[Lim Hyoung-taek] The Logic of Historical Understanding of Korean Culture (1)
In Relation to the Tradition of East Asia and the Modern World
Lim Hyoung-taek
Professor of Korean Chinese Classics, Sungkyunkwan University
Though I myself may be considered a person of the 20th century, I feel that this passing century will have been markedly different from the previous one. This is a country which boasts of a culture and history of five thousand years and a city that has been used as the capital for over 600 years, but just how many building over a century in age are actually still being put to everyday use? A small number do exist, but they are "preserved" as cultural artifacts. How out of place our ancestors would have felt had they seen our culture and the lives we live! We not only look different, we think differently as well.
As a result of the departure from the traditional, the cultural chasm between the present and the age-long past has undoubtedly deepened like never before. I do not intend to argue along moral lines or attempt aesthetic judgement on the phenomenon. Rather, the issue here is how to explain and understand the phenomenon logically.
A closer look to the chasm reveals an undercurrent of continuity beneath the apparent discontinuity. This continuity is does not even exist by intention, but happens over a wide range of areas that escape our awareness. Of course a great deal of active and conscious effort has gone into continuing our ancient heritage as well. It is my understanding that creative attempts to revive our tradition and to synthesize the ways of the East and the West have borne fruit, enough that there is ample reason to hope for significant accomplishments in this regard in the future. These efforts should not be overlooked if we are to study our culture as a whole.
My aim in the present article is to establish a logical approach to understanding Koreanculture through historical survey. Perhaps the task will be beyond my capacity, but there is reason enough to attempt at least an introductory essay on the matter. For as a scholar of Chinese classics, studying, writing and living in the 20th century, I want to affirm our cultural identity, in addition to my own identity, at this the turn of the century. This will hopefully be a point of departure for the inquiry into the fundamental problems concerning the national and cultural crisis of today.
1. The East Asian World as a Historical Realm
The views of Sin Chaeho, who held that all history is struggle, can be summed up inthe words, "History is the record of struggle between the self (a, 我) and the non-self(bia, 非我)." About Korea's national culture, he wrote that "Indirectly from India and directly from China, we (Korea) imported [foreign] culture, but how can it be that our national spirit and in turn, our national territory are reduced in proportion to the quantity of our import?" Sin seems to take on quite a negative and exclusive stance on exchange and mutual interrelation between nations.
This nationalist logic has been criticized by Hong Gimun for being idealistic (Sin Danjae Hakseol-ui Bipan ("A Cirtique Sin Danjae's Theory")). However, as the country's foremost problem at the time was the struggle for national emancipation from Japanese rule, it would being fair for us to try to interpret his view of history in a positive light. Moreover, we should give him credit for broadening our perspectives by emphasizing, yet not isolating, the self, while also postulating a coordinate concept of the "non-self." At the same time, we also need to take a closer look at the way in which he saw the outside world as it relates to the self exclusively as an object of strife, while failing to give any consideration to the friendship and interrelatedness of nations.
The truth is with men, and men do not differ according to nationality; so the men
of the East men, both Buddhists and Confucian, cross the ocean to the west and
attend to studies through jungyeok重譯.
This is the beginning of Choe Chiwon's Jin'gam Seonsa Bi ("The Epitaph of Seon Master Jin'gam"). Here we can see the progressive spirit of the people of Silla and their pursuit for an understanding of the borderless universality of men and truth. "Jungyeok" means to "second interpretation," which is what would have been necessary for those who advanced all the way to India in pursuit of the origin of Buddhism. This progressive spirit on the part of Choe Chiwon崔致遠 a thousand years ago was admired by the members of the Silhak School such as Bak Jega朴齊家; it was only in the modern era that his progressive spirit came to be eyed in a negative way. Even Choe Chiwon's views here fell under criticism for allegedly being sadaeju'ui事大主義 or mohwaju'ui慕華主義 (being submissive to the the "big country" or, China). Sin Chaeho would call Choe Chiwon "a slave to Chinese thought."
The poet Im Je林悌 used the pen name Baekho (The White Lake) and embodied a liberal spirit despite the fetters of medieval 16th-century Joseon. He left the a singular remark on his deathbed: "There is not one among sai palman四夷八蠻 (a collective name for "barbarians" along the border with China) that has not dominated as an imperial power; we are the only an exception. I belong to an insignificant nation, why need be mournful about my death?" His lamentation about the situation for the Joseon dynasty appears to originate in his frustration for "worship" for all things Chinese. In the meantime we can also see that he saw the entire East Asian world as being part of the same sphere.
According to Zhuangzi, the Chinese philosopher, "the saint does not discuss the world beyond liuge六合." Liuge, in itself, means the world around us, the universe. Here, however, it refers to a microcosmos with China as its center, the Gobi Desert to the north, Indochina to the south, the Japanese islands to the east, and the Kunlun Mountains to the west. The ancients could not conceive of that which existed beyond the realm of the liuge. It eluded even the grasp of the saint, the question over what was on the other side was excluded from philosophical discours. The ancient map of Tianxiatu ("World Map") also shows us a limited world centered on China. The sacred mulberry from which the sun is said to rise lies on the eastern border, and the pond where the sun sets is in the west; furthermore, the ambiguous names of mysterious legendary lands inscribed beyond the main perimeter. It is as if our ancestors have transcribed their world view on the map, and their perception is closely linked to East Asian world.
The Sino-centric world saw a long history of rulers alternating in relation to the power struggle between China and its frontier peoples, and each of the sai palman tried to claim it leaders were the rightful emperor. Korea, located at the eastern end of that world, was unable to avoid the convulsions of the rest of East Asian history. Just as Ming was replaced Yuan in 14th century China, Joseon replaced Goryeo on the Korean peninsula. Earlier, in the 7th century, the conflict among peninsula's Three Kingdoms of the was resolved in the course of the Northern and Southern Dynasties' integration into the Tang on the continent. The fall of Tang in the 10th century went hand in hand with the replacement of Silla by Goryeo. The subsequent circumstances of the modern era in the late 19th and the early 20th centuries would follow similar patterns.
I mention these chronological facts to note nothing other than the significance of the historical facts. To observe history without giving the outside trends their due regard, or only from the "combative" view of history, would be to miss the overall and complete picture of history. The historical realm of (North) East Asia was a microcosmos in itself, which formed a single civilization.