다산, 성리학과 탈성리학 사이에서

Dasan, in between Neo-Confucianism and post Neo-Confucianism: Focusing on Commentaries on the Analects, Ancient and Modern by Dasan

본 연구는 다산(茶山, 1762-1836)의『논어고금주(論語古今註)』에 나타난 유학(儒學)의 연속과 불연속적 특징을 밝히고자 한다. 이를 위해 선진 유학과 성리학의 천(天)과 명(命) 그리고 성(性) 개념의 비교를 통해 성리학의 특징을 제시하고, 다산의 학문이 이러한 성리학의 특징을 어떻게 받아들이고 있는지를 밝힐 것이다. 이 과정에서 다산이 성리학과 탈성리학의 사이에서 어떻게 유학의 연속과 불연속적 특징이 드러나는지 밝힐 것이다.

In this paper, we shall argue that within Dasan(茶山)'s philosophy there are both Neo-Confucian elements and what might be called the ‘post’ Neo-Confucian elements. First, we begin with an account of Neo-Confucianism, focusing on The Analects of Confucius. The requirements of Neo-Confucianism shall become clearer as the Neo-Confucianists' understanding of Tian(天) and Xing(性) is compared to the Confucianists' traditional understanding of them. We then illustrate how Dasan accepts the Neo-Confucianist's requirements (while rejecting some of them). Second, we shall show that Dasan rejects some of the Neo-Concianists' requirements. His rejecting is to be found within his explanation of Xing(性) and Ren(仁). Ren(仁), the Confucian moral principle, is equivalent to TianLi(天理) and also to XingLi(性理) according to the Neo-Confucianist. While Xing(性) is accepted as the universal principle by the Neo-Confucianists, Dasan interprets it as one's love towards one's own counterparts. He treats Daoxin(道心) to be the ground for Ren to be actualized. Hence, as we shall argue, while Dasan's philosophy is typically treated as a post Neo-Confucianism, it still falls within Neo-Confucianism. This is so especially when his studies are motivated by the Neo-Confucianists' concerns.