鄭齊斗에서 沈大允에로의 근대적 전이양상 - 하곡과 백운의 『中庸』 이해를 중심으로 -

Abstract

This study sought to conduct a comparative examination of the annotations on the Doctrine of the Mean by Jeong Je-du and Sim Dae-yun. Jeong Je-du with the pen name of Yugok (origin: Yeonil, 1649〜1736) is the founder of Korea’s Yang Myeonghak Doctrine in the 18th century. Sim Dae-yun with the pen name of Baekun (1806〜1872) is the founder of the original study of Chinese classics (經學) based on “The Great Ultimate Is Energy” (太極卽氣) doctrine who in the middle of the 19th century opposed Neo-Confucian annotations. During the Japanese colonial rule of Korea, Dakkahashi Doru(高橋亨, 1878〜1967), a representative pro-government scholar, argued that Sim Dae-yun’s Home Teaching Source (家學淵源) traced back to Jeong Je-du [Sim Dae-yun’s great-grandfather brother Sim Yuk, and his great-grandfather Sim Ak were prime disciples of Ha Gok.], and defined Sim Dae-yun as Joseon’s only dissident of Neo-Confucianism. In the middle and late 19th century, in Anseong, Sim Dae-yun was active as the leader of the small-scale study group of follower scholars who were related to Jeong Je-du’s Yang Myeonghak doctrine sources and Soron faction context, until he died. The research findings revealed the following. For the viewpoints by Jeong Je-du and Sim Dae-yun on Chinese classics, Jeong Je-du criticized the then criticism of Chinese classics based on Zhuzi’s Four Books Annotations (朱子 『四書集註』). He discussed gains and losses based on the Six Classics (六經), namely, Ancient Classics (古經), and argued the wrong and right beyond the principles of way. He argued that since Zhuzi from Southern Song wrote new annotations based on his own views, Jeong Je-du himself established his annotation theory on classics including the Doctrine of the Mean to restore the original meaning of Ancient Classics. On the other hand, Sim Dae-yun also argued that he had to correctly interpret the 500 to 600 years of the Jeong Ju Doctrine annotation system that had deceived saints and deluded the world. He thus established a new overall annotation system for the Four Books [excluding Mencius] and Five Classics (五經). Next, in Chapter 1 of the Doctrine of the Mean, for the annotation of “What Heaven has conferred is called THE NATURE” (天命之謂性), Jeong Je-du, deviating from the Zhuzi’s theory of “Heaven Is Reason” (天卽理) and “Nature Is Reason” (性卽理), defined Heaven (天) as the whole (全體) of one element (一元), Nature (性) as the Heaven as granted to Human Mind (人心). On the other hand, Sim Dae-yun defined Nature (性) as “Liking Profit, namely, goodness, and disliking Harm, namely, Vice.” He argued that Nature-Goodness (性善) based on Human Mind (人心)’s bright knowledge (明知) is not the same as “Sincerity is the way of Heaven” (渾然天理) that was inherently granted to humans and saints and ordinary people as argued by Zhuzi. In the Chapter of Bieun (費隱), Jeong Je-du, deviating from Zhuzi’s viewpoint of “Bi (費) is Yong (用) and Eun (隱) is Chae (體),” defined Bi (費) and Eun (隱) as the practical way of noble man. He defined Bi (費) as a scope of shallow and humble way that can be easily practiced, and Eun (隱) as a scope of noble, lofty and elegant way that is difficult to reach. On the other hand, Sim Dae-yun also negated Zhuzi’s the Eunbi (費隱) theory, defined Bi (費) and Eun (隱) as the humans’ practical way. He defined Bi (費) as broad and great ([廣大], and Eun(隱) as a simple and small [約小]. Jeong Je-du and Sim Dae-yun lived in different times of 200 years apart. Amid the Yang Myeonghak Doctrine and Soron Faction context continuing to be handed down, these scholars’ annotation system of the Doctrine of the Mean deviated from the Jeongju Doctrine annotation system, but they differed in itemized discussions according to their periods.