Keywords

1 What Is Jeong? Some Psychological Social Perspectives

Jeong (情) is known as a representative cultural emotion of the Korean people. Its literal meaning is emotion, but the practical meaning of jeong in Korean refers to specific feelings in human relationships with others. It implies affection, usually in combination with words for friendship (ujeong 우정 友情), lover (jeongin 정인 情人), or love (aejeong 애정 愛情). It is similar to love and affection in other cultures, but it involves a deeper attachment than affection, is more tender than passionate romantic love, and is more slowly accumulated than attachment.

Korean American psychiatrists Christopher Chung and Samson Cho made a noteworthy comparison table between jeong and love. It says, “Jeong is inter-individual, centrifugal, slow-paced, passive, and pre-oedipal, whereas love is intra-individual, centripetal, ranging in pace from instant to slow, active, and oedipal” (Chung and Cho 2006: 47). The word “inter-individual” means that jeong exists not only in the individual’s mind but also in the relationship between people. Thus, Chung and Cho call jeong “extra-psychic and inter-psychic emotion” (Chung and Cho 2006: 48). “Centrifugal” means that it moves toward others rather than oneself. “Pre-oedipal” means that jeong is more primordial than the formation of the Oedipal complex.Footnote 1 Jeong is therefore formed slowly in our daily lives knowingly or unknowingly. To be exact, it cannot be a pure individual emotion but always relational feelings. Emotions arises when one contacts objects. For example, when one meets an attractive object, one might feel pleasure, delight, and love. When one experiences a bad event, one feels sadness or anger. But jeong does not work in that way.

In the relational context, a Korean psychologist, Choi Sang-Chin, lists four elements for developing the feelings of jeong: “shared history, time spent together, tenderness, and intimacy” (Choi and Kim 2002: 32). The first two are external conditions and the latter two are internal ones. People share histories by experiencing life stories and overcoming obstacles together. Spending time together means doing things together on a daily basis, usually over a long period. Tenderness means taking care of each other without expecting a reward. Intimacy means lowering personal boundaries and opening oneself with trust. Sharing time, experience, and a common fate, and caring slowly make people soak into jeong. The Korean language expresses this state with the phrase “Jeong permeates me” (정들다 Jeong deulda). The permeation of jeong happens unnoticeably and spontaneously; people usually do not realize it until the object is gone. Human feelings are also spontaneously related to desire. When one loves something, one wants to have it. When one dislikes a thing, one wants to get rid of it. Jeong does not involve such selfish desires. It is more closely associated with sacrifice and sincerity and less with self-interest and benefit.

Jeong as relational feelings can exist in all kinds of relationships. People usually talk about jeong toward other humans, but some feel jeong toward dogs or cats, or even inanimate objects. For example, a needle is a famous object of jeong. Sewing was an important task and a virtue for Korean woman in the past. They sewed whenever they had time, whether to make garments or household goods or to mend them. Even at night, women sewed while waiting for their husbands. That means that a needle was a woman’s companion throughout her life and became an important object of affection.

Jeong can also be formed in love-hate relationships, such as between a husband and a wife, a mother-in-law and a daughter-in-law, or rivals. In those relationships, people have two opposite kinds of jeong, called miunjeong (미운정; jeong from hatred) and gounjeong (고운정; jeong from love). When people spend time together, and especially undergo turmoil together, they encounter both the good and the bad sides of each other, and they can come to understand each other deeply over time and develop sympathy and even a feeling of shared humanity. Because jeong is an emotion in relationships, it can encompass opposing emotions and varied objects.

Choi’s research also proves that jeong has been used a standard for evaluating personality as well (Choi et al. 1997: 560–563). In accumulating and sharing jeong, people’s personal characteristics are crucial. Caring, kind, sympathetic, self-sacrificial, optimistic, and honest people more easily establish jeong in relationships with others. Those people who have the full of potential of jeong are normally considered good, even ideal in Korean society. According to survey research by Choi, Korean people think that a person with jeong is caring, warm, reliable, considerate, and humble. On the other hand, self-centered, self-righteous, and condescending people are categorized as moojeong (무정 無情; heartless) (Choi et al. 1997: 567–568). These standards show that considering others is viewed to be more valuable than focusing on oneself in Korea people’s relationship.

Jeong is considered to be closely related to “we-ness,” We, uri (우리) in Korean, is a cultural concept with a strong sense of homogeneity. “We” is not just a plural form of “I” for the Korean people, but rather an extended “I.” In a family, the basic model of a jeong relationship, the members are not independent individuals but all part of the family. Other family members are also an extension of one’s “I.” This kind of we-ness is reflected in the language, too: When Korean people refer to their possessions, they use the word uri (we) instead of “my” or “our.” They use expressions such as “our car,” “our house,” and “our country” instead of “my car,” “my house,” and “my country.” This applies to other we-groups as well. School we-groups, company we-groups, and circle we-groups all become extensions of one’s family. “We-ness” means being part of a family.

According to Choi, Korean we-ness is different from Western countries we-ness:

College students in Canada experience we-ness when they work together with the people who share a same objective, interest, or concerns. We call it distributive we-ness. But Korean college students sense we-ness when they experience connectivity and interdependence rather than when they share commonalities of work, interest, or concerns. They also feel that such a we-group is a genuine we-group. We call it relational we-ness. … Korean people believe that first they form we-group, and then they can do anything together. (Choi et al. 2000: 205)

Because Korean we-group focuses more on who belongs to it than on the purpose of the group, Korean people like to do things with others and to belong to a group. For example, they prefer to go to lunch together instead of going alone. They tend to feel more comfortable in a group and even to pity a person who does not belong to a group. This kind of strong relational we-ness can be named “we-ism.”Footnote 2

For Koreans, “we-ness” has strong nuances of oneness and solidarity. The deeper a jeong relationship goes, the more the boundaries of the individual are blurred in this we-ness mechanism. Once a person joins a we-group, the others in the group care about the person like themselves. They even think they can know what the person needs because they are one—they have one and the same mind as human beings. For example, a boarding-house landlady might prepare a cake for a new foreign boarder’s birthday even when they are not close yet because she guesses the boarder feels lonely celebrating a birthday alone in a foreign country. The merit of this kind of we-ness is easily sympathizing with others in the we-group because their/our pleasure is my own pleasure, their/our happiness is my happiness, their/our pain is my pain and their/our sorrow is my sorrow. This kind of mind-reading based on oneness is a distinctive mark of jeong. A theme song in an advertisement for Chocopie, a popular Korean cake snack, captures this trait well:

You don’t have to say, I know. Through your eyes, I understand. By just looking at you, I know it in my heart. [Orion Chocopie], Jeong (情)Footnote 3

The advertisement displays jeong relationships well as people express their jeong to others by giving chocopies instead of words. For example, an elementary student leaves an apology letter for his teacher along with a chocopie to express regret for his bad behavior; a niece sends her uncle off to military service with a chocopie; and a daughter leaves a thank-you card with a chocopie for her father. In this context, jeong is identified with the heart; jeong is sharing hearts beyond words. This advertisement shows what jeong is in condensed form. Jeong is more than an individual emotion. It does not occur merely in the individual’s heart, but in relationships among people. It is not only an emotion; it is an important value in Korean culture. It is tightly intertwined we-ness, even solidarity.

Scholars have different views of the dynamism between jeong and we-ness (“we-ism”). Christopher Chung and Samson Cho, state, “As jeong expands, a Korean culture-specific ‘we-ness’ develops” (Chung and Cho 2006). Similarly, Choi Sang-Chin uses an analogy of frame and cement in a structure to explain this relationship: “We-ness gives a frame to a relationship, and jeong fills the empty areas so that the relationship can be built firmly” (Choi et al. 2000: 206). On the other hand, Choe Bongyeong, a scholar of Korean Studies, gives a compromise explanation. Though he emphasizes jeong as the way of being, he cannot ignore the strong we-ness in intimate relationships. In fact, the relationship between we-ness and jeong is like the problem of which came first: the chicken or the egg. A strong sense of we-ness commonly makes it easier for jeong to arise; people open themselves up to one another and help one another without calculating benefits to themselves. This kind of action waters jeong, and as jeong slowly permeates people and their relationships, the sense of we-ness also grows stronger. Therefore, jeong and we-ness interact and grow mutually.

2 The Jeong World and the Hanmaeum World

Although many people agree that jeong is a crucial concept to understand Koreans, there are few works discussing jeong in Korean philosophical traditions. Choe Bongyeong states that Koreans live in a world of jeong where everything makes jeong relationship (Choe 1998: 40). Lee Gidong holds that jeong is warm-heartedness based on the thought of identifying oneself with others (Lee 2015: 103–104).

Choe has tried to explain jeong through linguistic analysis and Neo-Confucian philosophy. The linguistic evidence, the diverse hanja (漢字) characters with jeong, is used to support his argument that Koreans live in the world of jeong. He found terms such as 情況 정황 jeonghwang (circumstance), 情勢 정세 jeongse (situation), 同情 동정 dongjeong (sympathy), 情趣 정취 jeongchui (sentiment), and so on, and classified words for the various characteristics of jeong: yujeong (유정有情; warm-heartedness) and mujeong (무정 無情; heartlessness); sangjeong (상정 常情; common feeling) and bijeong (비정 非情; ruthlessness); and onjeong (온정 溫情; tenderness) and naengjeong (냉정 冷情; cold-heartedness) (Choe 1998: 43–44). He explains the jeong world as follows:

This world consists of mul-jeong (물정 物情 thing-jeong) and sa-jeong (사정 事情 work-jeong). In this world, the principle of things (muli 물리 物理) becomes the innate nature (bonseong 본성 本性) of each thing, combines with matter (mulgeon 물건 物件), and manifests as a thing-jeong. The principle of case (sali 사리 事理) is embodied in a concrete case (sageon 사건 事件) and becomes case-jeong. … In thing-jeong and case-jeong, human-jeong (in-jeong 인정人情) is the crucial element. Human-jeong is jeong expressed through humans. That is a part of thing-jeongs. Human-jeong has a special attribute, a distinguished ability to communicate with the world and have a subjective mind. Human can understand the nature of things and know how to use things in ways corresponding to their nature. On the basis of this knowledge, humans achieve goodness by expressing jeong properly in the situation. (Choe 1998: 44)

The world is classified into things (物 mul/wu) and work or circumstances (事 sa/shi), and humans (人 in/ren), which belong to things. Interestingly, the Korean language adds the word jeong to those notions. Each word with jeong refers to a kind of emotion expressed through all sort of things, work, and humans. Sajeong is more like atmosphere or circumstance. Choe noticed this distinctive suffix and used it to support his argument that all beings have jeong and share it each other. Therefore, Jeong becomes the way of existence of all beings.

Further, Choe looked for its logical foundation in Neo-Confucian doctrines, especially cheonin seongmyeong (天人性命) and igi seongjeong (理氣性情) (Choe 1998: 43). Though he proposes two sets of Neo-Confucian concepts, they originate from slightly different philosophical traditions. Cheonin seongmyeong (天人性命) is a phrase from the traditional Korean medical theory of sasang euihak (四象醫學; Four constitutional medicine), which was developed by Yi Jema 이제마 (1837–1900), a Neo-Confiucian scholar.Footnote 4 According to Yi Jema’s “Seongmyeonglon 성명론 性命論,” heaven (天cheon/tian) means fate given by heaven, human (人in/ren) refers to human works, nature (seong/xing 性) refers to the innate nature that human beings should acknowledge, and life (myeong/ming命) refers to deeds that human beings should practice. Yigi seongjeong (理氣性情), on the other hand, is an essential Neo-Confucian theory to explain the world and human beings (Yi, Seongmyeonglon). According to it, all beings are combinations of principle (理 i/li) and material force (氣 gi/qi). The basic Neo-Confucian doctrine is that “the human mind (sim/xin) integrates and commands human (innate) nature (性 seong/xing) and emotions (情 jeong/qing).” As for the relationship between the mind, the innate nature, and emotions, two leading Chinese Neo-Confucians developed different perspectives: Zhu Xi (朱熹; 1130–1200) argued that “human nature (性 seong/xing) is principle (理 i/li)” and the heart-mind (心 sim/xin) “integrates and commands” human (innate) nature and emotion (情 jeong/qing). By contrast, Wang Yangming (王陽明; 1472–1529) said that “the heart-mind (心 sim/xin) is principle” and emphasized its “innate knowledge of good” and its “innate ability to do good.” For both thinkers, however, emotions/feelings (jeong/qing) such as joy, anger, sorrow, love, and desire represent “the aroused” state of the heart-mind.”

So how do those neo-Confucian notions support the concepts of jeong and logically organize the world of jeong? Unfortunately, Choe does not explain this. From my point of view, those two sets of concepts show the connectedness and interactive relationship between the outer world and humans. In other words, humans and all other beings contain innate nature given by heaven and interact with each other. Seong and jeong are the common element that makes this interaction possible according to Neo-Confusion philosophy, but Choe seems to keep only jeong in that spot. Therefore, Choe argues, all beings have jeong and exchange jeong in their relationships.

Unlike Choe, Lee Gidong, a scholar in Neo-Confucian studies, explains jeong in the context of hanmaeum world.

The Jeong culture is a phenomenon derived from Korean people’s warmhearted mind. … Korean people’s emotion places on the basic thought that you and I are oneness. A person who has this thought cares you more than oneself. Therefore, he/she feel the other’s pain like his/hers, and the other’s sorrow as his/her sorrow. … That person’s mind is warmhearted. (Lee 2015: 103–104)

In Lee’s explanation, Jeong is not a world but a culture. Jeong culture is based on warmhearted mind, and the warmhearted mind is based on the thought of oneness. The thought of oneness is another expression of “we-ism” and hanmaeum. The Korean people would express their strong we-ness status with the phrase “We are one” or “We are hanmaeum”; Hanmaeum (한마음) is a Korean translated term for ilsim (一心, one heart-mind) in classical Chinese. Han (한) means “one” and maum (마음) means “heart-mind.” “We are hanmaeum” means being different individuals but also one collective of human beings.

To highlight the Korean people’s hanmaeum idea, he first classifies people by two types as hyangnae (向內; inward) and hyanwoe (向外; outward). He, of course, stated Korean people in general are the inward type. Inward-type people are more interested in inward things like the mind whereas outward-type people are interested in outward things like the body. The inward type and the outward type have different perspectives of the way of beings. The body is the substantial part of existence to the outward type. Body is prior to mind. But hanmaeum (한마음, one heart-mind) is the essence of being to the inward type. Body attaches to mind. Each person has a mind because one mind primarily exists (Lee 2015: 20). Because of those different views, outward types see each being as a separate individual, but inward types think strongly that we, human beings, are one, originating from one mind, as shown in Fig. 9.1.

Fig. 9.1
figure 1

Outward type. (Source: Lee 2015: 20, translated)

Full size image

This diagram depicts human beings that each type views. Because people originally from one heart-mind, inward types have tendency to pursue this invisible root of the phenomenal world. Lee calls also one heavenly heart-mind (Haneul-maum 하늘마음) based on the thought that humans are not different from heaven (Lee 2016). Human mind contains the principle of heaven. This would be the reason Lee put one heart-mind on top instead of bottom in the diagram though he said one heart-mind is the root linking everyone’s mind. In addition, he claims to recover the thought of one heart-mind. With returning to one heavenly heart-mind, we-ism will go to broader direction, and we-group becomes inclusive to outsiders of the group. This inclusive oneness and we-ism will improve the good aspect of jeong, an invisible hug as Daniel Tutor, a British journalist, praised (Tutor 2012).

Regardless of its limit of generalizing Korean characteristic, Lee’s argument gives good picture to understand jeong in the relationship of we-ism, oneness, and one heart-mind: Jeong is caused by we-ism that comes from the idea that we share one heart-mind.

As mentioned above, when we discuss jeong, it always relates to Korean belief in “we-ism.” Choe Bongyeong and Lee Gidong view the relationship among jeong, we-ness, and hanmaeum differently. Choe basically thinks that the jeong world is basis of the we-ness spirit of hanmaeum, while Lee believes that the idea of hanmaeum can form we-ness and jeong.

According to Choe, Jeong helps people construct a community of “we” or “we-ness.” But there is an exception to this dynamism: “we” as a relational tie caused by inyeon (因緣) that could also form jeong. Choe borrows the Buddhist term inyeon to explain how family, the basic model of jeong relationships, can establish a we-community or a sense of we-ness prior to jeong.

In Buddhism, inyeon has been used to explain the patterns of existence of all beings. In (因) refers to “direct cause” and yeon (緣) to “indirect cause,” the conditions of the cause. Apple trees produce apples because they originally come from apple seeds (the cause), but also because of other conditions such as dirt, sunlight, and water that they need to bear fruit. Likewise, everything exists or disappears because of its cause and conditions. Inyeon can give a comprehensible answer to why certain beings meet in certain places and times. In Korean culture, the concept of inyeon and the related term karma (self-determination) have slightly twisted meanings and connote a destined relationship. So inyeon could be used to explain the relationships given by heaven, which exist before jeong. Not only does jeong form we-ness, as Choe argues, but inyeon also forms communities of we-ness: families (because we can’t choose our parents) in which jeong is activated.

Choe’s approach defines jeong not only as an emotion but also as a world where Korean people live in. Choe’s argument is quite persuasive, but it is still controversial whether we can call the way of existence of all beings jeong.

On the other hand, Lee finds the origin of jeong from hanmaeum. If we limit jeong to being cultural emotions among the Korean, Lee’s view is more acceptable. Emotion arises from a certain faith or idea. Even though you and I are different individuals, we both have hanmaeum as human beings. That gives us the feeling that connects us to one another. In this sense, Lee calls Korea the nation of hanmaeum. He made a connection between hanmaeum and Confucianism without explaining where this idea came from. Then, where does the hanmaeum belief come from? I believe that Buddhism gives a clue to answering this question.

3 Hanmaeum (한마음; One Heart-mind) as the Foundation of Jeong

The term hanmaeum (한마음, one heart-mind) appears in the Buddhist scriptures to explain the original and fundamental basis of the human mind. However, this term was not used to explain the oneness of all beings until the contemporary period. In the 1980s, the Korean Buddhist nun Daehaeng (大行; 1927–2012) creatively constructed her hanmaeum thought, which is similar to but distinctive from Wonhyo’s (元曉) notion of one heart-mind (ilsim/yixin 一心) by articulating the indigenous Korean term hanmaeum (한마음, one heart-mind). Her unique notion of hanmaeum provides deeper understanding of the foundation of jeong (정).

Daeheang is one of the most influential Buddhist nuns in the popularization of Buddhist teachings in Korea. She introduced hanmaeum (one heart-mind) and juingong (주인공/主人空; the sūnyatā of self) as the two crucial terms in her teaching. Instead of using the Chinese word 一心 ilsim/yixin (one mind), Daehaeng uses the Korean translated word for 一心 ilsim/yixin, hanmaeum (한마음) and explains it directly and simply. In No River to Cross, she defines hanmaeum more specifically: “Han means ‘one, ‘infinite, and ‘combined,’ and maum means ‘mind.’ Hanmaeum means ‘the fundamental mind that is intangible, invisible, beyond time and space, and has no beginning or end’” (Daehaeng 2007: 9). On combining with the word “One (한 han),” maum comes to have the meaning that this mind is the one ground of beings. Hanmaeum is the fundamental mind that exists equally in all beings, and all beings are derived from it. To explain the concept, Daehaeng uses the analogy of a radish and the ocean:

With a radish, you can make soup, kimchi, and other dishes. The radish in those dishes is still radish. Like this, the origination of all dharmas is hanmaeum (Daehaeng 1993: 350). … All things in this world are subsumed into one heart-mind, like all streams become one in the ocean. Hanmaeum is the origination of all things and the home for them to come back to. (Daehaeng 1993: 314)

Similarly, all beings have hanmaeum and eventually return to it. Hanmaeum is infinite because it is not limited to time, space, or a single being. Hanmaeum exists beyond all kinds of limits and distinctions, as we see in the one mind discourse above, because it is the unconditioned one needed to support conditioned beings:

Hanmaeum is not a mind of this side or of that side. It is too enormous to say this side or that side. It exists obviously, but ineffably. One never can see hanmaeum if he/she sees it dividing into two categories such as this and that, a favorite thing and a disliked thing, and a great thing and a teeny thing. A practitioner should not look for the hanmaeum keeping on dividing things. He/she can become close to hanmaeum when he/she can embrace both sides. (Kim, 1986: 18)

Daehaeng instructs that hanmaeum exists beyond dualistic schemes, and a practitioner can perceive it only when ceasing dualistic thought. Distinction and separation are the basic brain functions of humankind. Minds discern all things through comparison and differentiation. For example, perceiving white paper against a whiteboard is more difficult than perceiving white paper against a blackboard. If I cannot find the difference between my body and the outer world, then I cannot recognize myself. Without comparison, I cannot perceive what is big or small. Though that is the thought process of humans, Daehaeng suggests overcoming it and embracing both sides, as it is the characteristic of hanmaeum to be combined. Hanmaeum is interconnected wholeness, rather than an independent entity. All beings are combined with each other in hanmaeum, which is intangible and invisible. It also prevails in everything: “No one owns hanmaeum by oneself alone. Hanmaeum is for all living things and is all sentient beings’ mind. Hanmaeum is wholeness. It is immense and spacious like space” (Daehaeng 1993: 664).

All beings are originated from hanmaeum. That means all beings are sharing hanmaeum with each other and are interconnected like in Lee’s hanmaeum world. Though Lee’s theory only explains human relationship, Daehaeng embraces all beings’ relationship. The term juingong in her teaching reveals this relationship more clearly.

When hanmaeum is embodied and realized in oneself, it becomes juingong (주인공/主人空; the sūnyatā of self), one person’s hanmaeum. In Seon Buddhism, juingong refers to the true self, the master of oneselfFootnote 5:

Why is it called juingong? It is the doer, so it is called juin (主人, master/subject of actions), and it is empty, always changing with no fixed shape, so it is called gong (空, emptiness). Thus, juingong means your fundamental, profound, which is always changing and manifesting. (Daehaeng 2014: 10)

She uses the term juin (the master) not only because it is the doer but also because one’s body is a community of all its cells, and juingong is the subject who leads them (Daehaeng 1993: 380). Therefore, we can translate juingong into “empty-doer” or “changing-doer (impermanent self).” In Daehaeng’s teachings, the meaning of emptiness is flexibility and freedom. As water changes its shape to fill the space of its container, so does juingong. Indeed, hanamaum and juingong are essentially identical. So, juingong shares traits with hanmaeum:

Juingong is bright, eternal and ultimate. Juingong exists before the beginning of the world, and it does not perish even though the universe collapses and space disappears. Juingong is also called hanmaeum (Daehaeng 1993: 318). Both hanmaeum and juingong are the fundamental mind; but, unlike hanmaeum, juingong plays a role as the hub to connect all beings: “Juingong is the fundamental mind with which each one of us is inherently endowed and the mind that is directly connected to every single thing (Daehaeng 2007: 10).” Hanmaeum is the metaphysical basis while juingong is the subject of practice within with individuals. Daehaeng metaphorically compared Hanmaeum with the moon on the sky, and juingong with the moon reflected on the thousand rivers.

The basic structure of hanmaeum and juingong is similar to Lee’s “one heart-mind” and “mind” in Fig. 9.2 (inward type), which shows each human being has a mind that is derived from one mind. With this universal one mind, each being is connected to the other. However, hanmaeum thought offers a more delicate analysis. It subdivides an individual’s mind into juingong and consciousness. “A human being is the result of three things: the eternal foundation, consciousness, and the flesh” (Daehaeng 2007: 12). “Eternal foundation” refers to juingong as the source of life; “consciousness” is the mind, for discernment and discrimination; “flesh” is the body. The three aspects work together harmoniously, causing life. Daehaeng explains this using the analogy of a cart pulled by a cow (Daehaeng 1993: 386). The cart is flesh. The coachman is consciousness. The cow is juingong. What we think of as “self” is the combination of consciousness and flesh. Ordinary people feel that consciousness—the coachman—is the center of the self and leads the cart. However, the real master is the cow—juingong, eternal foundation. The cow knows best where it should go; therefore, letting the cow lead is the best way to live. Juingong as the shared hanmaeum, is the master of self. This thought emphasizes the intimate connections of hanmaeum and the individual.

Fig. 9.2
figure 2

Inward type. (Source: Lee 2015: 20, translated)

Full size image

The Hwaeom (Huayan 華嚴; Flower Garland) Buddhist teaching, “one is in all; all are in one,” supports the intimate connections of hanmaeum and individual. This tenet is based on a dependent arising worldview of Buddhism. Everything and everyone is interconnected, interdependent, and interrelated like Indra’s net. Indra is a thunder god who owns a vast net in which the strands are joined together by jewels. When light reflects onto one of the jewels, the same light is reflected and re-reflected endlessly throughout the expanse of the net. We can apply this to the example of a flower and the whole universe. A flower is interconnected with the whole universe, and the whole universe is within one flower. How could this be? We just see one flower, but there are unrevealed factors and efforts that allowed it to exist. A blooming flower needs a seed, soil, water, the light of the sun, time, a farmer’s labor, and so on. Hanmaeum is manifested in each being as juingong, and juingong in individuals is within hanmaeum. Like the metaphor of Indra’s net, all beings are interconnected through juingong and hanmaeum. So, they are one connected becoming rather than separated beings.

This interconnection through hanmaeum can strengthen the sense of we-ness and further jeong-relationship. As we see in the Lee Gidong’s arguments, jeong is a result of we-ism (we-ness) and we-ism roots into the thought of one heart-mind. Adding Daehaeng’s explanation to this structure is like watering a plant called hanmaeum idea.

Daehaeng’s unique hanmaeum teaching with five commensal teaching (ogongbeop 오공법五共法) presents the world as the hanmaeum world. Ogongbeop elucidates the meaning of hanmaeum by using five aspects. I would call it “the together teaching”: living together (gongsaeng 공생 共生), mind together (gongsim 공심 共心), essence/body together (gongche 공체 共體), function together (gongyong 공용 共用), and eating together (gongsik 공식 共食).

Living together means a sentient being does not live by itself; it lives together with others. Mind together means all sentient beings are from hanmaeum, and shares the same universal mind. With this “mind together,” no discrimination occurs between my mind and others—in other words, the self and others. Essence and function are a paired category of the concept of mind. Sentient beings’ essence is the same as hanmaeum, and they manifest together. Belonging to the same essence together denotes also sharing its body together as one body, because its character, che (체 體), means body as well. Daehaeng sees all cells as sentient beings, and says that each person’s body is full of sentient beings (Daehaeng 1993: 380), which means that beings share one body together. Function (yong 용 用) in functioning together (gongyong 공용 共用) means actions and their effects. Sentient beings are based on the same mind and the same essence, so their actions influence each other. For instance, my action of drinking influences others as well as myself. If I do good to others or to myself, it affects all beings including myself. This is because all beings are interconnected. Functioning together also means working together.

The meaning of functioning together is clearer when looking at it in relation to sharing together. The word she uses for sharing is “eating” (sik 식 食). Eating has several connotations. The action of eating is that of obtaining energy from other sentient beings’ lives. We live in a world of many food chains. From the perspective of the food, food is eaten and feeds people. Among interconnected relationships, all sentient beings feed each other. In addition, when one eats a meal with others, one is sharing. The word sik gives a more vivid picture of interconnection in the world than the picture that is offered by traditional Buddhist terms such as “dharma realm” and “dependent arising.” Daehaeng explains this interconnected existence mechanism as follows:

The universal dharma realm always turns around without discrimination between Self and others.Footnote 6 All things in the one dharma web work relatively. Therefore, all things that I do were not done by myself but done with all others in the universal dharma realm. For example, I earn money not all by myself but with all other beings in the universe. If there were no one, could I earn even a penny? I can do something because all things work together. Therefore, I naturally save others’ lives by living my life. I do not live and eat by myself, but live and eat together with others and the universe. (Daehaeng 1993: 577–578)

This “together teaching” clarifies Daehaeng’s hanmaeum world. The key point of the hanmaeum world is “togetherness.” Living together gives the big picture of togetherness. Then, the next three aspects—mind, essence, and function—are analyzed in conjunction from three perspectives. Sharing together wraps up Daehaeng’s together teaching. Sentient beings live together and are originated equally from hanmaeum. They share mind and body together and work with all others. This mechanism is called “sharing together.” Others and I are one, and live together in an interconnected relationship.

In Daehaeng’s hanmaeum world, all beings live together based on hanmaeum. It is similar to Choe Bongyeong’s “jeong world,” where all beings live by sharing jeong together. Both worlds emphasize the intimate interaction among all beings. Of course, they have differences. Hanmaeum is the origination of all beings, while jeong is the way of existence of all beings. Daehaeng’s hanmaeum thought supports the sense of we-ness and the jeong relationship vertically and horizontally. Vertically, hanmaeum is the root of all beings who share it as the same foundation. So, they are not separated from one another but have a connected “we.” Horizontally, all beings who live in the world of hanmaeum exist interdependently but they share the same fundamental mind, live as a connected body, work together, influence each other, and live together. The hanmaeum world is one intertwined whole, and individual beings are the parts of this web-like we-world.

Although Daehaeng started her unique notion of hanmaeum, it originated from the traditional Buddhist teaching of “one heart-mind” (一心) in The Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith (Daeseunggisillon 대승기신론 大乘起信論), a crucial treatise in Chinese Buddhism.Footnote 7 The concept of one heart-mind was noted by Wonhyo, a prominent Korean Buddhist scholar in the Silla Dynasty (57 BCE–935 CE). Contemporary Buddhist scholars claim that the concept of one mind is one of the most important terms to understand in Wonhyo’s philosophy. This indirectly shows how deep the hanmaeum idea is rooted in Korean people’s thought.

Like Daehaeng’s hanmaeum, one heart-mind is the metaphysical basis of all beings. The innate nature of all beings. In his commentary on The Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna, Wonhyo states: “all phenomena do not have innate nature (seong/xing 性) separately and [take] the one mind for their innate nature” (Wonhyo, T44: 206).

“All phenomena” is another way to express “all beings” in Buddhism. To understand it, think about the relationship between the metaphysical basis and all beings. All beings are conditions of others’ existences. “I” exists because there is “you.” We can recognize white, because there is black. If there is no “you,” and all being is “I,” then “I” cannot be recognized. If there is only the color white in the world, we cannot conceptualize white. We recognize X because of not-X, and the borderline between X and not-X. Therefore, all beings are limited and conditioned. In this limited world, humans look for unlimited and unconditioned things, because logically conditioned beings, including humans, can exist when the unconditioned exist. That is the metaphysical basis. Depending on philosophical tradition, philosophers look for it outside the limited world, inside the limited world, or in human beings. They call it God, Dao, Buddha nature, or one mind. This unlimited “one” manifests through conditioned beings, because the unlimited and the unconditioned cannot be perceived.

The interdependent relationship between the conditioned beings and the unconditioned is another expression of juingong and hanmaeum. Like their connected relationship added water to the hanmaeum idea, Wonhyo’s arguments proves how deep the source of water. Wonhyo holds that one heart-mind is the innate nature of all beings as well as the original mind of human beings.

The term “one heart-mind” unifies and sums up all discourse on the metaphysical basis Buddhism. Wonhyo equates one heart-mind with several Buddhist terms such as “real states of beings,” “suchness,” “Buddha nature,” “storehouse consciousness,” “pure consciousness,” and “Buddha womb” (T45 227c-228a). The unconditioned is the real states of all phenomena. It can be considered as emptiness (sūnyatā, 空 gong), because in Mahāyāna Buddhism, emptiness is a major term used to explain the metaphysical basis of existence. Wonhyo holds that it is not the same as emptiness, because the unconditioned has the faculty of inexplicable intelligence. So, it is called “mind” instead of emptiness.

In the early stage of Buddhist teachings, “non-self” (anattā) was put forth. “Non-self” means that nothing can exist independently or have any fixed, separated substance apart from others. Emptiness is another expression for non-self. Designating emptiness for the unconditioned thing is good for healing the suffering caused by strong attachment to objects and to self. If all beings’ innate nature, including self, is empty, there is nothing to cling to, causing good or bad emotions/feelings. Then, there is no way to suffer. However, the unconditioned thing manifests through conditioned things, so it cannot be totally empty. The Yogācāra school acknowledges this ineffable function of the unconditioned and calls it “storehouse” or “pure” consciousness. Both emptiness and consciousness are two faces of the unconditioned one.

The Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna integrates these discourses into a structure made up of one heart-mind and its two aspects. One heart-mind has the aspect of “suchness” and the aspect of rising and ceasing. The aspect of suchness refers to the emptiness of the unconditioned thing. The aspect of rising and ceasing refers to the consciousness part, which has ineffable function.

The discourse on one heart-mind gives us an idea of how to see the world and individuals as “one connected being.” One heart-mind is the metaphysical basis of all beings. It means that all beings including humans are originated from one heart-mind, though they all appear to be separate. However, people do not acknowledge that they are from one origin, and fight each other, thinking they are separate beings. Therefore, Wonhyo given the philosophy of The Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna teaches people to return to one mind, and then to benefit others. Likewise, Buddhist doctrine of one heart-mind offers more densely interconnected world view on the world as well as supports Korean people’s mind longing for oneness. Korean’s jeong culture is established on this world view.

4 Conclusion

Jeong, a moral, social, and cultural emotion of the Korean people, is based on the Korean Confucian notion of “we-ness (we-ism)” and this we-ness is derived from their common belief that “we are hanmaeum (one heart-mind).” The idea of hanmaeum originated from Korean Buddhism such as Wonhyo’s thought and Daehaeng’s contemporary teaching though it has not been noticed.

The Buddhist understanding of hanmaum firms the ground of jeong and makes the jeong relationship more inclusive. Hanmaeum is the origin and foundation of all beings that root on. This one universal mind prevails throughout the whole world, exists in all beings, and makes them connected and interdependent. The whole world’s interconnecting of all beings through hanmaeum is like an intertwined web. Daehaeng’s hanmaeum thought explains it through her teaching of togetherness. All beings live together, share the mind and body, work together, and feed one another in the web of life relationships. In this interaction, the meaning of “we-ism” can be strengthened, and the jeong relationship can be expanded to all beings.

Along with changing with time, jeong culture has been dimmed and redefined today to mean emotions in an old-fashioned relationship. It is because, in my view, the jeong relationship has been narrowed down to its significance of oneness or intimate relationships, and its problematic aspect of exclusivism is often noticed. However, with the Buddhist understanding of hanmaeum, the culture of jeong could overcome the exclusiveness of “we-groups” by sharing the one universal mind with all beings and promote the present and future welling of Korean and global society.