earticle

영어

To divide by the concept of Cheon (天) before and after the period of Song Dynasty: before Song Dynasty; according to the ancient Book of Odes (Sigyeong-詩經), “Cheon (天) gives birth to a large number of people”, and, Confucius(孔子) say “Cheon(天) gave me Virtue(德).” Mencius(孟子) say “The person done with all his heart knows Seong(性, personality), so if he knows such Seong(性, personality), then he knows Cheon(天).” In Doctrine of the Mean(中 庸), it says “Cheon(天) ordered it to be called – Seong(性, personality).” So, Cheon(天) had a religious meaning, such as Sangje(上帝) - Supreme Ruler. During the Song period, Cheon(天), the source of its existence, had construed as Mugeuk i Taegeuk Non(無極而太極論 – Theory of Supreme Ultimate while being Indeterminate) and Theory of li and ki (iginon-理氣論). Juja (朱子, a honorary name of Juhui, 朱熹) had said a reasonable Cheon(天), that is, Heavenly Principle(天理 – Cheolli) by interpreting Cheon(天) as Taegeuk(太極 – Supreme Polarity) and li(理) of Muwi(無爲 - uncontrived action). That’s why Juja had lost the religiosity because of his reasonable frame. The purpose of this dissertation is to identify of the quality of being religious of li(理) on the basis of attribute of Cheon(天) argued by Toegye and Juja. In the text of Seomyeong(西銘 – Western Inscription), we can see their interpretation of the content that Toegye as 『西銘考證講義』(Lecture on Historical Research of Western Inscription), and Juja as 『西銘解』(Commentary on the Western Inscription). Seomyeong(西 銘 – Western Inscription) was expounded as a logic of ‘iil bunsu’ (理一分殊 – coherence is one and distinguished into many). ‘理一分殊’ means to live in as meaningful as possible according to the human nature that has been bestowed upon thyself. Juja and Toegye both said that in the aspect of ‘iil’(理一 - coherence is one), Reverence(事天 ) ought to be done, but to look into the aspect of ‘bunsu’(分殊-distinguished into many), Juja argued that people should follow the order of Heavenly Principle(天理 – Cheolli), and Toegye argued that people should have to perform the filial piety(孝). There are differences in methods of Toegye and Juja on account of distinction between attributes of Cheon(天). Such a distinction affects the attribute of li(理). Juja said divisively that Soiyeon(所以然-why its principle is so) is li(理), and Sodangyeon(所當 然-what should be so) is Sa(事-divine project). Toegye argued that Sodangyeon(所當然-what should be so) is indeed li(理). It is the position of Toegye that to know Seong(性-the personality) of Sodangyeon(所當然-what should be so) is the first, rather than to know Cheon(天) of Soiyeon(所以然-why its principle is so) that is out of reach in a faraway place. Seong(性-the personality) is li(理) that bestowed by Cheon(天). In view of discussion about the essence and existence, for Toegye, the existence is the first, rather than the essence. The issues of existence is now enabled to talk about amid the discussion of metaphysics, namely li(理). Different from Juja, a theory noticed in Toegye is the theory of ‘Lijado’(理自到). ‘Lijado’(理自到 ) denotes ‘Li(理) leads on their own.’ It tells that separate from thing-in-itself, there is an energy that moves and oversees the thing. This is an issue of response between “I” as the principal agent and other people. If “I” as the principal agent is sincere to others, the others will come to me insomuch as they will be revealed through me. Here, a problem between the host and guest arises. Toegye perceived this problem that do not see me and others as same, and also do not see me and others as two. This is the logic of ‘ilii iiil’(一而二 二而一 – looks like one but two, looks like two but one) of ‘理一分殊’ (coherence is one and distinguished into many). The first thing to do between these two processes is to recognize the existence of ‘iil’(理一). Toegye strongly displays a religious attitude identifying Cheon(天)=Li(理)=Sangje(上帝- Supreme Ruler) in the same light.

한국어

天의 개념을 살펴보자면 宋代이전은 종교적(上帝) 天이라면 宋代이후는 합리적(天理) 天이다. 주 자는 종교성을 잃어버렸고 퇴계는 회복했다. 이 논문은 퇴계와 주자가 말하는 天의 속성이 다르 다는 것을 기반으로 理의 종교성까지 밝히는 것이 목적이다. ｢서명｣은 ‘理一分殊’의 논리로 설명되어진다. 주자와 퇴계는 理一이란 측면에서는 事天이란 해야 한다고 말하지만 分殊의 측면에서 살펴보면 주자는 天理의 이법을 따라야 한다고 하고 퇴계는 事 親의 孝를 행해야 한다고 한다. 이와 같이 퇴계와 주자는 天의 속성 다르기 때문에 방법에 있어서 도 차이가 생긴다. 이러한 차이는 理의 속성에까지 영향을 미친다. 朱子는 所以然은 理, 所當然은 事라고 구분해서 말한다. 退溪는 所當然이야 말로 理라고 말한다. 본질과 실존의 논의로 보자면 퇴계에게는 실존이 본질보다 먼저인 것이다. 理라는 형이상학적 논 의 속으로 실존의 문제를 이야기 할 수 있게 되었다. 退溪에게서 朱子와 다르게 주목되는 이론은 ‘理自到’설 이다. ‘理自到’는 나라는 주체가 타자에게 지극히 하면 타자가 나에게로 와서 나를 통해 발현된다는 것이다. 이 논의는 ‘物格’에 토를 넣는 문제에서 시작한다. 퇴계는 ‘物理’가 이르는 것이 아니라 ‘衆理’가 이르는 것이라고 말한다. 이는 ‘ 상대적 理’와 ‘절대적 理’를 명확하게 구분하기 위한 논의이다. 존재는 비존재를 존재로 한 존재이 기 때문에 상대적 理이지만 존재와 비존재를 뛰어 넘으면 절대적 理이다. 이는 分殊의 理와 理一 의 理에 대한 차이이다. 즉 절대적 理가 나에게로 이르러 내 삶에서 드러나는 공효가 物格이다. 퇴계는 天=理=上帝를 동일시하는 종교적인 태도를 강하게 보이고 있다.