In the history of Korean thought debates between Confucianism and Buddhism formed from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty is an epoch-making event in the various sides not only in the side of thought but also in the political a... In the history of Korean thought debates between Confucianism and Buddhism formed from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty is an epoch-making event in the various sides not only in the side of thought but also in the political and social side. the debates between anti-Buddhism and pro-Buddhism announce the change of new thought. Because of these debates, Buddhism is gradually declining and Confucianism takes the initiative in Korean thought. In this respect the study on the debates between Confucianism and Buddhism indicates very important meaning in the following two viewpoints. First, through the study on the first ideological debates in the history of Korean thought, we can recognize the prototype of Korean thought dispute about the level and method of discourse in the Korean intellectual history and social influence effect, etc. Second, we can understand its meaning and implication by observing what effect Confucianism and Buddhism exchange each other, and as a result, how newly transformed and established they are through debates. In the cataclysm from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty, a new-rising class taking charge of the new era accepts Sung Confucianism- the science of human nature and natural laws, as the basis of ideology and plays a leading role for the change to the new society. As a result, Buddhism taking charge of the world of Korean thought from ancient times has lost an influence gradually and by the reduction of its social function the ideological initiative has been changed to Sung Confucianism. In the previous researches on the problem of ideological change focused on surface phenomena and the results, they accept it only as the substitution of Confucianism for Buddhism and have a tendency to understand it as the viewpoint of one side acceptance through the friendship relation between Neo-Confucian scholars in the period of Won dynasty. Especially, because of having a tendency to understand the development of debates only from political, social and historical viewpoints, we cannot understand the theoretical basis and ideological meaning of discourse completely. Even though there has been a research based on the ideological aspect, as the beginning of debates the research on the ideological aspect has not been discussed fully by allowing too much spare for dealing with tremendous research area and the background of the age from the end of Korea dynasty Sung Confucianism was introduced into from China to all periods of Yi dynasty. In other words, as most of the previous researches have approached to political, social and historical viewpoints rather than the ideological aspect, they have limits to represent the ideological character and meaning of debates. This is to analyze the source and development of Confucianism and Buddhism and their core issues unfolded from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty for anti-Buddhism and pro-Buddhism, the criticism of Buddhism order and the harmony between Confucianism and Buddhism. To accomplish this research it is necessary for us to consider several facts as follows: First, it is the necessity of an objective viewpoint. A number of previous researches have pointed out the problem of anti-Buddhism theory and proved the superiority of pro-Buddhism theory. The anti-Buddhism theory represented by Jeong Do-jeon's ��Budda's doctrines has criticized Buddhism from subjective and voluntary viewpoints. There has been the same voluntary viewpoint in ��Hyen Jeong theory�� and ��the theory of Confucianism and Buddhism Inquiry�� to support pro-Buddhism. Debates between Confucianism and Buddhism occur by the difference of the world view originated from ideological faith and tradition and have their own contents and logic. Therefore, we have to approach not from either side of viewpoint but from the objective viewpoint of the third party to understand anti-Buddhism or pro-Buddhism Second, even though they support either the same anti-Buddhism or the same pro-Buddhism, there is a difference between the concrete contents. For example, there is a difference between Lee Saek's viewpoint and Jeong Do-jeon's viewpoint to support the same anti-Buddhism and a difference between ��Hyen Jeong theory�� and ��the theory of Confucianism and Buddhism Inquiry�� to support pro-Buddhism. Even though he has criticized Buddhism in the aspect of political system, Lee Saek with moderate views has accepted Buddhism in the religious aspect. In contrast to Lee's views, Jeong Do-jeon as a strong anti-buddhist has criticized Buddhism not only in the aspect of political system but in the ideological and religious aspect. Even though both ��Hyen Jeong theory�� and ��the theory of Confucianism and Buddhism Inquiry�� support pro-Buddhism, there is a difference in its logic and viewpoint. Therefore, even if they support the same anti-Buddhism or he same pro-Buddhism, we have recognized the difference of its content and logic and then have to discuss it. Third, it is the point what its ideological basis is and to what degree it is correct to support anti-Buddhism or pro-Buddhism. We can consider two kinds of viewpoints. One is whether criticizing contents are correct or not and the other to what degree its own viewpoint is correct as a criticising standard. For example, there are many incorrect parts of Buddhism doctrine in Jeong Do-jeon's ��Budda's doctrines�� and also many misunderstanding cases for Confucianism accepted as a criticising standard for Buddhism. Because of incorrect understanding for Buddhism and Confucianism, he is lacking in his objective criticism for Buddhism. As a result of his lack of the objectivity, Buddhism has been regarded as unorthodox. Therefore, to evaluate objectively debates between Confucianism and Buddhism, strict analysis is strongly needed for the criticism of contents and its standard. It is necessary to make sure to what degree anti-buddhist understands Buddhism and pro-buddhist understands Confucianism. At that time, many scholars were participated in the debates. As a result of these debates, we can evaluate their understandings and levels for Confucianism and Buddhism, namely, their academic levels. Fourth, to deeply understand debates between Confucianism and Buddhism from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty, it has to presuppose to understand debates between Confucianism and Buddhism in the history of Chinese thought, and the relationship between Confucianism and Buddhism in the period of three Kingdoms and in the beginning and middle of Korea dynasty. To understand debates between Confucianism and Buddhism from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty, they did not appear suddenly but happened in the ideological tradition and trend of the times. As a previous analysis, we have to analyze debates between Confucianism and Buddhism in China, in the period of three Kingdoms and in the beginning and middle of Korea dynasty. Especially, from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty debates between Confucianism and Buddhism result from confucian's anti-Buddhism. Anti-buddhists have criticized political and ideological ideas of Buddhism for defense of the fatherland and safeguard nation. we confirm the idea of safeguard nation as shown in Buddhist scriptures and need to analyze closely the formation and character of safeguard nation to exist actually in the period of Silla dynasty and Korea dynasty. This based on four viewpoints is to analyze the ideological meaning and character of debates between Confucianism and Buddhism formed from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty and the cause of anti-Buddhism. As the cause of anti-Buddhism, we observe carefully the research on anti-Buddhism and pro-Buddhism previously formed in China and are to analyze by the comparative method what is the difference between the previous research in China and the research on anti-Buddhism and pro-Buddhism formed from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty. Especially, we are to analyze critically Jeong Do-jeon's anti-Buddhism, and then to investigate the difference between his anti-Buddhism and Zhu Xi's criticism of Buddhism. Especially, we are to examine the main contents item by item shown in Jeong Do-jeon's ��Budda's doctrines�� and then to make a comparative study between his idea and Zhu Xi's idea for anti-Buddhism. At that time, we are to describe Kiwha's counterargument against anti-Buddhism. According to the topographical map of thought from the end of Korea dynasty to the beginning of Yi dynasty, Confucianism is a central idea but Buddhism and Taoism are not. Confucianism has been the general current of thought and as Buddhism has been disregarded, Buddhists have suggested that three religions, namely, Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism are not different but coincide one another. Because Buddhism is concerned with internal mental culture and Confucianism with external sovereign idea, the two religions take a charge of different role to coexist each other. We presented the theory of harmony between Confucianism and Buddhism. Kiwha's ��Hyen Jeong theory�� and ��the theory of Confucianism and Buddhism Inquiry�� are typical books for this trial. But confucianists with strong power felt the necessity to completely deny Buddhism as an old idea in order to establish the new idea for the system improvement of new dynasty. They criticized Buddhism more completely. Even if there are moderate confucianists to present the problem of Buddhism order to limit socioethical practical aspect, there are confucianists criticizing strongly ideological core issues as unorthodox idea. Lee Saek and Lee Jae-hyeon belong to the one and Jeong Do-jeon and Kweon Keon to the other. Because Buddhism influenced bad effects for the society, namely, socio-ethical or political-economical aspects, Jeong Do-jeon as a confucianist criticized Buddhism strongly. He missed socio-ethical and political-economical aspects of human beings originated from metaphysics for special view of the world or human beings. We understand that more fundamental criticism is to criticize metaphysical propositions as his core issues. As the result of the existing research, he pointed out not only social bad effects of Buddhism but real ideological criticism of Buddhism doctrine. On the other hand, another researcher insisted inhumanity criticism of Buddhism such as entering the priesthood and mercy, etc. The researcher insisted that there be delicate difference between Jeong Do-jeon and Zhu Xi. Zhu Xi criticised this problem systematically related to the ideological and metaphysical background and Jeong Do-jeon paid more attention to social aspect of Buddhism. Rotation and causation are arranged in the first part of ��Budda's doctrines��. He concentrated his arguments such as demolition, humanity, charity, hell, good and evil, and begging, etc. Dealing with this problem, hee has a power pen and is serious. Dealing with ideological metaphysical arguments, he roughed the contents, reduced the quantity, cited Zhu Xi's statements. Han Hyeng-jo's viewpoint follows Takahashi Tooru's suggestion in Japan. For the first time, Takahashi evaluated Jeong Do-jeon's anti-Buddhism compared with Zhu Xi's criticism of Buddhism. Takahashi described the characteristic of Chosun Buddhism as adherence and non-independence. He evaluated Jeong Do-jeon's anti-Buddhism as reciting Zhu Xi's criticism of Buddhism. He has evaluated there are no original ideas of anti-Buddhism among Chosun confucianists because of following Chinese logic. Takahashi's suggestion was linked to most Korean scholars such as Lee Byeng-do, Lee Jong-ik, Han Jong-man, Yoon Sa-sun, and Keum Jang-tae, etc. Jeong Do-jeon's anti-Buddhism is different from Takahashi's and Han Jong-man's evaluation. As Jeong Do-jeon discussed not only Rotation and causation but humanity and charity, he criticized Buddhism in the social viewpoints and ideological and metaphysical viewpoint. For Jeong Do-jeon's anti-Buddhism Buddhism was criticized completely by the viewpoint of Sung Confucianism and we had very important meaning ideologically. This is to analyze Jeong Do-jeon's originality and ideological characteristic different from Zhu Xi's criticism of Buddhism, to describe the origin of debates between Confucianism and Buddhism, its development and the ideological argument. ，韩语毕业论文，韩语论文题目 |
