2023/10/03

李滉 - Wikipedia 일어한역, Hayashi Razan, Yamazaki Ansai

李滉 - Wikipedia

李滉

출처: 무료 백과사전 '위키피디아(Wikipedia)'
李滉
이황의 석상(남산)
각종 표기
한글 :이황
한자 :李滉
발음 :이환
일본어 읽기:리
고구 : 리 쿠와
로마자 :Yi Hwang
템플릿 보기

李滉(리황/이환, 1501년 -1570 년 )은 이씨 조선 의 유학자 . 字は景浩(케이코 [1] , 경호). 호 는 퇴계 (타이케이 [1] , 테게), 도자기, 청량산인, 진보인. 이준 (栗谷)과 나란히, 조선 주자학 에 있어서의 2대 유로라고 불린다 [2] .

평생 [ 편집 ]

경상도 안동(현재 대한민국 경상북도 안동시 ) 출신. 본관은 경상도 진보. 11세에 논어를 배우기 시작해 20세경에 유학의 학문 에 몰두해 병약한 신체로 유명한 학자가 되었다. 33세에 과거에 합격한 후, 1542년 에 암행 어사 로서 충청도를 순찰하는 등 중앙이나 지방의 관료로서 활약했다 [3] . 양반 으로서 문과급 제 이후 성균관 의 사성이 되지만, 1545년 의 을사사 사 에서 실각했다. 낙동강 기슭의 토계에 양진암을 맺어 은둔하고 토계의 지명에서 '퇴계'(테게)라고 호하고 학문에 전심했다. 그 후, 종종 겹치는 출사의 생명에 따라 1548년 에 단양군 수가 되어, 도요기군 수시대에 한반도 최초의 은사 서원 , 소수 서원 등을 실현해 서원 문화 를 쌓았다 [4]. 성균관 대사성 등을 역임했다. 도요기군(현재 경상북도 영주시 ) 수시대에는 소수서원을 열었다.

1560년 에는 향리에 은거해, 「도산서원」을 열어 유교 의 연구와 후진의 육성에 힘을 쏟았다. ‘도산서원’은 왕으로부터 편액을 받은 은행액서원 으로서 조선 유교의 흥류의 척추가 된다.

사상 [ 편집 ]

이퇴계의 사상은 밝고 활발해진 양명학을 물리치고, 어디까지나 주자학 을 존중함으로써 주자학의 제요인 '격물치지'의 개념 이나 ' 이기2원론 '에 근거하여 정밀하고 조밀한 논의 를 전개하는 주리설에 특색이 있다.

'동방의 코 슈코 '로 불리며 동시대 이준과 함께 조선 유학의 대표자로 꼽히고 있다. 그 학설을 이어받는 자들은 영남학파 로 불리지만 나중에 이준의 계통을 끌어내는 기호학파와 날카롭게 대립했다.

그의 학문은 철저한 내성을 출발점으로 삼아 이 입장에서 주희의 학설 을 정리 했다. 4단 7정과 이기 와의 관계를 둘러싼 기 대비와의 오랜 세월에 걸친 조선 유학 사상 저명한 논쟁에서도 논리적 무결성을 중시하는 기대에 대해 인간이 있어야 할 도덕적인 모습 을 요구하고, 이기의 호발설 (사단은 이의 발, 칠정은 기의 발)을 주장해, 한층 더 이 자체의 동정(운동성)을 명언했다.

45세 무렵이 되어 '주자 대전 '을 입수하자 주자대전의 문장에 몰두해 수록된 주희의 문장을 발췌하여 '주자서절용'을 편찬 했다 . 이상적인 인격자, 대 유학자로서 역대 이씨 조선의 국왕 과 유학자 로부터 존경을 받았다. 그의 학문은 임라산 · 야마자키 암사이 · 오오츠카 퇴야 등 일본의 주자학자 에게 큰 영향을 주어 그의 '성학십도' · '자성록'·'이학 계몽 전의 ' 등의 저작 대부분이 도쿠가와 막부 아래의 에도 시대 의 일본 에서 복각되고 있다 [5] .

메모 [ 편집 ]

1000원 지폐
  • 서울 중심부에 있는 도로 ' 퇴계로 '는 그에 의해서 명명되어 있다.
  • 대한민국의 1000원 지폐 ( 조선어판 ) 의 초상화가 되고 있다.
  • 퇴계는 매화를 사랑한 인물로 그 유언도 '그 매화에 물을 줘'였다.

주요 일본어 번역 [ 편집 ]

  • 『자성록』 난바 정남 교주, 평범사 동양 문고 , 2015년

각주 [ 편집 ]

[ 각주 사용법 ]
  1. ↑ a b “李滉”. 일본대백과전서(닛포니카). 2022년 10월 28일에 확인함.
  2. ↑ 조식 (曺植 남명)을 포함한 조선 주자학 에서 3대 유화라고 불린다.
  3. ↑ 『조선왕조를 알 수 있다』 142면 롯 탄다 토요 감수
  4. ↑ ( 기무라 외 1995 , 117쪽 안쪽 단락)
  5. ^ ( 기무라 외 1995 , 117페이지 외측 단락)

참고 문헌 [ 편집 ]

관련 항목 [ 편집 ]

외부 링크 [ 편집 ]

위키미디어 커먼즈에는 이황 과 관련된 카테고리가 있습니다.

思想[編集]

李退渓の思想は明で盛んになった陽明学を退け、あくまで朱子学を尊重することで、朱子学の提要である「格物致知」の概念や「理気二元論」に基づいて、精緻で稠密な議論を展開する主理説に特色がある。

「東方の小朱子」と呼ばれ、同時代の李珥とともに朝鮮儒学の代表者とされている。その学説を継ぐ者たちは嶺南学派と呼ばれるが後に、李珥の系統を引く畿湖学派と鋭く対立した。

彼の学問は徹底した内省を出発点としており、この立場から朱熹の学説を整理した。四端七情と理気との関係をめぐる奇大升との長年にわたる朝鮮儒学史上著名な論争でも、論理的整合性を重視する奇大升に対して、人間のあるべき道徳的な姿を求めて、理気の互発説（四端は理の発、七情は気の発）を主張して、さらに理自体の動静（運動性）を明言した。

45歳頃になって『朱子大全』を入手すると、朱子大全の文章に没頭して、収録された朱熹の文章を抜粋して『朱子書節用』を編纂した。理想的な人格者、大儒学者として歴代の李氏朝鮮の国王や儒学者から尊敬を受けた。

彼の学問は林羅山・山崎闇斎・大塚退野などの日本の朱子学者に大きな影響を与えて、彼の『聖学十図』・『自省録』・『易学啓蒙伝疑』などの著作の大部分が徳川幕府下の江戸時代の日本で復刻されている[5]。

メモ[編集]

1000ウォン紙幣
  • ソウル中心部にある道路「退渓路」は彼に因んで名づけられている。
  • 大韓民国の1000ウォン紙幣（朝鮮語版）の肖像画となっている。
  • 退渓は梅を愛した人物で、その遺言も「あの梅に水をやってくれ」だった。

主な日本語訳[編集]

脚注[編集]

[脚注の使い方]
  1. ^ a b “李滉”. 日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ). 2022年10月28日閲覧。
  2. ^ 曺植（曺植　南冥）を含む朝鮮朱子学における三大儒と称される。
  3. ^ 『朝鮮王朝がわかる』142ページ六反田豊監修
  4. ^ (木村ほか1995, 117頁内側の段落)
  5. ^ (木村ほか1995, 117頁外側の段落)

参考文献[編集]

関連項目[編集]

===

Hayashi Razan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In this Japanese name, the surname is Hayashi.
Hayashi Razan
Hayashi Razan, 18th century portrait
Born1583
DiedMarch 7, 1657
Edo
Occupation(s)Historian, philosopher, political consultant, writer
Notable workNihon Ōdai Ichiran
ChildrenHayashi Gahō (son)
FamilyHayashi
EraEdo period
RegionEastern philosophy
SchoolJapanese Confucianism
Main interests
Japanese history, literature
Notable ideas
Three Views of Japan

Hayashi Razan (林 羅山, 1583 – March 7, 1657), also known as Hayashi Dōshun,[1] was a Japanese historian, philosopher, political consultant, and writer, serving as a tutor and an advisor to the first four shōguns of the Tokugawa bakufu. He is also attributed with first listing the Three Views of Japan. Razan was the founder of the Hayashi clan of Confucian scholars.

Razan was an influential scholar, teacher and administrator. Together with his sons and grandsons, he is credited with establishing the official neo-Confucian doctrine of the Tokugawa shogunate. Razan's emphasis on the values inherent in a static conservative perspective provided the intellectual underpinnings for the Edo bakufu. Razan also reinterpreted Shinto, and thus created a foundation for the eventual development of Confucianised Shinto in the 20th century.

The intellectual foundation of Razan's life's work was based on early studies with Fujiwara Seika (1561–1619), the first Japanese scholar who is known for a close study of Confucius and the Confucian commentators. This kuge noble had become a Buddhist priest; but Fujiwara's dissatisfaction with the philosophy and doctrines of Buddhism led him to a study of Confucianism. In due course, Fujiwara drew other similarly motivated scholars to join him in studies which were greatly influenced by the work of Chinese Neo-Confucianist Zhu Xi, a philosopher of the Song Dynasty.[2] Zhu Xi and Fujiwara emphasized the role of the individual as a functionary of a society which naturally settles into a certain hierarchical form. He separated people into four distinct classes: samurai (ruling class), farmers, artisans and merchants.

Academician[edit]

Razan developed a practical blending of Shinto and Confucian beliefs and practices. In particular, he argued that Shinto was a provisional and local form of Confucian ideas, enabling a Confucian interpretation of Shinto shrine rituals.[3] This coherent construct of inter-related ideas lent themselves to a well-accepted program of samurai and bureaucrat educational, training and testing protocols. In 1607, Hayashi was accepted as a political advisor to the second shōgun, Tokugawa Hidetada.

Razan became the rector of Edo's Confucian Academy, the Shōhei-kō (afterwards known at the Yushima Seidō) which was built on land provided by the shōgun. This institution stood at the apex of the country-wide educational and training system which was created and maintained by the Tokugawa shogunate. Razan had the honorific title Daigaku-no-kami, which became hereditary in his family. It also happened that the position as head of the Seidō became hereditary in the Hayashi family. Daigaku-no-kami, in the context of the Tokugawa shogunate hierarchy, effectively translates as "Head of the State University.[4]

In the elevated context his father engendered, Hayashi Gahō (formerly Harukatsu), worked on editing a chronicle of Japanese emperors compiled in conformance with his father's principles. Nihon Ōdai Ichiran grew into a seven-volume text which was completed in 1650. Gahō himself was accepted as a noteworthy scholar in that period; but the Hayashi and the Shōhei-kō links to the work's circulation are part of the explanation for this work's 18th and 19th century popularity. Contemporary readers must have found some degree of usefulness in this summary drawn from historical records.

The narrative of Nihon Ōdai Ichiran stops around 1600, most likely in deference to the sensibilities of the Tokugawa regime. Gahō's text did not continue up through his present day; but rather, he terminated the chronicles just before the last pre-Tokugawa ruler. This book was published in the mid-17th century and it was reissued in 1803, "perhaps because it was a necessary reference work for officials".[5]

Razan's successor as the Tokugawa's chief scholar was his third son, Gahō. After Razan's death, Gahō finished work his father had begun, including a number of other works designed to help readers learn from Japan's history. In 1670, the Hayashi family's scholarly reputation was burnished when Gahō published the 310 volumes of The Comprehensive History of Japan (本朝通鑑, Honchō-tsugan).[6]

Razan argued that Emperor Jimmu and the Imperial line were ultimately descended from an offshoot Chinese royal family by Wu Taibo. This opinion was considered dangerous to publish widely, and thus he argued it in a private work entitled Jimmu Tennō Ron (Essay on Emperor Jimmu). These unorthodox claims were supposedly opposed by Tokugawa Mitsukuni, and as a result there were obstacles in being able to publish such ideas.[7]

Razan's writings were compiled, edited and posthumously published by Hayashi Gahō and his younger brother, Hayashi Dokkōsai (formerly Morikatsu):

  • Hayashi Razan bunshū (The Collected Works of Hayashi Razan), reissued in 1918
  • Razan sensei isshū (Master Razan's Poems), reissued in 1921

Razan's grandson, Hayashi Hōkō (formerly Nobuatsu) would head the Yushima Seidō and he would bear the inherited title Daigaku-no kami. Hōkō's progeny would continue the work begun in the 18th century by the scholarly Hayashi patriarch.

Political influence[edit]

As a political theorist, Hayashi lived to witness his philosophical and pragmatic reasoning become a foundation for the dominant ideology of the bakufu. The political dominance of Hayashi's ideas lasted until the end of the 18th century. This evolution developed in part from Razan's equating samurai with the cultured governing class. Razan helped to legitimize the role of the militaristic bakufu at the beginning of its existence. His philosophy moreover encouraged the samurai class to cultivate themselves, a trend which became increasingly widespread over the course of his lifetime and after his death. Razan's aphorism encapsulates this view:

"No true learning without arms and no true arms without learning."[8]

Hayashi Razan and his family played a significant role is helping to crystallize the theoretical underpinnings of the Tokugawa regime.

In January 1858, Hayashi Akira, the hereditary Daigaku-no-kami descendant of Hayashi Razan, headed the bakufu delegation that sought advice from the emperor in deciding how to deal with newly assertive foreign powers.[9] This was the first time the Emperor's counsel was actively sought since the establishment of the Tokugawa shogunate. The most obvious consequence of this transitional overture was the increased numbers of messengers which were constantly streaming back and forth between Tokyo and Kyoto during the next decade. In the 19th century, this scholar-bureaucrat found himself at a crucial nexus of managing political change, moving arguably "by the book" through uncharted waters with Razan's well-settled theories as the only guide.[10]

Legacy[edit]

Razan's legacy has been memorialized and praised by some Japanese scholars for his relatively dispassionate attempt at understanding history for the time, leading some scholars to call him the "founder of modern historical research" in Japan. His work was influential on Arai Hakuseki, who is considered to have been even more dispassionate scholar.[11]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Ponsonby-Fane, Richard A. B. (1956). Kyoto: the Old Capital of Japan, 794–1869, p. 418.
  2. ^ Ponsonby-Fane, R. (1956). Kyoto: the Old Capital of Japan, 794–1869, p. 418.
  3. ^ Josephson, Jason (2012). The Invention of Religion in Japan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 28. ISBN 9780226412351.
  4. ^ Ponsonby-Fane, p. 418.
  5. ^ Screech, Secret Memoirs of the Shoguns: Isaac Titsingh and Japan, 1779–1822. p. 65.
  6. ^ Brownlee, John. (1999). Political Thought in Japanese Historical Writing, p. 120
  7. ^ Maitre, Cl. E. (1903). "LA LITTÉRATURE HISTORIQUE DU JAPON: DES ORIGINES AUX ASHIKAGA". Bulletin de l'École française d'Extrême-Orient. 3 (4): 564–596. doi:10.3406/befeo.1903.1256. ISSN 0336-1519. JSTOR 43729146.
  8. ^ Blomberg, Catherina. (1999). The Heart of the Warrior, p. 158.
  9. ^ Cullen, L. M. (2003). A History of Japan, 1582–1941: Internal and External Worlds, p. 178 n11.
  10. ^ Ponsonby-Fane, p. 324.
  11. ^ Brownlee, John S. (1988). "The Jeweled Comb-Box. Motoori Norinaga's Tamakushige". Monumenta Nipponica. 43 (1): 35–44. doi:10.2307/2384516. ISSN 0027-0741. JSTOR 2384516.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Banners mark the entrance to the reconstructed Yushima Seidō (Tokyo).

External links[edit]

Preceded by
none
Daigaku-no-kami
(Head of the state educational system)		Succeeded by

===

임라산

출처 : 무료 백과 사전 "Wikipedia (Wikipedia)"
「림라산상」[주석 1]

하야시 라산 (하야시 라잔, 텐쇼 11년( 1583년 ) - 명력 3년 1월 23일 ( 1657년 3월 7일 ))은 에도 시대 초기 주자 학파 유학자 . 임가 의 조. 나산은 호로 ,諱는 노부카츠 . 글자 는 자신. 통칭 은 또 사부로. 출가한 후의 호, 도춘의 이름으로도 알려져 있다 [주석 2] .

평생 [ 편집 ]

텐쇼 11년( 1583년 ), 교토 시조 신마치에서 태어났지만, 얼마 없이 백부에게 입양되었다. 아버지는 가가국의 향사 의 후예에서 랑인 이었다고 전해진다 [2] . 어린 시절부터 수재로서 구해져, 분로쿠 4년( 1595년 ), 교토· 건인사 에서 불교를 배웠지만, 승적에 들어가는 것(출가)은 거부 하고 게이 쵸 2년( 1597년 ), 집에 돌아왔다. 그동안 건인사 대통암의 고라지 자치와 겐닌지 10여원의 영주 영웅(雄長老)에 사사했고, 수장 장로에서는 문학에 뛰어난 마츠나가 사다토쿠로부터 자극을 받았다 . [2] . 집에 돌아가고 나서는 유유서에 친숙해져, 남송의 주석 (朱子)의 장구, 집주 ( 4 서 의 주석)를 연구했다 [3] .

독학을 진행하면서 한층 더 주자학 (송학)에 열중해 가서 게이쵸 9년( 1604년 )에 후지와라 히나 와 만난다. 그러므로 정신적, 학문적으로 크게 기와의 영향을 받게 되어, 스스로 유학하는 것에 주자학을 배웠다 . 히와와는 걸출한 영재가 문하에 합류한 것을 기뻐하며 나산에게 유복을 주었다. 나산이 그때까지 읽은 책을 정리해 목록을 만들자 440여부에 올랐다. 나산은 책을 읽는데 '5행으로 내린다'며 한눈에 5줄씩 읽어가고 모두 기억하고 있다고 한다. 나산의 영명함에 놀란 히와와는, 자신은 도쿠가와에의 사관을 좋아하지 않았기 때문에, 다음 경장 10년(1605년)에는 나산을 추거해 도쿠가와 이에야스 를 만나게 했다 . 나산이 이에야스에게 속견한 것은 교토 니 조성 에 있어서였다 [4] . 이에야스는 기와의 권고도 있어, 이 나라라산을 수중에 두어 가기로 했다 [3] . 나산은 살을 인정받아 23세의 젊음으로 이에야스의 브레인의 한 명이 되었다.

호히로지의 종명
도쿄도 신주쿠구에 있는 하야시씨 묘지. 임라산을 비롯해 일족이 자고 있다. 나라의 사적 으로 지정되어 있다. 내부는 11월 초순에만 공개되고 있다.

게이쵸 11년( 1606년 )에는 예수회 의 일본인 수도사 , 일만 하비안과「지구 논쟁」을 실시하고 있다. 이때 임라산은 지구동설 과 지구구체설을 단호하게 받아들이지 않고 지구방형설과 천동설을 주장했다.

게이쵸 12년( 1607년 ), 이에야스의 생명에 의해 승형이 되어, 도춘이라고 칭해 섬겼다. 또, 이 해, 에도 에 가서 2대 장군 도쿠가와 히데타다 에게 강서를 하고 있다. 나가사키에서 혼초 츠나메를 입수해, 스루후에 체재하고 있는 이에야스에 헌상하고 있다 [5] . 또, 게이쵸 19년( 1614년 )의 오사카의 진 에 즈음해서는 히로 지 절의 범종에 새겨진 교토 난젠지의 선승 문 영청 한 에 의한 명문중의 「국가 안강」 「군신풍락」의 문언의 건( 방광사 종명 사건 )에서, 이에야스에 추종하여, 이것을 도쿠가와가를 저주하는 것으로서 문제시하는 의견을 헌신했다 [6] . 게다가 나야마는 "오른쪽 사원 조신 이에야스"(오른쪽 사사는 우대신의 당나라)를 "이에야스를 쏘는"것이라고 무리하게 박힌 견해를 표명하고 있다[6 ] .

관영 원년( 1624년 ), 3대 장군· 도쿠가와 이에미츠(히데타다의 장남)의 사무라이가 되어, 한층 더 막부 정치에 깊이 관여해 가게 된다. 그 활약은, 「간에이 제가계도전」 「 혼조 통감」등의 전기·역사의 편찬· 교정 , 고서·고기록의 채집, “무가 제법도” “ 제사 법도 ” “ 어정서 백 개조 ” 등의 철정, 외교문서의 기초, 조선통신사 의 응접 등 다방면에 걸쳐 있다 [4] [주석3] . 관영 12년( 1635년 )에는 무가 제법도를 기초하고, 다음 공영 13년( 1636년 )에는 이세진구 참배전례에 해당한다.

히로나가 7년( 1630년 ), 장군·이에미츠로부터 에도 우에노 시노 오카에 토지를 주어지고, 히로나가 9년( 1632년 ), 나야마는 에도 우에노 오시오카에 사 학원 ( 학문소 )· 문고 와 공자묘를 세워 "선성전"이라고 칭했다. 나중에 오시오카 성당 이라고 불리는 시설이다(이들은 나중에 간다의 창평 자카로 옮겨지게 된다). 이 사학원에서는 많은 문인이 배출하고, 후세의 창평자카 학문소의 기초가 되었다. 또한 오와리번 초대번주의 도쿠가와 요시오리 는 나산이 나산의 사저의 일각에서 공자를 모시는 약식 석사를 집행 하는 것에 도움을 주고 있으며 [4] , 만년에는 막부보다 910석을 받았다 . 7] .

도쿠가와 가문의 이에야스, 히데타다, 이에미츠, 이에즈미의 장군 4대를 섬긴 나야 마는 초기 에도막부의 토대 만들기에 크게 관여 하여 다양한 제도, 의례 등의 룰을 정해 갔다 . 학문상에서는 유학· 신도 이외의 모든 것을 배제하고 주자학 의 발전과 유학의 관학화에 공헌했다. 박식으로, 학문서뿐만 아니라 기행서를 저술하는 등 문인으로서의 활약만도 다채롭다 [4] . 나산은 막부에 대해서는 승려의 자격으로 섬기면서 불교비판을 하고 있다 [4] .

덧붙여 임야 당대의 주가 대학 머리 (다이가쿠노카미)라고 칭한 것은 나야마의 손자의 3대·림봉오카의 대로부터이며, 이후 임가는 요요 막부의 교학의 책임자로서의 역할을 담당 한다 , 스루가 문고 의 관리도 행했다.

명력 2년( 1656년 )에는 사랑하는 아내를 잃고 있다. 다음 명력 3년( 1657년 ), 명력의 대불 에 의해 저택과 서고를 소실하고, 그 4일 후에 사망했다. 서고가 소실된 충격과 낙담으로 생명을 줄였다고도 한다. 향년 75. 무덤은 도쿄도 신주쿠구 이치야마 후시초 에 있다. 막부에 의한 나산의 등용은 유학자의 사회적 지위 향상에 큰 역할을 했다고 할 수 있다.

나산의 학문과 사상 [ 편집 ]

유학자 나산 [ 편집 ]

유시마 성당

임라산의 학문은, 한당의 구주 로부터 육상산 · 왕양명 의 학에 및, 제자 백가로부터 일본의 고전에도 통했지만, 남송 의 주희 ( 주자)의 학문( 주자학 )이 그 중심으로 예, 특히 사의 후지와라 히나와의 몰후는 명확하게 주희의 이기론(태극이기의 이론)의 입장에 서 있었다 [3] [7] . 나산은 주자학자로서 만물은 ‘이’와 ‘기’로 이루어진 이기 이원론을 설교하고 이법이 여러 현상을 지배하는 것처럼 이성이 정욕을 지배하는 것을 이상으로 했다(『산덕초』). 그리고 하늘(이기 미분의 태극 )을 자연·인문의 일체의 사물에 내재화하고, 또한 하늘은 마음에 의해 만상을 창조해, 이에 의해 만상을 주재하는 것으로서, 이 하늘의 작용, 즉 「천도」를 세우는 것이야말로 인도주의이며 , 이 인도의 실천·이행이 「격물」 보다 시작된다고 말했다 [3] .

나산의 인간론은, 인간은, 천리를 받고, 그 본성은 선이지만, 정욕을 위해 가려져 있기 때문에 충분히 발휘할 수 없다고 하는 것으로, 학문에 의해 우주를 괴롭히는 이리를 극복하고, 수양에 의해 정욕을 꺼내야 할 것을 주장했다 [8] .

또한 만상을 관철하는 도덕적 속성을 생각하는 입장에 서서 막 번체 제하 의 신분질서와 거기에서의 실천도덕을 형이상학 적으로 기초하였다 [7] . 『춘감초』에 있어서는, 우주의 원리인 이론은, 인간 관계에서는 신분으로서 나타나는 것으로 상하 정분의 이리를 설해 사농공상의 신분 제도를 정당화했지만, 이것은 , 막번 체제 의 근간 을 이루는 신분 질서 절대화의 이론이었다 [9] . 나산은 이 책에서 나라를 잘 다스리기 위해서는 '서'(질서·서열)를 유지하기 위해 '경'(쭉쭉쭉한 마음)과 그 구체적인 나타나는 '례'(예의· 법도 )가 중요시되어야 하는 것을 설설하고, 지경(마음 속에 '경'을 계속하는 것)을 강조하고 있다(존심지경). 나산은 우주의 원리인 이리를 들여다보면 안에 경, 밖에는 예로서 나타난다고 설, 경과 예가 인륜의 기본이며, 이와 마음의 일체화를 설한 것이다(거 경찰) [8] [주석 4] .

나산의 주자학은 중국에서 직수입한 것이 아니라 도요토미 히데요시의 조선 출병 을 계기로 유입한 조선주자학을 자각적, 선택적으로 섭취한 것으로 여겨진다[11 ] . 덧붙여 「라산」의 호도, 조선책의 「연평문답」에서 유래하는 것이다 [12] .

「백과전서파」라산 [ 편집 ]

『아즈마 거울』 고활자본 관영판・림도춘(라산)의 跋文

나산은 많은 작문·부시를 쓰고 있고 [7] , 오히려 나산은 어용학자 라기보다는 '도쿠가와 시대의 최초의 엔사이클로페디스트'였다는 평가가 있다[4 ] . ' 신도전수 '와 ' 혼아사 신사고 '에서는 주코가 주창한 귀신론을 바탕으로 고대 이후 일본의 신불습합을 비판 했다 . 중국의 본초학 의 소개서 『다식편』, 병학 의 주석서인 『손자 속해』 『삼략 속해』 『육상 속해』, 한층 더 중국의 괴기 소설 의 안내서 『괴담 전서』를 저 등의 관심과 학식은 다방면에 걸쳐 있다 [주석 5] . 일본사에도 조예가 깊고, 일본의 국조 로서의 태백설에 관심을 보이고 있다 [7] .

나산의 사상 [ 편집 ]

나산의 사상은 일반적으로 유교적인 현세주의·도덕주의, 및 일종의 합리주의 를 특징으로 한다 [7] .

특히 당시였던 주장의 하나에 불교의 배척이 있어, 불교가 그 해안주의에 서서 현세의 인간 사회에 있어서의 문제를 피해, 내세를 설설해 허망을 말한다고 비판해, 그 도덕 무시나 불승으로 보이는 부도덕・죄악 등을 추궁하고 있다 [7] .

지금 하나는, 신교합 일론이다. 나산은, 신도 , 왕도 , 유도 , 인도 의 근본은 동일하고, 신은 마음·리라고 하여 이당 기분 신도를 설설해, 일본 ​​신화 중 의 “ 3종의 신기 ”를 유교적인 지·인·용 [ 삼덕 의 상징]으로 간주했다 [7] [주석 6] . 또, 이당심 신도는, 근세 의 유가 신도 의 선두가 되었다 [3] .

근대주의의 입장으로부터의 평가는 낮다. 와쓰지 테츠로 는 지구체설을 힘차게 부정하는 등 나산은 하비안과의 논쟁에서도 과학에 전혀 관심을 보이지 않고 시야가 좁은 유럽에서는 근대적인 사상가가 나와 있던 시대에 고대 중국의 이상으로 돌아가는 시대착오 등 나산은 쇄국 과 함께 보수적 반동적인 편협한 정신을 뛰어넘어 오랫동안 일본인의 자유로운 사색활동을 방해한 '불행'이었다고 논하고 있다[14 ] .

편저서 [ 편집 ]

편저서는 150여 개 및 [7] 위에서 설명했다

  • 『삼덕초』
  • 『춘감초』
  • 『혼조 통감』（『혼조편 연록』）
  • 「관영제가계도전」(막부의 생명에 의해 편찬 주임으로서 종사한다)
  • 「혼조 신사 고」
  • 『신도전수』

등 외에도

  • 『라산문집』
  • 『라산시집』
  • 『丙辰紀行』
  • 『성리자 의속해』
  • 『신도비전절 중속해』

있다.

가족 [ 편집 ]

동생에게 하야시 나가키 . 나산에는 4명의 남자가 있어, 장남과 2남은 뭉치했다. 모토와 4년( 1618년 )에 3남・춘승, 관영 원년( 1624년 )에 4남・모리카츠가 모두 교토에서 태어났으며, 춘승은 쿠로미네, 모리카츠는 요코사이 ( 토쿠 코우 ) 사이)라고 호했다. 鵞峰은 아버지의 후계자로서 막부를 섬기고 대학 머리라고 칭할 수 있게 되었고, 독경재도 막부에 부름받았다 [3] .

에피소드 [ 편집 ]

  • 8세 때 한 나니가 ' 태평기 '를 읽는 것을 곁에서 듣고 이를 암창했다. 한 번 들은 것은 잊지 않기 때문에 사람들은 "이 아이의 귀는 낭이(ふくろみみ) 이다 .
  • 에도 성에 출사한 다이묘 가 각각 자신이 지참한 도시락을 먹고 있었을 때, 나가후 번주 · 모리 히데모토 의 도시락 속에 연어 필레가 들어가 있었다. 이때 나산은 무사시 이와 츠키번주 아베 중차 등과 함께 '희귀하다'며 연어의 필레를 조금씩 나누어 주었다고 한다 [16] .
  • 라산은 경안 4년( 1651년 )에 후미오 상황이 갑자기 출가하여 법명을 청정이라고 칭했을 때, 이를 “아아 치코의 아버지로 삼아야 한다. 무문 이것을 애원하지 않겠다고 하는 것도 이즈군이 얻는 켄이나라고 평가하고 있다 [17] .
  • 명력 2년(1656년), 아내를 죽었을 때에는, 그 죽음을 悼る시를 26목 읊는 등, 애처가였다.
  • 명력 3년 1월 18일 (1657년 3월 2일 )부터 삼일 삼밤에 이르는 명력의 대불(통칭 '소매 화재')에서는, 나산은 주위의 소란을 살짝 독서에 여념이 없었다 하지만, 간다의 집에 불이 났기 때문에, 1월 19일 ( 3월 3일 ), 읽기의 책 1권만으로 우에노 방면 으로 도망쳤지만, 집이 소실되어, 서고에 납입되고 있던 장서도 모두 소망했다고 듣고 발병했다고 한다 [18] .

임라산상 [ 편집 ]

나산은 무로마치 시대의 만리 집구 와 같이 아리마 온천 , 구사쓰 온천 , 게로 온천 의 3온천을 「천하의 3명천」이라고 적었다( 일본 3명천 ) [19] .

게로 온천가의 시라사와바시에는 임라산의 동상이 있다 [20] . 또한, 게로 온천에서 개최되는 게로 온천 축제의 참진 행렬은 「온천 추수 감사절(만리 집구제·림라산 축제)」으로서 개최되고 있다[21 ] .

각주 [ 편집 ]

[ 각주 사용법 ]

주석 [ 편집 ]

  1. ↑ 교토대학 종합박물관 창고. 원본의 화가는 불명. 본 그림은 에도 시대 후기의 모사.
  2. ^ 라산, 도춘 외, 라부자·석양면·호나비동·매화촌 그 외의 호가 있다 [1] .
  3. ^ 그러나 이에야스 자신은, 나산보다 숭전 이나 천대종 의 승려천해 를 정치적 조언자로서는 오히려 중용하고 있어 유학자를 굳이 특별시한 것은 아니었다.
  4. ^ 언제나 언동을 쏟아내고 예의를 드러내는 이 사상에는 무사계급에 지도자로서 자기를 율법과의 자각을 끄덕인 측면이 있는 것도 지적되고 있다[10 ] .
  5. ^ 라산은 널리 스스로의 학술종교를 싸웠기 때문에, 후세, 나카에토키나 야마자키 암사이로부터의 비판 을 받고 있다.
  6. ^ 이와키 타카리는 이것을 중세 말기의 이세 신도 의 흐름을 펌핑하는 발상이 될 것으로 하고 있다 [13] .

찾아보기 [ 편집 ]

  1. ↑ 미야자키(1994)
  2. ↑ a b 미야자키(1994)
  3. ↑ a b c d e f g 이시다 (2004)
  4. ^ a b c d e f 마츠오카 마사타카의 센야 천권 「도쿠가와 이데올로기」헬만 오무스
  5. ↑ 미야모토 요시미「도쿠가와 이에야스와 혼초학」
  6. ↑ a b 츠지 (1974) pp.210-211
  7. ↑ a b c d e f g h i 이와성 (1979) p.108
  8. ↑ a b 厨 (1995) pp.188-189
  9. ↑ 백취(2005) p.88-89
  10. ↑ 다카하시 외(2003) p.42
  11. ↑ 후카야(1993) pp.259-262
  12. ↑ 후카야(1993) p.262
  13. ↑ 이와성(1979) p.108
  14. ^ 와즈지 테츠로『묻힌 일본 ――키리시탄 도래 문화 전후에 있어서의 일본의 사상적 정황――』( 아오카 문고 )
  15. ↑ 이야기 일본사(아래) P.59
  16. ↑ 츠지(1974) p.132
  17. ↑ 츠지(1974) pp.386-387
  18. ↑ 후카야(1993) p.170
  19. ↑ “ 게로시 에코 투어리즘 추진 전체 구상(게로시 에코 투어리즘 추진 협의회) ”. 환경성 . 2021년 12월 1일 열람.
  20. ↑ “ 게로 온천 거리 맵 ”. 게로 온천 관광 협회 . 2021년 12월 1일 열람.
  21. ↑ “ 게로 온천 축제 개최! ”. 일본 온천 협회 . 2021년 12월 1일 열람.

임라산을 연기한 인물 [ 편집 ]

참고 문헌 [ 편집 ]

관련 항목 [ 편집 ]

외부 링크 [ 편집 ]

===

Yamazaki Ansai

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In this Japanese name, the surname is Yamazaki.
Yamazaki Ansai
BornJanuary 24, 1619
Kyoto
DiedSeptember 16, 1682 (aged 63)
Kyoto
EraEarly Tokugawa Era
RegionJapan
SchoolBuddhism, Neo-Confucianism, Suika Shinto
Main interests
Ontological Unity, Strict Moral Practice
Notable ideas
Suika Shinto

Yamazaki Ansai (山崎 闇斎, January 24, 1619 – September 16, 1682) was a Japanese philosopher and scholar. He began his career as a Buddhist monk, but eventually came to follow the teachings of Neo-Confucian Zhu Xi. He combined Neo-Confucian ideas with Shinto to create Suika Shinto.

Life[edit]

Early years/Buddhism[edit]

Born in Kyoto on January 24, 1619, Yamazaki Ansai was the son of a former rōnin-turned-doctor and the last of four children. In his youth, he was strongly influenced by both his mother and grandmother. While his mother "urged him to develop a noble heart worthy of a samurai's son,"[1] his grandmother supported him in his study of the Chinese language. In his preteens, he was sent by his father to serve as an acolyte at a Buddhist temple on Mount Hiei.[2] In his early teens, Ansai returned home, and after several years was finally permitted to enter the Myōshin-ji temple of the Rinzai Zen sect in Kyoto for further study. Due to his incredible scholarly aptitude, in his early twenties he was granted entrance to the Gyūkō-ji temple in Tosa. During his time at Tosa, he was strongly advised by his fellow monks to concentrate his studies on the teachings of Neo-Confucian scholars, thereby beginning the process of Ansai's conversion to Neo-Confucianism and ultimate rejection of Buddhism. Ansai was particularly captivated by the writings of the Song dynasty scholar, Zhu Xi (Chu Hsi), which later became the basis of Ansai's moral philosophy/teachings. At twenty eight, he returned to Kyoto, and under the patronage of Nonaka Kenzan, was able to continue his Neo Confucian studies, as well as begin to publish his own materials. With the production of his first work Heresies Refuted (Heikii, 1647), an outright rejection of Buddhist faith, Ansai fully embraced "the One True Way" of Neo Confucianism.[3]

Middle years: Neo-Confucianism and Kimon[edit]

After his first publication, Ansai spent the remaining thirty-five years of his life writing, publishing, editing, annotating, and punctuating Confucian and Shinto texts (that accumulated to over two thousand pages).[4] The decade following Tosa (1647–1657), Ansai lived, studied, and taught in Kyoto. There, he edited and published a great number of texts (mostly commentaries on the works of Chu Hsi). Ansai also frequently went to Edo, to give lectures on Cheng-Zhu school of Neo-Confucianism in front of a large number of daimyōs.[5] In 1655, he established a private school in Kyoto, began his first lecture cycle in the spring of the same year, and finished it at the end of 1656.

Ansai's group of Confucian disciples was collectively referred to as the Kimon school. His lectures focused on Ansai's own, hand selected canon. His canon consisted mostly of the classic Confucian writings that Zhu Xi had emphasized: the Elementary Learning, the Reflections on Things at Hand, and the Four Books (the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, the Analects of Confucius, and the Mencius). However, he also included Cheng Yi's Commentary on the Book of Changes. In the 1660s and 1670s, Ansai (following the example of Zhu Xi) personally edited the six books that comprised his canon.[6]

As a teacher, Ansai was described by his students as "extremely strict, sometimes scary, and short tempered." Generally speaking, Ansai had a reputation for being "single minded, doctrinate, and intolerant." Kaibara Ekken, a contemporary of Ansai's, had attended several of his lectures, and found Ansai to be: "severe, dogmatic, and more interested in strict moral discipline than in investigation of the principles for practical learning."[7] Such prominent Neo-Confucian scholars as Kinoshita Jun'an, Asami Keisai, Miyake Shōsai, and Satō Naokata were included amongst Ansai's followers of the Kimon school.

Bakufu involvement and Shinto beginnings[edit]

In 1658, Ansai moved to Edo, where he spent the next 7 years of his life, continuing his studying of Neo-Confucian texts, as well as beginning his research on a never completed historiography of Japan (based upon Shinto texts). In 1665, after building up a reputation in both Edo and Kyoto as an extraordinary teacher, was invited by Hoshina Masayuki (the daimyō of Aizu) to become his teacher. Ansai accepted the position and spent the next seven years of his life as the personal teacher of Neo-Confucian philosophy to Masayuki. For tutoring Masayuki for six out of the twelve months of the year, Ansai was given a salary of 100 gold ryō, two seasonal garments, and one haori coat.

Although Ansai and Masayuki were said to share a close relationship, Ansai refused to become his vassal, declaring that Confucian scholars should remain autonomous of another individual's influence. Masayuki proved to be Ansai's intellectual equal, helping him compile five different works: two gazetteers for the Aizu domain, and three Confucian texts: Gyokusan kōgi furoku (Appendix to Zhu Xi's lecture at Yushan), Nitei jikyōroku (Record of the two Cheng's political teachings), and the Irakusanshiden shinroku (Record of the mind-heart). During his years of service to Masayuki, Ansai compiled more writings of Zhu Xi during his off time in Kyoto. These included: Jinsetsumondō (Questions and answers on explanations of "humaneness"), Shōgaku mōyōshu and Daigaku keihatsu shū (Collections of [clarifications by Zhu Xi] on the Elementary Learning and the Great Learning).[8]

Due to this relationship, Ansai is considered to be one of the scholars most closely associated with the Tokugawa Bakufu. Also, Ansai was able to receive the secret teachings of the Yoshida and Ise Shinto traditions, which he would use in attempting to reconstruct a "pure Shinto", that would reflect the Way of Neo-Confucianism.

Later years: Schism in the Kimon school[edit]

After Masayuki's death in 1672, Ansai returned to Kyoto, where he spent the last decade of his life. In his later years, Ansai's scholarly focus dramatically shifted toward his project of synchronizing Shinto and Confucian thought. Ansai's introduction of Shinto into his teachings ultimately caused a schism among his students, dividing them into two groups: those who followed Ansai's Confucianism, and those who followed his Shinto. Very few were able to do both. In 1680, when Ansai put forth a radical re-interpretation of the Great Learning that defied traditional Confucian thought, he had a falling out with two of his best students, Satō Naokata and Asami Keisai, who could not accept Ansai's new interpretation. Ultimately, Ansai expelled Naokata and Keisai. After this, most of his students coalesced around the two defrocked pupils, thinning out the ranks of Ansai's still loyal followers.[9] With his formerly great school in ruins, Ansai died on September 16, 1682, and was buried at the Korotani mountain in Kyoto.

Split with Buddhism[edit]

Ansai's rejection of Buddhism was based upon what he perceived as a fundamental insufficiency/flaw in Buddhist moral principles. In Neo Confucianism, Ansai had found the "Truth": the universal and eternal cosmic Way that could not be found in Buddhism. His critique was based upon two, interconnected fallacies that he perceived in Buddhist thought. First, Ansai believed that Buddhism lacked a normative system for informing ethical behavior (stemming from his interpretation that the Buddhist notion of nature (sei) as nothingness or emptiness, was a metaphysical, and not an ethical ideal). Due to this, Buddhism contained no theory of mind-heart, and thus, was inadequate for cultivating the mind[10] (both of which were integral to Ansai's ethical thought). From Ansai's Neo-Confucian perspective, the mind was full (being inherently imbued with the concepts of the Five Relationships and the Five Virtues), not empty (as he believed Buddhism perceived it).[11] In the latter part of his life, when Ansai was attempting to prove the ontological unity of Shinto and Confucianism, he proclaimed that before the arrival of Buddhism to Japan, early Shinto and Confucianism were identical. He blamed the influence of Buddhist thought for creating a false dichotomy between the two systems (which in Ansai's view differed only in name).[12]

Neo-Confucian teachings[edit]

Influence of Zhu Xi[edit]

Ansai's teachings were seen to be part of a larger Neo-Confucian trend of the early Tokugawa period, referred to by Abe Yoshino as the rigaku (school of principle). Compared to the kigaku (school of material force), rigaku's primary focus was on moral cultivation and spirituality. Its followers considered ri (Chinese li: reason, rational principle, or law) to be a transcendent principle.[13] Although Ansai was part of this larger movement, in no way did he see himself as an "innovator" of Neo-Confucianism. Rather, he saw himself as a "servant of Truth," a "transmitter of the Way," and believed nothing of what he taught to be novel, since everything about the Way had already been said by the Confucian Sages. In particular, Ansai believed he was a "faithful transmitter" of the writings of both Zhu Xi, and the Korean Neo-Confucian Yi T'oegye (1507–1570), with special emphasis on Zhu's teachings.[14] Because of this, most of Ansai's Neo Confucian writings tended to be publications of Zhu Xi's works, with his own commentaries.

Although some of Ansai's teachings varied slightly from Zhu Xi's, the foundation of Ansai's thought was deeply grounded in Zhu's most fundamental premises. The foremost of these was Zhu Xi's cosmological belief that the principles of reason and morality (li), were the same as mankind's original nature (i.e. that the principles that guide and move the universe, are exactly the same as those that inform man's ethical behavior).[15] Therefore, by pursuing li, an individual was simultaneously "developing the potential of one's inner nature to guide on in behaving correctly." If an individual could endure it, he would be able to bring his own natural inclinations into perfect harmony with principles of universal morality. Zhu Xi saw this fulfillment of potential as the ideal state of human existence, and only possible to achieve if one were to obey one's allotted moral duty, given their relative position in society. Depending on their social role, the duties of the individual differed, as did the principles upon which they were grounded. However, Zhu Xi did not view this as problematic, since each of these principles was merely a different manifestation of the same general principle of morality, found in every human being. Xi believed that fulfilling one's proper social role was a means of understanding the universal principle of human morality (li). He referred to such a process as the "plumbing of principle". To perfect one's natural, innate potential was at the same time to realize one's self as an autonomous being.[16]

Reverence[edit]

Like Zhu Xi, Ansai firmly believed that an individual's moral duties reflected his specific social position (meibun). However, instead of focusing on the "plumbing of principle" (which he believed the average person was incapable of achieving) Ansai believed in order to properly achieve meibun, what was primary was an attitude of reverence (kei or tsutsushimi): steadiness of the mind and guarded behavior. Since Zhu considered reverence to be the necessary precondition for the "plumbing of principle", Ansai believed that reverence was the essential element of Zhu's moral thought.[17] To this end, he placed great emphasis on a particular passage of Zhu Xi's: "Reverence within, righteousness without."[citation needed] Reverence was the means by which one achieved the desired end of self-cultivation, necessary to fulfill the moral duties prescribed to an individual by their rigid, social obligations.[18] Realizing one's social obligations and maintaining an orderly, hierarchical society were the highest duties that an individual and mankind (respectively) had to fulfill. This notion stems from Ansai's morality, cosmology, and the interconnectedness between the two (all based in Zhu Xi's thought).

Ontology and morality[edit]

Like Zhu Xi, Ansai believed that the principles that guided the cosmic order were the same as the ethical principles that informed mankind's original nature (i.e. the same set of principles guided the cosmic, as well as the human world). Not only was there an inherent connection between the macrocosm (cosmos) and microcosm (humans), but they mutually influenced each other in a reciprocal and parallel manner. Just as the cosmic principles actively affect mankind (by informing humans of their natural, moral imperatives), so do human beings actively affect the cosmic order through their collective behavior. This is why Ansai believed it was a moral imperative for human beings to achieve unity with the cosmos. By understanding the ethical principles, they could simultaneously understand cosmic principles and positively affect not only themselves, but the universe as well. He linked morality with the Five Evolutive phases, to show that not only are cosmic and moral principles natural and inevitable, but that they mutually influence one another.[19] Physicist and philosopher Max Bernhard Weinstein found these views to be especially consonant with the theological theory of Pandeism.[20]

Cosmology and filial piety[edit]

Because cosmologically everything was interconnected, Ansai believed that the actions of an individual (in a similar manner to modern chaos theory) affect the entire universe. He stressed the Confucian concept of Great Learning, in which a person's actions (the center of a series of concentric circles) extend outward toward the family, society, and finally to the cosmos. The Five Virtues (all contained in the idea of reverence and inherent in man's original nature) direct the Five Relationships, between: parent and child (humaneness), lord and vassal (righteousness/duty), husband and wife (propriety), elder and younger (wisdom), and friend and friend (faithfulness). There are five steps which Zhu Xi advocated to perfect these relationships (and virtues): "study wisely, question thoroughly, deliberate carefully, analyze clearly, and act conscientiously." For Ansai, learning was the means to the ends of morality. However, of all of the relationships (and virtues) that Ansai emphasized, the relationship between the lord and vassal (duty) was the most important. Departing from Zhu Xi (who saw humaneness as the most important virtue), Ansai believed that maintaining the social order (through duty to one's lord) was the highest responsibility that one had to fulfill.[21]

Knowledge leads to morality[edit]

To achieve reverence (the means toward personal cultivation) Ansai proposed quiet sitting. Through quiet sitting, Ansai believed that an individual could gain access to the storehouse of hidden knowledge (inherent in all individuals). This storehouse is where qi (the vital material force) resides. By channeling qi, one is able to stimulate humaneness, which consequently triggers the other virtues. Through knowledge, virtue grows. Through virtue, one can act in proper accord with the outside world (and the cosmos in general). Thus, knowledge is the source by which an individual realizes his innate, human potential (as described by Zhu Xi).[22]

Suika Shinto[edit]

Interest in Shinto[edit]

In a failed attempt at creating a historiography of Japan, Ansai became intensely interested in Shinto's religious elements. From his own experience, Ansai believed that certain Shinto customs and rituals (such as funeral practices) reflected Confucian values. His Yamato shōgaku (Japanese Elementary Learning), published in 1658, although more focused on general social customs, marks a turning point in Ansai's thought, with its inclusion of various Shinto elements.[23] In the latter part of his life, Ansai began a project of combining Neo-Confucian morality (based on Zhu Xi) with the religious elements of Shinto.[24] Since Ansai believed in the ontological unity of everything, he believed that in the Shinto tradition, he could discover the Way, rooted in Japanese society.[25] Ansai's Confucian interpretation of Shinto mythology came to be known as Suika Shinto. Suika means the act of praying to call the gods down, to receive worldly benefits. Drawing on the secret traditions of both Yoshida and Ise Shinto (as well as classic Shinto myths, such as found in the Kojiki, Nihongi, Shoku Nihongi, Fudoki, etc.), Ansai was able to "uncover" numerous Neo-Confucian values within Shinto texts.[26] On November 23, 1672, he created the Record of the Fuji no mori Shrine (Fuji no mori yuzuemandokoro no ki), an essay that generally summarizes Ansai's views on Shinto and its connection to Neo-Confucian metaphysics.[27]

Confucian ethics embedded in Shinto[edit]

From the Shinto texts, he found particular moral values that he believed had counterparts in Confucianism. For example, he believed that the Confucian notion of reverence was the same as the Shinto idea of prayer (kitō). Righteousness (in Confucianism) was equivalent to the Shinto idea of honesty or forthrightness (massugu or shōjiki). In the opening chapters of the Nihongi, Ansai explained that the five generations of earthly gods (kami) were equivalent to the Five Evolutive Phases,[28] and that the pledge of Amaterasu to protect the divine lineage of her descendants, along with Yamato-hime's prophecy of "keeping right what is right and left what is left," are expressions of the values of the Way (loyalty, selflessness, steadfast and vigilant mind).[29]

Although Ansai claimed he was trying to discover Confucian values within Shinto, his discoveries had a profound effect on his personal philosophy. From his interpretation of a passage from the Nihongi, where Ō-ana-muchi converses with his own spirit, Ansai believed that every person's body is a shrine, that houses a living spirit. In effect, every person's physical heart contained a living god, and out of reverence to the gods, one should worship the self. He believed this to be analogous to the Confucian practice of self-cultivation.[30]

Shinto's influence of Ansai's thought[edit]

Ansai's interpretations of Shinto texts also (surprisingly) led to his affirmation of the political order of the Tokugawa Bakufu. He believed that just as much as the emperor, the bakufu was part of the sacred political order (and that these warriors were exemplified in the archetype of Susanoo). By divine mandate, the bakufu had been entrusted to protect the political realm, in the name of the emperor. This political order, for Ansai, reflected the greater cosmic unity of heaven and man.[31] Due to his belief in this unity, Ansai challenged the traditional Confucian notion of the Mandate of Heaven, where a ruler was held accountable for the welfare of his subjects, and could lose his legitimacy if he did not act in proper accord. However, Ansai believed that challenging political authority was paramount to disrupting the harmonic balance between heaven and man. Therefore, a subject must pledge his undying, unconditional loyalty to his master. This idea caused a great controversy amongst Ansai's followers in the Kimon school, as well as amongst his Suika Shinto disciples.[32]

Methodology[edit]

In his book Tokugawa Ideology, Herman Ooms describes Ansai's analysis of Shinto texts as being grounded in "hermeneutic operations", proceeding along four levels of interpretation. The first level is literal. From Ooms' perspective, Ansai believed the Shinto texts he read to be records of historical facts. The kami existed and Ansai believed in them. Second, Ansai employs an allegorical interpretation of the text, by analogically equating symbols he found within Shinto texts as expressions of Confucian truths. Third, Ansai interpreted the texts on a moral level, drawing ethical paradigms out of Shinto myths. The last level was anagogical, whereby Ansai argued for the supremacy of the Japanese nation (relative to all others), using his own interpretations of Shinto texts. Although often Ansai is criticized for his 'torturous rationalizations" found in Suika Shinto, Ooms argues that what distinguishes Ansai from other Neo-Confucian scholars of his time was the "systematic structure of his thought."[33]

Influence/legacy[edit]

Yamazaki Ansai was part of a larger movement in the early Tokugawa era that revived and helped proliferate Neo-Confucian thought in Japan.[34] He was the first to introduce the writings of the Korean Neo-Confucian scholar Yi T'ogeye to Japan, and was instrumental in popularizing Zhu Xi's thought (partly due to his connections with the government).[35] His political theory was appropriated by the Tokugawa Bakufu, as a means to legitimate the suppression of political contestation.

The institutions that Ansai had created (the Kimon school and Suika Shinto) did not last for very long (in their original forms, as Ansai had intended). However, the power of Ansai's ideas and the influence he exerted on a large number of his students have had vast repercussions. Ansai's Suika Shinto transformed Shinto into a political ideology that was later incorporated by ultra-nationalist thinkers in the 18th and 19th centuries. In his scholarly research of Shinto texts, Ansai was able to break the monopoly on Shinto doctrine, by freeing it from the private storehouses of specialist Shinto circles (Yoshida, Ise), and thereby making it available for future generations to freely study and interpret.[36]

Although the Kimon school suffered from various schisms (both during and after Ansai's time), its lineage has lasted until present times. After Ansai's death, his students continued to preach some form of his Confucian or Suika Shinto thought, to both commoners and Bakufu officials alike. A large number of Kimon scholars later filled the ranks of the Bakufu College during the Kansei Reforms.

Timeline[edit]

  • 1619 Born in Kyoto
  • 1641 Enters Gyūkōji temple in Tosa
  • 1647 Leaves Tosa, returns to Kyoto, publishes Heresies Refuted
  • 1655 Founds a private school in Kyoto, beginning of the Kimon
  • 1658 Moves to Edo, publishes Japanese Elementary Learning
  • 1665 Accepts position as private tutor to Hoshina Masayuki
  • 1672 Returns to Kyoto, publishes Record of the Fuji no mori Shrine
  • 1680 Falling out with Satō Naokata and Asami Keisai, schism in Kimon school
  • 1682 Death, buried on Korotani mountain in Kyoto

Works[edit]

  • Heresies Refuted (Heikii) (1647)
  • Japanese Elementary Learning (Yamato shōgaku) (1658)
  • Reflections on Things at Hand (punctuated and published) (1670)
  • Record of the Fuji no mori Shrine (Fuji no mori yuzuemandokoro no ki) (1672)
  • Bunkai Hitsuroku
  • Han Yü's treatise Chü yu ts'ao (published, with commentary)
  • Kōhanzensho
  • Nakatomi harae fūsuisō (commentary on the Nakatomi harae text)

Footnotes and references[edit]

  1. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Religious Dimensions of Confucianism: Cosmology and Cultivation. Philosophy East and West, Vol. 48, No. 1, The Religious Dimensions of Confucianism in Japan. (Jan., 1998), pp. 23.
  2. ^ Ooms, Herman. Tokugawa Ideology. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1985, p.199.
  3. ^ Ooms, p.200
  4. ^ Ooms, p.201
  5. ^ Tsuji, Tatsuya. The Cambridge History of Modern Japan, Volume 4, Early Modern Japan. Trans. by Harold Bolitho. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991, p.419
  6. ^ Ooms, p.212
  7. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Moral and Spiritual Cultivation in Japanese Neo-Confucianism. State University of New York Press, 1989, p.36
  8. ^ Ooms, p.225-226
  9. ^ Tsuji, p.420
  10. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Religious Dimensions of Confucianism, p.23
  11. ^ Ooms, 202-203
  12. ^ Ooms, p.221
  13. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Moral and Spiritual Cultivation in Japanese Neo-Confucianism, pp.69-69
  14. ^ Kassel, Marleen. Tokugawa Confucian Education. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996, p.68
  15. ^ Ooms, p.203
  16. ^ Tsuji, pp.416-419
  17. ^ Tsuji, p.419
  18. ^ Kassel, Marleen, p.69
  19. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Religious Dimensions of Confucianism, p.26
  20. ^ Max Bernhard Weinsten, Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Perception of Nature") (1910), page 235: "Von den Japanern soll einer ihrer bedeutendsten Philosophen, Yamazaki-Ansai, um die mitte des siebzehnten Jahrhunderts, entwickelt haben: "Gott ist das Wesen aller Dinge und durchdringt den Himmel und die Erde." Das klingt pandeistisch, kann jedoch auch metaphorisch gemeint sein, wie wir ja ähnliche Aussprüche von Gott tun.
  21. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Religious Dimensions of Confucianism, p.27
  22. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Religious Dimensions of Confucianism, p.28
  23. ^ Ooms, pp.227-228
  24. ^ Kassel, Marleen, p.68
  25. ^ Ooms, p.217
  26. ^ Ooms, pp.221-222
  27. ^ Ooms, p.228
  28. ^ Ooms, p.237
  29. ^ Ooms, p.223
  30. ^ Ooms, 231-232
  31. ^ Ooms, pp.237-238
  32. ^ Ooms, pp.247-248
  33. ^ Ooms, pp.282-283
  34. ^ Kassel, Marleen, p.77
  35. ^ Tucker, Mary Evelyn. Religious Dimensions of Confucianism, p.21
  36. ^ Ooms, 285-286

See also[edit]

===

야마자키 암사이

출처 : 무료 백과 사전 "Wikipedia (Wikipedia)"
야마자키 암사이
인물 정보
탄생모토와 4년 12월 9일(1619년 1월 24일)
사망덴와 2년 9월 16일(1682년 10월 16일)
부모야마자키 정인(아버지)
학문
시대에도 시대 전기
학파도사난 가쿠
자키 문학파
연구분야유학
신도학
특필해야 할 개념서가신도
영향을
받은 사람		쇼난 무네
화
골짜기 나카요시카와
고토 출구 연가
영향을
미친 사람		사토 나오미
아사미 사사이 미야케 나오사이
우에다
윤기 유사키 사이야 야마야마 마사모치
마치 공통 이즈모지 노부나가토 미몬 야스 후쿠시 부가 와 하루미 외




템플릿 보기

야마자키 암사이(야마자키 안사이, 모토 와 4년 12월 9일 ( 1619년 1월 24일 ) - 텐와 2년 9월 16일 ( 1682년 10월 16일 ))는, 에도 시대 전기 의 유학자 · 신도가 · 사상가 . 諱는嘉, 글자 는 경의 , 통칭 은嘉右衛門. 어둠사이는 호 . 「수가령사 (すいか・しでます)」라는 영사호를 생전에 정했다 [주1] .

주자학 의 일파인 사키몬학(키몬가쿠)의 창시자로서, 또, 신도 의 일파인 수가신도 의 창시자로서도 알려져 있다.

개요 [ 편집 ]

주자학자로서는 남 학파 에 속한다. 암재에 의해 논의된 주자학을 「사키몬학」 또는 「암재학」이라고 한다. 군신의 엄격한 상하 관계 를 설설하고 대의명분을 중시했다. 특히 유무방벌 을 부정하고, 폭군 우왕 에 대해서도 충의를 관철한 주문왕 과 같은 태도를 긍정한 것에 특징이 있다 [1] [2] [3] .

“ 유방 은 진의 백성이었고 이연 은 능 의 신 이었기 때문에 그들이 천하를 잡은 것은 반역 이다 . 라고 해도 모두 도의에 반하고 있고, 중국 역대의 창업의 군주로 도의에 이르고 있는 것은 후한의 광무제 단 하나이다”라고 말해 이성 혁명 을 부정 했다 [ 4 ] .

또 어느 때 제자들에게 향해 "지금, 나나 로부터 공자 나 맹자 를 대장으로서 일본에 공격해 오면 너들은 어떻게 할까"라고 물어, 응답에 궁금한 제자들에게 "그럴 때는 당연히 공자나 맹자와 싸웠다 혹은 베어 혹은 살아남는다. 그것이 공자나 맹자의 가르침 이다 .

어둠사이는 주자학뿐만 아니라 신도에 대해서도 논했다. 요시카와 고교 의 요시카와 신도를 발전시켜 '수가신도'를 창시해 거기에서도 군신관계를 중시했다. (→ 수가신도 )

이상과 같은 어둠사이의 사상은 미토학 · 국학 등과 함께 막부 말기 의 존왕추이 사상(특히 존왕사상 )에 큰 영향을 주었다 [6] .

문인에는, 사토 나오카타 · 아사미 사사이·미야케 나오사이 · 우에다 마사키 ·유사 키 사이 · 다니야마 · 마사모토마치공통·이즈모로 신나오·도치카몬 타이후쿠 · 야스이 산 테츠( 시부카와 하루미 )등 이 있어, 어둠 재학의 계통을 「사키몬 학파」라고 한다. 다만, 최종적으로 사상적 충돌을 일으켜 파문·절연한 제자도 많아, 정치의 요청에 대해서 주장을 바꾸어 경향이 있는 「림가」와 대비하는 형태로 「림가의 아세, 사키몬의 절교」라고 말했다.

평생 [ 편집 ]

약력 [ 편집 ]

모토와 4년(1619년), 교토 에서 태어난다. 아버지·야마자키 정인은 당시 낭인 이었고, 침의를 경영하고 있었다 [7] .

어려서 히에이산 에 들어가 드디어 묘신지 로 옮겨 승려가 된다. 19세 무렵 토사국 의 흡강사 로 옮겨 쇼난 종화 의 제자가 된다. 토사남학파의 골짜기 중에 주자학을 배우고, 또 노나카 가네야마나 고쿠라 산성 등과 도 교류하여 주자학에의 경도를 깊게 하고, 관영 19 년( 1642년 )에 25세에 축발·환속해 유학자 되었다.

명력 원년( 1655년 ), 교토시 가미교구의, 후에 이토 닌사이가 열리는 고의당 과 호리 카와 를 분리해 상대하는 위치에, 암재학을 열었다. (현재 葭屋마치도리에 「야마자키 암사이 저택터」석표 있음 [8] )

관문 5년( 1665년 ), 에도 에 나와, 아이즈 번주· 보과 마사유키 의 빈사로 맞이했다. 또 요시카와 신도의 창시자인 요시카와 고다리 에게 배우고, 신도 연구에도 본격적으로 임하게 되어, 종래의 신도와 유교를 통합해(신 유융합), 수가 신도를 열었다. 이러한 신도연구의 성과에 따라 번정에 대한 조언을 하는 한편 영내의 사원·신사의 정리를 행한 신불습합을 배제 했다 .

천화 2년(1682년), 사망.

묘소·영묘 [ 편집 ]

야마자키 암사이는, 인간의 마음(심신)은, 즉 텐진과 동원이며 동일 하다고 하는 사상으로부터, 자신의 심신을 자택의 사당에 모셨다 ( 생사 ) . 회 사 명은, 암사이의 영사호 와 같은, 수가령사. 나중에 시모 가미 신사 의 경내에 천좌하고, 사루타 히코 신사에 합사되어 현존하고있다 [9] .

묘소는 교토 시 사쿄구 구로타니초의 금계광명사 에 있다.

저서 일람 [ 편집 ]

야마자키 암사이가 등장하는 작품 [ 편집 ]

각주 [ 편집 ]

[ 각주 사용법 ]

주석 [ 편집 ]

  1. ^ 유래에 대해서는, 「카」의 글자를 2문자 「수」와 「가」로 분해했기 때문이라고도 하는데, 여러 설 있다(수가 신도#「수가」의 유래 )

출처 [ 편집 ]

  1. ↑ 일본사용어연구회 「필휴 일본사용어」(4정판) 실교 출판 (원저 2009-2-2). ISBN  9784407316599 .
  2. ^ 시 내쓰 유히코(1999). “야마자키 암사이편 “구유조”에 있어서의 주황설 이해에 대해서” . 히로시마 대학 동양 고전학 연구 .
  3. ^ 다니구치 마코 (2016). “근세 중기의 일본에서의 충의의 관념에 대해서 -야마자키 암사이학파를 중심으로-” . 와세다 대학 종합 인문 과학 연구 센터 연구지 .
  4. ↑ 히라이즈미 스미「이야기 일본사」 시모마키 P75, 코단샤 학술 문고
  5. ↑ 히라이즈미 스미「이야기 일본사」 시모마키 P76, 코단샤 학술 문고
  6. ^ 나카노 마사시 『만세일계의 마보로시』
  7. ↑ 전국 역사 교육 연구 협의회 「일본사 B 용어집-A 병기」(개정판) 야마가와 출판사 (원저 2009-3-30). ISBN 9784634013025 . 
  8. ↑ 야마자키 어둠사이 저택
  9. ↑ 어둠사이 야마자키 선생님 사당(수가사)비

참고 문헌 [ 편집 ]

전기류
  • 전기학회편 『야마자키 어둠과 게몬류』 메이지 서방, 1938년.
    • 전기학회편 『증보·야마자키 어둠과 게몬류』 메이지 서방, 1943년.
  • 사와이 케이이치 『야마자키 암사이 : 천인 유일한 묘, 카미아키 신기한 길』미네르바 서방 , 2014년. ISBN 9784623067008
연구 서류
잡지 논문
  • 콘도 케이고 “야마자키 암사이의 연구에 뜻하는 학도에게 주는 사전” “신도사 연구” 제48권 2호, 2000년.

관련 문헌 [ 편집 ]

단행본
잡지 논문
  • 안소야 마사히코 「근세 신도 사상사 연구의 목적과 방법：야마자키 암사이의 연구를 통해」 「계간 일본 사상사」 제47호, 1996년.

관련 항목 [ 편집 ]

외부 링크 [ 편집 ]

===


自省録 (東洋文庫) 単行本 – 2015/10/26
李 退渓 (著), 難波 征男 (編さん)
4.6 5つ星のうち4.6 2個の評価

朝鮮第一の儒者李退渓が弟子や友人に朱子学の真髄を情理を尽くして綴った書簡集。日韓の双方で愛読され、儒学史上屈指の名著が蘇る。
조선 제일 유자 이퇴계가 제자와 친구에게 주자학의 진수를 정리를 다해 철자한 서간집. 
한일 양측에서 애독되어 유학사상 굴지의 명저가 되살아난다.
457ページ
言語  日本語
出版社  平凡社
発売日 2015/10/26
===
上位レビュー、対象国： 日本
Amazon カスタマー
5つ星のうち4.0 個人的には
2016年7月24日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
まとめ方はいいと思います。
ただ面白味が薄かったです(^_^;)단지 재미있는 맛이 옅어요
3人のお客様がこれが役に立ったと考えています


===
===

Posted by at
Labels: