Abstract
“Does Daoism exist in Korean society?” This is still a controversy in Korean academic community. Among renowned scholars, there is a confrontation over this issue. Some argue that Korean Daoism does not exist. They understand religious practices of “Daoism” in Korean society as temporarily formed fashion under Chinese influence. Choi Joon-sik maintains that ‘Korean Daoism' is an illusion formed through the lens of sinocentrism. However, there are many other scholars who are concentrating on Korean Daoism as their research field and producing academic work.
This article focuses on transnationality in Korean Daoism as a reconciliation. The debate over transnationality in Korean Daoism involves the discussion of the relationship between Chinese Daoism and Korean Daoism. It often extends to the identity issue of Korean Daoism. In this article, transnationality in Korean Daoism is explained in terms of duality: Korean Daoism has been constructed by the constant influence of Chinese Daoism on one hand and by the authentic character of Korean Daoism on the other hand. If Korean Daoism was completely dependent on Chinese Daoism in terms of its development and identity, transnationality in Korean Daoism could not be discussed: Korean Daoism could be part of Chinese Daoism. If Korean Daoism was distinctively independent of Chinese Daoism, Korean Daoism could be described as ‘national' rather than ‘transnational'. In conclusion, Korean Daoism has been transnationally developed by intermingling authentic ideas and practices in the Korean peninsular and Daoist influences from China.
“Does Daoism exist in Korean society?” This is still a controversy in Korean academic community. Among renowned scholars, there is a confrontation over this issue. Some argue that Korean Daoism does not exist. They understand religious practices of “Daoism” in Korean society as temporarily formed fashion under Chinese influence. Choi Joon-sik maintains that ‘Korean Daoism' is an illusion formed through the lens of sinocentrism. However, there are many other scholars who are concentrating on Korean Daoism as their research field and producing academic work.
This article focuses on transnationality in Korean Daoism as a reconciliation. The debate over transnationality in Korean Daoism involves the discussion of the relationship between Chinese Daoism and Korean Daoism. It often extends to the identity issue of Korean Daoism. In this article, transnationality in Korean Daoism is explained in terms of duality: Korean Daoism has been constructed by the constant influence of Chinese Daoism on one hand and by the authentic character of Korean Daoism on the other hand. If Korean Daoism was completely dependent on Chinese Daoism in terms of its development and identity, transnationality in Korean Daoism could not be discussed: Korean Daoism could be part of Chinese Daoism. If Korean Daoism was distinctively independent of Chinese Daoism, Korean Daoism could be described as ‘national' rather than ‘transnational'. In conclusion, Korean Daoism has been transnationally developed by intermingling authentic ideas and practices in the Korean peninsular and Daoist influences from China.
This article focuses on transnationality in Korean Daoism as a reconciliation. The debate over transnationality in Korean Daoism involves the discussion of the relationship between Chinese Daoism and Korean Daoism. It often extends to the identity issue of Korean Daoism. In this article, transnationality in Korean Daoism is explained in terms of duality: Korean Daoism has been constructed by the constant influence of Chinese Daoism on one hand and by the authentic character of Korean Daoism on the other hand. If Korean Daoism was completely dependent on Chinese Daoism in terms of its development and identity, transnationality in Korean Daoism could not be discussed: Korean Daoism could be part of Chinese Daoism. If Korean Daoism was distinctively independent of Chinese Daoism, Korean Daoism could be described as ‘national' rather than ‘transnational'. In conclusion, Korean Daoism has been transnationally developed by intermingling authentic ideas and practices in the Korean peninsular and Daoist influences from China.
“Does Daoism exist in Korean society?” This is still a controversy in Korean academic community. Among renowned scholars, there is a confrontation over this issue. Some argue that Korean Daoism does not exist. They understand religious practices of “Daoism” in Korean society as temporarily formed fashion under Chinese influence. Choi Joon-sik maintains that ‘Korean Daoism' is an illusion formed through the lens of sinocentrism. However, there are many other scholars who are concentrating on Korean Daoism as their research field and producing academic work.
This article focuses on transnationality in Korean Daoism as a reconciliation. The debate over transnationality in Korean Daoism involves the discussion of the relationship between Chinese Daoism and Korean Daoism. It often extends to the identity issue of Korean Daoism. In this article, transnationality in Korean Daoism is explained in terms of duality: Korean Daoism has been constructed by the constant influence of Chinese Daoism on one hand and by the authentic character of Korean Daoism on the other hand. If Korean Daoism was completely dependent on Chinese Daoism in terms of its development and identity, transnationality in Korean Daoism could not be discussed: Korean Daoism could be part of Chinese Daoism. If Korean Daoism was distinctively independent of Chinese Daoism, Korean Daoism could be described as ‘national' rather than ‘transnational'. In conclusion, Korean Daoism has been transnationally developed by intermingling authentic ideas and practices in the Korean peninsular and Daoist influences from China.
| Translated title of the contribution | Rethinking Korean Daoism with a Special Focus on Transnational Aspects |
|---|---|
| Original language | Korean |
| Pages (from-to) | 207-234 |
| Number of pages | 28 |
| Journal | 인문연구 |
| Volume | 68 |
| Issue number | 68 |
| State | Published - Aug 2013 |