Article

주자학과 대순사상의 수양론 비교 연구

이광주 1 ,
Gwang-Ju Lee 1 ,
Author Information & Copyright
1대순진리회 교무부ㆍ연구원
1Division of Cultural Affairs, Daesoonjinrihoe
Corresponding Author : Gwang-Ju Lee

ⓒ Copyright 2015, The Daesoon Academy of Sciences. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Apr 20, 2015; Accepted: May 21, 2015

Published Online: Jun 01, 2017

ABSTRACT

This thesis examined Chu Hsi’s self-cultivation theory as the representative theory of cultivation in Confucianism, while juxtaposing it to self-cultivation theory in Daesoon thought, concentrating on its similarity and difference. Neo-Confucianism is a scholarship which has wielded a tremendous influence upon East Asia, while functioning as an official scholarship for long period up to Yuan, Ming, and Ching period, after achieving its synthesis by Chu Hsi. After 13th century, Neo-Confucianism has been a representative academic system in Confucianism, and self-cultivation theory was in its center. It suggested various virtues that classical scholars have to equip to fulfill the sainthood and the politics of royal road. The self-cultivation theory of Chu Hsi was developed upon the basis of the theory ‘Li-Qi’ and the theory of mind. Here, the practice of Geokyung(morally awakened state with a reverent spirit in every moment) and Gyeokmul-tsiji(reaching into the utmost knowledge through investigation of things) formed a nucleus of Chu Hsi’s self- cultivation theory. While Geokyung was to reveal one’s true nature through cultivation of mind, Gyeokmul-tsiji was to demonstrate the complete use of mind’s essence and function. Chu Hsi’s self- cultivation theory attempted to realize the unity of heaven and man, and through cultivating self and governing people, it also tried to achieve its ideal of the society of Great Union(Daedong).

Daesoon Thought is originated from Sangjenim who has descended to this world as a human being called Jeungsan. He went on his circuit to rectify the disorder of heaven and earth for 9 years to rectify the Three worlds of heaven, earth and human being which were faced with total annihilation due to its rule of mutual conflict, while creating an earthly paradise. Respecting the will of Sangjenim, Dojunim established the foundation of Do through launching ‘Meukeukdo’ and setting tenet, creed and object so that the cultivators (Doins) could believe and respect the truth of Sangje’s great itineration (Daesoon). Among those, the two components of creed, which are four fundamental principles and the three fundamental attitudes are of great account as precept and cardinal point. Through this means, the cultivators of Daesoonjinrihoe aspire to guard against self-deception through transforming the human spirit, to realize earthly immortality through renewing human beings, and to create an earthly paradise through transforming the world.

This thesis attempted to compare and analyze the theory of self- cultivation in Neo-Confucianism and Daesoon Thought in the aspect of ground, method, and object of cultivation. First, as for the ground of cultivation, the doctrines of Chu-tzu and Daesoon thought place the essence of cultivation on 'heaven'. Yet, whereas the former postulates Taekeuk (the Great Ultimate) as a principle as well as the heaven of a natural order, Daesoon thought postulates Sangenim as the heaven of superintendence as well as the heaven of a natural order, signified as its equation of Daesoon with circle, along with the unity of Meukeuk (Endlessness) and Taegeuk (the Great Ultimate). Further, the doctrine of Chu-zhu and Daesoon thought is identical in the point that both thoughts see mind as the subject of cultivation, while trying to restore a pure essence. Nevertheless, whereas Neo- Confucianism intends to give scope to ability of the complete use of mind’s essence and function, Daesoon Thought sees mind as the essence which is used by spiritual beings and as an organ that heaven, earth and human being rely upon as the center of the universe.

In the aspect of method of cultivation, the doctrine of Chu- zhu lays emphasis on the rational factor in that it brightens its 'myung-deoki'(bright inner virtue),' while trying to correspond to the law of heaven on the basis of 'Geokyung' and 'Gyeokmul-tsiji.' On the contrary, Daesoon thought lays much emphasis on faith factor in that it aspires for human perfection based on the restoration of conscience by cultivating Daesoonjinri with sincerity, reverence and faith along with 'quieting the heart-mind', 'quieting the body', 'respecting the God of the Ninth Heaven', and 'observing ritual practice on the basis of the faith in Sangjenim.

Yet, both thoughts have similarities in that cultivation of body forms the basis and that they attempt to realize their ideals through cultivation in daily life while taking 'Guarding against self- deception' as the key method of self-cultivation.'

However, the principle of Chu-zhu can be said to be a voluntary and autonomous practice based on scripture of the saint as well as self-reflection. On the other hand, Daesoon thought reveals certain difference in that it combines faith factor with one's self-effort by concentrating on cultivation under the presence of Sangjenim as the object of belief and the spirits of heaven and earth.

In the aspect of object of cultivation, both thoughts share similarities in that the saint and the perfected gentleman with a moral virtue as an ideal image of men in both thoughts attempt to realize each of their 'myung-deok' in human nature as a heavenly mandate while respecting morality. Further, they also share similarity in the point that the desirable characters in both thoughts want to participate in harmonious creation and nurturance. Yet, the perfected gentleman with a moral virtue is also characterized by its aim for a new heaven and earth where there is no mutual conflict but mutual beneficence, by promoting the moral influence and virtue of Sangjenim over one's own virtue, while practising the mutual beneficence of all life through harmonious union of divine beings and human beings.

Keywords: Daesoon Thought; Chu-zhu Thought; self-cultivation; Sangjenim; Geokyung (morally awakened state with a reverent spirit in every moment); Gyeokkmul-tsiji (reaching into the utmost knowledge through investigation of things); The four fundamental principles; The three fundamental attitudes; The unity of heaven and man; Cultivating self and governing people; Heaven; heart- mend; Saint; The perfected gentleman with a moral virtue

참고문헌(References)

1.

대순진리회교무부, 『전경』 13판, 여주: 대순진리회 출판부, 2010.

2.

대순진리회교무부, 『대순지침』, 여주: 대순진리회 출판부, 2012.

3.

대순진리회교무부, 『대순진리회요람』, 여주: 대순진리회 출판부, 2012.

4.

대순진리회교무부, 『포덕교화기본원리』,서울:대순진리회출판부, 1975.

5.

대순진리회교무부, 『포덕교화기본원리』 Ⅱ, 여주: 대순진리회 출판부, 2003.

6.

대순진리회교무부, 『대순회보합본집』 I, 서울: 대순진리회 출판부, 1992.

7.

대순진리회교무부, 『대순회보합본집』 II, 서울: 대순진리회 출판부, 1998.

8.

『훈시』.

9.

『道憲』 (1985).

10.

『呪文』, 서울: 대순진리회 수도부.

11.

朴景浩, 『太極道通鑑』, 부산: 태극도본부, 1956.

12.

『朱子語類』.

13.

『朱子大全』.

14.

『性理大全』.

15.

『大學或問』.

16.

『大學』.

17.

『中庸』.

18.

『論語』.

19.

『孟子』.

20.

『書經』.

21.

『小學』.

22.

김교빈, 「본체론과 심성론을 통해 본 주자의 격물치지이해」, 『동양철학연구』 6, 1985.

23.

김영주, 「대순진리회 마음공부 프로그램의 현황과 과제」, 『종교교육학연구』 43, 2013.

24.

김우형, 『주희철학의 인식론』, 서울: 심산, 2005.

25.

나권수, 「대순진리회의 이상사회론 연구」, 『대순사상논총』 21, 2013.

26.

노길명, 「대순사상에서의 경천ㆍ수도의 의미와 성격」, 『대순진리학술논총』 7, 2010.

27.

勞思光, 『중국철학사』 古代篇, 정인재 역, 서울: 탐구당, 1991.

28.

대순종교문화연구소, 『대순종교사상』, 서울: 대순진리회 출판부, 1989.

29.

대순종학교재연구회, 『대순사상의 이해』, 포천: 대진대학교 출판부, 2001.

30.

대순진리회 연구위원회 편집, 『대순논집』, 서울: 대순진리회 출판부, 1992.

31.

류병무, 「성경신의 의미 고찰」, 『대순사상논총』 22, 2014.

32.

박광수, 「경천(敬天), 수도(修道)의 의미와 실천방법」, 『대순진리학술논총』 7, 2010.

33.

박광수,「성경신(誠敬信)의 원리와 통합적 실천윤리」, 『대순진리학술논총』 11, 2012.

34.

박미라,「중국 유교의 이상 인간형-성인과 군자를 중심으로」, 『종교와 문화』 7, 2001.

35.

박종하, 「주자의 본체관에 대한 연구」, 성균관대학교 석사학위 논문, 2010.

36.

방립천, 『문제로 보는 중국철학』, 이기훈 외 역, 서울: 예문서원, 1997.

37.

변원종, 『주자학의 형성과 논변의 사유구조』, 파주: 한국학술정보, 2007.

38.

변원종, 『주자학과 육왕학』, 파주: 한국학술정보, 2008.

39.

송봉구, 「주자의 거경에 관한 연구」, 『유교사상연구』 21, 2004.

40.

안유경, 「대순사상의 성경신에 대한 종교적 해석」, 『대순사상논총』 22, 2014.

41.

양옌, 「대순진리회 수도 요체와 심신 수양」, 『대순사상논총』 21, 2013.

42.

유교사전편찬위원회, 『유교대사전』, 서울: 박영사, 1990.

43.

윤사순, 「유교의 '천인합일(天人合一)'사상에 대한 현대적 해석」, 『유교문화연구』 18, 2011.

44.

윤재근, 「대순진리회와 인존(人尊)사상」, 『종교교육학연구』 2, 1996.

45.

이강대, 『주자학의 인간학적 이해』. 서울: 예문서원, 2000.

46.

이경원, 「대순사상의 수양론 연구」, 『한국종교사연구』 8, 2000.

47.

이경원,「성ㆍ경ㆍ신과 대순수양론 연구」, 『대순사상논총』 12, 2001.

48.

이경원, 「대순사상의 심체론(心體論) 연구」, 『신종교연구』 6, 2002.

49.

이경원, 『대순진리회 신앙론』, 서울: 문사철, 2012.

50.

이경원, 『대순진리회 교리론』, 서울: 문사철, 2013.

51.

이경원,「지상신선실현-인간개조에 관한 연구」, 『대순진리학술논총』 13, 2013.

52.

이광률,「주자철학에 있어 '敬ㆍ知ㆍ行' 공부의 구조적 이해」, 『범한철학』 31, 2003.

53.

이상돈, 『주자의 수양론』, 서울: 문사철, 2013.

54.

이상돈,「주희 수양론에서 함양(涵養)과 체인(體認)」, 『동방학지』 143, 2008.

55.

이상익, 『주자학의 길』, 서울: 심산, 2007.

56.

이승환, 「주자 수양론에서 성(性)과 성향」, 『동양철학』 28, 2004.

57.

임종진, 「주자의 성인관」, 『대동철학』 25, 2004.

58.

장원목, 「성리학 본체론의 형성에 관한 연구」, 『한국사상과 문화』 22, 2003.

59.

전목, 『주자학의 세계』, 이완재 외 1명 역, 대구: 이문출판사, 1989.

60.

전병욱, 「주자 인론 체계와 공부론의 전개」. 고려대학교 박사학위 논문, 2008.

61.

정지윤, 「대순진리회 수행의 실제」, 『신종교연구』 30, 2014.

62.

조성열, 「『논어』, 『맹자』에 나타난 군자/소인, 대인/소인 연구」, 『철학논구』 34, 2006.

63.

조원일, 「맹자의 성인관 연구」, 『한국철학연구』 35, 2012.

64.

조원일, 「공자의 성인관 연구」, 『동서철학연구』 67, 2013.

65.

조용기, 「대순사상의 수양론 연구」, 대진대학교 박사학위 논문, 2011.

66.

차선근,「대순진리회 수행 연구의 경향과 과제」, 『대순사상논총』 24-1, 2014.

67.

최정락, 「다산 정약용의 상제사상 연구」, 연세대학교 석사학위 논문, 2012.

68.

최정묵,「『中庸』에 나타난 천인일관(天人一貫)의 사유구조」, 『동서철학연구』 50, 2008.

69.

최정묵,「『대학』의 삼강령 팔조목을 통해 본 유학의 세계」, 『동서철학연구』 62, 2011.

70.

태극도 교화부, 『태극도안내서』, 부산: 태극도본부, 1966.

71.

한국고전용어 편찬위원회, 『한국고전용어사전』 5, 서울: 세종대왕기념사업회, 2001.

72.

한국철학사연구회, 『주자학의 형성과 전개』, 서울: 심산, 2005.

73.

홍성민,「주자 수양론의 구조와 실천적 성격」, 고려대학교 박사학위 논문, 2008.

74.

황금중, 「주자의 공부론 연구」, 연세대학교 박사학위 논문, 2000.

75.

황금중, 「주자의 공부론의 형성과정과 문제의식」, 『한국교육사학』 31, 2009.

76.

황금중, 「『대학』의 공부 강목(綱目)에 대한 주희(朱熹)의 이해」, 『한국교육사학』 35, 2013.

77.

황의동, 「대순진리회의 유교적 이해」, 『대순사상논총』 20, 2009.

78.

황종원,「대순진리와 동학의 성, 경, 신 비교 연구」, 『대순진리학술논총』 8, 2011.