退溪의 太極論 硏究

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 영남퇴계학연구원 ㆍ수록지정보 : 퇴계학논집 / 16권
ㆍ저자명 : 황상희

목차

Ⅰ. 緖論
Ⅱ. 太極論
1. 一陰一陽의 太極
2. 率性之道의 太極
3. 太極과 天命의 관계
Ⅲ. 無極而太極論
1. 極에 대한 해석
2. 실존하는 無極而太極
3. 無極而太極과 天命
Ⅳ. 結論
참고문헌

한국어 초록

본 논문의 목적은 退溪의 太極觀을 살펴보는 데에 있다. 橫渠는 虛를
지극히 善하다고 하고 하였다. 橫渠는 太虛가 인간에게 응하면 神이니
이 神을 보존하는 것을 중요하다고 여겼다. 濂溪의 ‘無極而太極’은 動靜
으로 陰陽을 낳는다. 橫渠와 濂溪가 말하는 太虛와 太極은 天이 인간을
낳는 시원성을 강조하여 말하고 있다.
周濂溪의 動靜論에 朱子는 動靜하게 하는 ‘所以’가 理임을 부가적으로
설명했다. 朱子는 太極과 陰陽을 形而上과 形而下로 나눈다. 朱子가 만들어 놓은 理氣의 존재론에서 太極은 그 이전의 누렸던 종교적 시원성의
권위가 상당부분 손상되었다.
退溪는 太極과 理의 차원에도 體用이 있다고 한다. 退溪의 太極은 합
리적 理法性을 뛰어 넘어 스스로의 작용을 인정한다. 그리고 太極을 率
性이라고 말한다. 朱子가 一陰一陽의 道로 이법화 시킨 太極을 退溪는
天이 命한 性을 따르는 太極으로 자리매김하였다. 天이 부여한 내 삶을
다 사는 것이 초월성과 신성을 만나는 길이라고 믿는 退溪의 종교성을
알 수 있다. 또한 退溪는 無極而太極을 ‘지극한 有와 지극한 實이 존재’
한다고 해석하였다.

영어 초록

Chang Heng-qu argued that emptiness(虛) is very good. He
believed that when Taegeuk(太虛) responds to humans, it’s god, so
it’s important to preserve this god. Zhou Dunyi’s Mugeuk(無極) of
''jamugeukyiwitaegeuk(自無極而爲太極)’ is the root before Taegeuk,
and therefore, Mugeuk can be regarded as another name for god.
Chang Heng-qu’s and Zhou Dunyi’s Taegeuk and Mugeuk are
energy(氣). Regarding Zhou Dunyi’s theory of movements(動靜論),
Zhu Xi additionally explained that the reason for movements is the
principle(理). He divided Taegeuk and yin and yang as
metaphysical and physical. In his ontology of the fundamental
principle(理氣), the authority of Taegeuk with religious originality
which it enjoyed in the former theory of energy was damaged
considerably. Before Zhu Xi, god(上帝), the Cheon(天), Taegeuk,
Mugeuk and etc. were assumed in the ontology, but at the time of
Zhu Xi, the biggest authority of the theory of movements was
granted to Taegeuk, and its existence was defined as a reasonable
principle and law. Zhu Xi’s energy has self-contradictory functions
both manifesting and hiding the principle simultaneously.
Toegye argued that there are a principle and its application in
the level of Taegeuk and the principle, too. He acknowledged the
own functions of Taegeuk beyond the rational principle and law and
explained Taegeuk as nature. While Zhu Xi made Taegeuk as the
principle and law for the truth of one-yin-and-one-yang-in-turn,
Toegye considered it as following the nature ordered by the heaven. It shows his religiosity who believed that it was the way
to encounter transcendence and sanctity to live all of one’s own
life given by the heaven. Moreover, he interpreted ''MugeukyiTaegeuk
(無極而太極)'' as that ‘utmost existence(有) and utmost fundamentals
(實) exist.’
Toegye’s achievement is that while Zhu Xi considered the
foundation of Taegeuk as the rational principle and law, stained its
authority of originality, and regarded humans as the beings
confined by energy, Toegye insisted that it was Taegeuk ‘to follow
the nature commanded by the heaven,’ explained that Taegeuk has
the level of a principle and its application, and therefore, restored
energy as the agent manifesting the principle.

참고 자료

없음