퇴계 리발(理發)설의 수반론적 해명

이승환(Lee, Seung-Hwan) 한국동양철학회 2010 동양철학 Vol.0 No.34

퇴계의 리발(理發) 설은 조선유학 연구자들에게 가장 뚫기 어려운 관문이라 할 수 있다. 퇴계가 ‘리발’설을 제기하고 율곡이 이를 비판한 이래, 450여 년에 걸쳐 리발(理發)은 리동(理動).리도(理到)와 더불어 조선유학의 풀리지 않은 공안(公案)으로 전해져왔다. 율곡 계열의 학자들은 퇴계가 ‘리’의 무위(無爲)를 부정하고 활물(活物)로 여겼다고 비판하는 한편, 퇴계의 후학들은 선사(先師)의 설을 옹호하기 위해 갖가지 추가적 설명을 보태왔다. 현대의 조선유학 연구자들 또한 아직까지도 ‘리의 능동성’ 테제를 붙들고 씨름 중이다. 퇴계의 ‘리발’ 명제와 관련하여, 본고에서는 다음과 같은 세 단계의 논증을 통하여 ‘리발’ 명제가 결코 ‘리의 능동성’을 뜻하지 않는다는 점을 주장하고자 한다. 첫째, 주자가 ‘리발’을 말하지 않았다는 기존의 억측과 달리 주자는 ‘리발’에 관한 수많은 언급을 남겼으며, 주자의 ‘리발’은 수반이론(superveniance theory)을 전제로 하고 있다는 점을 밝힐 것이다. 둘째, 퇴계의 리발.기발 주장에 사용된 리·기 개념은 마음 안에 간직된 심리적 속성(또는 성향)으로서 ‘리’적 성향(본연지성)과 ‘기’적 성향(기질지성)을 의미하며, ‘리발’과 ‘기발’의 발(發) 자는 결코 운동(motion)의 의미가 아니라 심리적 속성(또는 성향)의 실현(actualization) 또는 예화(exemplification)의 의미임을 밝힐 것이다. 이 두 단계의 논증을 통해 퇴계의 ‘리발’설이 ‘리’의 능동성을 의미하지 않는다는 점이 밝혀지게 될 것이다. 본고에서는 ‘리의 능동성’ 테제를 반증하는데 그치지 않고, 한 걸음 더 나아가 퇴계­고봉 간 사단칠정 논변에 개입된 핵심 의제 중의 하나가 수반이론이라는 점을 밝히고, 퇴계의 리발(理發)설과 고봉의 리동(理動)설 또한 수반이론에 기초해있음을 밝히고자 한다. 퇴계의 ‘리발’설이 수반이론에 기초해있다는 사실이 논증된다면, 기존 연구자들이 주장해온 ‘리의 능동성’ 테제는 퇴계사상의 독창성을 드러내기보다 오히려 퇴계의 성향이론과 감정이론을 붕괴시키는 걸림돌이 될 것이다. 이러한 세 단계의 논증을 통해, 과거 450여 년간 퇴계의 ‘리발’을 ‘리의 능동성’으로 해석해오던 관행은 이제는 폐기되어야 할 ‘오해’임을 밝히는데 본 논문의 최종 목적이 있다. For Korean Neo-Confucian scholars, Toegye's argument of 'issuance of li''(li-fa 理發) has been regarded most difficult to understand. Toegye, in the process of debate with Gobong on the moral psychological issue of the origin of four beginnings(四端) and seven feelings(七情), proposed an argument that “Four beginning are the issuance of li, and seven feelings are the issuance of ch'i.” After Toegye's passing away, Yulgok started to provoke a severe criticism on Toegye's argument of the ‘issuance of li.’ From this on, between Toegye school and Yulgok school, regarding the subject of ‘issuance of li,’ mutual criticism has been continued for more than four hundred years. Even contemporary Neo-Confucian scholars of Korea still are struggling with each other on the very subject of ‘issuance of li.’ Most of contemporary Korean scholars interpret Toegye's argument of the ‘issuance of li'’ in terms of ‘activeness of li’ or ‘creativeness of li.’ The aim of this paper is to analyse the correct meaning of the statement, ‘issuance of li'’ from a viewpoint of philosophy of psychology. In this paper, I tried to prove that Toegye's conception of li-fa, instead of meaning ‘the activeness of li,’ or ‘creativeness of li,’ actually means ‘the manifestation of li'’ on the presupposition that li is the mental property or disposition which is equipped in human mind. My demonstration is composed of two steps. Firstly, I prove that li, in Zhu Xi's philosophical scheme, does not contain the very attribute of activeness or creativeness. In Zhu Xi's ontological scheme, li manifests through the ontological mechanism of supervenience. In other words, li supervenes on ch'i, just like a person rides on a horse. What is active or movable is only the ch'i but not the li, just like what is running is the horse but not the riding person. Secondly, I prove that Toegye's argument of ‘issuance of li'’ actually is based on a theory of supervenience just as Zhu Xi's theory of li and ch'i. For Toegye, li designates moral disposition which belongs to a mental property, and ch'i designates appetitive disposition which also belongs to mental property. Li, as well as ch'i, as a mental property, in order to be realized, necessarily requires a supervenience base. For Toegye, the concept of ch'i plays a double function; one as an appetitive disposition which belongs to a mental property, the other as a supervenience base which belongs to a physical property. The double meaning of ch'i actually was the main source that caused so much confusion and trouble for Choseon Neo-Confucian scholars. As a conclusion, Toegye's argument can be reconstructed as the following form: “Four beginnings are the exemplification of li (which is a mental property) through supervening on the supervenience base ch'i* (which is a physical property); while seven feelings are the exemplification of ch'i (which is a mental property) by supervening on the supervenience base, ch'i* (which is a physical property).”Through the above demonstration, we can clearly understand that Toegye's argument of ‘issuance of li'’ is based on a theory of supervenience. After all, Toegye's argument of ‘issuance of li'’ can never imply the meaning of ‘creativeness of li’ or ‘activeness of li.’ Through the analysis of Toegye's argument, we can newly find that the 16th century Choseon Neo-Confucian scholars already knew how to apply the theory of supervenience to explain the ontological mechanism of issuance of disposition (as a mental property) in relation with it's supervenience base which is a physical property. It is surprising that, while the concept of supervenience has appeared so late as in the middle of 20th century in the West, Toegye and Gobong, who lived in the 16th century Choseon, already knew how to employ the concept of supervenience in their moral-psychological debate. I think here lies the real originality of Toegye's scholarlship.

退溪의『中庸』解釋과 그 특징

엄연석 慶北大學校 退溪硏究所 2005 退溪學과 韓國文化 Vol.- No.36

본 논문은 주희의 『中庸章句』의 관점을 계승한 퇴계의 『中庸』 해석이 어떠한 특징을 가지는가 하는 점을 규명하고자 한다. 퇴계의 『중용』 해석의 내용과 특징은 『中庸釋疑』를 통하여 그리고 문인들과 문답한 내용 등을 통하여 살펴볼 수 있다. 퇴계는 대체로 주희의 『중용장구』의 성리학적 해석 관점을 계승하면서도, 자신의 理氣心性論의 시각을 관철하는 입장에서 『중용』을 해석하고 있다. 퇴계는 박세당이나 이익이 道를 구체적 현실에서의 주체적 실천이나 오륜을 실천하는 덕목으로 보는 것과 달리, 性·道·敎가 형이상학적 실체 또는 규범, 그리고 이들 도리를 닦는 것으로 이해하였다. 또한 그는 『중용』에서의 費隱 개념을 형이상의 원리의 세계의 중층적 구조와 실재성을 표현하는 것으로 설명하였다. 또 한편으로 퇴계에서 存養 省察, 戒懼, 謹獨 등을 일관하는 개념으로서 敬은 마음의 본체로서 性과 작용으로서 情을 전제하고 본성으로부터 나오는 감정을 다스림으로써 理를 마음에 확립하고자 하는 데 의미가 있다. 이러한 퇴계의 수양론적 관점은 誠과 愼獨을 상제에 대한 종교적 경외심과 복종의 관점에서 해석하는 정약용의 시각과 크게 대조되는 것이다. 나아가 퇴계는 中和와 中庸을 안과 밖으로 구분하여, 중화가 性情에 유래하여 안으로, 중용은 덕행에서 유래하여 밖이 된다고 보았다. 퇴계가 중화와 중용을 내외로 구분하는 것은 이 두 가지를 형이상과 형이하로 구별하고자 한 것으로, 그의 理氣論 철학과 일관된다. 이렇게 볼 때, 퇴계의 『중용』 해석에는 무엇보다도 일상적 현실에서의 실천성 보다도 形而上과 形而下, 마음의 未發과 已發, 性과 情, 動과 靜, 善과 惡을 구별하는 二元論的 관점이 그대로 반영되어 있다. 이러한 퇴계의 사변적 형이상학적 관점은 실천을 중시하는 박세당, 이익, 정약용 등과 같은 후대의 학자들에 의하여 비판을 받았다. 하지만 물질적 욕구와 도덕원칙의 혼돈에 따른 현대적 위기를 해결하고자 할 때, 理를 도덕적 실체로 마음에 확립하고자 한 퇴계의 철학적 입장은 매우 중요한 의의를 가진다. This essay intends to illuminate what characteristic of Toegye's interpretation of Chung-yung中庸 succeeded to Chu-hsi's view of Chung-yung Chang-chu 中庸章句. The content and characteristis of Toegye's commentary of Chung-yung can look through the Chung yung seok yi中庸釋疑 and the question and answer between he and his students. Mostly Toegye not only accepted the neo-confucian viewpoint which Chu hsi朱熹 offered in the Chung yung chang chu¨中庸章句, but also interpreted Chung yung according to his own standpoint of Li chi hsin cheng lun理氣心性論. Toegye understood the nature性·the ways道·the instruction敎 to mean the metaphysical or moral substance, norm, and principle of teaching respectively. However, Park se-dang朴世堂 and Lee ik李翼 regarded the path as a method of man's moral practice or practical virtues of five moral items.五倫. Moreover, Toegye considered the concept of the expansive and secret 費隱 to express the duplicative structure and reality of the metaphysical principle. On the other hand, in Toegye the reverence敬 is a method of culture which is penetrated into the preservation and cultivation存養, reflection省察, caution and apprehension戒懼, and watchfullness over himself謹獨 etc. And it is the methodological principle by which man tries to establish the principle in the mind by governing the feelings which arise from the nature on the basis of the nature as the substance of mind and the feelings as the operation of it. And then while in Toegye's theory of cultivation the reverence means to govern the mind and feelings and cultivate the nature as the principle being immanent in human mind, Cheng yak-yong丁若鏞 interpreted sincerity誠 and watchfulness over the alone愼獨 in connection with the religious reverence or awfulness and obedience of the Lord-on-High. Further in response to the Yulgok's question to suspect that equilibrium and harmony中和 and the mean中庸 can not be divided into the internal and the external, Toegye viewed equilibrium and harmony as the internal by being derived from nature and feelings, the mean as the external by being originated from virtuous conduct. That is to say, Toegye divided equilibrium and harmony and the mean respectively into the internal and the external. This means that he tried to distinguish these two into that which belongs to the realm 'above shapes'形而上 and which belongs to the realm 'within shapes'形而下. And Toegye's view as this is consistent with his theory of principle and material forces理氣論. Viewed as this, the dualistic sight in which one discriminates that which belongs to the realm 'above shapes'形而上, from that which belongs to the realm 'within shapes '形而下, mi-fa未發 of the mind from yi-fa己發 of it, nature from feeling, movement from calmness, good from evil in preference to practice in ordinary life is reflected in Toegye's commentary of Chung-yung as such. The criticism against Toegye's view by such scholars as Park se-dang, Lee ik, and Cheng yak-gong, who made the moral practice or virtuous conduct be important, mostly arises from Toegye's contemplative and metaphysical point of view. However in respect that we try to resolve the contemporary crisis being caused by the confusion between material desires and the moral principle, Toegye's philosophy which tried to stand the principle as the moral substance firm in the mind has a very important significance.

퇴계 이황 <심통성정도(心統性情圖)>의 후대 전승에 관한 연구

김세종 한국유교학회 2023 유교사상문화연구 Vol.- No.91

The purpose of this thesis is to examine how Toegye's <Simtongseongjeongdo> was transmitted in Joseon academia after Toegye. To this end, two themes were specified. First, what is the final orientation of Inuiyeji(仁義禮智) marked in Toegye's <Simtongseongjeongdo>? And how is this direction inherited in <Simtongseongjeongdo> produced later? Second, is <Simtongseongjeongdo> produced after Toegye inherited only the form of Toegye or is it produced in other forms as well? The discussion on the above topic is summarized as follows. The final opinion of Toegye's <Simtongseongjeongdo> is that the top is north and Ji (智), the bottom is South and Ye (禮), the right side is East and In (仁), and the left side is West and Ui (義). In addition, <Simtongseongjeongdo> after Toegye was produced by several scholars, and its aspects are classified into four types. The first is Doseol, which inherited the form of Toegye <Simtongseongjeongdo>. The second is a different type of <Simtongseongjeongdo>, in which the title is the same but the degree is different. The third is Doseol, which has a different name but inherits the form of Toegye. The fourth case is the same as Toegye's direction notation. As a result, the direction of Inuiyeji(仁義禮智) marked in the final version of Toegye is inherited only by Jeong Sihan's <Simtongseongjeongdo>. Lee Jae-hyung's Doseol is the only one that inherits this direction from other types of Doseol. Also, <Simtongseongjeongdo> produced after Toegye does not exceed 10 pieces. Among them, not only Toegye's form, but also <Simtongseongjeongdo>, which imitated the form drawn by Jeongboksim, was also produced. 본 논문은 퇴계의 성학십도 에 수록되어 있는 제6도 <심통성정도(心統性情圖)>가 퇴계 이후 조선 학계에서 어떻게 전승되었는가를 살펴보는 데 목적을 두었고, 이를 위해 두 가지 주제를 구체화했다. 첫째, 퇴계의 <심통성정도> 중도에 표기된 인의예지(仁義禮智)의 방위 배치는 최종적으로 어떠한 것이며, 이러한 방위 배치는 후대에 제작된 <심통성정도>에서 어떻게 계승되는가. 둘째, 퇴계 이후 조선 학계에서 제작된 <심통성정도>는 퇴계가 그린 형태만을 계승하는가 아니면 다른 형태로도 제작되는가. 이상의 목적과 문제의식에 따른 논의는 다음과 같이 요약된다. 먼저 퇴계의 <심통성정도> 중도는 위를 북쪽이자 지(智), 아래를 남쪽이자 예(禮)로 설정하고, 그림을 바라보고 오른쪽이 동쪽이자 인(仁), 왼쪽이 서쪽이자 의(義)의 방위 배치가 최종 의견이고, 이는 1572년 이전에 해주감영에서 판각된 판본이다. 또한 <심통성정도>는 퇴계 이후 여러 학자에 의해 제작되었는데 그 양상은 네 가지로 분류된다. 첫째는 퇴계 <심통성정도> 형태를 계승한 도설, 둘째는 다른 형태의 <심통성정도>로서 제목만 같고 도는 다른 경우, 셋째는 도설명은 다르지만 퇴계의 도설 형태를 계승한 도설, 넷째는 퇴계의 방위표기와 같은 방위표기를 한 도설 등이다. 이 결과 퇴계의 최종본에 표기된 인의예지의 방위는 정시한의 <심통성정도>만이 계승하고 있다. 또 퇴계 이후 제작된 <심통성정도>는 10편이 넘지 않고, 그러한 도설은 퇴계가 그린 형태만이 아니라 정복심이 그린 형태를 모방한 <심통성정도>도 제작되었다.

퇴계의 기묘사화에 대한 의리와 선비정신 연구

신두환 연민학회 2022 연민학지 Vol.38 No.-

This paper is a study of Toegye Lee-hwang's loyalty and scholarly spirit during Kimyo-Sahwa(己卯士禍) in 1519, wherein scholars were systematically executed by the government. Toegye witnessed this event, and this experience prompted him to appeal to the king for amnesty on behalf of these scholars. Following his appointment to a government post, Toegye continued to appeal, arguing that the king was perpetuating a campaign of disinformation to discredit the scholars. The case was settled, but it was not completely resolved. For this reason, Toegye would resign by posting a letter of resignation whenever he lowered his government post and he kept a certain distance from the government’s actions. Several of Toegye’s colleagues also posted their resignations in a similar fashion during this time. When discussing Toegye’s protests, the government formed the conclusion that Toegye was appealing for the restoration of the executed scholar’s reputations. In a personal meeting with the king, Toegye petitioned him to restore the reputation of Jo Kwang-jo, who was the representative figure of the executed scholars and whose life Toegye had documented during this period. However, Toegye’s persistent efforts were not realized until the next king, King Seonjo, ascended; at this time, Jo Kwang-jo’s reputation was restored, and he was given the position of Yeonguijeong. Toegye’s upright loyalty and scholarly spirit were apparent in his resignation from the government post under the pretext of illness as an act of protest. Toegye judged that the discipline of the state depends on the righteous spirit of scholars, and he was highly sympathetic to the sacrifices of the executed scholars and their loyalty to the state. In this situation, Toegye’s loyalty to the executed scholars and his strong scholarly spirit against injustice are evident. 본 논문은 퇴계의 기묘사화에 대한 의리와 그 선비정신을 연구한 논문이다. 퇴계는 그가 직접 목도한 기묘사화에 대하여 특별히 아픈 마음을 가지고 있었다. 그는 출사 이후 기회만 있으면 기묘사화 때 화를 당한 기묘명현들의 사면 복권을 조심스럽게 임금에게 소청하곤 하였다. 기묘사화가 수습되기는 하였지만 신원이 흡족하게 이루어진 것은 아니었다. 그는 이러한 이유로 조정과 일정한 거리를 두며 벼슬만 내리면 사직상소를 올려 사퇴하곤 하였다. 퇴계처럼 사직상소를 여러 번 올린 사람도 드물었다. 이를 두고 선조는 경연에서 퇴계는 왜 조정을 꺼려하고 벼슬만 내리면 사직을 하려 하는지에 대해 신하들에게 물은 적이 있었다. 거기에 대한 결론은 기묘사화에 대한 조광조의 신원이 회복되지 않는 데 대한 불만이라고 결론지어진다. 그는 기묘사화의 중심인물이었던 조광조의 신원을 회복해 줄 것을 경연에서 명종임금과 독대하여 토로하기도 하였다. 퇴계는 이 시기에 정암 조광조의 행장을 직접 썼다. 그의 조광조의 신원 회복에 대한 끈질긴 노력은 선조 대에 와서 이루어지게 된다. 선조는 기묘사화에 처참하게 희생된 조광조의 억울한 신원을 회복해 주고 그에게 영의정의 벼슬을 추증하게 된다. 이 과정에서 보여준 퇴계의 끈질기고 강직한 선비정신은 조정에서 관직이 내려올 때마다 병을 핑계로 사직한 것과 깊은 관련이 있었다. 퇴계는 국가의 기강이 선비들의 사풍(士風)에 달려 있다고 판단하며 기묘명현들의 국가에 대한 충성과 의리의 희생에 대하여 높이 평가하였다. 퇴계의 기묘명현에 대한 의리관과 강인한 선비정신은 그의 문학작품 곳곳에서 드러나고 있다.

Acceptance and Influence of Toegye’s Philosophy in the Kumamoto 熊本 Jitsugaku 實學 School: The Search of a Korean-Japanese Relationship from the Position of Toegye’s Philosophy

Seog-In Eom 영남퇴계학연구원 2019 The Journal of Toegye Studies Vol.2 No.2

This manuscript reexamines how the Kumamoto 熊本 Jitsugaku 實學 (kor. Silhak, Realist School of Confucianism) School embraced Toegye’s philosophy. For this purpose it focuses on the thoughts of Ōtsuka Taiya 大塚退野 (1678-1750), precursor of this school, who in the Japanese history of thought was the person presumably most fascinated with the philosophy and personality of Yi Toegye 李退溪 (1501-1570), adds the related commentaries of Yokoi Shōnan 橫井小楠 (1809-1869) and Motoda Nagazane 元田永孚 (1818-1891), which later inherited Taiya’s philosophy, and thus subsequently tries to find to a desirable blueprint for the future Korean-Japanese relations. In the history of thought in East Asian between the 17th and the 18th century, Taiya chose the orthodox Neo-Confucianism of Zhu Xi and Toegye from the spectrum of the various ideas in the Edo period history of thoughts and became deeply absorbed in it, which later when scholars from the same region who succeeded him sought the foundation for a new philosophy they called Jitsugaku 實學 constituted one important axis among the ideas in the reformation period towards the end of the Tokugawa shogunate 幕末惟新期. To verify that the main source of contact with and influence from Toegye’s philosophy for the scholars of the Kumamoto Jitsugaku School came from the “study of the mind” (kor. Simhak 心學 or Simsulgongbu 心術工夫), in this manuscript we will examine commentaries that these scholars beginning with Taiya made on Yi Toegye as well as the critical statements about Ogyū Sorai 荻生徂徠 (1666-1728) and Yamazaki Ansai 山崎闇齋 (1619-1682). The criticism of Sorai and Ansai also bears the functional significance to highlight the ideological peculiarities and position of Toegye and the Kumamoto Jitsugaku School in the Japanese history of thought. In conclusion, this links the importance that is attached to the “study of the mind” to the “discourse on the unity of heaven and man 天人合一論”, and points out that the desirable blueprint of the future between Korea and Japan, which Toegye and the scholars of Kumamoto Jitsugaku School that succeeded him were implying, could be created when approaching other states with the extended line of thoughts from a policy of genuine “benevolence 仁” that cares for the real life of the citizens and not with a “truthful mind”, the “principle of benevolence and righteousness of heaven and earth 天地仁義の大道” or the fictitious honor of the “state” and rivalry.

Recreation of the Discourse of Morality-Righteousness (道義) and the Representation of Yi Toegye in the Post-1945 Context of Korea and Japan

Hae-Soo Kang 영남퇴계학연구원 2022 The Journal of Toegye Studies Vol.5 No.1

This thesis examines how Yi Toegye was represented in the process of resummoning the discourses of ‘a state based on Morality-Righteousness’ (道義國家) and ‘Morality-Righteousness of People’ in Korea and Japan both before and after liberation focusing the discussion of Yi Toegye in both nations before and after the ruling period of Park Chung-hee (1963-1979). In other words, this means the study of Yi Toegye before and after liberation not focused on the historical and academic research, but rather on what the discussion of Yi Toegye was talking about in this period. At the same time, I would like to think about what the current voices trying to achieve ‘Korea-Japan friendship’ and ‘East Asia peace’ through the ‘cultural icon’ of ‘Yi Toegye’ between Korea and Japan have deceived and concealed. In conclusion, the main background of the driving force that promoted Yi Toegye researches in both Korea and Japan post-liberation/war were the discourse of ‘Morality-Righteousness’. For ‘Yi Toegye', by awarding the image of “Our model educator” (in Park Jong-hong) in Korea and “The Founder and Builder of the Moral Philosophy” (in Abe Yoshio) in Japan, both Korea and Japan have added momentum to the transmission and spread of the discourse of ‘Morality-Righteousness’. Even today, modern discourse of (the acceptance of) Yi Toegye is spoken as an example that symbolizes ‘symbiosis’ between the two countries in the ‘History of Korea-Japan Cultural Exchange’. Yi Toegye has been fulfilling his role in reconstructing the history of Confucian scholars ‘exchange’ from the three countries in East Asia in the pre-modern era as a history of mutual exchange centered on the nation-state called ‘Korea-Japan Cultural Exchange History’, and at the same time assuring the establishment of ‘the History of Korea-Japan Confucian Studies’. This phenomenon is an obstacle to approach the historical originality of ‘mentality’ and ‘exchange’ of Confucian scholars in the Joseon Be careful of mixing McCune-Reischauer Romanization and Revised Romanization (2000). Dynasty and Edo period. apart from the ‘nation-states’ of ‘Korea’ and ‘Japan’. The dismantling of this ‘completed image of Yi Toegye’ and its practices may be a task that needs to be deeply reflected as a ‘past to be liquidated’ at the present time, the 77th anniversary of liberation from the Japanese Empire. no matter how difficult the task is.

퇴계의 『맹자석의』와 조선 전기의 맹자해석

함영대(咸泳大) 한국국학진흥원 2014 국학연구 Vol.0 No.25

이 논문은 퇴계 이황의 『맹자석의』가 조선 전기의 맹자학에서 지니는 학술 운동으로서의 성격과 지향에 대한 논의이다. 퇴계 당시 조선에서는 『맹자』를 읽는 방법이 확정되지 않았으므로 다양한 해석의 관점이 중층적으로 혼재되어 있었다. 『맹자석의』에는 그러한 당대의 상황, 곧 주자의 독법뿐이 아니라 평소 퇴계의 경전강독 습관과 당대 조선의 맹자 읽기의 전통, 아울러 제자들과의 문답을 통한 성찰이 고루 담겨져 있다. 퇴계의 사후 퇴계 제자들이 관계官界에 대거 진출하고, 그들의 노력에 의해 퇴계의 견해가 이후 언해의 표준이 되었지만 『맹자석의』를 저술할 당시는 이 책 역시 다양한 해석의 하나였다. 그러므로 우리는 『맹자석의』가 탄생하는 과정에서 발휘된 그 학술적 운동성과 지향을 주목하여 성찰할 필요가 있다. 『맹자석의』를 통해 퇴계는 맹자 당대의 구체적 현실에 대해 분명하게 지적했으며, 군주와 백성을 독립적인 도덕주체로 상정했으며, 도덕 주체가 주체적 의지를 발양해야 함을 분명하게 말했다. 아울러 경전 이해에 있어서 정확한 번역을 통한 해석을 중시하여 우리말의 어휘들이 가지는 뉘앙스를 엄밀하게 구분하여 해석에 활용하기도 했다. 당대 통행하던 ‘사서대전본四書大全本’이라는 텍스트의 제한과 자신의 주자학적 시각으로 인해 퇴계의 『맹자석의』는 주자학적 분위기를 짙게 드리우고 있지만 그것은 절대적인 관점이 아니었다. 우리말 번역을 위한 다양한 방법론적 시도와 경전을 해석하는 퇴계의 뚜렷한 주관성은 적지않은 비중으로 자리잡아 『맹자석의』의 내용을 풍부하게 한다. 우리는 ‘조선에 주자학을 정립한 학자’라는 이제까지의 퇴계에 대한 선입견을 잠시 내려놓고 경전 해석의 텍스트에 좀 더 집중하여 퇴계 경전해석의 겉모습이 아닌 그 진정성을 읽어낼 필요가 있다. This thesis discusses the characteristics and aims of ‘Maengjaseokui(孟子釋義)’ of Toegye Yi-hwang as an academic movement in Mencius studies during the early Joseon dynasty. When Toegye was alive in Joseon, there was not a determined method of reading ‘Mencius’ so various viewpoints of interpretation were mixed in layers. ‘Maengjaseokui’ contains usual reading habits of Toegye, tradition of reading Mencius at that time in Joseon and the reflections earned by the questions and answers with disciples as well as circumstances of the time, that is to say the reading method of Zhuxi. ‘Maengjaseokui’ was also one of the various interpretations at that time when it was written although opinions of Toegye became the standard of Korean translation of Chinese characters by the efforts of Toegye’s disciples who entered into the official circles in large numbers. Toegye indicated detailed realities of the period of Mencius through ‘Maengjaseokui’, brought up the issue that a sovereign and a people is independent moral entity for discussion and also affirmed that a moral entity must exhibit free will. In addition, he stressed the interpretation through exact translation in terms of understanding the scriptures so strictly distinguished different nuances of Korean words for translation. Many ideas of Neo-Confucianism are contained in ‘Maengjaseokui’ of Toegye due to the limit of a text called ‘Saseodaejeonbon(四書大全本)’ which was popular at that time and Toegye’s own Neo-Confucianist perspective but they were not an absolute viewpoint. Toegye’s insistent subjectivity which tried various methods of translating Korean and interpreting the scriptures played a great role in enriching the contents of ‘Maengjaseokui’. We need to set down the bias that Toegye is a scholar who established Neo-Confucianism in Joseon so far and see the real values of Toegye, not the revealed aspects of Toegye’s interpretation of the scriptures.

퇴계 사단칠정론(四端七情論)의 수양론적 고찰-정심공부(正心工夫)를 중심으로-

김동숙 ( Kim Dong-sook ) 충남대학교 유학연구소 2016 儒學硏究 Vol.36 No.-

본 논문은 『大學』의 正心工夫에 대한 퇴계와 고봉의 논의를 중심으로, 퇴계의 소종래로서 정의된 사칠 개념으로는 해명이 어려워 보였던 四端不中節 · 七情中節 현상이 수양론적 측면에서 마음의 主宰문제와 연결되어 설명될 수 있음을 확인한 후 그의 사칠론을 새롭게 모색해 보는 것에 목적이 있다. 이와 같은 목적을 달성하기 위하여 먼저 고봉과의 논쟁 내용 및 기타 언급을 통하여 퇴계의 사칠 개념을 정리해볼 것이다. 사단과 칠정이 본래 性에서 발한 하나의 情이라는 점에 초점을 둔 고봉은 퇴계의 소종래로부터의 정의 방식에 문제가 있음을 지적한다. 그의 논리로 보면 퇴계의 사칠론은 사단의 기적 측면과 칠정의 리적 측면이 제외된 것이자, 아울러 사단부중절과 칠정중절을 정합적으로 설명할 수 없다는 한계를 가진다. 그러나 퇴계에게 있어 사칠의 중절·부중절은 그의 소종래적 정의로부터 보장되는 것이 아닌, ``마음이 그들을 온전하게 주재하는가``에 따라 결정되는 문제이다. 퇴계의 사칠개념은 연원으로부터 정의됨과 동시에 마음이라는 수양론적 층위에서도 논의되고 있었다. 이러한 퇴고 양자의 입장과 그 대립양상은 『대학』·「정심장」해석에서 명확하게 드러난다. 퇴계는 소종래로부터의 정의방식에 입각하여 악으로의 轉化가능성을 가진 칠정을 정심공부의 대상으로 두어야 한다고 본다. 이에 고봉은 소종래적 사유로 정심공부의 대상을 결정할 수는 없다고 반론하고, 그 근거로 사단이 부중절할 가능성을 든다. 즉 사단 또한 하나의 의도로서 마음에 개입되어 잘못 발현할 수 있다는 것이다. 그러나 퇴계는 칠정을 정심공부의 대상으로 보는 입장을 견지함과 동시에, 사단 또한 마음에 담아두어도 전혀 해가 되지 않는 순선무악한 감정임을 명시한다. 그는 맹자가 말한 사단의 본래적 함의에서는 부중절이 성립되지 않는다는 것을 강조한다. 그들의 사칠 정의방식의 차이는 이와 같은 공부론 상의 해석에서도 보인다. 그러나 앞서 살펴본 바와 같이 퇴계가 사단부중절을 전면 부인했다고 볼 수는 없다. 퇴계에게 있어 사단의 중절한 발현에 직접적으로 영향을 미치는 것은 바로 마음이 그를 온전히 주재하고 있는가의 여부이다. 순선이라는 소종래적 정의가 그대로 실현되는 상황은 오직 성인의 경우에 한정된 것이다. 고봉과의 논의에서 사단부중절의 발생을 범인의 경우에 한했던 것 또한 이와 같은 맥락이다. 한편 칠정이 중절하여 선한 감정이 될 수 있는가 또한 ``악으로 흐를 수 있다``는 소종래적 정의가 아닌 리의 주재여부, 즉 마음의 수양문제로 귀결된다. 다시 말해 퇴계에게 있어 사단과 칠정의 중절 여부는 소종래로서의 정의가 아닌 마음의 주재라는 수양론적 차원에서 해명되는 문제였던 것이다. 이와 같은 내용을 토대로 본 논문은 그의 사단칠정 개념을 마음의 주재문제와 연결지어 재검토하는 것으로 마무리될 것이다. 퇴계의 사단과 칠정 개념은 "마음이 감정을 주재하면 모두 중절한다."는 수양론적 해석을 통하여 더욱 완결적으로 이해될 수 있으며, 그를 통해 보다 현실적이며 실천적인 개념으로 재고 가능하다. This paper, based on The Study of Rectifying the Mind from The Great Learning, pursues the confirmation of Not Perfectly-measured of Four-Beginnings and Perfectly-measured of Seven-Feelings whether could be interpreted through the Relationship with Theory of The Study on Rectifying the Mind and seeks the unique way of understanding of Toegye`s Four-Seven. For achieving these goals, this paper will analyze the gap between Toegye and Gobong about Four-Seven and will discuss Four-Seven of Toegye`s issues which could be questioned by Gobong who has the different point of view from. Toegye explains Four-Beginnings` manifestation connects with Purely-Good and Seven-Feelings` with qi. Per contra, Gobong focuses more on Feelings that Four-Beginnings and Seven-Feelings are revealed by Feelings originated from Nature. Gobong pointed out the limitation of Toegye`s opinion which deficient in explanation of qi from Four-Beginnings and li from Seven-Feelings and also lack of coherence of "Not Perfectly-measured of Four-Beginnings" and "Perfectly-measured of Seven-Feelings". However, for Toegye, the matter of whether Perfectly-measured or Not Perfectly-measured decided not by its Origin but the Supervision of the Mind itself that consists inside mind thoroughly. Then this paper will state Toegye`s reasoning why he introduced Seven-Feelings for studying in "The Chapter of Rectifying the Mind" of The book Great Learning, Gobong`s contention of Not Perfectly-measured of Four-Beginnings as a refutation from Toegye`s logic, and will figure the divergence of two opinions. Toegye emphasizes only Seven-Feelings as a study subject because Purely-Good nature of Four-Beginnings cannot harm inside mind yet there is a possibility of Seven-Feelings might turn into Evil. On the other hand, Gobong focuses both Four-Beginnings and Seven-Feelings for study subjects with his view which Four-Beginnings could involve inside mind with intention and eventually can cause the result of Not Perfectly-measured of Four-Beginnings. In Toegye`s opinion, Not Perfectly-measured of Four-Beginnings is just the result of wrong manifestation interrupted by intention. Toegye insists that Four-Beginnings itself cannot be described as Perfectly-measured or Not Perfectly-measured. For him, the matter of Perfectly-measured or Not Perfectly-measured of Four-Beginnings is not defined as Origins but is on the level of the expansion of the Supervision of Mind. Throughout this paper, it will be concluded by reviewing Toegye`s Four-Seven with the Supervision of Mind. Whether Perfectly-measured of Seven-Feelings morally revealed or not depends on the Supervision of Mind, not the Origin which ``Seven-Feelings might turn into Evil``. For Toegye, Four-Beginning matter contains not its definition from the Origin but the Supervision of Mind portrayed in the perspective of the Self-Cultivation Theory. Thus, Toegye`s Four-Beginnings and Seven-Feelings could be interpreted thoroughly through the perspective of the Self-Cultivation Theory and considered as practical concept.

『師門手簡』에 나타난 스승 退溪의 面貌

정시열 한국언어문학회 2012 한국언어문학 Vol.83 No.-

This study aims to consider various aspects of Toegye Lee Hwang shown in 『Samunsugan』. 『Samunsugan』is collection of letters combined in eight books of 113 letters sent from Toegye to his best pupil, Wolcheon Jo Mok, from 1550 till 1570, and Wolcheon made it himself at the age of 65. In terms of material value, this collection of letters is full of contents showing intimate relationship between Toegye and Wolcheon which we can hardly find from any other place. And it contains various information about socio-cultural circumstances around the mid-16th century when the letters were written. The discussion of this article focusing on the value of 『Samunsugan』 concentrates on the figure of Toegye, the writer of the collection of letters unlike what has been investigated in previous researches. Therefore, this article focuses on examining how Toegye as a mentor appears in 『Samunsugan』to figure out the aspects of his. Analyzing 『Samunsugan』 with the focus on this point, we can summarize Toegye’s aspects largely into four parts. First, he seems very close to his disciple sharing even ordinary things with him. Toegye and Wolcheon were not just in general teacher-student relationship for teaching and learning but also shared various interests as well as all the emotions they felt in their everyday lives. Their humane exchange can be truly said to be intimate. Second, he confesses what lacks in him to his disciple and shows his determination for further efforts. Toegye often berates himself due to the pressure he had in reality for all the unbearable hardships and academic achievements. However, even in that situation, he strived to hold his intention firmly never straying from the right path. Third, he shows an attitude as a strict instructor pointing out the faults of his discipl’s. Toegye never misses to give strict words to Wolcheon about his deeds and merits and demerits of his character. However, his scolding was never high-handed but followed logic while being mild. He was a wonderful mentor in that the provided his disciple with chances for reflection without any addition of negative emotion. Fourth, he is accompanied with his disciple with the mediation of science. According to the result of examining the arguments Toegye takes to deliver his theories to Wolcheon, in the two’s academic exchange, mostly, Wolcheon asks questions, and Toegye gives answers about them. However, Toegye also cultivated his own science as well thanks to Wolcheon. As written above, the teacher-student relationship between Toegye and Wolcheon was broad in its range, and they formed horizontal relationship beyond mere vertical relationship. Instead of Toegye insisting on his authority in the teacher-student relationship, he recognized his disciple as a companion to live within the same time, so he was such a humane mentor wanting to realize relationship and education at the same time.

퇴계(退溪)의 「도산잡영(陶山雜詠)」의 이학적(理學的) 함의(含意)와 그 전승

권오영 ( Oh Young Kwon ) 한국한문학회 2010 韓國漢文學硏究 Vol.0 No.46

이 글은 退溪李滉의 「陶山雜詠」의 시 작품에 담긴 理學的의미와 그 전승과정을 역사학적 관점에서 탐구한 논고이다. 퇴계의 「도산잡영」은 주자의 「武夷精舍雜詠」의 전통을 이어 퇴계 자신의 문학과 理學세계를 표현한 것이다. 특히 「도산잡영」시의 몇 편은 天理, 敬, 義의 내용을 담고 있다. 그는 <天淵臺>, <天光雲影臺>, <玩樂齋>시에서 자신의 이학적 정서를 잘 표현하였다. 퇴계의 敬과 理에 대한 탐구는 `天光雲影`과 `鳶飛魚躍`으로 상징된다. 그는 `천광운영`에서 敬을 드러내고 `연비어약`에서 天理의 생동적인 모습을 표현하였다. 송대 이학에서 새롭게 제기된 천리는 이제 퇴계에 의해 도산의 공간에서 구체적으로 논의되었다. 그리고 程?에 의해 제기된 敬은 완락재에서 퇴계에 의해 실천되었다. 그는 완락재에서 敬과 義, 無極과 太極, 陰陽과 五行의 오묘함을 부단히 탐구하였고, 자연의 理가내 마음에 이른다는 `理到`설을 믿게 되었다. 그리하여 퇴계는 「도산잡영」을 통해 도산에 펼쳐진 자연이 그의 마음에 다가와서 하나가 되는 理學의 최고 경지인 和의즐거움을 맛보았다. 퇴계의 「도산잡영」은 이미 당대의 학자에게도 크게 주목 받던 작품이었고, 후대의 학자들에게도 깊은 영향을 주었다. 퇴계의 제자인 奇大升은 「도산잡영」詩韻에 의거하여 퇴계 이학의 함의를 드러내었다. 특히 기대승은 「완락재」시에서 涵養공부를 강조하였고, 敬과 義가 순환하는 묘리의 탐구를 강조하였다. 그런데 퇴계의 「도산잡영」을 그대로 모방하여 시를 짓고 기문을 쓴 학자는 李象靖이다. 이상정의 「高山雜詠」은 주자가 武夷九曲을 경영하고 「무이정사잡영」을 읊었던 것과 퇴계가 도산을 경영하고 「도산잡영」을 읊었던 것을 수용하여 자신이 거주하고 있는 산수 공간을 시로 읊은 것이다. 이상정은 삼라만상과 사귐에 자신의 즐거움이 삼라만상과 더불어 무궁하다고 하였다. 그는 퇴계의 이학을 정리하면서 산수로 대표되는 자연 속에서 `仁`과 `智`를 제기하여 퇴계의 이학의 최고 경지인 樂(즐거움)을 구현하려고 했다. 주자의 「무이정사잡영」에는 아직 敬과 義의 내용이 언급되지 않고 있다. 퇴계는 「도산잡영」에서 주자의 「觀書有感」등 작품에서 과감하게 이학에 해당하는 내용을 수용하여 도산을 이학의 공간으로 만들고 이학적 함의의 시를 읊었다. 그리고 程顥의 `天理`와 程?의 敬, 周敦?의 太極의 묘를 탐구하는 공간임을 여지없이 드러내었다. 퇴계가 구축한 이러한 理學의 詩세계는, 조선시대에 詩로서 이학을 논한 하나의 전형이 되어 그뒤기대승과 이상정 등 많은 학자들에 의해 더욱 闡明되고 전승되어 나갔다. The paper tries to analyse the process of the Toegye Yi Hwang`s Dosanjobyoung`s succession and its meaning in the perspective of the study of Li. Toegye`s Dosanjobyoung is presenting his literature and view of the study Li by succession of the Chu Hsi`s tradition of Muyjeongsajobyoung(武 夷精舍雜詠). Especially, in several poem of the Dosanjobyoung contain the principle of Heaven(天理), Mindfulness(敬), Righteousness(義). He has expressed his emotion at the poem of Chenyeondae(天淵臺), CheonKwangwounyoungdae(天光雲影臺), and Wanlakjae(玩樂齋) in terms of the study of Li. Toegye`s studies on Mindfulness, Li symbolized as Cheonkwangwounyoung(天光雲影: the color of heaven and shadow of clouds) and Yeonbioeyak(鳶飛魚躍: an eagle is flying and a fish is jumping). He has presented Respect at the Cheonkwangwounyoung and expressed dynamic image of the principle of Heaven. The principle of Heaven that has been newly overtured at the study of Li in the Song(宋) Dynasty is more specifically discussed by Toegye. And the Mindfulness which has been brought up by the principle of Heaven is executed by Taegye at the poem of Wanlakjae. In the poem of the Wanlakjae, he searched ardently about the mystery of Mindfulness, Righteousness, Non-Ultimate(無極) and Great Ultimate(太極) and Five Elements(五行) and believed the theory of Lidoseol(理到 說) that the nature`s Li is realized in human`s heart. Hence, Toegye has enjoyed the joy of harmony which is the highest dimension of the study of Li by realizing Dosan`s nature in his heart through the Dosanjobyoung. Toegye`s Dosanjobyoung is the masterpiece among scholars at that generation and it has also influenced on to the scholars of later generation. Ki Dae Seung who was student of the Toegye has revealed implications of Toegye`s the study of Li abides by the rhyme of the Dosanjobyoung. Especially, Ki Dae Seoung has emphasized on controling mind at the poem of Wanlakjae and stressed necessity of the research on the cycle of Mindfulness and Righteousness. On the other hand, the scholar who mimics Dosanjobyoung as it was Yi Sang Jeong(李象靖). Yi Sang Jeong`s Kosanjobyoung(高山雜詠) is the poem describing the landscape of his residence and it was written by accepting Toegye`s Dosanjobyoung and Chu Hsi`s Muyigugok(武夷九曲). Yi Sang Jeong said that the joy(樂) is endless by interacting with the Mother Nature. As he sums up the Toegye`s the study of Li, he has tried to realize the highest joy by overturing benevolence(仁) and wisdom(智) inthe nature. There has yet to be mentioned Mindfulness and Righteousness in Chu Hsi`s Muyjeongsajobyoung. Toegye has written Li implicated poem by accepting the content of the study of Li from Chu Hsi`s Kawnseoyougam(觀書有 感 get touched after reading) and so on in his work of Dosanjobyoung. And he fully revealed in his works that Jeong Ho`s `principle of Heaven` and Jeong Yi`s `Mindfulness` and Chu Don Yi`s search on the abstruse principle of Great Ultimate. All those the study of poem for Li world constructed by Toegye has been a model that discussed the study of Li and they were recited and succeeded by many scholars afterwards such scholars as Ki Dae Seoung and Yi Sang Jeong.