• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.7-42
• /
• 2012

The Ho-Rak controversy is an internal dispute in the Kiho School. Both Ho and Rak adopt the theories of Yulgok(栗谷) as their common standard of right arguments. The controversy continues almost two hundred years after the dispute between LEE Gan(李柬) and HAN Wonjin(韓元震). However, it does not develop rich theoretical resources. The fundamental issue of Ho-Rak controversy is how to define the relation of mind(心) and temper(氣質). Ho School regard temper as material of the mind, and so they insist that mind and temper are ultimately the same. But Rak School regard temper as desire of the body, and so they insist that mind and temper are the another one. The viewpoint of Rak School does not correspond to the view of the traditional Neo-confucianism. So we should understand that mind and temper are ultimately the same. However if we define that mind and temper are the same, and they act at the same time, then we can not insure the foundation of pure goodness in human mind. LEE Chulyoung(李喆榮) defines that mind and temper are ultimately the same, but they act alternately. It is the exact definition about the relation of mind and temper.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.73-108
• /
• 2012

Researches about the Horaknonjaeng(湖洛論爭) have succeeded by focusing on the Osangnonbyeon(五常論辨)?Mibalnonbyeon(未發論辨). In a way of these researches, philosophic thought of Gwon Sangha(權尙夏) is dealt in a comparison and in that process his philosophic thought seems to be known. However, these researches are treating several thoughts so it is difficult to find accurately what point describes the position of his thought in the korean confucian thought as origin of Hohak(湖學). In this paper, therefore, I examine Gwon Sangha's theory of mind-nature by focusing on the understanding the concept of mind-nature in Hansujaejib(寒水齋集) and find its position in history of thought as an origin of forming Hohak. Before 1709, Horaknonjaeng don't break out, Gwan Sangha had been formed that Inmulseongsangi(人物性相異) of Osangpyeonjeon(五常偏全) based on the understanding of the fact that ensuring of Bonyeonjiseong(本然之性 性善) in Gijiljiseong(氣質之性) and under this influence scholars of Hohak formed thoughts and insisted Osangpyeonjeon(五常偏全 人物性相異) during Horaknonjaeng. In the point of Simseongilmul(心性一物) focusing on nature, he didn't admit the Jujaeseong(主宰性) of mind. This is the efforts of finishing the controversy of Simseongigi(心性二岐) and the efforts of finding the relation between Simseon(心善). Such thoughts are set before the Horaknonjaeng and basing on these influences, scholars of Hohak formed their thoughts and insisted the Gibulyongsa(氣不用事 未發氣質有善惡).

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.349-386
• /
• 2014

Noju Oh Hui-sang(1763-1833) is one of the neo-Confucian scholars representing with Hong Chik-pil the Kiho-Nak School from the late 18th to the early 19th century. He did sincerely not only succeed theories of Kiho School originated from Yulgok, but also strengthened the main view of the Nak faction by clarifying the theoretical stance of it derived from Kim Chang-hyop. Not only he does suggest critical points of view against Ho faction in terms of Horak Controversy, but also criticizes heterodox account, which raised by an inner circle of Nak faction. In this vein, Oh established the neo-Confucian ways of realization of morality and ideal society by setting up his own points of view on mind and bright virtues that are followed by various issues of Horak Controversy. My paper will examine the values of Oh's account of Nature-Principle in the light of intellectual historical context by paying a special attention to his critical views of Ho faction. Oh's main idea is how to systematize practical foundation of realizing morality. Thus, he wants to theoretically explain both the practice of morality and the reality of pure moral mind in order to establish concrete practices of them in the real world. In doing so, he pays attention to mutual inclusive relationship between Principle and Matter(ki:氣). The mutual inclusive relationship between them can be exactly applied into the relationship between mind and Nature. So, the realityof moral principle explicitly implies the pure goodness of moral agency. Furthermore, his elucidation of logical relationship between mind and Nature and its values via the ontological understanding of them is to set up a system of cultivation, i.e., realizing practical foundation of pure moral mind. In conclusion, we can evaluate that Oh's account of Nature-Principle, at least, aims not only at establishment of moral agency and its reality in a theoretical dimension, but also at a guarantee of their realization in the world.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.209-242
• /
• 2021

This manuscript started with the purpose of producing research that investigated and verified how Buddhism was understood by Seongdam (性潭) Song Hwan-gi (宋煥箕), the founder (宗匠) of Horon (湖論) who was active around the early 19 th century. Song Hwan-gi, Uam (尤菴) Song Si-yeol (宋時烈)'s fifth generation, was a scholar who had a deep sense of duty to inherit the Theory of Uam (尤菴學), and he adhered to the Confucian theory of genealogy (道統論) and Anti-Heresy Discourses. Thus, this manuscript expressed curiosity about Song Hwan-gi's understanding of Buddhism, which was the representative heresy. This manuscript examined the naming method of Buddhist clergy (僧侶), degree of pedagogical knowledge, and critical statements that were made concerning Buddhist tales (說話). Meanwhile, it is noticeable that the terms of address for Buddhist clergy were composed of four categories: general terms, honorific forms, palanquins [輿], and miscellaneous terms of address. This scheme conforms to the Buddhist-friendly aspects of Song Hwan-gi. Examples of these terms of address include Danseung (擔僧) and Yeoseung (輿僧), both of which were Buddhist clergy who carried palanquins. Naturally, Song Hwan-gi was helped by Buddhist clergy when he went sightseeing on famous mountains. In the meantime, Song Hwan-gi's pedagogical knowledge can be shown to be not especially profound based on his understanding of The Diamond Sutra, The Avatamska Sutra, and The Shurangama Sutra. Cheongnyansan Travel Records (淸凉山遊覽錄) and Dongyu Diary (東遊日記) make it clear that Song Hwan-gi had no interest in taking refuge in the three treasures of Buddhism (佛法僧 三寶). It is rather the case that he was deeply critical of Buddhism. On the other hand, Song Hwan-gi expressed profound sadness when he encountered the dilapidated remains (古蹟) of Buddhist temples and hermitages. Consequentially, it can be concluded that Song Hwan-gi's understanding of Buddhism contained examples of affirmation, acceptance, denial, and exclusion.