Chapter III
Chapter III, Sec. 1: Sijeongju (侍天主) View of Heaven
1. Indigenous Modernity of the Sijeongju (侍天主, Serving the Lord of Heaven) View of Heaven
a. The Western Formal (Morphological) View of Heaven
The heliocentric theory and Calvin's doctrine of predestination, which are representative of Western modernity, were both changes in perspective regarding the View of Heaven (天觀, cheon'gwan), View of Earth (地觀, jigwan), and View of Humanity (人間觀, in'gangwan). Since the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity constitute the most fundamental foundation directly tied to human existence and survival, changes of epoch-marking significance such as those of the modern era are measured by transformations in these three views. It has been said that the motivating force behind the emergence of modern philosophical theology in the West lay in the Copernican revolution in astronomy.¹
The concepts of the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity were key terms for dividing the cosmos in the Eastern cosmological worldview represented by the Three Powers (三才, samjae) of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity. Park Won-gil has noted that in northern Shamanism, the structure of the universe is organized according to the theory of Three Realms (三界宇宙說, samgye ujuseol), which divides the cosmos into the upper, middle, and lower realms, or alternatively into the Heavenly Realm (天界), Human Realm (人界), and Earthly Realm (地界).² U Silha further argues that the Three-Number Differentiation (三數分化, samsu bunhwa) worldview — the basic framework of thought in northern Shamanism — consists of the Three Realms cosmology together with the World Tree (宇宙木, ujumok) belief, according to which the roots are connected to the underworld, the trunk exists in the human world, and the branches and crown are connected to the divine realm, as well as the theory of Three Souls (三魂說, samhonseol).³ U Silha has already argued that the Three-Number Differentiation worldview, through the fractal principle, spread into the Five Phases (五行), the Seven Stars faith, the Mongolian veneration of 99, and Europe's three-function system.⁴ The universal culture of Three-Number Differentiation related to traditional music and the World Tree is also traced to the umbilical cord.⁵
In Western thought, which shares a common origin in religion connected to northern Shamanism, the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity also appeared in the form of a three-function system. Dumézil has argued that the Indo-European mythology that forms the background for the emergence of Western thought is composed of a three-function system that assigns the functions of religion (Heaven), production (Earth), and warfare (Humanity), just as in the Eastern concept of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity (天地人).⁶ The ancient cities of Greece and Rome were likewise said to have been built upon this mythological background.⁷ Representative examples of the three-function system include India's caste system, the Trojan War in Greek and Roman civilization with its many associated events, and China's concept of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity. Eliade also identified it as a common element in world mythology.⁸ India's caste system, the figures of Hera, Aphrodite, and Athena in the Trojan War, and today's separation of powers into legislature, judiciary, and executive are all organized under the influence of the three-function system into military, production, and distribution. The three-function system is said to appear commonly across Europe, India, and China. Every three-function system is said to form a complete whole like the Taiji (太極), composed of three attributes like the Three Taiji (三太極) — Heaven (vertical), Earth (horizontal), and Humanity (three-dimensional) — which is another form of the Taiji.⁹ The View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity were foundational concepts for dividing the cosmos in the West from the age of mythology. The three-function system is the idea that the most efficient governance is achieved by dividing the world into religion (three-dimensional), politics (vertical), and economy (transformative, horizontal). The three-function system appears within the system of gods that manifests universally, including the Indo-Germanic tradition. The first function is sovereignty (主權), which has a dual nature: on the one hand, order and tranquility; on the other, sorcery and demonic qualities. This duality can be seen in India's Mitra-Varuna and in the Germanic Tyr and Odin. The second function is the warrior, represented by India's Indra, Rome's Mars, and the Germanic Thor. The third function is the farmer (production, beauty).¹⁰ The number three is said to have many elements that can be interpreted as a universal symbol of humanity, being related to the umbilical cord, which resembles a near-death experience.¹¹ The View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity can thus serve as a concept for comparing Eastern and Western thought.
That Heaven, Earth, and Humanity (天地人) as the Three Powers serves as a foundational concept in Western thought is also evident in the cosmology of Platonic philosophy — which is at the root of Western philosophy — being composed of three dimensions: universe, God, and humanity, just as in the Eastern concept of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity. The Biblical statement that humanity was created in the image of God was debated throughout the Middle Ages according to the Idea-Form theory of Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy. Raymond Panikkar (1918–present), one of today's leading representatives of pluralistic theology, holds that ever since human self-consciousness emerged, all things have in fact been composed of three dimensions: universe, God, and humanity, and he calls this triple relationship the cosmotheandric vision or cosmotheandric intuition.¹² As is well known, Plato explained that the visible cosmos is a reflection of the invisible world of Ideas. In this context, the invisible world of Ideas corresponds to the Eastern concept of Heaven (天), the visible world corresponds to the Eastern concept of Earth (地), and the observing being corresponds to the Eastern concept of Humanity (人).
Western philosophy has long been characterized — as expressed in Whitehead's famous remark¹³ — by the enormous influence of Platonic thought. Plato's ideas were transformed by his disciple Aristotle into a form better suited to explaining reality: Aristotle explained Ideas as Form (形相, hyeongsan) and the earth as Matter (質料, jillyo). In Aristotle's conception, the universe took the form of the Formal Heaven and the Material Earth — a world in which the form of Heaven transforms Earth as matter. Humanity is regarded as the being that helps Heaven's form manifest itself on Earth.
The Western View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity that originates with Aristotle can be called ontological, because it presupposes substance when explaining change. Ontology and generationism (生成論, saengseongnon) have become the primary systems of thought that distinguish East from West in contemporary discourse.¹⁴ In an Eastern system of thought that thinks from the whole to the part, from above to below, a generative system of thought forms in which change is explained without positing substance; in a Western system of thought that proceeds from part to premise, an ontological system of thought forms in which change is explained through the substance of individual parts.
François Jullien, who applied Deleuze's theory of immanence to Eastern thought, also regards the West, which explains change through substance, as ontological, and the East, which explains it through attributes, as generative. A representative example is found in medicine: Eastern medicine, dealing with the living body, has sparse anatomical charts, while Western medicine, dealing with the dead body, has detailed ones. From the standpoint of Western ontology represented by substantialism, all of the following — today's atomism that represents the West, the monotheism that represented medieval Western thought, and Plato's Ideas that represented ancient Western thought — can be regarded alike as a Formal (形相的, hyeongsanjeok) View of Heaven, i.e., as forms conceived as substances. In the ontological View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity, the substance underlying change was formerly posited as God; but in the modern era, which negates God, change came to be explained through matter alone, without God.
Aristotle's theory of substance (實體論, silcheron) is an ontological theory holding that for the process of change to constitute a logical explanation, it must necessarily be explained through substance. For example, according to Aristotle's theory, for water to transform into fire, there must be a substance possessing the attribute that enables water to become fire; otherwise, it does not constitute a rational discipline. By contrast, the fractal Taeul (太乙) and Taeil (太一) of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases are etymologically deeply related to fractals, because the character 태 (太) can be interpreted to mean "oscillating between the maximum and minimum."¹⁵ The resonance principle (感應原理, gamŭng walli) can change without any substance whatsoever.
The four causes (四原因, sa wonin) are the substantive causes of this change, and the four elements are the matter that generates change. Aristotle held that the universe is composed of four elements: earth, water, fire, and wind (地水火風). By the same principle, the universe is composed of four causes: formal cause, final cause, efficient cause, and material cause. Seo Myeong-eung took note of this and emphasized that Shao Kangjie's (邵康節) theory of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases is more logical than the theory of four causes. Seo Myeong-eung interpreted Shao Kangjie's Former Heaven studies (先天易學) as substance (體) and Western science as function (用), arguing that Western science as represented by Aristotle's four-cause theory was derived from the system of Former Heaven studies.¹⁶ Among the four causes, the material cause and formal cause are intrinsic to things, but the efficient cause and final cause — which set things in motion and realize their purpose — exist outside things. The difference between the Eastern theory of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases and the Western theories of four causes and four elements lay in whether change was explained through substance. The representative Chinese comparative philosopher Mou Zongsan (牟宗三) has stated that "Western philosophy understands the personal God (人格神, in'gyeoksin) through the concept of 'substance' (實體), whereas Chinese philosophy understands the Way of Heaven (天道, Cheon'do) through the concept of 'function' (作用)."¹⁷ Against this, the East explained the cause of change not through substance but through "gi (氣)" or "resonance (感應, gamŭng)." Nahan Heungshun (羅欽順), who is said to have succeeded Zhu Xi, speaks of resonance: "What resonates is gi, and the principle of resonance is the order that causes resonance to occur without fail."¹⁸ Today, it is said that all things are synchronized as in resonance.¹⁹ According to the contemporary quantum mechanical worldview, which holds that all things simultaneously possess both particle and wave nature, the West — which emphasizes particles — explains through substantialism, while the East — which emphasizes waves — explains through resonance theory. Resonance explains the contingency and emergence of life better than substance can.²⁰
If form and matter combining through purpose and efficient cause constitutes the four causes by which substance is formed, then the differentiation of matter is the four great elements (四大, sadae) of earth, water, fire, and wind. When the theory of four elements is interpreted as a cycle, the four elements become the four phases of the cycle: contraction (water) → compression and explosion (earth) → expansion (fire) → dispersion (wind). Aristotle further substantialized the theory of earth, water, fire, and wind that predated Empedocles. Dumézil has argued that in the anthropological structure of the Indo-European imaginary composed of ascent and descent, the substantialist cosmological view was created as the four-element theory, in which fire and wind ascend and earth and water descend.²¹
The four-element theory and the theory of four causes can be said to be closely related. In India, where the four-element worldview prevailed, logic similar to the four-cause theory also developed; the process of explaining the change of the four elements can be said to connect directly to the four-cause theory.
The four-cause theory was regarded as the most rational Western theory for explaining the universe even up to the seventeenth century, when Matteo Ricci lived. Therefore, in the Western Formal View of Heaven, Plato's Idea or Christianity's monotheistic God — as a fifth element (第五元素) separate from earth, water, fire, and wind — became the center of the View of Heaven. Unlike the East, the Western View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity — with its clearly demarcated boundaries — establishes a mode of liminality through the substance of the fifth element rather than through intrinsic liminality.
Aristotle's four-cause theory was used by Matteo Ricci in the Tianzhu Shiyi (天主實義, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven) as an argument that the cosmology of earth, water, fire, and wind is more scientific than the cosmology of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. Matteo Ricci used Aristotle's four-cause theory to prove the existence of the Lord of Heaven (天主, Cheonju). The material cause and formal cause that constitute things are intrinsic to things, but the efficient cause and final cause that set things in motion and realize their purpose exist outside things — and that, he argued, is precisely the Lord of Heaven. The Tianzhu Shiyi, Chapter 1, Section 6, states: "There is not a single thing under heaven that does not possess these four. Among the four, the formal and material — these two are within things, constituting the intrinsic nature of things, perhaps called Yin and Yang. The efficient and final — these two are outside things, transcending things and prior to them, and cannot constitute the intrinsic nature of things. I hold: the Lord of Heaven is what makes things what they are; he is spoken of only as 'efficient' and 'final,' not as 'formal' or 'material.'"²²
The two systems of thought may appear similar, but the difference was that while Yin-Yang and the Five Phases explains change through attributes, earth, water, fire, and wind explains it through substance — and this difference produced a major divergence in the modernity of East and West. In the West, as seen in medieval architecture and art, even the attributes of God are manifested through the four attributes of earth, water, fire, and wind.
Today, most East Asians prefer the Western traditional View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity — which does not acknowledge spirit-divinities (神明, sinmyeong) — as a scientific worldview. However, measured by the Eastern View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity, the Western view, which does not acknowledge spirit-divinities, is also a View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity established under certain particular assumptions. The Western View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity can be called an ontological View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity — one that has as its background the ontology of explaining change through substance, originating with Aristotle.
In sum, the Western ontological View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity is represented by the worldview of earth, water, fire, and wind originating with Aristotle. In the Western case, which observes things from below to above, substance is divided into essence and phenomenon; consequently, phenomenon is the formal essence transforming the phenomenal matter as substance. Against this, generationism does not presuppose substance, so the East does not distinguish phenomenon from essence — phenomenon and essence are unified as one, as in Yin-Yang and the Five Phases, and change is explained through monism.
Notes & References (3)
FOOTNOTES — Section a:
1. Richard Schaeffler, tr. Yi Jongjin, Phänomenologie der Religion [Phenomenology of Religion] (Seoul: Hawoo, 2023), pp. 241–242.
2. Park Won-gil, Shamanism of the Eurasian Steppe Empires (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2001), p. 36.
3. U Silha, Structure and Principles of Traditional Music: 'Dance of the Three Taiji' — East Asian Music (Seoul: Sonamu, 2004), p. 202; reprinted in Heo Ho-ik, Korean Culture and the Theory of Heaven-Earth-Humanity Harmony (Seoul: Dongyeon, 2020), p. 163.
4. U Silha, The Three-Number Differentiation Worldview: Northeast Asian Mother Culture, Eurasian Mother Culture (Sonamu, 2012), pp. 279–298.
5. Kim Yeong-gyun, "A Study of the Umbilical Cord and the Number Three," Comparative Folklore Studies 44 (Comparative Folklore Society, 2011); Kim Yeong-gyun, The Umbilical Cord Code (Batangso, 2011).
6. Kim Hyeonja, Georges Dumézil: Comparative Studies of Indo-European Mythology (Seoul: Minumsa, 2018).
7. Fustel de Coulanges, tr. Kim Eungjong, The Ancient City: A Study on the Religion, Laws, and Institutions of Greece and Rome (Seoul: Akanet, 2000).
8. Mircea Eliade, tr. Yi Yongju, A History of Religious Ideas, Vol. 1: From the Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries (Seoul: Ihaksa, 2005), pp. 155–156.
9. Obayashi Taryo and Kodama Yoshiyo, tr. Gwon Taehyo, Introduction to Mythology (Seoul: Saemunsa, 2003), pp. 158–159.
10. Ibid.
11. Kim Yeong-gyun, The Umbilical Cord Code: A Cultural History of Straw Ropes, Snakes, and Umbilical Cords (Seoul: Batangso, 2011), pp. 129–130.
12. Heo Ho-ik, Heaven-Earth-Humanity Theology: A New Direction for Korean Theology (Seoul: Dongyeon, 2020), pp. 338–357, 538–541.
13. A. N. Whitehead, tr. O Yeonghwan, Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology (Seoul: Minumsa, 1994), p. 109.
14. Kim Gyeongsu, The Generationism of Laozi and Zhuangzi (Seoul: Munsacheol, 2015); Yi Jeongwoo, World History of Philosophy, Vol. 4: Horizons of Post-Modern Thought (Seoul: Gil, 2024).
15. Park Junyeong, "A Study on the Formation and Development of the Concept of Ghosts and Spirits in Pre-Qin China: Centered on the 'gui (鬼)' Section of the Shuowen Jiezi," M.A. thesis, Myongji University, 2012, p. 58; Jo Yeonguk, "A Study on the Cosmological Ontology of the Dongui Bogam," Daoist Culture Studies 33 (2010), pp. 119–120; Do Gwangsun, "Scientific Thought in Daoism," Journal of Daoist Studies 5(1) (1990), p. 5; Yi Changil, The Philosophy of Shao Kangjie: Former Heaven Studies and Correlative Thinking (Seoul: Simsan, 2007), p. 275; Kim Su-in, "A Study on the Cultivation Theory in Sonam Jeong Sa-cho's 'Taiji Lian Neifa'," M.A. thesis, Wonkwang University, 2011.
16. Yi Bongho, The Philosophy of Seo Myeong-eung, Teacher of King Jeongjo: A Joseon Scholar's Response to Western Science (Dongkwaseo, 2014), p. 231.
17. Mou Zongsan, Eastern Philosophy and Aristotle: Original Title — Lectures on the Theory of Four Causes (Busan: Sogang, 2001), p. 84.
18. Choe Jindeok, A Defense of Zhu Xi Studies: The Philosophy of Iibunsun of Na Jeongam (Seoul: Cheonggye, 2000), p. 147.
19. Steven Strogatz, tr. Jo Hyeon-uk, Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order (Paju: Gimm-Young, 2005), pp. 203, 389.
20. Moon Yeong-bin, "Integrated Understanding of Life and Its Social-Ethical Implications," Christian Social Ethics 12 (2006), pp. 126–131.
21. Yun Yunrak, "Aristotle's Theory of Elements: Focused on the Generation-Destruction Mechanism of Elements in the De Generatione et Corruptione," Western Classical Studies 31 (2008), pp. 83–108; Gilbert Durand, tr. Jin Hyeongjun, The Anthropological Structures of the Imaginary (Paju: Munhakdongne, 2007).
22. Matteo Ricci, tr. Yi Suung, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (Tianzhu Shiyi) (Waegwan: Bundo Publishing, 1984), pp. 33–34; Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u Compared through the Concepts of Shangdi and Heart-Mind," Minjok Munhwa 61 (2022), pp. 125–172.
b. The Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven
Traditionally, the Eastern concept of "Heaven" (天, cheon) was divided into two: first, the concept of "Heaven" that corresponds to and is paired with "Earth" (地, ji) within the compound "Heaven-and-Earth" (天地, cheonji); and second, the Heaven before the division into Heaven-and-Earth — the Heaven of Wuji (無極) and Taiji (太極) that gave birth to Heaven-and-Earth — that is, the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天, cheon'oe cheon), the sky above the sky. Geum Jangtae has noted that "'Heaven' is the ultimate being that presides above all 'spirit-divinities' (神, sin), and all spirit-divinities each bear a certain role — like the officials of a court (朝廷) presided over by Heaven — forming one world without conflict."²³ Zhang Zai (張載) likewise distinguished between "the Heaven referred to in the compound Heaven-and-Earth" and "the Heaven above Heaven."²⁴ In the Eastern concept of the divine, the Supreme God (上帝, Sangje) is not a being belonging to Heaven, unlike the Western God. Heaven and Earth are themselves one thing (一物, ilmul) created by the Supreme God. Indeed, in the Eight Trigrams (八卦) of the Book of Changes, Heaven and Earth — Qian (乾) and Kun (坤) — occupy one element among the Eight Trigrams as a single entity. In Eastern thought, the Heaven-beyond-Heaven exists outside of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, yet because Heaven-Earth-Humanity is created by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (as Zhang Zai recognized), it is also, like the Eight Trigrams, contained within Heaven-Earth-Humanity. It has also been argued that the Supreme God (上帝) of the Book of Odes (詩經, Sigyeong) shares five personal attributes with the Creator in the Biblical Psalms: Creator of all things (造生者), Revealer (啓示者), Overseer of Covenant (契約의 주관자), Savior (救援者), and Moral Source (道德的 근원).²⁵ This is analogous to how, in the West, before Adam and Eve were divided, it was the same Adam even after the division into Adam and Eve. Thus, when the concept of Heaven-Earth-Humanity posits Heaven as the Heaven-beyond-Heaven outside of Heaven-and-Earth, then Earth (地) becomes the Heaven-and-Earth created by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven; but when Heaven-divided-from-Earth is taken as Heaven, then Earth (地) becomes the concept of Earth (地) divided from that Heaven-and-Earth pairing. This ambiguous double usage of the concept of Heaven is also the reason why discussions of the Eastern View of Heaven and View of Earth are difficult and prone to confusion. This paper intends to clarify the distinction between Heaven as Heaven-beyond-Heaven and Heaven as divided from Heaven-and-Earth before discussing the concept of Heaven.
This applies equally to the concept of the divine (神, sin). When the concept of Heaven (天) is used as the Heaven-beyond-Heaven that created Heaven-and-Earth, the divinity at that level means the Supreme God (上帝); while the divinity that governs the operation of Heaven-and-Earth within the Heaven-and-Earth produced by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven becomes the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven and Earth (天地神明, cheonji sinmyeong) or simply spirit-divinities (神明, sinmyeong). However, when distinguished from humanity, both the Supreme God and spirit-divinities have been collectively called "divinities" (神, sin), so the concept of the divine also needs to be distinguished. In Donghak Thought, the Supreme God or Lord of Heaven (天主, Cheonju) refers to the divine of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, and this differs from the concept of divinity in existing Eastern thought, which often refers to spirit-divinities.
Compared with the West, the West has unified the divine by primarily emphasizing only the Supreme God of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, whereas the Eastern concept of Heaven had the meaning of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven strongly emphasized in the era of the three dynasties of Xia, Shang, and Zhou, but in Neo-Confucianism it was used almost exclusively as the concept of Heaven as one of the Heaven-and-Earth pair — that is, as the Principle-Heaven (理法天, ibeopcheon).
The Principle-Heaven (理法天) is a term that emphasizes the rational and normative aspect of Heaven rather than its personal dimension. This reflects the Eastern thought that because the Heaven-above-Heaven created Heaven-and-Earth according to principle, the Heaven-below-Heaven operates according to fixed laws. The Heaven-below-Heaven, having been made according to principle, is relatively lacking in personal attributes; yet because the Heaven-above-Heaven exists, the Principle-Heaven is also variable — but in Eastern thought, the attributes of Heaven were fixed as the Principle-Heaven.
This applies equally not only to the concept of the divine but also to the concept of Earth (地). When Heaven is used as the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, the concept of Earth becomes the "Heaven-and-Earth" already constituted by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven; in this case, Earth appears as the object and result of "creative transformation" (造化, johwa) or "transformation through non-action" (無爲而化, muwi ihwa) or "gi-transformation" (氣化, gihwa) brought about by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven. Thus in Donghak Thought, the terms "creative transformation," "transformation through non-action," and "gi-transformation" become the terms signifying the Earth (地) corresponding to the Heaven-beyond-Heaven.
The ambiguous double usage of the concepts of Heaven (天), Earth (地), and the divine (神) is similar in East and West. However, the reason the East uses them more ambiguously than the West is that, unlike the substantialist West, in the East where change proceeds through resonance, Heaven, Earth, and the divine are explained as changes in correlative thinking (相關的 思惟, sangwan'jeok sawi). In the East, where explanation is centered on attributes, the specific range of meaning for Heaven, Earth, and the divine may differ by context, but the attributes remain the same.
Correlative thinking corresponds to the aesthetic order in Western thought, so the Eastern concepts of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity can be more precisely defined as aesthetic terms.²⁶ Accordingly, the Eastern View of Heaven — divided by Yin-Yang as represented by "Heaven is round, Earth is square" (天圓地方, cheonwon jibang) and "Heaven is the Way, Earth is Virtue" (天道地德, cheondo jideok) — can be classified as an Assimilative (同化的, donghwajeok) View of Heaven; the View of Earth as a Condensing (凝縮的, eungchukjeok) View of Earth; and the View of Humanity as a Grafting (接化的, jeophajeok) View of Humanity.²⁷
Assimilation (同化, donghwa) is a term expressing the attribute commonly appearing in Heaven-round (天圓) relative to Earth-square (地方) and in the Way of Heaven (天道) relative to the Virtue of Earth (地德) — it is the making of heterogeneous natures or forms identical, as in "photosynthetic assimilation." Because assimilation integrates heterogeneous things into one while forming a principal-subordinate relationship,²⁸ it expresses the character of the circle of integration and the Way of order. The spiritual cultures of the East — Daoism, Buddhism, and Confucianism (儒佛仙, yubolseon) — also display the character of assimilation: Daoism assimilates to nature, Confucianism assimilates inwardly, and Buddhism assimilates to the Dharma.²⁹ Unlike the West, which analyzes and dominates, the East had an organic view of nature in which nature and humanity are one, and therefore pursued assimilation.
Condensation (凝縮, eungchuk) is a term expressing the attribute commonly appearing in Earth-square (地方) relative to Heaven-round (天圓) and in the Virtue of Earth (地德) relative to the Way of Heaven (天道) — it expresses the phenomenon in which different elements intertwine and solidify, as in "vapor condensation." Unlike assimilation, condensation does not change the component itself, but compresses heterogeneous beings into a small unified whole, characterized by the square's precise angularity, like the virtue of exactness. Both condensation and assimilation aim at unity, but the direction of force is opposite. If assimilation is a force that continuously expands outward from the self as center, condensation is a force that contracts inward. If assimilation is neutralization and harmonization (中和), condensation is like return (回歸).³⁰ The material cultures of the East — art, music, and martial arts — sought maximum effect with minimum effort, like the aesthetic of empty space (餘白, yeobaek).
Grafting (接化, jeopwa) is a term expressing the meeting and merging of mutually opposing beings — such as Heaven-round (天圓) relative to Earth-square (地方) and the Virtue of Earth (地德) relative to the Way of Heaven (天道) — into one harmony. Like the "접화군생" (jeopwa gunsaeng, "grafting to nurture all living things"), it expresses an integration in which two beings meet as equals and preserve their heterogeneity. If assimilation aims toward a center and condensation aims toward perfectionism, grafting advocates pluralism through the harmonization of mutual overcoming (相克, sanggeuk). This is fitting for the attribute of humanity — the fusion of Heaven-round (天圓) and Earth-square (地方) as expressed in the circle-square-angle (圓方角), and the fusion of the Way of Heaven (天道) and the Virtue of Earth (地德) as expressed in the virtuous gentleman (道德君子).
At this point, the Eastern concepts of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity form a relationship like Yi Yeong-ran's definition of liminality, in which phylogeny repeats ontogeny. "Qian is vigorous, Kun is compliant" (乾健坤順)³¹ — meaning that what Heaven determines, Earth carries out. If we designate Qian as Heaven (1) and Kun as Earth (2), then Earth's compliance (順) contains Heaven's vigor (健), carrying the meaning of 1+2. Likewise, Humanity — which grafts Heaven and Earth — forms the relationship 3, 1+2+3, (1+2+3)' within Heaven (1), Earth (2), Humanity (3). That is, condensation includes assimilation, and grafting includes assimilation, condensation, and even a third existence.
In contrast to the generative Eastern mode of thought, the ontological Western mode corresponds to differenciation (異化, ihwa) or segmentation (分化, bunhwa), the opposite of assimilation; and since this corresponds to ontological order, following the ontology of Aristotle that is the cornerstone of Western ontology, the Western View of Heaven can be classified as the Formal View of Heaven; the View of Earth as the Material (質料的, jillyojeok) View of Earth; and the View of Humanity as the Growth Theory (成長論的, seongjangnon'jeok) View of Humanity.
In the Eastern generative View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity — where things spontaneously differentiate from Wuji and Taiji — the Eastern View of Heaven becomes an Assimilative View of Heaven that integrates all things into one body. If the Daoist View of Heaven is an Assimilative View of Heaven toward the natural world, which is the creation of Heaven, then the Confucian View of Heaven can be called an Assimilative View of Heaven directed inward toward the mind of humanity, which is Heaven's masterpiece. Even the Buddhist View of Heaven — the closest to ontology within Eastern thought — can be called an Assimilative View of Heaven in ontology toward the being called Heaven.³²
Unlike the Western Three Powers, which explains change through substance, the Eastern View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity explains change through attributes; therefore, the laws of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases apply to the Eastern View of Heaven as they do to all things. The Yin-Yang and Five Phases operating as attributes apply not only to material things but also to spirit-divinities, so the Eastern Heaven is composed of countless spirit-divinities to which the laws of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases are applied.
The Eastern concept of the divine was not a singular concept like the Western absolute God, but a composite concept divided into the Supreme God (上帝) as the highest deity, the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven and Earth (天地神明), and ancestral spirits (祖上神). Unlike the West's few angels, Eastern spirit-divinities are so numerous that there are said to be countless buddhas in even a single speck of dust; packed throughout the cosmos like a computer, they operated the universe and were beings that, according to the law of Yin-Yang, possessed their own proper domain.³³ Eastern spirit-divinities, each guarding their Yin-Yang domain, were so autonomous that even the Supreme God could not interfere in the affairs of spirit-divinities, so in the East the highest divinity was nearly depersonalized into a principle and forgotten.³⁴ In the Eastern divine-human relationship, spirit-divinities were beings created by the Supreme God in a Yin-Yang relationship with humanity, just like all other beings; and the ancestral spirits that humans became after death — unlike spirit-divinities — did not involve themselves in the operation of Heaven-and-Earth, but were beings that oversaw humans cultivating themselves and combining with spirit-divinities in a Yin-Yang relationship.
If the constitutive principle of the Western traditional ontological Three Powers is the principle of earth, water, fire, and wind, then the constitutive principle of the Eastern traditional generative Three Powers is Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. If the Western View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity — starting from the three-function system in Greek-Roman and Indian mythology and arriving at Aristotle through earth, water, fire, and wind — was early systematized as the ontological View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of matter and form, then the Eastern generative View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity was formed over a long period through mutual interaction among Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, and Yin-Yang and the Five Phases.
The Eastern traditional View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity is broadly divided into the Three Powers perspective of the Book of Changes (主易의 三才觀) and the Three Realms perspective of Buddhism (佛敎의 三界觀). If the Three Powers perspective of the Book of Changes — composed according to the principles of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity — is the traditional Eastern generative Three Powers perspective, the Buddhist Three Realms perspective is closer to an ontological Three Powers perspective. The Eastern traditional View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity developed first with the Daoist Three Powers perspective of the Book of Changes, then through the introduction of the Buddhist ontological Three Realms perspective, finally being synthesized into a Neo-Confucian Three Powers perspective. In fact, Confucianism had almost no ontological cosmology before Buddhism was introduced, and the generative cosmology of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases was introduced first. It is natural that in the generative Eastern system of thought, the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity could only develop into a Three Powers perspective after the Buddhist ontological system of thought was introduced.
The Eastern Three Powers perspective — which, due to differences in natural and cultural environment, developed a more generative View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity than the West — was a View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of correlative thinking represented by Heaven-Earth-Humanity and Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. The theories of Yin-Yang, the Five Phases, and the Three Powers, said to have arisen independently at different times in history, share correlative thinking and began to be integrated in Confucianism from Dong Zhongshu's (董仲舒) theory of Heaven-Humanity Resonance (天人感應論); but they were fully integrated beginning with Zhou Dunyi's (周敦頤, 1017–1073) Taijitu Shuo (太極圖說, Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate Explained), which became the foundation of Neo-Confucianism. The Yin-Yang referred to in the Book of Changes developed in the order of the Asian shamanistic Three Powers of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity — similar to Europe's three-function system — and then the Five Phases. The developmental process of correlative thinking can be summarized as follows.
Although Yin-Yang, the Three Powers, the Five Phases, and the Eight Trigrams had different origins, they were each different perspectives on the same Three Powers, so they could be integrated once the differences in perspective were understood. Each of these was a minimal system for viewing the Three Powers from a particular perspective. Yin-Yang, the Three Powers, the Five Phases, and the Eight Trigrams become an integrative principle capable of interpreting the same Three Powers in detail, according to Shao Kangjie's (邵康節) method of doubling (加一倍法, ga ilbaepbeop).
First, Yin-Yang, as a universally common binary opposition, is the first stage of intuitively distinguishing things and becomes a principial attribute. In the generative Three Powers perspective that emphasizes attributes, Yin-Yang becomes the fundamental principle. As Zhu Xi stated: "Between Heaven and Earth there is Li and there is Qi. Li is the Way above form — the root of generating things. Qi is the instrument below form — the means of generating things. Therefore, in the generation of humans and things, they must first receive this Li and thus have their nature, and then receive this Qi and thus have their form" (天地之間, 有理有氣. 理也者, 形而上之道也, 生物之本也. 氣也者, 形而下之器也, 生物之具也. 是以人物之生, 必稟此理, 然後有性, 必稟此氣, 然後有形, Zhu Xi, Collected Works, Vol. 58, "Reply to Huang Daojun").³⁵ In a world where there is no form, if Yin-Yang manifests binary opposing attributes, then for these attributes to have substance in reality they must constitute a three-dimensional form; so it develops into the Three Powers (三才, samjae), the minimal system for constituting a three-dimensional form. Here the Three Powers are represented by the Three Powers of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity; and since the Three Powers developed from Yin-Yang into form, within Heaven-Earth-Humanity, Heaven holds the role of Yang, Earth the role of Yin, and Humanity the role of the mediating Center (中).
Once three-dimensional form is constituted through the Three Powers, just as in the material world a particle must simultaneously possess wave character in order to exist, the particle must constitute a Four Symbols (四象, sasang) system that can cycle as a wave. The Four Symbols system represented by the Four Qualities (元亨利貞, wonhyeongnijong), the four phases of generation-growth-harvest-storage (生長斂藏), and the four seasons is similar to the Four Symbols system constituted by earth, water, fire, and wind. However, the difference between the Four Symbols system of earth-water-fire-wind and the Four Symbols system of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases is that the earth-water-fire-wind system is a substantialist mode of thought that proceeds from below to above, and is therefore not an attributive mode of thought that develops into the Five Phases as attributes common to things.
The Four Symbols system must again constitute mutual overcoming (相克, sanggeuk) and mutual nourishment (相生, sangsaeng) to maintain continuous circulation; so it develops into the Five Phases (五行, ohaeng) — the minimal system of mutual overcoming and nourishment — and requires Earth (土, to) as the central mediating role.³⁶ However, even the Five Phases are still living numbers (生數, saengsu) that have not yet acquired the Yin-Yang that constitutes things; and for these living numbers to acquire Yin-Yang with the capacity for change in reality, the Five Phases must change into the Eight Trigrams (八卦, palgwe) — the minimal system of mutual overcoming and nourishment that can form as an even number.³⁷ The Eight Trigrams again require a center, becoming the Nine Palaces and Eight Trigrams (九宮八卦, gugu palgwe), which becomes the basic system of correlative thinking explaining the universe and develops into the River Chart and Luo Writing (河圖洛書, Hado Nakseo).
For the Nine Palaces of the River Chart and Luo Writing to manifest as an actual substance performing the operation of Heaven-and-Earth, the element of time is added, appearing as the Ten Heavenly Stems (十干, sipgan) and Twelve Earthly Branches (十二支, sipiji). The Ten Heavenly Stems and Twelve Earthly Branches contain Earth (土) elements in the time arrangement — such as Chen-Xu-Chou-Wei (辰戌丑未) — which mediate temporal change.³⁸ The Ten Heavenly Stems and Twelve Earthly Branches, respectively assigned to Heaven and Earth, operate through the twelve stages of cyclical vitality (十二運星, sibiryunseong)³⁹ — the operation of Heaven-and-Earth (天地之用, cheonjijiyong) — through the ascent of earthly qi and descent of heavenly qi (天氣下降 地氣上昇, cheon'gi hagang jigi sangsŭng), i.e., the ascent and descent of Heaven and Earth (天地昇降, cheonjiŭng'gang), for the purpose of Heaven-Earth transformation and nourishment (天地化育, cheonji hwayuk): the stages of embryonic formation (胞胎), nurturing birth (養生), bathing and capping (浴帶), official vigor (冠旺), decline and illness (衰病), and death and storage (死藏). If the Ten Heavenly Stems and Twelve Earthly Branches are like atoms in physics, then the twelve stages of cyclical vitality — the operation of Heaven-and-Earth — are like molecules, in which atoms combine to produce entirely different properties.
The twelve stages of cyclical vitality are an expression of Heaven-and-Earth's cyclical transformation and nourishment (天地化育) as the life cycle of a living being.⁴⁰ Like the meeting of man and woman, Heaven-and-Earth as Yin-Yang descend and ascend (天降地昇), beginning with the embryonic formation in which the seed of life is sown in the earth; the earth nurtures the seed; the seed goes out of the earth or out of the body to be bathed in the celestial rain and dew and forms as another individual wrapped in a sash — the bathing-and-capping stage; then it reaches the official vigor in which it takes on responsibilities and acts vigorously; and then it declines, falls ill, and is buried — these twelve stages. This is analogous to Campbell's twelve stages of the monomyth, seven character archetypes,⁴¹ the Ten Ox-Herding Pictures (尋牛圖, simuido), and similar processes. Kim Ji-ha expressed this as the "Yul-ryeo" (律呂).⁴² The operation of Heaven-and-Earth shows that the movement of Heaven-and-Earth is not mechanical and natural, but is the result of the utmost Sincerity, Reverence, and Faith (誠敬信, seonggyeongsin) of the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven-and-Earth. From the standpoint of Eastern thought, what Western atomistic modernity most neglected in its mechanistic view of nature was the omission of the Sincerity, Reverence, and Faith of spirit-divinities. Both Donghak Thought and Daesoon Thought refer to this as "the disease of no-Way" (無道病, mudobyeong).⁴³
The operation of Heaven-and-Earth influences not only everyday things but also the systems of thought, and Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism appear as reflections of the operation of Heaven-and-Earth: the embryonic formation of Heaven-and-Earth is expressed through the Daoist way of emptiness and non-being; the nurturing birth of Heaven-and-Earth through the Buddhist way of cessation and extinction; and the bathing-and-capping of Heaven-and-Earth through the Confucian way of following the decree (以詔, ijo).⁴⁴ While the Western View of Heaven explains the characteristics of Heaven through the substantive attributes of earth, water, fire, and wind, the East expresses the attributes of Heaven through the four attributes of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. While the Western View of Heaven is substantialist and therefore after the modern era differentiates endlessly as individual units like atoms, the Eastern View of Heaven shows a unified structure within each unit — atom, molecule, individual, society, etc. — of Yin-Yang, Three Powers, Five Phases, Eight Trigrams, Ten Heavenly Stems, Twelve Earthly Branches, and the like.
1. Richard Schaeffler, tr. Yi Jongjin, Phänomenologie der Religion [Phenomenology of Religion] (Seoul: Hawoo, 2023), pp. 241–242.
2. Park Won-gil, Shamanism of the Eurasian Steppe Empires (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2001), p. 36.
3. U Silha, Structure and Principles of Traditional Music: 'Dance of the Three Taiji' — East Asian Music (Seoul: Sonamu, 2004), p. 202; reprinted in Heo Ho-ik, Korean Culture and the Theory of Heaven-Earth-Humanity Harmony (Seoul: Dongyeon, 2020), p. 163.
4. U Silha, The Three-Number Differentiation Worldview: Northeast Asian Mother Culture, Eurasian Mother Culture (Sonamu, 2012), pp. 279–298.
5. Kim Yeong-gyun, "A Study of the Umbilical Cord and the Number Three," Comparative Folklore Studies 44 (Comparative Folklore Society, 2011); Kim Yeong-gyun, The Umbilical Cord Code (Batangso, 2011).
6. Kim Hyeonja, Georges Dumézil: Comparative Studies of Indo-European Mythology (Seoul: Minumsa, 2018).
7. Fustel de Coulanges, tr. Kim Eungjong, The Ancient City: A Study on the Religion, Laws, and Institutions of Greece and Rome (Seoul: Akanet, 2000).
8. Mircea Eliade, tr. Yi Yongju, A History of Religious Ideas, Vol. 1: From the Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries (Seoul: Ihaksa, 2005), pp. 155–156.
9. Obayashi Taryo and Kodama Yoshiyo, tr. Gwon Taehyo, Introduction to Mythology (Seoul: Saemunsa, 2003), pp. 158–159.
10. Ibid.
11. Kim Yeong-gyun, The Umbilical Cord Code: A Cultural History of Straw Ropes, Snakes, and Umbilical Cords (Seoul: Batangso, 2011), pp. 129–130.
12. Heo Ho-ik, Heaven-Earth-Humanity Theology: A New Direction for Korean Theology (Seoul: Dongyeon, 2020), pp. 338–357, 538–541.
13. A. N. Whitehead, tr. O Yeonghwan, Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology (Seoul: Minumsa, 1994), p. 109.
14. Kim Gyeongsu, The Generationism of Laozi and Zhuangzi (Seoul: Munsacheol, 2015); Yi Jeongwoo, World History of Philosophy, Vol. 4: Horizons of Post-Modern Thought (Seoul: Gil, 2024).
15. Park Junyeong, "A Study on the Formation and Development of the Concept of Ghosts and Spirits in Pre-Qin China: Centered on the 'gui (鬼)' Section of the Shuowen Jiezi," M.A. thesis, Myongji University, 2012, p. 58; Jo Yeonguk, "A Study on the Cosmological Ontology of the Dongui Bogam," Daoist Culture Studies 33 (2010), pp. 119–120; Do Gwangsun, "Scientific Thought in Daoism," Journal of Daoist Studies 5(1) (1990), p. 5; Yi Changil, The Philosophy of Shao Kangjie: Former Heaven Studies and Correlative Thinking (Seoul: Simsan, 2007), p. 275; Kim Su-in, "A Study on the Cultivation Theory in Sonam Jeong Sa-cho's 'Taiji Lian Neifa'," M.A. thesis, Wonkwang University, 2011.
16. Yi Bongho, The Philosophy of Seo Myeong-eung, Teacher of King Jeongjo: A Joseon Scholar's Response to Western Science (Dongkwaseo, 2014), p. 231.
17. Mou Zongsan, Eastern Philosophy and Aristotle: Original Title — Lectures on the Theory of Four Causes (Busan: Sogang, 2001), p. 84.
18. Choe Jindeok, A Defense of Zhu Xi Studies: The Philosophy of Iibunsun of Na Jeongam (Seoul: Cheonggye, 2000), p. 147.
19. Steven Strogatz, tr. Jo Hyeon-uk, Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order (Paju: Gimm-Young, 2005), pp. 203, 389.
20. Moon Yeong-bin, "Integrated Understanding of Life and Its Social-Ethical Implications," Christian Social Ethics 12 (2006), pp. 126–131.
21. Yun Yunrak, "Aristotle's Theory of Elements: Focused on the Generation-Destruction Mechanism of Elements in the De Generatione et Corruptione," Western Classical Studies 31 (2008), pp. 83–108; Gilbert Durand, tr. Jin Hyeongjun, The Anthropological Structures of the Imaginary (Paju: Munhakdongne, 2007).
22. Matteo Ricci, tr. Yi Suung, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (Tianzhu Shiyi) (Waegwan: Bundo Publishing, 1984), pp. 33–34; Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u Compared through the Concepts of Shangdi and Heart-Mind," Minjok Munhwa 61 (2022), pp. 125–172.
b. The Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven
Traditionally, the Eastern concept of "Heaven" (天, cheon) was divided into two: first, the concept of "Heaven" that corresponds to and is paired with "Earth" (地, ji) within the compound "Heaven-and-Earth" (天地, cheonji); and second, the Heaven before the division into Heaven-and-Earth — the Heaven of Wuji (無極) and Taiji (太極) that gave birth to Heaven-and-Earth — that is, the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天, cheon'oe cheon), the sky above the sky. Geum Jangtae has noted that "'Heaven' is the ultimate being that presides above all 'spirit-divinities' (神, sin), and all spirit-divinities each bear a certain role — like the officials of a court (朝廷) presided over by Heaven — forming one world without conflict."²³ Zhang Zai (張載) likewise distinguished between "the Heaven referred to in the compound Heaven-and-Earth" and "the Heaven above Heaven."²⁴ In the Eastern concept of the divine, the Supreme God (上帝, Sangje) is not a being belonging to Heaven, unlike the Western God. Heaven and Earth are themselves one thing (一物, ilmul) created by the Supreme God. Indeed, in the Eight Trigrams (八卦) of the Book of Changes, Heaven and Earth — Qian (乾) and Kun (坤) — occupy one element among the Eight Trigrams as a single entity. In Eastern thought, the Heaven-beyond-Heaven exists outside of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, yet because Heaven-Earth-Humanity is created by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (as Zhang Zai recognized), it is also, like the Eight Trigrams, contained within Heaven-Earth-Humanity. It has also been argued that the Supreme God (上帝) of the Book of Odes (詩經, Sigyeong) shares five personal attributes with the Creator in the Biblical Psalms: Creator of all things (造生者), Revealer (啓示者), Overseer of Covenant (契約의 주관자), Savior (救援者), and Moral Source (道德的 근원).²⁵ This is analogous to how, in the West, before Adam and Eve were divided, it was the same Adam even after the division into Adam and Eve. Thus, when the concept of Heaven-Earth-Humanity posits Heaven as the Heaven-beyond-Heaven outside of Heaven-and-Earth, then Earth (地) becomes the Heaven-and-Earth created by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven; but when Heaven-divided-from-Earth is taken as Heaven, then Earth (地) becomes the concept of Earth (地) divided from that Heaven-and-Earth pairing. This ambiguous double usage of the concept of Heaven is also the reason why discussions of the Eastern View of Heaven and View of Earth are difficult and prone to confusion. This paper intends to clarify the distinction between Heaven as Heaven-beyond-Heaven and Heaven as divided from Heaven-and-Earth before discussing the concept of Heaven.
This applies equally to the concept of the divine (神, sin). When the concept of Heaven (天) is used as the Heaven-beyond-Heaven that created Heaven-and-Earth, the divinity at that level means the Supreme God (上帝); while the divinity that governs the operation of Heaven-and-Earth within the Heaven-and-Earth produced by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven becomes the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven and Earth (天地神明, cheonji sinmyeong) or simply spirit-divinities (神明, sinmyeong). However, when distinguished from humanity, both the Supreme God and spirit-divinities have been collectively called "divinities" (神, sin), so the concept of the divine also needs to be distinguished. In Donghak Thought, the Supreme God or Lord of Heaven (天主, Cheonju) refers to the divine of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, and this differs from the concept of divinity in existing Eastern thought, which often refers to spirit-divinities.
Compared with the West, the West has unified the divine by primarily emphasizing only the Supreme God of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, whereas the Eastern concept of Heaven had the meaning of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven strongly emphasized in the era of the three dynasties of Xia, Shang, and Zhou, but in Neo-Confucianism it was used almost exclusively as the concept of Heaven as one of the Heaven-and-Earth pair — that is, as the Principle-Heaven (理法天, ibeopcheon).
The Principle-Heaven (理法天) is a term that emphasizes the rational and normative aspect of Heaven rather than its personal dimension. This reflects the Eastern thought that because the Heaven-above-Heaven created Heaven-and-Earth according to principle, the Heaven-below-Heaven operates according to fixed laws. The Heaven-below-Heaven, having been made according to principle, is relatively lacking in personal attributes; yet because the Heaven-above-Heaven exists, the Principle-Heaven is also variable — but in Eastern thought, the attributes of Heaven were fixed as the Principle-Heaven.
This applies equally not only to the concept of the divine but also to the concept of Earth (地). When Heaven is used as the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, the concept of Earth becomes the "Heaven-and-Earth" already constituted by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven; in this case, Earth appears as the object and result of "creative transformation" (造化, johwa) or "transformation through non-action" (無爲而化, muwi ihwa) or "gi-transformation" (氣化, gihwa) brought about by the Heaven-beyond-Heaven. Thus in Donghak Thought, the terms "creative transformation," "transformation through non-action," and "gi-transformation" become the terms signifying the Earth (地) corresponding to the Heaven-beyond-Heaven.
The ambiguous double usage of the concepts of Heaven (天), Earth (地), and the divine (神) is similar in East and West. However, the reason the East uses them more ambiguously than the West is that, unlike the substantialist West, in the East where change proceeds through resonance, Heaven, Earth, and the divine are explained as changes in correlative thinking (相關的 思惟, sangwan'jeok sawi). In the East, where explanation is centered on attributes, the specific range of meaning for Heaven, Earth, and the divine may differ by context, but the attributes remain the same.
Correlative thinking corresponds to the aesthetic order in Western thought, so the Eastern concepts of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity can be more precisely defined as aesthetic terms.²⁶ Accordingly, the Eastern View of Heaven — divided by Yin-Yang as represented by "Heaven is round, Earth is square" (天圓地方, cheonwon jibang) and "Heaven is the Way, Earth is Virtue" (天道地德, cheondo jideok) — can be classified as an Assimilative (同化的, donghwajeok) View of Heaven; the View of Earth as a Condensing (凝縮的, eungchukjeok) View of Earth; and the View of Humanity as a Grafting (接化的, jeophajeok) View of Humanity.²⁷
Assimilation (同化, donghwa) is a term expressing the attribute commonly appearing in Heaven-round (天圓) relative to Earth-square (地方) and in the Way of Heaven (天道) relative to the Virtue of Earth (地德) — it is the making of heterogeneous natures or forms identical, as in "photosynthetic assimilation." Because assimilation integrates heterogeneous things into one while forming a principal-subordinate relationship,²⁸ it expresses the character of the circle of integration and the Way of order. The spiritual cultures of the East — Daoism, Buddhism, and Confucianism (儒佛仙, yubolseon) — also display the character of assimilation: Daoism assimilates to nature, Confucianism assimilates inwardly, and Buddhism assimilates to the Dharma.²⁹ Unlike the West, which analyzes and dominates, the East had an organic view of nature in which nature and humanity are one, and therefore pursued assimilation.
Condensation (凝縮, eungchuk) is a term expressing the attribute commonly appearing in Earth-square (地方) relative to Heaven-round (天圓) and in the Virtue of Earth (地德) relative to the Way of Heaven (天道) — it expresses the phenomenon in which different elements intertwine and solidify, as in "vapor condensation." Unlike assimilation, condensation does not change the component itself, but compresses heterogeneous beings into a small unified whole, characterized by the square's precise angularity, like the virtue of exactness. Both condensation and assimilation aim at unity, but the direction of force is opposite. If assimilation is a force that continuously expands outward from the self as center, condensation is a force that contracts inward. If assimilation is neutralization and harmonization (中和), condensation is like return (回歸).³⁰ The material cultures of the East — art, music, and martial arts — sought maximum effect with minimum effort, like the aesthetic of empty space (餘白, yeobaek).
Grafting (接化, jeopwa) is a term expressing the meeting and merging of mutually opposing beings — such as Heaven-round (天圓) relative to Earth-square (地方) and the Virtue of Earth (地德) relative to the Way of Heaven (天道) — into one harmony. Like the "접화군생" (jeopwa gunsaeng, "grafting to nurture all living things"), it expresses an integration in which two beings meet as equals and preserve their heterogeneity. If assimilation aims toward a center and condensation aims toward perfectionism, grafting advocates pluralism through the harmonization of mutual overcoming (相克, sanggeuk). This is fitting for the attribute of humanity — the fusion of Heaven-round (天圓) and Earth-square (地方) as expressed in the circle-square-angle (圓方角), and the fusion of the Way of Heaven (天道) and the Virtue of Earth (地德) as expressed in the virtuous gentleman (道德君子).
At this point, the Eastern concepts of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity form a relationship like Yi Yeong-ran's definition of liminality, in which phylogeny repeats ontogeny. "Qian is vigorous, Kun is compliant" (乾健坤順)³¹ — meaning that what Heaven determines, Earth carries out. If we designate Qian as Heaven (1) and Kun as Earth (2), then Earth's compliance (順) contains Heaven's vigor (健), carrying the meaning of 1+2. Likewise, Humanity — which grafts Heaven and Earth — forms the relationship 3, 1+2+3, (1+2+3)' within Heaven (1), Earth (2), Humanity (3). That is, condensation includes assimilation, and grafting includes assimilation, condensation, and even a third existence.
In contrast to the generative Eastern mode of thought, the ontological Western mode corresponds to differenciation (異化, ihwa) or segmentation (分化, bunhwa), the opposite of assimilation; and since this corresponds to ontological order, following the ontology of Aristotle that is the cornerstone of Western ontology, the Western View of Heaven can be classified as the Formal View of Heaven; the View of Earth as the Material (質料的, jillyojeok) View of Earth; and the View of Humanity as the Growth Theory (成長論的, seongjangnon'jeok) View of Humanity.
In the Eastern generative View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity — where things spontaneously differentiate from Wuji and Taiji — the Eastern View of Heaven becomes an Assimilative View of Heaven that integrates all things into one body. If the Daoist View of Heaven is an Assimilative View of Heaven toward the natural world, which is the creation of Heaven, then the Confucian View of Heaven can be called an Assimilative View of Heaven directed inward toward the mind of humanity, which is Heaven's masterpiece. Even the Buddhist View of Heaven — the closest to ontology within Eastern thought — can be called an Assimilative View of Heaven in ontology toward the being called Heaven.³²
Unlike the Western Three Powers, which explains change through substance, the Eastern View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity explains change through attributes; therefore, the laws of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases apply to the Eastern View of Heaven as they do to all things. The Yin-Yang and Five Phases operating as attributes apply not only to material things but also to spirit-divinities, so the Eastern Heaven is composed of countless spirit-divinities to which the laws of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases are applied.
The Eastern concept of the divine was not a singular concept like the Western absolute God, but a composite concept divided into the Supreme God (上帝) as the highest deity, the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven and Earth (天地神明), and ancestral spirits (祖上神). Unlike the West's few angels, Eastern spirit-divinities are so numerous that there are said to be countless buddhas in even a single speck of dust; packed throughout the cosmos like a computer, they operated the universe and were beings that, according to the law of Yin-Yang, possessed their own proper domain.³³ Eastern spirit-divinities, each guarding their Yin-Yang domain, were so autonomous that even the Supreme God could not interfere in the affairs of spirit-divinities, so in the East the highest divinity was nearly depersonalized into a principle and forgotten.³⁴ In the Eastern divine-human relationship, spirit-divinities were beings created by the Supreme God in a Yin-Yang relationship with humanity, just like all other beings; and the ancestral spirits that humans became after death — unlike spirit-divinities — did not involve themselves in the operation of Heaven-and-Earth, but were beings that oversaw humans cultivating themselves and combining with spirit-divinities in a Yin-Yang relationship.
If the constitutive principle of the Western traditional ontological Three Powers is the principle of earth, water, fire, and wind, then the constitutive principle of the Eastern traditional generative Three Powers is Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. If the Western View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity — starting from the three-function system in Greek-Roman and Indian mythology and arriving at Aristotle through earth, water, fire, and wind — was early systematized as the ontological View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of matter and form, then the Eastern generative View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity was formed over a long period through mutual interaction among Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, and Yin-Yang and the Five Phases.
The Eastern traditional View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity is broadly divided into the Three Powers perspective of the Book of Changes (主易의 三才觀) and the Three Realms perspective of Buddhism (佛敎의 三界觀). If the Three Powers perspective of the Book of Changes — composed according to the principles of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity — is the traditional Eastern generative Three Powers perspective, the Buddhist Three Realms perspective is closer to an ontological Three Powers perspective. The Eastern traditional View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity developed first with the Daoist Three Powers perspective of the Book of Changes, then through the introduction of the Buddhist ontological Three Realms perspective, finally being synthesized into a Neo-Confucian Three Powers perspective. In fact, Confucianism had almost no ontological cosmology before Buddhism was introduced, and the generative cosmology of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases was introduced first. It is natural that in the generative Eastern system of thought, the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity could only develop into a Three Powers perspective after the Buddhist ontological system of thought was introduced.
The Eastern Three Powers perspective — which, due to differences in natural and cultural environment, developed a more generative View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity than the West — was a View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of correlative thinking represented by Heaven-Earth-Humanity and Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. The theories of Yin-Yang, the Five Phases, and the Three Powers, said to have arisen independently at different times in history, share correlative thinking and began to be integrated in Confucianism from Dong Zhongshu's (董仲舒) theory of Heaven-Humanity Resonance (天人感應論); but they were fully integrated beginning with Zhou Dunyi's (周敦頤, 1017–1073) Taijitu Shuo (太極圖說, Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate Explained), which became the foundation of Neo-Confucianism. The Yin-Yang referred to in the Book of Changes developed in the order of the Asian shamanistic Three Powers of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity — similar to Europe's three-function system — and then the Five Phases. The developmental process of correlative thinking can be summarized as follows.
Although Yin-Yang, the Three Powers, the Five Phases, and the Eight Trigrams had different origins, they were each different perspectives on the same Three Powers, so they could be integrated once the differences in perspective were understood. Each of these was a minimal system for viewing the Three Powers from a particular perspective. Yin-Yang, the Three Powers, the Five Phases, and the Eight Trigrams become an integrative principle capable of interpreting the same Three Powers in detail, according to Shao Kangjie's (邵康節) method of doubling (加一倍法, ga ilbaepbeop).
First, Yin-Yang, as a universally common binary opposition, is the first stage of intuitively distinguishing things and becomes a principial attribute. In the generative Three Powers perspective that emphasizes attributes, Yin-Yang becomes the fundamental principle. As Zhu Xi stated: "Between Heaven and Earth there is Li and there is Qi. Li is the Way above form — the root of generating things. Qi is the instrument below form — the means of generating things. Therefore, in the generation of humans and things, they must first receive this Li and thus have their nature, and then receive this Qi and thus have their form" (天地之間, 有理有氣. 理也者, 形而上之道也, 生物之本也. 氣也者, 形而下之器也, 生物之具也. 是以人物之生, 必稟此理, 然後有性, 必稟此氣, 然後有形, Zhu Xi, Collected Works, Vol. 58, "Reply to Huang Daojun").³⁵ In a world where there is no form, if Yin-Yang manifests binary opposing attributes, then for these attributes to have substance in reality they must constitute a three-dimensional form; so it develops into the Three Powers (三才, samjae), the minimal system for constituting a three-dimensional form. Here the Three Powers are represented by the Three Powers of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity; and since the Three Powers developed from Yin-Yang into form, within Heaven-Earth-Humanity, Heaven holds the role of Yang, Earth the role of Yin, and Humanity the role of the mediating Center (中).
Once three-dimensional form is constituted through the Three Powers, just as in the material world a particle must simultaneously possess wave character in order to exist, the particle must constitute a Four Symbols (四象, sasang) system that can cycle as a wave. The Four Symbols system represented by the Four Qualities (元亨利貞, wonhyeongnijong), the four phases of generation-growth-harvest-storage (生長斂藏), and the four seasons is similar to the Four Symbols system constituted by earth, water, fire, and wind. However, the difference between the Four Symbols system of earth-water-fire-wind and the Four Symbols system of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases is that the earth-water-fire-wind system is a substantialist mode of thought that proceeds from below to above, and is therefore not an attributive mode of thought that develops into the Five Phases as attributes common to things.
The Four Symbols system must again constitute mutual overcoming (相克, sanggeuk) and mutual nourishment (相生, sangsaeng) to maintain continuous circulation; so it develops into the Five Phases (五行, ohaeng) — the minimal system of mutual overcoming and nourishment — and requires Earth (土, to) as the central mediating role.³⁶ However, even the Five Phases are still living numbers (生數, saengsu) that have not yet acquired the Yin-Yang that constitutes things; and for these living numbers to acquire Yin-Yang with the capacity for change in reality, the Five Phases must change into the Eight Trigrams (八卦, palgwe) — the minimal system of mutual overcoming and nourishment that can form as an even number.³⁷ The Eight Trigrams again require a center, becoming the Nine Palaces and Eight Trigrams (九宮八卦, gugu palgwe), which becomes the basic system of correlative thinking explaining the universe and develops into the River Chart and Luo Writing (河圖洛書, Hado Nakseo).
For the Nine Palaces of the River Chart and Luo Writing to manifest as an actual substance performing the operation of Heaven-and-Earth, the element of time is added, appearing as the Ten Heavenly Stems (十干, sipgan) and Twelve Earthly Branches (十二支, sipiji). The Ten Heavenly Stems and Twelve Earthly Branches contain Earth (土) elements in the time arrangement — such as Chen-Xu-Chou-Wei (辰戌丑未) — which mediate temporal change.³⁸ The Ten Heavenly Stems and Twelve Earthly Branches, respectively assigned to Heaven and Earth, operate through the twelve stages of cyclical vitality (十二運星, sibiryunseong)³⁹ — the operation of Heaven-and-Earth (天地之用, cheonjijiyong) — through the ascent of earthly qi and descent of heavenly qi (天氣下降 地氣上昇, cheon'gi hagang jigi sangsŭng), i.e., the ascent and descent of Heaven and Earth (天地昇降, cheonjiŭng'gang), for the purpose of Heaven-Earth transformation and nourishment (天地化育, cheonji hwayuk): the stages of embryonic formation (胞胎), nurturing birth (養生), bathing and capping (浴帶), official vigor (冠旺), decline and illness (衰病), and death and storage (死藏). If the Ten Heavenly Stems and Twelve Earthly Branches are like atoms in physics, then the twelve stages of cyclical vitality — the operation of Heaven-and-Earth — are like molecules, in which atoms combine to produce entirely different properties.
The twelve stages of cyclical vitality are an expression of Heaven-and-Earth's cyclical transformation and nourishment (天地化育) as the life cycle of a living being.⁴⁰ Like the meeting of man and woman, Heaven-and-Earth as Yin-Yang descend and ascend (天降地昇), beginning with the embryonic formation in which the seed of life is sown in the earth; the earth nurtures the seed; the seed goes out of the earth or out of the body to be bathed in the celestial rain and dew and forms as another individual wrapped in a sash — the bathing-and-capping stage; then it reaches the official vigor in which it takes on responsibilities and acts vigorously; and then it declines, falls ill, and is buried — these twelve stages. This is analogous to Campbell's twelve stages of the monomyth, seven character archetypes,⁴¹ the Ten Ox-Herding Pictures (尋牛圖, simuido), and similar processes. Kim Ji-ha expressed this as the "Yul-ryeo" (律呂).⁴² The operation of Heaven-and-Earth shows that the movement of Heaven-and-Earth is not mechanical and natural, but is the result of the utmost Sincerity, Reverence, and Faith (誠敬信, seonggyeongsin) of the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven-and-Earth. From the standpoint of Eastern thought, what Western atomistic modernity most neglected in its mechanistic view of nature was the omission of the Sincerity, Reverence, and Faith of spirit-divinities. Both Donghak Thought and Daesoon Thought refer to this as "the disease of no-Way" (無道病, mudobyeong).⁴³
The operation of Heaven-and-Earth influences not only everyday things but also the systems of thought, and Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism appear as reflections of the operation of Heaven-and-Earth: the embryonic formation of Heaven-and-Earth is expressed through the Daoist way of emptiness and non-being; the nurturing birth of Heaven-and-Earth through the Buddhist way of cessation and extinction; and the bathing-and-capping of Heaven-and-Earth through the Confucian way of following the decree (以詔, ijo).⁴⁴ While the Western View of Heaven explains the characteristics of Heaven through the substantive attributes of earth, water, fire, and wind, the East expresses the attributes of Heaven through the four attributes of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. While the Western View of Heaven is substantialist and therefore after the modern era differentiates endlessly as individual units like atoms, the Eastern View of Heaven shows a unified structure within each unit — atom, molecule, individual, society, etc. — of Yin-Yang, Three Powers, Five Phases, Eight Trigrams, Ten Heavenly Stems, Twelve Earthly Branches, and the like.
FOOTNOTES — Section b:
23. Geum Jangtae, Spirit-Divinities and Rituals: The Religious World of Confucianism (Seoul: JNC, 2009), p. 62; Zhang Zai distinguished between "the Heaven of the Great Void (太虛之天)" and "the Heaven counterposed to Earth (天地對擧之天)." Zhengmeng, "Taihe"; cited in Xu Yiming, Xing Li yu Qi Huang (Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 1997), p. 32.
24. Ibid.
25. Kim Yeong-ho, "A Comparative Study of the Attributes of Heaven (天) in the Book of Odes and the Attributes of God in the Psalms," Won-Buddhism Thought and Religious Culture 71.
26. Kim Yeong-geon, "Correlative Thinking and Aesthetic Order," Philosophical Discussions 26 (2011), pp. 165–193; Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea (Goyang: Misulmunhwa, 2015).
27. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea (Goyang: Misulmunhwa, 2015), pp. 34–139. Choe Gwangjin used the terms assimilation, condensation, and grafting to compare the cultures of Korea, China, and Japan, but these also largely correspond to the Eastern concepts of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity.
28. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 56–59.
29. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 62–75.
30. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 78–95.
31. "Qian is Yang, Kun is Yin. This is the qi of Heaven-and-Earth, filling the space between the two. It is what humans and things draw upon to form their bodies. Therefore it is said, 'The filling of Heaven-and-Earth is my body. Qian is vigorous, Kun is compliant. This is the will of Heaven-and-Earth.'" Cao Duan (曹端), Commentary on the Western Inscription (西銘述解), in Han'mi Munhwasa ed., Comprehensive Collection of Korean Studies on the Book of Changes, Vol. 12 (Seoul: Han'mi Munhwasa, 1998).
32. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 62–75.
33. For the universe as computer, see Tom Siegfried, tr. Ko Jungsuk, The Bit and the Pendulum: From Quantum Computing to M Theory — The New Physics of Information (Seoul: Gimm-Young, 2003), pp. 26–29.
34. On Zhu Xi's respectful distancing from the divine, see Choe Jindeok, "Zhu Xi Studies' Theory of Li and Qi and Theory of Ghosts and Spirits," Yangmyeonghak 23 (2009), pp. 381–382.
35. Zhu Xi, Collected Works, Vol. 58, "Reply to Huang Daojun" (答黃道夫書).
36. So Gwang-seop, "A Mathematical-Physical Model of the Five Phases," Journal of Korean Oriental Medicine for Adults 1 (1995), pp. 25–36.
37. Gang Yong-gyun, "A Mathematical Model of the Five Phases and Eight Phases," Journal of the Korean Society for Psychotronic Research 3(1) (1999). The numbers 7 and 9 cannot form a one-to-one mutual overcoming-nourishing system. 8 is the smallest even number that forms a one-to-one mutual overcoming-nourishing system.
38. Pak Seong-u, "A Study on the Wang-Sang-Hyu-Su-Sa Theory: Centered on the Theory of Earth Flourishing in the Four Seasons," M.A. thesis, Kongju National University, 2006; Gwon Yeong-min, "A Study on the Division of Seasons in the Theory of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases," M.A. thesis, Kongju National University, 2017.
39. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Jejesaeng" 43.
40. Choe Jeonghye and Choe Jeongjun, "A Study of Abe Taizan's Theory of Twelve Cyclical Stages," Humanities Research 48, pp. 315–349; Yi Jin-hun, "A Study on the Twelve Cyclical Stages," M.A. thesis, Kongju National University, 2010.
41. The seven character archetypes are: hero, mentor, threshold guardian, herald, shapeshifter (trickster), shadow, and trickster. Just as Campbell's hero's journey has been verified in countless films and games, the universality of the seven archetypes has been verified through many works. See Stuart Voytilla, tr. Kim Gyeong-sik, Myth and the Movies (Seoul: Eulyoo, 2005).
42. Kim Ji-ha, What Is Yul-Ryeo? (Seoul: Han Munhwa Multimedia, 1999).
43. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Haengrok" 5-38.
44. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyoun" 1-66. The character 以 (i) in "以詔 (ijo)" includes the meaning "to follow as a model." See Ko Yunsuk, "The Philosophy of 'Modeling [以]' Heaven-and-Earth: Focused on the Great Image Commentary (大象傳) of the Qian and Kun Hexagrams in the Book of Changes," Korean Philosophical Studies 70, pp. 156–157 (2021).
c. The Collision and Mutual Overcoming of Eastern and Western Views of Heaven in the Modern Era
i. The Collision of Views of Heaven
The Western View of Heaven — expressed through the attributes of earth, water, fire, and wind — and the Eastern View of Heaven — expressed through Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — had certain points of similarity. Indeed, Matteo Ricci, who set out to evangelize the East, marveled upon discovering that the Eastern View of Heaven as found in the Book of Documents (書經, Seoggyeong) — a Confucian classic predating Neo-Confucianism — was similar to the Western View of Heaven, and indeed surpassed it in certain respects, taking hope for the Eastern mission.
"Among all the nations of non-believers known in Europe, I have never seen one with fewer errors than the ancient Chinese. Indeed, I found in their books that they always venerate a supreme being which they call the King of Heaven (天帝) or Heaven-and-Earth (天地). Perhaps in their thinking, Heaven and Earth, as living things, constitute a single body (體), and the supreme being of that body is something like a soul."⁴⁵
Matteo Ricci pursued the Eastern mission through the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity as expressed in earth, water, fire, and wind. The View of Heaven in the Book of Documents that Ricci discovered displayed characteristics — Heaven as Creator, Heaven's providence, Heaven's judgment, Heaven as Sovereign — that appeared almost identical to those of Western learning:
"Heaven and Earth are the parents of all things; humanity is the spirit of all things." 惟天地 萬物父母 惟人 萬物之靈 — Book of Documents (書經), "Taishi I" (泰誓上). [Creator Heaven]⁴⁶
"The Brilliant Heaven, casting its favorable regard, has given him dominion over the four seas, making him ruler under heaven." 皇天眷命, 奄有四海, 爲天下君 — Book of Documents, "Canon of Yu" (大禹謨) 1. [Heaven's providence]⁴⁷
"Heaven punishes those who are guilty." 天討有罪 — Book of Documents, "Counsels of Gao Yao" (皐陶謨) 5. [Heaven's judgment]⁴⁸
"The Way of Heaven is to reward those who do good and inflict calamities on those who do evil." 天道福善禍淫 — Book of Documents, "Announcement of Tang" (湯誥). [The attribute of Heaven as Sovereign]⁴⁹
Matteo Ricci regarded it as a regrettable decline that the Heavenly thought of the Book of Documents — which he found to be similar to the Western View of Heaven — had its personal-divine attributes fade and transform into a principle-law deity (理法神) as it passed through the Zhou dynasty, Confucius, and Neo-Confucianism. However, from today's perspective, which understands this as the attribute of multiple modernities in which the secular (俗) subsumes the sacred (聖), the sacredness is rather seen as having been further reinforced.⁵⁰
In practice, the Joseon intellectuals — who lived in the most Neo-Confucianized society in East Asia — welcomed the Tianzhu Shiyi as a thought that could illuminate the original meaning of Confucianism. Intellectuals of the era such as Gwangam Yi Byeok (李蘗) and Jeong Yakyong staked their lives on accepting Western learning. On the other hand, many intellectuals represented by Sin Hudam (愼後聃, 1702–1761), who wrote the Discourse on Western Learning (西學辨, Seohakbyeon), expressed concerns about Western learning.⁵¹
However, the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of earth, water, fire, and wind — in which the attributes of Heaven as fifth element are maximized — and the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — in which the attributes of Earth-as-Soil (土) are maximized — collided head-on. Fortunately, in Ricci's era, the two Views of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity maintained a cooperative relationship under the pretext of the Supplementing Confucianism theory (補儒論, boyuron); but after Ricci's death, the two came to reject each other in the controversy over Supplementing Confucianism, developing into an antagonistic relationship, and the East ultimately faced a crisis in which its civilization might be extinguished by the West, as with the Inca or Maya empires. The East could not transcend the precedents of Confucianism, and the West could not accommodate the East.
In particular, the question of whether the "Li" (理) of the Taiji is an autonomous being became the core issue of the two Views of Heaven. In the Western Formal View of Heaven — which explains change through substance — all things are created, so the "Li" of the Taiji cannot be an autonomous being; but in the Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven — where the operation of Heaven-and-Earth was entrusted at the Opening of Heaven-and-Earth (天地開闢, cheonji gaebyeok) — the "Li" of the Taiji is autonomous, so the two Views of Heaven were bound to clash.
To clarify the Western substantialist position that "Li" cannot be autonomous — by distinguishing whether "Li" is an autonomous being (substantia) or an accidental being (accidentia) — Matteo Ricci in the Tianzhu Shiyi argued as follows in dialogue with a Chinese scholar:
Chinese Scholar: "The Taiji is nothing other than Li (理)." ... Western Scholar: "The Taiji argument cannot be the origin of all things. In discussing the categories of things, there are two types: autonomous beings (自立體, jarip'che) and dependent beings (依賴體, uiraeche). Things that can establish themselves without relying on any other thing — Heaven-and-Earth, ghost-spirits, humanity, birds, plants, metals and stones — all belong to autonomous beings. Things that cannot be autonomous must rely on other things to be established. The Five Constants (五常; benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, faithfulness), the five colors, the five tones, the five tastes — all belong to dependent beings. To give an analogy with a white horse: the whiteness of a white horse is a dependent being, and the horse is an autonomous being. ... For one thing there is only one autonomous being, while dependent beings are too numerous to count. For example, for a person there is only one autonomous body, but within it are contained many dependent beings such as emotion, nature, countenance, appearance, and human relations. In discussing the Taiji as interpreted by the single word Li, Li cannot be the true cause of Heaven-Earth and all things. For Li too is nothing more than a type of dependent being."⁵²
Against this, the Neo-Confucian Sin Hudam responded in the Seohakbyeon with the Eastern attributive logic that Li and things (事物) are completely connected — where there is Li there are things, and where there are things there is Li: "Of course, Li does not depart from the human mind and things. But can it be said that the Li said to be in the human mind and in things was something that did not originally exist but only fitted in and attached after the human mind came to exist, and attached itself to things like a growth that appeared suddenly without having been there before? And can it be said on this basis that Li comes after things and thus cannot be the origin of things?"⁵³
The general populace, who had been favorably disposed toward the West, also shifted to a negative position regarding the Western View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity after the Beijing Convention, when Western domination began in earnest. The East, pressed by Western power, now came to require the liminality of a rite of passage and the reactivation of a new View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity to counter Western power. Accordingly, in East Asia, movements arose such as China's Yiguandao (一貫道), the Taiping Rebellion, and the Xinhai Revolution; and in Japan, new religious movements such as the Meiji Restoration and Tenrikyo (天理敎) appeared or spread.
The place most acutely sensitive to the collapse of the Yin-Yang and Five Phases View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity was Korea — the most thoroughly Confucianized of the three East Asian nations. Korea further developed the theory that Western learning had originated in the East (西學中源論, seohak jungwonron) and interpreted Western learning from an Eastern perspective. The Korean theory of Western-learning-Eastern-origin, beginning with Seo Myeong-eung and passing through Jeong Yakyong and Choe Han-gi, reached a critical turning point in Donghak Thought.⁵⁴ Donghak Thought proposed, through the liminality of Sijeongju (侍天主), a harmony between the personal God (人格神) of earth, water, fire, and wind and the principle-law God (理法神) of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases.
In the Eastern case, instead of the Creator hiding away, Heaven, Earth, and the Human Realm — unlike in the West — were divided into Heaven, Earth, and Humanity and Yin-Yang as in the Book of Changes, forming an autonomous and consistent system of spirit-divinities. If in Western learning the other divinities of the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms disappear due to monotheism, then in Daoism, under the influence of the Book of Changes, the divinities of the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms operate as an autonomous and consistent system of Yin-Yang. This connects to Donghak's theory of creative transformation (造化思想, johwa sasang) through the Eastern theory of Li-Qi and the theory of ghost-spirits (鬼神論, guisinron) in their substance-function (體用, cheyong) relationship, as follows: Seo Myeong-eung states that Shao Kangjie was the first to apply the Li-Qi concept to the divine-human relationship, revealing that the Yin-Yang relationship between spirit-divinities and humanity corresponds to the Yin-Yang relationship between Soil (土) and the remaining four phases (Wood, Fire, Metal, Water) in the Five Phases.⁵⁵
After the theory of Western-learning-Eastern-origin was introduced to Joseon, a counter-argument based on Yin-Yang and the Five Phases was raised against Ricci's critique of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. Seo Myeong-eung refuted Matteo Ricci's Tianzhu Shiyi using Shao Kangjie's (邵康節, 1011–1077) theory of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. Meanwhile, Jeong Yakyong (丁若鏞, 1762–1836) partly accepted Ricci's views in critiquing Neo-Confucianism, but this was done in order to defend Eastern values. In this way, before Donghak, the debate between East and West over correlative thinking was an important issue in the academic world of the time. "Donghak" was born in a period and atmosphere that emphasized the indigenous methodology of Eastern learning vis-à-vis "Western learning" (西學, seohak).
At that time, for East Asians, establishing indigenous modernity was not merely a matter of choice but a matter of survival. Having experienced the power of the West through the Opium War, the East perceived the danger that failure to establish indigenous modernity could plunge Asia into the same state of civilizational loss as the African peoples or the indigenous peoples of the Americas. Moreover, to East Asians who had been working harder than Westerners, the shock of the West was not only a material threat but also a spiritual threat — the loss of motivation as all their previous efforts came to naught.
In the age of imperialism, East Asians faced a spiritual crisis of losing not only material security but their very identity, either uncritically accepting Western learning or falling back on Eastern mysticism. The establishment of indigenous modernity through correlative thinking — Eastern rationality — was increasingly becoming a core issue for the survival of East Asia. Donghak was established carrying this heavy burden. Once the concepts of Donghak — grounded in the correlative thinking of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — were established, concepts such as "boundless great Way" (無極大道, mugŭk daedo), "Heaven-Earth spirit-divinities" (天地鬼神, cheonji gwisin), "the upper cycle of the primordial year" (上元甲, sangwon'gap), and "another Gaebyeok" (다시 개벽, dasi gaebyeok) were newly formulated.
ii. The Mutual Overcoming of Views of Heaven
As the Views of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases and of earth, water, fire, and wind collided, the mutual overcoming (相克化, sanggeukwa) of the Views of Heaven intensified. Both thought systems — Yin-Yang and the Five Phases, and earth, water, fire, and wind — have the same ideal View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity, but their patterns of mutual overcoming are also similar. In the earth-water-fire-wind worldview, the ideal world degenerates due to human sin into the Three Disasters (三災, samjae) of water, fire, and wind; in the Yin-Yang and Five Phases worldview, it degenerates due to an imperfect world structure into the chaos of Yin-Yang (陰陽亂雜, eumyang nanjap). Through the East-West exchange that unfolded after Matteo Ricci, the East and West each, for different reasons, underwent a mutual overcoming in which the View of Heaven came to deny God.
After Matteo Ricci, the confusion in the East-West divine-human relationship began in the area of the doctrine of the soul's immortality after death.⁵⁶ After Ricci, in the East the Li-Qi theory — which holds that qi disperses after four generations — came to be doubted, and in the West the belief that the divine world consisted of only one absolute God and a few angels came to be doubted. The Daesoon Thought view of the soul, centered on the hun and po (魂魄, honbaek) concept, is characterized by the concept of the rectified soul (正魂, jeonghon), which emphasizes human growth.⁵⁷ After Ricci, in the East Yin-Yang and the Five Phases and the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven-and-Earth came to be denied, while in the West, as in the East, an atheistic worldview composed of countless principle-law divinities or machines was formed.
The difference between Eastern and Western modes of thought is detailed in Matteo Ricci's Tianzhu Shiyi and the controversies surrounding it. By today's standards, the earth-water-fire-wind worldview looks more similar to the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — which Ricci criticized — than to the modern mechanistic scientific view; but in that it emphasizes substance for explaining change, it was, as François Jullien pointed out,⁵⁸ closer to the modern mechanistic scientific view. Ricci, despite the common attribute of both the Eastern Yin-Yang and Five Phases View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity and correlative science, criticized the Eastern Yin-Yang and Five Phases View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity as unscientific explanation for explaining change not through substance but through attributes.⁵⁹
As seen in the controversy over Supplementing Confucianism, while Catholicism denied the Eastern worldview that Ricci had transmitted, secular society in fact welcomed it. Beginning with Descartes — epitomized by cogito ergo sum — the West bleached out the existing concept of the divine⁶⁰ and built a mechanistic worldview without God. In ethics, however, theories emphasizing the Gospel over Law expanded. The Western transition to ethics and morality without God can be called a Confucian transformation of theology. The Confucian transformation can be summarized as the transition from Law to Gospel, and this is also evident in the case of Karl Barth (1886–1968), one of the leading theorists of modern Western theology.⁶¹ That is, Calvin's doctrine of predestination transformed into social empathy in a society without God. Modernity became concentrated on a new liminality. From the humanistic standpoint, this transformation in the concept of the divine was interpreted as a positive change; but today, as the problems of modernity have become maximized, it has become an occasion for reflection and a catalyst for seeking a new alternative modernity.
In the mutually overcome divine-human relationship of divine exaltation and human diminishment (神尊人卑, sinjon inbi), humanity must leave the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms through liberation, withdrawal from the secular, or death, in order to escape the suffering of birth, aging, sickness, and death. In the mutually overcome View of Heaven, spirit-divinities are also bound, each guarding their boundaries — beings imprisoned within the calamity of stagnation (否劫, bigeop) confined to their own domain. Humanity, each under the influence of earthly qi, raises different civilizations and falls into mutual conflict. Also, in the mutually overcome Heaven, due to disharmony in the rain and dew (雨露, uro), humanity lives in the suffering of the Three Disasters of water, fire, and wind. Mutual overcoming begets mutual overcoming, and Heaven-and-Earth and humanity fall into a state of chaos and devastation — this is the reality of the present age.
d. Liminality in Donghak Thought's Sijeongju (侍天主) View of Heaven
i. The Sijeongju (侍天主) View of Heaven in Donghak Thought
When the Neo-Confucian Principle-Heaven (理法天, ibeopcheon) reached the stage of being unable to solve the problems of a new era in East Asia — and especially in Joseon society — Donghak proposed a solution through a new View of Heaven: the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天, cheon'oe cheon), i.e., the Heaven of Wuji (無極, mugŭk). Donghak sought to embrace the learning of Western thought within a View of Heaven. This is analogous to how the Mongol and Islamic invasions of the West served as background for Western modernity. The new View of Heaven Donghak proposed was, unlike the Neo-Confucian Principle-Heaven, direct communication with the Heaven above Heaven — the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天). The "Heaven" in Sijeongju is the concept of Heaven as Heaven-beyond-Heaven.
Donghak Thought sought to promote indigenous modernity in the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity by emphasizing the concept of Heaven-beyond-Heaven — a concept that had not received attention in the existing View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity. In multiple modernity theory, modernity — as in Donghak Thought — arises from subsuming and liminality: reactivating the alienated portion of the existing View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity and transforming the hierarchical relationship of the sacred (聖, seong) and the profane (俗, sok) so that the profane can accommodate the sacred. Donghak Thought pursues a rearrangement of the sacred-profane hierarchy — experiencing the sacred in everyday profane life — through direct communication with the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, and attempts a liminality that resolves accumulated existing problems through Sustaining the Heart-Mind and Rectifying the Gi (守心正氣, susim jeonggi).
Suun expressed direct communication with the "Heaven-above-Heaven" — distinct from the "Heaven" of existing Neo-Confucianism — as Sijeongju (侍天主, Serving the Lord of Heaven). Suun invested all his capacities throughout his life for direct communication with the "Heaven-above-Heaven." After nearly forty years of effort, Suun finally arrived at the Dialogue with the Heavenly Teacher (天師問答, cheonsa mundap) in the gyeongsin year (1860). The term "Cheonsa Mundap" was first used by Yi Don-hwa — a prominent doctrinal researcher of the Cheondogyo era — to express Suun's experience of encountering the Supreme God.⁶²
Suun received the first revelation from the Supreme God on the fifth day of the fourth lunar month of 1860 (the gyeongsin year). The Cheonsa Mundap lasted approximately six months, and after more than a year of deliberation, Suun expressed this in detail in the Yongdamyusa (龍潭遺詞) and the Donggyeongedaejeon (東經大典). Yi Don-hwa therefore divides Suun's practice into the Cheonsa Mundap and the inner descent-discourse (降話, ganghwa). However, the Dowon Giseo (道源記書), written after the Yongdamyusa and Donggyeongedaejeon, contains passages showing that Suun communicated with the Supreme God multiple times until just before his arrest.⁶³
The text of the initial revelation is as follows:
不意四月 心寒身戰 疾不得執症 言不得難狀之際 有何仙語 忽入耳中 驚起探問則 曰勿懼勿恐 世人 謂我上帝 汝不知上帝耶 問其所然 曰余亦無功故 生汝世間 敎人此法 勿疑勿疑 曰然則 西道以敎人乎 曰不然 吾有靈符 其名 仙藥 其形 太極 又形 弓弓 受我此符 濟人疾病 受我呪文 敎人爲我則 汝亦長生 布德天下矣
[In the unexpected fourth month, with a chill in the heart and trembling of the body, at a moment when the ailment could not be diagnosed and its nature could not be described in words, there were certain words of an immortal suddenly entering the ears. Startled, I inquired further, and was answered: "Fear not, fear not. The people of the world call me the Supreme God (上帝, Sangje); do you not know the Supreme God?" When I asked the reason, I was answered: "I too, having no merit, brought you forth into the world to teach people this Way. Do not doubt, do not doubt." I asked: "Then shall I teach people through the Western Way?" I was answered: "That is not so. I have a spiritual talisman (靈符, yeongbu); its name is the immortal medicine (仙藥, seonyak), its form is the Taiji, and another form is Gung-gung (弓弓). Receive my spiritual talisman to save people from illness; receive my incantation to teach people to serve me — then you too shall achieve long life and spread virtue throughout the world."⁶⁴]
It is said that what is most characteristic of Donghak Thought in the history of modern religion and even of world religious history is that the religious experience of its founder is expressed in great detail and over a long period of time.⁶⁵
In the course of interpreting the content of the dialogue conducted during the approximately six-month Cheonsa Mundap, Donghak was established. In the "Nonhangmun" (論學文, Discourse on Learning), Suun first emphasized the distinctiveness from Western learning as the epistemological background of Donghak. Suun announced that the Supreme God he encountered was the Heaven-above-Heaven that integrated the heavens of East and West, claiming that it was especially the Heaven above the Western Heaven. Suun clarified this in terms of the character of "learning" (學, hak). As seen in the very title "Nonhangmun," among all the civilizations of the world that resisted Western imperialism, only Korea's Donghak took "learning" — an epistemological subject — as its primary theme. The claim that the difference between East and West lies in the fundamental aspect of cognitive structure first appears in Donghak's "Nonhangmun."
In the "Nonhangmun" of the Donggyeongedaejeon, Suun refers to the fact that the West is analytical — its words changing according to circumstances — and though it appears to believe in God, it does not actually believe, and thus ultimately falls into nihilism. First, Suun specifies the difference between Donghak and Western learning with the phrase "un jeuk il do jeuk dong i jeuk bi" (運則一 道則同 理則非): "The cosmic cycle is one, the Way is the same, but the principle is different."
日與西道 無異者乎
Question: Is it not different from the Western Way?
日洋學 如斯而有異 如呪而無實 然而運則一也 道則同也 理則非也
Answer: Western learning is similar to this but has differences; it is like prayer but without substance. However, the cosmic cycle is one, the Way is the same, but the principle is different.⁶⁶
In the above passage, Suun states that Eastern and Western learning have the same goal but are methodologically different. Bae Yeong-sun has compiled the prior research on this topic. Bae Yeong-sun has noted that existing prior research had not clarified in detail the differences in cycle (運, un), Way (道, do), and principle (理, i) referred to in Donghak, and elaborated on those differences. Bae Yeong-sun has further analyzed Sijeongju as correlative thinking of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, dividing "Sijeongju-johwajong-yeongse bulgwang mansaji" (侍天主 造化定 永世不忘萬事知) as follows: "Sijeongju" corresponds to Heaven (天), "johwajong" to Earth (地), and "yeongse bulgwang mansaji" to Humanity (人).
Bae Yeong-sun further applies Sijeongju to cycle (運), Way (道), and principle (理): Way (道) corresponds to "Sijeongju (侍天主)," cycle (運) to "johwajeong (造化定)," and principle (理) to "yeongse bulgwang mansaji (永世不忘萬事知)." Ultimately, the difference between Donghak and Western learning is that while Heaven-and-Earth are the same and one, the difference lies in the principle (理) of humanity serving the Lord of Heaven. Bae Yeong-sun states that in Donghak, while the Heaven (Way) of spring-summer-autumn-winter is the same for East and West, the Earth (Earth) of the East and West differs according to cyclical qi (運).⁶⁷
The difference in principle between Donghak and Western learning is explained in Donghak as follows:
曰何爲其然也 曰吾道無爲而化矣 守其心正其氣 率其性受其敎 化出於自然之中也 西人 言無次第 書無皂白而 頓無爲天主之端 只祝自爲身之謀 身無氣化之神 學無天主之敎 有形無迹 如思無呪 道近虛無 學非天主 豈可謂無異者乎
["How does this come to be?" "The Way I receive transforms the world naturally in accordance with the will of Heaven. When each person sustains their original heart-mind, rectifies their qi, follows their innate Heavenly nature, and receives the teaching of Heaven, transformation is achieved naturally. In contrast to this, Western people — those who believe in Western learning — have no proper order in their words and no clear logic in their writings. There is no genuine substance of serving the Lord of Heaven, and they merely pray for means of personal benefit. Therefore there is no wondrous state of the body uniting with the numinous qi, and no true teaching of the Lord of Heaven; there is form without substance. They seem to think of Heaven but do not truly serve Heaven. Thus their Way is nearly empty of content, and their religion does not serve the Lord of Heaven. How can it be said that there is no difference?"⁶⁸]
The above passage is considered one of the most difficult portions of the Donggyeongedaejeon; the reason is said to be that the object of criticism in the passage has primarily been understood as Catholicism or Catholic believers. It is said to be understandable if the object of criticism is read as Westerners in general and Western learning as a whole.⁶⁹
Regarding the above passage, Bae Yeong-sun states that the decisive difference between Donghak and Western learning pointed to by Donghak is "the spirit of gi-transformation" (氣化之神, gihwa jisin). Here, "gi-transformation" (氣化, gihwa) means the condensation of Heavenly qi into the body. Western learning only prays toward the Lord of Heaven, but has no incantation (呪文, jumun) capable of self-gi-transformation, and no cultivation practice of Sustaining the Heart-Mind and Rectifying the Gi. Just as Suun criticized Western learning for the strict vertical distinction between clergy and laity, he criticizes here by the same logic the Western learning that lacks gi-transformation.
What Suun in fact most prided himself upon in founding Donghak was Sustaining the Heart-Mind and Rectifying the Gi, and he said the same not only against Western learning but also against Confucianism.⁷⁰ Suun's view that the difference between Donghak and Western learning lies in the presence or absence of cultivation methods was a brilliant insight into Eastern and Western learning. Ken Wilber (1949– ), a prominent transpersonal psychologist who has been said to have integrated Eastern and Western spirituality, has also pointed out that the greatest weakness of Western thought — even systematic philosophies like German Idealism — is the absence of a theory of self-cultivation.⁷¹ Wilber stated that the most urgent problem in contemporary thought is the redirection of the Western epistemological approach toward a cultivation-based approach.⁷²
The appearance of the Supreme God in Donghak Thought was, from the standpoint of orthodox Neo-Confucianism, an anomalous and heterodox manifestation belonging to the category of the strange, violent, and supernatural. Suun's Cheonsa Mundap appeared even more anomalous because Suun's family lineage belonged to the orthodox line of Korean Neo-Confucianism. Though Suun was born under unfortunate circumstances — with a status lower than that of an illegitimate child (庶子, seoja) as the son of a remarried woman's descendant — his father, Gŭnam Choe Ok (近菴 崔鋈, 1762–1840), occupied a place in the authentic transmission lineage of Toegye Yi Hwang (李滉, 1501–1570). Not only Confucian scholars but also the general populace found the appearance of the Supreme God to be an extraordinary situation; yet unexpectedly, Suun's Cheonsa Mundap — his conversation with the Supreme God — was accepted across social strata. Donghak Thought came to overcome this through drawing on many traditions of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism.
Recent research points to the influence of Chinese Daoism, which was being newly introduced at the time Donghak was established, as the background for the widespread acceptance of Suun's Cheonsa Mundap. In particular, the influence of Late Joseon Luandao Daoism (鸞壇道敎, nandan dogyeo) has been highlighted. This was due to the introduction of Chinese Daoism, which is less well known today: due to the chaos of the Qing dynasty, many Qing Daoist masters entered Joseon, and it is said that the first Daoist organization in Joseon — called "Musangdan" (無相壇) — was formed at that time. Even Emperor Gojong published Daoist scriptures as a national project. It is said that the background enabling Suun's Cheonsa Mundap to be recognized as a dialogue with the Supreme God was the changing atmosphere of Joseon society brought about by the introduction of Luandao Daoism.⁷³
The Daoist influence on the establishment of Donghak also appears in incantation practice and Donghak devotional songs (東學歌詞, donghak gasa). It is said that Donghak could gain recognition in a Confucian society due to the influence of Daoism that was being introduced. Donghak Thought also incorporated Daoism, which was the repository of the traditional civilization of East Asia at that time. In the case of "Donghak devotional songs," these can also be interpreted as spirit-writing (降筆, gangpil) resulting from contact with spirit-divinities.⁷⁴ It is also said that the three essences of East Asian intellect — Shao Kangjie's knowledge, the poetry of Li Bai and Du Fu, and the eloquence of Su Qin and Zhang Yi — shone forth in Jeungsan as well.⁷⁵ In fact, Suun was later appointed by Jeungsan as the Patriarch (宗長, jongjang) of the Post-Heaven Daoist tradition (後天仙道, hucheon seondo), which is connected to Daoism. This indicates that Donghak inherits the essence of Daoism. Jeungsan expressed this as the twelfth stage of "embryonic formation" (胞胎, pottae) in the twelve stages of cyclical vitality — the operation of Heaven-and-Earth — and in concrete form as "creative transformation" (造化, johwa).⁷⁶
In Eastern thought, the View of Heaven is related to the method of cultivation practice. In cultivation methods, the View of Heaven can be said to be a point of convergence. The greatest feature of Donghak cultivation was incantation practice. Even from the standpoint of orthodox Neo-Confucianism, this was exceptionally accepted. Incantations had been partly introduced even in Confucianism — as in the "Jeong-yeok" (正易) case of singing-dancing (詠歌舞蹈, yeong'ga mudo) and in the case of sijo (時調) recitation. While "incantation" had long been widely used in Buddhism as Buddhist chanting (念佛, yambul), it was anomalous in the Confucian mainstream of Joseon — yet paradoxically, it was precisely this anomalous quality that caused Donghak to spread more widely.⁷⁷ Incantation practice was a universal cultivation method of all ages and nations, also used in contemporary Western spiritual cultivation; but in Korea, it was first introduced for the self-cultivation of the general public through Donghak, and was subsequently widely used in new religions.⁷⁸
The influence of Confucianism in the establishment of Donghak was also significant. Donghak was actually evaluated by Jeungsan as having been unable to transcend the precedents of Confucianism.⁷⁹ First, Donghak — as seen in the content of the representative incantation, "Ji gi geum ji won wi dae gang" (至氣今至願爲大降, May the Supreme Qi descend greatly upon me now) — emphasizes the role of qi (氣), which is also emphasized in Neo-Confucianism. While Donghak was in a position to emphasize "qi" (氣) over "li" (理) — as in "do gi jang jon sa bul ip" (道氣長存邪不入, If the Way's qi endures, evil shall not enter)⁸⁰ — Donghak, except for the Supreme God, shows almost no content regarding Daoist spirit-divinities, suggesting that it does not fundamentally depart from the Confucian-level "qi."
The Supreme God concept of Suun, which did not emphasize Daoist spirit-divinities, also does not greatly depart from the influence of the Confucian View of Heaven. An Yu-gyeong argues that while Donghak emphasizes "qi," the background of Donghak's establishment shows the relationship running from the establishment of li (理) in Toegye through Dasan. Toegye's influence was great in making Donghak possible in Korea.⁸¹
Overall, Suun's understanding of Donghak remained within the Confucian tradition in theoretical dimensions such as the concept of the Supreme God, while in metaphysical aspects such as arts of technique and divination (術數, sulsu), Daoism was actively incorporated.⁸² Indeed, it is said that the arts of technique and divination also played a significant role in making Donghak widely known to the general public.⁸³
That Donghak remained within the Confucian tradition metaphysically while excelling in Daoist arts of technique in physical-material dimensions actually served to further reinforce Donghak's Confucian tradition. As depicted in Hwang Hyeon's (黃玹, 1855–1910) Oha Gimun (梧下記文), Donghak attracted people from a wide variety of social strata, and the purposes of joining were extremely diverse.⁸⁴ Jeungsan actually highly evaluated Jeon Myeong-suk (全明淑, 1855–1895), who worked for the liberation of social status among Donghak participants, and discerned that while many Donghak participants publicly advocated national protection and popular welfare (保國安民, boguk anmin), inwardly they dreamed of becoming kings and nobles (王侯將相, wanghu jangsang).⁸⁵ Those who joined Donghak aiming to become kings and nobles judged that they could sufficiently realize their dreams in the Donghak that excelled in arts of technique. Accordingly, Yun I-heum argues that Donghak appeared to the general populace as an expansion of Jeong Gam-rok (鄭鑑錄) thought and subsequently became the model for new religions.⁸⁶
The Buddhist influence on the establishment of Donghak was indirect. The Buddhist influence extends only to the fact that Suun fled to the Ŭnjŏgam hermitage, and that Donghak incantations are similar to Buddhist chanting. The Donghak peasant movement first began to be activated when a book written by Yi Seo-gu (李書求, 1754–1825) — found inside the Maitreya statue at Seonunsa Temple — was taken out by the district leader Son Hwa-jung (孫華仲, 1861–1895). However, beliefs regarding previous lives and ancestors — such as the law of karmic connection — were not emphasized in Donghak, and the concept of the resolution of grievances (解冤, haewon), prominent in Daesoon Thought, did not appear in Donghak Thought.
In addition to Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism, a great influence on the establishment of Donghak was the thought of Yin-Yang. Though Yin-Yang thought can be included within the broader category of Daoism, if considered separately, Donghak did not fundamentally depart from the Confucian Yin-Yang view — as in the Book of Changes — that "Heaven-and-Earth are ghost-spirits, and ghost-spirits are Heaven-and-Earth." Though Donghak began by emphasizing Heaven-above-Heaven and sought to criticize and transcend Western learning and Confucianism-Buddhism-Daoism, Donghak Thought — unable to incorporate the concept of spirit-divinities — still did not greatly depart from Confucianism. This was a somewhat different character from the Yin-Yang perspective of Daesoon Thought, which emphasizes spirit-divinities.
In addition to the ideological background of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism, Donghak was established due to the influence of fear of foreign powers and its reaction — national sentiment — so that in the thought of Suun and Jeungsan there appears a spirit of resistance against the Western invasion of the open-port era.⁸⁷
"I too was born in the East and received [this Way] in the East; though the Way is the Way of Heaven (天道), the learning is Eastern Learning (東學)." — Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun."⁸⁸
Donghak expanded from resistance against Japan to resistance against the West. After Donghak, the concept of "East" (東, dong) changed from meaning Korea in relation to China to meaning the East in relation to the West. However, Donghak — which had begun as a social movement under the concept of "learning" (學, hak) like "Neo-Confucianism" — is said to have become internalized through the Japanese colonial period.⁸⁹
At the time of Donghak's establishment, the Donghak leaders' awareness of the international situation was limited to the scope of China. In the Donghak devotional songs, hostility toward Japan is prominently displayed, which is also close to the Confucian precedent of interpreting the world in a China-centered way.
In the end, Suun's understanding of Donghak came about against the background of Suun's eventful life course, deep scholarship, and pure heart, influenced by the nationalism of the Jeonggam-rok (鄭鑑錄), the will to abolish the hereditary status system, and ignorance of the international situation. The Donghak Peasant Movement that subsequently unfolded was also significantly influenced by these circumstances of Donghak's establishment. Compared to Daesoon Thought, Donghak does not emphasize principle but emphasizes qi — and Kim Ji-ha says that compared to Donghak Thought, Daesoon Thought emphasizes everyday life.
The View of Heaven in Donghak Thought ultimately emerged as a solution to the confrontation between the Western View of Heaven — which emphasizes the transcendent Heaven-beyond-Heaven (超越天, choyŏlcheon) and does not emphasize the immanent Heaven-within-Heaven-and-Earth (內在天, naejae cheon) — and the Eastern View of Heaven — which emphasizes the immanent Heaven-within-Heaven-and-Earth and does not emphasize the transcendent Heaven-beyond-Heaven. The indigenous modernity of Donghak Thought's View of Heaven lies in this solution: reshaping the sacred and profane, encompassing and transcending the Views of Heaven of all ages and nations, East and West. Donghak Thought's View of Heaven sought to maximally incorporate the best of the Confucian-Buddhist-Daoist traditions of the East and also to embrace the excellence of the Western View of Heaven. This duality of Donghak Thought's View of Heaven was early on characterized by Kim Gyeong-jae and others as a panentheistic concept of God.⁹⁰ However, the existing panentheistic concept of God has an aspect in which its formative background has not been sufficiently revealed through connection with modernity.
Modernity was, in the West, a question of science, but for East Asians it was a question of survival — of whether or not to suffer ethnic cleansing. Today, questions of modernity are discussed at an academic level, but at that time modernity involved questions of survival. Moreover, today the problem of modernity has expanded beyond the Eastern question into a question of the extinction of humanity. The View of Heaven of Donghak Thought, established with great difficulty, manifests itself in various forms.
ii. The Aspects of Liminality in the Sijeongju (侍天主) View of Heaven
In a time when indigenous modernity was needed, Donghak first proposed "Mugeuk Daedo" (無極大道, the Boundless Great Way) as a new View of Heaven. "Mugeuk Daedo" is associated with the Heaven-above-Heaven — the primordial cosmos. This can be compared to how Western modernity, in the situation of the Eastern-Western collision of Mongol and Islamic invasions, developed all the way to atomism as a new View of Heaven. Donghak's View of Heaven — which encompasses and transcends the Eastern and Western Views of Heaven through the Heaven-beyond-Heaven — repeats in ontogeny the phylogeny manifested in the Eastern and Western Views of Heaven. This shows the indigenous modernity of liminality achieved by rearranging the boundary between the sacred and the profane.
몸이 몹시 떨리면서 밖으로 신령한 기운이 접하고 안으로 말씀이 가르침으로 내리는데, 보려 해도 보이지 아니하고 들으려 해도 들리지 않아 마음이 오히려 괴이하고 의아해지므로 마음을 가다듬고 기운을 바르게 하여 묻기를, "어찌하여 이렇습니까?" 대답하시기를, "내 마음이 곧 네 마음이니라[吾心卽汝心]. 사람이 어찌 이를 알리오. 천지는 알아도 귀신은 모르니 귀신이라는 것도 나니라. 너는 무궁무궁한 도에 이르렀으니 닦고 단련하고, 글을 지어 사람을 가르치고, 법을 바르게 하여 덕을 펴면 너로 하여금 장생하여 천하에 빛나게 하리라." 나 또한 거의 한 해를 닦고 헤아려 본즉, 자연한 이치 아님이 없으므로 한편으로 주문을 짓고 한편으로 신령한 기운을 받는[降靈] 법을 짓고, 한편으로는 천주를 잊지 않는 글을 지으니, 절차와 도법이 오직 스물 한 자[주문]를 가지고 될 따름이었다.
[As the body trembled greatly, numinous qi made contact from without, and words descended as teaching from within; trying to see it, it could not be seen; trying to hear it, it could not be heard — so the heart became all the more astonished and perplexed. Composing the heart-mind and rectifying the qi, I asked: "Why is it so?" The answer was: "My mind is your mind [吾心卽汝心, o sim jeuk yeo sim]. How could people know this? Though Heaven-and-Earth know, ghost-spirits do not; and what is called ghost-spirits is also I. You have arrived at the boundless, boundless Way — cultivate and train yourself, compose writings to teach people, rectify the method and spread virtue, and I will cause you to achieve long life and shine upon all under Heaven." I too, cultivating and assessing for nearly a year, found that there was nothing that was not a natural principle; so I composed, on the one hand, an incantation; on the other, a method for receiving the numinous qi (降靈, gangnyeong); and on the other, a writing for not forgetting the Lord of Heaven. The procedure and the Way-method amounted to nothing but twenty-one characters [the incantation].
擧此一一不已故 吾亦悚然 只有恨生晩之際 身多戰寒 外有接靈之氣 內有降話之敎 視之不見 聽之不聞 心尙怪訝 修心正氣而問曰 何爲若然也. 曰吾心卽汝心也 人何知之 知天地而無知鬼神 鬼神者吾也 及汝無窮無窮之道 修而煉之 制其文敎人 正其法布德則 令汝長生 昭然于天下矣 吾亦幾至一歲 修而度之則 亦不無自然之理 故 一以作呪文 一以作降靈之法 一以作不忘之詞 次第道法 猶爲二十一字而已⁹¹]
The above passage is the section in which Suun describes the moment of receiving the Mugeuk Daedo. What "Mugeuk Daedo" is and why Donghak can be expressed as "Mugeuk Daedo" is made clear in this passage from the Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun." While the expression of Donghak as Mugeuk Daedo appears multiple times in the Yongdamyusa as well,⁹² the above passage is the most detailed.
Wuji (無極) refers to the state prior even to the Taiji — the state before Yin-Yang were divided — and is thus associated with the primordial cosmos. From the perspective of the View of Heaven, it corresponds to the Heaven-above-Heaven, the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天). Therefore, "Mugeuk Daedo" means the Way of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, which transcends existing Neo-Confucianism (which claimed to have illuminated the principle of the Taiji), Western learning (which claimed to have illuminated the Lord of Heaven), and Buddhism (which claimed to awaken to the substance of the cosmos). Accordingly, just as in the above passage — "You have arrived at the boundless, boundless Way" — Mugeuk Daedo becomes the "boundless, boundless Way."
The reason Mugeuk Daedo is the "boundless, boundless Way" is explained in the above passage by "My mind is your mind [吾心卽汝心]." Here, "my mind (吾心, o sim)" is the mind of the "Heaven-above-Heaven" — the Heaven-beyond-Heaven; and "your mind (汝心, yeo sim)" is the mind of humanity as represented by Suun. This means that the mind of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven — the mind of Wuji — becomes the mind of humanity. This is the statement that the mind of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, which is the origin of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, is the same as the mind of humanity — meaning that the status of humanity in the universe becomes a being whose mind communicates with Wuji — and thus it becomes "Mugeuk Daedo."
The most significant difference between the existing Wuji and Donghak's "Mugeuk Daedo" in relation to the View of Heaven is the first appearance of "Wuji" — i.e., the Supreme God — who directly communicates with humanity, as in the Cheonsa Mundap and spirit-writing (降筆, gangpil). Indeed, in the initial Cheonsa Mundap, Suun continually doubts the Supreme God's intentions and insists on his own position, and thus actually wins the Supreme God's trust. Donghak's View of Heaven — of a Wuji that directly communicates with humanity — appears as a View of Heaven that harmonizes the Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven and the Western Formal View of Heaven without conflict.
Regarding the Eastern case, "Mugeuk Daedo" first shows the tradition of Wuji-Taiji-Yin-Yang-Five Phases — the representative correlative thinking of the East — in its very name. This corresponds to the Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven. The expression "Mugeuk Daedo that has never existed in all eternity" (만고없는 무극대도) can be read as meaning the completion of correlative thinking. The expression "never in all eternity" (만고없는) appears five times in the Yongdamyusa:⁹³ Furthermore, the expression "Mugeuk Daedo" also signifies that Donghak Thought inherits the correlative thinking of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism — which developed as Eastern religions. In fact, Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism have as their background the correlative thinking in which Heaven-Earth-Humanity are unified, and there has been prior research arguing that the representative Sijeongju thought of Donghak represents the form of Confucianism-Buddhism-Daoism — which developed in the direction of internalizing absolute beings — maturing into transcendent Heaven.⁹⁴
Regarding the Western Formal View of Heaven, it appears in Donghak's concept of "muwi ihwa" (無爲而化, transformation through non-action). The concept of "muwi ihwa," first used in Donghak, can be thought of as a concept connecting the Daoist "muwi jayeon" (無爲自然, non-action and naturalness) with the Western learning concept of "johwa" (造化, creative transformation). Muwi ihwa has the significance of connecting the creative transformation within the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms (the Yin-Yang harmony of the three realms) to the creative transformation of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven that connects the Creator with the Three Realms. Donghak reactivates the concept of the personal divine Heaven-beyond-Heaven as a Creator (造生者, josangja) that emphasizes the attribute of creation in creative transformation. Suun, in interpreting the incantation, explained that "johwa" (造化) means "muwi ihwa" (無爲而化), and "jeong" (定) means "habgideok jeonggisim" (合其德 定其心, to accord with its virtue and settle its heart-mind).⁹⁵ Suun called Donghak "muwi ihwa" and explained that muwi ihwa refers to the entire creative transformation of the numinous Supreme Qi (至氣, jigi), and that if one sustains the heart-mind, rectifies the qi, follows the nature, and receives the teaching, transformation will emerge naturally.⁹⁶
The reason Donghak connected East and West through muwi ihwa was to mediate the double opposition of tradition and modernity through liminality. Indeed, it has been argued that the Supreme God of the Eastern tradition as Creator, as manifested in the Book of Odes (詩經, Sigyeong), shares five personal attributes with the Creator in the Biblical Psalms.⁹⁷ The Creator's attribute is also clearly expressed in Chinese classics through the Shuowen Jiezi (說文解字):⁹⁸ "The deity (神) is the heavenly spirit that draws out all things" (神, 天神, 引出萬物者也); and through the Book of Odes:⁹⁹ "Heaven gave birth to all the people; to every thing there is its principle. The people, holding to their constant nature, are fond of this noble virtue." (天生烝民, 有物有則, 民之秉彝, 好是懿德 — Book of Odes, "Major Odes, Zhengmin" (大雅·烝民))
Even after making contact with the personal Heavenly numinous presence, Suun explains the Lord of Heaven's teaching in connection with Daoism as the principle of the non-personal, natural creative transformation and movement. When asked how his experience differed from Western learning, he elaborated that while the celestial cycle (天運) and the Way of Heaven (天道) are the same, their principle (理) is different. The difference of principle Suun mentioned can be understood as pointing to the difference in the method of learning — the difference in "learning" (學, hak).¹⁰⁰
Suun's Cheonsa Mundap also inversely allows one to surmise the reason Heaven chose Suun. Like Jesus who overcame the temptation of the Devil, Suun refused all the Supreme God's proposals of worldly success, and even refused success through existing Confucianism-Buddhism-Daoism.¹⁰¹ The trust relationship thus established expanded, during the Donghak Peasant Movement, even to the belief that Donghak peasant movement participants could block bullets.
The reason Suun's Cheonsa Mundap could win the trust of others was that Heaven chose as the figure to manifest itself precisely the most problematic person — one like Suun. Heaven appeared to Suun, a very middle-ground being who was neither an existing establishment figure nor a lower-class person.
Suun was the most unfortunate homo sacer that his era could produce.¹⁰² Although Suun had a father who was the most eminent scholar of the most orthodox Neo-Confucian lineage, Suun had to occupy the status of a descendant of a remarried woman — even lower than an illegitimate child. When his father died and even his home burned down, Suun had to wander the country to make a living. In the end, even wandering was not easy, and Suun returned home. People rather placed their trust in the fact that Heaven appeared to a being like Suun. Though unfortunate, Suun also had extraordinary qualities no less than his father, and he even had the sobriquet "Boksu" (複術), meaning one skilled in arts of technique.
The difference between Donghak Thought's concept of creative transformation and the Western concept lies in the fact that it is correlative transformation. Prior research on the continuity and change as correlative thinking shown by the Sijeongju thought of Donghak — more clearly expressed through the tradition of Confucian-Buddhist-Daoist thought — has been abundant, as has prior research on the epistemological dimension. There has been extensive prior research on the continuity and change of the epistemological dimension of correlative thinking in Donghak Thought, and an overview can be obtained through an analysis of prior research.
To examine the prior research on correlative thinking in Donghak Thought, it is necessary to begin again with the definition of correlative thinking. The correlative thinking represented by Yin-Yang and the Five Phases uses the term "correlative" (相關, sangwan), meaning that parts are mutually related; but the connection of parts to parts ultimately means the connection of parts within the whole — which can ultimately be called organic theory (有機體理論, yugiche iron), which views the whole and parts unitarily, or holistic theory, or holographic (全息的, jeonsiŭk) perspective. That is, broadly defined, correlative thinking includes organic thinking and holographic thinking.
If correlative thinking — the Eastern mode of thought — is expanded to include holographic theory or organic theory, prior research on the correlative epistemic perspective of Donghak encompasses a very wide range both domestically and internationally. Having examined foreign cases earlier, turning to the domestic case: in the narrow sense, we can cite the research of Yi Chang-il, who translated and introduced correlative thinking domestically. Without actively applying it to Donghak Thought, Yi Chang-il's research introduced domestically the major Western methodology for studying Eastern thought — that studies of Eastern thought must first approach through correlative thinking — and analyzed the philosophy of Shao Kangjie, who greatly influenced Donghak Thought, through the methodology of correlative thinking.¹⁰³
Though Donghak appears to assert a thought disconnected from the East Asian tradition through the term "gaebyeok" (開闢, Great Opening), the definition of Donghak in Donghak Thought — as seen in the essay "Nonhangmun," in which the term "Donghak" first appears — defines Donghak as a discipline grounded in Yin-Yang and the Five Phases, the representative theory of correlative thinking. In fact, Shao Kangjie — a Neo-Confucian theorist of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases, identified by correlative thinking theorists as a representative theorist of correlative thinking — is also identified as a thinker who greatly influenced Donghak Thought.¹⁰⁴ The term "another Gaebyeok" (다시 개벽) in Donghak Thought was also a term widely used in late Joseon dynasty intellectuals influenced by Shao Kangjie.¹⁰⁵
Expanded to include holographic theory or organic theory, the pioneering domestic research on correlative thinking in Donghak Thought was conducted by Kim Sang-il. Kim Sang-il defined Donghak as "new Western learning" (新西學, sinseohak) and interpreted Donghak as a pioneering Eastern version of Whitehead's process thought.¹⁰⁶ Afterward, Kim Sang-il named Eastern thought "Han Philosophy" (韓哲學, han'cheolhak) and expanded it even to fractal science, theoretically elaborating the characteristics of correlative thinking in Donghak through comparison with a wide range of Western thought across the ages.
The representative Eastern term in which the correlative nature of creative transformation appears is Sijeongju. Donghak's View of Heaven — manifested as Mugeuk Daedo from the East and Muwi Ihwa from the West — is synthesized in Sijeongju. Sijeongju is especially the concept that represents the View of Heaven in Donghak Thought. As expressed in Donghak's representative incantation "Sijeongju johwajong" (侍天主造化定), Sijeongju is the root of creative transformation. Researchers who have studied the commonalities between Donghak and Neo-Confucianism argue that the creative transformation of Sijeongju is similar in content to Neo-Confucian creative transformation and is the concept that encompasses Donghak's other phrases "gi-transformation" (氣化, gihwa) and "muwi ihwa" (無爲而化). In the "Nonhangmun" of Donghak, "si" (侍, serving/attending) is stated as "nayu sinnyeong oeyu gihwa ilse jiin gakji buri" (內有神靈 外有氣化 一世之人 各知不移): "Having Spiritual Numinosity Within, Having Gi-transformation Without, the people of one generation each knowing and not moving [away]." It is said that the three meanings of the initial Donghak's "si" (侍, attending) of serving were reduced in later Donghak to the inner qi alone. Suun's Hanullim had three implications — the transcendent personal God, the Supreme Qi (至氣) performing life movement within nature, and the inner Spiritual Numinosity of the individual — and Son Byong-hui argued that once one realizes only the inner Hanullim among these, the Hanullim with the remaining two meanings — the Supreme God and the essence of Heaven-Earth-all things — would also be naturally realized within oneself.¹⁰⁷ This means the realization that Sijeongju means having a numinous heart-mind and a gi-transforming body, and all people of the world maintaining that state — that is, all returning to the one body (同歸一體, donggwi ilche) that creatively evolves (造化, johwa). Therefore Sijeongju is said to be precisely donggwi ilche, and "creative transformation."¹⁰⁸
As Sijeongju is precisely immanent transcendence, Donghak Thought shares cultivation methods with existing Confucianism and Daoism. It has been argued that the diversity of the Donghak concept of "si" (侍) originates from the fact that Donghak's concept of the divine emerged from three intellectual sources: shamanism, Catholic learning, and Confucianism.¹⁰⁹ However, unlike Confucianism, Donghak Thought substantiated the principle-law (理法, ibop) as in Daoism; and unlike Daoism, a personal Creator God appears. In the creative transformation of Donghak Thought through "Sijeongju," unlike in Confucianism or Daoism, a "hidden God" appears. It is in the dimension of East-West fusion in creative transformation — rather than the Daoist tradition that had only emphasized the evolutionary aspect — that the creative aspect was more strongly emphasized in Donghak Thought.
The common ground that "Sijeongju" shares with Western learning is not only the appearance of a personal God but also the scene of encounter with the personal God. Researchers who emphasize the commonality with Western learning argue that Suun's Cheonsa Mundap is similar to the experience of the Apostle Paul. It is said that there was no precedent among past Koreans' religious experiences of directly encountering God as Suun did. From this perspective, it is also assessed that Donghak's Cheonju (天主, Lord of Heaven) was influenced by Christianity. However, it is also explained that Suun harmonized the Eastern method of self-introspection — internal transcendence — with traditional Korean faith in God.¹¹⁰
The indigenous modernity of the View of Heaven in Donghak Thought is the communication between the Heaven-beyond-Heaven and the human heart-mind, and from this — the rearrangement of the sacred and profane — that is, the emergence of the liminality of boundary-crossing. In political and social thought, this also means the upward mobility of commoners becoming nobles; and in the relationship of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, it means the elevation of the status of Earth and humanity, which had been marginalized. Donghak's View of Heaven — which transcends the Views of Heaven of East and West through the appearance of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven — repeats in ontogeny the phylogeny manifested in the Eastern and Western Views of Heaven, demonstrating indigenous modernity through liminality.
23. Geum Jangtae, Spirit-Divinities and Rituals: The Religious World of Confucianism (Seoul: JNC, 2009), p. 62; Zhang Zai distinguished between "the Heaven of the Great Void (太虛之天)" and "the Heaven counterposed to Earth (天地對擧之天)." Zhengmeng, "Taihe"; cited in Xu Yiming, Xing Li yu Qi Huang (Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 1997), p. 32.
24. Ibid.
25. Kim Yeong-ho, "A Comparative Study of the Attributes of Heaven (天) in the Book of Odes and the Attributes of God in the Psalms," Won-Buddhism Thought and Religious Culture 71.
26. Kim Yeong-geon, "Correlative Thinking and Aesthetic Order," Philosophical Discussions 26 (2011), pp. 165–193; Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea (Goyang: Misulmunhwa, 2015).
27. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea (Goyang: Misulmunhwa, 2015), pp. 34–139. Choe Gwangjin used the terms assimilation, condensation, and grafting to compare the cultures of Korea, China, and Japan, but these also largely correspond to the Eastern concepts of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity.
28. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 56–59.
29. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 62–75.
30. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 78–95.
31. "Qian is Yang, Kun is Yin. This is the qi of Heaven-and-Earth, filling the space between the two. It is what humans and things draw upon to form their bodies. Therefore it is said, 'The filling of Heaven-and-Earth is my body. Qian is vigorous, Kun is compliant. This is the will of Heaven-and-Earth.'" Cao Duan (曹端), Commentary on the Western Inscription (西銘述解), in Han'mi Munhwasa ed., Comprehensive Collection of Korean Studies on the Book of Changes, Vol. 12 (Seoul: Han'mi Munhwasa, 1998).
32. Choe Gwangjin, The Aesthetics of Korea, pp. 62–75.
33. For the universe as computer, see Tom Siegfried, tr. Ko Jungsuk, The Bit and the Pendulum: From Quantum Computing to M Theory — The New Physics of Information (Seoul: Gimm-Young, 2003), pp. 26–29.
34. On Zhu Xi's respectful distancing from the divine, see Choe Jindeok, "Zhu Xi Studies' Theory of Li and Qi and Theory of Ghosts and Spirits," Yangmyeonghak 23 (2009), pp. 381–382.
35. Zhu Xi, Collected Works, Vol. 58, "Reply to Huang Daojun" (答黃道夫書).
36. So Gwang-seop, "A Mathematical-Physical Model of the Five Phases," Journal of Korean Oriental Medicine for Adults 1 (1995), pp. 25–36.
37. Gang Yong-gyun, "A Mathematical Model of the Five Phases and Eight Phases," Journal of the Korean Society for Psychotronic Research 3(1) (1999). The numbers 7 and 9 cannot form a one-to-one mutual overcoming-nourishing system. 8 is the smallest even number that forms a one-to-one mutual overcoming-nourishing system.
38. Pak Seong-u, "A Study on the Wang-Sang-Hyu-Su-Sa Theory: Centered on the Theory of Earth Flourishing in the Four Seasons," M.A. thesis, Kongju National University, 2006; Gwon Yeong-min, "A Study on the Division of Seasons in the Theory of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases," M.A. thesis, Kongju National University, 2017.
39. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Jejesaeng" 43.
40. Choe Jeonghye and Choe Jeongjun, "A Study of Abe Taizan's Theory of Twelve Cyclical Stages," Humanities Research 48, pp. 315–349; Yi Jin-hun, "A Study on the Twelve Cyclical Stages," M.A. thesis, Kongju National University, 2010.
41. The seven character archetypes are: hero, mentor, threshold guardian, herald, shapeshifter (trickster), shadow, and trickster. Just as Campbell's hero's journey has been verified in countless films and games, the universality of the seven archetypes has been verified through many works. See Stuart Voytilla, tr. Kim Gyeong-sik, Myth and the Movies (Seoul: Eulyoo, 2005).
42. Kim Ji-ha, What Is Yul-Ryeo? (Seoul: Han Munhwa Multimedia, 1999).
43. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Haengrok" 5-38.
44. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyoun" 1-66. The character 以 (i) in "以詔 (ijo)" includes the meaning "to follow as a model." See Ko Yunsuk, "The Philosophy of 'Modeling [以]' Heaven-and-Earth: Focused on the Great Image Commentary (大象傳) of the Qian and Kun Hexagrams in the Book of Changes," Korean Philosophical Studies 70, pp. 156–157 (2021).
c. The Collision and Mutual Overcoming of Eastern and Western Views of Heaven in the Modern Era
i. The Collision of Views of Heaven
The Western View of Heaven — expressed through the attributes of earth, water, fire, and wind — and the Eastern View of Heaven — expressed through Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — had certain points of similarity. Indeed, Matteo Ricci, who set out to evangelize the East, marveled upon discovering that the Eastern View of Heaven as found in the Book of Documents (書經, Seoggyeong) — a Confucian classic predating Neo-Confucianism — was similar to the Western View of Heaven, and indeed surpassed it in certain respects, taking hope for the Eastern mission.
"Among all the nations of non-believers known in Europe, I have never seen one with fewer errors than the ancient Chinese. Indeed, I found in their books that they always venerate a supreme being which they call the King of Heaven (天帝) or Heaven-and-Earth (天地). Perhaps in their thinking, Heaven and Earth, as living things, constitute a single body (體), and the supreme being of that body is something like a soul."⁴⁵
Matteo Ricci pursued the Eastern mission through the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity as expressed in earth, water, fire, and wind. The View of Heaven in the Book of Documents that Ricci discovered displayed characteristics — Heaven as Creator, Heaven's providence, Heaven's judgment, Heaven as Sovereign — that appeared almost identical to those of Western learning:
"Heaven and Earth are the parents of all things; humanity is the spirit of all things." 惟天地 萬物父母 惟人 萬物之靈 — Book of Documents (書經), "Taishi I" (泰誓上). [Creator Heaven]⁴⁶
"The Brilliant Heaven, casting its favorable regard, has given him dominion over the four seas, making him ruler under heaven." 皇天眷命, 奄有四海, 爲天下君 — Book of Documents, "Canon of Yu" (大禹謨) 1. [Heaven's providence]⁴⁷
"Heaven punishes those who are guilty." 天討有罪 — Book of Documents, "Counsels of Gao Yao" (皐陶謨) 5. [Heaven's judgment]⁴⁸
"The Way of Heaven is to reward those who do good and inflict calamities on those who do evil." 天道福善禍淫 — Book of Documents, "Announcement of Tang" (湯誥). [The attribute of Heaven as Sovereign]⁴⁹
Matteo Ricci regarded it as a regrettable decline that the Heavenly thought of the Book of Documents — which he found to be similar to the Western View of Heaven — had its personal-divine attributes fade and transform into a principle-law deity (理法神) as it passed through the Zhou dynasty, Confucius, and Neo-Confucianism. However, from today's perspective, which understands this as the attribute of multiple modernities in which the secular (俗) subsumes the sacred (聖), the sacredness is rather seen as having been further reinforced.⁵⁰
In practice, the Joseon intellectuals — who lived in the most Neo-Confucianized society in East Asia — welcomed the Tianzhu Shiyi as a thought that could illuminate the original meaning of Confucianism. Intellectuals of the era such as Gwangam Yi Byeok (李蘗) and Jeong Yakyong staked their lives on accepting Western learning. On the other hand, many intellectuals represented by Sin Hudam (愼後聃, 1702–1761), who wrote the Discourse on Western Learning (西學辨, Seohakbyeon), expressed concerns about Western learning.⁵¹
However, the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of earth, water, fire, and wind — in which the attributes of Heaven as fifth element are maximized — and the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — in which the attributes of Earth-as-Soil (土) are maximized — collided head-on. Fortunately, in Ricci's era, the two Views of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity maintained a cooperative relationship under the pretext of the Supplementing Confucianism theory (補儒論, boyuron); but after Ricci's death, the two came to reject each other in the controversy over Supplementing Confucianism, developing into an antagonistic relationship, and the East ultimately faced a crisis in which its civilization might be extinguished by the West, as with the Inca or Maya empires. The East could not transcend the precedents of Confucianism, and the West could not accommodate the East.
In particular, the question of whether the "Li" (理) of the Taiji is an autonomous being became the core issue of the two Views of Heaven. In the Western Formal View of Heaven — which explains change through substance — all things are created, so the "Li" of the Taiji cannot be an autonomous being; but in the Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven — where the operation of Heaven-and-Earth was entrusted at the Opening of Heaven-and-Earth (天地開闢, cheonji gaebyeok) — the "Li" of the Taiji is autonomous, so the two Views of Heaven were bound to clash.
To clarify the Western substantialist position that "Li" cannot be autonomous — by distinguishing whether "Li" is an autonomous being (substantia) or an accidental being (accidentia) — Matteo Ricci in the Tianzhu Shiyi argued as follows in dialogue with a Chinese scholar:
Chinese Scholar: "The Taiji is nothing other than Li (理)." ... Western Scholar: "The Taiji argument cannot be the origin of all things. In discussing the categories of things, there are two types: autonomous beings (自立體, jarip'che) and dependent beings (依賴體, uiraeche). Things that can establish themselves without relying on any other thing — Heaven-and-Earth, ghost-spirits, humanity, birds, plants, metals and stones — all belong to autonomous beings. Things that cannot be autonomous must rely on other things to be established. The Five Constants (五常; benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, faithfulness), the five colors, the five tones, the five tastes — all belong to dependent beings. To give an analogy with a white horse: the whiteness of a white horse is a dependent being, and the horse is an autonomous being. ... For one thing there is only one autonomous being, while dependent beings are too numerous to count. For example, for a person there is only one autonomous body, but within it are contained many dependent beings such as emotion, nature, countenance, appearance, and human relations. In discussing the Taiji as interpreted by the single word Li, Li cannot be the true cause of Heaven-Earth and all things. For Li too is nothing more than a type of dependent being."⁵²
Against this, the Neo-Confucian Sin Hudam responded in the Seohakbyeon with the Eastern attributive logic that Li and things (事物) are completely connected — where there is Li there are things, and where there are things there is Li: "Of course, Li does not depart from the human mind and things. But can it be said that the Li said to be in the human mind and in things was something that did not originally exist but only fitted in and attached after the human mind came to exist, and attached itself to things like a growth that appeared suddenly without having been there before? And can it be said on this basis that Li comes after things and thus cannot be the origin of things?"⁵³
The general populace, who had been favorably disposed toward the West, also shifted to a negative position regarding the Western View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity after the Beijing Convention, when Western domination began in earnest. The East, pressed by Western power, now came to require the liminality of a rite of passage and the reactivation of a new View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity to counter Western power. Accordingly, in East Asia, movements arose such as China's Yiguandao (一貫道), the Taiping Rebellion, and the Xinhai Revolution; and in Japan, new religious movements such as the Meiji Restoration and Tenrikyo (天理敎) appeared or spread.
The place most acutely sensitive to the collapse of the Yin-Yang and Five Phases View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity was Korea — the most thoroughly Confucianized of the three East Asian nations. Korea further developed the theory that Western learning had originated in the East (西學中源論, seohak jungwonron) and interpreted Western learning from an Eastern perspective. The Korean theory of Western-learning-Eastern-origin, beginning with Seo Myeong-eung and passing through Jeong Yakyong and Choe Han-gi, reached a critical turning point in Donghak Thought.⁵⁴ Donghak Thought proposed, through the liminality of Sijeongju (侍天主), a harmony between the personal God (人格神) of earth, water, fire, and wind and the principle-law God (理法神) of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases.
In the Eastern case, instead of the Creator hiding away, Heaven, Earth, and the Human Realm — unlike in the West — were divided into Heaven, Earth, and Humanity and Yin-Yang as in the Book of Changes, forming an autonomous and consistent system of spirit-divinities. If in Western learning the other divinities of the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms disappear due to monotheism, then in Daoism, under the influence of the Book of Changes, the divinities of the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms operate as an autonomous and consistent system of Yin-Yang. This connects to Donghak's theory of creative transformation (造化思想, johwa sasang) through the Eastern theory of Li-Qi and the theory of ghost-spirits (鬼神論, guisinron) in their substance-function (體用, cheyong) relationship, as follows: Seo Myeong-eung states that Shao Kangjie was the first to apply the Li-Qi concept to the divine-human relationship, revealing that the Yin-Yang relationship between spirit-divinities and humanity corresponds to the Yin-Yang relationship between Soil (土) and the remaining four phases (Wood, Fire, Metal, Water) in the Five Phases.⁵⁵
After the theory of Western-learning-Eastern-origin was introduced to Joseon, a counter-argument based on Yin-Yang and the Five Phases was raised against Ricci's critique of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. Seo Myeong-eung refuted Matteo Ricci's Tianzhu Shiyi using Shao Kangjie's (邵康節, 1011–1077) theory of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases. Meanwhile, Jeong Yakyong (丁若鏞, 1762–1836) partly accepted Ricci's views in critiquing Neo-Confucianism, but this was done in order to defend Eastern values. In this way, before Donghak, the debate between East and West over correlative thinking was an important issue in the academic world of the time. "Donghak" was born in a period and atmosphere that emphasized the indigenous methodology of Eastern learning vis-à-vis "Western learning" (西學, seohak).
At that time, for East Asians, establishing indigenous modernity was not merely a matter of choice but a matter of survival. Having experienced the power of the West through the Opium War, the East perceived the danger that failure to establish indigenous modernity could plunge Asia into the same state of civilizational loss as the African peoples or the indigenous peoples of the Americas. Moreover, to East Asians who had been working harder than Westerners, the shock of the West was not only a material threat but also a spiritual threat — the loss of motivation as all their previous efforts came to naught.
In the age of imperialism, East Asians faced a spiritual crisis of losing not only material security but their very identity, either uncritically accepting Western learning or falling back on Eastern mysticism. The establishment of indigenous modernity through correlative thinking — Eastern rationality — was increasingly becoming a core issue for the survival of East Asia. Donghak was established carrying this heavy burden. Once the concepts of Donghak — grounded in the correlative thinking of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — were established, concepts such as "boundless great Way" (無極大道, mugŭk daedo), "Heaven-Earth spirit-divinities" (天地鬼神, cheonji gwisin), "the upper cycle of the primordial year" (上元甲, sangwon'gap), and "another Gaebyeok" (다시 개벽, dasi gaebyeok) were newly formulated.
ii. The Mutual Overcoming of Views of Heaven
As the Views of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases and of earth, water, fire, and wind collided, the mutual overcoming (相克化, sanggeukwa) of the Views of Heaven intensified. Both thought systems — Yin-Yang and the Five Phases, and earth, water, fire, and wind — have the same ideal View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity, but their patterns of mutual overcoming are also similar. In the earth-water-fire-wind worldview, the ideal world degenerates due to human sin into the Three Disasters (三災, samjae) of water, fire, and wind; in the Yin-Yang and Five Phases worldview, it degenerates due to an imperfect world structure into the chaos of Yin-Yang (陰陽亂雜, eumyang nanjap). Through the East-West exchange that unfolded after Matteo Ricci, the East and West each, for different reasons, underwent a mutual overcoming in which the View of Heaven came to deny God.
After Matteo Ricci, the confusion in the East-West divine-human relationship began in the area of the doctrine of the soul's immortality after death.⁵⁶ After Ricci, in the East the Li-Qi theory — which holds that qi disperses after four generations — came to be doubted, and in the West the belief that the divine world consisted of only one absolute God and a few angels came to be doubted. The Daesoon Thought view of the soul, centered on the hun and po (魂魄, honbaek) concept, is characterized by the concept of the rectified soul (正魂, jeonghon), which emphasizes human growth.⁵⁷ After Ricci, in the East Yin-Yang and the Five Phases and the Spirit-Divinities of Heaven-and-Earth came to be denied, while in the West, as in the East, an atheistic worldview composed of countless principle-law divinities or machines was formed.
The difference between Eastern and Western modes of thought is detailed in Matteo Ricci's Tianzhu Shiyi and the controversies surrounding it. By today's standards, the earth-water-fire-wind worldview looks more similar to the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases — which Ricci criticized — than to the modern mechanistic scientific view; but in that it emphasizes substance for explaining change, it was, as François Jullien pointed out,⁵⁸ closer to the modern mechanistic scientific view. Ricci, despite the common attribute of both the Eastern Yin-Yang and Five Phases View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity and correlative science, criticized the Eastern Yin-Yang and Five Phases View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity as unscientific explanation for explaining change not through substance but through attributes.⁵⁹
As seen in the controversy over Supplementing Confucianism, while Catholicism denied the Eastern worldview that Ricci had transmitted, secular society in fact welcomed it. Beginning with Descartes — epitomized by cogito ergo sum — the West bleached out the existing concept of the divine⁶⁰ and built a mechanistic worldview without God. In ethics, however, theories emphasizing the Gospel over Law expanded. The Western transition to ethics and morality without God can be called a Confucian transformation of theology. The Confucian transformation can be summarized as the transition from Law to Gospel, and this is also evident in the case of Karl Barth (1886–1968), one of the leading theorists of modern Western theology.⁶¹ That is, Calvin's doctrine of predestination transformed into social empathy in a society without God. Modernity became concentrated on a new liminality. From the humanistic standpoint, this transformation in the concept of the divine was interpreted as a positive change; but today, as the problems of modernity have become maximized, it has become an occasion for reflection and a catalyst for seeking a new alternative modernity.
In the mutually overcome divine-human relationship of divine exaltation and human diminishment (神尊人卑, sinjon inbi), humanity must leave the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms through liberation, withdrawal from the secular, or death, in order to escape the suffering of birth, aging, sickness, and death. In the mutually overcome View of Heaven, spirit-divinities are also bound, each guarding their boundaries — beings imprisoned within the calamity of stagnation (否劫, bigeop) confined to their own domain. Humanity, each under the influence of earthly qi, raises different civilizations and falls into mutual conflict. Also, in the mutually overcome Heaven, due to disharmony in the rain and dew (雨露, uro), humanity lives in the suffering of the Three Disasters of water, fire, and wind. Mutual overcoming begets mutual overcoming, and Heaven-and-Earth and humanity fall into a state of chaos and devastation — this is the reality of the present age.
d. Liminality in Donghak Thought's Sijeongju (侍天主) View of Heaven
i. The Sijeongju (侍天主) View of Heaven in Donghak Thought
When the Neo-Confucian Principle-Heaven (理法天, ibeopcheon) reached the stage of being unable to solve the problems of a new era in East Asia — and especially in Joseon society — Donghak proposed a solution through a new View of Heaven: the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天, cheon'oe cheon), i.e., the Heaven of Wuji (無極, mugŭk). Donghak sought to embrace the learning of Western thought within a View of Heaven. This is analogous to how the Mongol and Islamic invasions of the West served as background for Western modernity. The new View of Heaven Donghak proposed was, unlike the Neo-Confucian Principle-Heaven, direct communication with the Heaven above Heaven — the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天). The "Heaven" in Sijeongju is the concept of Heaven as Heaven-beyond-Heaven.
Donghak Thought sought to promote indigenous modernity in the View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity by emphasizing the concept of Heaven-beyond-Heaven — a concept that had not received attention in the existing View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity. In multiple modernity theory, modernity — as in Donghak Thought — arises from subsuming and liminality: reactivating the alienated portion of the existing View of Heaven, View of Earth, and View of Humanity and transforming the hierarchical relationship of the sacred (聖, seong) and the profane (俗, sok) so that the profane can accommodate the sacred. Donghak Thought pursues a rearrangement of the sacred-profane hierarchy — experiencing the sacred in everyday profane life — through direct communication with the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, and attempts a liminality that resolves accumulated existing problems through Sustaining the Heart-Mind and Rectifying the Gi (守心正氣, susim jeonggi).
Suun expressed direct communication with the "Heaven-above-Heaven" — distinct from the "Heaven" of existing Neo-Confucianism — as Sijeongju (侍天主, Serving the Lord of Heaven). Suun invested all his capacities throughout his life for direct communication with the "Heaven-above-Heaven." After nearly forty years of effort, Suun finally arrived at the Dialogue with the Heavenly Teacher (天師問答, cheonsa mundap) in the gyeongsin year (1860). The term "Cheonsa Mundap" was first used by Yi Don-hwa — a prominent doctrinal researcher of the Cheondogyo era — to express Suun's experience of encountering the Supreme God.⁶²
Suun received the first revelation from the Supreme God on the fifth day of the fourth lunar month of 1860 (the gyeongsin year). The Cheonsa Mundap lasted approximately six months, and after more than a year of deliberation, Suun expressed this in detail in the Yongdamyusa (龍潭遺詞) and the Donggyeongedaejeon (東經大典). Yi Don-hwa therefore divides Suun's practice into the Cheonsa Mundap and the inner descent-discourse (降話, ganghwa). However, the Dowon Giseo (道源記書), written after the Yongdamyusa and Donggyeongedaejeon, contains passages showing that Suun communicated with the Supreme God multiple times until just before his arrest.⁶³
The text of the initial revelation is as follows:
不意四月 心寒身戰 疾不得執症 言不得難狀之際 有何仙語 忽入耳中 驚起探問則 曰勿懼勿恐 世人 謂我上帝 汝不知上帝耶 問其所然 曰余亦無功故 生汝世間 敎人此法 勿疑勿疑 曰然則 西道以敎人乎 曰不然 吾有靈符 其名 仙藥 其形 太極 又形 弓弓 受我此符 濟人疾病 受我呪文 敎人爲我則 汝亦長生 布德天下矣
[In the unexpected fourth month, with a chill in the heart and trembling of the body, at a moment when the ailment could not be diagnosed and its nature could not be described in words, there were certain words of an immortal suddenly entering the ears. Startled, I inquired further, and was answered: "Fear not, fear not. The people of the world call me the Supreme God (上帝, Sangje); do you not know the Supreme God?" When I asked the reason, I was answered: "I too, having no merit, brought you forth into the world to teach people this Way. Do not doubt, do not doubt." I asked: "Then shall I teach people through the Western Way?" I was answered: "That is not so. I have a spiritual talisman (靈符, yeongbu); its name is the immortal medicine (仙藥, seonyak), its form is the Taiji, and another form is Gung-gung (弓弓). Receive my spiritual talisman to save people from illness; receive my incantation to teach people to serve me — then you too shall achieve long life and spread virtue throughout the world."⁶⁴]
It is said that what is most characteristic of Donghak Thought in the history of modern religion and even of world religious history is that the religious experience of its founder is expressed in great detail and over a long period of time.⁶⁵
In the course of interpreting the content of the dialogue conducted during the approximately six-month Cheonsa Mundap, Donghak was established. In the "Nonhangmun" (論學文, Discourse on Learning), Suun first emphasized the distinctiveness from Western learning as the epistemological background of Donghak. Suun announced that the Supreme God he encountered was the Heaven-above-Heaven that integrated the heavens of East and West, claiming that it was especially the Heaven above the Western Heaven. Suun clarified this in terms of the character of "learning" (學, hak). As seen in the very title "Nonhangmun," among all the civilizations of the world that resisted Western imperialism, only Korea's Donghak took "learning" — an epistemological subject — as its primary theme. The claim that the difference between East and West lies in the fundamental aspect of cognitive structure first appears in Donghak's "Nonhangmun."
In the "Nonhangmun" of the Donggyeongedaejeon, Suun refers to the fact that the West is analytical — its words changing according to circumstances — and though it appears to believe in God, it does not actually believe, and thus ultimately falls into nihilism. First, Suun specifies the difference between Donghak and Western learning with the phrase "un jeuk il do jeuk dong i jeuk bi" (運則一 道則同 理則非): "The cosmic cycle is one, the Way is the same, but the principle is different."
日與西道 無異者乎
Question: Is it not different from the Western Way?
日洋學 如斯而有異 如呪而無實 然而運則一也 道則同也 理則非也
Answer: Western learning is similar to this but has differences; it is like prayer but without substance. However, the cosmic cycle is one, the Way is the same, but the principle is different.⁶⁶
In the above passage, Suun states that Eastern and Western learning have the same goal but are methodologically different. Bae Yeong-sun has compiled the prior research on this topic. Bae Yeong-sun has noted that existing prior research had not clarified in detail the differences in cycle (運, un), Way (道, do), and principle (理, i) referred to in Donghak, and elaborated on those differences. Bae Yeong-sun has further analyzed Sijeongju as correlative thinking of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, dividing "Sijeongju-johwajong-yeongse bulgwang mansaji" (侍天主 造化定 永世不忘萬事知) as follows: "Sijeongju" corresponds to Heaven (天), "johwajong" to Earth (地), and "yeongse bulgwang mansaji" to Humanity (人).
Bae Yeong-sun further applies Sijeongju to cycle (運), Way (道), and principle (理): Way (道) corresponds to "Sijeongju (侍天主)," cycle (運) to "johwajeong (造化定)," and principle (理) to "yeongse bulgwang mansaji (永世不忘萬事知)." Ultimately, the difference between Donghak and Western learning is that while Heaven-and-Earth are the same and one, the difference lies in the principle (理) of humanity serving the Lord of Heaven. Bae Yeong-sun states that in Donghak, while the Heaven (Way) of spring-summer-autumn-winter is the same for East and West, the Earth (Earth) of the East and West differs according to cyclical qi (運).⁶⁷
The difference in principle between Donghak and Western learning is explained in Donghak as follows:
曰何爲其然也 曰吾道無爲而化矣 守其心正其氣 率其性受其敎 化出於自然之中也 西人 言無次第 書無皂白而 頓無爲天主之端 只祝自爲身之謀 身無氣化之神 學無天主之敎 有形無迹 如思無呪 道近虛無 學非天主 豈可謂無異者乎
["How does this come to be?" "The Way I receive transforms the world naturally in accordance with the will of Heaven. When each person sustains their original heart-mind, rectifies their qi, follows their innate Heavenly nature, and receives the teaching of Heaven, transformation is achieved naturally. In contrast to this, Western people — those who believe in Western learning — have no proper order in their words and no clear logic in their writings. There is no genuine substance of serving the Lord of Heaven, and they merely pray for means of personal benefit. Therefore there is no wondrous state of the body uniting with the numinous qi, and no true teaching of the Lord of Heaven; there is form without substance. They seem to think of Heaven but do not truly serve Heaven. Thus their Way is nearly empty of content, and their religion does not serve the Lord of Heaven. How can it be said that there is no difference?"⁶⁸]
The above passage is considered one of the most difficult portions of the Donggyeongedaejeon; the reason is said to be that the object of criticism in the passage has primarily been understood as Catholicism or Catholic believers. It is said to be understandable if the object of criticism is read as Westerners in general and Western learning as a whole.⁶⁹
Regarding the above passage, Bae Yeong-sun states that the decisive difference between Donghak and Western learning pointed to by Donghak is "the spirit of gi-transformation" (氣化之神, gihwa jisin). Here, "gi-transformation" (氣化, gihwa) means the condensation of Heavenly qi into the body. Western learning only prays toward the Lord of Heaven, but has no incantation (呪文, jumun) capable of self-gi-transformation, and no cultivation practice of Sustaining the Heart-Mind and Rectifying the Gi. Just as Suun criticized Western learning for the strict vertical distinction between clergy and laity, he criticizes here by the same logic the Western learning that lacks gi-transformation.
What Suun in fact most prided himself upon in founding Donghak was Sustaining the Heart-Mind and Rectifying the Gi, and he said the same not only against Western learning but also against Confucianism.⁷⁰ Suun's view that the difference between Donghak and Western learning lies in the presence or absence of cultivation methods was a brilliant insight into Eastern and Western learning. Ken Wilber (1949– ), a prominent transpersonal psychologist who has been said to have integrated Eastern and Western spirituality, has also pointed out that the greatest weakness of Western thought — even systematic philosophies like German Idealism — is the absence of a theory of self-cultivation.⁷¹ Wilber stated that the most urgent problem in contemporary thought is the redirection of the Western epistemological approach toward a cultivation-based approach.⁷²
The appearance of the Supreme God in Donghak Thought was, from the standpoint of orthodox Neo-Confucianism, an anomalous and heterodox manifestation belonging to the category of the strange, violent, and supernatural. Suun's Cheonsa Mundap appeared even more anomalous because Suun's family lineage belonged to the orthodox line of Korean Neo-Confucianism. Though Suun was born under unfortunate circumstances — with a status lower than that of an illegitimate child (庶子, seoja) as the son of a remarried woman's descendant — his father, Gŭnam Choe Ok (近菴 崔鋈, 1762–1840), occupied a place in the authentic transmission lineage of Toegye Yi Hwang (李滉, 1501–1570). Not only Confucian scholars but also the general populace found the appearance of the Supreme God to be an extraordinary situation; yet unexpectedly, Suun's Cheonsa Mundap — his conversation with the Supreme God — was accepted across social strata. Donghak Thought came to overcome this through drawing on many traditions of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism.
Recent research points to the influence of Chinese Daoism, which was being newly introduced at the time Donghak was established, as the background for the widespread acceptance of Suun's Cheonsa Mundap. In particular, the influence of Late Joseon Luandao Daoism (鸞壇道敎, nandan dogyeo) has been highlighted. This was due to the introduction of Chinese Daoism, which is less well known today: due to the chaos of the Qing dynasty, many Qing Daoist masters entered Joseon, and it is said that the first Daoist organization in Joseon — called "Musangdan" (無相壇) — was formed at that time. Even Emperor Gojong published Daoist scriptures as a national project. It is said that the background enabling Suun's Cheonsa Mundap to be recognized as a dialogue with the Supreme God was the changing atmosphere of Joseon society brought about by the introduction of Luandao Daoism.⁷³
The Daoist influence on the establishment of Donghak also appears in incantation practice and Donghak devotional songs (東學歌詞, donghak gasa). It is said that Donghak could gain recognition in a Confucian society due to the influence of Daoism that was being introduced. Donghak Thought also incorporated Daoism, which was the repository of the traditional civilization of East Asia at that time. In the case of "Donghak devotional songs," these can also be interpreted as spirit-writing (降筆, gangpil) resulting from contact with spirit-divinities.⁷⁴ It is also said that the three essences of East Asian intellect — Shao Kangjie's knowledge, the poetry of Li Bai and Du Fu, and the eloquence of Su Qin and Zhang Yi — shone forth in Jeungsan as well.⁷⁵ In fact, Suun was later appointed by Jeungsan as the Patriarch (宗長, jongjang) of the Post-Heaven Daoist tradition (後天仙道, hucheon seondo), which is connected to Daoism. This indicates that Donghak inherits the essence of Daoism. Jeungsan expressed this as the twelfth stage of "embryonic formation" (胞胎, pottae) in the twelve stages of cyclical vitality — the operation of Heaven-and-Earth — and in concrete form as "creative transformation" (造化, johwa).⁷⁶
In Eastern thought, the View of Heaven is related to the method of cultivation practice. In cultivation methods, the View of Heaven can be said to be a point of convergence. The greatest feature of Donghak cultivation was incantation practice. Even from the standpoint of orthodox Neo-Confucianism, this was exceptionally accepted. Incantations had been partly introduced even in Confucianism — as in the "Jeong-yeok" (正易) case of singing-dancing (詠歌舞蹈, yeong'ga mudo) and in the case of sijo (時調) recitation. While "incantation" had long been widely used in Buddhism as Buddhist chanting (念佛, yambul), it was anomalous in the Confucian mainstream of Joseon — yet paradoxically, it was precisely this anomalous quality that caused Donghak to spread more widely.⁷⁷ Incantation practice was a universal cultivation method of all ages and nations, also used in contemporary Western spiritual cultivation; but in Korea, it was first introduced for the self-cultivation of the general public through Donghak, and was subsequently widely used in new religions.⁷⁸
The influence of Confucianism in the establishment of Donghak was also significant. Donghak was actually evaluated by Jeungsan as having been unable to transcend the precedents of Confucianism.⁷⁹ First, Donghak — as seen in the content of the representative incantation, "Ji gi geum ji won wi dae gang" (至氣今至願爲大降, May the Supreme Qi descend greatly upon me now) — emphasizes the role of qi (氣), which is also emphasized in Neo-Confucianism. While Donghak was in a position to emphasize "qi" (氣) over "li" (理) — as in "do gi jang jon sa bul ip" (道氣長存邪不入, If the Way's qi endures, evil shall not enter)⁸⁰ — Donghak, except for the Supreme God, shows almost no content regarding Daoist spirit-divinities, suggesting that it does not fundamentally depart from the Confucian-level "qi."
The Supreme God concept of Suun, which did not emphasize Daoist spirit-divinities, also does not greatly depart from the influence of the Confucian View of Heaven. An Yu-gyeong argues that while Donghak emphasizes "qi," the background of Donghak's establishment shows the relationship running from the establishment of li (理) in Toegye through Dasan. Toegye's influence was great in making Donghak possible in Korea.⁸¹
Overall, Suun's understanding of Donghak remained within the Confucian tradition in theoretical dimensions such as the concept of the Supreme God, while in metaphysical aspects such as arts of technique and divination (術數, sulsu), Daoism was actively incorporated.⁸² Indeed, it is said that the arts of technique and divination also played a significant role in making Donghak widely known to the general public.⁸³
That Donghak remained within the Confucian tradition metaphysically while excelling in Daoist arts of technique in physical-material dimensions actually served to further reinforce Donghak's Confucian tradition. As depicted in Hwang Hyeon's (黃玹, 1855–1910) Oha Gimun (梧下記文), Donghak attracted people from a wide variety of social strata, and the purposes of joining were extremely diverse.⁸⁴ Jeungsan actually highly evaluated Jeon Myeong-suk (全明淑, 1855–1895), who worked for the liberation of social status among Donghak participants, and discerned that while many Donghak participants publicly advocated national protection and popular welfare (保國安民, boguk anmin), inwardly they dreamed of becoming kings and nobles (王侯將相, wanghu jangsang).⁸⁵ Those who joined Donghak aiming to become kings and nobles judged that they could sufficiently realize their dreams in the Donghak that excelled in arts of technique. Accordingly, Yun I-heum argues that Donghak appeared to the general populace as an expansion of Jeong Gam-rok (鄭鑑錄) thought and subsequently became the model for new religions.⁸⁶
The Buddhist influence on the establishment of Donghak was indirect. The Buddhist influence extends only to the fact that Suun fled to the Ŭnjŏgam hermitage, and that Donghak incantations are similar to Buddhist chanting. The Donghak peasant movement first began to be activated when a book written by Yi Seo-gu (李書求, 1754–1825) — found inside the Maitreya statue at Seonunsa Temple — was taken out by the district leader Son Hwa-jung (孫華仲, 1861–1895). However, beliefs regarding previous lives and ancestors — such as the law of karmic connection — were not emphasized in Donghak, and the concept of the resolution of grievances (解冤, haewon), prominent in Daesoon Thought, did not appear in Donghak Thought.
In addition to Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism, a great influence on the establishment of Donghak was the thought of Yin-Yang. Though Yin-Yang thought can be included within the broader category of Daoism, if considered separately, Donghak did not fundamentally depart from the Confucian Yin-Yang view — as in the Book of Changes — that "Heaven-and-Earth are ghost-spirits, and ghost-spirits are Heaven-and-Earth." Though Donghak began by emphasizing Heaven-above-Heaven and sought to criticize and transcend Western learning and Confucianism-Buddhism-Daoism, Donghak Thought — unable to incorporate the concept of spirit-divinities — still did not greatly depart from Confucianism. This was a somewhat different character from the Yin-Yang perspective of Daesoon Thought, which emphasizes spirit-divinities.
In addition to the ideological background of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism, Donghak was established due to the influence of fear of foreign powers and its reaction — national sentiment — so that in the thought of Suun and Jeungsan there appears a spirit of resistance against the Western invasion of the open-port era.⁸⁷
"I too was born in the East and received [this Way] in the East; though the Way is the Way of Heaven (天道), the learning is Eastern Learning (東學)." — Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun."⁸⁸
Donghak expanded from resistance against Japan to resistance against the West. After Donghak, the concept of "East" (東, dong) changed from meaning Korea in relation to China to meaning the East in relation to the West. However, Donghak — which had begun as a social movement under the concept of "learning" (學, hak) like "Neo-Confucianism" — is said to have become internalized through the Japanese colonial period.⁸⁹
At the time of Donghak's establishment, the Donghak leaders' awareness of the international situation was limited to the scope of China. In the Donghak devotional songs, hostility toward Japan is prominently displayed, which is also close to the Confucian precedent of interpreting the world in a China-centered way.
In the end, Suun's understanding of Donghak came about against the background of Suun's eventful life course, deep scholarship, and pure heart, influenced by the nationalism of the Jeonggam-rok (鄭鑑錄), the will to abolish the hereditary status system, and ignorance of the international situation. The Donghak Peasant Movement that subsequently unfolded was also significantly influenced by these circumstances of Donghak's establishment. Compared to Daesoon Thought, Donghak does not emphasize principle but emphasizes qi — and Kim Ji-ha says that compared to Donghak Thought, Daesoon Thought emphasizes everyday life.
The View of Heaven in Donghak Thought ultimately emerged as a solution to the confrontation between the Western View of Heaven — which emphasizes the transcendent Heaven-beyond-Heaven (超越天, choyŏlcheon) and does not emphasize the immanent Heaven-within-Heaven-and-Earth (內在天, naejae cheon) — and the Eastern View of Heaven — which emphasizes the immanent Heaven-within-Heaven-and-Earth and does not emphasize the transcendent Heaven-beyond-Heaven. The indigenous modernity of Donghak Thought's View of Heaven lies in this solution: reshaping the sacred and profane, encompassing and transcending the Views of Heaven of all ages and nations, East and West. Donghak Thought's View of Heaven sought to maximally incorporate the best of the Confucian-Buddhist-Daoist traditions of the East and also to embrace the excellence of the Western View of Heaven. This duality of Donghak Thought's View of Heaven was early on characterized by Kim Gyeong-jae and others as a panentheistic concept of God.⁹⁰ However, the existing panentheistic concept of God has an aspect in which its formative background has not been sufficiently revealed through connection with modernity.
Modernity was, in the West, a question of science, but for East Asians it was a question of survival — of whether or not to suffer ethnic cleansing. Today, questions of modernity are discussed at an academic level, but at that time modernity involved questions of survival. Moreover, today the problem of modernity has expanded beyond the Eastern question into a question of the extinction of humanity. The View of Heaven of Donghak Thought, established with great difficulty, manifests itself in various forms.
ii. The Aspects of Liminality in the Sijeongju (侍天主) View of Heaven
In a time when indigenous modernity was needed, Donghak first proposed "Mugeuk Daedo" (無極大道, the Boundless Great Way) as a new View of Heaven. "Mugeuk Daedo" is associated with the Heaven-above-Heaven — the primordial cosmos. This can be compared to how Western modernity, in the situation of the Eastern-Western collision of Mongol and Islamic invasions, developed all the way to atomism as a new View of Heaven. Donghak's View of Heaven — which encompasses and transcends the Eastern and Western Views of Heaven through the Heaven-beyond-Heaven — repeats in ontogeny the phylogeny manifested in the Eastern and Western Views of Heaven. This shows the indigenous modernity of liminality achieved by rearranging the boundary between the sacred and the profane.
몸이 몹시 떨리면서 밖으로 신령한 기운이 접하고 안으로 말씀이 가르침으로 내리는데, 보려 해도 보이지 아니하고 들으려 해도 들리지 않아 마음이 오히려 괴이하고 의아해지므로 마음을 가다듬고 기운을 바르게 하여 묻기를, "어찌하여 이렇습니까?" 대답하시기를, "내 마음이 곧 네 마음이니라[吾心卽汝心]. 사람이 어찌 이를 알리오. 천지는 알아도 귀신은 모르니 귀신이라는 것도 나니라. 너는 무궁무궁한 도에 이르렀으니 닦고 단련하고, 글을 지어 사람을 가르치고, 법을 바르게 하여 덕을 펴면 너로 하여금 장생하여 천하에 빛나게 하리라." 나 또한 거의 한 해를 닦고 헤아려 본즉, 자연한 이치 아님이 없으므로 한편으로 주문을 짓고 한편으로 신령한 기운을 받는[降靈] 법을 짓고, 한편으로는 천주를 잊지 않는 글을 지으니, 절차와 도법이 오직 스물 한 자[주문]를 가지고 될 따름이었다.
[As the body trembled greatly, numinous qi made contact from without, and words descended as teaching from within; trying to see it, it could not be seen; trying to hear it, it could not be heard — so the heart became all the more astonished and perplexed. Composing the heart-mind and rectifying the qi, I asked: "Why is it so?" The answer was: "My mind is your mind [吾心卽汝心, o sim jeuk yeo sim]. How could people know this? Though Heaven-and-Earth know, ghost-spirits do not; and what is called ghost-spirits is also I. You have arrived at the boundless, boundless Way — cultivate and train yourself, compose writings to teach people, rectify the method and spread virtue, and I will cause you to achieve long life and shine upon all under Heaven." I too, cultivating and assessing for nearly a year, found that there was nothing that was not a natural principle; so I composed, on the one hand, an incantation; on the other, a method for receiving the numinous qi (降靈, gangnyeong); and on the other, a writing for not forgetting the Lord of Heaven. The procedure and the Way-method amounted to nothing but twenty-one characters [the incantation].
擧此一一不已故 吾亦悚然 只有恨生晩之際 身多戰寒 外有接靈之氣 內有降話之敎 視之不見 聽之不聞 心尙怪訝 修心正氣而問曰 何爲若然也. 曰吾心卽汝心也 人何知之 知天地而無知鬼神 鬼神者吾也 及汝無窮無窮之道 修而煉之 制其文敎人 正其法布德則 令汝長生 昭然于天下矣 吾亦幾至一歲 修而度之則 亦不無自然之理 故 一以作呪文 一以作降靈之法 一以作不忘之詞 次第道法 猶爲二十一字而已⁹¹]
The above passage is the section in which Suun describes the moment of receiving the Mugeuk Daedo. What "Mugeuk Daedo" is and why Donghak can be expressed as "Mugeuk Daedo" is made clear in this passage from the Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun." While the expression of Donghak as Mugeuk Daedo appears multiple times in the Yongdamyusa as well,⁹² the above passage is the most detailed.
Wuji (無極) refers to the state prior even to the Taiji — the state before Yin-Yang were divided — and is thus associated with the primordial cosmos. From the perspective of the View of Heaven, it corresponds to the Heaven-above-Heaven, the Heaven-beyond-Heaven (天外天). Therefore, "Mugeuk Daedo" means the Way of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, which transcends existing Neo-Confucianism (which claimed to have illuminated the principle of the Taiji), Western learning (which claimed to have illuminated the Lord of Heaven), and Buddhism (which claimed to awaken to the substance of the cosmos). Accordingly, just as in the above passage — "You have arrived at the boundless, boundless Way" — Mugeuk Daedo becomes the "boundless, boundless Way."
The reason Mugeuk Daedo is the "boundless, boundless Way" is explained in the above passage by "My mind is your mind [吾心卽汝心]." Here, "my mind (吾心, o sim)" is the mind of the "Heaven-above-Heaven" — the Heaven-beyond-Heaven; and "your mind (汝心, yeo sim)" is the mind of humanity as represented by Suun. This means that the mind of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven — the mind of Wuji — becomes the mind of humanity. This is the statement that the mind of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven, which is the origin of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, is the same as the mind of humanity — meaning that the status of humanity in the universe becomes a being whose mind communicates with Wuji — and thus it becomes "Mugeuk Daedo."
The most significant difference between the existing Wuji and Donghak's "Mugeuk Daedo" in relation to the View of Heaven is the first appearance of "Wuji" — i.e., the Supreme God — who directly communicates with humanity, as in the Cheonsa Mundap and spirit-writing (降筆, gangpil). Indeed, in the initial Cheonsa Mundap, Suun continually doubts the Supreme God's intentions and insists on his own position, and thus actually wins the Supreme God's trust. Donghak's View of Heaven — of a Wuji that directly communicates with humanity — appears as a View of Heaven that harmonizes the Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven and the Western Formal View of Heaven without conflict.
Regarding the Eastern case, "Mugeuk Daedo" first shows the tradition of Wuji-Taiji-Yin-Yang-Five Phases — the representative correlative thinking of the East — in its very name. This corresponds to the Eastern Assimilative View of Heaven. The expression "Mugeuk Daedo that has never existed in all eternity" (만고없는 무극대도) can be read as meaning the completion of correlative thinking. The expression "never in all eternity" (만고없는) appears five times in the Yongdamyusa:⁹³ Furthermore, the expression "Mugeuk Daedo" also signifies that Donghak Thought inherits the correlative thinking of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism — which developed as Eastern religions. In fact, Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism have as their background the correlative thinking in which Heaven-Earth-Humanity are unified, and there has been prior research arguing that the representative Sijeongju thought of Donghak represents the form of Confucianism-Buddhism-Daoism — which developed in the direction of internalizing absolute beings — maturing into transcendent Heaven.⁹⁴
Regarding the Western Formal View of Heaven, it appears in Donghak's concept of "muwi ihwa" (無爲而化, transformation through non-action). The concept of "muwi ihwa," first used in Donghak, can be thought of as a concept connecting the Daoist "muwi jayeon" (無爲自然, non-action and naturalness) with the Western learning concept of "johwa" (造化, creative transformation). Muwi ihwa has the significance of connecting the creative transformation within the Heavenly, Earthly, and Human Realms (the Yin-Yang harmony of the three realms) to the creative transformation of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven that connects the Creator with the Three Realms. Donghak reactivates the concept of the personal divine Heaven-beyond-Heaven as a Creator (造生者, josangja) that emphasizes the attribute of creation in creative transformation. Suun, in interpreting the incantation, explained that "johwa" (造化) means "muwi ihwa" (無爲而化), and "jeong" (定) means "habgideok jeonggisim" (合其德 定其心, to accord with its virtue and settle its heart-mind).⁹⁵ Suun called Donghak "muwi ihwa" and explained that muwi ihwa refers to the entire creative transformation of the numinous Supreme Qi (至氣, jigi), and that if one sustains the heart-mind, rectifies the qi, follows the nature, and receives the teaching, transformation will emerge naturally.⁹⁶
The reason Donghak connected East and West through muwi ihwa was to mediate the double opposition of tradition and modernity through liminality. Indeed, it has been argued that the Supreme God of the Eastern tradition as Creator, as manifested in the Book of Odes (詩經, Sigyeong), shares five personal attributes with the Creator in the Biblical Psalms.⁹⁷ The Creator's attribute is also clearly expressed in Chinese classics through the Shuowen Jiezi (說文解字):⁹⁸ "The deity (神) is the heavenly spirit that draws out all things" (神, 天神, 引出萬物者也); and through the Book of Odes:⁹⁹ "Heaven gave birth to all the people; to every thing there is its principle. The people, holding to their constant nature, are fond of this noble virtue." (天生烝民, 有物有則, 民之秉彝, 好是懿德 — Book of Odes, "Major Odes, Zhengmin" (大雅·烝民))
Even after making contact with the personal Heavenly numinous presence, Suun explains the Lord of Heaven's teaching in connection with Daoism as the principle of the non-personal, natural creative transformation and movement. When asked how his experience differed from Western learning, he elaborated that while the celestial cycle (天運) and the Way of Heaven (天道) are the same, their principle (理) is different. The difference of principle Suun mentioned can be understood as pointing to the difference in the method of learning — the difference in "learning" (學, hak).¹⁰⁰
Suun's Cheonsa Mundap also inversely allows one to surmise the reason Heaven chose Suun. Like Jesus who overcame the temptation of the Devil, Suun refused all the Supreme God's proposals of worldly success, and even refused success through existing Confucianism-Buddhism-Daoism.¹⁰¹ The trust relationship thus established expanded, during the Donghak Peasant Movement, even to the belief that Donghak peasant movement participants could block bullets.
The reason Suun's Cheonsa Mundap could win the trust of others was that Heaven chose as the figure to manifest itself precisely the most problematic person — one like Suun. Heaven appeared to Suun, a very middle-ground being who was neither an existing establishment figure nor a lower-class person.
Suun was the most unfortunate homo sacer that his era could produce.¹⁰² Although Suun had a father who was the most eminent scholar of the most orthodox Neo-Confucian lineage, Suun had to occupy the status of a descendant of a remarried woman — even lower than an illegitimate child. When his father died and even his home burned down, Suun had to wander the country to make a living. In the end, even wandering was not easy, and Suun returned home. People rather placed their trust in the fact that Heaven appeared to a being like Suun. Though unfortunate, Suun also had extraordinary qualities no less than his father, and he even had the sobriquet "Boksu" (複術), meaning one skilled in arts of technique.
The difference between Donghak Thought's concept of creative transformation and the Western concept lies in the fact that it is correlative transformation. Prior research on the continuity and change as correlative thinking shown by the Sijeongju thought of Donghak — more clearly expressed through the tradition of Confucian-Buddhist-Daoist thought — has been abundant, as has prior research on the epistemological dimension. There has been extensive prior research on the continuity and change of the epistemological dimension of correlative thinking in Donghak Thought, and an overview can be obtained through an analysis of prior research.
To examine the prior research on correlative thinking in Donghak Thought, it is necessary to begin again with the definition of correlative thinking. The correlative thinking represented by Yin-Yang and the Five Phases uses the term "correlative" (相關, sangwan), meaning that parts are mutually related; but the connection of parts to parts ultimately means the connection of parts within the whole — which can ultimately be called organic theory (有機體理論, yugiche iron), which views the whole and parts unitarily, or holistic theory, or holographic (全息的, jeonsiŭk) perspective. That is, broadly defined, correlative thinking includes organic thinking and holographic thinking.
If correlative thinking — the Eastern mode of thought — is expanded to include holographic theory or organic theory, prior research on the correlative epistemic perspective of Donghak encompasses a very wide range both domestically and internationally. Having examined foreign cases earlier, turning to the domestic case: in the narrow sense, we can cite the research of Yi Chang-il, who translated and introduced correlative thinking domestically. Without actively applying it to Donghak Thought, Yi Chang-il's research introduced domestically the major Western methodology for studying Eastern thought — that studies of Eastern thought must first approach through correlative thinking — and analyzed the philosophy of Shao Kangjie, who greatly influenced Donghak Thought, through the methodology of correlative thinking.¹⁰³
Though Donghak appears to assert a thought disconnected from the East Asian tradition through the term "gaebyeok" (開闢, Great Opening), the definition of Donghak in Donghak Thought — as seen in the essay "Nonhangmun," in which the term "Donghak" first appears — defines Donghak as a discipline grounded in Yin-Yang and the Five Phases, the representative theory of correlative thinking. In fact, Shao Kangjie — a Neo-Confucian theorist of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases, identified by correlative thinking theorists as a representative theorist of correlative thinking — is also identified as a thinker who greatly influenced Donghak Thought.¹⁰⁴ The term "another Gaebyeok" (다시 개벽) in Donghak Thought was also a term widely used in late Joseon dynasty intellectuals influenced by Shao Kangjie.¹⁰⁵
Expanded to include holographic theory or organic theory, the pioneering domestic research on correlative thinking in Donghak Thought was conducted by Kim Sang-il. Kim Sang-il defined Donghak as "new Western learning" (新西學, sinseohak) and interpreted Donghak as a pioneering Eastern version of Whitehead's process thought.¹⁰⁶ Afterward, Kim Sang-il named Eastern thought "Han Philosophy" (韓哲學, han'cheolhak) and expanded it even to fractal science, theoretically elaborating the characteristics of correlative thinking in Donghak through comparison with a wide range of Western thought across the ages.
The representative Eastern term in which the correlative nature of creative transformation appears is Sijeongju. Donghak's View of Heaven — manifested as Mugeuk Daedo from the East and Muwi Ihwa from the West — is synthesized in Sijeongju. Sijeongju is especially the concept that represents the View of Heaven in Donghak Thought. As expressed in Donghak's representative incantation "Sijeongju johwajong" (侍天主造化定), Sijeongju is the root of creative transformation. Researchers who have studied the commonalities between Donghak and Neo-Confucianism argue that the creative transformation of Sijeongju is similar in content to Neo-Confucian creative transformation and is the concept that encompasses Donghak's other phrases "gi-transformation" (氣化, gihwa) and "muwi ihwa" (無爲而化). In the "Nonhangmun" of Donghak, "si" (侍, serving/attending) is stated as "nayu sinnyeong oeyu gihwa ilse jiin gakji buri" (內有神靈 外有氣化 一世之人 各知不移): "Having Spiritual Numinosity Within, Having Gi-transformation Without, the people of one generation each knowing and not moving [away]." It is said that the three meanings of the initial Donghak's "si" (侍, attending) of serving were reduced in later Donghak to the inner qi alone. Suun's Hanullim had three implications — the transcendent personal God, the Supreme Qi (至氣) performing life movement within nature, and the inner Spiritual Numinosity of the individual — and Son Byong-hui argued that once one realizes only the inner Hanullim among these, the Hanullim with the remaining two meanings — the Supreme God and the essence of Heaven-Earth-all things — would also be naturally realized within oneself.¹⁰⁷ This means the realization that Sijeongju means having a numinous heart-mind and a gi-transforming body, and all people of the world maintaining that state — that is, all returning to the one body (同歸一體, donggwi ilche) that creatively evolves (造化, johwa). Therefore Sijeongju is said to be precisely donggwi ilche, and "creative transformation."¹⁰⁸
As Sijeongju is precisely immanent transcendence, Donghak Thought shares cultivation methods with existing Confucianism and Daoism. It has been argued that the diversity of the Donghak concept of "si" (侍) originates from the fact that Donghak's concept of the divine emerged from three intellectual sources: shamanism, Catholic learning, and Confucianism.¹⁰⁹ However, unlike Confucianism, Donghak Thought substantiated the principle-law (理法, ibop) as in Daoism; and unlike Daoism, a personal Creator God appears. In the creative transformation of Donghak Thought through "Sijeongju," unlike in Confucianism or Daoism, a "hidden God" appears. It is in the dimension of East-West fusion in creative transformation — rather than the Daoist tradition that had only emphasized the evolutionary aspect — that the creative aspect was more strongly emphasized in Donghak Thought.
The common ground that "Sijeongju" shares with Western learning is not only the appearance of a personal God but also the scene of encounter with the personal God. Researchers who emphasize the commonality with Western learning argue that Suun's Cheonsa Mundap is similar to the experience of the Apostle Paul. It is said that there was no precedent among past Koreans' religious experiences of directly encountering God as Suun did. From this perspective, it is also assessed that Donghak's Cheonju (天主, Lord of Heaven) was influenced by Christianity. However, it is also explained that Suun harmonized the Eastern method of self-introspection — internal transcendence — with traditional Korean faith in God.¹¹⁰
The indigenous modernity of the View of Heaven in Donghak Thought is the communication between the Heaven-beyond-Heaven and the human heart-mind, and from this — the rearrangement of the sacred and profane — that is, the emergence of the liminality of boundary-crossing. In political and social thought, this also means the upward mobility of commoners becoming nobles; and in the relationship of Heaven-Earth-Humanity, it means the elevation of the status of Earth and humanity, which had been marginalized. Donghak's View of Heaven — which transcends the Views of Heaven of East and West through the appearance of the Heaven-beyond-Heaven — repeats in ontogeny the phylogeny manifested in the Eastern and Western Views of Heaven, demonstrating indigenous modernity through liminality.
FOOTNOTES — Sections c and d:
45. M. Ricci, N. Trigault, and G. Bessière, Histoire de l'expédition chrétienne au royaume de la Chine 1582-1610 (Desclée de Brouwer, 1978); cited in Yi Seongbae, Confucianism and Christianity: Yi Byeok's Korean Theological Principles (Gyeongbuk: Bundo Publishing, 1979), p. 144.
46. Yi Seongbae, Confucianism and Christianity, pp. 175–187.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid.
49. Ibid.
50. Wang Hui, tr. Baek Won-dam, Park Ja-yeong, et al., The Rise of Modern Chinese Thought (Paju: Dolbegae, 2024).
51. Yi Seongbae, "The Meeting of Confucianism and Catholicism: The Philosophical Perspective of Gwangam Yi Byeok's Christian Thought (1)," Eastern Philosophy Research 27 (2001), pp. 27–58.
52. Matteo Ricci, tr. Yi Suung, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (Tianzhu Shiyi) (Waegwan: Bundo Publishing, 1984), pp. 33–34; cited in Yi Seongbae, "The Meeting of Confucianism and Catholicism," pp. 36–37.
53. Choe Dong-hŭi, Korean Silhak's Response to Western Learning (Seoul: Korea University, Institute for the Study of National Culture, 1988), pp. 244–245; cited in Yi Seongbae, "The Meeting of Confucianism and Catholicism," pp. 37–38.
54. Ham Yeong-dae, "The Development and Implications of the Theory of Western-Learning-Eastern-Origin (西學中源論) in the 18th–19th Centuries: The Counter-Logic of Joseon Scholars against Western Learning," Hanmun Gojeon Yeon'gu 40(1), pp. 243–267.
55. Yi Bongho, The Philosophy of Seo Myeong-eung; Geum Jangtae, Spirit-Divinities and Rituals; Choe Jindeok, "Zhu Xi Studies' Theory of Li and Qi and Theory of Ghost-Spirits," Yangmyeonghak 0(23), 2009, pp. 377–406; Kim Baekhyeon, Studies in Daoist Philosophy (Gangneung: Dongnyeok, 2002); Choe Chibong, "A Substance-Function (體用論) Study of 'Daesoon'," Ph.D. dissertation, Daejin University, 2020.
56. Yi Hyang-man, "From Theory of Hun-po to Theory of Soul," Catholic Theology and Thought 67 (2011), pp. 16–24; Edgar Morin, tr. Kim Myeong-suk, Man and Death (Seoul: Dongmunseon, 2000), pp. 147–164.
57. Oh Seok, "A Study on the Theory of the Soul in Daesoon Thought," Ph.D. dissertation, Daejin University, 2019.
58. François Jullien, tr. Heo Gyeong, Dialogue Between Mencius and Enlightenment Philosophers (Han'ul Academy, 2006).
59. Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u Compared through the Concepts of Shangdi and Heart-Mind," Minjok Munhwa 61 (2022), pp. 125–172.
60. Yi Jeongwoo, World History of Philosophy, Vol. 3: Cartography of Modernity (Seoul: Gil, 2021), p. 292.
61. Kim Heup-young, Theology of the Way (Seoul: Dasan Geullbang, 2005), pp. 203–216.
62. Yi Don-hwa, History of the Establishment of Cheondogyo (Seoul: Gyeongin Munhwasa, 1982), pp. 14–16; cited in Park Jeong-ho, "The Concept of the Divine in Suun Choe Je-u," Tongil Inmunhak 74 (2018), p. 138.
63. Dowon Giseo, pp. 27–29 (October 1860), pp. 41–42 (late 1862), p. 53 (late October 1863).
64. Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu, Cheondogyo Gyeongjeon [Cheondogyo Scriptures] (Seoul: Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu Publishing, 1982). For quotations and translations of Donghak-related passages, this paper cites Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu, Cheondogyo Gyeongjeon; Choe Dong-hŭi and Yi Gyeong-won, Newly Written Donghak (Jipmundang, 2003); Kim Yong-ok, Donggyeongedaejeon (Tongnamu, 2021); and Kim Yong-hwi, The Philosophy of Choe Je-u (Ewha Womans University Press, 2012). Unmarked citations are from Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu, Cheondogyo Gyeongjeon.
65. Kim Tak, The Ideology Running Through Korean New Religions: Anthropocentrism (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2023), pp. 69–70.
66. Bae Yeong-sun, "The Problem of the Distinctiveness of Donghak and Western Learning," Daegu Sahak 73 (2003), p. 198.
67. Bae Yeong-sun, "The Problem of the Distinctiveness of Donghak and Western Learning," pp. 203–205.
68. Choe Dong-hŭi and Yi Gyeong-won, Newly Written Donghak (Seoul: Jipmundang, 2003), pp. 230–231.
69. Hwang Jong-won, "The Direction of Confucian Reform, the Concept of Equality, and Attitudes toward Western Modern Civilization in Choe Je-u and Park Eun-sik," Toegye Studies and Confucian Culture 49 (2011), p. 330.
70. Bae Yeong-sun, "The Problem of the Distinctiveness of Donghak and Western Learning," p. 205.
71. Ken Wilber, The Marriage of Sense and Soul (Beomyangsa, 2007), pp. 189–190.
72. Yu Gwon-jong, "Prospects for Integrated Scholarship in the Study of Confucian Cultural Tradition," Philosophical Inquiry 22 (Chung-Ang University, Institute of Philosophy, 2007), p. 25.
73. Kim Yun-gyeong, "The Development and Transformation of Popular Daoism in Late Joseon: Centered on Donghak and Jeungsan Gyo," Daoist Culture Studies (2013); Kim Yun-gyeong, "A Study on the First Organized Daoism in 19th-Century Joseon, Musangdan (無相壇)," Korean Philosophical Studies (2019).
74. Park Byeong-hun, "A Study on Donghak Spirit-Writing (降筆)," Religious Studies (2020).
75. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyobeop" 2-42.
76. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gongsa" 3-39.
77. Jo Gyeong-dal, The Heretical Popular Uprising (Seoul: Yeoksa Bipyeongsa, 2008).
78. A. Deane, Voyagers: Secrets of Amenti (Columbus, NC: Wild Flower Press, 2002).
79. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyoun" 1-9.
80. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyobeop" 2-3.
81. An Yu-gyeong, "The Developmental Patterns of Religious Views of Heaven (天觀) in Mid-Late Joseon: Centered on Toegye, Dasan, Suun, and Jeungsan," Daesoon Sasang Nonchong (2020).
82. Park Jong-cheon, "Donghak and Jeungsan-do Seen through Daoist Immortal Thought," Minjok Munhwa Yeon'gu 96 (2022), pp. 291–330.
83. Ibid.
84. Yu Ji-yeon, "Hwang Hyeon's (1855-1910) Perception of and Critique of Donghak: Centered on the Oha Gimun," Riwon Haksul Nonchip 2 (2004), pp. 1–54.
85. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gongsa" 2-19.
86. Yun I-heum, Korean Religion and the History of Religion (Seoul: Bakmunsa, 2017).
87. Go Nam-sik, "A Comparison of Nationalist Elements in Suun and Jeungsan," New Religions Research (2012), p. 69.
88. Donggyeongedaejeon (東經大典), "Nonhangmun" (論學文).
89. Jang Seok-man, "The Internalization and Institutionalization of the Concept of Religion," in Religion and Colonial Modernity (Seoul: Chaek'kwa Hamkke, 2013).
90. Kim Gyeong-jae, "Suun's Experience of Sijeongju and Donghak's Concept of the Divine," Donghak Studies 4 (1999), pp. 23–43.
91. Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun"; cited in Kim Yong-hwi, The Philosophy of Choe Je-u: Sijeongju and Another Gaebyeok (Seoul: Ewha Womans University Press, 2012), pp. 123–124.
92. The expression "never in all eternity" (만고없는) appears five times in the Yongdamyusa: "After the lower primordial year cycle passes, in the fine season of the upper primordial year, the Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity shall emerge in this world" (Yongdamyusa, "Mongjung Noso Mundap-ga"); "Is it a dream or wakefulness? Receiving the Mugeuk Daedo, after rectifying the heart-mind and cultivating the self, sitting down and thinking again..." (Yongdamyusa, "Gyohun-ga"); "Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity, received as if in dream or wakefulness" (Yongdamyusa, "Yongdam-ga"); "Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity, received as if in dream or wakefulness" (Yongdamyusa, "Dosu-sa"); "Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity, established in this world" (Yongdamyusa, "Gwonhak-ga").
93. Kim Sang-il, Donghak and New Western Learning (Seoul: Jisiksaneopsa, 2000).
94. Ibid.
95. Donggyeongedaejeon (東經大典), "Nonhangmun" (論學文). "The virtue of the gentleman: his qi is rectified and his heart-mind is settled, therefore he accords with Heaven-and-Earth in virtue. The virtue of the petty person: his qi is not rectified and his heart-mind shifts, therefore he violates Heaven-and-Earth in its mandate. Is this not the principle of flourishing and declining?" (君子之德, 氣有正而心有定, 故與天地合其德, 小人之德, 氣不正而心有移, 故與天地違其命, 此非盛衰之理耶?); cited in Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u," p. 158.
96. Jo Yong-il, "A Study on the Thought of Creative Transformation (造化思想) in Donghak" (Seoul: Dongguk University). 至者 極焉之爲至. 氣者虛靈蒼蒼, 無事不涉, 無事不命, 然而如形而難狀, 如聞而難見, 是亦渾元之一氣也. (Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun"). ["What is meant by 'supreme' (至) is the utmost. What is meant by 'qi' (氣) is that it is spiritually numinous and vast, involved in all things, commanding all things, yet while like form it is hard to describe, and while like something heard it is hard to see — this too is the primal unified qi (渾元之一氣)."] Huang Zongzuan, "A Study on the Wuwei Thought of Donghak," Dadong Cheolhak 66 (2014), p. 50; Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u," pp. 158–159.
97. Kim Yeong-ho, "A Comparative Study of the Attributes of Heaven (天) in the Book of Odes and the Attributes of God in the Psalms," Won-Buddhism Thought and Religious Culture 71.
98. Xu Shen, Shuowen Jiezi, p. 5: "The deity (神) is the heavenly spirit that draws out all things"; cited in Kim Yeong-ho, pp. 207–208.
99. Book of Odes (詩經), "Major Odes, Zhengmin" (大雅·烝民): "Heaven gave birth to all the people (天生烝民), to every thing there is its principle (有物有則). The people, holding to their constant nature (民之秉彝), are fond of this noble virtue (好是懿德)"; cited in Kim Yeong-ho, pp. 207–208.
100. Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u," pp. 147–148.
101. 曰然則 西道以敎人乎 曰不然 吾有靈符 其名仙藥 其形太極 又形弓弓 受我此符 濟人疾病 受我呪文 敎人爲我則 汝亦長生 布德天下矣. (Donggyeongedaejeon, "Podŏngmun"). 吾子,謂我呼父也。"敬敎呼父,則上帝曰:'汝誠是佳。符,三神山不死藥,汝何知之。'先生逐寫數百張,連為吞服。過去七八朔後,纖身潤富,容貌幻態。上帝又敎曰:'汝除授白衣相乎!'先生答曰:'以上帝之子,寧為白衣相乎?'上帝曰:'汝不然,則受我造化,以参造化。'先生受教以試之曰:'皆是有世之造化也。'先生不應。又曰:'此造化行之後,彼造化行之。'先生卽爲行之,此化彼化,是亦有世之化也。以此化敎人,則必為謨人,永不擧行。上帝又見造化曰:'此造化眞可為行化也。'先生強為行之,則是可為亦然也。其後雖有命教,誓不擧行。絶飲十一日. (Dowon Giseo; cited in Kim Yong-ok, Donggyeongedaejeon 1 (Seoul: Tongnamu, 2021), pp. 124–131.)
102. Park Jong-cheon, "The Thought of Korean Indigenous New Religions from the Perspective of the 'Subaltern': Centered on a Comparison of Suun, Jeungsan, and Sotaesan," Daesoon Sasang Nonchong (2021).
103. Yi Chang-il, The Philosophy of Shao Kangjie (Simsan, 2007).
104. Im Byeong-hak, "The Influence of Shao Kangjie's Image-Number Studies (象數易學) on Korean New Religions: Centered on Donghak and Won-Buddhism," Eastern and Western Philosophy Studies 78 (2015), pp. 171–194.
105. Gwak Sin-hwan, Joseon Confucianism and the Philosophy of Shao Kangjie (Yemun Seowon, 2014); Han Seung-hun, "Maitreya, Gaebyeok, Yonaoshi: Crisis and Revolutionary World Consciousness in the History of East Asian Religions," Religion and Culture 40, pp. 29–52 (2021); Han Seung-hun, "Gaebyeok (開闢) and Gaebyeok (改闢): The 18th-Century Origins of the Apocalyptic-Eschatological Gaebyeok Concept in Late Joseon," Religion and Culture 34 (2018), pp. 203–243.
106. Kim Sang-il, Suun and Whitehead (Jisiksaneopsa, 2001). For broader research, see: Kim Sang-il, Han Medicine and the Russell Paradox Solution (Jisiksaneopsa, 2005); Kim Sang-il, Korean Culture and Hyperspace (Gyohak Yeon'gusa, 1999); Kim Sang-il, Alain Badiou and the New Beginning of Philosophy, Vols. 1-2 (Saemuljyeol); Kim Sang-il, The Logic of the Book of Changes and Post-Modernity (Jisiksaneopsa, 2006); Kim Sang-il, The Budoji Calendar and the Anthropocene (Dongyeon, 2021); Kim Sang-il, A History of the Development of Korean Ethnic Consciousness (Jisiksaneopsa, 1988); Kim Sang-il, Han Philosophy (Onnuri, 1995); etc. Kim Sang-il also conducted research related to Daesoon Thought: Kim Sang-il, "A Study on the Two Natures of God in Process Theology and the Divine-Human Harmony in Daesoon Thought," Daesoon Jinri Haksul Nonchong 3 (Daejin University, 2008); Kim Sang-il, "A Civilizational Historical Study of the Four Principles of Daesoon Thought," Daesoon Jinri Haksul Nonchong 1 (Daejin University, 2007).
107. Hwang Jong-won, "A Critical Study of the Doctrine of Innaecheon and the Theory of Mind-Nature in Cheondogyo in the Early 20th Century," Dadong Cheolhak 44 (2008), pp. 95–96.
108. Son Byeong-uk, "A Comparison of the Cultivation-Realization System (修證體系) of Donghak and Buddhist念佛禪," Donghak Hakbo 23 (2011), pp. 101–145.
109. Hwang Jong-won, "The Three Intellectual Sources of the Donghak Concept of the Divine: Centered on the Relationships with Shamanism, Catholic Learning, and Confucianism," Confucian Studies 32 (2015).
110. Kim Jong-seo, "The Collision between Eastern and Western Religions and the Dynamic Faith of Modern Korea," Religion and Culture 16 (Seoul National University, Institute for the Study of Religion, 2009), pp. 28–29.
45. M. Ricci, N. Trigault, and G. Bessière, Histoire de l'expédition chrétienne au royaume de la Chine 1582-1610 (Desclée de Brouwer, 1978); cited in Yi Seongbae, Confucianism and Christianity: Yi Byeok's Korean Theological Principles (Gyeongbuk: Bundo Publishing, 1979), p. 144.
46. Yi Seongbae, Confucianism and Christianity, pp. 175–187.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid.
49. Ibid.
50. Wang Hui, tr. Baek Won-dam, Park Ja-yeong, et al., The Rise of Modern Chinese Thought (Paju: Dolbegae, 2024).
51. Yi Seongbae, "The Meeting of Confucianism and Catholicism: The Philosophical Perspective of Gwangam Yi Byeok's Christian Thought (1)," Eastern Philosophy Research 27 (2001), pp. 27–58.
52. Matteo Ricci, tr. Yi Suung, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (Tianzhu Shiyi) (Waegwan: Bundo Publishing, 1984), pp. 33–34; cited in Yi Seongbae, "The Meeting of Confucianism and Catholicism," pp. 36–37.
53. Choe Dong-hŭi, Korean Silhak's Response to Western Learning (Seoul: Korea University, Institute for the Study of National Culture, 1988), pp. 244–245; cited in Yi Seongbae, "The Meeting of Confucianism and Catholicism," pp. 37–38.
54. Ham Yeong-dae, "The Development and Implications of the Theory of Western-Learning-Eastern-Origin (西學中源論) in the 18th–19th Centuries: The Counter-Logic of Joseon Scholars against Western Learning," Hanmun Gojeon Yeon'gu 40(1), pp. 243–267.
55. Yi Bongho, The Philosophy of Seo Myeong-eung; Geum Jangtae, Spirit-Divinities and Rituals; Choe Jindeok, "Zhu Xi Studies' Theory of Li and Qi and Theory of Ghost-Spirits," Yangmyeonghak 0(23), 2009, pp. 377–406; Kim Baekhyeon, Studies in Daoist Philosophy (Gangneung: Dongnyeok, 2002); Choe Chibong, "A Substance-Function (體用論) Study of 'Daesoon'," Ph.D. dissertation, Daejin University, 2020.
56. Yi Hyang-man, "From Theory of Hun-po to Theory of Soul," Catholic Theology and Thought 67 (2011), pp. 16–24; Edgar Morin, tr. Kim Myeong-suk, Man and Death (Seoul: Dongmunseon, 2000), pp. 147–164.
57. Oh Seok, "A Study on the Theory of the Soul in Daesoon Thought," Ph.D. dissertation, Daejin University, 2019.
58. François Jullien, tr. Heo Gyeong, Dialogue Between Mencius and Enlightenment Philosophers (Han'ul Academy, 2006).
59. Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u Compared through the Concepts of Shangdi and Heart-Mind," Minjok Munhwa 61 (2022), pp. 125–172.
60. Yi Jeongwoo, World History of Philosophy, Vol. 3: Cartography of Modernity (Seoul: Gil, 2021), p. 292.
61. Kim Heup-young, Theology of the Way (Seoul: Dasan Geullbang, 2005), pp. 203–216.
62. Yi Don-hwa, History of the Establishment of Cheondogyo (Seoul: Gyeongin Munhwasa, 1982), pp. 14–16; cited in Park Jeong-ho, "The Concept of the Divine in Suun Choe Je-u," Tongil Inmunhak 74 (2018), p. 138.
63. Dowon Giseo, pp. 27–29 (October 1860), pp. 41–42 (late 1862), p. 53 (late October 1863).
64. Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu, Cheondogyo Gyeongjeon [Cheondogyo Scriptures] (Seoul: Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu Publishing, 1982). For quotations and translations of Donghak-related passages, this paper cites Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu, Cheondogyo Gyeongjeon; Choe Dong-hŭi and Yi Gyeong-won, Newly Written Donghak (Jipmundang, 2003); Kim Yong-ok, Donggyeongedaejeon (Tongnamu, 2021); and Kim Yong-hwi, The Philosophy of Choe Je-u (Ewha Womans University Press, 2012). Unmarked citations are from Cheondogyo Jungang Chongbu, Cheondogyo Gyeongjeon.
65. Kim Tak, The Ideology Running Through Korean New Religions: Anthropocentrism (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2023), pp. 69–70.
66. Bae Yeong-sun, "The Problem of the Distinctiveness of Donghak and Western Learning," Daegu Sahak 73 (2003), p. 198.
67. Bae Yeong-sun, "The Problem of the Distinctiveness of Donghak and Western Learning," pp. 203–205.
68. Choe Dong-hŭi and Yi Gyeong-won, Newly Written Donghak (Seoul: Jipmundang, 2003), pp. 230–231.
69. Hwang Jong-won, "The Direction of Confucian Reform, the Concept of Equality, and Attitudes toward Western Modern Civilization in Choe Je-u and Park Eun-sik," Toegye Studies and Confucian Culture 49 (2011), p. 330.
70. Bae Yeong-sun, "The Problem of the Distinctiveness of Donghak and Western Learning," p. 205.
71. Ken Wilber, The Marriage of Sense and Soul (Beomyangsa, 2007), pp. 189–190.
72. Yu Gwon-jong, "Prospects for Integrated Scholarship in the Study of Confucian Cultural Tradition," Philosophical Inquiry 22 (Chung-Ang University, Institute of Philosophy, 2007), p. 25.
73. Kim Yun-gyeong, "The Development and Transformation of Popular Daoism in Late Joseon: Centered on Donghak and Jeungsan Gyo," Daoist Culture Studies (2013); Kim Yun-gyeong, "A Study on the First Organized Daoism in 19th-Century Joseon, Musangdan (無相壇)," Korean Philosophical Studies (2019).
74. Park Byeong-hun, "A Study on Donghak Spirit-Writing (降筆)," Religious Studies (2020).
75. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyobeop" 2-42.
76. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gongsa" 3-39.
77. Jo Gyeong-dal, The Heretical Popular Uprising (Seoul: Yeoksa Bipyeongsa, 2008).
78. A. Deane, Voyagers: Secrets of Amenti (Columbus, NC: Wild Flower Press, 2002).
79. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyoun" 1-9.
80. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gyobeop" 2-3.
81. An Yu-gyeong, "The Developmental Patterns of Religious Views of Heaven (天觀) in Mid-Late Joseon: Centered on Toegye, Dasan, Suun, and Jeungsan," Daesoon Sasang Nonchong (2020).
82. Park Jong-cheon, "Donghak and Jeungsan-do Seen through Daoist Immortal Thought," Minjok Munhwa Yeon'gu 96 (2022), pp. 291–330.
83. Ibid.
84. Yu Ji-yeon, "Hwang Hyeon's (1855-1910) Perception of and Critique of Donghak: Centered on the Oha Gimun," Riwon Haksul Nonchip 2 (2004), pp. 1–54.
85. Jeon'gyeong (典經), "Gongsa" 2-19.
86. Yun I-heum, Korean Religion and the History of Religion (Seoul: Bakmunsa, 2017).
87. Go Nam-sik, "A Comparison of Nationalist Elements in Suun and Jeungsan," New Religions Research (2012), p. 69.
88. Donggyeongedaejeon (東經大典), "Nonhangmun" (論學文).
89. Jang Seok-man, "The Internalization and Institutionalization of the Concept of Religion," in Religion and Colonial Modernity (Seoul: Chaek'kwa Hamkke, 2013).
90. Kim Gyeong-jae, "Suun's Experience of Sijeongju and Donghak's Concept of the Divine," Donghak Studies 4 (1999), pp. 23–43.
91. Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun"; cited in Kim Yong-hwi, The Philosophy of Choe Je-u: Sijeongju and Another Gaebyeok (Seoul: Ewha Womans University Press, 2012), pp. 123–124.
92. The expression "never in all eternity" (만고없는) appears five times in the Yongdamyusa: "After the lower primordial year cycle passes, in the fine season of the upper primordial year, the Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity shall emerge in this world" (Yongdamyusa, "Mongjung Noso Mundap-ga"); "Is it a dream or wakefulness? Receiving the Mugeuk Daedo, after rectifying the heart-mind and cultivating the self, sitting down and thinking again..." (Yongdamyusa, "Gyohun-ga"); "Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity, received as if in dream or wakefulness" (Yongdamyusa, "Yongdam-ga"); "Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity, received as if in dream or wakefulness" (Yongdamyusa, "Dosu-sa"); "Mugeuk Daedo never seen in all eternity, established in this world" (Yongdamyusa, "Gwonhak-ga").
93. Kim Sang-il, Donghak and New Western Learning (Seoul: Jisiksaneopsa, 2000).
94. Ibid.
95. Donggyeongedaejeon (東經大典), "Nonhangmun" (論學文). "The virtue of the gentleman: his qi is rectified and his heart-mind is settled, therefore he accords with Heaven-and-Earth in virtue. The virtue of the petty person: his qi is not rectified and his heart-mind shifts, therefore he violates Heaven-and-Earth in its mandate. Is this not the principle of flourishing and declining?" (君子之德, 氣有正而心有定, 故與天地合其德, 小人之德, 氣不正而心有移, 故與天地違其命, 此非盛衰之理耶?); cited in Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u," p. 158.
96. Jo Yong-il, "A Study on the Thought of Creative Transformation (造化思想) in Donghak" (Seoul: Dongguk University). 至者 極焉之爲至. 氣者虛靈蒼蒼, 無事不涉, 無事不命, 然而如形而難狀, 如聞而難見, 是亦渾元之一氣也. (Donggyeongedaejeon, "Nonhangmun"). ["What is meant by 'supreme' (至) is the utmost. What is meant by 'qi' (氣) is that it is spiritually numinous and vast, involved in all things, commanding all things, yet while like form it is hard to describe, and while like something heard it is hard to see — this too is the primal unified qi (渾元之一氣)."] Huang Zongzuan, "A Study on the Wuwei Thought of Donghak," Dadong Cheolhak 66 (2014), p. 50; Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u," pp. 158–159.
97. Kim Yeong-ho, "A Comparative Study of the Attributes of Heaven (天) in the Book of Odes and the Attributes of God in the Psalms," Won-Buddhism Thought and Religious Culture 71.
98. Xu Shen, Shuowen Jiezi, p. 5: "The deity (神) is the heavenly spirit that draws out all things"; cited in Kim Yeong-ho, pp. 207–208.
99. Book of Odes (詩經), "Major Odes, Zhengmin" (大雅·烝民): "Heaven gave birth to all the people (天生烝民), to every thing there is its principle (有物有則). The people, holding to their constant nature (民之秉彝), are fond of this noble virtue (好是懿德)"; cited in Kim Yeong-ho, pp. 207–208.
100. Baek Minjeong, "The Thought of Jeong Yakyong and Choe Je-u," pp. 147–148.
101. 曰然則 西道以敎人乎 曰不然 吾有靈符 其名仙藥 其形太極 又形弓弓 受我此符 濟人疾病 受我呪文 敎人爲我則 汝亦長生 布德天下矣. (Donggyeongedaejeon, "Podŏngmun"). 吾子,謂我呼父也。"敬敎呼父,則上帝曰:'汝誠是佳。符,三神山不死藥,汝何知之。'先生逐寫數百張,連為吞服。過去七八朔後,纖身潤富,容貌幻態。上帝又敎曰:'汝除授白衣相乎!'先生答曰:'以上帝之子,寧為白衣相乎?'上帝曰:'汝不然,則受我造化,以参造化。'先生受教以試之曰:'皆是有世之造化也。'先生不應。又曰:'此造化行之後,彼造化行之。'先生卽爲行之,此化彼化,是亦有世之化也。以此化敎人,則必為謨人,永不擧行。上帝又見造化曰:'此造化眞可為行化也。'先生強為行之,則是可為亦然也。其後雖有命教,誓不擧行。絶飲十一日. (Dowon Giseo; cited in Kim Yong-ok, Donggyeongedaejeon 1 (Seoul: Tongnamu, 2021), pp. 124–131.)
102. Park Jong-cheon, "The Thought of Korean Indigenous New Religions from the Perspective of the 'Subaltern': Centered on a Comparison of Suun, Jeungsan, and Sotaesan," Daesoon Sasang Nonchong (2021).
103. Yi Chang-il, The Philosophy of Shao Kangjie (Simsan, 2007).
104. Im Byeong-hak, "The Influence of Shao Kangjie's Image-Number Studies (象數易學) on Korean New Religions: Centered on Donghak and Won-Buddhism," Eastern and Western Philosophy Studies 78 (2015), pp. 171–194.
105. Gwak Sin-hwan, Joseon Confucianism and the Philosophy of Shao Kangjie (Yemun Seowon, 2014); Han Seung-hun, "Maitreya, Gaebyeok, Yonaoshi: Crisis and Revolutionary World Consciousness in the History of East Asian Religions," Religion and Culture 40, pp. 29–52 (2021); Han Seung-hun, "Gaebyeok (開闢) and Gaebyeok (改闢): The 18th-Century Origins of the Apocalyptic-Eschatological Gaebyeok Concept in Late Joseon," Religion and Culture 34 (2018), pp. 203–243.
106. Kim Sang-il, Suun and Whitehead (Jisiksaneopsa, 2001). For broader research, see: Kim Sang-il, Han Medicine and the Russell Paradox Solution (Jisiksaneopsa, 2005); Kim Sang-il, Korean Culture and Hyperspace (Gyohak Yeon'gusa, 1999); Kim Sang-il, Alain Badiou and the New Beginning of Philosophy, Vols. 1-2 (Saemuljyeol); Kim Sang-il, The Logic of the Book of Changes and Post-Modernity (Jisiksaneopsa, 2006); Kim Sang-il, The Budoji Calendar and the Anthropocene (Dongyeon, 2021); Kim Sang-il, A History of the Development of Korean Ethnic Consciousness (Jisiksaneopsa, 1988); Kim Sang-il, Han Philosophy (Onnuri, 1995); etc. Kim Sang-il also conducted research related to Daesoon Thought: Kim Sang-il, "A Study on the Two Natures of God in Process Theology and the Divine-Human Harmony in Daesoon Thought," Daesoon Jinri Haksul Nonchong 3 (Daejin University, 2008); Kim Sang-il, "A Civilizational Historical Study of the Four Principles of Daesoon Thought," Daesoon Jinri Haksul Nonchong 1 (Daejin University, 2007).
107. Hwang Jong-won, "A Critical Study of the Doctrine of Innaecheon and the Theory of Mind-Nature in Cheondogyo in the Early 20th Century," Dadong Cheolhak 44 (2008), pp. 95–96.
108. Son Byeong-uk, "A Comparison of the Cultivation-Realization System (修證體系) of Donghak and Buddhist念佛禪," Donghak Hakbo 23 (2011), pp. 101–145.
109. Hwang Jong-won, "The Three Intellectual Sources of the Donghak Concept of the Divine: Centered on the Relationships with Shamanism, Catholic Learning, and Confucianism," Confucian Studies 32 (2015).
110. Kim Jong-seo, "The Collision between Eastern and Western Religions and the Dynamic Faith of Modern Korea," Religion and Culture 16 (Seoul National University, Institute for the Study of Religion, 2009), pp. 28–29.