• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.142
• /
• pp.241-263
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this paper is to investigate Toegye's simhak in relation to spiritualism. In general, we call Chu Hsi's learning "lihak" (the learning of principle) while Wang Yangming's learning is described as "simhak" (the learning of mind). However, we sometimes call Toegye's learning "simhak" in spite of his respect for Chu Hsi's philosophy of li. Toegye's simhak is different from Wang Yangming's. Nonetheless, Toegye too, highlighted the existential meaning of truth. Toegye regarded simgyung (the book of mind) as one of the most important classics for self-cultivation. As is well known, Toegye's main concern was concentration on mind and heart cultivation. Toegye understood li as a spiritual being, which can actualize itself. The goal of simhak is to become a sage. For a sage, there is no contradiction between moral norm and human desire. To become a sage, Toegye developed the theory and practice of mind cultivation. Toegye's simhak has some common characteristics with Louis Lavelle's philosophy of spiritualism. Both Toegye and Louis Lavelle lay great emphasis on self reflection and spiritual life. In particular, Toegye developed the concrete method of mind cultivation. In the 21st century, human beings are confronted with spiritual crisis in many aspects. Toegye's simhak can be advanced as useful wisdom to keep one's mind in a peaceful and harmonious state.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.130
• /
• pp.247-276
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this paper is to explore how Zhang Zai(張載)''s Gi-Hak(氣學) and Wang Shou-Ren(王守仁)''s Sim-Hak(心學) are interrelated, which differs from prior positions viewing the two as separate, unrelated philosophies or ones standing in contrast to each other. By direct comparing the notions Tae-Heo(太虛) and Yang-Ji(良知), I tried to explain that ontological structures of Gi-Hak and Sim-Hak are interrelated ; and by comparing Dae-Sim(大心) and Chi-Yang-Ji(致良知), I made an argument that Gong-Bu-Ron(工夫論) of Gi-Hak and Sim-Hak corresponds to each other. Zhang Zai''s the doctrine of Tae-Heo can be seen as a respond to Jeok-Myeol-Ron(寂滅論) in Buddhism ; therefore, understanding Sim-Hak in terms of Gi-Hak, that is, interpreting the fundamental meaning of Yang-Ji as Tae-Heo, can free Yang-Myeong-Sim-Hak(陽明心學) from the unceasing criticism by Ju-Ja-Hak(朱子學) that it is a 'Buddhistic heresy'. This study could be highly significant in that it enables us to read the tradition of Zhang Zai not only from the viewpoint of u-Ja-Hak, but even from ang-Myeong-Sim-Hak tradition. I interpreted Yangming School of Mind as a developmental succession of Neo-Confucianism, and understood Zhang Zai''s Gi-Hak as a theoretical pioneer of Wang Shou-Ren''s Sim-Hak.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.28
• /
• pp.331-362
• /
• 2010

Simjae defined the relationship between Learning of Classics and Learning of the Mind-and-Heart as mutually interdependent. Clarifying "righteousness and principle" lies within the purview of "knowledge" and cultivating the mind-and-heart based on such knowledge lies within the realm of "action." Learning of Classics and Learning of Controlling the Mind-and-Heart thus can be understood as relationship between knowledge and action. If Simjae's theory of knowledge and action is applied to the relationship between Learning of Classics and Learning of the Mind-and-Heart, we can derive the following conclusion. His assertion that "knowledge precedes action" indicates that classical studies to explore the principle of goodness must precede mind-and-heart studies to cultivate the mind. In fact, only when we know what is the right principle can we cultivate our mind based on that principle. However, Simjae attached importance to action in terms of its significance. This means that the Learning of the Mind-and-Heart is "eventually more important" than the Learning of Classics which explores the principle of goodness. Thus, when linked to his theory on knowledge and action, Simjae 's philosophy founded on the twin pillars of classical studies and mind-and-heart studies can be summarized: "One must first delve into the principle of goodness through Confucian classical studies and then rectify one's mind based on knowledge thus gained."

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.135-179
• /
• 2001

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.9-38
• /
• 2014

Hanhweon-dang Kim Goeng-pil(1454~1504) sublimated ethics whose lead was opened up by Jeong Mong-ju in late Goryeo as one scholarly tendency. Kim Goeng-pil was called 'the father of ethics in Joseon' and has been respected as a model of ethicist for 400 years since then. Following Kim Goeng-pil, Confucian scholars of Joseon cultivated perseverance through Xiaoxue and the perseverance was sublimated to Confucian scholars' energy and then that of state, which served as driving force to keep the national legacy. Kim Goeng-pil suggested how to study with Xiaoxue and sought moral human beings and ethically ideal societies based on strong practicability which is required in Xiaoxue. Individuals' cultivation and social reform are not at a different dimension. Spirit of 'self-cultivation' that Kim Goeng-pil himself demonstrated advanced to pursuit of ethical, ideal state when reaching a level of Jo Kwang-jo. Kim Goeng-pil thought that teaching in Xiaoxue could be achieved through 'Gyeong (敬, respect).' It is the key of Neo-Confucianism in Joseon to control one's mind through the cultivating method of 'Gyeong.' Kim Goeng-pil settled Joseon's Confucianism as 'practical ethics(心學).' Before Kim Goeng-pil, no scholars had well presented the aspects of practical ethics. After King Myeongjong and Seonjo, Confucianism in Joseon worked as the cornerstone of practical ethics. Since mid-17th century, the system of practical ethics had been firmly established with focus on 'Gyeong. Literary men of Kim Goeng-pil and scholars they fostered led the academic and political world of Joseon after mid-16th century. They played the lead in Sarim faction's(士林派) ruling after King Seonjo came to throne. The very foundation which sublimated Joseon to the ethically ideal state and made the Dynasty a 'state of Sarim' was actually laid by Kim Goeng-pil.

• Journal of Oriental Neuropsychiatry
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.36-47
• /
• 1997

• Journal of Oriental Neuropsychiatry
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.2-35
• /
• 1997

• Journal of Sasang Constitutional Medicine
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.105-112
• /
• 1993

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.62
• /
• pp.177-207
• /
• 2016

This essay is dealing with Yang-Ming Studies' fundamental ideas, which are the goal of learning, the cultivation theory, and the ultimate goal in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue. The first, what is the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue: It is generally accepted idea that the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue is to be a sage. But there are different suggestions about the ideas above. The reason is like this: Zhu-Zi-Studies was eager to be a sage through its cultivation theory. Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue criticized the cultivation theory in Zhu-Zi-Studies. Therefore, some people don't agree with the idea that the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue is to be a sage. In this essay, I try to demonstrate that the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue is to be a sage. The second, What is the major cultivation theory in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue: The core cultivation theory is the Zhi-Ling-Zhi(Fulfillment Innate Knowledge of Goodness). For this, there is no question, but it is difficult how to learn and practice Zhi-Ling-Zhi in the daily life. I try to explain the right meaning and practice over Zhi-Ling-Zhi. The third, what is the ultimate goal in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue: It is general method in examine Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue that is comparing with Zhu-Zi-Studies. So there is a natural tendency focusing on the differences and similarity between Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue and Zhu-Zi-Studies. But If I say, what is the ultimate goal in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue? That is the realization of Ren, Which is the harmony with all things in heaven and earth.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.105
• /
• pp.321-350
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this paper is to identify the difference between Sangsan-Simhak(象山心學) and Yangming-Simhak(陽明心學). This means that the whole history of Sung Confucianism needs to be understood based on changing philosophical paradigm according to the times, not general perception which regards the whole history of Sung Confucianism as Li-Hak (理學) and Sim-Hak(心學). This kind of perception is caused by the general perception which divides Sung Confucianism into Sim-Hak and Li-Hak. We regard the former as Chung-Chu study and the latter as Liu-Yang study. Because of this, Sangsan study is recognized as the former stage study of Yangming study and can not be placed in independent position in whole history of Sung Confucianism. And Sang is regarded that it takes diametrical opposition with Chuhsi study. So it is said that there is no point of sameness among them. But Sangsan study was generated from 'Song-Hak(宋學)' based on paradigm of Li-Hak and Yangming study was generated from 'Ming-Hak(明學)' based on paradigm of Sim-Hak. The difference between 'Song-Hak' and 'Ming-Hak' is generated from proposition called 'Sim is Li (心卽理)' that most research has overlooked. To identify these things, this paper examine the philosophical difference between 'Song-Hak' and 'Ming-Hak' and analyze the proposition 'Sim is Li(心卽理)' that regards Sangsan study and Yangming study as same philosophical system. And this paper identify the philosophical difference between Sangsan study and Yangming study by examining the method that the concept of 'Sim is Li(心卽理)' is applied in moral cultivation. This paper shows that the difference of interpretation about the concept of Li(理), between 'Song-Hak' based on Li paradigm and 'Ming-Hak' based on Ki-Hak(氣學) paradigm, causes different meaning in 'Sim is Li(心卽理)'. Through these, this paper demonstrate the difference between the paradigm of 'Song-Hak' that Chuhsi study and Sangsan study have and the paradigm of 'Ming-Hak' that Yangming study has and the fact which Sangsan study is systematic philosophy of Sung Confucianism in itself not former stage of Yangming study.