퇴계가 살던 16세기 조선사회는 훈구파에서 사림파로 정권이 바뀌는 과도기였다. 퇴계는 조광조가 주창하던 도학정치가 기묘사화로 좌절되자 사림세력을 결집하고 재훈련시키기 위해 도학 이론을 정립하고, 도통을 확립하며, 향약을 실시하고, 서원을 설립했다. 퇴계의 도학은 수양론으로부터 출발한다. 훈구파의 부정부패를 비판하기 위해서 심성론을 개발했다. 인간의 본래의 마음은 천리를 품부받아 착하다고 본다. 성선설이다. 이 착한 마음이 하늘로부터 온 것이기 때문에 심성론은 우주론으로 연결된다. 이 착한 마음을 지키기 위해서는 경(敬)을 해야 한다고 했다. 경을 하려면 존천리(存天理) 알인욕(遏人欲)해야 한다는 것이다. 퇴계의 도학은 주돈이-장재-정호-정이-주희로 이어지는 송대 도학자들의이론을 이어받았다. 특히 주희의 이론을 조술했다. 따라서 주자의 이론과 다른 사상은 이단으로 배격했다. 무속, 불교, 도교, 노장뿐 아니라 같은 유교 중에서도 왕양명의 심학, 서경덕의 심학까지 배격했다. 리기론에서 주리론은 퇴계철학의 핵심이다. 리(理) 없는 기(氣)가 없다는 것이다. 퇴계는 4단7정론(四端七情論)에서 리발(理發), 리동(理動)을 주장했다. 리가 발한 것이 4단으로 순선(純善)인데 반해 7정은 중절(中節) 여부에 따라 선(善)할 수도 있고 악할 수도 있다는 것이다. 그런데 여기서 리는 무위(無爲)라고 했는데 어떻게 발하느냐는 문제가 생긴다. 이에 퇴계는 리의 체용론(體用論)을 들고 나온다. 리의 체(體)는 무위이지만 리의 용은 동정(動靜)이 있다는 것이다. 이와같이 반론이 있는데도 불구하고, 주리론, 리동론을 고집한 것은 도덕리(道德理)를 밝히기 위해서이다. 이 때의 리는 자연법칙적, 객관적 리에 끝나는 것이 아니라 시비, 선악을 밝히는 가치론적 리, 곧 도덕리인 것이다. 선행을 하는 것을 우주론인 리기론에 연계한 것이다.
The choson society in the 16th century, the time of Twaegyae Lee Hwang, was witnessing the transfer in power, from the Hungu faction to the Sarim faction. When the so-called "Dohak politics(politics based upon one"s own understanding and studies of Do[the way of life])" led by Jo Gwang Jo failed because of 1519 political purge of newcomers, Twaegyae gathered together Sarim figures, and in order to appropriately train them, he concentrated his efforts upon establishing "Dohak" theories, developing the "Dotong" line of succession(line of succession in terms of "Dohak" studies), initiated the custom of Hyangyak(local rules for autonomous self-governing), and erected Seoweon schools. Twaegyae"s Dohak studies began with the argument calling for self character building. Twaegyae developed the theory regarding human nature, in order to criticize the wrong doings and malpractices of the Hungu figures. He figured that human nature was good in its very design, as it was formed while receiving the essence and principles of the universe. And as he figured that human nature would be good-hearted because of its relationship with the heavenly principles, his theories led to a series of other theories, which involved the nature of the universe. He argued that in order to preserve this good nature, one must continue its efforts of being sincere and maintaining the concept of Gyeong/敬. And in order to do so, Twaegyae argued that one must honor the principles of the universe(存天理) and suppress one"s own passions and desires(遏人欲). Twaegyae"s Dohak studies inherited those of the Chinese Sung dynasty Dohak philosophers, from Ju Don Ih to Jang Jae, to Jeong Ho and Jeong Ih, and finally to Ju Hi. More specifically Twaegyae consulted and built his theories upon the theories of Ju Hi. As a result, quite naturally he came to criticize and reject all other forms of theories and studies, which not only included Shamanism, Buddhism, Taoism but also included other Confucian trends such as the Shimhak studies(studies of human nature and especially the ‘Shim/心’ concept) of Ming dynasty"s Wang Yang Myeong and choson"s Seo Gyeong Deok. The theory of Ih/理"s determinative influences was the essence of Twaegyae"s philosophy. It argued that no Gi/氣 could exist without Ih/理. In his theory of "4 starters and 7 emotions", Twaegyae argued that Ih was the one that always triggered(理發), and Ih was the one that always motivated(理動/or mobilizes). Ih would trigger and set "4 starters" in motion, which were good in nature, but the 7 emotions that were induced as a result could appear either good or bad due to certain variables. In the meantime, one might question how could Ih trigger or motivate something when its very nature was the one of "Muwi/無爲"("letting it flow without interfering"), and in response Twaegyae suggested the argument that Ih had both Chae and Yong(體用論) in its design, saying that Ih was composed of not only Chae(which embodies the "letting it flow" side of Ih), but also Yong(which embodies the more dynamic[動靜] part of Ih). Although there were some objections and controversies among philosophers, Twaegyae faithfully engaged in establishing such theories regarding Ih"s prominence in influence and Ih"s nature of triggering and motivating, in order to clearly define the principles behind the concept of morality(道德理). His concept of Ih was not a mere, naturally-conceived, objective kind of Ih, but also a concept that can be used in valuation, determining what would be right and what would be wrong. In other words, he connected the act of doing something good, to the theories that dealt with universal properties.
(0)
(0)