본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

The Understanding of and Response to Western Learning by Confucian Scholars of the Yeongnam Region in the 19th Century: Emperor Above, Master of Heaven, and Worshiping Rites for the Spirit

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류한국어와문학

초록

This study reviews how the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam region in Joseon around the 19th century critically perceived Western Learning, particularly the Catholic concepts of Deus and anima. The Confucian scholars of Yeongnam primarily focused on the two aspects of the principle from a Neo-Confucian worldview: the aspect of non-action (muwi) and the aspect of ruling over (jujae). They understood the notion of Emperor Above (sangje) through this ruling nature of the principle. While guarding against the favorable interpretation of Western Learning by the Southerners of the Gyeonggi area such as Yi Ik and An Jeongbok, the Southerners of the Yeongnam region felt the necessity to distinguish their scholarly identity more clearly. The disciples of Yi Sangjeong such as Nam Hanjo, Jo Suldo, Jeong Jongno, Ryu Geonhyu, and Ryu Chimyeong criticized the concept of the Master of Heaven (cheonju) and emphasized the aspect of non-action found in Emperor Above in Confucianism, namely, the impersonal and universal properties of the Great Ultimate (taegeuk) and the principle (ri). Although Western books introducing Catholicism argued that Deus was an immaterial, eternal, and intellectual being, Confucian scholars regarded that a personified Master of Heaven, who had specific emotions and will and judged the good and evil of humans, was ultimately in the same finite category as divine force (yeongsin). In face of such limited and personified characteristic of the Master of Heaven, the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam region further emphasized the universality and public nature of the principle. This was particularly the case of ancestral spirit (hollyeong), which was universal and public. According to them, material force was constantly regenerated in accordance with the universality of the principle. One was able to perform a worshiping rite and reciprocally connect with the objects of worship, be it one’s ancestors or the sages, since the principle deserved to be revered and worshiped. The key to the worshiping ritual was to therefore understand and perceive the principle with one’s mind and venerate the proper objects of worship. The spirit (sin) only existed when the principle was proper. The encounter with the arguments of Western Learning and Catholicism by the Southerners of the Gyeonggi area who were of the Seongho School as well as the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam region served as an important opportunity that triggered their various inner capabilities. While the dissemination of Western Learning agitated the intellectuals of Joseon and divided their lines of thought, it also provided an impetus for them to actively reflect upon the beliefs and values they harbored. This is evident by the intellectual response of the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam area who critically reviewed the meaning of Emperor Above, ancestral spirit, and worshiping rituals.

Abstract

This study reviews how the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam region in Joseon around the 19th century critically perceived Western Learning, particularly the Catholic concepts of Deus and anima. The Confucian scholars of Yeongnam primarily focused on the two aspects of the principle from a Neo-Confucian worldview: the aspect of non-action (muwi) and the aspect of ruling over (jujae). They understood the notion of Emperor Above (sangje) through this ruling nature of the principle. While guarding against the favorable interpretation of Western Learning by the Southerners of the Gyeonggi area such as Yi Ik and An Jeongbok, the Southerners of the Yeongnam region felt the necessity to distinguish their scholarly identity more clearly. The disciples of Yi Sangjeong such as Nam Hanjo, Jo Suldo, Jeong Jongno, Ryu Geonhyu, and Ryu Chimyeong criticized the concept of the Master of Heaven (cheonju) and emphasized the aspect of non-action found in Emperor Above in Confucianism, namely, the impersonal and universal properties of the Great Ultimate (taegeuk) and the principle (ri). Although Western books introducing Catholicism argued that Deus was an immaterial, eternal, and intellectual being, Confucian scholars regarded that a personified Master of Heaven, who had specific emotions and will and judged the good and evil of humans, was ultimately in the same finite category as divine force (yeongsin). In face of such limited and personified characteristic of the Master of Heaven, the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam region further emphasized the universality and public nature of the principle. This was particularly the case of ancestral spirit (hollyeong), which was universal and public. According to them, material force was constantly regenerated in accordance with the universality of the principle. One was able to perform a worshiping rite and reciprocally connect with the objects of worship, be it one’s ancestors or the sages, since the principle deserved to be revered and worshiped. The key to the worshiping ritual was to therefore understand and perceive the principle with one’s mind and venerate the proper objects of worship. The spirit (sin) only existed when the principle was proper. The encounter with the arguments of Western Learning and Catholicism by the Southerners of the Gyeonggi area who were of the Seongho School as well as the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam region served as an important opportunity that triggered their various inner capabilities. While the dissemination of Western Learning agitated the intellectuals of Joseon and divided their lines of thought, it also provided an impetus for them to actively reflect upon the beliefs and values they harbored. This is evident by the intellectual response of the Confucian scholars of the Yeongnam area who critically reviewed the meaning of Emperor Above, ancestral spirit, and worshiping rituals.

참고문헌 (16)

  1. 안영상, "천주교의 수용 과정에 나타난 사상적 變容에 관한 연구- 상제 귀신설을 중심으로_", 동양철학연구, 28, pp.67~104 (2002), 동양철학연구회
  2. 안영상, "천주교의 천주(상제)와 영혼불멸설에 대한 영남 퇴계학파의 대응 양식", 시대와 철학, 16(1), pp.107~134 (2005), 한국철학사상연구회
  3. "Cha, Gijin", The Research of Korean Church History, ~ (2002)
  4. Gang, Segu, (2012), Sungkyunkwan University Press
  5. Geum, Jangtae, (2003), Seoul National University Press
  6. Gwon, Jinho, (2013), Korean Studies Institute
  7. Gwon, Oyeong, (2003), Dolbegae
  8. Gwon, Oyeong, (2011), Iljisa
  9. "2010", 7
  10. 김문식, "조선후기 京南과 南의 교류양상 -영야 주실의 한양조씨가를 중심으로-", 한국사상과 문화, (15), pp.94~120 (2002), 한국사상문화학회
  11. Kim, Munsik, (2007), Taehaksa
  12. 김선희, "19세기 영남 남인의 서학 비판과 지식 권력: 류건휴의 『이학집변』을 중심으로", 한국사상사학, (51), pp.451~486 (2015), 한국사상사학회
  13. 김순미, "大埜 柳健休의 《異學集辨》에 나타난 천주학 비판에 관한 연구", 교회사연구, (45), pp.159~198 (2014), (재)한국교회사연구소
  14. 서종태, "順菴 安鼎福의 〈天學設問〉과 〈天學考〉 · 〈天學問答〉에 관한 연구", 교회사연구, (41), pp.5~71 (2013), (재)한국교회사연구소
  15. Song, Yeongbae, (1999), Seoul National University Press
  16. 이상호, "류건휴의 『계호학적』과 『이학집변』에 나타난 후기 영남학파의 ‘도통’과 ‘벽이단’ 의식", 동양철학, (32), pp.75~97 (2009), 한국동양철학회[DOI]

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)