How to Take Notes

Recently there have been a slew of articles that made me feel like a kid again.  There was an article that taught me how to tie my shoes, one that showed me how to tie a scarf, and another on how to use toilet paper properly.  I've re-learned so many things recently it'd be embarrassing to continue.

So here I am, an almost - but at the time I started writing this not quite - 30 year old (re)learning how to tie my shoes and live life.  For a quick second I thought I was some oddball outlier.  But then I started to take a look around - like really looked closely at everything again - and I was surprised (in a not so surprised way) to see so many people re-learning how to tie their shows, for reals.

When it comes to basic tasks and activites from eating to excersing and thinking, my bet is that most of us learned how to do these things by simply just following along.  Following whom?  Our parents, siblings, relatives, teachers, and friends of course.  And that's generally good enough.   We learn a small, but crucial aspect of a task, and as we get older we develop and build out our skill/know how of that task.

Let's take the example of note taking as a case-in-point.   Most learn to take notes in elementary school or middle school.  We were advised to keep seperate notebooks for each specific subject.  As we matriculated through high school, university and beyond, this idea of 'seperation' probably continued.  Maybe you now keep an array of different pens to identify different subjects, or use a specific filing technique when you save notes and documents electronically or perhaps you have different sized post-its to catagorize different thoughts.  Or maybe you are "that person" who meticulously labels mini-tabs before you stick then on pages like bookmarks with medieval metadata.

With this hypothetical example at least, the guiding philosophy - that thought at the center of what note taking (as we learned it) is - has been 'seperation of different thoughts and ideas for some specific purpose.'  And it works, up to a point.  How many of you still have your notebooks from middle school, let alone from university or even your planner from last year?  Trick question; it doesn't matter because even if you still have your old notebooks, or a hard drive full of documents, they have probably been left untouched.  Everything written down or saved now remains lost and covered in that original seperation; such loss is built into and anticipated by the very way we learned to take notes.

Things are getting a little deep, no?  I mean, I  thought we were just talking about note taking right?!  Well, we're about to get even deeper.  We will now represent, symbolically, what note taking always has been but never thought of as being, what note taking has been to us, and what it could be in order to show a better way to take notes.

If you take a wide lens towards what note taking - or the recording of anything for that matter - has been throughout the history of humankind, it has simply been a long, running recording of thoughts & ideas.  These recorded thoughts are all essentially functions: they are all linked to some specific thing (e.g. a passage in a book, a specifc topic, a particular lecture, an assignment, a to-do etc...).  On top of that, over-arching relations run through these thoughts and ideas (e.g. time, place, a broad topic, a general thing, mood or behaviour).  Much like a river, recorded notes pierce through time, are firmly connected with and touch their sorrounding environs and flow through space timelessly.  This we can symbolize with the character '流'.

Now let's try to represent the essence of what note taking has been.  The philosophy we etched out above should help.  The driving force, the reason why we take notes is 'for some specific end' and thus we may re-present this idea with the symbol which has been used to convey acting for some things sake: '爲'.

Despite the shortcommings with taking notes focused solely on some specific end, it's hard to entirely refute the positive value or effect - however short lasting they may be - in our drive towards a better way.  On the contrary, a synthesis should be what we strive for.  Thus, for simplicity we can simply add a negation repesented with the symbol '無' to what we have thought note taking has been so that the resulting essence of the couplet is one where a specific end does not exist, but in the absence of such an end all ends are possible or '無爲'.

When all elements are combined we are left with '流無爲' or a flowing non-doing (i.e. not doing something for some specific end; doing something with all ends being possible without any any end being a direct impetus, focus nor a consideration of the original act).  This is best exhibited in the 流無爲 note-taking app Diaro.  Try it out.  Use it.  Carry it with you.  Save it in the cloud.  Add and update this flowing list across platforms and devices.  Pay a little money to use it, forever.  Give it to your children.

Basic tasks and how well we carry them out form the foundation of every other activity we engage in.  If we can do basic things better, it would make sense that any unlocked efficiency could ripple through every other thing we do.  Today, the best ways of doing things are readily available and shared through the internet.  So, if we can learn the best way to do the basics, we no longer need to settle for what's simply been good enough.

Re-do

Walking across once well worn floors,
now brittle and frail, their creaks shriek for
time to leave them be,
and so I leave.

In dark basement, beer in hand, words on tap,
I channel my 李白, illuminating the shared gap
between τέχνη and ροίησις,
whilst violence rages beyond the borders that keep us.

Pittering late afternoon rain patters the city,
blanketed in mist amidst the howl of all things windy
from whence
time has slipped past since.

The last gasps of breath escape persed lips, vision fading before
brothers of other shores
destroy and claim amore;
waves crashing, stealing fore.

Swirling silent it spins, blackness blanketing its evermore,
nothing to be heard for nothing is forevermore;
time sleeps, no stir, no beat,
and so I leave.


李白       : Li Bai
τέχνη    : Techne
ροίησις : Poïesis

Words on tap

What are you doing? Or, what are you really doing? And, what do you really want to be doing?

Walking across once well worn floors, now brittle and frail, their creaks shriek for time to leave them be, and so I leave.

In dark basement, beer in hand, words on tap, I channel my 李白 and illuminate the secret affinity between τέχνη and ροίησις, all the while violence rages outside and past the borders beyond...

What are we doing? Or, what are we really doing? And, what will we be (really) doing?

Cherry Blossoms

Cherry Blossoms seem to engender a near mythical appreciation.  They are the definitive message bearer to the masses that the long, hard Winter has fallen to the sudden, surprise, early thrust spear of Spring.  The blossoms themselves will lead any casual observer to those memories - or fantasies for those as-yet-uninitiated - of youth when one first becomes aware of the opposite sexes surfeit of supple, unblemished smoothness.  This in turn is also, apart from being the place of their actual origin, probably what leads many to associate the blossoms with Japan and its culture.

That said, many other countries as well, including South Korea and the United States, have unofficial periods wherein the blooming of these trees is announced, celebrated and enjoyed by its citizenry.  These celebrations are more natural in that they are informal and lacking governmental or organizational auspices - which is to say that they do not take place within a conspicuous human enframing.  It is nature itself that calls to man as it were, to come hither to catch a glimpse of perfection, which if the blossom itself is any indication only occurs in youth.  Those so lucky to actually witness that moment, and it really is The Moment when the blossoms are in full bloom - and by full bloom I am not talking about the early, awkward stages of blooming when their skinny, pointed limbs are all too clearly visible and I am especially not talking about the later stage when the ugly, green leaves, the body hair if you will, poke through the perfect skin of blossoms that just form a complete, seemingly impenetrable orb of angelic whiteness around those awkward limbs - is to be bestowed with and at the same time burdened by Truth.  And it is probably for this reason why many will simply pay it no mind and miss it altogether.

We lateborn, unfortunately, are no longer able to readily receive Truth let alone begin to comprehend it.  Just try asking yourself what you believe Truth is or means.  A few mental stuttering starts heading nowhere, probably followed by an anecdote of modern usage that goes something like the following: truth is something agreed upon, ideally based on fact, and that upon hearing or reading usually elicits a "Yeah, (I think) that is true" or something to that effect.  Or maybe those of you who hail from institutions with latinate mottos (full disclosure: the motto of my alma mater, Korea University, is 'Libertas, Justitia, Veritas') will pay heed to the fact that Truth as spoken today in most romantic languages at least, derives from the Latin 'Veritas'.  (The etymological origins of 'truth' as spoken in English, it should be noted, shares a closer affinity than we would like to admit with 'faith' and even 'loyalty', which is food enough for thought itself).  That said, I don't know of anyone who actually knows let alone can indicate how exactly Veritas was thought of when it was still part of a living vernacular.  

Veritas was not an original, thoughtful construct in Roman times, however, it was the translation of the Greek 'Aletheia' into Roman thought and as a result this thoughtful Greek Word has been brought into our modern language in an equally violent manner being called 'Truth'.  To put it simply, the Greek word speaks of an "unconcealedness" or literally "the state of not being hidden". Moving fore, treading closer to the danger, and not for the mere purpose of highlighting etymological similarities, although such similarities cannot be said to not exist, I would like to briefly touch upon 眞理 or Zhenli or 진리.  There are probably many ways to think through this word, or set of characters, and the argument could probably be made as to whether one should even try to think through the couplet or instead focus on one character at a time or even if such an attempt should be made at all!

Shall we not at least try to take a leap, perhaps even a leap of faith towards what may be true? A good place to start along a way to thinking, generally, is through the thoughts of an actual thinker.  Regarding '眞', Zhuangzi (莊子) has already thought this character through as meaning 'Every-thing as it is' or '있는 그대로' in Korean.  The second character, a compound of the radicals 玉 + 里, that when taken in isolation respectively indicate a precious gem and a village.  Together, nowadays, when combined the resulting '理 ' is translated as either 'control' or 'logic', but these translations, especially the former, are ex post facto derivations.  Derived from what? In both cases, the original gem and village denote the 'explicit implicitness' or the concealed nature of both objects.  In the case of a precious gem, actually what is emphasized and always apparent first is the rough stone with the gem itself being unseen and only revealed later. A village is always only a village, and an area only comes to be called a village by virtue of the inhabitants that often exist in obscurity, or concealedness therein. So to be clear, the aspect of control that the above character has come to embody happened after, and only after the rough exerior of the gem or the nameless inhabitants of a village were forgotten in the sense that it became so simple to control the attaining of the gem itself or the groups of contained people.  

The above attempt at beginning to think through '眞理', which now that it is safe to say is an approximation of Truth in both Chinese, Japanese and Korean, was given solely as food for thought. In this moment the matter at hand, however, is Cherry Blossoms.  Cherry Blossoms, as mentioned at the outset, tend to evoke associations of Japan and its culture.  As a matter of fact, the Japanese have for centuries made it a practice to picnic or sojourn under blooming Cherry Blossoms.  In their traditional poetry, Cherry Blossoms were expressed reverentially by the single character denoting all flowers '花' for more than a millennia and some centuries.  Why? Well, I guess, since '花' is composed of '艹' a radical simply demarcating something as a plant and '化' symbolizing man becoming man from man, then the Japanese must therefore have had an original, intimate experience wherein the Cherry Blossoms, and particularly Cherry Blossoms in full bloom came to represent not just plants that become unconcealed from out of the concealement that exists and is protected within plants which they in turn again appear within, but also that opening into what is concealed in man that allows man to become unconcealed as such.  Or were you asking why Japanese picnicked beneath Cherry Blossoms in full bloom? Or did I answer that question too?

Unconcealedness needs concealedness.  What is concealed is therefore no less true than what is unconcealed.  The long, hard Winter that is now forgotten, out of sight and mind, has allowed the Beauty of Unconcealment to shine forth in full bloom by concealing itself.  Does the poetry of the Japanese mean as much when they employ '花' to represent Cherry Blossoms?  Who can say?  Some light may befall our blind struggles fore if we remember poetry has always been Song. Laudes is the Latin name for songs.  Laudare is a eulogy or praise.  Maybe the ancient Greek myths were just long poems that were singing, praising, eulogizing, remembering what has been and thus what could be again and Japanese Poems are myths along the Same vein.  If so, and even if not, I like to think of Cherry Blossoms as our Myth of Life, a life that may oft be forgotten, but will always be remembered, if not knowingly.

P.S. The Japanese call and know 'word' as 言葉 or petal(s) of saying...

Human Experiences As Experiential Humans

People just don't know. People are either afraid of or have no fear of what they don't know. Case in point: weed. Many are vehemently opposed to it whilst the rest are either users puffing away with no fear or are one of those who don't or no longer smoke, but are still nonetheless taking the idea of weed lightly; read without fear (of it's weight: importance).  

So what does 'knowing' look like? To tread upon a closely related, but slightly more enlightened path let's take the well known subject of wine up. Wine is not just a substance; it is far more. How much more? To avoid a long diatribe, I simply ask of you to think upon what man has come to know of wine. A lot. Next I pose this simple question, "Of what we 'know' in regards to what wine is, is wine limited to that knowledge, is it merely something that can have certain attributes listed, varietals evaluated, etc...?". Surely not, it is something to be experienced, fully. Experience means eundo assequi, to obtain something along the way, to attain something by going on a way. 

So what is reached by the individual who undergoes an experience with wine? Not mere knowledge. Granted. Obtained is a relation of oneself to wine's manifold essence. A relation should not be confused with a mere standing in front of a thing, although that is the essence of what an idea is, but a relation in the sense that what is experienced cannot occur or come to light the same if one aspect were different. Thus we can say that each experience is fundamentally different, in an essentially inseparable subjective and objective sense.  

From such an experience we have in our mind, and moreover we have impressed upon our senses (not in the sense of possessing a mere object) an idea of what wine then is. Idea, eidos in the Greek, in the sense that what remains can only remain from the originary experience; it is that experience always and forever more. 

But, it may rightfully be objected, others can say that they too, even without physically experiencing something, say ganja, and can still have an idea about something. Surely. Can one argue against them? If all they mean to say is that they have the ability to sense, in the sense that they are able to turn towards a certain call or scent, and as such a turning towards something is inherently a standing with or against something or what we alluded to earlier as a 'standing-in-relation-with', then yes they too can have that 'idea' as well. That not withstanding, however, their 'idea' to put it lightly, has no weight. Thus their claim to their idea, whilst a valid one in regards to what an idea is, lacks importance and weight when con-sidered widely.  

Nowadays, however, people are fucking retarded; they wrongly assert the claim 'everyone is entitled to have their own idea' to mean 'everyone is correct in their ability to have and maintain an idea' no matter how light an idea's inherent importance may be. No one can deny funadamently the ability of an idea to impact others given what we have said in regards to what the essence of an idea is, but the fact that people feel like their idea is important when we said earlier most people don't truly know the weight of something because they have not, they do not know what it means to have a 'true experience' is clear evidence of how soft people are today. 

Experiencing, as it should be apparent by now, necessarily goes beyond what we conceive of as being physical towards a deeper, yet fully related, thinking experience where the true importance of something becomes apparent, appears be-fore: only with you (thus with all???). Such an undertaking, as it should be, is not easy; it's hard as a rock is heavy(重). One cannot take this lightly, and if you cannot take something lightly you should be con-cerned perhaps even fearful of what is to be con-fronted as it is what is most important.

Thus fear, as being that which hinders one from seeing what truly lies before oneself on the path towards something is what needs to be overcome, what one needs(必要) to truly experience as being that which has been overcome to help give weighty-necessity (重要) or importance to an experience; leading to transcendence. Inherently, where fear is, security can not exist, as fear should force one into caring about it upon being truly con-fronted. 

Secure, sine-cure, meaning literally: without care. The only way to overcome fear is to step into it, or better yet by taking a (originary) leap into it (Ur-sprung). A gap separates you from what lies before, thus a leap, perhaps to say it clearer, a leap of faith is necessary? Not a blind leap into the unknown, but into what always has been. Experiences, whence truly experienced, take us back to the origin by lighting the path be-fore of what is, always has been and what will continue to be: the weightiest(最重要) of all. 

So why do so many people not care??? Is there nothing to fear any longer? Do people know, truly and essentially, how to care? Or do people merely have a faint idea left over, a vestigial memory if you will, from sometime or someone who really cared that allows them to have a claim, regardless of how tenuous or hollow it may be, to 'know' about caring and thus blindly believe that they do care? Do people want to care??? 

"The only thing one has to fear is fear itself...". Fear itself never exists in and of itself, it is as it is only as it is con-fronted. Con-fronted by whom? Man. Why is the rule of law held in such esteem? Or western gods? but for the mere fact that they are not man. Man is only safe when he is not man, or to put it clear, as he is not in a relation with himself as man. To rephrase the above quote then we might say, "The only thing man fears is man; his true self (das Selbst, 真正的自己)." Thus man usually finds himself as a mere 'role' or part being played by a 'disinterested' con-ception of an original self for a cyclical purpose; a purpose, mind you, worked out well in advance of the common understanding as to why said purpose or 'goal' is or must be under constant pursuit.  

The ego or I of who we are is only projected outwards as a sliver of who we really are as a mere mask (persona)... Our persona, as is well accepted, is the mask we put on for society, but moreover for ourselves, paradoxically to protect ourselves from our very self. But who are we when we are our True Self???

Does this not call for self-discovery through self-examination or as it is refered to in the East as meditation or 省察 or 自己反省 or 參神...  

To interject into this polemical dialogue, if I can be granted the reprieve in calling this in such a way, what does all of this have to do with weed? Everything and nothing. Please do not take the last sentence as some vacuous truism said just for saying's sake. Words should be said with the greatest care to permit the calling from such saying to carry it's full weight... Such sayings are hard, and are apt to be mis-understood, but this should not discourage the attempt...  

Anyways, weed among other drugs and fear-shrouded objects, has been shown to not 'enlighten' the mind by playing the role of a shortcut and 'turning on' various areas of the brain, but actually serves to shut down a very particular part of the brain responsible for 'projecting' our masked self; our ego. But, we know that despite this literal freeing ourselves from our mask of ourselves, weed can stone us and make us unaware of anything. As a result, weed is used as an escape from the mask; a running away from: read a non con-fronting. 

Thus no experience is to be had. However, what would happen if a teacher appeared in order help and guide others on a true experience with weed. Not to merely 'use' it as a cause to elicit a reaction, although no one can doubt that this sort of relationship can be derived out of such an experience, but to really come to understand what has for thousands of years remained in the shadows due to constant mis-understanding. Even if weed has been used in the past, however distant or near, there has never been a push to experience it as it really is. Such a far reaching Experience would hold within it all that has been and more: the weight of itself upon us. 

To bear the full weight of something, together with it, upon our self; that is a path that once set upon will not serve as an isolated lane dead-ended in itself, but contrarily, as any path that really is a path, will bear a relation to something. Where the relation is, or if such a relation should be found to be the Relation of relations, is far from being decided, but that should not discourage the attempt from happening either. 

道와 學

道와 學
Dao and Study

몇 해 전에 韓國哲學會의 「韓國思想의 創造」란 모임에서 美國에서 哲學教授로 있는 분이 哲學은 自己反省의 極致라는 발표를 한 일이 있다.  필자는 그 석상에서 哲學은 自己反省의 극치가 될 수 없고, 道가 바로 自己反省의 극치라고 했으나 충분한 공감을 얻을 수가 없었다. 東西哲學을 전공한 분들도 많았는데 적극적인 응원을 얻지 못했다.

A few years back at a gathering of the Korean Philosophical Society, a lecture was given with the title 'The Creation of Korean Thought'. An individual who had spent time in the United States working as a professor of philosophy made a presentation wherein he stated philosophy is the pinnacle of self-reflection(自己反省). From my seat I retorted it isn't philosophy, but Dao that is the pinnacle of self-reflection, however, others in attendance apparently didn't share my sentiments on the matter. Even from those with a background well versed in both Eastern and Western philosophy, no support was to be found.

東洋思想은 원래 道와 教를 구별한다. 道가 목표이고 教는 수단이다.  道는 淨心이요，正心이다.  教는 哲學이고, 學이고, 理論이다.  道는 現實이고 , 教는 概念化된 理論이고 , 現實을 가리키는 손가락이다. 栗谷의 「擊蒙要訣」에서도 첫째로 自身이 聖人이 되겠다는 뜻을 세우고 一步도 이 목표에서 후퇴해서는 안 된다고 (立志)했고, 둘째로 낡고 좋지 못한 습관을 뜯어 고치고 (革舊習), 세째로 讀書를 꼽고 있다.

The fact is that Eastern thought originally distinguished between 'Dao'(道) and 'Teaching'(教). Dao being the ultimate goal, whilst Teaching is seen simply as a means. Dao being a clean mind, an honest mind. Teaching is philosophy, learning and theory. Dao is reality whereas Teaching is conceptual theory; merely a finger pointing towards reality. In the chapter entitled "Jimengyaojue"(擊蒙要訣) by Li gu(栗谷) it is written, "An individual who has committed to becoming a sage(聖人) shall firstly not deviate one step from their chosen path (立志: to stand (firm) in meaning). Secondly, they shall grab hold of and fix one's anachronous and bad habits (革舊習). Lastly, they must read."

이렇게 우리의 傳統은 공부라 하면, 사람이 되는 것, 成熟된 사람, 人間이 본래 태어날 때 潛在的으로 가지고 있는 能力, 즉 性•佛性•天真을 實現하는 修練이고 人間이 天에 合하는 것이 목적이었다. 다른 活動은 이 目標를 達成하기 위한 방법 내지 수단에 지나지 않는다

If we say that our tradition is one of study, then our objectives are: to become human, to mature, and manifest all the latent capabilities we were born with. This last point must be taken as meaning or referring to the discipline that allows us to realize our true disposition (性), Buddah's disposition (佛性), our true mind (天真) as well as harmonizing with the heavens above (and everything below). All other actions are just means or methods used to attain such an objective.

中庸에 「天命之謂性 率性之謂道 修道之謂教 道也者 不可須臾離也 可離非道也」라고 말하고 있듯이 道는 본래의 性品으로 돌아가는 것이고 道를 닦는 것이 教다.

In "The Mean" the following well known phrase is written: 「What was commanded by the heavens is called one's disposition; taking command and leading oneself to one's original disposition is called Dao; the cultivation of Dao is called Teaching. That is Dao and to deviate from it is not allowed ; if it is, than it cannot be said to be Dao.」As it says, Dao is the return to one's original disposition and the cultivation of Dao is (by means of or through) Teaching.

이것은 西山大師의 禪教 統一論에서 지적했듯이 佛教의 목표는 佛心이 되는 것이고 大根機, 즉 儒教에서 말하는 生而知之者는 教인 佛經, 즉 佛語를 읽지 않고 바로 自己의 마음을 깨달아서 바로 佛心이 되지만 대부분의 사람들은 中根機，下根機, 즉 儒教에서 말하는 學而知之者 困而知之者에 속하기 때문에 佛語(佛經)를 통하지 않고서는 自己의 마음을 보게 되어 결국 佛心에 도달하는 것에는 다름이 없다. 이것이 禪是佛心 教是佛語라고 표현되고 있는 것이다.

This is observed within the great teacher Xishan's (西山大師) 'Treatise on Unifying Zen and Teaching' (禪教 統一論) where it is said that the objective of Buddhism is developing the mind of Buddha and 大根機. This denotes the Teaching (教) in Buddhist sutra or - in other words - the 'One who lives and thus knows' (生而知之者) that is spoken of in Confucianism. This is not to be confused with reading the word of Buddha, but on the contrary it signifies, through an awareness or becoming conscious of one's mind, the becoming or development of the Buddha's mind. However, whilst the majority of people are designated as 中根機 or 下根機 - or what Confucianism refers to as 'Those who learn and thus know' or 'Those who experience difficulty and thus know' (學而知之者 困而知之者), regardless of whether or not they utilize Buddhist classics, if they are able to at least come to see their own minds then it is no different than achieving Buddha's true mind in the end. This is expressed as 禪是佛心 教是佛語 meaning that Zen is the Buddha's mind; Teaching is the Buddha's word.

1973년에 피히트(Picht)는 韓國哲學會 초청으로 서울에서 한 「理論과 省察」(Theorie und Meditation)이란 講演에서 西洋文化는 自然과 人間, 社會와 文化를 파괴한다. 왜냐하면 西羊文化는 플라톤 이후의 形而上學에서 파생되었기 때문이요, 西洋의 科學도 西洋의 形而上學의 파생물이며 이러한 파괴 작용을 일으키는 원인은 西洋의 形而上學이 論理(Logik)라는 獨斷(Dogma)에 토대를 두고 있다는 사실에 있다고 지적했다.

In 1973, after accepting an invitation to come to Seoul at the behest of the Korean philosophical society, in a lecture entitled 'Theory and Meditation', Picht stated that Western culture has destroyed nature and humanity alongside society and culture. He went on to implicate Western culture itself as being the reason for this state of affairs since Western culture, as we know it, was derived out of the metaphysics of Plato onwards. Western science is, in addition, a derivative of Western metaphysics and the root cause of its destructive application lies in the fact that Western metaphysics is based upon the dogma of Logik.

말하자면 西洋의 形而上學이나 그의 파생물인 科學은 이론이기 때문에 真理가 아니며, 真理가 아니기 때문에 파괴 작용이 일어나는 것이다. 西洋의 形而上學의 위기는 현재 科學技術文明時代에서 地球를 지배하고 있는 科學는 基督教的이고, 西洋的인 形而上學을 통해서만 가능했고 이 유럽적고 기독교적인 主題는 전인류의 주제가 되었기 때문이라고 갈파했다.

To state it clearly, Western metaphysics and it's derivative science are - owing to the fact that they are theory - not truth (真理).  As such they allow for destructive application. Thus the crisis of Western metaphysics, which in the current scientific-technological era where science - something that at it's core is Christian and has been made possible only through Western metaphysics - has come to dominate the world in consequence of a former purely European and Christian issue that is now facing humanity as a collective whole.

그러면서 西洋式 思考方式인 理論的 合理的 사고 방식은 真理에 도달할 수 없으므로 真理에 도달할 수 있는 새로운 사고방식을 제안하면서 그것을 省察(Meditation)이라고 했는데, 어떻게 하면 이러한 사고방식에 도달할 수 있는가에 대한 방법의 제시가 없다.  이것은 마치 西洋의 實存思想이 죽음에 대한 공포 내지 불안을 지적한데 그치고, 이 불안을 해결하는 방법의 제시가 없는 것과 같은 선에서 정지해 버리는 것과 같다.

Thus, as the Western rational-theoretical way-of-thinking is incapable of stepping into truth, it posits a new way-of-thinking: meditation (省察；the most observing observation). However, no mention is given as to how one is supposed to set out upon this path of thinking in order to achieve it. This is no different than the fear or anxiety towards death that existential thought observes, but then abruptly falls silent about before it can provide any suggestion as to how one may attempt to relieve such anxiety.

真理에 도달하고 죽음에 대한 불안을 없애는 방법이 바로 東洋에서 말하는 修道인 것이다. 佛教에서 말하는 教가 理論이고 禪이 省察인 것이다.  理論이 學이고 省察은 道인 것이다.  哲學은 理論이기 때문에 道가 아니고 學이다.  소크라테스까지는 西洋哲學도 理論이기보다 道의 요소를 지니고 있었다는 것이 지적되고 있다.

The way towards stepping into truth as well as removing one's anxiety associated with death is none other than what is spoken of in the East as 'cultivating dao' (修道). In Buddhism, Teaching is theory whilst Zen is meditation. Theory is study whilst meditation is Dao. As philosophy is theory it cannot be Dao; it (referring to philosophy) can only be study. It must be made clear, however, that up until and including Socrates, Western philosophy, as opposed to theory, contained elements of Dao.


道
Dao

그러면 이러한 真理에 도달하는 사고방식을 획득하려면 어떤 방법, 어떤 과정을 밟아야 되는가?

So then, by which path and along which route must one traverse before one may enter into a way-of-thinking capable of stepping into truth?

真理에 도달하는 사고방식을 획득한 자를 儒家에서는 聖人이라고 하고, 佛教에서는 부처, 즉 覺者라고 하며, 道教에서는 真人이라고 한다.  그러면 이러한 聖人∙覺者∙真人이 되는 길은 어떠한 것인가?

In Confucianism one who has entered into a way-of-thinking capable of stepping into truth is called a sage or 聖人 whilst Buddha or 'the enlightened one' along with 'man in truth' are the respective designations used in both Buddhism and Daoism to describe the same individual. Thus one must ask: "Upon what path does one become a sage, enlightened one or man in truth?"

儒教에서는 人欲之私가 없어지면 되는 것이고, 佛教에서는 執着이 없어지면 되는 것이고, 老子에서는 有為가 없어지면 되는 것이고, 西洋의 精心分析治療에서는 주된 動機가 없어지는 것이고, 人間主義 心理學에서는 缺乏動機가 없어지는 것이다. 西洋의 精神分析이나 人間主義 心理學은 동양의 道처럼 높은 목표를 指向하지는 않지만 동일한 궤도에서 先後가 다를 뿐이다.

In Confucianism this path is achieved when an individual's private greediness is eliminated, whilst Buddhists say it is achieved when an individual's obsessions or attachments are eliminated. Laozi (老子) said it occurs when you eliminate your belief in 'formulaic relationships' (有為), whilst in Western psycho-analytic treatment it occurs when one's dominant impetus is eliminated and humanistic psychiatrists claim it is achieved when one's deficient impetus is eliminated. Whilst Western psycho-analysis or humanistic psychology doesn't aim towards such a lofty goal as the Eastern Dao, it is along the same route whilst only it's outward appearance differs.

이러한 性이나 覺, 無為나 精神分析에서의 自己實現 등 그리고 人間主義 心理學에서의 自己實現化는 이름만 다를 뿐이지, 같은 實物을 지칭하는 데 불과하다.

All of the aforementioned designations, from disposition to enlightenment, from no-form relationships to the self-realization of psycho-analysis and humanistic psychology are merely different in name - they all denote the same substance.

이러한 경지에 이르는 過程을 精神分析나 修道, 특히 佛教의 修道와 비교하면서 기술해 보기로 한다. 大慧禪師는 碍膺之物을 既除하면 覺이라고 했다. 이것은 精神分析에서 콤플렉스(complex)를 제거한다는 것과 통한다.

I will now attempt to describe and compare the psycho-analytic and (mainly) Buddhist cultivating of Dao in terms of courses that are capable of leading to the aforementioned borders (of mankind's potential). The Zen master Da Hui said that only after one has removed all 'true addictions' (碍膺之物) is one said to be enlightened. In psycho-analysis this is what would be accomplished through the elimination of one's complexes.

가슴에 거리끼는 物件, 즉 콤플렉스가 있으면 事物이 그러한 색채로 물들거나 歪曲되어 보인다.  그러므로 이런 것이 없으면 사물이 있는 그대로 드러난다.  말하자면 나의 마음이 現實을 있는 그대로 비쳐 준다.

If there is an object afflicting one's mind (碍膺之物), a complex in other words, then all objects and things become tainted and distorted through that cracked lens, so to speak. Therefore, if such an impediment were to be removed, all objects and things would thereupon appear just as they are. Simply put, one's mind would shine upon reality (thereby showing it) just as it is.

이것이 主客一致，天人合一，空，無為의 境地요, 聖人∙부처∙真人의 자리다.  흔히 參禪을 하는 데 360도를 돌아서 覺에 이른다고 한다.  이것은 西洋의 精神治療 과정에서 被治療者의 精神健康∙人格成熟이 이루어지는 과정을 비교해 보면 이해하기가 쉽다.

There are many terms used to indicate such a state: 'a congruence in subjective and objective realities' (主客一致), 'the fusion of heaven and man' (天人合一), 'space' (空), 'no-form relationships' (無為) are a few examples in addition to the designations of sage (聖人), Buddha, as well as 'man in truth' (真人). Frequently when engaging in Zen Buddhism there is talk of enlightenment being the culmination of rotating 360 degrees. When juxtaposed with the process of achieving a state of mental health and personal maturation in therapists, the meaning of the aforementioned '360 degrees of enlightenment' should become easier to comprehend.

서양의 精神分析에서 모든 人間은 神經症的 요소가 있다고 보는 것이 佛教에서 모든 人間을 眾生으로 보는 것과 같다.  眾生이란 말은 神經症(넓은 뜻에서)이란 말과 같다. 말하자면 모든 人間은 콤플렉스, 즉 碍膺之物이 있다는 뜻이다.

Just as Western psycho-analysis views every individual as possessing neurotic elements, in Buddhism they view every individual as a 眾生. 眾生 may be seen as being analogous with neurosis (at least in a broad sense). Simply put, every individual has a complex or a 'true addiction' (碍膺之物).

神經症은 自身의 절실하고 중요한 감정, 즉 사랑과 미움, 특히 미운 감정을 의식 밖으로 몰아내는 데 성공이 되어서 症狀이 나타난다.  말하자면 自己와 他人에게 이러한 감정을 은폐해서 나타나는 것이다.  그래서 儒家에서는 毋自欺를 강조하게 된다.

Symptoms of neuroses manifest themselves when an individual is successful in burying(?) one's root emotions - either feelings of love or hate, but in particular feelings of hate - into their unconsciousness. In other words, neurosis appears when an individual suppresses his or her emotions either towards others or themselves. Being cognizant of this fact, Confucianism has for many ages thus emphasized that individuals must be aware of and avoid self-deception (毋自欺).

精神治療가 마음속에 있는 그대로를 관찰해서 精神治療者에게 보고케 한다. 被治療者가 마음속에 있는 것을 성실하게 보고를 시작하면 처음에는 우리 어머니는 세상에서 가장 理想的이고 나를 지극히 사랑한다고 시작한다.  이것이 禪에서 말하는 0度 境界다.  그러나 어머니에 대한 感情을 세밀히 성실하게 관찰하게 되면 무언가 언짢는 감정이 있는 것을 발견한다.

Psycho-therapy seeks to have an individual observe exactly what resides in their mind to allow the psycho-therapist to catch a glimpse as well. At the outset, when a non-therapist first begins to sincerely reflect upon one's own inner mind and heart, there is typically a strong tendency to lovingly regard one's mother as the greatest, most exemplar figure in the world. This stage is what would be referred to as the 'Zero Degree' in Zen Buddhism. However, from the time when an individual begins to take heed of such feelings in a deeper and more nuanced manner, one discovers that not all is what one expected; feelings of ill will also exist.

이러한 감정을 계속 드러내면 나중에는 어머니를 죽이고 싶을 정도의 증오심이 끓어오준다.  말하자면 어머니가 원수가 된다.  이 境界가 參禪에서 말하는 180度 境界이고, 山이 山이 아니고 물이 물이 아닌 境界다. 처음에 出發한 0度 境界는 山이 山이고 물이 물이었던 것이 완전한 價值의 顛倒(전도)가 일어난다.  이러한 어머니에 대한 過去의 억압되었던 증오심을 다 표현하고 나의 진정한 감정으로서 받아들이고 왜 그런 감정을 품게 되었나를 이해하고 나면 어머니에 대한 좋은 감정만이 남게 된다.

As these emotions continue to manifest themselves, eventually murderous feelings of hatred towards one's mother manifest. At this point your mother has become your enemy. This stage is referred to as the '180 Degree' stage and is depicted metaphorically in the following poetic utterance: the mountain is no longer mountain, and water is no longer water. Compared this with when one was at the initial 'Zero Degree' stage where mountains were still mountains and water was still water. This second stage appears as a complete reversal of values. Only after expressing these hitherto repressed feelings of malice that the individual has held towards their mother and embrace their true emotions and feelings can an individual understand why they initially held such feelings in the first place. And it is from that point that they are left with nothing but positive feelings towards their mother.

 否定的인 感情과 肯定的인 感情을 다 받아들이고 나면 이 境界가 360度 境界고, 出發點으로 돌아온 것이다.  다시 山이 山이고 물이 물이지만 0度에서 출발할 때의 山이나 물은 아니다. 0度에서는 있는 그대로의 事物이나 自己 他人 世界의 모습이 아니다. 360度를 돌아서 비로소 완전한 있는 그대로의 모습이 나타난다. 否定과 肯定, 陰과 陽, 그것이 現實이고 真理인 것이다.

This stage is known as the '360 Degree Point' where they can, owing to the fact that they have fully embraced their positive feelings as well as their negative feelings, come full circle returning to where they began: Zero Degree. Mountains are now again mountains, and water truly is water, however, they are not the same mountains nor is it the same water one knew or saw at the outset of Zero Degree. What was at the outset was not the appearance of beings, oneself, others or the world as they truly were. It is only upon (re)turning 360 Degrees that everything appears truly as it is. Negativity and positivity as well as concealment and unconcealment (yin and yang, 陰陽) are reality (manifest origin, 現實) and truth (aletheia, 真理).

理論과 現實 또는 真理와의 관계를 參禪에서 十種病을 對治하는 三玄門을 들어서 검토해 보는 것이 적절한 것 같다.

Taking together the relationship between theory, reality and aletheia in addition to the 三玄門 utilized as an alternative treatment (對治) for the '10 root afflictions' (十種病) in Zen Buddhism and examining them is, as I see it, appropriate at this juncture.

佛教에서는 말, 즉 概念이나 理論은 真理를 가리키는 손가락이다.  真理는 달(月)이고, 教는 손가락(指)이다.  三玄門이란 體中玄∙句中玄∙玄中玄을 말한다.

The words, or concepts and theories found in Buddhism are like a finger pointing towards truth (aletheia). Aletheia is the moon (月: the light that shines down illuminating what is and already has been), whilst Teaching is the finger. 三玄門 speaks of 體中玄, 句中玄 and 玄中玄.

體中玄은 佛教의 最高理論인 華嚴經의 教理를 완전히 概念的으로 이해하는 것이다. 다음 段階은 句中玄인데, 體中玄에서 佛教의 理論을 완전히 이해해도 아직 말이 있고 概念이 있고 생각이 붙어 있기 따문에 손가락을 보고 있는 셈이다.  소위 語路∙義路∙聞解思想이 있는 것이다.  科學이나 哲學 등 모든 學은 이 수준에 머물러 있는 것이다.

體中玄 is the absolute conceptual understanding of Buddhism's greatest theoretical work, the Huaan-jing 華嚴經, and it's teachings. The next stage, or 句中玄, is like the previous 體中玄 stage in the sense that it also completely comprehends Buddhist theory in words and concepts, however, since it is during this stage that an individuals own thoughts are attached, it is metaphorically seen to be the same as staring at one's extended finger that is pointing to something or someplace (as opposed to at what the finger is pointing at).* This is the path of speech (語路), the path of righteousness (義路) and an ideology of auditory understanding (聞解思想). Science, philosophy or any other study (學) is stuck at this level.

다음에 句中玄 또는 用中玄은 體中玄의 聞解思想을 없애기 위해서, 즉 概念理論을 떠나고 現實, 즉 여기 이곳 (here and now)을 가리키는 방법이다. 千七百公案 話頭 등 禪問答다.  佛法大意가 무엇이냐고 묻는다면 初玄門인 體中玄의 단계에서는 概念을 가지고 論하는 水準이모로 佛教의 理論을 가지고 답을 삼겠지만, 句中玄에서는 똥 막대기니 뜰아래 잣나무 등이란 대답으로 지금 이곳을 가리킨다.  개념을 떼어 버리고 현실을 가리키는 셈이다.

Next, as a method to signal the here and now, or in other words reality, 句中玄 or 用中玄, seeks to remove the ideology of auditory understanding (聞解思想), or depart from conceptual theory. This is the 'Zen question-response' (禪問答) that is exhibited in such examples as 千七百公案 話頭. When posed with the query as to what the grand meaning of Buddhist proscriptions (佛法大意) may be, those standing at the entrance of the dark gates (初玄門) as 體中玄 will merely reply utilizing the theories of Buddhism since they are of a level capable only of arguing through conceptualizations. Those along the path known as 句中玄 will reply by speaking through examples (e.g. a stick used to point out shit or the pine tree under the roofs ledge and so on). In other words they will indicate what is right here, right now. They have extricated themselves from concepts and are now pointing towards reality.

句中玄에서는 개념을 떼어 버리지만은 아직 말(言句)이 붙어 있다.  그러나 句中玄의 말은 현실을 가리키기 때문에 活句라고 하고, 體中玄의 말, 즉 華嚴經이나 八萬大藏經은 死句라고 한다.  다음의 門은 玄中玄에서 개념은 떼어 버렸지만 말이 남아 있기 때문에 말과 생각을 다 떼어 버리는 방법이다.  離言絕慮가 目的이다.

Along the way in 句中玄, whilst one may have extricated themselves from conceptions, they still remain attached to words (言句). Despite this, because the words spoken along the way in 句中玄 are pointing towards reality they are referred to as 'living words' (活句). On the contrary, words spoken in 體中玄, for example those found in the Huayan-jing or Bawandazang-jing (華嚴經 or 八萬大藏經), are called 'dead words' (死句). Passing through the next gate, or 玄中玄, this is the method in which one extricates oneself from words by tossing away the words that remain after previously freeing oneself from concepts but not words. The objective is to depart from words and end thought (離言絕慮).

佛教大意가 무엇이냐고 질문을 한다면 한참 동안 대답을 않은 良久, 전혀 대답을 않는 默然, 또는 다짜고짜로 몽둥이로 후려갈기는 桻, 또는 소리를 꽥 지르는 喝(할), 禪床 등을 치는 방법을 사용한다. 이것이 가장 으뜸가는 방법이다.  왜냐하면 석가모니가 깨달은 바는 모든 苦行이 다 소용이 없고, 내가 보고 있는 나나 他人世界가 내가 깨다고 있지 못한 내 마음을 投射한 錯覺이기 때문에 現實을 바로 보기 위해서는 내 마음을 돌이켜 비추어야 한다는 것이기 때문이다.

Thus when one is posed with the question of what the grand meaning of Buddhist proscriptions (佛法大意) is, instead of words, such methods as 'virtuous brevity' (良久) where no reply is provided for a long time, or 'tacit revelation' (默然) where no reply at all is provided, as well as the unexpected strike of a stick (棒), sudden screaming (喝) or the Zen-pedestal are utilized. This is the absolute pinnacle, but at the same time the most basic of all methods. The reason for this, as explained through the anecdotal realization of Shakyamuni goes as follows: Asceticism (苦行) in all its forms is of absolutely no use. This is due to the fact that the myself or anyone else that I may be looking at are both realities that I am unable to see clearly since what I see are merely the projected misapprehensions that stem from my unenlightened (or unconscious) mind. Therefore, in order to truly see reality as it is, I must reflect upon my mind throwing light upon it (and consequently on the reality that the mirror of my mind has projected it's light out upon everything).

즉 不取外相 自心返照가 八萬大藏經의 核心이다.  그러므로 佛教의 修道에서 특히 參禪에서 自心返照가 아닌 이상, 自心返照에 이르는 하나의 계단으로서의 價值 이외에 아무런 가치가 없는 것이다. 質問에 대해서 良久, 默然，桻，喝，擊禪床 등의 방법을 사용하면 自心返照를 하지 않을래야 하지 않을 도리가 없는 것이다.  되지도 않는 소리 말고 네 마음을 비추어 보라는 뜻이다.

This speaks towards the crux of the 八萬大藏經 that has been condensed as follows: 不取外相 自心返照.  Therefore in the cultivation of Dao (修道) of Buddhism, and especially within Zen Buddhism, there exists no ideal above reflecting upon and lighting up ones mind (自心返照) and no value beyond the value in achieving 自心返照. There simply is no alternative to 自心返照 that is achieved through the employment of 良久, 默然, 桻, 喝, or 擊禪床 in response to any inquiry that may be made. The meaning of this is simply that, as opposed to uttering a sound - a sound that, to be clear as yet does not exist - one must instead attempt to shed light upon one's mind.

自心返照의 깊이를 「大乘起信論」에 나타나는 바로 보면, 모든 現象은 業識을 外部에 投射한 錯覺이다.  業識은 無意識의 밑바닥이다.  業識이 굴려서 (著者의 견해로는 抑壓이 되어) 轉識이 되고 轉識이 現識이 된다.

If one truly sees the depth of 自心返照 as it appears in the「大乘起信論」, one will come to understand that every phenomenon is merely a misapprehension that stems from the projection of one's karmic consciousness (業識) upon the external world. Karmic consciousness is the nadir of unconsciousness. When karmic consciousness is rolled (or in the opinion of this writer, when it is suppressed) 'rolled consciousness' (轉識) is the result and in turn rolled consciousness becomes 'manifest consciousness' (現識).

여기까지가 無意識이다.  現識으로부터 智識이 파생되고 智識에서 相續識이 파생된다.  智識과 相續識은 意識이다. 대체로 學은 智識과 相續識에 속하는 것이고 正見이 아니라 邪見, 즉 錯覺이다.  業識이 自覺이 되고 淨化가 되면 轉識∙現識 이하가 다 淨化다 되므로 내 마음은 맑은 거울과 같이 現實을 있는 그대로 비추어 준다.  이것이 부처의 境地다.

To make it clear, what has been discussed up until this point has been unconsciousness. From manifest consciousness 智識 is derived and 'inherited consciousness' (相續識) is derived in 智識.** 智識 and 相續識 are consciousness. Generally, study (學) is accepted as belonging to 智識 and 相續識, and it is not considered to be 正見 (meaning the wisdom to accurately judge the true appearance or content or (真相) of every existing formed or formless thing in the universe (諸法). Rather 邪見 (a distorted view that ignores karmic reason or 道理) is a misapprehension or an illusion (錯覺). Karmic consciousness becomes self-realization, and when catharsis takes place, specifically when catharsis occurs to 轉識 and 現識, the result is a mind that is similar to a spotless mirror in the sense that it lights up reality just as it is. This is the region of the Buddha.

부처 다음에 가는 菩薩은 業識이 완전 淨化가 되지 못하고 흔적이 남아 있으나, 이것을 自覺하고 轉識•現識이 되어서 投射되는 일이 없다. 이것은 西洋의 精神分析에서 성숙된 分析者는 主動機 (業識에 해당)의 흔적이 남아 있으나, 이것을 自覺하고 患者 治療에서 投射를 하지 않는다는 점과 일치한다. 그러므로 理論的이고 概念的인 思考 理論은 智識∙相續識에 머물러 있기 때문에 真理에 契合할 수가 없다는 것을 분명히 알 수 있다.

The stage prior to that of the Buddha is known as 菩薩 or bodhi-sattva, and its major difference when compared with the Buddha is that one's karmic consciousness has not undergone complete catharsis and as a result traces remain. That said, however, the individual at this stage apprehends this, 轉識 and 現識 form and projection no longer occurs. This stage is analogous with that of Western psycho-analysis wherein the analyst still possess traces of 'residing motivations' (主動機; analogous with 業識), however, this is apprehended and no projection occurs during patient treatment. Therefore, it should be quite apparent that conceptual theoretical thinking, owing to the fact that it resides within 智識 and 相續識, can never coincide (契合) within aletheia.

이렇게 哲學이 現在의 形態로서는 自己反省의 정도가 智識 이상 거슬러 올라갈 수가 없기 때문에, 自己反省의 극치가 되려면 修道가 되지 않으면 안 된다는 것이 명백해진다. 윌리엄 바렛도 東洋思想이 西洋哲學者에게 도움을 줄 수 있는 것은 플라톤 이래 西洋哲學이 갇혀 있는 概念의 감옥으로부터 해방을 시켜 준다는 점이라고 지적하고 있다.

It is in this way that philosophy in it's current form, due to the fact that the degree of self-reflection it is capable of achieving is no greater than that of 智識, and therefore in order to reach the pinnacle of self-reflection, it should be clear by now that it can only be brought about through the cultivation of Dao (修道). William Barlett pointed out that the contribution Eastern thought can make towards Western philosophers lies in the fact that it is capable of liberating them from the conceptual prison Western philosophy has been locked in from the time of Plato onwards.


結語
Closing Words

이상 哲學의 門外漢으로서 韓國의 思想界∙學界의 病弊를 서양의 精神分析과 東洋의 道를 공부하는 학도의 입장으로 몇 가지를 지적했다.  西洋哲學이 소크라테스 이전에는 道 요소가 우세하였으니까 그의 제자 플라톤 이후로 이론이 되어 버리고 나서는 實存哲學의 形態로서 道의 再生의 기미가 보인다. 우리는 이러한 歷史的 時點에서 피히트가 지적했듯이, 真理에 도달하는 사고방식인 道의 現代的 意義를 깊이 깨달아야 된다는 것을 절감한다.  哲學이 自己反省의 極致가 되려면 理論과 말, 概念으로부터 해방이 되어야 한다.  그것은 東洋思想의 공통적인 특징, 즉 理論은 現實을 가리키는 수단에 지나지 않으며 得意忘言이면 道易親인 것이다.

Above are just a few casual philosophical observations posited from from the perspective of a student of both Western psycho-analysis and Western Dao in regards to the ills currently afflicting Korean thought and academia. It is owing to the fact that within Western philosophy from the time of the pre-Socratics, elements of Dao were ascendent. However, following his pupil, Plato, metaphysics became enmeshed in theory; that is at least until the indicatory re-emergence of Dao appeared in the form of existential philosophy. It is incumbent upon all of us now at this pivotal point in history, that we bear in mind the observation made by Picht: we must fully comprehend the deep modern meaning of the way of thinking that is capable of entering into truth or aletheia: Dao. Philosophy, in order to achieve the highest pinnacle of self-reflection, must free itself of theory, words and conception. That is the shared characteristic of Eastern thought, namely that theory is merely a means to indicating reality and that it is only when one gains the meaning and forgets words (得意忘言) will Dao turn in closer with us (道易親).

이러한 理論과 現實(真理), 學과 道의 문제가 體와 用이 개념과 더불어 우리 나라의 學問, 특히 人文社會科學界에서 충분히 의견이 교환되어 밝혀져야만 우리 나라의 學界나 思想界，國民生活 전반의 혼란을 바로잡을 수 있을 뿐만 아니라, 현재 전인류가 당면하고 있는 가장 중대한 문제의 해결책을 열어 주는 것이라고 확신한다.

I am certain that in this manner, if the issues of theory and reality (truth or aletheia), study and Dao coupled as well as the concept of body and soul (體用) are brought together in a discussion wherein academicians - particularly those of whom hail from the humanity-social sciences - are able to satisfactorily exchange their views and shed light upon them, only then will we, the Korean nation, be able to grab hold of and steady the storm that has led our realm of study (學界), our realm of thought (思想界) and our way of life, at least partially, into the chaos it has found itself in. Moreover, we will be able to open up into the glow that will lead us on the path towards discovering the solutions regarding the biggest problems now plaguing all of humanity.


* A true point-of-view
** 智識: a term denoting an affect of consciousness that gives rise to distorted thoughts devoid of reason regarding objects, and the un-knowing of from whence, in every individuals minds, every object originates.

創造

Creation or creativity. 創造. 창조. From whence does it come? Being of a Western background, but ironically a bit more well versed in the historical flow and emotion of Eastern culture (read: 文化）I shall venture fore in an attempt at thinking creation through by following the lithographical representation that stands before us today. Even a cursory glance at the two characters that comprise the Chinese characters that have come to be seen in translation as creation, read chuangzao in modern mandarin chinese - and as i see - seem to sound an echo of not only the etymological roots of the idea conveyed, but point us towards both a culmination and beginning in the course of humanity that many have turned a blind eye to or more accurately a dead ear towards. 

Anyone who lives in Korea will be familiar with the two characters written above from having confronted them during the course of memorizing the required 2000 character familiarization program proscribed to students through their primary and secondary educations. 創 would have been memorized as meaning 비롯하다 or 'the beginning' or 'to begin with' etc... While 造 will be thought of as 짓다 or 'to build/construct' coinciding with modernity and it's emphasis upon material creation. Already, thinking creation as 'an original or starting building' speaks towards something more than our common conception of creation. However, when looking at the second character and thought through as the combination of it's radicals it becomes defined as a 'going conveying' or as a 'coming conveyance'; it no longer says anything about a purely physical constructing (although it doesn't say anything about the disavowal of constructing as such).  

The first character is more complex and can be viewed in a few more or less obscuring cloaks of shadow. The conspicuous two lines on the right side denote a knife, or a sharp object designed for carving and when those lines are removed the character left standing speaks something of a 창고 or 'a closet' or 'a place to serve as a holder of' or simply put a 곳집 or 'a place home' when translated literally. What is left, 君 jun, is read as sage denoting a wiseman. This character, however can be deconstructed further into 尹 (yin) with a myriad of connotations including a family surname, but the meaning dating from the warring states period conveying 다스림 or control is coincidentally the dominant meaning associated with the character when memorizing it today. This character can be viewed as the construction as the composition of still another radical and line, but as the association between that particular radical and the character at hand is a tenuous one that at this time is not apparent we shall pass over it to the character 口 (kou) meaning mouth. The literal interpretation then, of the character denoting a sage disembarks from the Western conception of a mystical sage down to the most humane idea of an individual who controls or has learned to 'master one's words'. Creation then, may be thought as 'words, whence mastered and stored (committed either to memory or other verbal form) or etched (in writing), that either go and convey or appear as a coming conveyance.  

Creation thus denotes the very moment (thought of as 'everything all at once as one' as opposed to a single snapshot of time with a singular focal point excluding everything else) of civilizations' emergence in tandem with its subsequent elliptically effecting existence that continuously and spontaneously gives rise to civilizing forces at any given moment. 一日不讀書口中生荊棘 is a phrase conveying the thought that should one day pass without reading (words generally seen in the broad sense as "creative words") thorns will grow in one's mouth. Read: thorns will form upon the words themselves obscuring the full extent of their original living import. A dead civilization will still leave behind relics and vestiges of it's former existence, an existence, mind you, that once flourished and was alive in the fullest sense, however, such times are usually obscured by the overgrowth of vines that often enough bear thorns.  

Thus these words speak of words and the living relationship that was set in elliptical motion from the first time that man began to master his words into a going conveyance to whomever via either spoken word or (as the latter addition signified by the two lines meaning either knife or etching) into written word, and every instance of such 'creation' since then. Creation constantly creates civilization that civilizes man constantly. This speaks to what creation, and in the particular the form it has taken in Chinese and Korea, has both conveyed to us up until today and continually conveys to those who listen to the living word by those who have mastered words in their own time and by cutting away thorns from the those words that thrived in a different time in terms of what they have been saying and what they are capable of saying.

東西南北의 만남

Convergence of East, West, North and South 

개인 노이로제의 경우를 보면 자기의 獨立性과 主體性이 침해당하고 오랜 시일 외부의 침해로부터 벗어나지 못하는 상태가 계속되면 마음속에 나를 압박하고 구속하고 나의 主體性을 침해하는 원수의 代理機關이 자리를 잡는다.  이것이 內在化된 敵이요, 내부의 적이다.

Imagine if one were to have their independence and autonomy infringed upon by some inescapable external party for an extended period of time. In individual cases of neuroses, that oppression and constraint actually takes root in the mind of the individual as a proxy organ of that enemy. In other words you end up with an internal foe.

이 마음속에 자리를 잡은 원수는 항상 마음속의 나를 보고, '너는 못난 놈이다, 세상에서 너와 같이 못난 놈이 어디 있느냐'고 壓倒해 온다.   그려면 그는 늘 이러한  屈辱的인 상태에서만 머물러 있기가 너무나 비참하기 때문에 바로 이 원수를 숭상하고 닮으려고 갖은 애를 쓴다.

This foe, so situated, is perpetually in one's thoughts screaming out, "You aren't shit!" or "There is no one in the entire world as pathetic as you!" Since it is just too miserable to remain in such an abusive state for an extended period of time, efforts are expended to actually revere this internal foe and become like them.

그러고서는 나는 天才다, 유명한 俳優가 된다, 歌手가 된다, 노벨상을 탄다, 大統領이 된다는 등 꿈을 꾼다.  이러한 꿈이 그렇지 못한 현실에 부딪치면 또다시 뿌리 깊은 열등감과 自虐에 빠진다.  이러한 自己卑下와 自己膨脹 사이를 무한정으로 來往하는 것이 노이로제 환자의 심리다.  그러면 건강한 정신이란 어떤 상태를 말하는 것인가? 그것은 한마디로 한다면 主體性이다.

It is in this state that dreams of becoming a genius, a famous actor, a singer, a Nobel Laureate or a president occur. When reality exposes those dreams as not being achieved, the sense of despair and self-torment will intensify. This elliptical cycle of self-disparagement and self-growth is the psychology of a patient suffering from neurosis. So what then is a sound and healthy psychological state? Simply put, it is autonomy(主體性).

主體性이란, 나 즉 나의 감정이 억압됨이 없는 상태이며 내가 나의 主人이요, 自由요, 모든 나의 행동은 나의 선택이기 때문에 잘되거나 못 되거나 나의 책임이란 自覺의 상태를 말하는 것이다.  釋迦牟尼가 외쳤다는 天上天下唯我獨尊, 즉 우주에 있어서 나는 나에게 있어서 가장 존귀하다는 자각이다. 

Autonomy is the state of not being emotionally oppressed by an external force. It is where you are your own lead actor. It's freedom and realizing that, because your actions are solely up to your own discretion, whether something turns out well or not, the ultimate responsibility lies solely within you and you alone. It’s as the Shakyamuni(釋迦牟尼) shouted, "In the heavens above as well as below, I alone am most important!" It is the realization that since the only thing you truly have in the whole universe is yourself, you are what is most precious.

*이 글은 이동식 박사님이 쓴 韓國人의 主體性과 道에서 제 일장에서 나온 韓國人의 思想的 病弊이란 제2과에서 기록된 몇 문단을 뽑아서 올림

*These are a few excerpts taken from the second chapter of Dr. Lee, Dong-shik’s ‘The Autonomy and Dao of Koreans’ entitled “The Ideological Malaise of Korean.” 

아 참 추수감사절 놓쳤네...

아는 사람들 다 아는데 어제는 미국 일년 중에 가장 중요하고 미국다운 빨간날 추수감사절이었다.  

모르는 사람이 있을지도 모르겠지만 있으면 한국의 추석이랑 비슷한 날이라고 생각하면 된다.  온 가족들이랑 일년 내내 모든 일을 반성하고 감사하는 마음으로 모으고 칠면조를 비롯하여 풍부한 음식을 배가 터질 정도로 엄청 많이 먹는 날이다.  

한국에 온지 벌써 3년 연속 이러한 행사에 참여하지 못했다.  거의 반세계 떨어지고 가을 학기가 얼마 남아 있지 않아서 몇일간에만 고향에 돌아가는 게 아까워서 그리운 마음을 참고 겨울 방학을 도착할 때까지 기다릴 수 밖에 없는 상황이다.  

어쨋든 추수감사절 바로 전날에 미디어와 사회변경이란 개지루한 강연을 들었을 때 심심해서 그런지 책가방에서 오래동안 점차점차 독서하는 "한자의 이해"란 책을 꺼냈고 읽기 시작했다.  

이 책은 독자들에게 한문을 익혀주기 위한 목표로서 성어와 격언, 한시 (漢詩），당시（唐詩），사서삼경 등등 한문의 대표적인 고전의 제일 중요하고 한문을 배우는데 가장 도움이 되는 부분을 한권에 모으고 각각 나누어 있다.  

그날에 진난번에 읽어온 당시 부분에 이백 （李白）다음에 우연히 왕유 (王維）가 지어진 《九月九日憶山中兄弟》란 시가 나왔다.  

이 시를 처음으로 감상했을 땐 유학생으로서 고향의 동생을 생각하는 심정이 참으로 진실된다고 생각했다.  

시의 기구에 있어서는 외로운 나그네로서의 쓰라림을 참아견디는 심정이 넘쳐흐른다.  

나처럼.  

승구에는 항상 부모를 생각하는 마음에 사로잡펴 헝클어지는 심사를 달래는 다부진 내심이 연보인다.  

내 마음과 같다.  

전구에 있어서는 형제들의 워애로운 정이 넘쳐 곧 달려가고 싶은 결구의 애절함이 얽히는 것이다.  

내가 하고 싶은 것처럼.  

우애 넘치는 家族愛의 풍부함과 사랑스런 정감이 무르녹고 있다.  아래에 왕유의 작품을 원전으로, 한국어로 그리고 영어로 된 번역을 드리고 있다.


九月九日憶山中兄弟       王維

獨在異鄉為異客
每逢佳節倍思親
遙知兄弟登高處
遍揷茱萸少一人

구월구일 날에 산위에 있는 동생을 생각한다

홀로 타향에 있어 타향의 나그네 되었으니
매양 佳節을 만날 때마다 갑절이니 어버이를 생각한다
멀리 알건대, 형제가 높은 곳에 올라
모두 茱萸를 꽂았지만 나 하나 모자란다

The 9th day of the 9th month I think of my brother on top of the mountain

Alone in a foreign town I'm just another passerby,
this time of year doubles the thoughts of my loved ones.
From afar, I know my brother must have reached the summit;
everyone must have planted their cornel seeds by now, everyone but me.

You say 'Democracy'

Democracy is a term not much unlike that pasty skinned goth chick sitting at the back of your sophomore chemistry class.  It is often cut up, passed around, turned inside out and generally taken for granted by most people; even those nearest and supposedly dearest.

While most people in the free world cite the idea of 'democracy' as one of the crowning achievements of the Western world, I would first like to say the idea and form has existed in the East centuries prior (e.g. 民本主義 or 민본주의 or the populace as the root of rule in Korean) so the persistent egotism and, if I dare say, prejudiced bias surrounding the term should cease.  "The diamond of the world" or "The diamond of mankind's history" would be much more apt expressions.

But I digress; the points I would like to make are twofold: Firstly, I would like to proffer my personal definition of 'democracy' quoted  from the often overlooked Libertarian Political-Philospher of the UofC school Henry Simons; and Secondly, I will raise the importance and necessity of living for life juxtaposing that life system with the contemporary conceptual prison society finds itself locked in guarded by the almighty dollar.

Democracy is "...government by discussion and consensus...and political consensus, especially at the higher and highest levels, focused on clear-cut, general rules of law and policy.  It is such a discussion that feeds the growth and diffusion of the moral consensus.  Only from slow action out of such a discussion may a nation build solidly and progressively the principles and working rules which afford political security and economic stability.  Only by adherence to the rule of law and to announced rules of policy may a people have strong government without granting inordinate, arbitrary power to ruling parties, factions and majorities of the moment.  Only thus may freedom be protected..." (Simons, Econ. Policy for a Free Society, pg. 19)


"The alternative  is "plebicitary democracy," the antithesis of libertarian government.  Elections then merely choose among leaders or factions.  Campaigns are mere contests for power - slogan-mongering, promising everything to all minorities save the scapegoats, absurd eulogies and vilifications.  Platforms are unprincipled in themselves and binding, if at all, only during the campaign.  Parties are simply organizations for promising and dispensing patronage, standing for nothing but unlimited prerogative of tactical opportunism, either as "government" or "opposition" (if any).  Such, at all events, is the meaning of government by men as the antithesis of government by law and policy rules." (Simons, Econ. Policy for a Free Society, pg. 19)


To make it quite explicit I am in favor of, in the context of the American political spectrum, Libertarian Democracy; as defined as a hybrid form of Democracy and Aristocracy.  Where all members of the nation state are citizens in the sense that their main focus or occupations reside not in the government but in the private sector and the day-to-day government consists of a small number of individuals in comparison to the overall population of citizens.   Although this is obviously not quite ideal given the sheer size of the American continent and population, it appears to me at least to be the most efficient, least intrusive and fairest.

This form of government is what the founding fathers created.  A country free under the rule of just law. However, as we can see in the contemporary realm of politics that this law and legislation and the overall state of politics has fallen into the category of 'plebicitary democracy' defined above.  Recalling Rousseau's misgivings toward the feasibility of true democracy in states of large size and population, it is clear to see and more importantly can be overtly sensed that it is the influence of the various private interests in public affairs at the root of the problem; in short, the corruption of the legislative body.  Taking the tax code as an example, government is convoluted leading to a drastic increase of esoteric business and tireless, unceasing discussions; and no considerable degree of equality exists coupled with great luxury that are the possessions of but a small minority corrupting both rich and poor at once, one through possession, the other through vanity; it has put the country on sale to vanity and soft living; it has deprived the state of all its citizens, making each of them subject to the other, and all of them to public opinion.

A degree of virtue is required in every citizen to prefer freedom regardless of the instability and dangers coupled with it as opposed to tranquility and servitude.  Obviously this virtue espoused in Rousseau's 'The Social Contract' or as I like to refer to it as the "Character of Gods" is absent in contemporary America and has been for some time.  Thus, the country's political state has fallen into the abyss of "plebicitary democracy," a vicious cycle flaring up at every electoral interval. Even the Judicial branch, following the Executive and Legislative branches has succumbed as evidence to the recent supreme court rulings regarding the "humanity" of corporations and legality of private undisclosed campaign funding.

Emphasis placed on such an abstract and ideal notion such as 'virtue' has long been esteemed in Eastern philosophy with unlikely a bigger proponent or laudable figure as Confucius.  To quote from the second book of The Analects entitled 'Administration' or ‘為政’ chapter 3, "Confucius said, "If the people be led by laws and punitive measures to bring about uniformity they will seek to evade punishments and not  know shame.  If the people be led by virtue and courtesy and etiquette to bring about conformity they will have shame and know the difference between good and bad.""  ［子曰“道之以政， 齊之以刑，民免而無恥。道之以德，齊之以禮，有恥且格。”］Is this the virtue Rousseau spoke of? The virtue he so eloquently decried as being a pipe dream only suited for Gods?

The perception of what a God is differs when viewed from a Western perspective and Eastern point of view.  Western theologies have stripped mankind of the direct links to omniscience of the mind and heart leaving only a vague and metaphysical dotted line leading towards the Gods.  Eastern thought, specifically traditional and pre-imperialist thought, on the other hand, emphasizes that every man and woman is capable of achieving and possesses "godliness." Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism etc... all have titles for the "godlike" state or peak state of the enlightened.  Therefore Eastern thought produces a more humanistic state of mind and consequently the hitherto metaphysical ideal of virtuousness and virtuosity, being a part of human existence, is materially and temporally closer and more attainable.  It moves from the realm of idealism which implies an otherworldly connection and thus risks ostracizing many who feel that they are not worthy of the gods, into the world in which we live turning it into the most equal yet significant goal of each and every individual performing in the concert of humanity.

At this point I would like to bring up my second point; the importance of living for life.  When I say living for life, there is an inherent assumption and acceptance that everyone has different preferences and the idea of an all encompassing secular or societal goal will not and hasn't worked evidenced through such failures and imminent failures as the former USSR and the DPRK.  Living for life is the daily struggle to refine oneself and try to develop ones every faculty, with the metaphysical goal of sharpening each and every aspect to its highest point eventually coalescing at the "God" point; seeing the world through a pure lens and reflecting oneself back onto the world.  That reflection is virtue.  Virtue isn't just found in the end, but during the stages of leading up to the the point where one exits this world and the conscious acknowledgment of such a process.

This stage and process is more eloquently explained in The Dao and Self-Independence of the Korean People (韓國人의 主體性과 道）the seminal work written by one of Korea's original founding fathers of modern psychiatry and more importantly taoistic psychiatry, Dr. Dong-shik Lee (이동식 박사님). The 'Self-Independence' is simply stated the point at which and individual becomes the main actor of one's own life and the pinnacle of such a mind state being found in the words of Buddah, “In terms of myself, in this universe the most revered being is Me."  (天上天下唯我獨尊）Without self-reverence and respect how can one respect anyone else.  So what is to say that our current generation with its innumerable scientific and technological advances hasn't already achieved this?

Referring briefly back to Rousseau's quote regarding luxury, it deflects everyones attention to superfluities that benefit no-one.  In other words our societies life quest for money in the name of capitalism acts as a deflector taking our minds off of ourselves, and thus off of our fellow man onto an inanimate abstract nothingness.  Is there any room to question what is the root of the unspeakable inhumanity (you fill in the ______ in terms of what atrocities have been committed or are still underway....) our generation is witnessing? To clarify, of course it is not money itself that is the problem, but our preoccupation with it.  The same can be said of religion in the past and now that perverted mans eyes away from himself to a nothingness above.  An the Warring past of Asia that despite the teachings and nominal state religions of Confucianism, saw leaders diverting the eyes of the people onto the conquest of abstract territorial power.   These diversions are labeled ‘礙膺之物’ or objects that obstruct/hinder the heart or in other words unhealthy obsessions; true addiction.

The only way to get rid of such obsessions is to admit that such a problem exists.  There be no methadone for the masses to estrange itself from its opiate.  Time is necessary, and more importantly our leaders need to help set examples and lead themselves in a healthier way.  I'm afraid that there is no pre-fab model for this either.  However, the answer lies in education.  I repeat education as an enlightening process as opposed to the indoctrination that has  persisted until present day in most schools.  To emphasize the need for reform in education, one need not argue on such an abstract and metaphysical basis because the three elements that currently define and control our era and the world itself, science, economics, and political technology are taught to not a single student with the exception of science although the quality is extremely sub-par.  It is extremely dumb founding as to the extent that the masses have been misdirected from the forces that affect their everyday lives to the pursuit of such an abstract  commodity.

More needs to be written.  More needs to be said.  More needs to be done.

쉬즈모 (徐志摩）

徐志摩(1897-1931)는 중국 현대문학사 중 대표 시인이며 중국 문학 경계를 넘어서 세계 문학계에게 혁명적인 영향을 끼친 중대한 인물이었다. 《굿바이 캠브리지 (再见康桥）》，《눈꽃의 기쁨（雪花快乐）》, 《우연 (偶然）》은 주요 작품.  쉬즈모는 또한 여러 문학 단체에 활약하게 참여하였으며 1920대 중에 소위 '사상문학혁명'을 제창한 후스(胡适）, 이른바 '삼미(三美）를 제기한 원이두(闻一多)등이랑  낭만주의에 바탕을 둔 신월파 (新月社)를 결성하였다.  

신월파는 당시에 활발한 창조파(创造社）의 분발한 상상력과 자유체 의 시형을 주장한 낭만주의적인 시의 운동을 계승하면서 또한 그것을 부정•극복하고자 한 시인 그룹이었다.  그들은 시인의 이상에 근거하여 자연과 사회 속에서 아름다움을 더 정련해 내고자 했으며, 이로부터 '이성에 의한 감정의 절제'라는 미학 원칙과 '시형식의 격률화"라는 주장을 제기하였다.   결국 그들의 격률시는 감정과 정서를 시의 핵심을 보면서도 이를 응축한 시 형식 속에서 정련화하려는 의식적 노력의 성과였다고 하겠다.

여기에서 '이성에 의한 감정의 절제'가 추구하는 것은 주관적 감정 토로에서부터 주관적 감정의 객관적 대사화이었다.  이를 예술적 상상과 구체적인 객관 현실에로의 변화를 통해  함축적•형상적인 표현을 이루어 내고자 하였다.  또한 이러한 미학의 원칙을 구현하기 위해, 그들은 시적 감정을 엄격히 규범화된 형식 속에 정제시키기 위한 시의 격률화를 제기하였다.  위에서 언급된 '삼미' 즉 음악미, 회화미, 검축미를 추구하였다.

쉬즈모는 낭미주의적 시를 상징한 자유, 사랑 및 아름다움의 추구를 통해 내면의 정감과 독특한 개성을 객관 사물의 이미지 속에 투사해 내면서, 한편 시의 내재적 형짓미와 음악 미의 조화를 바탕으로 한 미적 내용과 형식의 통일을 모색하였다.  역설적이게도 이러한 아름다운 사랑의 탐구를 중국 현대역사 중 가장 추하고 폭력적인 시적 때 진행한 것이다.

*공사중*

유종원 柳宗元(773-819)

중국의 당시(唐詩)라면 사람들이 자꾸 이백 李白(701-762)이나 두보 杜甫(712-770)를 무의식적으로 생각이 나게 마련이에요. 그들은 중국의 고전시뿐만 아니라 중국 문학 자체를 대표하는 시인들이기 때문이에요. 그런데 두보와 이백 이외에 또 다른 주목할 만한 시인이 누구십니까 공경하게 의문하면 제가 이렇게 대답할 거예요. 유종원이요. 저말고는 고려대의 중어중문학의 위대한 이재훈 교수님 등이 지적하듯이중국의 고전문학을 전문가로서 공부하신 학자들도 중당이나 당시 중에 유종원은 언급을 많이 받은 시인이래요.

그의 시풍은 아주 한적하고 투명하여 대부분의 전문가들에 따르면 그 시대의 매우 유행했던 산수자연의 모습과 그 속에서 체험하는 심경을 읊은 산수시로 종류되는 거예요. 유종원의 시를 감상할 때 화가가 잘 그린 그림를 눈 앞에 출현하듯이 그의 시는 잘 다듬어진 시구와 정교하고 깨끗한 풍경 묘사를 통해 산수의 신비스런 아름다움을 효과적으로 포착하고 있어요. 거의 평생을 유배지에서 보냈던 유종원은 자기가 보였던 환경을 시로 바로 그대로 간직할 수 있어요. 개인적으로 매우 재미있고 잘 지어진 유종원의 한 시를 여러분과 함께 나누워 드릴게요. 강설이라...

江雪

千山鳥飛絶, 萬徑人踪滅.

孤舟蓑笠翁, 獨釣寒江雪.

강설

온 산에 새도 날지 않고

모든 길에 인적 끊어졌다.

외로운 배에 사립 걸친 한 노인

눈 내리는 강에서 홀로 낚시 드리운다.

River Snow

Through the mountains not a bird flutters, the many trails marks now extinct.

In a lonely boat a straw hat and caped grandfather, alone holds a rod on the snow falling river.

Wine+christmas eves in Corea

Overextended grimy fingernails. I wake up. What day is it? I role over habitually grab my dick; i got a semi. Ask myself to wake, or not to wake. Tuesday. Overcast, like a today should be. Heartbeat reverberating in my temple, lifting myself from my death. Looking around I see my one room, Korean status room; gas burner in corner, crusted with overnight ramen packages, powder, noodles, gas nozzle left unclamped; shoes amuck, books and class printouts my carpet. Wine bottles, Stout, Grolsch and other beer bottles here and there but you shan’t call me no drunk. Chinky eyes, no racist, I think, “오늘은 나 뭐 할 거야?” and step the fuck out of bed.

Turn it on and start the bobbin of the head, put the glasses on, “turn it on Kweli,” up and then contacts poking my eyes out, or in? Grab my trampled toothbrush, not straightedge brush, lay the gel on and weed whack back and forth, but not enough for the dental hygienist; gotta floss, however, no ambition. Strip and grab the mini-size towel, place it on the knob in front of the shower door. Do the shower then hop out a shivering, it’s december, pre-christmas, sub zero, centigrade, no family just myself and dry the fuck off. Four hours sleep, slept in too much and stressing about it, but at the same time confident as fuck. The diary of an ambitious low self-esteem arrogant fuck.

Smith’s Wealth of Nation’s, 孟子, Rousseau’s Social Contract and Thoreau’s Walden stacked next to me. A few texts related to the study of traditional Chinese characters in Korean, modern Chinese and sixth level Korean fill out my winter semester curriculum. “이거 다 공부할 수 있겠냐? 그야 프라스(+) 공자의 《論語》그리고 다음 학기의 배울 이재훈 교수님이 맡으실 ‘고전독해연습’ 수업의 교재를 안 공부해서는 안 되겠다”라는 생각이 머리속에 떠올렸다. What am I? The future.

문학의 중요성

文學的本質是有節奏的情緖的世界

문학의 본질은 리듬이 있는 정서의 세계이다

The essence of literature is the rhythmic emotion of the world.