학술논문
『中庸』의 다기성(多岐性)에 관한 연구 : 주희, 정약용, 심대윤을 중심으로 / A Study on Versatility in Zhongyong(中庸) : Focusing on Zhu Xi, Jeong Yagyong and Shim Daeyoon
Document Type
Dissertation/ Thesis
Author
Source
Subject
Language
Korean
Abstract
본 연구는 현대사회에서 나타나는 양극화의 문제에 대한 해결을 내면의 성찰, 도덕주체의 자세, 외면적 갈등의 대처 방식이라는 세 가지 층위를 통해 『中庸』의 中과 庸에 대한 여러 가지 측면과 가치를 재발견하는데 주목한다. 『中庸』 1장에 나오는 “기쁨, 성냄, 슬픔, 즐거움이 아직 드러나지 않는 것을 中이라 이르고 發하여 모두 절도(節度)에 맞는 것을 和라 이르니, 中이란 천하의 큰 근본이요, 和란 천하의 공통된 道이다”에 대한 주희(朱熹, 1130∼1200), 정약용(茶山, 1762∼1836), 심대윤(白雲, 1806∼1872)의 견해에서 나타나는 中의 다양한 층차를 분석한다. 이렇게 내포된 견해를 분석하는 것은 中을 명확히 이해하는데 도움을 주는 것은 물론, 中을 통해 사람들이 일상생활 속에서 부딪힐 수 있는 다양한 양상의 갈등 상황에서 어떻게 적절히 대응할 수 있는지를 더 분명히 제시해 줄 수 있을 것이다. 주희에게 中이란 어느 한 곳에도 치우치지 않고 편벽되지도 않는 ‘마음의 상태’이며, 이런 마음의 상태는 天下의 大本으로 이미 인간의 덕(德)으로 내재되어 있는 천리(天理)의 당연함을 의미한다. 이러한 맥락에서 주희의 中은 ‘내면의 성찰’에 초점을 두고 있으며 이는 여러 가지 문제의 해결 방안을 자신의 내부에 초점을 두고 풀어간다고 할 수 있다. 반면 정약용에게 中이란 사람이 도덕주체의 자세로 노력해 나가는 꾸준한 ‘실천’으로, 문제를 해결하는데 있어서 사람과의 관계 속에서의 ‘적극적인 실천 태도’에 초점을 둔다고 할 수 있다. 그리고 심대윤에게 中이란 사람과 사람 사이에 갈등 상황이 생겼을 때, 해답은 나에게 있는 것이 아니라 갈등을 겪고 있는 ‘사람들 속’에서 찾아내는 것이다. 따라서 심대윤은 ‘외면적 갈등의 대처 방식’에 초점을 두고 있다고 할 수 있다. 이렇게 『中庸』에 나오는 中에 대한 세 학자의 견해를 종합하여 中을 “상황에 따른 적절한 균형성”으로 정의한다. 그리고 『中庸』 13장에서 등장하는 庸德之行과 庸言之謹에 대한 세 학자의 견해를 분석하여 중용(中庸)의 다른 핵심 개념인 庸의 의미를 파악하고자 한다. 주희에게 庸이란 일상의 도리(平常)를 뜻한다. 이때 일상의 도리(平常)란 ‘일상적인 도덕을 행하는 것’과 ‘평상시 말을 삼가는 것’인 뜻을 내포하고 있다. 여기서 주희는 ‘일상적인 도리(平常之理)를 따르는 인간은 바름의 기준이 되어야 한다’는 점을 강조한다. 따라서 주희에게 중용(中庸)이란, 어느 한 곳에도 치우치지 않고 편벽되지도 않는 마음의 상태가 본성(本性)으로 이미 인간의 덕(德)으로 내재되어 있으니 ‘일상적인 도덕을 행하는 것’과 ‘평상시 말을 삼가는 것’에 떳떳함을 가지고 노력함을 말한다. 반면 정약용에게 庸이란 ‘항상(恒常)’ㆍ‘경상(經常)’으로 보고 있으며 중요한 것은 실천함에 있어서 꾸준히 행하는 ‘지속성’이라고 강조한다. 따라서 정약용에게 중용(中庸)은 어느 한 곳에도 치우치지 않고 편벽되지 않은 신중한 상황적 판단과 조심스러운 태도를 가지고 그러한 상태를 ‘꾸준히 성취할 수 있도록 해야 함’을 의미한다. 마지막으로 심대윤에게 庸은 平常으로서 곧 謙을 말하는 것이라고 해석하며 ‘사회 안에서 타인과의 조화로움’에 초점을 둔다. 따라서 심대윤에게 중용(中庸)이란, 타인과의 관계 속에서 갈등이 생겼을 때 禮를 통해 전반적으로 많은 단서를 모아 상황을 적절히 파악하여 균형을 찾아 해결하는 ‘겸손(謙)의 태도’라고 볼 수 있다. 이를 종합해 보면, 庸이란 ‘상황에 따른 적절한 균형성(中)’을 이루기 위해 사람이 가야 할 “행보(行步)”라고 할 수 있다.
This thesis focuses on rediscovering diverse aspects and values of zhong(中) which is a state of keeping to the middle way without lack or excess and yong(庸) which is a state without change in mind while maintaining cleanness and blamelessness, out of “Zhongyong” through three kinds of levels like introspection attitudes of moral subjects and outward conflicts in order to solve the problems of polarization which appear in the modern society. In the first chapter of “Zhongyong” it is stated that “zhong(中) is a state where joy, anger, sorrow and happiness have not been revealed and he(和) is that everything is moderated after being revealed. Therefore zhong(中) is the great foundation of the world and he(和) is its common way.” I analyze the diverse differences of zhong(中) among the opinions of Zhu Xi(朱熹, 1130∼1200), Jeong Yagyong(丁若鏞, 1762∼1836) and Shim Daeyoon(白雲, 1806∼1872) about the definitions of zhong(中) and he(和) above. Analyzing the opinions implied like this not only helps people to understand zhong(中) distinctly, but also will be able to propose clearly how people can properly respond to the diverse aspects of conflicts that they may encounter in their daily lives through zhong(中). For Zhu Xi, zhong(中) is a “state of mind” that is neither one-sided nor prejudiced and such a mental state means that heavenly principle which is already inherent with human morality as a great foundation of the world is natural. In this context, zhong(中) of Zhu Xi focuses on “introspection” and it can be said that it solves the various problems by focusing on one’s inner self. For Jeong Yagyong on the other hand zhong(中) is a consistent practice where people keep making efforts with the attitudes of moral subjects and it can be said that it focuses on “the active attitude of practice” in a relationship with people to solve the problems. And for Shim Daeyoon if there is an interpersonal conflict zhong(中) is to find a solution for the conflict “from the person or people” in conflict not from myself. Therefore it is possible to describe that he focuses on “dealing with conflicts outwardly” zhong(中) is defined as “a proper balance depending on the circumstances” by summarizing the opinions of the three scholars about zhong(中) from “Zhongyong” as above. And I intend to figure out the meaning of yong(庸) which is another key concept of “Zhongyong” by analyzing the opinions of the three scholars about Yongdukjihang(庸德之行) which means the practice of virtues and Yongeonjigeun(庸言之謹) which means refraining from speaking in the 13th chapter of “Zhongyong” yong(庸) means normality and constancy(平常) to Zhu Xi Here normality and constancy include “the practice of ordinary virtues” and “refraining from speaking in usual days” Here Zhu Xi emphasizes that “people who follow their ordinary duties need to be the standard of rightness” Therefore for Zhu Xi the nature of Zhongyong(中庸) is a “state of mind” that is neither one-sided nor prejudiced and it is to honorably make efforts for “the practice of ordinary virtues” and to “refrain from speaking in usual days” because it is already inherent with human morality. On the other hand Jeong Yagyong sees yong(庸) as normal and constant and he emphasizes that what is important is persistency maintained consistently during practice. Therefore Zhongyong(中庸) that he has in mind means “to ensure to consistently achieve” such a state with prudent situational judgment and cautious attitude that are neither one-sided nor prejudiced. For the last time, Shim Daeyoon interprets yong(庸) as normality and constancy(平常) which means modesty and he focuses on “harmony with others in society” Zhongyong(中庸) that he emphasizes can be understood as “attitude of modesty” to remove troubles through Li(禮) by figuring out the situation properly after collecting many clues across the board and seeking balance if there is a conflict in a relationship with others. Taken together it is possible to describe that yong(庸) is a “path(行步)” people should follow in order to achieve “a proper balance(中) depending on the circumstances.”
This thesis focuses on rediscovering diverse aspects and values of zhong(中) which is a state of keeping to the middle way without lack or excess and yong(庸) which is a state without change in mind while maintaining cleanness and blamelessness, out of “Zhongyong” through three kinds of levels like introspection attitudes of moral subjects and outward conflicts in order to solve the problems of polarization which appear in the modern society. In the first chapter of “Zhongyong” it is stated that “zhong(中) is a state where joy, anger, sorrow and happiness have not been revealed and he(和) is that everything is moderated after being revealed. Therefore zhong(中) is the great foundation of the world and he(和) is its common way.” I analyze the diverse differences of zhong(中) among the opinions of Zhu Xi(朱熹, 1130∼1200), Jeong Yagyong(丁若鏞, 1762∼1836) and Shim Daeyoon(白雲, 1806∼1872) about the definitions of zhong(中) and he(和) above. Analyzing the opinions implied like this not only helps people to understand zhong(中) distinctly, but also will be able to propose clearly how people can properly respond to the diverse aspects of conflicts that they may encounter in their daily lives through zhong(中). For Zhu Xi, zhong(中) is a “state of mind” that is neither one-sided nor prejudiced and such a mental state means that heavenly principle which is already inherent with human morality as a great foundation of the world is natural. In this context, zhong(中) of Zhu Xi focuses on “introspection” and it can be said that it solves the various problems by focusing on one’s inner self. For Jeong Yagyong on the other hand zhong(中) is a consistent practice where people keep making efforts with the attitudes of moral subjects and it can be said that it focuses on “the active attitude of practice” in a relationship with people to solve the problems. And for Shim Daeyoon if there is an interpersonal conflict zhong(中) is to find a solution for the conflict “from the person or people” in conflict not from myself. Therefore it is possible to describe that he focuses on “dealing with conflicts outwardly” zhong(中) is defined as “a proper balance depending on the circumstances” by summarizing the opinions of the three scholars about zhong(中) from “Zhongyong” as above. And I intend to figure out the meaning of yong(庸) which is another key concept of “Zhongyong” by analyzing the opinions of the three scholars about Yongdukjihang(庸德之行) which means the practice of virtues and Yongeonjigeun(庸言之謹) which means refraining from speaking in the 13th chapter of “Zhongyong” yong(庸) means normality and constancy(平常) to Zhu Xi Here normality and constancy include “the practice of ordinary virtues” and “refraining from speaking in usual days” Here Zhu Xi emphasizes that “people who follow their ordinary duties need to be the standard of rightness” Therefore for Zhu Xi the nature of Zhongyong(中庸) is a “state of mind” that is neither one-sided nor prejudiced and it is to honorably make efforts for “the practice of ordinary virtues” and to “refrain from speaking in usual days” because it is already inherent with human morality. On the other hand Jeong Yagyong sees yong(庸) as normal and constant and he emphasizes that what is important is persistency maintained consistently during practice. Therefore Zhongyong(中庸) that he has in mind means “to ensure to consistently achieve” such a state with prudent situational judgment and cautious attitude that are neither one-sided nor prejudiced. For the last time, Shim Daeyoon interprets yong(庸) as normality and constancy(平常) which means modesty and he focuses on “harmony with others in society” Zhongyong(中庸) that he emphasizes can be understood as “attitude of modesty” to remove troubles through Li(禮) by figuring out the situation properly after collecting many clues across the board and seeking balance if there is a conflict in a relationship with others. Taken together it is possible to describe that yong(庸) is a “path(行步)” people should follow in order to achieve “a proper balance(中) depending on the circumstances.”