Choe Han-gi's Discourse on Singi and His Criticism on Chinese Medicine and Western Medicine: Focusing on the Relationship with Seo Gyeong-deok's Philosophy / 의사학

This study examines how Choe Han-gi (崔漢綺, 1803–1879) developed his medical discourse which integrated the concepts of traditional Chinese medicine with modern Western anatomy, based on the philosophy of Seo Gyeong-deok (徐敬德, 1489–1546), a scholar of the Neo-Confucianism of Joseon (1392–1910). Seo emphasized gi (氣, C. qi, vital, material force) rather than yi (理, C. li, the principle of things) as a way of understanding the world. Since Choe's early academic interests pertained to Neo-Confucianism, it is reasonable to examine his philosophy in this context. Similar to Seo, Choe assumed that the most essential component of the world was the intrinsic and mysterious gi. Although Seo spoke of gi as a damil cheongheo ji gi (湛一淸虛之氣, the gi which is profound, uniform, clear, invisible, and empty), Choe preferred to use the word singi (神氣, C. shenqi, the intrinsic, invisible, and mysterious gi). He believed that the earth, moon, and stars operated through the action of singi and that all creatures could only exist by relying on it. Singi was the most important premise in Choe's medical discourse, a fact demonstrating that although he could be very critical of traditional Chinese medicine, his perspective was part of that tradition. He believed that singi integrated and operated the entire human body and that it perceived external objects. He also emphasized the role of hyeongjil (形質, C. xingzhi, a visible object with a form and quality; here it means all human bodies). This was the medium through which singi could appear in reality. Choe thought that singi could not reveal itself in reality without hyeongjil, and that hyeongjil became a dead thing without singi. His perception of the role of hyeongjil was expressed in his interest in modern Western anatomy, an interest that complemented his focus on singi. In light of his understanding of the singi-hyeongjil relationship, Choe criticized both modern Western anatomy and traditional Chinese medicine. He thought that modern Western anatomy lacked awareness of singi and that traditional Chinese medicine lacked accurate knowledge of human anatomy. Although he was not completely sympathetic toward any forms of medicine, he was open to ideas from both Western and Chinese medicine. Choe could not accept Western anatomy as fully as Japanese intellectuals did. The study of anatomy in Japan had developed in relation to the idea of Ancient Learning (古學, C. guxue), which denied such theories of systematic correspondence as Yin and Yang and the Five Elements (陰陽 五行, C. yinyang wuxing) and tended to focus on the action of hyeongjil itself. Because Choe accepted modern Western anatomy without accepting Ancient Learning, his perspective was unique in the history of East Asian anatomy. From a medical history perspective, how does Choi Han-gi's medical discourse distinguish itself from other medical discourses, and what are its characteristics? In addition to other explanations, focusing on the political imagination associated with medicine can help illuminate the differences between the medical discourse of Choe and those of others. Discussion of medicine and the human body was tied to political thought, manifesting the political imagination of the society in which that discussion took place. The development of Western and Japanese anatomy reflected a vertical and hierarchical political order, exemplified by the belief that the brain was the center of the body. However, Choe doubted that organs like the brain or heart dominated the body. In his view, the singi ruled the body; it was not a specific organ, and it was equally inherent in all people. His political thought also emphasized the horizontal and equal order among people. His view of singi simultaneously influenced both his perspective on medicine and his perspective on society. Choe Han-gi's belief in this horizontal and equal political order was inherent in his singi-centered medical discourse.

HISTORY OF WESTERN ANATOMY IN MONGOLIA / Монголын эм зүй, эм судлал

In the History of Yuan Dynasty, the 81st chapter of scripture “…Khubilai Khaan was established the Medical school in May, second year of Jun Tung”. This is certifying that first confidential hospital was formed in 1261 of public reckoning. In 1280 Mongolian State 5th article of law /one of the codes of law for 13th century were the hospitals /Military/ approved by State law during the 10-13th century, which had their strong rules and regulations. Doctor Khusekhui, a Mongolian nationality was printed the three volumes of book, which titled “Brief Practical Guide to Healthy Diet” printed in 1330. Also there are high needs to search theoretic creature about Mongolian food. Starting since 17th century Mongolian doctors, scientists were started to establish flow of “Four Medical Tantras” and based on “Astanga Hrdayam Samhita” written by famous Doctor Bagbat from Indian Auyrved /1500-1600/, “The explanation of Quintessence of the Eight Branches” his explanatory literature by Chandranandan, was compiled by sage Doctor, Elder Utog Yondongombo /729-854/ and Younger Utog Uoyndongombo reviewed again “Four Medical Tantras” during XII century. Study of personal history and works of famous Mongolian doctors and scholars is a tool for drawing historical tree of the traditional medicine. Of particular importance is period between 17th and 19th century which is a golden period of traditional medicine development. In this research project we identified the details of personal history of some scholars who had great contribution into the development of traditional medicine including Zaya Pandit Namkhaijamts from Oirad (1559), Lama Gegeen Luvsandanzanjaltsan (1639-1704), Zaya Pandit Luvsanprinlei (1642-1715), Lord Gombojav from Uzemchin (1680-1750), Arya jonlon Pandit Agvaanluvsandanbiijantsan (1770- 1845), Sube hambo Ishbaljir (1704-1788), Tsahar gevsh Luvsanchultem (1740-1810), Mindol nomuun Khan (1789-1838), Toin Jambaldorj (1792-1855), Luvsanchoimbal (19th century), Jigmeddanzanjamts (19th century), Ishdanzanvaanjil (1852-1906), Agvaangenden (19th century), Yondon (19th century), Lunrig Dandar (1831-1920), Choijamts (1860-1928). In addition, we also made observations on their works from the perspectives of theory, methodology and philosophy. Comprehending a science in light of its own methodology is important because then it opens up for observations from the perspective of other sciences and methodologies as well as creates new ideas.