으로 약육강식의 제국주의와 민족주의로 분열되어 있어서 도저히 공정부가 이루어질 수 없는 상황이었다. 양계초의 󰡔신중국미래기󰡕에서는 중국이 제국주의 열강에 의해 분할되고, 중국인의 자치능력이 부족하여 노예상태에 빠져 있다고 진단하였다. 그러나 혁명이 일어나서는 안 된다고 보았다. 혁명으로 인해 많은 사람들이 피를 흘리고, 다양한 의견으로 인해 중국이 사분오열될 것이기 때문이라는 것이다. 이에 양계초는 자유, 평등의 민권을 실현하기 위해서는 자립정신으로 국민들을 교육시켜야 하며, 교육사업이 활발해지면 대외사상이 발달하여 외국인이 침입이 없고, 전제정치가 스스로 파괴된다고 보았다. 즉 민덕, 민지, 민력의 수준을 전반적으로 향상시키면 혁명이 없어도 백성들이 자유와 평등의 사회를 달성할 수 있다고 보았던 것이다. 오늘날 중국은 강유위의 󰡔대동서󰡕를 중시하고 하나의 거대한 중국제국을 이룩하려고 하고 있다. 이에 비해 양계초의 󰡔신중국미래기󰡕에서는 국가간의 평등한 관계를 중시하고, 국민들의 자유 평등관계를 중시한다는 점에서 무력과 억압을 통해 강대국 실현을 꾀하고 있는 현대중국이 나아가야 할 방향에 대해서 일정부분 보완책이 될 수 있다. This study analyzes the transformation and the Ideal Society Theory of the Chinese Modern Confucianism through 󰡔The Book of the Great Unity󰡕by Kang You-wei and 󰡔The record of new Chinese future(新中國未來記)󰡕 by Liang QiChao. Kang You-wei suggested One world(Datong) thought and the ideal politics in󰡔The Book of the Great Unity󰡕under the overall decline of Chinese Confucianism at the beginning of the 20th century, and Liang QiChao predicted the future of China in󰡔The record of new Chinese future󰡕. There have been studies on politics, ideology and literature of Kang You-wei and Liang QiChao about 󰡔The Book of the Great Unity󰡕 and 󰡔The record of new Chinese future󰡕, but those studies did not cover the correlation with the traditional Confucianism, especially the relevance with 󰡔The Great Learning(大學)󰡕 that integrates Confucian idea of governance. Therefore, this study reviews how individual virtues and the idea of governance were transformed in modern China by comparing with Three Doctrines and Eight Categories of 󰡔The Great Learning󰡕. Kang You-wei and Liang QiChao suggested different opinions about Three Doctrines and Eight Categories of 󰡔The Great Learning󰡕 presented by Zhu Xi in Southern Sòng Dynasty. Kang You-wei accepted the opinion of Zhu Xi and comprehended Three Doctrines as ’Myungmyungduk(明明德)’, ‘Shinmin(新民)‘ and ’Jieojiseon(至於至善)‘, and considered ’the Principle of Huyl-Gu’ as the basis of peaceful world, relating ‘Burinjisim(不忍之心)’ of 󰡔The Book of the Great Unity󰡕. However, he accepted Yangmingism as he considered ‘Seongui’ as the basis of Sushin among Eight Categories. On the other hand, Liang QiChao interpreted ‘Myeongdeok(明德)‘ as the virtue citizens should share, or ’wisdom of the people(民智)’, ‘ethics of the people(民德)’ and ‘civil rights(民權)’. Regarding ‘Shinmin(新民)’, he understood it as the one that changes the disposition of citizens by learning new external knowledge for the change of disposition. Liang QiChao argued in 󰡔The Great Learning󰡕 that public morals should be cultivated rather than individual virtues, and argued freedom, equality and equal rights about individuals and nation. The ideal society of 󰡔The Book of the Great Unity󰡕 by Kang You-wei is the one that makes all human beings reach the One world(Datong) as Taepyeongse that covers lull of Georanse and Seungpyeongse. Kang You-wei thought that it is necessary to demolish the boundary of families, society and nations in order to accomplish the ideal society, and argued the establishment of integrated public government with no nation name or border eventually after Georanse, Seungpyeongse and Taepyeongse. However, unlike the opinion of Kang You-wei, the situation of the beginning of the 20th century was separated into imperialism of the law of the jungle and nationalism in reality, so the establishment of public government was impossible. In 󰡔The record of new Chinese future󰡕 by Liang QiChao, China was divided by Powers of imperialism, and the ability of Chinese people’s autonomy was not sufficient, so the country was in the slave situation. However, Liang QiChao thought a revolution shouldn’t occur because many people would shed too much blood and China would be in utter disruption. Therefore, Liang QiChao claimed that it is important to educate citizens with independent mentality to realize the civil rights of freedom and equality, and if education business is vitalized, foreign thought is developed, which leads to prevention of foreign intrusion and to destruction of autocracy by itself. In other words, he thought if the level of ethics of the people, wisdom of the people and civil power is overall improved, citizens could reach the society of freedom and equality without revolution

양계초 문학관에 대한 신채호의 수용양상

趙寶璐 한국중국산문학회 2015 중국산문연구집간 Vol.5 No.-

This thesis has a purpose of showing the Liang-QiChao’s influence on Korean poetics in the time of enlightenment on a comparative literature. Korean intellectuals must have realized many facts for themselves while discussing utility theory in the time of Korean enlightenment, when they faced different kinds of circumstances, utility theory, nevertheless, is considered to be influenced by Liang-QiChao’s in many parts, considering that the contents they discussed and the vocabulary they used. Therefore, his work as well as Liang-QiChao’s poetics spread fast among Korean world of poetry and did help Korean intellectuals in many ways, who were working on enlightenment and social reform at that time. Korean intellectuals in the time of enlightenment like Sin, Chai-ho thought poetry of one method, which they could reform Korean society and politics and save their country in crisis as they accepted Liang-QiChao’s poetics. This thesis contains discussions. First, positive acceptance of Liang-QiChao’s poetics revolutionism. It can be said that Liang-QiChao’s work was introduced to Korea thanks to his Patriotic Enlightenment Thought in his work, even though his expressive technique in his work is hard to ignore. Second, both 「Eumbingsilsihwa(음빙실시화)」and 「Cheonheedangsihwa(천희당시화)」 have argued that new western culture and thought should be accepted through poetry. Third, both 「Eumbingsilsihwa」and 「Cheonheedangsihwa」 suggested the unification of the written and spoken language.

梁启超旧体诗与金泽荣汉诗比较研究 ― 以“沉郁顿挫”为中心―

金贤珠,王成志 영남중국어문학회 2023 중국어문학 Vol.- No.93

Liang Qichao's old style poems and Kim Taek-young's Chinese poems were influenced by Du Fu's poetry in both content and art, so their poems showed the characteristics of “depression and frustration”. In terms of content, the strong emotion laid the foundation for Du Fu's poetry's “depression and frustration”. Liang Qichao and Kim Taekyoung also wrote their poems about patriotism and nationalism in exile, so their poems both showed the characteristics of “depression”. The difference is that Liang Qichao's poems add a more tragic color to the “depression” foundation. For Kim Taek-young, the reality of the country's demise makes his poems more melancholy. In art, the use of implicit rhetoric and the poetic style of rhythm has contributed greatly to Du Fu's poetry's “depression and frustration”. The poems of Liang Qichao and Kim Taek-young also show similar characteristics. First of all, they both like to use the implicit rhetorical technique of combining false with true. Liang Qichao's old style poems also use symbolic implicit rhetoric techniques. Kim Taek-young's “depression and frustration” of Chinese poetry is also due to the extensive use of allusions. Secondly, Liang Qichao and Kim Taek-young both prefer metrical poetry.

梁啓超의 「少年中國說」 독해 ― ‘소년/청년’ 소환의 중국적 맥락에 대한 고찰

민정기 한국중국현대문학학회 2009 中國現代文學 Vol.0 No.50

Since Liang Qichao wrote “Of Young China”(少年中國說) and summoned “youth” in the modern context for the first time in China, many of those who sought for China's future, Li Dazhao, Chen Duxiu and Luxun to name a few, regarded themselves as “youth”, called for “youth”, and lectured “youth”. China had a long tradition of admiring the elder as the wise, and praised the young who had the sincerity of an old man. But by the end of 19th century, in deep worry of Chinese civilization collapsing, the “youth” quickly rose as a core sign in imagining a nation and all of the pessimism and hope were projected on it. “Youth” being called upon in the way of constructing modern subject and nation is not a unique Chinese experience. But having to do so in the face of a powerful Western Other addressing you as “ancient” in a negative sense, is quite unique, at least so in East Asia.(It is widely accepted that the emerging modern West European subject marginalized and alienized Greek, Egyptian, Indian, and Chinese civilizations by addressing them “old” or “ancient”. How these “ancient” civilizations in turn took to applicate youth discourse in constructing modern nation themselves will be an interesting theme of comparative studies.) If one was in the stage of childhood and needed to grow up to be civilized, it would not be a big problem. But if one has to get young again? That was a huge problem. Not only that, it was also a painful experience to unavoidably accept the overwhelming naming of the Other and at the same time having to learn from the same Other so as to refuse the name “ancient”. Chinese youth discourse is located as such in midst of a war for authority over naming. Liang Qichao's “Of Young China” begins as follows: “Japanese repeatedly call China 'Ancient Empire'. This naming supposedly originated from the Westerners. Alas! Is China old after all? I, Liang Qichao say, 'Nonsense! In my heart and in my eyes, there is only a youthful China!” Like so, Liang declares that China is not old, and at the same time refuses to accept the naming authority of the West. Preceding youth discourse of the May Fourth movement Liang's call for youth gave an important momentum for Chinese intellects of the time for thinking the renewal of Chinese civilization. But on the other hand, excessive awareness towards the Other calling China as “ancient” made Liang's youth discourse to deny everything traditional marked as “ancient”. In turn, if only the youth bears positive values, then it was inevitable to earn for eternal youth. It may be only proper that “Of Young China”'s last lines are as follows: “Therefore today's responsibilities are not of any others but the youth. If the young are wise the nation becomes wise. If the young are strong the nation becomes strong. If the young are independent the nation becomes independent. If the young are free the nation becomes free. If the young progress the nation will progress. If the young can win Europeans the nation can win Europe.…… Glory to our young China! Just like the universe it will never wither! Glory to our youth of China! Along with the nation they will bloom forever !” It might as well be noted that continuous fight and destruction for lasting youth and renewal of youth in 20th century China is predicted in Liang's text.

량치차오의 예술론에 관한 연구

정균선 경상국립대학교 경남문화연구원 2023 남명학연구 Vol.77 No.-

Liang Qichao(梁啓超) writes about art in his later years. His theory of art embraces Western ideas and talks about the coexistence of Western and Chinese art based on considerations of Chinese art. During Liang Qichao's exile in Japan, which began in 1898, he advocated a revolution in the literary world, which subjugated literature and literature to politics by emphasizing the political utility of literature and literature. In addition, the emotional education, art education, and taste(趣味) education he claimed were education for the enlightenment of the people. Chinese aesthetics were closely related to the struggle for enlightenment and revolution of ideas from the background of the modern era. For the Enlightenment ruler Liang Qichao, aesthetics had the goal of enlightening the people and forming a modern nation-state. Enlightenment movement and taste(趣味) art are Liang Qichao's attitude in life, which is rooted in traditional ideas. Liang Qichao did not just promote an individual's noble hobby or taste, but ultimately enlightenment was a taste(趣味) and aimed at enlightening the people through hobby education. Liang Qichao continues to develop enlightenment ideas throughout his life. He argues for 'taste(趣味) theory' and says that if you live in a state of mind that has given up private and utilitarian attention, it is a life of 'A living taste(趣味)'. This is because you have to live a life in a state of mind that has no qualms about abandoning an individual's axiom, so that you do not live a life that is only urgent to your goals. For him, the art of changing people's minds would have been the best weapon to enlighten the people.

논문(論文) : 양계초 문학관에 대한 신채호의 수용양상

조보로 ( Bao Lu Zhao ) 한국중국산문학회 2015 중국산문연구집간 Vol.5 No.-

This thesis has a purpose of showing the Liang-QiChao’s influence on Korean poetics in the time of enlightenment on a comparative literature. Korean intellectuals must have realized many facts for themselves while discussing utility theory in the time of Korean enlightenment, when they faced different kinds of circumstances, utility theory, nevertheless, is considered to be influenced by Liang-QiChao’s in many parts, considering that the contents they discussed and the vocabulary they used. Therefore, his work as well as Liang-QiChao’s poetics spread fast among Korean world of poetry and did help Korean intellectuals in many ways, who were working on enlightenment and social reform at that time. Korean intellectuals in the time of enlightenment like Sin, Chai-ho thought poetry of one method, which they could reform Korean society and politics and save their country in crisis as they accepted Liang-QiChao’s poetics. This thesis contains discussions. First, positive acceptance of Liang-QiChao’s poetics revolutionism. It can be said that Liang-QiChao’s work was introduced to Korea thanks to his Patriotic Enlightenment Thought in his work, even though his expressive technique in his work is hard to ignore. Second, both 「Eumbingsilsihwa(음빙실시화)」and 「 Cheonheedangsihwa(천희당시화)」 have argued that new western culture and thought should be accepted through poetry. Third, both 「 Eumbingsilsihwa」and 「Cheonheedangsihwa」 suggested the unification of the written and spoken language.

1920년대 申采浩와 梁啓超의 역사연구방법론 비교 : E. 베른하임을 참고하여

박찬승(Park, Chan-Seung) 한국사학사학회 2004 韓國史學史學報 Vol.0 No.9

'Introduction' of the book 'Korean ancient history' written by Shin Chae Ho was highly influenced by Liang Qichao's(1873~1929) book 'The methodologies of Chinese history'. Shin Chae Ho borrowed many ideas and most of the organizational framework of his 'Introduction' from Liang Qichao. Shin Chae Ho dealt with the same themes that was found in 'The methodologies of Chinese history' but discussed it in terms of historical documents or events in Korea. Since Liang Qichao referred to 'Introduction to history' written by Ernst Bernheim when he wrote his book, it can be assumed that modern methodologies of western history was adopted by Shin Chae Ho in his 'Introduction'. Shin Chae Ho believed that history is a document of mental activities that develop both spatially and temporally. He emphasized the importance of objective descriptions of historical facts. He also knew the importance of explanations for causal relationship in writing history and of studies of historical records. All these reflect the influences of Liang Qichao and Ernst Bernheim on Shin Chae Ho. However, Shin Chae Ho had his uniqueperspectives as well. For example, he said that history is a struggle between 'me'(or 'us') and 'others'. He also emphasized the importance of specificities and uniqueness of each nation(Minjok). These are indications of his own 'nationalistic history'. In summary, Shin Chae Ho adopted modern methodologies in Western history from Liang Qichao and Ernst Bernheim and developed a new methodology of his own. We now call it methodology of nationalistic history.

梁啓超의 국민국가론과 民權ㆍ民族관념(1896-1902)

曺秉漢(Cho Byong-Han) 서강대학교 인문과학연구소 2007 서강인문논총 Vol.22 No.-

중국에 서구 근대문명 도입의 새벽을 연 淸末 초기 啓蒙사상가로 청일전쟁후 變法운동 시기의 嚴復과 변법 실패후 일본 망명지에서 20세기 초두에 계몽활동을 시작한 梁啓超를 들 수 있다. 대개 중국의 계몽운동을 대표하는 것으로 알려진 1910년대 후반 중화민국 초기의 5ㆍ4新文化운동은 필자의 입장에서는 좀 더 철저한 후기 계몽운동이라 할 수 있다. 본고의 범위는 변법운동 시기(1895~1898)에 『時務報』의 「變法通議」(l896) 발표로 시작해 淸朝 ‘政體개혁’을 모색한 양계초의 사상 전개, 1898년 말 일본 망명후 계몽활동 시기에 『淸議報』의 「自由書」(l899) 등에서 시작해 『新民叢報』의 「新民說」(1902)에 이르러 대체로 완결된 체계를 갖추게 된 근대 ‘국민국가론’의 형성과정과 성격, 이론적 구조를 추적하는 것이다. 변법 시기의 양계초는 康有爲 중심의 전투적 변법파 핵심집단의 이론가로서, 서구에서 시작된 세계 대세의 발전에 따라 정체 개혁의 이념적, 현실적 불가피성을 설득함으로써 일본과의 전쟁에서 파산한 洋務개혁의 수준을 넘어 변법파 핵심집단의 이데올로기와 정책을 공론화하는 역할에서 탁월한 영향력을 발휘했다. 이 시기 양계초의 개혁사상은 스승 강유위의 今文經學[『春秋』公羊學]에 기초한 孔敎[改新유교]와 유토피아 大同세계 및 3世進化說로 구성된 준종교적 이상주의 개혁이념을 기초로 발전된 것이었다. 그는 근대적 학교 개혁을 통한 국민교육과 法治적 官制 개혁, 지방의회 중심의 지방자치를 구국의 개혁방안으로 제시했다. 君權을 넘어선 개혁의 사회 적 주체로서 紳士層의 단체결합[合群]과 그들의 紳權으로 대표되는 民權 관념, 民智의 증진을 통한 新民의 조성이라는 관념을 제기한 적이 있다. 변법 시기에 배태된 이 같은 관념이 일본 망명후 수년 간 더욱 철저한 서구 근대문명의 도입을 추구하는 계봉사상으로 전환하는 데는 1900년 義和團 동란을 계기로 淸朝 정부의 괴뢰화 및 세계열강의 공동관리하에 중국 半식민지화의 완성, 메이지[明治] 일본의 학계를 통한 신문명의 충격이라는 역사적 배경이 있었다. 일본을 통해 섭취한 서구의 신학문ㆍ신사상을 소개할 뿐 아니라 民智로부터 확장해 자유ㆍ민권과 아울러 民德 영역에서 ‘公德’ 내지 국민도덕의 형성을 모색하기 시작했다. 이 같은 사상적 전변은 양계초가 엄복의 계몽사상과 접근하면서 더욱 포괄적, 정치적인 계몽이론을 체계화하는 과정으로서, 강유위의 공교주의, 공양학적 대동 세계주의와 도식적 역사 단계설을 포기하고 이상주의ㆍ세계주의로부터 현실적 민족주의로 전환하는 것이기도 했다. 사상ㆍ언론의 자유를 중심으로 한 양계초의 자유관은 결국 국내의 정치적 권리[민권]와 대외적 국가주권[국권]이라는 집단적, 정치적 권리로 수렴되었으며, 따라서 개인적 자유와 인권은 더 이상 추구되지 않았다. 인민의 집적이 국가이므로 민권은 국권의 구성요소로서 양자 사이의 대립적 모순관계는 상정되지 않았다. 그것은 민권 신장의 방편이 될 수도 있으나 한편으로 민권이 국권의 종속 변수로 국민국가 형성을 위해 동원되는 전략적 가치로만 인식되기 쉬웠다. 더욱이 君權ㆍ官權의 억제를 통해 확보할 부분적 민권의 전면적 완성으로서 민주 이념은 이상으로서 먼 미래로 보류되었을 뿐이다. 국민국가의 형성에 필수적인 요소는 민권 이외에 공덕, 즉 국민도덕이었다. 민권은 국민과 군주ㆍ관료사이에 각자 권한의 법률적 한정을 통해 성립되므로 법치를 보장하는 立憲制 정체의 확립이 필요하며, 단지 군주의 유무로 구별되는 입헌군주정과 입헌공화정의 차이는 양계초의 생각에 그다지 의미가 없는 것이었다. 그럼에도 민권과 공덕ㆍ법치ㆍ지방자치 등에 기초한 양계초의 국민국가론과 민족주의론은 민권과 국권 사이의 균형을 모색하는 계몽주의적 합리성의 측면이 있었다. 민권과 법치를 통한 근대국가 건설이 국민의 지방자치 역량에 의존한다는 주장은 그가 반대한 공화정의 사회적 토대이기도 했다. 그럼에도 개인의 자유ㆍ인권 관념이 결여된 국민의 집단적 민권 관념은 국가공동체의 구성원으로서의 인민의 집단적 평등권만 중시될 위험성이 있다. 그가 天皇制 관료독재국가인 일본형 입헌군주제를 영국형의 입헌군주제와 마찬가지로 찬양한 것도 그 결함의 표현이다. 국민국가의 주권 평등을 옹호하는 방어적 민족주의를 제시한 양계초가 민족주의에 기초한 서구 제국주의를 민족주의 발전의 필연적 단계로서 ‘민족제국주의’라 규정한 것은 이 시대 사회진화론이나 경쟁적 문명론을 수용한 결과로서 그의 근대 국민국가론 자체의 한계였다. 또한 양계초의 합리적 국민국가론이 전근대적 種族주의와 결합한 사실도 주목된다. 그는 역사란 인종의 발달과 그 경쟁을 서술한 것이고 세계가 진보할수록 종족 이론도 더욱 발달한다고 했다. 동아시아에서 근대 민족주의의 형성은 국민국가론이 전근대적 종족주의와 결합함으로써 가능했던 것이다. We can assign two men, Yen Fu(嚴復) and Liang Qichao(梁啓超) as the famous thinkers of enlightenment beginning to introduce the modern civilization from the West, Yen in the period of reform movement after the Sino-Japanese war and Liang at the outset of 20th century, early days of his exile to Japan. In fact, the New Culture movement of May Fourth era was renowned as the representative of Chinese enlightenment movement. I would like to appoint it as the later enlighten movement, while I named the activities of Yen and Liang as the early enlightenment movement. 'This thesis includes Liang's transformation of intellectual activities from the period of political reform movement(1895-1898), started by publishing the famous essay, the general argument of institutional reform(「變法通議」 1896), to the period of the early enlighten movement (1899-1902), almost accomplished by writing the more famous article, the new citizen(or nation)(「新民說」, 1902). In this, I will trace the formative process, nature and theoretical structure of Liang's theories of the modem nation state in China. Liang Qichao showed his outstanding capacity in the roles of publicizing the ideology and policies of the core reformist group to overcome the current ideas of Yangwu(洋務) reforms, persuading the inevitability of reforming thoroughly the traditional polity according to the general tendency of the world. His reform ideas of the days were developed from K'ang Youwei's(康有爲) ideologies, which were consisted of the reformist Confucian religion(孔敎), utopian great world unity(大同), and three-phase progress of world history, based on the Confucian New Text Commentary(今文經學). Liang proposed the plans to save China, which reform the school system and bureaucratic institutions into modem national education and constitutional government, and suggested to establish the regional self-government and promote the people's intellect(民智) and people's rights(民權), leaded by the provincial Confucian literati class through the new social organizations. These reform plans would lead the Chinese to the new citizen(or nation). Liang's progressive ideas during reformist days was reoriented to develop the enlightenment ideas in order to establish the nation state in early several years of his exile life, under the great impacts of deteriorated situation of semi-colonialized China, reached the climax of crisis before and after the Boxer rebellion(義和團, 1900), and of the introduction of modem civilization through the learned world of Meiji(明治) Japan. He introduced and publicized the Western new learnings and cultures as well as invented the modem concepts of public morals(公德) to form the nation's morals, and searched more deeply the ideas of people's rights, which were linked with the idea of liberty. This conversion of his thoughts made him to approach Yen Fu's standpoint understanding the West more deeply, abandoning his teacher Kang Youwei's renewed Confucian visions united with many Western ideas. In Liang's theories of nation stste, two pivotal concepts, people's rights and public moral were harmonious with state's rights against the imperialistic outer world. His ideas of so-called 'civilized liberty' and personal rights(人權) didn't have an independent role in Chinese historical arena without the setting of citizenship, and were assimilated to the collective people's rights which should be balanced by people's duties. And the people's rights were to be inspired as nationalistic power, not as the original value independent from the nation state, and the democracy was even reserved for far future as an ideal, and need not to be realized at present. people's rights, as well as monarch and officials, were also protected and restricted by the laws, and so Liang laid stress on constitutional polity regardless of whether monarch was in state or not. Accordingly, Republican polity had no prestige more than constitutional monarchy. It disclosed the important defect in Liang's view of democ