• Title/Summary/Keyword: 한주(이진상)

Search Result 4, Processing Time 0.018 seconds

Study on the beginning pattern of simseul argument in the 19th Century -Based on the letter written by Hanju and Mangu (19세기 심설논쟁의 발단양상에 관한 연구 - 한주 이진상과 만구 이종기의 서신 내용을 중심으로 -)

  • An, yoo-kyoung
    • The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
    • /
    • no.59
    • /
    • pp.89-120
    • /
    • 2018
  • This paper is a study of the beginning pattern of simseul argument in the 19th century, based on the letter written by Hanju(1818~1886) and Mangu(1837~ 1902). In the text, I analyzed the theoretical differences between Mangu and Hanju that inherited from the study of Jungjae, is to expand the scope of the dispute between the Hanju and Mangu which to provide the beginning pattern of simseul argument. By revealing the theoretical difference between Hanju and Mangu, in the opposite direction, the content of the simseul argument between the Hanju and Jungjae's developed could be clearer. In the Hanjujip, there are nine letters to Mangu, there are also three letters to the Mangujip. These letters show a certain difference in the learning of the two people. So the text focuses on the content of these letters and reveals their theoretical differences, eventually it is confirmed that their theoretical differences lead to the beginning pattern of simseul argument. In particular, interpretation of LiKi leads to interpretation of Sim. Sim interpretation centers on the interpretation of the Zhuxi's 'Ki of Jungsang' meaning, while Hanju emphasizes to see as Lee, Mangu emphasizes that as the sum of Liki. 'Ki of Jungsang' is an interpretation of Zhuxi' Sim, and in the end, interpretation of 'Ki of Jungsang' means interpretation of Sim. Thus, while Hanju tried to see of Li, Mangu wanted to see at the sum of LiKi. This is simseul argument between Hanju and Man-gu, which was unfolded in the extension of the 19th century's simseul argument of erection. Through their argument, they are going to use it as an opportunity to review details of how the debate started in the Toegye school.

Hanju Yi Jinsang(寒洲 李震相)'s concept of Li(理) through his viewpoint on the Ido-seol(理到說) (이도설(理到說)에 대한 견해를 통해 본 한주 이진상(寒洲 李震相)의 '리(理)' 개념)

  • Lee, Won-Jun
    • The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
    • /
    • no.52
    • /
    • pp.107-130
    • /
    • 2017
  • The purpose of this study is to catch the characteristics of the Hanju Yi Jinsang (寒洲 李震相, 1818~1886)'s thought of the 'Li(理)' through Hanju's view on the Ido-seol(理到說), the Toegye Yi Hwang(退溪 李滉, 1501~1570)'s latter Mulgyuk(物格) theory, and to establish the foundation for identifying the aspects of development about Toegye School's concept of Li from Toegye's Ido-seol. The Ido-seol was criticized for regarding Li - the immovable principle - as 'living thing'. Toegye School's scholars tried to solve this problem by translating the 'word' correctly. Hanju also translated the word 'Do(到)', the verb of 'Ido', as meaning of 'perfectly understood' based on his translation of the word 'Gyuk(格)' as 'Ku(究)'. On the other hand, he also regarded the principle-application structure of Li and the its characteristic the 'Li as Hwalmul(活物)' as the main point of Toegye's Neo-confucianism thought his methodology 'Three viewpoints[三看法]'. Before Hanju, scholars dose not have more opinion from the translation of the word, and it is too difficult to identifying their scholarly identity through their viewpoints on Ido-seol. On the other hand, Hanju thought that the lack of the idea for comprehensive approach between Xin(心) and Li(理) will cause the misunderstanding the relationship between Xin and Li. In this reason, he evaluated Toegye's Ido-seol based on the concept of 'One principle and its manifoldness[理一分殊]'. Consequently, he concatenated the characteristic of Xin which includes all things with concept of Mulgyuk, and emphasized that Xin which penetrates the principle of all things has the characteristic of 'One principle(理一)'.

Characteristics of Lee Jin Sang's Thought exposed through Discussions (주문팔현과 퇴계학자들의 토론에서 드러나는 한주학의 특징)

  • Kim, Nak-Jin
    • The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
    • /
    • no.59
    • /
    • pp.121-153
    • /
    • 2018
  • The eight most prominent students of Lee Jin Sang discussed and developed the doctrines of the Master while discussing with the surrounding Toegye scholars. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between the doctrines of Toegye and the doctrines of Hanju in their discussions. First, the two were originally aimed at the same scholarship, so they discussed in a friendly atmosphere and some of the Toegye scholars participated in Hanju group. but at a certain point, they were a violent atmosphere of confrontation. Next, I tried to clarify the confrontation between Juli and Jeugli. And I tried to explain that they had different thoughts about domination of li. In addition, I looked at the meaning of excessiveness and compromise, the key words to criticize others and defend oneself. Finally, I explained that the ultimate difference between the two schools is in the methods of mind cultivation.

Lee, Jin sang' Neo-Confucianism in the viewpoint of Perception in Toegye School (지각설(知覺說)을 중심으로 본 한주(寒洲) 이진상(李震相)의 성리학(性理學) - 심즉리설(心卽理說) 성립의 역사적 배경을 중심으로 -)

  • Kim, Nak-jin
    • (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
    • /
    • no.36
    • /
    • pp.229-264
    • /
    • 2009
  • This paper aims for a study on the theory that mind is Li(principle). The method of research is laid emphasis on searching for the historical development of the perception Theory in late Cho-Sun. First of all, I investigated a meaning of the perception theories of Ho-Rak school, that were criticized in the Cho-Sun academic world. The next, I investigated the theory of Li-ju-Ki-ja that was raised by Yi Sang Jung. He thought that Li is supervisor and Ki is assistance. And he put a construction on the Perception Theories of Toegye school. Yi Jin sang's theory of perception is the result of criticism against Ho-Rak school, and a fresh and in-depth construction of Yi Sang Jung's perception theory. His viewpoint was contradiction to the theory of Sim si Ki(the theory that Mind is made of Ki). And he rediscovered the human conscience that was born endowed from Heaven.