華西學派의 成長과 重菴 金平黙의 役割―心主理說의 옹호를 중심으로 (Chungam Kim P'yŏngmuk: His Role in the Growth of the Hwasŏ School)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원
· 수록지 정보 : 대동문화연구 / 61호 / 349 ~ 373페이지
· 저자명 : 박성순

초록

李恒老가 華西學派의 創始者라면 金平黙은 守成者요 中興者라고 할 수 있다. 김평묵은 이항로 사후 다음과 같은 방식을 통해서 화서학파의 착근과 그 성장을 도모했던 것으로 보인다. (1) 宋時烈의 心說을 직접적으로 비판한 崔益鉉과는 달리, 스승의 학설이 송시열 심설의 본지를 계승한 것으로 설명함으로써 화서학파가 老論의 道統을 계승하였음을 적극적으로 표방하는 것, (2) 田愚나 柳重敎와 같이 스승의 심설에 대해 비판하는 인사들에게 명확한 해명을 제시함으로써 화서학파에 대한 의혹을 불식시키고 학파 내부의 결속을 공고히 하는 것, (3) 衛正斥邪運動을 선도함으로써 신흥 산림세력으로서 정국을 주도하는 것이었다.

영어초록

Well known as the father of the Hwasŏ School, Yi Hangno, the only scholar who was recommended to attend an emergency court conference on the French Disturbance of 1866, provided the ideological foundations of the isolationist policy. Yi then based his argument on his own theory of simjuri (心主理), which literally means that the subject of human mind is li(理) or principle. His theory unprecedentedly understood myŏngdŏk (明德) as li and also emphasized the distinctions between humanity and animal. His theory consequently provided no room for any compromise with the Western 'barbarians'. The so-called 'defending orthodoxy and rejecting heterodoxy' movement launched by the Hwasŏ School was indeed initiated by Yi's theory and subsequently distinguished the Hwasŏ School among other intellectual circles of the time as a new rising school representing conservative voices.
The most serious criticism of the Hwasŏ School came from the Nakhak School, a branch of the Patriarch's Faction (Noron), which then lined up with the influential in-law families on the political stage and was closer to a faction than a school. The Nakhak scholars not only criticized the Hawsŏ School scholars for their art of life and their view of the situation but also accused them, Yi Hangno in particular, of the offsprings of Wang Yangming. For this reason, defending the theory of simjuri was really critical to the Hwasŏ School because failure in defending it would seriously undermine the raison d'être of the school.
Within the Hwasŏ School, however, there were three different views of Yi's theory of simjuri. Each of the views was led by Kim P'yŏngmuk, Yu Chunggyo, and Ch'oe Ikhyŏn respectively, all of who were commonly acknowledged as the legitimate successors to the tradition of the school. Ch'oe understood Yi's theory of simjuri as the best Confucian interpretation of human mind and contended that Yi eventually corrected the problems of the theory of simjŭkki (心卽氣), which literally means that the human mind is qi(氣) or material force, advocated by Song Siyŏl, the very leader of the Patriarch's Faction, in the seventeenth century. Yu, on the other hand, was critical to the theory of simjuri in that it differed from the original concept of the simjŭkki theory and thus suggested that the former be revised.
Between Ch'oe and Yu, Kim P'yŏngmuk assumed a prudent attitude. He was much more interested in the unity of the Hwasŏ School itself. After Yi passed away, he struggled himself for the continuous growth and indigenization of the school. He first argued that altogether Yi's theory succeeded to the legitimacy of the Patriarch's Faction as well as the gist of Song's theory. Among many factions, he even contended, the Patriarch's Faction was the only 'real' faction of the 'real' Confucian scholars. In fact, he eagerly took a lead in spreading the 'defending orthodoxy and rejecting heterodoxy' idea. He also called for an explanation from Yu whom he believed as a seceder. Through this effort Kim played a major role in strengthening the school unity and developing the Hwasŏ School into the most influential conservative school of the time.

참고자료

· 없음