하곡 정제두와 소론계 주자학자들의 양명학 논변

Abstract

The debate on Yangming studies 陽明學 between Jeong Je-du and the Soron 小論 faction of neo-Confucian scholars holds primary significance as the first substantial debate on Yangming studies in the history of Joseon thought. The stances of both sides involved in this debate are clear: Soron scholars criticize Yangming studies as heretical, while Jeong Je-du defends Yangming studies asserting that it embodies the true meaning of Sage’s Learning 聖學. This article examines the major issues and content of the debate on Yangming studies to highlight the characteristics and significance of Jeong Je-du’s defense of Yangming studies. In particular, by focusing on how Jeong Je-du’s understanding of Yangming studies deepened, expanded, and specialized in the process of his defense, it aims to elucidate Jeong’s unique understanding of Yangming studies that exhibits Korean characteristics. Through the debate on Yangming studies, Jeong Je-du achieved three major achievements. First, he deepened and expanded his understanding of Yangming studies. In the process of responding to criticism from Zhuxi scholars, he gained a deeper understanding of Yangming studies’ main theories and established the doctrinal lineage theory from the viewpoint of Yangming studies based on Confucian classics, culminating in his work, “Hakbyeon” 學辯. Second, he explained the main concepts and theories of Yangming studies using the key concepts and theories of Joseon neo-Confucianism. Representative examples include interpreting ‘innate knowledge’ 良知 from the perspective of the ‘principle of life’ 生理 and explaining the theory of ‘innate knowledge itself and its function’ 良知體用 using the theory that ‘nature is substance and emotion is function’ 性體情用. By explaining ‘innate knowledge’ with the ‘principle of life’, Jeong Je-du merged ‘benevolence’ 仁 and ‘innate knowledge’ within the concept of the ‘principle of life.’ This effort signifies his attempt to integrate Mingdao studies 明道學 and Yangming studies, holding considerable historical importance. Third, Jeong Je-du reinterpreted major topics of Joseon neo-Confucianism based on Yangming studies. He offered new explanations for the Four-Seven Debate 四端七情論 and the theory of Zhong-He 中和 based on the theory of ‘innate knowledge itself and its function. These efforts highlight the unique characteristics and contributions of Hagok studies distinguishing it from Chinese and Japanese Yangming studies.