• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.357-384
• /
• 2021

The ethics of Daesoon Jinrihoe is a system of contemporary practical morality, which contains religious features such as "One Dao" (一道), "Two Mountains" (二山, an allusion to Kang Jeungsan 姜甑山, and Jo Jeongson 趙鼎山), "Three Realms" (三界, means the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity." For the purpose of my paper, "One Dao" is the ethical principle of Daesoon as well as the Tenets: "the Virtuous Concordance of Yin and Yang, Harmonious Union between Divine and Human Beings, the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence, and Perfected Unification (jingyeong 眞境) with the Dao." "Two Mountains" are the Objects of belief. The Three Realms are the scopes of moral concern. In order to devote the Tenets of the ethical principle, ascetic practice in daily life has been emphasized as "Sincerity, Respectfulness, and Faithfulness" which are collectively called "Three Essential Attitudes." Meanwhile, "Quieting the Mind, Quieting the Body, Reverence for Heaven, and Cultivation (of oneself in accordance with doctrines)" are defined as the "Four Cardinal Mottoes." The ultimate belief is converted into guidelines for ethical conduct and religious rites. Through cultivation an interaction emerges between humankind and divine beings. The ethical ideal in Daesoon Jinrihoe includes personal "Perfected Unification with the Dao," nobility and cooperativity between humans and divine beings, and "the earthly paradise of the Later World." Compared to Buddhism, Christianity, and Daoism, Daesoon Jinrihoe's unique features are embodies by three aspects: the unity of mutual beneficence among the Three Realms, the cooperativity and nobility between humans and divinities, and the transcendental nature of the earthly paradise.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.1-40
• /
• 2024

Time can be the fundamental basis of religious doctrine and the foundation for a life of faith. Therefore, understanding a religion's interpretation of time and exploring its perception is accepted as one of the approaches to comprehending its principles. Based on this idea, this article delves into how chronos (measured time) and kairos (experienced time) are manifested in Daesoon Jinrihoe. In Daesoon Jinrihoe, the moment when chronos and kairos intersect is considered a moment of spiritual experience. Ethical codes are accomplished in the midst of the process of defining this time as the Heavenly Dao and adjusting human affairs accordingly. These ethics lead individuals towards a religious life. East Asian traditions also apply this logic, but Daesoon Jinrihoe differs in that it emphasizes reinterpreted ethics. Furthermore, Daesoon Jinrihoe posits that Degree Numbers (度數) are a device that ensures the transition from chronos to kairos. Degree Numbers, which are both a law of the universe's motion and a function of time, were emphasized by the Kang Jeungsan when he advocated for the discarding of old ways and the creation of the new ways. He thereby urged humans to live in accordance with time. Time is also facilitated in the dimension of ritual observances and participation, with examples including prayers, devotional offerings, and holy works (gongbu, 工夫). Those rituals of Daesoon Jinrihoe actively incorporate a unique basis of reason for this style of engagement with time, which is one of the aspects that is held to secure justification.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.40
• /
• pp.39-76
• /
• 2022

The two religious ethics, Christianity's 'love your enemies' and Daesoon Jinrihoe's 'grievance-resolution for mutual beneficence', can be misunderstood as similar. The misunderstanding arises from these religious ethics having something in common that specifically points to a particular object, called an enemy, and contains instructions to treat that object altruistically. However, from the perspective of Religious Ethics, the two teachings are not the same. The beliefs they are based upon are different, the religious character they pursue is different, and their processes of obtaining legitimacy, logic, and implementation are different. The most distinct difference between these ethics is that the Christian ethic focuses on a victim's role whereas Daesoon Jinrihoe ethic emphasizes the roles of both victims and perpetrators. In case of 'love your enemies,' if a perpetrator turns away from a victim and believes that they would be forgiven for their sin, the victim is unlikely to practice the teaching 'love your enemies.' Accordingly, to avoid criticism over cases wherein love of an enemy is nothing but a shallow grace, the roles of the two sides should be more highlighted than that of the absolute being. As for grievance-resolution for mutual beneficence, this teaching encourages victims to resolve their grievance with a goal of mutual beneficence. The perpetrator should likewise resolve the grievances and grudges of their victim with the aim of mutual beneficence. Jeungsan especially stressed that perpetrators have to resolve 'Cheok (慼: the resentment and grievances that someone holds against the one who victimized them)' through the ethic of grievance-resolution in order for living well. In other words, 'the ethic of Cheok-resolution' is an ethic wherein the perpetrator also plays an important role in the implementation of grievance-resolution for mutual beneficence.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.35
• /
• pp.509-539
• /
• 2020

Daesoon Jinrihoe makes use of The Canonical Scripture as the main body to explain their thinking regarding divine beings and humankind as it relates to doctrine, sacredness, religiousness and other such contents. The traditional meaning of divine beings and humankind through the interpretation of The Canonical Scripture, transcends ethics, tradition, sociality, and the ultimate concern of secularity. The analysis from the perspective of The Canonical Scripture can help readers to understand the purpose of Daesoon Jinrihoe's implementation of its policies and their future direction. The local church takes the Bible as its main body and connects God with man as an implantation of divine life and temperament that harmonizes itself with human life and nature. The divine life is constantly reconciled with one's human life to make one a holy person, or a humanistic diviner. This is the rationale of the 'God-Man,' those whose human lives become lives of God-men. This style of living enables divine nature to mingle with human nature as an explicit behavioral act, mode of character development, and lifestyle. Therefore, the expression "the Blending of God and man" is an interpretation of the relationship between God and man which focuses on their sacred connection. Engagement in this extends to the scope of the local church. The different divisions between Daesoon Jinrihoe and the local church appear on the basis of things such as history, culture, language, and religion, but both posit a theology of "Harmonious Union between Divine Beings and Human Beings" and "the Blending of God and man" according to a transcendent interpretation of God and man. Through dialogue, they can discover similarities and differences in this shared notion with both systems of theological thought.

• Journal of Daesoon Thought and the Religions of East Asia
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.55-70
• /
• 2024

This study presents and examines various ethical theories that could offer potential solutions to the issue of discrimination against non-human animals in contemporary society, and traces its implications for Korean religions. The article focuses on two normative ethical theories - virtue ethics and the ethics of care - and through an analysis of existing research, argues that both theories may serve as foundational principles guiding our behavior, not only in our interactions with other humans but also in our treatment of non-human animals. Furthermore, the examples presented in this study demonstrate that similar ethical theories have already been adopted as frameworks for human behavior towards other living beings within two religious traditions, Buddhism and Daesoon Jinrihoe. In both belief systems, animals are acknowledged as integral components of the world in which we live. Additionally, both religions endorse the idea that the well-being of non-human animals and our attitudes toward them can also have a direct impact on our present lives, as well as on our future existence. Consequently, promoting morally upright conduct towards other living creatures should be viewed as a necessary measure, beneficial not only for the animals themselves but also for the collective well-being of humanity.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.77-108
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the characteristics of 'Podeok' in Daesoon Jinrihoe. The term Podeok can cause some misunderstanding as the same word Deok (德 virtue) has long been used in the Eastern Tradition. In other words, for most people who are used to traditional thought, Podeok may be conflated with the similar word 'Deok (virtue)' as used within Confucianism. People who are familiar with Confucian culture might thereby misunderstand the term Podeok as an aspect of Confucian moral ethics, or they could misconstrue Daesoon Jinrihoe as having appropriated and misused Confucian ideas. Furthermore, there are other problems that could arise if people compare Daesoon Jinrihoe's 'Podeok' with 'Deok (virtue)' as used by Laozi. While Deok in Laozi's usage represents the ability of an individual who can exercise his or her rationality with excellence, Deok in Daesoon Jinrihoe indicates the idea of actualizing Mutual Beneficence and the conditions that enable Mutual Beneficence. If one understands Deok as used by Laozi to contain the meaning of Mutual Beneficence, then it is possible to think that the two tradition share a similar meaning of Deok as Podeok in Daesoon Jinrihoe pursues Mutual Beneficence as its ultimate value. In order to preemptively correct these misunderstandings, I need to clarify how the idea of Deok was born out of traditional thought and what meanings it embodies. Additionally, it is necessary to examine how it became meaningful in Confucianism, and how it was criticized and ascribed new meanings in Laozi's thought. Through these clarification, it will become clear that Deok originally indicated a religious ritual that the king of the Zhou Dynasty performed after receiving the heavenly mandate and assuming rule over the nation. Later, this idea was transformed into a moral virtue and norm by Confucius. This moral virtue and norm was criticized by Laozi as an unnatural form of control as it was understood by Laozi as a teleological argument justifying whether or not lives were to be saved or sustained based on the perceived merits of each individual. On the contrary, Deok in Daesoon Jinrihoe and traditional thought stand on a totally different theological bases. Deok in Daesoon Jinrihoe is a means to practice and realize the truth of the earthly paradise of the Later World and the truth of Mutual Beneficence which were posited to the world through Kang Jeungsan's Works of Haewon (grievance resolution) that resolved the pattern of mutual conflict that characterized the Former World. Therefore, the idea of Podeok in Daesoon Jinrihoe gains completion only on the premises of Haewon Sangsaeng (resolution of grievances for mutual beneficence) and Boeun Sangsaeng (reciprocation of favors for mutual beneficence), and the way to practice Podeok is to practice Haewon Sangsaeng and Boeun Sangsaeng. In addition, the subordinate virtues such as loyalty, filial piety, and faithfulness that exist within Daesoon Jinrihoe's religious practice are not same as those of traditional thought. They are new concepts of virtues drawn from the cosmological laws of Daesoon Jinrihoe. To be specific, the virtues of Daesoon Jinrihoe are not rules that create discrimination and mutual conflict, but are instead ethical rules established upon the basis of Heaven and Earth having been newly organized, and thus, they will bring virtuous concordance, harmonious union, and mutual beneficence. The idea of 'Podeok' in Daesoon Jinrihoe can be understood as a religious practice that requires doctrinal understanding and tangible practice in daily life of followers. In other words, it is not the same Deok of earlier traditional thought in East Asia, but is instead a religious truth by which practitioners realize the truth of Sangje's Works of Haewon in human world as they practice Haewon Sangsaeng and Boeun Sangsaeng.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.375-406
• /
• 2024

This study aims to define the meaning of 'Sangsaeng (mutual beneficence)' within the context of 'Sangsaeng ecological theory,' a form of discourse of that has emerged from Daesoon Jinrihoe's perspective on ecology. Sangsaeng ecological theory applies the concept of interdependence to ecology in order to explain how Sangsaeng, which is commonly used as an ethical system for humans, can be applied to the realm of ecology such that it extends its scope of application to include non-human beings. Interdependence, when applied to ecology, is formed via relationships between individuals. Such relationships can be positive, negative, or neutral, and the type of interdependence that emerges can be competitive, predatory, parasitc, and symbiotic. Even if the relationship between individuals ends negatively, it can still exert a positive effect on the ecosystem. Consequently, all of these produce a type of 'dependence'. However, relationships that end negatively can generate grievances, and from the perspective of Sangsaeng ethics, this type of interdependence is to be avoided. Therefore, by way of contrast, ecological Sangsaeng may include both relationships of positive interdependence and relationships of predation, parasitism, and competition in so far as there no grievances. Ecological theory requires a perspective that enables an understand of the relationship between nature and humans in an integrated way that does not separate them. One view of universe, known as Cheonji-saengin-yongin (Heaven and Earth give produce humans make use of them) provides insights into the relationship between the universe and humans and nature and humans from an interdependent perspective. Heaven and Earth take humans as the basis of their existence, and only after humans discover the law of nature and the sacredness behind it can a deep interdependence between Heaven and Earth and humans and nature and humans be established. However, as modern humans emerge, the interdependence between Heaven and Earth and humans collapses as they destroy nature and lower the authority of Shindo (divine order). Haewon Sangsaeng (the resolution of grievances for mutual beneficence) and Boeun Sangsaeng (the reciprocation of favors for mutual beneficence) is the solution to reestablish the interdependence that has been disconnected between Heaven and Earth and humans and nature and humans. The practice of Haewon Sangsaeng through Gongbu rituals is the way to restore interdependence between nature and humans. The process of humans achieving Dotong (mastery of the Dao) through religious practices is the practice of Boeun Sangsaeng, and humans will be reborn into Injon (Human Nobility or 'divine humans') with ecological nature and enjoy an eternal interdependent relationship with nature. In summary, Sangsaeng in the context of Sangsaeng ecological theory is the idea and practice of allowing nature and humans to restore their interdependence and live on eternally.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.115-151
• /
• 2021

According to Lee Young-geum, the ideas of grievance resolution and mutual beneficence were already present in shamanism. She also insists that Jeungsan merely theorized upon these ideas by inheriting them and his religious activities must be identified from within a shamanistic worldview. Contrary to Lee's claim, Cha Seon-keun argues that the grievance resolution of Jeungsan is far beyond the contents and level of development found in shamanism. He also insists that Jeungsan's religious activities must be identified as having a certain orderly uniqueness distinct from shamanism. The argument between these two different perspectives has not attracted other researchers besides those who are directly involved. However, this debate deserves attention with regard to the problem of how one approaches a given religion and which academic perspective should be applied. Based on the perspective of the Daesoon Jinrihoe, this study examines their debate by considering four issues. Firstly, whether Jeungsan inherited or expanded upon the subject of grievance resolution and its range remains undetermined. Secondly, the ethics of mutual beneficence and grateful reciprocation in Jeungsan's concept of grievance resolution should be analyzed as to whether that idea reasserts the ethics of shamanism. Thirdly, it is necessary to study whether his method of grievance resolution fully embraced the methods of grievance resolution that exist in shamanism. Lastly, it should be determined whether or not Jeungsan's religious activities and system of thought should be identified within a shamanistic worldview. Through this review, Lee and Cha can be shown to have different opinions on the academic approach to research on religion. Accordingly, this study concludes that Lee's method of only interpreting Jeungsan's religious thought via a shamanic worldview is incompatible with academic methodology. A scholar of religious studies should discuss Jeungsan on his own merits rather than just imply that Jeungsan thoroughly reflects the worldview of shamanism, doctrinal studies of Buddhism, and Daoist thought as well as other theologies. In other words, if certain tangible and intangible elements found in shamanism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, and Christianity are also observed in Jeungsan's religious thought, it is necessary to comprehend how different or similar those elements are or whether they are re-interpreted in any manner. In the case of Lee, her method of overemphasizing similarities is now criticized as outdated. Nowadays, it is necessary to demonstrate awareness of modern religious studies tendency to pay equal attention to similarities and differences.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.40
• /
• pp.1-38
• /
• 2022

The aim of this research is to discover the value of peace conveyed by Haewon Sangsaeng, the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence, as espoused by Holy Teacher Kang Jeungsan (姜甑山, 1871~1909) and to evaluate its modern significance. To the faithful, Jeungsan is seen as the Supreme God who descended into the world in the Late Joseon Dynasty in the year 1871. Until the time of His passing away into Heaven in 1909, He vastly saved the world and fulfilled the hopes of humankind by carrying out the fundamentally innovative Reordering Works of Heaven and Earth (1901~1909) in the Three Realms of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity. He has thereby been appraised as a great religious figure within religious and academic circles. Jeungsan's ideological contributions can be summarized into two main points. One is the concept of 'the Great Opening and the Later World,' which foreshadowed the liquidation of the old system of order and the arrival of a new world. The other contribution is the concept of 'the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence,' a fundamental principle meant to achieve human salvation and world peace. In this context, 'the Great Opening' is precisely a 'positivistic religious expression of peace,' and 'the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence' is the principle by which 'peace can be achieved in the world for all humankind.' In particular, the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence is a tenet within the doctrine of Daesoon Jinrihoe, and it is the main concept that forms the basis of Daesoon Thought. It can be said to be the core current that flows through Jeungsan's Reordering Works of Heaven and Earth. Nowadays, the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence is being discussed and cited in various ways in academic fields as well as in discourse on coexistence, mutual beneficence, and peace. The Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence is specifically based on observations of the structure of conflicts as observed throughout world history via global conflicts, regional conflicts, cultural conflicts, ideological conflicts, class conflicts, generational conflicts, racial conflicts, religious conflicts, and other such conflicts. That is why the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence is discussed in depth within academic settings wherein the nature of conflict-resolution is examined. Looking at the previous studies on this topic, those studies tended to focus on key concepts or concerns such as human beings, divine beings, the earthly paradise of the Later World, ideal societies, world peace, new principles of order, and lasting peace. In particular, the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence has been presented as directly related to concepts such as love, coexistence, harmony, and peace for humankind and the world. Its significance has been applied to ethics, philosophy, order, and principles, and it has been understood as conveying values such as peace. Accordingly, this paper examines the ideological connections to the succession and establishment of Jeungsan's notion of the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence based on previous research, but further examines the value of peace communicated via the principles and ideas that pervade current discourse on the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence. I hope to thoroughly explore Haewon Sangsaeng in regards to its modern significance to the world and to humankind.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.30
• /
• pp.1-57
• /
• 2018

There are three purposes to this study: first, to understand comprehensively the meaning of Haewon-sangsaeng (Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence) Thought, which can be taken as representative thought regarding peace in Korean new religions. Next, Haewon-sangsaeng Thought and the works for Haewon (resolving grievances) will be examined as principles and practical mechanisms for building the paradise of the Later World and understanding the structure of this system of thought. Lastly, logical inferences will be made regarding the future of humanity and the world through the ideological characteristics implied by Haewon-sangsaeng Thought. Haewon-sangsaeng Thought contains the complicated concepts of Haewon and Sangsaeng. Haewon is the resolution of the enmity and grievances that have accumulated in the realms of humanity and deities. Sangsaeng indicates the action of mutually benefiting one another or a state wherein people live in prosperity and peace. In Daesoon Jinrihoe, the concept of Haewon-sangsaeng is expressed explicitly and has broad applications. It can be expanded for the global peace and the harmony of all humanity. As the result of an integrated analysis of previous studies, it can be stated that Haewon-sangsaeng has values and meanings in terms of principles, laws, ethics, and ideology all of which are commonly connected to Injon (Human Nobility), Sangsaeng, peace, harmony, the Later World, and paradise. This indicates that its valuable for the future of humanity and world is deeper and wider than its mere etymological meaning. The common factor among paired ideas such as human nobility and Sangsaeng, peace and harmony, and Later World and paradise is the realization of humanity's greatest wish. This is the reason why the value and meaning of Haewon-sangsaeng can be expanded globally. The works of Haewon were a religious act of Kang Jeungsan who resolved the grievances of the Former World which was under the rule of mutual conflict and built a Later World that will operate according to mutual beneficence. Therefore, the principle of Haewon-sangsaeng has a motivative power, through the Reordering Works of the Universe, which can transform the future of humanity and the world. In this study, it can be inferred that as Haewon-sangsaeng 'fulfills human desires' and forms a 'harmonious relations of Sangsaeng' between humans and world, humans will be transformed into Injon (Human Nobility) while the world turns into a paradise, and the future turns into period of peace. Therefore, Haewon-sangsaeng Thought works as a principle that changes society, the world, and the universe. The social actualization of Haewon-sangsaeng is tantamount to bringing the future of Injon, paradise, and peace into objective reality. Previous studies on Haewon-sangsaeng Thought had been carried out under difficult circumstances by a small number of scholars. For all the above reasons, I anticipate that there will be more and more studies made on the topic of Haewon-sangsaeng Thought, which seeks the realization of Haewon (the Resolution of Grievances), Sangsaeng (Mutual Beneficence), human nobility, paradise, and peace. I hope it will emerge as a main subject in global religious thought.