정치는 무위(無爲)인가 유위(有爲)인가? - 정약용과 레뀌돈의 관점 비교 -

Abstract

In this paper the author considers some main contents of Jeong Yak Yong and Le Quy Don’s thought on non-action politics (無爲政治). Non-action (or active (有爲) in contrary) politics is a topic closely connected to other key topics of Confucian political philosophy such as rule-of-morality (德治), self-cultivation (修身), cultural transformation (敎化), the way of King (王道) etc. Right from the beginning of Confucianism, Confucius confirmed that Emperor Shun’s ideal politics was the non-action politics, therefore in the history of Confucian political philosophy, Confucian scholars did not consider that confirmation, they only discussed about what non-action politics was. However to that question, there were many different answers. From Zhu Xi downward, almost all Neo-Confucian scholars agreed that non-action politics was governing relying on the morality, in that situation the politician’s self-cultivation could not be seen, hence it was called ‘non-action’. And when that cultivation reached the extreme point, then the cultural transformation of people could automatically occur without intervention of other treasures or methods. However, although they emphasized the aspect of the king’s self-cultivation and the rule-of-morality, the meaning of ‘do nothing’ in the ‘non-action politics’ cannot be perfectly rejected and it caused several evils in the real political life. In that situation, Jeong Yak Yong considered and criticized directly the thought of Neo-Confucianism and Zhu Xi on ‘non-action politics’. He thought that ‘non-action’ was nothing but the heretical thought of the Mysterious learning (玄學) and the Pure discussion (淸談), not the genuine thought of Confucian sages. The ‘non-action’ that Confucius said was only the emphasis on the necessity of the engagement of talents in governing the country. The true politics must be active, meaning the unceasing activities of the politicians. In another respect, Le Quy Don – the Vietnamese Neo-Confucian scholar – although admitted that non-action politics was the ideal politics, as the orthodox Confucianism, but his interpretation of ‘non-action politics’ was similar to Jeong Yak Yong’s ‘active politics’, that is to say Le Quy Don affirmed the positive activities of the politicians and their influence to the real political life. Therefore it can be said that ‘non-action’ in Le Quy Don’s thought seems only a state that the ideal politics can reach to, not some method to control the politics. Considering two scholars’ thought on ‘non-action politics’, we can see similarities of them, regardless of the fact that they were from different schools of Confucianism and different countries. And those similarities can be seen as the distinguishing and progressive features of their thoughts.