God and Creativity in Theology of Han
(The Wesleyan Theological Society 2008)
Young Woon Ko, Ph.D.
(Rogers State University)
I. Introduction
This presentation examines the divine in the process-relational paradigm of Han
as the substance of Korean religio-cultural history. Han, a word deeply embedded in the
Korean religious culture, literally means “middle,” “some,” “one and many,” and “part
and whole” and thereby represents the correlation between opposite elements, which
entail the creative interaction of God and the world. Han has formed the prototype of
Korean religious life as a vessel to adopt Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, and
Christianity in its own tradition.
Han, a word deeply embedded in the Korean mind system, literally means middle,
becoming, some, around, the one and the many, and the part and the whole. The meaning
of Han is organic, relation, and the fixed frame does not exist in it. Sang Yil Kim writes,
The word Han was also used as a suffix or prefix in many words associated with
some of the major identities as indicated by the following examples: Hanguk—the
Korean country, Hanminjok—the Korean people, Hangul—the Korean alphabet,
Hanbok—the Korean clothing, Hanearl—the Korean spirituality, Hananim—the
Korean God, etc. . . . Han signifies ‘totalistic,’ ‘harmonious,’ ‘nondualism,’ and
‘nonorientable.’ The reason why Korean Buddhism and Confucianism successfully
overcome dualism lies in Han-Korean unique relational mind system. 1
Han is non-scientific or illogical in terms of Western scientific rationalism, which
is based on the separation between subject and object of Newtonian and Decartesian
mechanic world view and which is reductive and objective. Subject is separated from
Sang Yil Kim, “Introduction,” in Hanism as a Korean Mind, ed. Sang-Yil Kim,
Young Chan Ro (Los Angeles: The Eastern Academy of Human Science, 1984) 18.
1
1
object and the objective world is defined by the subject. According to Harold Oliver,
however, “all relations are fundamental. . . . The subject-object paradigm of Western
thought that has dominated Western metaphysics by providing it with the alternatives of
Idealism and Realism, derived from the erroneous operation of treating relata as
fundamentals.” 2
The purpose of this presentation is to examine God and creativity in the relational
paradigm of Han in contrast to reductionism and subject-object paradigm based on the
concept of substance. On the basis of the relational world-view, Han sees the part and
the whole, the one and the many, not as reductive but as a living and relational and
organic system.
II. Kim Ilbu’s Jeongyeokdo and Non-Directed Order and Harmony between God
and the World in Han
In this section, I will explain the meaning and value of Han revealed in Kim Ilbu’s
(1828-89) Chart of the Eight Trigrams, Jeongyeokdo, which represents the spirit of
Korean native religions. I will demonstrate how the Han thoughts of Kim’s Jeongyeokdo
have been uniquely shaped in relation to Fu Xi’s (ca. 4,700 BCE) Chart of the Eight as
the prototype of Yijing, the Book of Changes, one of the primary classics in the Chinese
tradition.
The key subject of Yijing is the interaction of heaven, earth, and human being,
with an emphasis on the dynamic tension and transformation of all components making
the world.
In Yijing all things are defined by way of organic interrelationship, where the
2
Harold H. Oliver, Relatedness: Essays in Metaphysics and Theology (Macon, GA:
Mercer University Press, 1984), 37.
2
reality of life shows the process of change. It is only abstract thinking that takes them out
of their dynamic continuity and isolates them as static units.
So the Supreme Ultimate in Yijing cannot be understood without the phenomena of
changes. The Supreme Ultimate in Yijing indicates the creative process of principle and the
empirical world in which the contrasting poles of yin and yang are not antagonistic but
always communicative and transformational in the complementary relation. The opposites
components of God and the world, or Heaven and Earth are not independent realities but
the complementary characters of yin and yang formed in the organic relation. Yin and
Yang are two modes of the Supreme Ultimate. Yin expressed by a divided line means “the
soft and yielding, the submissive.” Yang line expressed by a solid line means “the hard
and strong, the assertive.” In the process of changes, the yin and yang lines are expanded
by the connection of each other to describe concrete phenomena of nature in “Four
3
Figuration of Double Lines,” or “Four Images.” The eight trigrams are, therefore, formed
by adding another line (yin and yang line) to those double lines.
But this theme of Yijing has differently been developed in China and Korea. Let
me compare and contrast Chinese Fu Xi’s Chart of the Trigrams with the Korean Kim
Ilbu’s Chart of the Trigrams, Jeongyeokdo. Fu Xi has been regarded as the first
legendary sage king in Chinese history drew the Eight Trigrams in a circle: In Yijing, 1,
3, 5, 7, 9 are all classified as Heavenly, Heaven belongs to Yang, so the yang numbers are
odd. 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 are all classified as Earthly. Earth belongs to yin. So the yin
numbers are even.3 Fu Xi’s Chart of the Eight Trigrams shows the yin-yang harmony
(always yin and yang facing each other and making a pair, 1/6, 2/7, 3/8. 4/9). And even
and odd number makes a pair by facing each other, which means harmony in the Yijing
3
Zhu Xi, Introduction to the Study of the Classic of Change (New York: Global
Scholarly Publications, 2002), 6-7.
4
paradigm, that is, correlating the opposites.
Fu Xi arranged these eight trigrams in a circle. If you see the circular diagram of
Fu Xi’s Chart, you can find an opposite direction between group yang (1, 2, 3, 4) running
counter clockwise and group yin (5, 6, 7, 8) going clockwise. But you also see a certain
direction within each group. In other words, from number one to four within group yang,
the arrangement of each trigram is directional and so does it from five to eight in group
yin. So the four trigrams within each group of yin and yang are directional. And each
individual line proceeds from the inside to the outside showing expansion from the low to
the high; from the earth to heaven.
5
Ilbu Kim shifted the consecutive order of one to four in group yang by arranging
the relation between one and two (1->2) in consecutive order but that between three and
four in reversed order (4->3).
In the same way, for the group yin, five and six are in
consecutive order (5->6) but seven and eight are in reversed order (8->7). Ilbu Kim’s
Eight Trigrams attempts to intensify the relation between the opposites by annihilating
any directional order. It changed all directional consecutive order of group yang (1234)
and group yin (5678) to the non-directional order of each yang (1423) and yin (5876).
For Fu Xi’s Chart of the Eight Trigrams, each individual line proceeds from the
inside to the outside, showing expansion from the low to the height; from the earth to
heaven. Jeongyeok diagram, however, Kun symbolizing the earth is located at the
6
highest point, and the individual line proceeds from the outside to the inside, shifting
from the center to the periphery.
Kim’s attempt is to overcome the hierarchical order of the Supreme Ultimate, yin
and yang, four images, and eight trigrams. This means that all individual lines are not
subordinate to the higher status. In the hierarchical order, human is subordinate to God,
nature to human, women to men, whereby reductionism and foundationalism of theology
is formed. Any equality and autonomy cannot be expected in that hierarchy. Some
directional order of Yijing had been one of the reasons for the feudal system and gender
inequality in the Eastern society. But Ilbu Kim’s trigrams attempted to make the world
without any discrimination.
Kim’s Jeongyeokdo symbolizes nullifying all the hierarchical order between male
and female, the ruler and the ruled, God and the world, destroying all discrimination of
races, classes, sexes.
Kim Ilbu’s Jeongyeokdo has influenced later development of Korean native
religions such as Donghak and Jeungsan’s thought. Historically the traditional text of
Yijing based on Fu Xi’s Arrangement had been responsible for sexism and classism in
East Asian society although he did not intend such a discrimination.
While Kim makes his diagram non-orientable and non-directed, he maintains the
order and harmony of the universe. The main purpose of this non-orientedness or nondirectedness in Kim’s Jeongyeok was to show that there would be no obstacle among
nations, neighbors, and communities; there is no conflict of ideology, no discrimination
of sexes and races. This also means no obstacle in mind.
7
Donghak is one of the Korean native religions (1824-64), which was founded by
Choi Jae-Woon (1824-64) in 1860. It was a revolutionary life-movement of the religious
spirit of the Korean people in the 19th century, when the country was faced with a
political, social, and cultural crisis. The key of Donghak movement in Korean history
was to eliminate all hierarchical structure of status – to destroy the evil of classism and
sexism.
The God of Donghak is the pan-en-theistic Spirit who brings the universe into
harmony. The concept of God in Donghak is not transcendental monotheism, nor
immanent pan-theism but pan-en-theism representing God’s dipolar nature of
transcendence and immanence in the creative movement of the universe. Donghak
articulates this pen-en-theistic nature of God in three modes: “Shih Chun-ju (waiting on
or bearing God), “Yang Chun-ju (raising or fostering God),” and “Che Chun-ju
(embodying God).”
To wait on God means to be filled with spiritual energy inside to feel the harmony
of the spirit. Chun-ju means God while Shih means “writing on, bearing , serving.”
According to Yong Choon Kim, a Donghak thinker, “Shih Chun-ju means “man bears
God” or ‘man serves God.’ Shih Chun-ju signifies that the human bears the essence of
God within himself/herself, or the human serves God who is the Higher Spirit within the
human mind.” 4 Shih Chun-ju represents the organic relationship between God and the
human spirit. Choi Jae-woo understands “waiting on God,” not in terms of monotheistic
action, rationalistic epistemology, or emotional feelings, but rather with the personal
experience of his commitment. Waiting on God is toe be aware of God the Lord
Young Choon Kim, “An Analysis of Early Chun-Do-Kyo thought” in Korea Journal
17, no 10 (Seoul, Koryo, 1977), 98.
4
8
immediately and unimmediately, who fills the universe with his creative energy and
novelty and who brings it into harmony with one’s body and mind.
For God’s interaction with the world, another important term in Donghak is Yang
Chun-ju (raising God). Yang means “fostering,” “developing,” or “raising.” That is to
say, the world raises and fosters God.5 In Yang Chun-ju, God is not unchangeable but
movable, dynamically relating to the world. God is affected by and related to the word,
just as the world is affected by and related to God. Raising God signifies that God does
not control the whole process of the world. God does not only affect or condition the
world but God is also affected or conditioned by the world in that God is raised and
developed by the world.
If we commit evil, we come to hurt God bearing in ourselves. In other words, we
have to develop and foster God in order for God to manifest Godself in our world. In this
sense, God who is only in transcendent realm gives no meaning to our world. Yet, God’s
transcendence is necessarily required in that we have to transform our world by
responding to and bringing God’s transcendent vision. In this sense God’s transcendence
and immanence forms a dipolar pattern in a cyclical movement.
For another concept for God in Donghak, “Che Chun-ju (embodying God)”
means to realize God in human body. Choi Shi-young writes, “we embody Chun-ju by
waiting on Chun-ju and raising Chun-ju. Every river, drainage, and lake is the blood and
skeleton of the universe, the universe is the place where God dwells and embody
Himself/Herself.”6 Thus God and the world are organically interrelated with each other.
5
Choi Dong Hee, History of Korean Religious Thought, vol. 3, Chun-Do-Kyo (Seoul:
Munwhasa, 1978), 58.
6
Canon of Chun-Do-Kyo (Seoul: Chun-Do-Kyo General Assembly, 1970), 124.
9
If the world suffers, God suffers. God and the world organically grow together and form
a community.
Kim Ilbu’s Han thoughts in Jeongyeokdo has also influenced Daesoon Jinrihoe as
one of the Korean native religions. The interaction of heaven and nature with human
beings is greatly articulated by the tenet of Daesoon thoughts. The unity of yin and yang,
God-human harmony, mutual existence-in-support, and the realm of truth in which the
ultimate way pervades the whole world. The harmony of non-theistic and theistic
religion can be found in Han thoughts of Korean native religions.
From the topological perspective, Kim’s Jeongyeokdo is compared to the nonEuclidean way and implies the four dimensional world by breaking a barrier between
front and back, right and left, above and below, inside and outside. The opposites
support each other by making a perfect harmony.7 This is why Kim calls Jeongyeokdo
“The World of Mirrors” in which things are reflected in one another by connecting the
opposite. Kim deconstructs a certain directional and orientable point that can mean
transcendent God, male-privileged society, human centeredness with no respect to nature.
These are based on a directional, orientable, and hierarchical structure. The key of
Jeonyeokdo is that each element is central. Each trigram is not directed to a certain point
but circularly revolved by connecting the opposites, so that all hierarchical structure is
deconstructed.
Kim Ilbu’s Jeongyeokdo is based on the relational paradigm of Han in which the
divine reality and human being always are interdependent. The notion of God in Han is
quite different from that of God as transcendent reality developed in the traditional
7
Sang Yil Kim, Yijing and the Logic of Postmodernism (Seoul: Jishik Sanyopsa, 2006),
412-32.
10
classical theism in which God influences the world but not vice versa. In this theistic
tradition, God is strictly distinguished from the world and thereby described as a
controller. The world is totally dependent on God but not vice versa. God is described
as almighty and immovable and dominates the world. This view of God has difficulty in
explaining the problem of chaos and evil in the world. As a result, it was greatly
challenged by an atheistic view with an emphasis on reason.
In Han thoughts is found a different model of God from such a traditional
Western theism, however. God does not the control the whole process of the world. God
does not only affect the world but God also is affected by the world. The divine reality in
Han thoughts is not a fixed or static being but always exists in dynamic relationship with
the human mind and nature. In this sense, the divine represents the meaning of the
ultimate in relation to the human nature. The divine signifies the force to bind heaven,
earth, and human into peace and harmony.
The divine reality is not separated from the human mind and nature. For Han,
the divine means the force of harmony and order for the world. The goodness of our
mind and nature is based on the divine spirit, which is in and with all created entities in
the universe. From the Han perspective, the truth refers to the state in which the divine
permeates into everything constituting the universe; the harmonious state of the universe
is based on the divine spirit and order to be actualized in the human world.
This relation between God and the world is rooted in the pattern of yin-yang
dynamics. According to Daejin Jeong, “while God is compared to yin due to its
11
invisibility, we humans can be to yang because of the existence of our body.” 8 Yin and
yang are defined in the relation of both opposition and fellowship. Both opposite images
are not static but are of change and transformation in their fellowship.
From the Han perspective, God does not control but always cooperates with the
world, whereby God does not give any male image of active and controlling power, of
independent reality without any receptiveness and responsiveness.
This view of God from the paradigm of Han is parallel with Whiteheadian
process view of God. For Whitehead (1861–1947), God is an actual entity that is defined
in relationship with the rest of the universe. The essential nature of actual entities is their
prehension, which describes how an entity reacts or responds to its environments. Actual
entities mean the subjective moments of experience of which the world is made up. All
existences in the universe are formed in each moment of my experiences. In this sense,
according to Whitehead, actual entities also are defined as temporal actual occasions.
God is exceptional, however, because God is non-temporal. So God is an actual entity
but not an actual occasion.9
God and the actual world creatively interact with each other through their
prehensions. Their prehensions begin with God’s supplying each temporal actual entity
with its initial aim, whereby God influences the world. God’s initial aim is driven from
God’s conceptual prehension of the entire multiplicity of eternal objects. This process of
prehension is what Whitehead calls “God’s primordial nature.” 10 This primordial nature
8
Daejin Jeong, The Collection of Theories on Daesoon Thoughts [Daesoonsasang
Nonchong] (Gyunggi, Korea: Ilsim, 2004), 57
9
Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality: An essay in Cosmology, ed. David Ray
Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne (New York: The Free Press, 1979), 75.
10
Ibid., 33-4.
12
of God is related to the character of yin. God’s primordial nature is characteristic of
God’s initial aim, which only displays the vision of the world but does not coerce the
world to realize it in His/Her controllable force. God’s primordial nature does not refer
to any actualized one but a potential urge toward particular realization.
On the other hand, human beings, as temporal actual entities, first perform their
physical prehensions. This echoes Jung’s statement that “humans can be compared to
yang because of the existence of their body.”11 The human prehensive mode starts with
casual efficacy, causally inherited from the immediate past, which is very dim and
obscure. This is the primitive prehension taking place in the initial phases of
concrescence as “reenactive” or “conformal” feeling. According to Whitehead, this
mode of prehension is based on bodily feeling in the experience of actual entities.12
Whitehead argues that God’s consequent nature is another aspect of divine
character, which is in a complementary relation with God’s primordial nature. God’s
consequent nature manifests God’s dependence on the world. In God’s primordial nature,
“there is no reference to particular actualities or to any particular actual world.”13 God’s
primordial nature is God’s purpose or initial plan with regard to the temporal world. On
the other hand, God’s consequent nature means God’s receptiveness and responsiveness
in which God is affected by all the myriad things and co-creative with the world.14
This receptive and responsive characteristic of God’s consequent nature is well
exhibited in the following statement of Daesoonjinri:
While God has no place to be dependent on if there were no people behind, people
11
Jeong, 57.
12
Whitehead, 118-23.
13
Ibid., 207.
Ibid., 13.
14
13
has no place to be dependent on if there were no God ahead. All things are greatly
achieved by the harmonization of God and humanity. The divine reality waits on
human beings and vice versa, so that yin is united with yang. In this manner, after
God communicates with humanity, the way of heaven and earth is performed. The
divine matters are followed by the human matters and vice versa.”15
This shows how human behaviors can affect the divine realm and thereby the divine
consequently cares for their matters. “God is affected by the incantation of the person
who practices the Way.” In other words, God is not the wholly other independent of
human affairs. God reveals Godself in cooperation with the human affairs.
III. God and Creativity in The Relational Paradigm of Han
Dynamic tension between the opposites is a great source of creativity in Han
thoughts. Unlike Aristotle’s Law of Contrast (that cannot be both A and not A), the
paradoxical relation between the contrasts is not the negative agent to be eliminated. The
one-many relationship in Whitehead’s concept of creativity helps to understand such a
paradox. Whitehead’s creativity does not mean that the many proceed toward the one
final reality but that the many becomes the one and vice versa in a cyclical movement.
According to Whitehead, concrescence is described as a “micro-cosmic process” in
which an actual entity is developed and forms itself as a particular being in relationship
with other actual entities.16 In other words, concrescence indicates that the disjunctive
“many” through transition is transformed into a new unity, which has its own unique
features through “final cause.”17 At this point, the disjunctive “many” participate in the
“Disciplinary Practices” [Gyowoon]
in The Book of Daesoonjinri (Seoul:
Daesoonjinrihoe Publication, 1982)., 2:42.
16
Whitehead, 214.
17
Ibid., 212.
15
14
process, forming a new unity. They make an actual occasion in a moment when various
kinds of entities are “together,” so that “many” coexist in a new entity. 18
This process of concrescence is distinctively different from the Hegelian Absolute
Spirit because the one unity attained by the process of concrescence is constantly open to
the many. When an actual entity attains its completion with its unique features by the
process of concrescence, the entity continuously participates in the constitution of
‘many.’ As such a completed entity offers itself as data for other actual entities and
participates in the formation of new entities. Whitehead calls this process “transition.”
According to Whitehead, transition is the macrocosmic process that moves from
particular existent to particular existent.19
For Whitehead, the one as unity does not mean the one as opposed to evil. Rather
it means a complex unity. Whitehead says that “the many components of a complex
datum have a unity: this unity is a ‘contrast of entities.’”20 In other words, the creative
advance in the one-many dynamic relation is made by proceeding “from ‘contrasts’ to
‘contrasts of contrasts,’” which does not mean proceeding to the ultimate end but
“indefinitely to higher grades of contrasts.”21 If we follow this position of Whitehead,
creative advance does not refer to mass movements toward only good but rather to
ceaseless contrasts of contrasts in which good and evil are constantly intermingled in the
journey toward a complex unity.
The relational paradigm of Han represents the cosmological view of the Korean
native religious tradition that regards a thing not as a substance but as a flowing of events
18
19
20
21
Ibid., 21.
Ibid., 55.
Ibid., 36.
Ibid., 212.
15
whereby contradictory elements are interrelated paradoxically. Because a thing is not
defined a fixed frame but by relationship with others, it draws a pattern of change and
transformation with others. The religions of Han observe that a life is not constituted by
its unchangeable essence but by the interaction with other lives. A life then is defined in
a relational character shaped by way of change and transformation.
Thus, the Han thoughts do not support the unchangeable and static generality
disassociated from the dynamic phenomenal world in order to seek the essence of a thing.
From the Han perspective, to define an object in a fixed frame leads to an estrangement
between the dynamic actuality and the concept of the object. While the actuality of the
object is in the process of change and transformation in organic relation to the rest of the
world, its concept refers to the abstract feature of a certain thing. In this context, the Han
theory enhances the dynamic actuality of life that cannot be found in conceptual language.
The world view of Han always refers to the flowing world in the rhythmic
balance between yin and yang. The harmony of all things is produced by the interaction
between the correlation of yin and yang. This means that any existence can be defined
neither as yin itself nor as yang itself; the most significant nature of yin and yang is their
dynamic change and movement in their mutual interaction.
From such a mutual relationship, the production and transformation of nature is
accomplished by the circle of its unity and diversity. This process reveals the
significance of Han cosmology. Han means the principle of all myriad elements of
which the universe is composed. It is based on the creative process in change and
transformation in which nature is interrelated organically with the human mind. The
16
change and transformation of mind and nature are conducted by the yin-yang dynamics in
mutual existence.
Han is the principle of the universe developed in the creative process and
dynamic movement of the opposites. Han means that the ultimate principle of the
universe is circulated constantly in the organic relation between mind and nature. This
refers to the change in the process of transformation, in which all beings are situated.
The foundational principle of transformational change is developed not in the
abstractedness of concept and essence of being but in concrete phenomena revealed in
immediate experience as irreducible to the dualistic form of either A or not A.
Since Han concerns itself with process, its logical pattern is distinguished from
abstract logic or formal logic in which truth and falsehood are divided clearly. It is
beyond the demarcation between truth and falsehood that a correlation of antithetical
elements is developed creatively in a paradoxical system.
The correlative cosmology of yin and yang is developed in the patterns of
diversity-in-unity and unity-in-diversity. Han accentuates that all the lives of the
universe should return to the harmonious state of human mind and nature, which means
none other than the ultimate way and thereby aims to bring into the new world the realm
of truth in which the ultimate way pervades. 22 Unlike Aristotle’s Law of Contrast, the
world of Han is described in both the ultimate and non-ultimate, which forms the
foundational logic of Han. The ultimate in Han means the comprehensiveness of
paradoxical situations and dynamic tension of yin and yang. Therefore, the ultimate is
different from eternity reality such as Plato’s Idea or the transcendent God in Christianity.
Sang Yil Kim “A View on the Uniqueness of Korean Mind” in Studies on Religions
of Korea (Seoul: The Association of Korean Native Religions, 2006), 11-13.
22
17
Han emphasizes the One Mind, which is the source of all life and the indivisible
state of mind that is free from all the shackle of self-deception. The One Mind is
considered a cosmological explanation of existences in the universe.23 This realm of the
One Mind is different from the soteriological ideal emphasizing the attainment of the
divine and the sacred world separated from the secular. Instead, the explanation of Han
is about the peace and harmony of existences in this world through the dynamic
interrelatedness between the mind and nature.
Han is considered the cosmological harmony of all existences in mutual nonobstruction of the One Mind. In this true realm, God, human, and nature are harmonized
and unified, whereby all conflicts can be overcome by a greater and broader horizon
toward the ultimate reality.
According to Han, no individual gains complete power or can exercise one’s full
power until one is given some environment. Specifically, one’s power is exhibited only
when an individual is in an organic unity and relates with other environmental worlds.
An individual exists interdependently with his or her environments in organic society.
When an individual participates in organic unity with others, it is said to be a wholistic
existence. The feature of the truth of Han is described as the One Mind in which all
contrasting elements are paradoxically combined and all discriminations are dissolved.
God, human, and nature are not three different substances but can be unified in the world
of Hanism that practices the One Mind.
They are identical in terms of the ultimate
reality in which all phenomenal distinctions are abolished.
23
Ibid., 33.
18
Self-deception originates from the mutual exclusion and opposition in which all
phenomena are filled with conflicts and struggle. The human ego is responsible for such
an opposition. Han understands that the ego-consciousness always can be apart from the
divine-human-nature harmony, and thereby distort the true self united with the divine and
nature.
The divine order in the world of Han is the harmonious order formed by
embracing the contrasting poles of yin/yang, heaven/earth, the masculine/the feminine,
the mind/nature, good/evil, and true/false.
Although God is not identified with human
mind and nature, it also is not an agent outside them. The true realm filled with the
divine way is not only comprehensive but also creative in that it is engaged continuously
in the world of the mind and nature of things.
This principle of Han as the harmonious proceeding of the opposites is based
upon the cyclical relation in that the two different entities interact continuously and thus
are mutually transformed with no hierarchical order. In this manner, God, human, and
nature should be comprehended in their internal relationship. The harmony of Han
thoughts is the harmony among humans, the harmony between human and nature, and the
harmony between the divine and the human.
19
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Canon of Chun-Do-Kyo. Seoul: Chun-Do-Kyo General Assembly, 1970.
Choi, Dong Hee, History of Korean Religious Thought, vol. 3, Chun-Do-Kyo. Seoul:
Munwhasa, 1978.
Jeong, Daejin. The Collection of Theories on Daesoon Thoughts [Daesoonsasang
Nonchong] Gyunggi, Korea: Ilsim, 2004.
Kim, Sang Yil. “A View on the Uniqueness of Korean Mind” in Studies on Religions of
Korea. Seoul: The Association of Korean Native Religions, 2006, 9-40.
___________. Hanism as a Korean Mind. Los Angeles: The Eastern Academy of
Human Science, 1984
___________. Yijing and the Logic of Postmodernism. Seoul: Jishik Sanyopsa, 2006.
Kim, Young Choon, “An Analysis of Early Chun-Do-Kyo thought” in Korea Journal 17,
no 10 (Seoul, Koryo, 1977), 90-113.
Oliver, Harold H. Relatedness: Essays in Metaphysics and Theology. Macon, GA:
Mercer University Press, 1984.
The Book of Daesoonjinri [Jungyong]. Seoul: Daesoonjinrihoe Publication, 1982.
Whitehead, Alfred North. Process and Reality: An essay in Cosmology, ed. David Ray
Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne. New York: The Free Press, 1979.
Zhu Xi, Introduction to the Study of the Classic of Change (New York: Global Scholarly
Publications, 2002.
20