儒釋衝突與調和 -- 近現代臺灣與韓國漢傳佛教比較=The Conflict andReconciliation Between Confucianism and Buddhism: the Chinese Buddhism in Taiwan and Korea’s Intercultural Communication
Why there are so big differences between Taiwan’s and Korea’s Chinese Buddhism will be further discussed in this paper based on the existing studies. This is a very interesting and important subject. The research will be done on four terms which include the analysis of the development of Taiwan’s and Korea’s Chinese Buddhism from the angle of the conflict and reconciliation between Confucianism and Buddhism, what actually is the reason of Chinese Buddhism’s boom in Taiwan, and the development of Chinese Buddhism in Korea. Firstly, comparing the religious notions of Korea dynasty’s and Ming dynasty’s officials through the 16th century’s records of Ming district’s culture in Fujian Province which is one root of Taiwan culture to realize that Ming’s officials held inclusive religious notion of Confucianism, Buddhism and Daoism’s mélange, but Korea’s officials held the religious notion of overwhelming Confucianism and outcasting heresies. Secondly, the notion of taking Confucianism as the model and Buddhism as the complement which based on the combination of three religions was still kept in Taiwan district during the late Ming and early Qing periods, but the notion of Neo-Confucianism was still kept from early to late Korean dynasty and the view of outcasting other heresies was always existing, too. Thirdly, the consciousness against tradition appeared in Taiwan Buddhism during the Japanese occupation that not only laid the groundwork for women’s independent position, but also improved Buddhist status and decreased the gulf between the Confucian scholars and the monks with the increasing anti-traditional consciousness and the decadent traditional notion of class. On the other hand, the modernizing trend of establishing education institute of a new type had appeared in Korean Buddhism during the Japanese occupation. However, Korean Buddhism in this period largely relied on Japanese Buddhism and attempted the reviving development of Korean Buddhism. This dependence becomed deeper and deeper that made the opposition and contradiction appear between the pro-Japanese mainstream Religious Affairs Institution which betrayed the nation and the nonofficeholding General Affairs Institution which emphasized nation and independence. Fourthly, a space for the development of modern Taiwan Buddhism in the present age is made due to the diversity of cultural and academic thoughts and the decadent view and tradition of the extremely conservative Neo-Confucianism. But in Korea, the centralized Buddhist system and thought which started from Korean dynasty has been continued because of the unification view of Confucianism and resulted in the anomalies that is unfavorable to Buddhism’s development. Therefore, we can know that this kind of centralized system has more negative factors to Korean Buddhism’s whole development and does not fit this diversified age. As regards diversity and unification, this is not only a very interesting phenomenon, but also
