율곡학파의 ‘理氣渾淪’ 개념 고찰 - 이이와 임성주의 철학을 중심으로 -
‘LiKi Honlun(理氣渾淪)’ in the Yulgok School - Focusing on YI I and IM Seong-ju’s Philosophy -
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
‘LiKi Honlun(理氣渾淪)’, a concept that represents the non-separateness of ‘li(理)’ and ‘ki(氣)’ is widely acknowledged as a key logic especially used by the Yulgok school in opposing the Toegye school. To date, there has not been adequate analysis on ‘LiKi Honlun’ in the Yulgok school. This research examines the philosophical context in which ‘LiKi Honlun’ was used by two of the major figures of Yulgok camp, YI I and IM Seong-ju, and therefore explains the meaning and role of ‘LiKi Honlun’ in their theories of li and ki, mind and nature, and self-cultivation. For YI, li and ki are honlun(non-separable) in the way that ki is determinative of all phenomena while li is absolute for being the ontological basis of phenomena. ‘LiKi Honlun’ then serves as a theoretical prerequisite of YI’s theories of ‘ki emerges as one route with li mounting it(氣發理乘一途)’ and ‘li is universal and ki restricts li(理通氣 局)’. It also lies the foundation for his viewpoint of ‘rectifying physical endowment(矯氣 質)’. IM pushed forward YI’s idea that ki is determinative of all phenomena. He further interpreted ki as the structural basis of phenomena while limiting li’s role by reinterpreting li as the basis which is crucial only for supporting the quality and features of ki. Li and ki are then honlun in that li serves as ki’s ‘attendant’. By such usage of ‘LiKi Honlun’, IM endeavored to resolve the problems of gap between the ‘che(體)’ and ‘yong(用)’ probably hidden in YI’s concept of ‘LiKi Honlun’, and eventually constructed his ki-monism, which can be seen as an extreme form of YI’s theory of ‘ki emerges as one route with li mounting it’. IM’s usage of ‘LiKi Honlun’ also supports the effectiveness of ‘nurturing the vast moving vital force(養氣)’, a method of self-cultivation that he emphasized. Both the Yulgok and Toegye schools used to share the term ‘LiKi Honlun’ itself. Therefore, knowing ‘how’ the concept was used, rather than ‘whether’ the term itself was used or not, should be a more effective way to figure out the characteristics of any specific school or scholar. In this respect, being a study of the concrete meaning and usage of ‘LiKi Honlun’ in the Yulgok school, this research can help provide a new perspective to survey Korean Confucianism.
Abstract
‘LiKi Honlun(理氣渾淪)’, a concept that represents the non-separateness of ‘li(理)’ and ‘ki(氣)’ is widely acknowledged as a key logic especially used by the Yulgok school in opposing the Toegye school. To date, there has not been adequate analysis on ‘LiKi Honlun’ in the Yulgok school. This research examines the philosophical context in which ‘LiKi Honlun’ was used by two of the major figures of Yulgok camp, YI I and IM Seong-ju, and therefore explains the meaning and role of ‘LiKi Honlun’ in their theories of li and ki, mind and nature, and self-cultivation. For YI, li and ki are honlun(non-separable) in the way that ki is determinative of all phenomena while li is absolute for being the ontological basis of phenomena. ‘LiKi Honlun’ then serves as a theoretical prerequisite of YI’s theories of ‘ki emerges as one route with li mounting it(氣發理乘一途)’ and ‘li is universal and ki restricts li(理通氣 局)’. It also lies the foundation for his viewpoint of ‘rectifying physical endowment(矯氣 質)’. IM pushed forward YI’s idea that ki is determinative of all phenomena. He further interpreted ki as the structural basis of phenomena while limiting li’s role by reinterpreting li as the basis which is crucial only for supporting the quality and features of ki. Li and ki are then honlun in that li serves as ki’s ‘attendant’. By such usage of ‘LiKi Honlun’, IM endeavored to resolve the problems of gap between the ‘che(體)’ and ‘yong(用)’ probably hidden in YI’s concept of ‘LiKi Honlun’, and eventually constructed his ki-monism, which can be seen as an extreme form of YI’s theory of ‘ki emerges as one route with li mounting it’. IM’s usage of ‘LiKi Honlun’ also supports the effectiveness of ‘nurturing the vast moving vital force(養氣)’, a method of self-cultivation that he emphasized. Both the Yulgok and Toegye schools used to share the term ‘LiKi Honlun’ itself. Therefore, knowing ‘how’ the concept was used, rather than ‘whether’ the term itself was used or not, should be a more effective way to figure out the characteristics of any specific school or scholar. In this respect, being a study of the concrete meaning and usage of ‘LiKi Honlun’ in the Yulgok school, this research can help provide a new perspective to survey Korean Confucianism.
참고문헌 (22)
- "定本退溪全書", ~
- "栗谷全書", ~
- "朱熹集", ~
- "鹿門集", ~
- "朱子語類", ~
- 劉明鍾, "韓國思想史", pp.387~ (1992), 以文出版社
- 장숙필, "四端七情論", pp.95~96 (1992), 民族과 思想硏究會
- 전호근, "16世紀 조선 성리학의 특징에 관한 연구 : 퇴·고·율·우 논변을 중심으로", 박사, 육가공, pp.1997
- 최영진, "한국철학사 : 16개의 주제로 읽는 한국철학사", pp.169~ (2009), 새문사
- 윤사순, "한국유학사상 : 한국유학의 특수성 탐구", pp.324~ (2012), 지식산업사
- 채희도, "인심도심상대설(人心道心相對說)과 율곡의 인심청명어도심설(人心聽命於道心說) : 리기관(理氣觀)과 인심도심관(人心道心觀)의 관계를 중심으로", 泰東古典硏究, 48, pp.154~155 (2022)
- 박다진, "율곡의 호발설(互發說)비판에 대한 성호의 반비판 : 사상사적 함의에 주목하여", 儒學硏究, 50, pp.27~ (2020)
- 홍성민, "理氣經緯의 형이상학과 도덕적 인간학", 東洋哲學硏究, 107 (2021)
- 김승태, "이상정의 ‘理氣統看’과 이이 성리학 辨析", 동서철학연구, 60, pp.164~ (2011)
- 손흥철, "朝鮮性理學에서 理氣一元論의 특성과 전개", 율곡학연구, 54, pp.146~ (2023)
- 룩이준, "정시한의 사단칠정론 재검토 : ‘理氣渾淪’ 개념을 통해서", 퇴계학보, 150, pp.93~ (2021)
- 이명심, "녹문 임성주의 理氣同實論연구", 東洋哲學硏究, 82 (2015)
- 안유경, "녹문鹿門임성주任聖周의 성리학적 특징 고찰 : 기론자氣論者인가 이기론자理氣論者인가", 국학연구, 41 (2020)
- 김경호, "녹문과 노사의 율곡철학에 대한 재해석", 율곡학연구, 23, pp.181~ (2011)
- 김용헌, "이간의 이기동실・심성일치론과 임성주의 비판", 율곡학연구, 50 (2022)
- 정원재, "이이, 임성주, 기정진의 본체론", 哲學硏究, 57, pp.5~ (2002)
- 이형성, "이이(李珥)의 리통기국론(理通氣局論)에 대한 후학의 학문적계승과 변화 양상 탐구", 儒學硏究, 36, pp.212~217 (2016)
