Changing Korean Perceptions of on the Eve of Modern Transformation: The Case of Neo-Confucian Yangban Chai-sik Chung

Before the modern period, Koreans tended to view Japan with a mixture of antipathy toward a ruthless invader and condescension toward a more peripheral member of their -centered world. As that world began to change on the eve of the modern era, some reform-minded Korean intellectuals began to view Japan in a different light, see- ing its heterodox and its military culture as strengths rather than as marks of backwardness. By the eve of the colonial period, many looked to Japan as a model of how Koreans could adapt to the modern world without losing their national character. has not been free from foreign invasions throughout its history. China and especially the northern tribal groups, such as the Khitan, the Jiirchen, the Mongols, and the Manchus have invaded Korea. But most troublesome for Korea have been the repeated threats and invasions from the Japanese in the south. The Japanese pirate raids in the late fourteenth century, and especially Hideyoshi's destructive invasions (1592-1598), have left an indelible impres- sion on the minds of the Korean people. The Koreans transmitted the memory of the tragic invasions and the profound enmity that resulted from them from generation to generation through oral tradition. Among others, the story of the heroic Zen monk Samyöngdang who led a guerrilla war against Hideyoshi's army is the best known. In addition, many stories of anti-Japanese resistance were preserved and passed on, such as Imjinnok [Record of the Hideyoshi invasions] and Kwak Chae-u chön, the biography of a heroic general who fought against the Japanese invaders. Unlike the Chinese, the Khitan, the Mongols, or Manchus, the memory of whose invasions have faded over time, Japan has always impressed the Korean people as the primary enemy country.1 Behind this special anti-Japanese feeling is the Korean attitude of cul-

Korean Studies, Volume 19. ©1995 by University of Hawai'i Press. All rights reserved. 40KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 19 turai superiority and the habit of condescension to the Japanese. At the basis of this feeling of cultural superiority was the Korean belief in Confucianism and the sinocentric spatial symbolism and cosmology. In such symbolism and cosmology China was the natural center of ch'onha [all under heaven]. The Koreans understood that the Confucian moral ideals of the Five Relationships, the Three Bonds, and the rules of propriety dominated the sphere of Chinese culture. And Koreans distinguished China from the peripheral, barbarian world. They believed that China was the center, and all of the peripheral nations under heaven were to serve China. In terms of the spatial conception of center and periphery they associated the peripheral areas of China with the dwelling place of barbarians, beasts, and evil spirits.2 The Koreans took pride in being called by China the "little China" in the east that faithfully followed Confucianism. But they looked down upon Japan as culturally more backward than Korea because of its peripheral location, calling the Japanese barbarians and "beasts." The Koreans' historical self-understanding further reinforced such feelings of cultural superiority. They believed that it was through Korea that the Japanese had first learned of the more advanced culture from the con- tinent, such as Chinese characters, classical Chinese culture, and Mahayana Buddhism. Koreans also resentfully remembered the abduction of skilled Korean potters as of war, who had influenced the development of Korean ceramics in Japan, especially in Satsuma and Arita.3 Especially self-gratifying to the Korean scholar-officials was the fact that the Neo-Confucian philosophy of Zhu Xi was first introduced to Japan by Korean scholars. Kang Hang (1567-1618) was a of war who was captured by Hideyoshi's armies when they invaded Korea in 1592-1598. Brought to Japan, he later helped Fujiwara Seika (1561-1619) lay the founda- tion for the development of Tokugawa Neo-Confucianism. It was through Kang that Fujiwara and his fellow Confucian scholars learned to admire the systems of Confucian moral principles, rituals, and government.4 The Koreans took especially great pride in Yi T'oegye (1501-1570), the Zhu Xi of Korea, who was widely respected by the Japanese Confucian scholars. T'oegye exerted a profound and lasting influence on such Edo scholars as Fujiwara Seika, Hayashi Razan (1583-1657), Yamazaki Ansai (1618-1682), and Yokoi Shönan (1809-1869). As is evident in their travel records, the Korean envoys took special note of this fact because of their preoccupation with Confucian values. The Korean travelers in Iapan deplored Japan's lack of a civil service examination system for government officials. The lack of such a system of recruitment held back men of ability from distinguishing themselves in the world. They also noted with curiosity the lower of Confucian scholars compared to , doctors, and monks. They attributed this to Japan's military culture that belittled Confucian literati culture.5 In contrast, it is interesting that they disregarded me more advanced chung: Changing Perceptions of Japan4 1 state of Japanese accomplishments in industry, commerce, and technology. Shin Yu- (1681-?) visited Japan in 1719-1720 as an attaché of a Korean envoy. He was exceptional in reporting about how he was amazed to see a magnificent castle with ponds, moats, and bridges in Osaka, the old city of Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1537-1598). Hundreds of Buddhist temples, bridges, and luxurious homes of the and affluent people deeply impressed him. He marveled over a gorgeous palace of a prince with splendid gardens and a library well stocked with the Classics and all kinds of writings from China and Korea. Stores that sold the best wines, well-advertised pharmaceutical stores, and gaudy geisha houses were eye-opening things to him. It is interesting that Shin reported that the Japanese people loved lewd and beautiful things and that men and women in the streets were all clad in silks. He noted that the Osaka region benefited from active foreign trade and had the advantages of rivers, lakes, forests, and moats. Its fertile lands also deeply impressed him. They yielded varieties of rich agricultural products and minerals not found in abundance in Korea, such as gold, silver, copper, tin, and rare lumber.6 Chöng Yag-yong (1763-1836), a foremost Shirhak (Practical Learning) scholar, is known to have transcended the sinocentric worldview of his time more than many of his contemporaries. But even he was not entirely free from a view of Japan that was greatly constricted by Confucian tradition.7 Yet, unlike many of his contemporaries who had condescending views of Tokugawa Confucianism, Chöng was more well-informed about its develop- ment. He took special interest in the scholars of the school of Ancient Learn- ing (Kogaku), such as Ito Jinsai (1627-1705), OgyO Sorai (1666-1728), and Dazai Shundai (1680-1747). These scholars tried to achieve proper morality by reading original works to understand the ideas of the sages. In search of the unadulterated teachings of and Mencius, the Kogaku scholars criti- cized the systems of Zhu Xi and Wang Yangming. Chöng appears to have found some affinities between the general orientations of the Kogaku scholars and his own wish to return to the pristine teachings of Confucius and Mencius. This is well born out in his famous critiques of the contemporary five schools of learning (Ohangnon, namely, Söngnihak, the school of Nature and Princi- ple; classical exegesis; belles-lettres; learning for civil service examinations; and divinations), which had stifled the original teachings of the Duke of Zhou and Confucius.8 Chöng wrote an important book, Annotated Commentary on the Ana- lects of Confucius (Nonö kogümju).9 This was based on his extensive study of the ancient Han and Tang commentaries and the commentaries of the Analects. In this work Chöng makes frequent references to the exegeses of the Analects by the Kogaku scholars such as Ito Jinsai, Ogyü Sorai, and especially Dazai Shundai. But he had some reservations about their interpretations of the Chinese Classics, which he thought were "excellent, although distorted some- 42KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 19 times."10 Why did he think the views of the Kogaku school was "distorted sometimes?" One example, among others, is his criticism of Dazai's interpre- tation of the following passage in the Analects: "The people may be made to follow a path of action, but they may not be made to understand it."" Sharply distinguishing the Confucian junzi [gentlemen] from shaoren [petty men], Dazai maintained thatjunzi should rule shaoren. If, however, all the petty men were to become gentlemen, there would be no one left for gentlemen to govern. Thus Dazai clearly endorsed the idea that educated gentlemen should govern the ignorant masses. But Chöng thought that this was contrary to his belief that the masses were the basis of society. He judged, too, that Dazai's elitist view contradicted Confucius's view that "in teaching there should be no distinction of classes."12 Japan had been a military, or barbarian, nation without classic learning. And the Japanese had been without the moral knowledge of propriety, righ- teousness, and shame and modesty—therefore a cause for worry. But now that Japan had become a civilized nation, Chöng Yag-yong thought, there was no reason for Korea to worry about it. He reached this conclusion because the level of understanding of the Chinese Classics by the Kogaku scholars such as Ito Jinsai, Ogyü Sorai, and Dazai Shundai were now all "splendid."13 When Chöng thus expressed his optimistic view of Japan, however, he really be- trayed his lack of a fuller knowledge about the country. Many Korean envoys who had visited Japan had failed to notice the active development of industry in various clan regions. Similarly, Chöng was totally ignorant of such devel- opments in Japan. It is especially noteworthy that he was not even aware of the presence of Rangaku [Dutch studies]. For that matter, the Korean envoys to Japan did not know anything either about the cult of Western learning that had flourished in Japan after the mid-eighteenth century. Through the medium of Dutch books, some educated Japanese had begun to study European medi- cine, weaponry, astronomy, and technology. This means that Japan had come in touch with the development of the practical knowledge in the West much earlier than Korea. This difference goes far in explaining why Korea was very much behind Japan in "enriching the country and strengthening the army."14 More refreshing is Chöng's comment about the more open world of ideas in Tokugawa Japan than in Yi Korea. He knew that Japan was culturally a backward country that had first received books from the ancient Korean kingdom of Paekche (18 b.c.-a.d. 660). But he acknowledged that later, as Japan came to have direct access to books from China, it became a civilized country with notable Confucian scholars. He named OgyO Sorai as an espe- cially noteworthy scholar with many disciples. He suspected that Japan was now "more far-reachingly advanced" in Chinese learning than Korea. Tanta- lizingly, he did not explain why. But he attributed it to the fact that Japan did not have the system of civil service examinations.15 He also noted that Japan chung: Changing Perceptions of Japan43 was more freely able to excel in literature, rival China in military power, and achieve very effective and disciplined systems for social control. Again he attributed these successes to the fact that Japan did not have to suffer the fet- ters of the civil service examination system.16 What weighed on his mind was that the environment of Jap- anese thought was much more free and more diversified than that of Chosön Korea. Korea allowed only the Zhu Xi school to reign as orthodoxy. In Toku- gawa Japan, by contrast, Zhu Xi's philosophy coexisted along with the Wang Yangming school. In addition, the Zhu Xi school lived side-by-side with the school of Ancient Learning, the Eclectic school, and the school of Empirical Rationalism. Chöng felt a great sense of uneasiness and shame about the closed environment and retarded development of the intellectual life of his country.17 It is noteworthy that he could turn away from the inherited sinocen- tric cultural perspective to look at Iapan with an open mind. The fact that he could look at his received tradition more objectively was a remarkable depar- ture from his inherited intellectual environment. A sea change in the Korean view of Japan, however, came in the middle of the nineteenth century when Japan began to develop rapidly as a modern state bent on the conquest of Korea. In the 1870s and the early 1880s, the con- servative Confucian literati had continued to define the traditional Korean view of Japan and the outside world. Their motto was "revere China and expel the barbarians" (chonhwa yangi). Japan's tum to the West at this time made that country appear—in the eyes of these people—"the same with the West."18 But from 1874 all through the 1880s a small minority of yangban and chungin [middle people] intellectuals of Confucian Shirhak and Buddhist persuasions (such as Pak Kyu-su, Kang Wi, O Kyöng-sök, Yu -gi, Yi Tong-in) increasingly began to open their eyes to the realities of the outside world. These people overcame their hackneyed feelings of cultural superiority.19 Some of these reform-oriented intellectuals were moderate gradualists. They approached the problems of enlightenment, or development of "timely matters," within the confines of traditional Confucian values and frame of ref- erence. For example, Yun-shik (1835-1922), a prominent political figure of his time, clearly distinguished himself from more progressive leaders such as Kim Ok-kyun, Pak Yöng-hyo, So Chae-p'il, So Kwang-böm, and Hong Yöng-shik. Clinging to the traditional China-centered worldview, Kim Yun- shik criticized these men for replacing the ways of Yao, Shun, Confucius, and Mencius with the ways of the West. To Kim, these men, especially Kim Ok- kyun, appeared to be radicals who destroyed the heavenly principle, turning the inherited Confucian values upside down.20 The progressive leaders, however, discovered that Japan, which had turned to the West and its advanced civilization, was now a country that "parted with Asia." These leaders found out that the Japanese felt the same 44KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 19 contempt for backward Korea as the Koreans had felt toward the Japanese. They saw that the Confucian cultural yardstick by which they had measured Japan was behind the times. They now learned that the West ruled the world and that Western culture was the yardstick of national development. These reform-oriented intellectuals were the young advocates of "civili- zation and enlightenment" (munmyöng kaehwa) in the ill-fated Kapshin Coup of 1884, the first attempt at modernizing reforms in Korea. These people wanted to achieve an egalitarian social order, supplanting the old oligarchic, yangban-àomìnatea society.21 One of the reform movement leaders, Pak Yöng-hyo (1861-1939), had seen modern Japan in 1882 as a leading delegate of the Korean goodwill mission to Japan. There he took up the idea of free- dom and the popular rights of the people. After the abortive reform attempt of 1884, Pak fled to Japan. During a decade of exile in Japan he wrote the famous "Proposals for Reforming the Internal Affairs of Korea" (1888), call- ing for the enlightenment and modernization of Korea. Included in Diplomatic Documents of Japan, this is the most important and inclusive document that represents the ideals of "civilization and enlightenment" of the progressive reformers. Pak's reformist ideas were greatly influenced by, among others, the writings of Fukuzawa Yukichi, with whom Pak had personal contact for a con- siderable time. Especially noteworthy were the influences of Fukuzawa's Seiyöjijö [Conditions in the West, 1866], Bunmeiron no gairyaku [An outline of a treatise on civilization, 1876], and Gakumon no susume [The encourage- ment of learning, 1872-1 876]. 22 Pak learned from Fukuzawa the fundamental idea that the foundation for an independent and modern nation-state is enlightened people with knowl- edge of "literature, ability, and techniques." He realized that it was imperative to tap people's "vital energy" effectively. This would be made possible by pro- viding them with a "due measure of freedom" and rights through a modern, universal legal system. Under the influences of Fukuzawa's Gakumon no susume and Bunmeiron no gairyaku, Pak especially underscored the point that Korea had to borrow modern education from other sources. For it was modern education that could inculcate the idea of people's rights and responsibility for national independence. To promote popular freedoms and rights, Pak also advocated the abolition of traditional hierarchical social discrimination, class and factional endogamy, and . There was one thing that set Pak apart from Fukuzawa. Despite his great indebtedness to the Japanese enlight- enment thinker, Pak had remained more Confucian at heart than Fukuzawa, who refused to remain sheltered in Confucian cultural values.23 The influence of Fukuzawa was also much evident in the reformist thought of Yu Kil-chun (1856-1914). Yu was another eminent munmyöng kaehwa leader, who visited Japan in 1881 as a member of Korea's observa- tion mission to Japan (shinsa yuramdan) and as a student (1881-1882). Along chung: Changing Perceptions of Japan45 with Pak's aforementioned "Proposals," Yu's Söyu kyönmun [Things seen and heard during the journey to the West, 1889] is a well-known landmark in Korean modern reformist thought. This book echoed such ideas of Fukuzawa as natural rights, the spirit of individual independence, freedom, popular rights, the need for improved education, and national independence.24 We should note that Fukuzawa's influence upon these Korean reformers preceded by more than a decade his impact on Chinese reformers like Liang Qichao. Another salient point to note is that Korea had always been much more dependent on China than had Iapan, which was more geographically separated from the continent. For hundreds of years, Chinese learning and the stratified traditional social system for which it was philosophically responsible had stifled the spirit of independence and initiative from within. Instead, they en- couraged a servile attitude among the common people. This particularly weighed on the Korean reformers. Yu Kil-chun for one, like his Japanese mentor Fukuzawa, maintained that it was for lack of such a spirit that the Koreans had lagged behind. And he insisted that Koreans had to go through a moral revolution that unleashed in them a spirit of initiative and independence.25 Yu particularly emphasized the belief in reciprocal duty involving Heaven-endowed equal natural rights, reason, and progress, which is central to the tradition of the French Enlighten- ment. It is also evident that an individualistic philosophy and the American creed of freedom and equality deeply influenced Yu. For these thoughts Yu owed much to Fukuzawa's Seiyöjijö, Gakumon no susume, and Bunmeiron no gairyaku. There is one thing that stands out in the modernizing attempts of Yu and, for that matter, Pak: despite their modernizing ideals, they were more Confucian than their Japanese counterpart Fukuzawa. They were more inclined to search for cultural equivalents to Western ideas in their Neo-Con- fucian language than Fukuzawa was. But their efforts to render the cultural text of Western civilization into Korean cultural equivalents were futile: they fell short of bridging the gap between the old things of Korea and the new things of the West. It is also ironic that the reformers' attempts to look to Japan for help in modernizing Korea eventually made them pawns of imperial Japan. In the eyes of reform-minded yangban Confucian intellectuals, the main hindrance on the Korean road to modern development was hackneyed Zhu Xi orthodoxy. For example, Yi Ki (1848-1909), a scholar-patriot in the tradition of the Shirhak, represented a view common to the reform-oriented intellec- tuals at the turn of the century. Yi judged that the scholarship of such exclu- sionist wijöng eh 'öksa [defending orthodoxy and rejecting heterodoxy] literati as Ki Chöng-jin, Ch'oe Ik-hyön, Song Pyöng-sön, and others was no longer "fit for the prevailing conditions" of the time (shise). Such scholarship had to be discarded. Yi attacked the old learning because it had nurtured the root of 46KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 19

Chinese toadyism (sadae, serving the great). He felt that it would take a new generation of children nurtured in new learning for a new Korean society to emerge. Such learning had to be a new trinitarian education for intelligence, moral virtue, and physical strength.26 Pak Ün-shik (1859-1925) was a noted Confucian reformer, thinker, writer and acting president of the Korean Provisional Government in exile. It was Pak who more specifically explained his ideal of new education to save the Korean people and state from impending national doom. He was deeply immersed in orthodox Zhu Xi tradition. But toward 1898 he went through a fundamental reformation of his thought, confirming the conviction that Zhu Xi orthodoxy was a passé thought.27 He articulated this in his well-known essay, "On the Quest for Confucian Reformation" (Yugyo kushin non, 1909). In this essay he proposed Wang Yangming's thought as an alternative to the now-sterile Zhu Xi orthodoxy that was mired in scholastic metaphysics. Wang's thought, he reasoned, had promised fresh moral meaning, critical and creative spirit, dynamic action, and individual freedom. Wang emphasized the unity of knowledge and action, which encouraged learning by doing, an inquisitive attitude, and daring applications of knowledge. Pak thought that Wang's thought would help provide Korea with a fresh spiritual climate in which scientific knowledge and the values of work and achievement could germinate and grow.28 What Pak attempted to do was to vitalize the neglected and fledgling Shirhak strand in Confucian tradition by integrating it with the disfavored Wang Yangming school. He also tried to fit these ideas to English positivism and the French Enlightenment ideal of progress. Pak turned his attention to the role that Wang's thought had played in the modern transformation of Japan. He noted such Yangming followers of Japan as Nakae Töju, Saigö Takamori, Yoshida Shöin, and Öshio Heihachirô with great interest. He observed with particular interest that some of these people had been the leaders of Japan's Meiji Restoration, inspired by the courage that came from their deep belief in Wang's thought.29 Pak also confirmed that Wang's thought had a significant part in modern Chinese political thought. He was heartened to learn that such reform leaders as Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao, and Tan Sitong were sympa- thetic to Wang's thought. For they discovered in it elements that had much in common with current Western thought.30 Pak examined Wang's thought to find a new cultural system for a wealthy and strong Korea, perhaps stimulated by the example of the Meiji reformers. This gives very dramatic testimony to the fundamental change taking place in the perspectives toward Japan and the West on the part of some more reform-oriented yangban Confucian intellectuals. Faced with imperial Japan's impending conquest of Korea, Pak also made a devastating critique of the traditional value system of Chosön. He chung: Changing Perceptions of Japan47 especially condemned the belittling of martial valor and military power. For national survival he insisted that Korea should learn from Japan and its bushidö [military code of honor], which had instilled in its citizens national bravery, patriotism, and group solidarity. He attributed to bushidö both Japan's victory over China and Russia and its progress in modernizing.31 This new respect for the Japanese military ethos was a remarkable departure from the traditional Korean yangban disdain of the martial spirit and military culture of Japan. This more than anything else was a tremendous change in attitude toward Japan in the late nineteenth century. Another noteworthy fact is that Pak himself was a leading figure in Korea's national resistance to Japanese imperialism. It was he who wrote the famous Hanguk tongnip undongji hyolsa [The bloody history of the Korean independence movement]. Pak was one of the minority of Confucians at the turn of the century who could see and under- stand how the world had changed around them. There was another noteworthy characteristic in the Korean perception of Japan at this time. As the impact of the modern world had begun to be felt, some Korean intellectuals took to task the growth of an indiscriminate and subservient attitude toward things modern or Western. The Hwangsöng shin- mun (Capital Gazette) was founded by Namgung Ok in 1898 to express the voice of the moderate Confucian neotraditional reform element within the Independence Club (Tongnip hyöphoe). This paper catered to the conser- vatively oriented reform element who found its moderate Confucian tone congenial. Along with its editor, Chang Chi-yön, Pak Ün-shik was a frequent contributor. In its editorial of 17 July 1910, the Gazette discussed the pattern of Korean acceptance of things foreign. The editorial divulged that the Christian community in Korea was prone to revere foreigners, losing the spirit of their own nation and culture. It maintained that Koreans had to learn from the Japa- nese how to maintain their cultural identity in the face of foreign challenges. It named Japan as the model to emulate in accepting ideas and materials. It pointed out that Japan had a peculiar "quality" that adapts other religions to its own. The editorial added that Japan could adapt other religions to its own "under the influence of its own national character without becoming the slave of a doctrine." The editorial continued: An individual who is deficient in independence (chajusöng) and self-reliance (cha- sinyök) cannot help preserve the ability of his country to be independent. Speaking of Korea and Japan, our country Korea has historically been ahead of Japan in religious and scholarly discoveries. However, in the capacity of its nation and people to be inde- pendent, Korea is far inferior to Japan. Why is this so? Whatever nation's scholarship she may learn from, Japan has borrowed from others only those elements that it needs to produce an amalgam with her own national character. Japan has done so without being reduced to other nation's religion and scholarship and thus losing her own spirit of bushidö. Therefore, when Buddhism comes to Japan it becomes the Buddhism of 48KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 19

Japan, and not the Buddhism of India. When Christianity comes to Japan it becomes the Christianity of Japan, and not that of the West. Similarly, when Wang Yangming's thought comes to Japan, it becomes Wang Yangming's thought in Japan, and not that of China ...This is the attitude of independence and self-reliance in Japanese religious and scholarly circles. So the nation's and the people's ability to be independent is also firm and strong. Our Korean people have ample religious faith and scholarly ability. But whenever we believe in the religions and study the scholarship of others, we become enslaved to them. This unfortunate lack of an attitude of independence and self-reliance has led us to a condition in which there is no functional independence for the state or the people.32 These reform-oriented yangban Confucian intellectuals did not just face the changing realities passively; they took the initiative to comprehend them more actively. They had the courage to look at their own inherited society and tradition from the point of view of other cultures and civilizations. But in ordering and understanding the perceived realities, they could not entirely go beyond the inherited Confucian concepts and categories. To attain a more real- istic grasp of the modern world in the making, they had to free themselves from the shackles of their own inherited worldview and conceptual categories. Their changing perception of Japan lacked this radical self-awareness and conscious reaching for new models to understand the world in change.

NOTES An earlier version of this work was presented at the Meiji Studies Conference, held on 6-8 May 1994 in Cambridge, Massachusetts, sponsored by the Edwin O. Reis- chauer Institute of Japanese Studies, Harvard University. 1 . For the typical example of the traditional Korean attitude toward Japan, see Pak Un-shik's Hanguk tongnip undongji hyölsa [The bloody history of the Korean independence movement] in Pak Ün-shik chönsö [Collected works of Pak Ün-shik], 3 vols. (: Tanguk taehakkyo ch'ulp'anbu, 1975), vol. 2, pp. 509-512 (hereafter cited as Chönsö). 2.Hwasö sönsaeng munjip [Collected literary works of Yi Hang-no], 42 kwön, 22 ch'aek (1899), kwön 25 (Chapchö), pp. 18ab. See also Lien-sheng Yang, "Historical Notes on the Chinese World Order," in The Chinese World Order, ed. by John K. Fair- bank (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968), pp. 20-33. 3.Pak, Chönsö, vol. 1, pp. 510-511; Yi Wön-sik, Chosön t'ongshinsa [Korean diplomatic envoys to Japan] (Seoul: Minümsa, 1991), pp. 325-333; Kim T'ae-jun, Imjinnan kwa Chosön munhwa üi tongjöm [The war with Japan and the transmission of Korea culture to Japan] (Seoul: Hanguk yönguwön, 1977), chap. 2. 4.Abe Yoshio, Nihon Shushigaku to Chosen [Japan's Zhu Xi learning and Chosön] (: Tokyo daigaku shuppankai, 1965), chap. 1. See also Kang Chae-ön's article on Tokugawa Confucianism and Kang Hang in Hanguk munhwa kyoryusa [A history of Korean cultural exchange], ed. by Kim T'ae-jun et al. (Seoul: Minmungo, 1991), pp. 246-264. 5.Abe, Nihon Shushigaku to Chosen. See also Shin Yu-han, Haeyu rok [Travels in Japan], trans, by Chang Sang-söp ( Seoul: Chöngümsa, 1976), especially pp. 207- 209; Kang Chae-ön, Hanguk üi kaehwa sasang [Korea's enlightenment thought], trans, by Chöng Ch'ang-yöl (Seoul: Pibong ch'ulp'ansa, 1981), pp. 88-89. chung: Changing Perceptions of Japan49

6.Shin, Haeyu rok, pp. 110-111. 7.Chöng owed his knowledge of Tokugawa Neo-Confucianism, especially of the school of Ancient Learning, to such Shirhak scholars as and An Chöng-bok. See Kang Chae-ön, "Chöng Tasan üi ilbon kwan" [Chöng Yag-yong's view of Japan] in Chosön üi söhaksa [A history of the Western learning in Chosön] (Seoul: Minümsa, 1990), pp. 231-235. 8.Chöng Yag-yong, Chöng Tasan chönsö [Collected works of Chöng Tasan], 3 vols. (Seoul: Munhön p'yönch'an wiwönhoe, 1961), vol. 1, pp. 227La-230Ua (here- after cited as Tasan chönsö). 9.This appeared in 40 kwön but is regrouped as 10 kwön in Chöng Tasan chönsö, vol. 1, pp. 695Ua-920Ub. 10.Chöng, Tasan chönsö, vol. 1, pp. 237Lb-238Ub; Kang, "Chöng Tasan üi ilbon kwan," pp. 236, 237-238. 11.James Legge, The Analects of Confucius, vol. 1 of The Chinese Classics (reprinted from the last editions of Oxford University Press), 5 vols. (: Hong Kong University Press, 1970), p. 211. 12.Chöng, Tasan chönsö, vol. 1, p. 768Lab; Legge, The Chinese Classics, vol. l,p. 305. 13.Chöng, Tasan chönsö, vol. 1, pp. 237Lb-238Ub. 14.See Kang, "Chöng Tasan üi ilbon kwan," p. 239. 15.Chöng, Tasan chönsö, vol. 1, p. 438Ua. 16.Chöng, Tasan chönsö, vol. 1, pp. 229Ub-La. 17.This stance comes out clearly throughout his critiques of the five schools of learning. See Chöng, Tasan chönsö, vol. 1, pp. 227La-230Ua, especially his comment on the School of Nature and Principle, pp. 227La-228Ua. See also vol. 1, pp. 238Ub- La, and Kang, "Chöng Tasan üi ilbon kwan," p. 237. 18.Ch'oe Ik-hyön (1833-1906), an outspoken advocate of wijbng ch'öksa [defending orthodoxy and rejecting heterodoxy], made this point most poignantly. See his Myonam chip [Collected works], 24 kwön (1933), kwön 3 (So), pp. 33a-41b (1876.1.22). See also Hatada Takashi, "Kindai ni okeru Chösenjin no Nihon kan" [The Korean view of Japan in modern times], Shisö 520 (October 1967), pp. 59-73; Tabo- hashi Kiyoshi, Kindai Nissen kankei no kenkyü [A study on modern Korean-Japanese relations], 2 vols. (Keijö: Chosen sötokufu chüsüin, 1940), vol. 1, pp. 511-512, 514— 515. 19.Yi Kwang-nin [ Kwang-rin], Hanguk kaehwa sasang yöngu [Studies on Korean enlightenment thought] (Seoul: Ilchogak, 1979), pp. 2^14; Kang, Hanguk üi kaehwa sasang, pp. 192-201. 20.Kim Yun-shik, Sok ümch'öngsa [Continuing cloudy and clear history] (Seoul: Kuksa p'yönch'an wiwönhoe, 1960), p. 156. 21.See entries in Hansöng sunbo (Seoul: Söul taehakkyo ch'ulp'anbu, 1966); Kyö Zai-ken (Kang Chae-ön), "Kindai Chosen ni okeru jiyü minken shisö no keisei" [The formation of ideas of freedom and rights in recent Korea], Shisö 570 (December 1971), pp. 99-102. 22.For 's memorial, see "Boku Eikyô Chosen naisei kaikaku ni kansuru kenpakushö" (dated 24 February 1884) in Nihon gaikö bunshö [Diplomatic documents of Japan] (Tokyo: Nihon kokusai rengö kyökai, 1949), vol. 21, no. 106, pp. 292-311. See also Aoki Köichi, "Chosen kaika shisö to Fukuzawa Yukichi no chosaku" [The Korean enlightenment thought and the writings of Fukuzawa Yukichi], Chösen gakuhö 52 (July 1969), pp. 35-92. 23.For Fukuzawa's influence on Pak, I draw heavily from my forthcoming 50KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 19 paper, "Korea's Search for Civil Society: Problems of Perception and Adaptation," which was presented at the Conference on Civil Society in , held on 23-25 October 1992 in Montreal, sponsored by the Joint Committee for European-American Cooperation in East Asian Studies. See also Aoki, "Chösen kaika shisö." 24.Yu Kil-chun, Söyu kyönmun, reprint ed. (Seoul: Kyöngin munhwasa, 1969). 25.Yu, Söyu kyönmun, p. 149. 26.Yi Ki, Haehak yusö [Posthumous collected works], Hanguk saryo ch'ongsö, no. 3 (Seoul: Kuksa p'yönch'an wiwönhoe, 1955), pp. 71-80. For similar arguments, see the editorials (nonsöl) in Hwangsöng shinmun, Y2, 13 January, 25 April 1909, and 3 May 1906; Taehan maeil shinbo, 28 November 1909; and also a three-part editorial on "Patriotism" in Mansebo, 26-28 July 1909. 27.Pak Ün-shik, "Hak üi chilli nun üi ro tchoch'a kuhara" [Seek the truth of learning through doubt], Tonga Ubo, 3, 6 April 1925. This is also found in Pak, Chönsö, vol. 3, pp. 196-200. See also Pak Ün-shik, "Ha o tongmun cheu" [Congratulating fellow students], Söu hakhoe wölbo, vol. 1, p. 1, or Pak, Chönsö, vol. 3, pp. 31-33. About Pak's intellectual pilgrimage, see Chönsö, vol. 3, pp. 44-47, 286-287. 28.Pak Ün-shik, "Yugyo kushin non" [On the quest for Confucian reformation], Söbuk hakhoe wölbo 10 (March 1909), pp. 13-15; or Pak, Chönsö, vol. 3, pp. 47-48. See also Pak's letter to the Director of the Wang Yangming Society of Japan in Pak, Chönsö, vol. 3, pp. 237-238. For more detailed discussion of Pak's reformist thought, see Chai-sik Chung, "On the Quest for Confucian Reformation," Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 49 (June 1979), pp. 1-38. 29.Pak, Chönsö, vol. 2, pp. 165-166. See also Pak's second letter to the Direc- tor of the Wang Yangming Society of Japan in Chönsö, vol. 3, pp. 235-236. 30.Editorial, Hwangsöng shinmun, 30 January 1909; "Shimhak kangyön" [Lectures on learning of the mind-and-heart], Söbuk hakhoe wölbo 10 (March 1909), pp. 19-21. 31.Pak Ün-shik, "Munyak chi p'e nun p'ilsang ki kuk" [Pursuit of cultural dis- sipation leads to loss of country], Sou hakhoe wölbo 10 (September 1907), pp. 1-6. This is also found in his Chönsö, vol. 3, pp. 94-96. See also Editorial, Hwangsöng shinmun, 31 March 1904. 32.Editorial, Hwangsöng shinmun, 8 January 1910. For the editorials calling for consciousness of the spirit of Korea, see Hwangsöng shinmun, 20 March 1908. See also Chai-sik Chung, "On the Quest for Confucian Reformation," pp. 13-14.