徐花潭 학술에 대한 후대 문인들의 인식 코드

Abstract

Tohak(道學) theory of Hwa-tam Sŏ Kyŏng-tŏk(花潭 徐敬德, 1489~1546) had two simultaneous characteristics with respect to the epochal context of the early Chosŏn period. That is to say, his philosophy was an indicator that referred to the fact that it entered the stage of deepening and deduction beyond the level of superficial accommodation of Song's Neo-Confucianism(宋學), and at the same time to the fact that there was a distance between the whole system of his philosophy and pure Zhuism(淳朱子學) as it originated from Northern Song's Shao Yong(邵雍) and Zhang Zai(張載). Though this duality of Hwa-tam's philosophy had been recognized for its achievement in pioneering the level of later period's Tohak theory, his theory was not recognized by Chosŏn's mainstream Neo- Confucianism as containing the pure essence of Tohak theory. Most of the poems created for him in later periods made more tributes to him on his humanistic and academic sides than treated him as a subject of academic criticism. The general reason for this is that his contribution to the deepening of Tohak theory in the early Chosŏn period was by this time generally acknowledged, and that Shao Yong's Sangsuhak(象數學) had risen as a novel subject of interest since the 17th century. Hwa-tam's scholastic attitude lied ultimately in the state of self-realization through his internalization of earlier sages' books. This scholastic attitude played the role of opening later Tohak philosophers' aesthetic realms as it was reflected in the figure of Tsen Tien(曾點) as an example of vivid personality. Moreover, while the western astronomy and calendar introduced through Qing in the 17th century was both rejected and accommodated, scholars rejecting them were invited to have interest in the traditional oriental calendar and Sangsuhak. At that moment, Hwa-tam attracted attention as a scholar who internalized Shao Yong's Sangsuhak. He was thus often figured in poems in later periods through characteristic literary codes, with his figure overlapped by Shao Yong's. Though his theory after all was judged as a non-pure Zhuism heretical philosophy by T'oegye(退溪) and Yulgok(栗谷)'s academic criticisms, its vitality continued with later epochal requirements.