희망의 한 풍경으로서 백석의 만주 시편

이승이(Seung-yi, Lee) 어문연구학회 2010 어문연구 Vol.65 No.-

Baek seok moved to Manju during the Policy Transformation period (1931-1945). During this period, Manju was an area overwhelming with the sentiments of political, economic, and cultural survival as a colony. For Baek seok, Manju was an area of pioneering and rehabilitation and his move to Manju was an act of searching for new possibilities. This paper aims to examine the implications of Baek seok’s move to Manju as well as to discuss the implications of Baek seok’s Manju poems presented between 1940 and 1941. Specifically, the paper focuses on how Baek seok overcame his disappointment with the Manju he experienced as opposed to the Manju he imagined. This concentration is an extension of the interest of how the multicultural citizens of Manju, who were split among sympathizing with the people of Chosun, the people of Japan, and the people of Manju, overcame the challenges of reality. The answers can be found from the ideas of the purity nature, the mentality of muk, and idle nature that are all expressed in the Manju poems. The appearance of Manju that he described in his poems was the hope that he materialized for the state. As a result, ‘towards Manju’ entails the movement of the tragedy of the colonial Chosun or the tragedy of Baek seok’s life, ‘away from Manju’ which implies freedom from Manju that was a spatial extension of tragedy.

1930년대 전반기 이광수의 만주 인식과 민족 담론

김경미 ( Kyung Mi Kim ) 한국문학언어학회(구 경북어문학회) 2014 어문론총 Vol.62 No.-

This paper is the purpose to look into the relationship between the manju awareness and the race discussion In the literature of Lee Gwang-soo of in 1930s. In 1930s, the manju patterning in the manju text of the second middle part Lee Gwang-soo was closely related with to the manju policy caused due to the political dynamics of China and Japan and was found. In 1930, there was the national discussion and interaction which the found in the leading article of the manju policy of the either before or after and Lee Gwang-soo logic of the manju discussion is the ill-posedness formed by the premise based on the culture at that time. These awarenesses found in the manju-related leading article of Lee Gwang-soo could confirm that visual angle as his journalist and the association at that time nationalism point of view which was correlated and they were found. [Sambong’s home] reappears the severity of the situation by the contradiction of the system and contradiction of the political economic structure, Sambong doesn``t go forward from the eventuality of the prologue to the communism. The logic will be able to interpret in the relationship with the formed race discussion while it of Lee Gwang-soo selecting the nationalism emphasizes the ill-posedness at that time. The manju shows that logic of the imperialism which the manju as to it, induced to the space of the pathfinding and space of the possibility in this account of travels prologue to the slogan called ``the Oh harmony`` to the colony shipbuilding workers is the virtual image. In short, the manju awareness found in Lee Gwang-soo, in 1930, the manju text of the either before or after could confirm to Manchuria was not converted to TRUE systemic to the start point, in addition be made in the relationship with the race discussion formed based on the culture of the day.

중국서부의 문수신앙과 西夏 오대산의 개창

계미향 한국정토학회 2017 정토학연구 Vol.28 No.-

This paper is to examine the belief of Manjuśri Bodhisattva begun from Dang dynasty that how it was flourished and developed in Tunhuang, Uigur and Xixià[西夏國]. At the time which was under the rule of Turfan some altar portrait of Manjuśri Bodhisattva[文殊變] was enshrined in Mogao Caves[莫高窟]. At the time of Wu Dai[五代] a large complete map of Mt. Wutai was established in the sixty first cave of Mogao of Tunhuang which was a base of Silk road culture and also a foundation of Manjuśri belief of Wutai mountain by Tunhuang residents. The sixty one cavern of Mogao was also called by Manjuśri-hall since a statue of Manjuśri Bodhisattva was enshrined. On the other hand it is found a record of Mt. Wutai belief by Uigur people in the Hall of Jù-lóng[居庸關] of the Great Wall near Peiking of China . The empire of Xixià established in 11st century the Manjuśri belief of Mt. Wutai was also flourished but the Xixià people could not pilgrimize Mt. Wutai of Shanxi province at that time for diplomatic problem with Sòng dynasty of China. So the royal family of Xixià by the demand of northwest Buddhist of China wishing pilgrimize on Mt. Wutai had emulated the belief of Mt. Wutai in the valley of Mt. Hèlán of Língzhōu. The examine of Mt. Wutai belief in Xixià is attractive for this writer that the source of the belief on Manjuśri Bodhisattva in Mt. Hèlán was a site of practicing asceticism by Muru[無漏], a Buddhist pilgrim of Silla for ancient India. At the time of the An Lushan Rebellion in 755 A.D. emperor Sùzōng[肅宗] ascended the throne from a feudal lord who experienced a master Muru appeared in his dream who practiced asceticism in the valley of Mt. Hèlán of Língzhōu. The emperor invited the master Muru and the master Bùkōng[不空] to lead the religious rite for national salvation in the imperial palace of Chángān[長安] and also in the place of honored visit by emperor. After three hundred years the royal family of Xixià designated Mt. Hèlán as a second Mt. Wutai of Língzhōu and constructed some temples that enshrined Manjuśri Bodhisattva in the valley of Mt. Hèlán where the Master Muru still practiced asceticism that made the place as a foundation of Mt. Wutai belief on Manjuśri Bodhisattva by Tangut people. The Tangut people repaired Great Buddhist Stupa of Xiàyuàn[下院], Língzhōu that had enshrined statue of the master, Muru in the past. All of Buddhist devote of royal family of Xixià comes from an establishment of religious base of their own that emulated the belief of Mt. Wutai which copied the belief of Manjuśri Bodhisattva in Mt. Wutai in China that was flourished in Korea and Japan province. 본고는 당(唐)대부터 유행했던 오대산 문수보살신앙이 중국 서북부인 돈황과 위구르, 서하국(西夏國)에서는 어떻게 전개되었는지를 살펴보기 위해 서술되었다. 실크로드의 거점 도시인 돈황 막고굴에는 토번의 돈황 지배기에 여러 문수변(文殊變)이 조성되었다. 이어 오대(五代)에는 막고굴 제61굴에 대형의 오대산전도(五台山全圖)가 조성되어 돈황인들의 오대산 신앙의 중심지가 되었다. 제61굴에는 문수보살상도 조성되었기에 그곳을 달리 문수당(文殊堂)이라고도 하였다. 한편 북경 인근의 만리장성 거룡관에는 위구르인들의 오대산 신앙을 엿볼 수 있는 기록이 남아 있어 그에 대해서도 간략히 살펴보았다. 이어 11세기에 건국된 서하국에서도 오대산 문수신앙이 크게 유행하였다. 그러나 서하인들은 송(宋)과의 정치적인 이유로 산서성 오대산 순례가 불가능했기에, 서하왕실은 오대산 순례를 희망하는 중국 서북부 지역 불자들의 요청으로, 영주(靈州) 하란산(賀蘭山) 백초곡에 오대산신앙을 이식하였다. 서하국의 오대산 신앙이 우리에게 더욱 뜻 깊은 이유는 하란산 문수신앙의 발원지가 바로 신라의 천축구법승 무루(無漏)의 수행지였기 때문이다. 안사(安史)의 난(755년)으로 영주에서 등극한 당 숙종은 하란산 백초곡에서 수행하던 무루를 현몽하고, 그를 어렵게 모셔와 불공삼장과 함께 행재소(行在所)에서는 물론, 장안의 황궁에서도 구국 기도를 이끌게 하였다. 그로부터 약 300년 후 같은 지역에서 건국한 서하왕실에서는 무루가 수행하던 하란산을 오대산으로 상정하고, 그가 수행하던 백초곡에 문수보살을 주존으로 모신 여러 사찰을 창건하여 서하인들의 신앙의 중심지로 삼았던 것이다. 또한 그들은 무루의 소상을 모신 영주(靈州) 하원(下院)의 굉불탑(宏佛塔)도 크게 보수하였다. 서하왕실의 이런 노력은 이미 한국과 일본에 이식되어 있던 오대산신앙을 모범으로 삼아 자신들의 신앙처를 마련한 결과이었다.

신채호의 만주인식과 그 변모

표언복 ( An Bok Pyo ) 국제비교한국학회 2011 비교한국학 Comparative Korean Studies Vol.19 No.3

This study deals with the way how Manju was recognized at that time and how their perception had changed from works of Danjae Shin Chae Ho. Three stages are involved. The first phase is the era of historical, biographic novels. The second is the era of editorials, and the third is the stage of fantasy novels. Manju is the old lost territory of Korea for Shin Chae Ho. Thus, he believed that Manju is our territory that must be regained. This belief was consistent throughout all his life. He emphasized his belief through various types of writing. His attitude slightly changed according to the types of work. In historical, biographical novels, he focused the belief that Manju was our territory before. In editorials, he tried to make people aware that Manju was a competitive target place among the great nations. He emphasized more active interest to Manju. During the era of fantasy novels, he focused on the necessity of aggressive struggles to restore Manju. More and more his intention to restore Manju became more active. Shin Chae Ho was one of the representative intellectuals who thought that we should be aware and restore Manju through literature.

만주 공간을 바라보는 남성적 시선과 여성 인물의 재현

차성연(Cha seong yeon) 동남어문학회 2016 동남어문논집 Vol.1 No.41

본고는 ‘일제말기 한국문학과 만주’ 관련 연구 분야에 ‘페미니즘 지리학’ 방법론을 도입함으로써, 만주 배경 소설에 나타난 남성적 시선에 문제를 제기하고자 한다. 이효석의 『벽공무한』이나 한설야의 『대륙』과 같은 작품에서 만주 공간은 정복하고 소유할 수 있는 개척지로서 인물의 모든 욕망을 판타지적으로 충족시키는 서사 전개의 무대이다. 식민지를 바라보는 시선은 제국주의적인 동시에, 남성이 여성을 바라보는 시선을 그대로 닮아있다. 만주 공간은 현실 공간인 조선과 분리된 채 남성적 야망을 충족할 수 있는 닫힌 공간으로 재현되었다. 이러한 닫힌 공간에 틈을 낼 수 있는 가능성은 인물들의 위치나 태도, 만주 공간의 내/외부를 가로지르는 어떤 장소 등에서 찾을 수 있을 것이다. 본고에서는 『사랑의 수족관』의 여성 인물 ‘강현순’의 역설적 위치에서 그 가능성을 찾아보았다. 중심 공간인 경성에 속해있지만 그 중심의 힘인 자본(혹은 권력)을 소유하거나 지향하지 않고 자신만의 삶의 태도로서 중심에 속한 인물들에게 영향을 미치고 있기 때문이다. 『벽공무한』의 여성 인물 ‘나아자’는 남성의 이상향을 그대로 체현한 인물인 반면, 『대륙』의 ‘마려’는 주체적 의지와 판단에 의해 행동하는 인물이다. 하지만 그러한 자발적 협력은 일본의 제국주의적 힘이나 자본의 영향력을 가리는 은폐막이 될 수 있다. 따라서 『대륙』에 그려진 만주 공간의 가능성은 여성 인물이 남성적 시선으로부터 자유롭지 못한 것처럼 자본으로부터 자유롭지 못하다는 전제 위에서 펼쳐지는 (불)가능성일 수밖에 없다. 이렇게 보면 만주 공간을 바라보는 남성적 시선과 여성 인물의 재현은 일정한 연관성 하에 연결되어 있음을 알 수 있다. This study is aimed to question masculine viewpoint observed in the novels with Manju as setting by introducing applying the methodology of ‘feminism geography’ to research areas related to 'Korean literature and Manju at the end of Japanese colonization era of Korea'. As seen in Lee Hyo-seok's novel 'Byeokgongmuhan' or Han Sul-ya's novel 'Continent', Manju is the space where narration is unfolded satisfying all sorts of human desires in a fantastic manner, as a conquerable and possessable land. The perspective on the colony is imperialistic and similar to that on which men have women. In the novels, Manju was represented as a closed space away from the reality - Chosun - and satisfying manly desires. The potential to crack such close space can be found in character's situation and attitude and some locations cutting across Manju. The present study attempted to find the potential in the situations in which 'Kang Hyun-soon', who is a female character in the novel 'Aquarium of Love'. Although placed in Gyeongseong (Seoul), which is a central space of the storylines, she influenced over other characters in the center with her own attitude to her life, without possessing or pursuing capital (or authority), which is the main force of the center. While 'Naaja' the female character of 'Byeokgongmuhan' materializes male masculine utopia as it is, 'Marye' in 'Continent' is a female character that acts on her subjective will and judgement. However, such voluntary cooperation can be a bank to protect and conceal the power of Japanese imperialism or the influence of capitalism. Therefore, the potential rendered onto the space of Manju in 'Continent' cannot be possible because the novels were written under the premise that take Manju can't be free from the power of capital just as the female character is not free from the perspective of male characters. Judging from this aspect, male viewpoint and the representation of female characters are connected in the same context.

兪晩柱 ≪欽英≫에 나타난 중국고전소설 읽기

권운영 중국어문연구회 2019 中國語文論叢 Vol.0 No.91

In his study of Yu Manju’s Heumyeong, he not only developed a more specific and systematic critique of Chinese novels, but also carried out an individual study focusing on Chinese novels. In the past, we studied the critical parts of Chinese novels independently from the traditional Korean and Chinese, and examined the meaning of the novel review and cultural history by choosing a comparative study method. In Korean literature, Yu Manju’s Heumyeong focuses on cultural aspects of the Joseon Dynasty, on the aspects of diary literature with various materials, and on the evaluation. On the other hand, Chinese literature only compiles a list of Chinese novels presented in Yu Manju’s Heumyeong. Looking at Yu Manju’s views on Chinese novels will be an important research foundation in understanding the process and type of Chinese novel reading by Korean writers during the Joseon Dynasty. They organized their opinions in an objective period with more abundant data than previous researches. No writings have been found on Chinese novels more closely than Yu Manju’s Heumyeong. As such, Heumyeong is definitely a remarkable record for supporting and loving Chinese novels. In the 18th century, Joseon was in a special political and social situation. The process of getting a Chinese novel or buying a Chinese novel and recording it were not easy, either. Nevertheless, you can find records of Chinese novels of many writers at that time. In order to study more comprehensively and objectively, we studied Chinese novel reading and review of 18th century Chinese novel, breaking away from previous research that mainly covered criticism of Chinese novel in Yu Manju’s Heumyeong.

유만주(兪晩柱)의 「전목재연보(錢牧齋年譜)」연구

김하라 ( Ha Ra Kim ) 한국한문학회 2015 韓國漢文學硏究 Vol.0 No.57

It is very controversial thing to answer the question who Qian Qianyi(錢謙 益) was. Because he made a living in somewhat contradictory and dubious way Qian Qianyi had been underestimated and scorned for a long time despite his brilliant achievements as a author. Unlike other critics, Yu Manju兪晩柱considered Qian Qianyi as a most crucial author in literature so that tried to describe his life as objectively and indiscriminately as possible. While Yu Manju wrote The chronological list of the Qian Qianyi``s life錢 牧齋年譜he focused on the Qian Qianyi``s competence as a poet and a historian. It is the central axis of The chronological list of the Qian Qianyi``s life how that competence had been kept and developed through his life. Meanwhile Yu Manju made an effort to describe the Qian Qianyi``s private life as well as his public life thoroughly. From that we can infer Yu Manju had a prominent talent as a biographer. Plus it must be said Yu Manju pointed out the fact in The chronological list of the Qian Qianyi``s life that in some sense Qian Qianyi was nothing but one of the Chinese who held a sense of ethnocentrism or Sinocentrism being indifferent to the public interest of Joseon(朝鮮). From the way how he handle the subject we can infer that when it comes to writing about someone Yu Manju thought highly of objective and rational attitude.

유만주(兪晩柱)의 『수호전(水滸傳)』 독법(讀法)

김하라 ( Ha Ra Kim ) 한국한문학회 2011 韓國漢文學硏究 Vol.0 No.48

몽상과 욕망을 기록한 데서 오는 虛構性은, 兪晩柱가 쓴 日記『欽英』의 다양한 면모 가운데 그다지 조명되지 않은 것에 해당한다. 이 글은 『흠영』의 이러한 虛構的면모가 연원하는 바를 그의 소설 독서와 관련하여 밝히려는 하나의 시도이다. 20대의 유만주는 評點本四大奇書및 明淸筆記類의 독서를 통해 소설에 대한 비평적 지식체계를 형성해 나갔다. 이 가운데 그는 李卓吾評批本『水滸傳』이 지향하는 ''새로운 세계의 구축''이라는 주제의식에 내적으로 깊이 공감하여 자신의 허구인 『臨華制度』의 저술에 『수호전』의 다양한 면모를 반영하기 시작하였다. 또한 유만주는 명청의 소설을 읽던중 『수호전』의 평점비평가로서 김성탄을 주목하기 시작했고, 서른 살에 비로소 70회본『수호전』을 읽었다. 넉 달에 걸친 이 『수호전』 독서일기는 私生活과 自我가 교직되어 독특한 양상을 보여준다. 그는 『수호전』의 문예미학적 측면에 주목하여 적극적으로 읽고 논평하며 그 스스로 ''허구''를 구축하는 데 중요한 참조대상으로 삼았고, 다른 한편으로는 스스로의 존재를 돌아보고 반추하며 ''이 소설을 읽고 있는 나는 어떤 사람인가''하는 질문을 던지고 해명하는 데 이르기도 했다. 이 두 가지 읽기의 태도는 독서와 창작의 관련, 소설과 자아의 관련이라는 측면이 두드러지는 그 특유의 讀法에 해당한다. The diary has a latent tendency to become a fictitious narrative, organizing its structure in a self-centered way. Heumyeong欽英not only has this tendency, but includes some fiction as a literal meaning of the word. This fictitious aspect of Heumyeong comes from reveries and desires of Yu Manju兪晩柱, the writer of Heumyeong. He makes a vast, beautiful utopia named Imhwadongcheon臨華洞天in his diary. Heumyeong is best known for a reading diary of Yu Manju. And then some researchers take notice of his enthusiasm for wandering through the world of books. They have an insatiable curiosity about the titles of books referred in Heumyeong, describing lists of the books at great length. Accordingly what kind of reading diary Heumyeong is and why the writer mentions the books, relatively remains unnoticed. In this paper, I attempt to focus on the interrelationship between the fictitious aspect of Heumyeong and the fictions Yu Manju read with avidity. Relating his reading diary about the Four Masterworks of the Ming Novel四大奇書, a special regard will be paid to Shuihuzhuan水滸傳, commented by Jin Shengtan金聖嘆. Poring over Shuihuzhuan, Yu Manju empathizes with heroes living on the margins of society and writes about his own marginal utopia in more detail. The fictitious aspect of Heumyeong throws light on Yu Manju's intentions and methods as a writer.

통원(通園) 유만주(兪晩柱)의 한글 사용에 대한 일고(一考)

김하라 국문학회 2012 국문학연구 Vol.0 No.26

Yu Manju, a gentry man living in Seoul of the second half of the 18th century, had been continued the character(especially Hangul) mediated communication with women within his family. And he recorded the contents of the communication in his diary Heumyoung. This records show that Hangul writing of women was useful means of gender communication within the gentry. Yu Manju wrote down the reading scene of his female relatives. They were reading aloud various novels and travelogues written in Hangul . In this scene, we can find the typical character culture of the gentry women in 18th century Seoul. Yu Manju exchanged correspondence with his two niece of contrasting economic situation and gave each of them papers, writing brushes and ink sticks equally. This means that the female gentry were reading and writing in everyday life regardless of the rich and the poor. The main using character of the gentry man of 18th century Choseon including Yu Manju' is Chinese character. So he wrote a diary in Chinese character. But he frequently communicated with women, the main users of Hangul. This was a background of his sporadic writing in Hangul. He unconsciously used Hangul in writing about the illness of his beloved son. Both of an exquisite user of native language and aesthetic writer, he translated into his spoken language into the written language Sino-Korean carefully. In this process, he found the impossibility of the translation. This is the reason why some Hangul words of aesthetic and emotional implications like "meoheulmeoheul머흘머흘" remain in his Chinese handwritten diary. 18세기 후반, 서울에 거주한 사대부 남성인 유만주(兪晩柱)는 자신의 가문 내 여성들과 문자를 매개로 한 소통을 일생 지속해 왔으며, 그 내용을 자신의 일기 『흠영』에 기록했다. 그는 자신이 태어날 무렵과 그 이전에 할머니가 쓴 한글 일기를 읽으며 집안의 과거사를 돌아보았다. 그는 가문 내 다양한 연령대의 여성들과 편지를 주고받은바 그 내용의 일부를 한문으로 번역하여 일기에 기재하기도 했다. 그리고 그는 장모와 자주 교류하며 자신의 죽은 아내에 대한 이야기를 나누고, 장모가 한글로 쓴 아내의 행장을 받아 와 아버지께 보였다. 이런 사실들은 여성이 한글로 문자행위를 하는 것이 사대부가 내의 성별간 소통에 유용한 수단이 되었음을 보여준다. 유만주는 그 부유한 종형제인 유준주(兪鵔柱) 가의 여성들이 소설과 연행록 등 다양한 한글문헌을 읽고 있는 장면을 일기에 상세히 기록하고 있는데, 여기서 18세기 중후반 서울의 부유한 사대부가 여성들이 향유하던 문자문화의 전형적인 양상이 포착된다. 한편 유만주가 부유한 종질녀 기계 유씨와 가난한 내종질녀 안동 김씨 모두와 편지를 주고받고, 특히 이들에게 지필묵을 선물하는 모습에서, 서울에 사는 일반적인 사대부가 여성들이 빈부와 상관없이 일정한 문자 교양을 생활화하고 있었음을 알 수 있기도 하다. 더 나아가 사대부가 여성이라는 하나의 계층에서, 빈부와 경향(京鄕)에 크게 상관없이 보편적으로 문자문화를 누리고 있었다는 점은 유만주가 쓴 야담에 보이는, 어떤 극빈층 재지양반의 아내가 한글소설을 읽는 장면에 집약되어 나타난다. 한글의 주된 사용자인 여성들과의 소통과 교류는 유만주가 자신의 일기에서 한글을 구사하고 있는 것의 한 배경을 이룬다. 이러한 소통과 교류가 특별한 것이 아니라는 데서, 당시의 사대부 남성들이 한글을 해득하고 구사하는 일이 보편적이었으리라고 추론할 수 있다. 그리고 이 점은 당시 사대부계층의 정점에 있었던 정조(正祖)가 편지에 한글을 섞어 구사하고 있는 데서도 확인된다. 구어를 반영한 즉시적 표현이라 정의할 수 있는 이들의 글쓰기는 한글 사용이 편만해 있었던 당시의 보편적 상황을 보여준다. 한편, 조선의 구어 현실을 반영하여 조선식 한자어를 적극적으로 만들어가는 도중, ‘머흘머흘’과 같이 끝내 번역하기 어려운 한글 고유어를 한문 사이에 남겨두고 있는 유만주의 면모에서, 말에 대한 예민한 감각을 지닌 문인으로서의 특수성을 발견할 수 있다.

소설 읽기와 마음의 발견: 兪晩柱의 <西遊記> 독서 일기

김하라 근역한문학회 2020 한문학논집(漢文學論集) Vol.57 No.-

Yu Manju兪晩柱, a 25-year-old diary witer of Seoul, read Journey to the West 西遊記 in lunar october 1779. Prior to that, he was reading Buddhist scriptures such as the Lotus Sutra 法華經 and practicing the writing. As a lover of Chinese novels, he found several similarities between Chinese novels and Buddhist scriptures. He found common points in the form of a combination of verse and prose, the chapter-titled method of composition, the presence of a commentary that interprets the contents of the text, the use of idioms to draw the reader's attention in a question-and-answer format, and detailed descriptions of curved and delicate details. And he judged that the novel had this style and form under the influence of the Buddhist scriptures. Yu Manju read True Enlightenment of Journey to the West 西遊眞詮, the edition commented by Chen Shibin陳士斌, a writer during the time of Kangxi Emperor of the Qing Dynasty. Commentaries with strong Taoist philosophical tendencies are attached to each episode in this edition. Yu Manju did not accept the Taoist interpretation and defined this novel as “a side story of the scriptures of the mind”. It is understood that he accepted the narrative of this novel as an allegory of the mind. 18세기 서울의 일기 작가 유만주는 25세 되던 1779년 음력 10월에 서유기를 읽고 그 독서의 경험을 일기 <흠영>에 기록했다. 그는 이에 앞서 <묘법연화경>과 같은 불교 경전을 읽으며 한문 문장의 작법과 불교 철학에 대한 소양을 쌓아 가던 중이었다. 유만주는 명청 소설과 불경을 비교하여 읽으며, 이 두 부류가 서사물로서 공통점을 가지고 있음을 발견했다. 그는 운문과 산문이 결합된 형식, 장회체의 구성 방식, 본문 내용을 풀이하는 해설부의 존재, 문답 형식으로 독자의 주의를 환기하는 관용구의 사용, 곡진하고 섬세한 세부 묘사 등 형식과 문체의 측면에서 그 공통점을 구체적으로 정리한 후 이를 바탕으로 ‘소설 불경 기원설’이라 할 만한 견해를 정립했다. 한편 유만주가 읽은 <서유기>는 청나라 때 진사빈이 해설을 붙인 판본인 서유진전이었다. 이 판본은 삼교가 혼융된 <서유기>의 특성을 받아들이되 도가철학적 경향이 강한 해석을 시도한 것이었다. 유만주는 <서유진전>을 통독했으나 도가적 해석을 받아들이지 않고 이 소설에 대해 ‘<서유기>는 <심경>의 외전’이라는 정의를 내렸다. 그의 이 정의는 <서유기>의 서사를 마음의 알레고리로 이해한 결과였다.