장자는 죽음의 철학자다. 그는 죽음의 불가지론자였지만, 죽음에 관해 많은 말을 남겼다. 그에게 죽음은 중요한 철학적 테제였음에 분명하다. 선행연구자들은 장자의 죽음관을 그의 세계관으로부터 구성해냈다. 그들은 장자가 죽음과 삶을 구분하지 않았다고 말하고, 장자가 죽음을 찬양했던 것처럼 말하기도 했다. 장자의 죽음관을 정확히 도출하기 위해 고찰한 장자의 세계관에 대한 이해가 정밀하지 않았기 때문에 도달한 결론이다. 본고에서는 장자의 죽음에 대한 태도가 환영과 거부의 사이에 있었다고 주장했다. 그리고 이 주장에 도달하는 와중에 생명, 개체, 기 그리고 감응의 문제를 다뤘다. 장자의 생명은 생기다. 생기는 언표되기 어렵지만 명확하게 체험할 수 있다. 인식과 존재를 섞어 놓는 기는 상징적 존재로서, 변화의 조짐이기도 했다. 변화는 일기의 변화였으므로, 세계와 격절된 개체는 성립할 수 없었다. 장자의 개체는 개방적이었다. 개방된 개체는 세상과 감응했다. 자의식은 감응을 방어했으므로, 도가 수양론에서는 자의식의 제어를 요구했고, 자의식이 제거된 상태의 체험을 중시했다. 호흡법과 같은 명상법이 중시된 까닭이다. 죽음은 감응을 방지하는 자의식의 소거를 의미하는 동시에 감응자체를 불가능하게 만든다. 그러므로 장자에게 죽음은 환영할 만한 일이 아니다. 다만, 죽음에 저항하는 것은 세상과의 격절을 만들고 감응을 거부하는 것이었으므로, 장자는 죽음을 애써 거부하지는 않았을 것이다. 장자의 죽음에 대한 태도는 환영과 거부의 사이에서 찾아야 한다.
Zhuangzi was a philosopher who had interest in the matter of death. Considering the fact the other contemporary philosophists did not show much interest in this matter, he can be told as a philosophist of death. Previous studies, which studied the view of death of Zhuangzi through his world-view, reached similar conclusion that Zhuangzi thought death is similar to life. I don’t think this conclusion is wrong. However, more precise investigation shows a little difference with the conclusion of previous studies. The life is understood by the concept of qi(氣), which is clear, but not comprehensible with language. Qi is a symbol of change and change itself. Death was understood as the change of qi by Zhuangzi. The individuality that is departed from the world is not to be accepted on the premise there the world is one qi itself. The individuality of Zhuangzi should be an open system. A closed individuality can't be imagined in the world-view of Zhuangzi. Therefore, there is not a clear distinction in the world-view of Zhuangzi. An individual as an open system interacts with circumstance and each other. Qi mediated this interaction, whose meditation is called as resonance. The self-cultivation of Daoism recommended the resonance through qi. Death means not only the disappearance of self-consciousness that prevented resonance but also the impossibility of resonance. Therefore, Zhunagzi is not to be thought that he accepted death with joy. For the refusal of death proves the failure of resonance. Therefore, his stance on the matter of death could be placed between acception of death with joy and refusal with obstinacy.
Zhuangzi was a philosopher who had interest in the matter of death. Considering the fact the other contemporary philosophists did not show much interest in this matter, he can be told as a philosophist of death. Previous studies, which studied the view of death of Zhuangzi through his world-view, reached similar conclusion that Zhuangzi thought death is similar to life. I don’t think this conclusion is wrong. However, more precise investigation shows a little difference with the conclusion of previous studies. The life is understood by the concept of qi(氣), which is clear, but not comprehensible with language. Qi is a symbol of change and change itself. Death was understood as the change of qi by Zhuangzi. The individuality that is departed from the world is not to be accepted on the premise there the world is one qi itself. The individuality of Zhuangzi should be an open system. A closed individuality can't be imagined in the world-view of Zhuangzi. Therefore, there is not a clear distinction in the world-view of Zhuangzi. An individual as an open system interacts with circumstance and each other. Qi mediated this interaction, whose meditation is called as resonance. The self-cultivation of Daoism recommended the resonance through qi. Death means not only the disappearance of self-consciousness that prevented resonance but also the impossibility of resonance. Therefore, Zhunagzi is not to be thought that he accepted death with joy. For the refusal of death proves the failure of resonance. Therefore, his stance on the matter of death could be placed between acception of death with joy and refusal with obstinacy.
