1960년대 일본조선연구소의 `식민사상` 제기와 `고도성장체제` 비판

장미현 ( Jang Mi-hyun ) 역사문제연구소 2012 역사문제연구 Vol.16 No.1

The Japanese Joseon Research Institute was a research facility established in 1961, during the time of the Korea-Japan talks and also the `Return project,` the time when the Japanese researchers` interest in Korean studies was growing higher than ever. Through the 1960s and `70s, the Japanese Joseon Research Institute pursued both academic studies and reform activities, and with their activities either in the form of publications or seminars, members of the institute argued that in order to truly reform Japan, the “Colonial thinking(the Colonial philosophy)” of the Japanese public should be erased from the minds of the Japanese people. The Japanese Joseon Research Institute was a place where not only researchers studying the history of Joseon, but also researchers studying the history of entire Asia, all gathered together and analyzed (while also displaying themselves) all the changes that were occurring throughout the Japanese society, as well as the academic community, in the 1960s. The primary focus of the studies and activities of the Japanese Joseon Research Institute was no other than the Korean peninsula, the country which had been invaded by the Japanese imperialism in the early half of the 20th century, and the country the Japanese people was once again about to infiltrate with their economic advances enabled by the Korea-Japan talks in 1965. They argued that the activities of the Institute should concentrate upon eliminating the above-mentioned “Colonial thinking(the Colonial philosophy),” which was turning out to be a constant dilemma which Japan had to face all the time when it negotiated with the Joseon people. The Institute members` intentions were not to merely assess how much of a responsibility the Japanese would have to bear for their invasion of the Joseon peninsula in the past, but to determine the process in which `Colonial thinking` was reinforcing the structure of (Japanese) ruling (of Korea) in the present. It was truly a huge departure from the Japanese `Colonial attitude,` and surprisingly it came from no other than the researchers of Japan, which had been the Imperial motherland in the first place. The concentrated high development in the Japanese society during the late 1960s was also considered to have been a result of Japan`s `invasion` of the Korean economy which was made possible after the signing of the Korea-Japan talks. The Institute argued that because the Colonial thinking was never successfully eliminated or sufficiently suppressed, the Japanese people were not regarding such offenses as invasive ones. They passionately argued that in order to go beyond all the `high developments,` the Colonial `philosophy` should be resolved and be done with more thoroughly. The Japanese Joseon Research Institute`s argument that criticised the Japanese authorities for `forgetting the responsibility for colonizing a country and ruling it,` and that the colonial philosophy was still continuing to exist, was something that was hard to swallow for their contemporary Japanese brethren, who considered the post-war era to be an entirely different time period from the pre-war period, as seen from a `Post-war Democracy` perspective. Even the Japanese Communists blamed the Japanese Joseon Research Institute for defining the victims(the people) as offenders. `Colonial philosophy` was all about Japan`s responsibility for its own past deeds, colonizing a country and ruling it with a fist. Yet the Japanese Joseon Research Institute did not use the word only to analyze the past. The institute members wanted to change the world, and the future of Japan. It was a cause to reconfigure the Japanese consciousness, and the very topic the institute utilized in doing so was the history of Joseon. The Japanese Joseon Research Institute defined the `researchers` as `research activists,` and established the elimination of Colonial thinking(philosophy) as their top-priority action. Their such stance was well reflecting the nature of the Japanese intellectuals of the time, who were more than ready to delve into the real world. They raised some issues regarding the `fashion` of the Japan society`s high development, when economic developments were in high-gear and especially based upon no other than the `colonial thinking`. They urged the Japanese people to think about the role the “Imperialist Americans(or the `Americans fighting the Cold war`)” urged them to play in the first place.

북한의 최한기 철학 독법과 한계 - ‘조선철학사’ 서술의 변화와 특징을 중심으로 -

이행훈 계명대학교 한국학연구원 2023 한국학논집 Vol.- No.91

The description of Choi Han-gi in the first part of the History of Joseon Philosophy, published in North Korea in 1960, triggered research in South Korean academia. Since then, North Korea has continued to describe and systematize the history of Joseon philosophy for about 10 years, while South Korea's description of the history of Korean philosophy has been suspended since 1987. However, South Korean research on Choi Han-gi has fallen short of its achievements in terms of the diversity of characters and themes, such as the foundation work of canonization. This is because the basic premise of the history of philosophy and the systemic ideology of the struggle between idealism and materialism became the shackles of Choi Han-gi's reading. The history of Joseon philosophy based on Marxism-Leninism has become a tool for the succession of national cultural heritage and class education, with the Juche ideology(主體思想) systematized in the mid-1970s as its program, and the basic tone of historicism and classism strengthened in the 1980s. According to the worldview struggle, the genealogy of medieval materialist philosophy from Seo Gyeongdeok(徐敬德) to Choi Han-gi was made, and the historical limitations of Choi Han-gi's thought were highlighted according to the class struggle. Choi Han-gi's research focused on epistemology centered on Gicheukcheui(氣測體義), and the concentration of data is also a problem, such as citing only part of Injeong(人政) when dealing with social and political thoughts. In addition to Ki monotheism, the progressiveness of Choi Han-gi's philosophical thought was highlighted in Daedong Thought(大同思想), atheism, and the theory of foundation, which can be found in studies related to Silhak(實學). The representative researcher is Jeong Seong-cheol, who participated in the first history of Joseon philosophy, and follow-up studies are usually within the scope of Jeong Seong-cheol's research. In the 2000s, North Korea continued to describe the history of philosophy, while introducing Choi Han-gi as a major figure in the history of Joseon philosophy by translating and introducing Singitong(神氣通) in the university textbook, Collection of Joseon Philosophy History. Choi Han-gi can be a clue to the point of contact between North and South Korean academic exchanges and the direction of the narrative of the history of Korean philosophy.

16世紀 朝鮮의 『朱子大全』 刊行과 그 學問的 動向 硏究

신두환 경상국립대학교 경남문화연구원 2016 남명학연구 Vol.52 No.-

이 논문은 조선의 16세기 『朱子大全』 刊行과 그 이후의 學問的 動向에 대해서 연구한 논문이다. 조선의 한문학은 주자의 영향을 받은것이 크다. 그러나 『朱子大全』의 간행보급은 16세기에 와서 이루어진다. 이 책을 바탕으로 16세기 퇴계와 율곡을 거치면서 조선 성리학은최고의 절정기를 맞이하였다. 『朱子大全』 간행이후 조선 선비들의 학풍은 변하였다. 『朱子大 全』의 간행은 성리학을 『性理大全』 중심에서 『朱子大全』 중심으로 변환하게 하였다. 그리고 『朱子大全』 속의 백록동 서원의 기록은주세붕에 의해 소수서원을 창건하게 하였으며 이를 바탕으로 번져나간교육의 영향은 조선을 크게 변모시켰다. 『朱子大全』 속에 들어있던 주자의 시는 조선 선비들의 경모의 대상이 되었다. 특히 <武夷櫂歌>의 영향은 조선 선비들로 하여금 <九曲歌>를 짓게 하였고, 조선 산수의 자연미를 새롭게 발견하게 하였다. 주희의 詩文은 조선 사림들의 문장의 전범이 되었으며, 조선의 문풍을변화시켰다. 『朱子大全』 속의 이기철학의 영향은 조선의 철학적 사유의 틀을바꾸게 하였다. 그 이후 벌어지는 이기철학은 조선의 학문을 더욱 깊고오묘하게 발전하도록 영향을 미쳤다. 그리고 향약에 대한 영향은 조선의 풍속을 변화시켰으며 조선 사회를 더욱 발전시키는 계기가 되었다. 이 밖에도 『朱子大全』의 영향은 여러 방면에서 생활문화와 사상의기저를 변화시켰다. 위대한 책 한권이 세상을 바꾼다. 『朱子大全』 한권이 조선의 학문을 변화 시켰다. 16세기 『朱子大全』 한 책이 조선의 선비사회에 미친 영향은 지대하였다. This paper is a study on the 『Zhujadaejeon(朱子大全)』’s publication and a tendency of scholarship the 16th century in Joseon(朝鮮). The effects of the scholarship is Zhu Xi(朱熹) of the Joseon Dynasty are very big. But it made 『Zhujadaejeon』 the publication of supply is done came in the 16th century. Based on this book, but through Toegye(退溪) and Yulgok(栗谷), The Joseon Dynasty, the 16th century was the prime of Neo-Confucianism. 『Zhujadaejeon』 after publication academic traditions of Joseon dynasty was changed. 『Zhujadaejeon』 after publication Neo-Confucianism transformed. 『Zhujadaejeon』 after publication created the first Seowon(書院) in Joseon Dynasty, The effect of it can spread education based on that significantly transformed the Joseon. Compilation of poetry and prose Joseon's poetry and prose was a lot of influence. Especially, Zhu Xi’s <Muyidoga(武夷櫂歌)> was bring into vogue The Gugok-poetry(九曲詩歌) in Joseon. Zhu Xi’s a nature poem was newly discovered up the Joseon Dynasty the natural beauty of landscape. Became literary spirit of Joseon, Zhu Xi’s poetry and prose was Joseon’s poetry and prose example changed. Zhu Xi's The RiGi(理氣) philosophy Changed the framework of philosophical rationality of the Joseon Dynasty did. RiGi(理氣) philosophy was make more rapid development philosophy of the Joseon Dynasty. 『Zhujadaejeon』 introduced in Hyang'yak(鄕約) was Joseon's traditions, educated. This Hyang'yak (鄕約) is a unique Korean custom. In addition, 『Zhujadaejeon』 is life in many ways the effects of culture and ideas changed the base of. “One child, one teacher, one pen, and one book can change the world,” 『Zhujadaejeon』 one book can change the world of the Joseon.

북한 '조선철학'의 연구경향과 학문적 특성

전미영(Joen Mi-Yeong) 부산대학교 한국민족문화연구소 2008 한국민족문화 Vol.31 No.-

The purpose of this paper is to understand the academic features of Korean philosophy, 'Joseon philosophy' in North Korea. More specifically, this paper analyzes North Korean philosophy by focusing on the North Korean's most authoritative Journals of philosophy, Research of Philosophy and Journal of Kim 11 Sung University. In North Korea, the philosophy has been distorted by dictatorial political power and restructured by unitarian ideology, Juche philosophy since 1960. Consequently North Korean philosophy became a means to develope their political ideology. Korean philosophical circles produced a large quantity of output every year in various fields of philosophy. But, most philosophical opinions were based on 'Juche Philosophy'. Evidently, there is neither controversy nor academic argument in North Korean academic circles. The studies of Korean traditional philosophy, Joseon philosophy, have been researched by a guiding principle of Juche methodology. Consequently a difference of a point of view of traditional philosophy between South and North Korea is severe. One of the most significant difference is the materialistic conception of the history of philosophy.

성호 이익 형법사상 재조명

하태영(Ha, Tae-young) 동아대학교 법학연구소 2016 東亞法學 Vol.- No.72

『성호사설』은 약 300년 전 부패한 조선 후기 사회에 ‘문헌(文獻)’으로 정면 도전한 조선 선비의 글이다. 전체 3007편이다. 『성호사설』 형사법 관련 논단을 읽으면서 성호 글은 오늘의 우리 세상을 통찰하고 있다고 생각했다. 형사법과 관련된 글이 22편정도 된다. 형법철학, 형벌철학, 형사소송철학, 형사철학 그리고 형법사상으로 분류하였다. 성호 주장이 담긴 내용을 분석하면서 현대적 의미를 모색했다. 성호는 강간과 화간 개념을 명확하게 구분한다. 성호는 폭력으로 옷을 벗기고 여자가 거절하는데 겁간하려 하는 것은 이미 강간에 해당한다고 해석한다. 범행자에게 쫓기어 쉴 사이 없이 달아나다가 모면하지 못한 것도 강간에 해당한다고 본다. ‘인과관계’와 ‘고의’의 문제를 통찰한 탁월한 법해석이라고 생각한다. 성호의 형사제도 개혁안들은 이상론이 아니다. 현실을 구체적으로 분석하고 실천에 옮길 수 있는 대안들이 명쾌하게 제시되어 있다. 성호 주장은 오늘날 형사정책적인 측면에서 큰 의미가 있다. 그래서 ‘조선 실학사상 대부’라고 부른다. 나는 감히 ‘한국 근대 형사철학 선각자’라고 평가한다. 조선 후기 은둔 철학자, 성호가 피로 쓴 논단은 거대한 ‘사색의 산맥’이다. 나는 성호가 퇴계(退溪, 1501~1570)와 남명(南冥, 1501~1572) 그리고 율곡(栗谷, 1537~1584)과 다산(茶山, 1762~1836)을 이어 주는 중요한 ‘조선의 진보사상가’라고 생각한다. 300년을 멀리 보신 분이다. 경기도 안산에 살았던 성호가 ‘세월호 사건’을 직접 보았다면 우리 사회에 어떤 말을 했을지 궁금하다. 그리고 ‘김영란법’을 보았다면 어떤 평가를 내렸을지 궁금하다. 이 논문은 『성호사설』 인사문과 경사문 그리고 만물문에 수록된 형사법 관련 22편의 논단을 발굴하여 현대적 의미를 검토하였다. 이 논문의 목적은 조선 후기 형법과 형사소송법 그리고 형사정책 이론과 실제를 조망하는데 있다. 그리고 조선 후기 역사와 성호 형법사상을 재조명하여 한국 형법학의 정신사를 풍부하게 하는데 있다. 후행연구에 길잡이가 되었으면 한다. 『Seongho saseol』is a Joseon classical scholars" writing that directly challenged against corrupt late Joseon society around 300 years with ‘literature(文獻)’. It is composed of total 3007 articles. When reading the paragraph related to criminal law of 『Seongho saseol』, the researcher considered that Seongho"s writings had an insight into our world today. There are about 22 writings related to criminal law. There were classified into criminal philosophy, punishment philosophy, criminal procedure philosophy, criminal case philosophy, and criminal law idea. This research investigated modern significance by analyzing the content that contains Seongho"s insistence. There are about 22 writings related to criminal law. There were classified into criminal philosophy, punishment philosophy, criminal procedure philosophy, criminal case philosophy, and criminal law idea. This research investigated modern significance by analyzing the content that contains Seongho"s insistence. Seongho"s criminal affair system reform plans are not the ideal theory. The alternatives that can concretely analyze and practice in reality are clearly suggested. Seongho"s insistence has a big significance in respect of criminal policy today. Accordingly, he is called ‘a godfather of Joseon Silhak idea’. The researcher dare to evaluate it as ‘the pioneer of Korean modern criminal affair philosophy’. The paragraphs that Seongho, late Joseon hermit philosopher wrote were a huge ‘mountain chain of meditation’. The writer considers Seongho as an important ‘progressive thinker’ that connected Toegye(退溪, 1501~1570), Nammyeong(南冥, 1501~1572), Yulgok(栗谷, 1537~1584) and Dasan(茶山, 1762~1836). He viewed 300 years far away. The researcher wonders what would Seongho say to our society when he witness ‘Sewol ferry incident’, who lived in Gyeonggi-do Ansan. Also, the researcher wonders what would he make assessment of ‘Kim yeongran law’. This research reviewed the modernistic significance by discovering the discourse related to criminal law included in Insamun, Gyeongsamun, and Manmulmun of 『Seongho saseol』. The significance of this research is to view the theory and reality of late Joseon criminal law, criminal procedure law, and criminal policy. Also, this research intended to enrich mental history of Korean criminal law by reinterpreting late Joseon history and Seongho"s criminal law idea.

‘조선철학’ 대 ‘한국철학’ : ‘북’의 조선철학 연구 특징과 남북철학의 공동연구 가능성

박민철 한국철학사상연구회 2019 시대와 철학 Vol.30 No.3

Heterogeneity is the foundation for creating new things, while at the same time presupposing differences. The fact that South and North Korea have accumulated research achievements from different perspectives can rather be a factor in the richness of the academic realm of philosophy. Therefore, what we need now is an active attempt to go beyond "Study of division" and "division of Study.“ Therefore, the joint study between South and North philosophy is important. Because the philosophical system created in a certain time and space is generally concentrated in the values, emotions, and cultures of the society, philosophical research can be an important stepping stone in exploring the differences and realizing commonality in the South and North society. This study defined the feature of the recent philosophical research in North Korea as an interest in modern philosophy on the Korean Peninsula. And it revealed that the detailed subjects are being organized and specialized. Through these discussions, in conclusion, this study presents the possibility and obstacle of the 'Unified Philosophical History of the South and the North'. 이질성은 차이를 전제하는 동시에, 새로운 것의 창조를 낳는 토대가된다. 남한과 북한이 서로 상이한 시각에서 연구성과를 축적하였다는 것은오히려 철학이라는 학문영역의 풍부함을 가져다주는 요소가 될 수 있다. 따라서 지금 우리들에게 필요한 것은 ‘분단의 학문’ 그리고 ‘학문의 분단’을넘어서려는 적극적인 시도이다. 한국철학과 북한철학의 공동연구는 그래서중요하다. 특정 시간과 공간 속에서 생성된 철학 체계는 그 사회의 가치, 정서, 문화가 총체적으로 집약되어 있기 때문에, 남북 사회의 차이를 탐구하고 공통성을 실현시켜나가는 데 있어서 철학연구는 중요한 디딤돌이 될수 있기 때문이다. 이때 본 연구는 최근 북한의 철학연구에서 드러나는 특징을 한반도의 현대철학에 대한 관심으로 정의하였으며, 이 속에서 세부 주제들에 대한 체계화 및 전문화가 이뤄지고 있음을 밝혔다. 이러한 논의들을 통해 결론적으로 이 연구는 ‘남북통합철학사’의 가능성과 걸림돌을 제시하고 있다.

조선후기 과학과 실학에 미친 도가철학의 영향 -이익의 서양과학 수용과 도가적 이해를 중심으로-

이진경 ( Jin Kyung Lee ) 한국동서철학회 2015 동서철학연구 Vol.75 No.-

조선후기 일군의 학자들은 도가철학을 인식의 틀로 활용하여 서양과학을 수용하고 이해하였다. 사실 도가의 기철학은 동양의 전통 과학과 천문학이 형성ㆍ발전하는 과정에서 사상적 원류로 기능하여 왔으며, 서양과학 수용과정에서 서양과학에 상응하는 학문으로 인식되었다. 대표적으로 조선후기 이익의 우주론과 서명응의 선천역학, 홍대용의 과학적 세계관은 도가의 기철학을 인식 기반으로 자연 세계에 대한 인식 전환을 시도한 사례들이다. 그리고 자연에 대한 이들의 인식 전환은 현실질서의 변화에 대한 요구로 이어졌다. 특히 성리학적 도덕원리와 도가의 기철학이 절충된 형태인 이익의 우주론에서 서양의 천문과학은 기철학의 주요 개념에 대응하여 설명되어졌다. 이와 같은 이익의 우주론은 과학의 영역뿐만 아니라 사회, 정치의 측면에도 영향을 미쳤다. 즉 그는 중화의 위상을 보편적인 것으로 인정하면서도, 조선의 상대주의적 주체성을 주장하였다. 그리고 정치에서는 객관적 황로정치의 도입을 주장하는 법치주의적 정치사상을 논의하였다. 도가철학은 서양과학을 이해하는 해석의 틀로서만 기능한 것이 아니라 실학에도 중대한 영향을 미쳤다. 도가 기철학은 탈이념적이고 실증적인 사유에, 인식 상대주의는 탈중화주의와 주체성의 자각에 기여하였다. 홍대용과 북학파의 실학은 이러한 도가철학의 영향을 가장 많이 받은 것이다. The prominent scholars of the late period in Joseon Dynasty used Taoism philosophy as the frame of perception to understand and embrace western science. In fact, the Qi philosophy of Taoist was the foundation of traditional oriental science and astronomy. Yi Ik, Seo Myeong Eung, and Hong Dae Yong were the scholars who perceived that Taoism philosophy corresponded with western science. Yi Ik`s Cosmology, Seo Myeong Eung`s Sun-Chun-Yeok-Hak, and Hong Dae Yong`s scientific view of the world showed the transition of the perception of the world and scientific thoughts based on the concept of Taoism philosophy. Especially, Yi Ik explained and understood the western astronomy by corresponding it to the concepts of Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu`s Qi philosophy and cosmology. Also, scientific cosmos and Taoism philosophy influenced a change in direction to escape from Sino-centrism. Although Yi Ik admitted the universal status of China, he asserted the relative independence of Joseon. In politics, he also discussed the political thought based on constitutionalism that asked for introduction of objective Huang-Lao Philosophy. As illustrated above, Taoism philosophy not only functioned as a framework for interpretation to understand western science, but also had significant influence on Silhak. Hong Dae Yong and Bukhak School`s Silhak were influenced the most by this Taoism philosophy.

북한의 이황 철학 연구 ‒객관적 관념론에서 신학적 관념론으로‒

강경현 한국철학회 2023 철학 Vol.- No.157

유물론과 관념론의 투쟁으로 조선철학을 바라보는 북한의 연구에서 이황 철학은 1960년 이래로 봉건 도덕 윤리를 옹호하기 위해 고안된 관념론이면서도인식론의 차원에서 대상 세계의 실재함을 어느 정도 인정하는 “객관적 관념론”으로 평가된다. 2010년 간행된 조선철학전사에서 이황 철학은 “신학적 관념론”이라는 용어를 통해 “극단적인 관념론”으로 그려진다. 이러한 변화의 핵심에는 이황철학의 인식론이 “신비적 직관[神悟]”을 방법으로 한다는 해석, 그리고 동아시아관념론을 발전사적으로 바라보며 주희 철학의 관념론적 사유가 이황 철학에 이르러 완결성을 갖추게 되었다는 철학사적 이해가 자리하고 있다. 이 글은 이와 같은변화가 기존의 철학사 서술과 비교할 때 이황 철학의 원전과 개념을 보다 충실히인용하고 구성해 내면서 진행되었다는 점에 주목한다. In the field of North Korean studies since the 1960s, where Korean philosophy is viewed as a struggle between materialism and idealism, Yi Hwang’s philosophy is characterized as ‘objective idealism.’ This interpretation suggests that his philosophy was crafted to defend a feudal moral ethic while also acknowledging the objective world to some extent within the realm of epistemology. In The Complete History of Joseon Philosophy, published in 2010, Yi Hwang’s philosophy is portrayed as ‘extreme idealism’ through the term ‘theological idealism.’ This shift in perspective revolves around understanding Yi Hwang’s epistemology as a form of ‘mystical intuition’ and adopting a philosophical-historical viewpoint that sees East Asian idealism as a developmental narrative, culminating in Yi Hwang’s philosophy. This article highlights that this change is accompanied by more thorough citation and organization of Yi Hwang’s philosophical literature and concepts when compared to existing narratives in the history of philosophy.

조선 후기 經書類 언해에 대한 사대부 기록의 양상 - 해석적 오류에 대한 인식을 중심으로 -

이기대 고려대학교 한국언어문화학술확산연구소 2011 Journal of Korean Culture Vol.17 No.-

한글이 창제된 이후 경서류를 한글로 번역한 형태인 언해가 이루어졌으며, 경서류 언해는 조선의 사상적 기반인 주자학을 교육하는 과정에서 유용한 수단으로 이해되었다. 이 때문에 사대부들은 경서류 언해에 대한 관련 기록을 남기고 있는데, 본 논문에서는 이러한 기록과 그 양상에 대해 논의하였다. 그리고 기록을 통해 사대부들은 경서류 언해의 한글과 한문의 언어적 불일치에 대해 관심을 가지고 있었음을 알 수 있다. 또한 이러한 언어적 불일치로 인해 경서류를 이해하는 과정에서 한계가 있다고 기록하고 있다. 아울러 주자학에 대한 이해의 정도가 달라지면서 초기에 언해된 내용에 문제가 있다고 인식하였다. 때문에 이전의 언해서를 새롭게 교정하면서 주자학의 학문적 성과를 반영하려는 노력이 지속적으로 이루어졌다. 이러한 기록의 내용을 종합해 보면, 사대부들은 경서류 언해를 통해 주자학을 배우는 것은 학문의 초기 단계에서만 효과적이었다고 인식하였음을 알 수 있다. 따라서 조선시대 경서류 언해는 언해된 내용만으로 이루어지는 것이 아니라, 한문으로 된 원문이 중심이 되어 언해가 부기되는 형태로 이루어질 수밖에 없었다. Since the invention of Hangeul(Korean alphabet), Eonhae(諺解), which is a form of having translated Gyeongseoryu(經書類) into Hangeul, had been performed. And, Eonhae(諺解) in Gyeongseoryu(經書類) was a very useful means in educating Jujahak(朱子學:Zhu Xi` philosophy), which is the ideological foundation in Joseon. Accordingly, Sadaebu(士大夫:scholar-officials of Joseon)s including king in Joseon discussed actively about Eonhae in Gyeongseoryu. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to research into record of Sadaebu(士大夫) on Eonhae(諺解) in Gyeongseoryu(經書類). As a result of research, Sadaebu(s) were revealed to have worried about linguistic mismatch between Hangeul and Chinese character through Eonhae in Gyeongseoryu. And, they recognized that there is limitation to understanding Gyeongseo due to this linguistic mismatch. Also, as the understanding level about Jujahak was varied, Sadaebu(s) recognized that there is a problem about the contents, which had been Eonhae in the early days. Thus, an effort has been continued that tries to reflect the differentiated contents in Jujahak while newly proofreading the previous Eonhaeseo. In conclusion, Sadaebu(s) can be known to have recognized that learning Jujahak through Eonhae in Gyeongseoryu was effective only in the initial stage of learning. Accordingly, Eonhae of Gyeongseoryu in Joseon period couldn't help being formed that Eonhae is done bookkeeping with the center on the original text in Chinese character, not what is formed only with the contents in Eonhae.

최봉익의 지눌관 및 혜심관을 통해 본 南北韓 불교철학 사이의 소통 가능성 고찰

김방룡(Kim, Bang-Ryong) 국제고려학회 서울지회 2010 국제고려학회 서울지회 논문집 Vol.13 No.-

I have examined the research trend of North Korean Buddhist philosophy as a South Korean Buddhist philosopher. What I wish to show in this paper is to explore the scholastic understanding among the scholars in South and North Korea. The goal of this paper is to research about the way of understanding way between South and North Korean Buddhism by the comparison of scholar’s cognition about Korean Buddhism. Choi Bong-Ik’s viewpoint on Jinul and Hyeasm in ꡔThe Outline about the history of Joseon Philosophyꡕ will be discussed as the main topic. I also handled the following three topics. First, I explained Choi Bong-Ik’s viewpoint on Jinul and Hyeasm and its characteristics. I also arranged the current of North Korean philosophy and the feature of the history of Joseon Philosophy from his book. second, I inquired into the sameness and difference about the viewpoint on Jinul and Hyeasm between Choi Bong-Ik, North Korean philosopher, and South Korean philosophers. Third, I recognized that there was a big gap on the understanding between South and North Korean scholars through above researches. In conclusion, I showed a couple of ways how to make a point of contact between North and South Korean philosophy.