이지의 『노자』 도 개념에 대한 이해

Abstract

This article discusses the Ming scholar, Li Zhi’s (李贄, 1527∼1602,styled Zhuowu 卓吾) understanding of the philosophy of Laozi. This article focuses on his anti-metaphysical understanding of such central concepts of the Laozi as Dao, being (you 有), and non-being (wu 無), and suggests that his understanding of the Laozi relates to Zen (Chan)Buddhism. Li has been known as an non-sectarian, iconoclastic, and anti-metaphysical thinker; he was a radical student of the Yangming school, a Zen (Chan) Buddhist monk, and a Taoist at the same time. Such characteristics of his learning are well reflected in his interpretation of the Laozi; his learning in the Yangming school and Zen Buddhism influenced his understanding of the philosophy of Laozi. In his interpretation of the Laozi Ch.1, Li shows a parallelism between chang-dao 常道 vs. ke-dao 可道 and chang-ming 常名 vs. ke-ming 可名,implying “kedao” and “keming” can be deemed as nouns - an effable Dao and a nameable name, which are not the Constant Dao and name (fei-chang-dao/ming) and yet a provisional modes of Dao and name. In doing so, Li wants to find the philosophical basis of a positive understanding of the effable Dao and nameable names. And Li’s understanding of the concept of being and non-being collaborates with his understanding of the effable Dao and nameable names; he emphasizes the interpenetrative or complementary relationship of being and non-being, thereby supporting his understanding of the effable Dao and names. Li says that Dao can be understood as both being and non-being,but also asserts that Dao can be neither being nor non-being. His point seems to be that Dao in itself is totally the reality. And further, Li manifests that one can reach Dao when he understands that Dao has Dao-less-ness (wudao 無道), or non-Dao. At this point, Li introduces the concept of Emptiness (kong 空). This suggests that his radical suggestion of Dao as non-Dao is influenced by another source, i.e., Buddhism.