율곡의 이기론과 우파니샤드의 브라만(Brahman) 개념 비교 연구

초록

This study aims to examine the similarities and differences between East Asian Neo-Confucianism and Indian metaphysics through a comparative analysis of Yulgok Yi I’s (栗谷 李珥, 1536–1584) theory of Li (理) and Qi (氣) and the concept of Brahman in the Upanishads. Yulgok understood Li and Qi as the fundamental principles constituting the universe and human existence, explaining their relationship through the concepts of Li-Qi Bulsangni (理氣不相離, the inseparability of Li and Qi) and Li-Qi Bulsangjap (理氣不相雜, the non-confusion of Li and Qi). Furthermore, through the practices of Geogyeong-Gungni (居敬窮理, reverent mindfulness and investigation of principle) and Byeonhwa-Gijil (變化氣質, transformation of physical temperament), he argued that human beings can attain moral perfection through continuous self-cultivation and reflection. In contrast, the Upanishads describe Brahman as the ultimate reality characterized by “truth, consciousness, and infinity” (satyam jñānam anantam brahma), while emphasizing the identity between Brahman and Ātman through the doctrine of the unity of Brahman and self. According to the Upanishads, liberation (mokṣa) is attained through the removal of ignorance (avidyā) and the realization of true knowledge (jñāna). This study first analyzes the ontology, theory of mind, and cultivation theory in Yulgok’s philosophy, and then examines the concept of Brahman, the doctrine of the unity of Brahman and Ātman, and the structure of liberation in the Upanishads. Based on this analysis, the study compares the two traditions in terms of their concepts of ultimate reality, worldview, epistemology, and practical systems of self-transformation. The findings reveal that both Yulgok’s Li and the Upanishadic Brahman function as ultimate principles possessing both transcendence and immanence, and that both traditions share a non-dualistic perspective in which human existence is fundamentally connected to a deeper ultimate reality. Moreover, both philosophical systems affirm the possibility of human transformation and inner maturation beyond the limitations of ordinary existence. Nevertheless, significant differences also emerge. In the Upanishads, Brahman is understood as pure consciousness (cit) itself, and the ontological identity between the self and ultimate reality is emphasized. By contrast, Yulgok’s Li is understood primarily as the metaphysical ground of moral order and cosmic principle rather than as a conscious entity. Furthermore, while the Upanishadic path of liberation focuses on ontological awakening and metaphysical emancipation, Yulgok’s cultivation theory emphasizes moral practice and the perfection of character within human relationships and social ethics. This study aims to demonstrate that Yulgok Yi I’s theory of Li and Qi (理氣論) and the concept of Brahman in the Upaniṣads, despite emerging from different philosophical traditions, share a profound structure of resonance and conceptual affinity when examined through a comparative perspective.

키워드