교조신원운동기 동학교단과 정부 간의 담론투쟁

The Discursive Struggle between the Religious Body of Donghak and the Government during the Period of the Movement Vindicating the Innocence of the Founder of Donghak : A Consideration on Its Confucian Aspects

The campaign to vindicate the innocence of the founder of Donghak(敎祖伸寃運動) can be divided into three periods. In its first period, the leaders of Donghak demanded, through institutional proceedings to Chungcheong Gamyeong(忠淸監營) and Jeolla Gamyeong(全羅監營), that their followers should be released and their founder be cleared of the false charge. As the leaders tried to advocate their legitimacy and the Gamyeong also sticked to its existing governmental policy of ‘disapproval of Donghak’, there appeared controversy about ‘whether Donghak is orthodoxy(正學) or heresy(異端).’ Realizing the limit of ‘petition to the local government’, they took two approaches in the second period of the movement; that is, appeal by kneeling in front of the palace(伏閤上疏) and announcement of the repulse of Japan and the West(斥倭洋 宣言). The leaders of Donghak, appealing to the central government, vindicated mainly the innocence of the founder by way of appeal by kneeling in front of the palace, the strategy that Confucian scholars actually monopolized then, while followers in Jeolla-do employed the method of ‘announcement(榜文)’, a non-institutional way, and the cause of ‘the duty(義理) of loyalty and filial piety’, announcing the repulse of Japan and the West to the local government and people. In the third period of the movement, the leaders got out of the total dependence on appeal and adopted as their key strategy ‘the announcement of the repulse of Japan and the West.’ There at last ensued formal negotiations between ten thousands of Donghak followers and the government astounded by their force. The leaders of Donghak attempted to show their sincerity and appeal to people, and the government tried to cut off the influence and urged its dissolution. Accordingly, the controversy between the two sides was taken place with its focus on ‘duty(義理)’, not on ‘the repulse of Japan and the West.’