earticle

영어

As we all know, South Korea’s real learning is the 18th century about 200 years before the new style of study, which is to Dasan Jeong Yakyong (1762-1863) for the master of Confucianism. The formation and development of real learning in South Korea, of course, inseparable fro m the impact of Chinese and Western cultural influences of advanced technology. However, South Korea’s thought of orient is not only critica l thinking to accept the thought of Chinese and Western, but also combi ned South Korea’s indigenous ideology and culture. It is created differe nt knowledge from china and West-----"Donghak Thought" . The tho ught of orient, which is to "God" as the main concept, is produced in South Korea into the modern nation when the threshold and the process of modern civilization in South Korea played a crucial role and influenc e. Thus, if real learning premises critical Korean Confucianism, so, Sout h Korea’s "Donghak Thought" is to learn Korean real learning’s produc tion of "continuation" or "alternative". Most scholars of South Korea bel ieved that thought of orient is different from Confucianism, but also different from the Western, and thought of orient is by the "Confucian" and "Western learning" exclusion and persecution against the creation of kn owledge of Confucianism and Western learning. In other words, though t of orient the "new knowledge" that is different from Confucianism and Western, and the other before learning, school and religion. Then any source of ideas can not be divorced from the historical background at that time, the same can not be cut off historical heritage, even the "opp osition" mentality, the same hidden culvert with each other's views and ideas. No less than Confucianism in the development process as absorb ed Buddhism, Taoism and other ideas, Buddhism in China is also integr ated into the process of localization, including like traditional Chinese culture. Although South Korea’sthought of orient is the idea of Confucia nism and Western learning criticism of the premise, in this thought doe s not violate the law as I have said before. In the thought of orient, it is appeared around the Confucianism and Western learning’s shadow. If "Donghak Thought" has sense of real learning, this tendency can best represent the idea is the thoughtof orient’s "opened the day after tomorrow," thinking. The thought of orient advocated"acquired" means the world to another cycle, but not as the modern Western world to pur sue another. Moreover, even reincarnation of the world, and can not be absolutely the same, or is the same world, or, Metacarpus can not use the "open" word. One of the important means to open up a "revolution" is, that "innovation", a word that is "new". Choi Je woo, founder of the central idea in thought of orient can be summarized as "serve God". He resolved "serve" as "Waiter there gods, outside the gasification". Schola rs tend to believe that "God has a different internal and external side of the performance: In my heart, it is to the gods to show up; out ofmy heart, but gasification to represent it in its own strength. If anyone has the same consciousness of this truth, he is to serve God". This logic is consistent with the original way of thinking the thought of orient: That is, whether acknowledged or not, "God" is always of existence, on ly "deceive" unknown and can not achieve its "serve". And in order to perceive "God", it is need to constantly "self-cultivation" and "practice ability". When you sense God's presence and know the power of God, you will be able to "serve" God. Some scholars believe that God is the "gods" and "gasification" appeared in two forms, which I consider impo rtant is the "gods" in the form, and by the gods to achieve its gasificati on. In other words, God-centered are, for the use of gasification as a way to update the universe. Importantly, the gods and gasification are not two things. They are the different manifestations of God and the different understanding of God’s ways in people. So it is an example of God’s immanence and transcendence. The thought of orient bring up this "Serve God" thinking, the fundamental purpose is not to "serve Go d" itself, but rather to transform the world through the gasification. Bec ause a world without equality and freedom what is not the majority of the people of the place, is a very dark society. South Korea's "3, 1" is the Korean independence movement, which is the modernization of the "Start". Meanwhile the third generation of Ch'ondogyo’s Uiam Son Bye ong-hee is one of the leadersin this movement, and also the one of Sout h Korea’s democratization movement’s main representative. Uiam Son Byeong-hee’s idea directly impact on the South Korea’s modern thinkin g and movements, in particular, Son Byeong-hee through his "three wa rs" theory and other ideas, to South Korea’s government demanded for political reform.

한국어

모두들알고있듯이, 한국實學은18세기전후약200년사이의새로운학풍 을말하는데 이는 다산 정약용(1762-1863)을 집대성자로 한儒學사상이다. 한 국實學의형성과발전은중국實學의영향과서방선진과학기술문화의영향을 떠나서말할수없다. 그러나한국의東學사상은中西사상을비판하며접수하 였을뿐만아니라한국의本土사상문화와결합하여중국과서방의학문과부 동한“東學"을창립하였다. “天主"를주체개념으로하는東學사상은韓민족이 근대의문에들어섰을즈음에나타났으며한국현대문명의진전에지극히중요 한작용과영향을일으켰다. 그리하여한국實學은성리학을비판하는것을전 제로한다면한국의“東學"은한국實學의“연속" 혹은“교체"의산물이라고할 수있다. 대부분의한국학자들은東學은儒學과구별되며西學과도구별되여 東學은“儒士"와“西學"의배제와박해를받아儒學과西學을반대하면서창 조한 학문이라고 인식한다. 즉 東學은 儒學과 西學및 그전의 기타 학문、學 派、종교와구별되는“새로운학문"이다. 하지만어느사상의기원이든모두당 시의 시대적 배경을 벗어날수 없으며 역사의 전통과 갈라놓을 수 없다. 비록 “대립"적인사상일지라도서로의관점과사상이함축되여있을것이다. 儒學 이 발전과정 중 佛、道등 이 기타 사상을 흡수한 것처럼 중국불교도 本土化 과정에서儒學을비롯한중국의전통문화를용납하였다. 한국의東學사상은비 록朝鮮朝儒學과西學을비판하는것을전제로하는사상이지만이사상중에서는 앞서 말한 규 칙을 어기지 않았고 東學의 사상 중 여러 면에서 儒學의 사상과 西學이 반영되였다. 만약 “東學"이 實學성 경향이 있다면 이런 경향의 사상을 제일 잘 대표할 수있는것이바로東學의“後天開闢"사상이다. 東學이주장하는“後天"은이 세계의다른한가지輪廻를일컫는데이는현대서방이추구하는다른하나의 세계와다르다. 그리고輪廻의세계도절대적으로같을수없고혹같은세계라 고 하면 水雲도 “開闢"이란 두 글자를 사용하지 않을 것이다. 개척의 중요한 의의 중의 하나는 “혁명", 즉 “창신"이며 한마디로 “新"이다. 東學의 창시인인 최제우의 중심사상은 “侍天主"로 개괄할 수 있다. 그는 “侍"를 “侍者” 내부에 神靈이 있고 외부에氣化가있다"로 해석하였다. 학자는 이에 대해 “天主는 내외두방면의부동한표현이있다. 즉나의마음안에는神靈으로나타나고 나의마음밖에는氣化로자신의역량을표시한다. 만약사람이이러한시종불 변의진리를깨달았다면그는이미侍天主이다"라고인정하였다. 저는이런해 석이전면적이지못하다고생각된다. 왜냐면“侍"의각도로부터볼때, 주체는 我여야지 “天主"가 아니다. 이러한 逻辑는 東學本来의 사유방식에도 부합된 다. 즉 승인의 여부를 떠나서 "天主"는 시종 존재물이고 “愚夫愚民"하여 알지 못하고실현할수없는“侍"일뿐이기때문이다. 그리고“天主"를감지하기위 하여끊임없는“心性修養"과“實踐功夫"가필요된다. 당신이天主의존재와 天主의위력을느꼈을때당신은비로소“侍" 天主이다. 일부학자들은天主는 "神靈"과"氣化"의두가지형식으로현신한다고하는데저는중요한것은“神 靈"의 형식으로 나타나고, 神靈을 통하여 氣化하는 것이라고 생각한다. 다시 말하면神靈이本이고氣化가用이며이를통하여우주를갱신한다. 중요한것 은神靈과氣化는두가지물질이아니고, 이것天主의부동한표현방식과사 람들이 天主에 대한 부동한 이해방식이며 이에 따라 天主의 내재성과 사람의 초월성을 설명한다. 東學이 제출한 이러한 “侍天主"사상의 근본 목적은 “侍天 主"자체에 있는 것이 아니라 氣化를 통하여 이 세계를 개조하려는 것에 있다. 왜냐하면이세계는평등과자유가존재하지않고많은백성들의터전이없는 하나의매우암흑한사회이기때문이다. 한국의“3.1"독립운동은한국근대화의 “시작"인데 그중천도교제3대 교주의암손병희는이번운동의지도자의한 사람이며또한한국민주화운동의주요대표인물이기도하다. 의암손병희의 사상은 한국 근대화 사상과 운동에 직접적인 영향을 주었으며 특히 손병희는 그의“三戰輪" 등의사상을통하여당시의한국정부에정치개혁의요구를제출 하였다.