|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
승랑과 원효의 상즉론(相卽論)의 비교연구=A Comparative Study on the Doctrine of Mutual Identification between Seung-rang and Wonhyo |
|
|
|
| Author |
김영미 (著)=Kim, Young-mi (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
인도철학=印度哲學=Korean Journal of Indian Philosophy
|
|---|
| Volume | n.62 |
|---|
| Date | 2021 |
|---|
| Pages | 137 - 168 |
|---|
| Publisher | 印度哲學會 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://krindology.com/
|
|---|
| Location | Korea [韓國] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 韓文=Korean |
|---|
| Note | 저자정보: 동국대학교 대학원 인도철학과 철학박사. |
|---|
| Keyword | 원효= Wonhyo; 생멸상즉=生滅相卽=production and extinction are mutual identification; 유무상즉=有無相卽=existence and non-existence are mutual identification; 승랑=Seung-rang; 불이중도=不二中道=the middle way of non-duality; 무이중도=無二中道=the middle way free from dualistic extremes |
|---|
| Abstract | 승랑(僧朗)은 유무(有無)를 속제로 삼고, 비유비무(非有非無)를 진제로 삼고서, 진속이 아닌 것[비진비속(非眞非俗)]을 깨달음의 경지인 불이중도(不二中道)라고 상정한다. 승랑이 주옹(周顒)에게 전해준 ‘유무상즉(有無相卽)’이 ‘가명공(假名空)’ 사상으로 불이중도를 드러낸 것이다. 불이중도를 확립한 승랑의 사상은 이원적(二元的) 범주론(範疇論), 무득(無得)의 오도론(悟道論), 방편적(方便的) 교화론, 상즉(相卽)의 실상론(實相論)으로 정리된다. 반면 원효는 『금강삼매경론』에서 진제를 [시각의] 원성실성으로, 속제를 세속법인 변계소집성으로, 진제중도는 [본각의] 원성실성으로, 속제중도는 의타기성으로, 진제중도와 속제중도가 둘이 아닌 경지를 무이중도(無二中道)라고 상정한다. 원효가 『금강삼매경론』에서 해석한 일사구게(一四句偈)의 ‘생즉멸(生卽滅)ㆍ멸즉생(滅卽生)’은 ‘생멸상즉(生滅相卽)’의 경지이다. 결국 승랑은 제법의 실상(諸法實相)을 해석할 때 가명공(假名空)사상으로 ‘유무상즉론(有無相卽論)’을 설명하고, 원효는 『금강삼매경론』에서 일사구게(一四句偈)를 설할 때 ‘생멸상즉론(生滅相卽論)’으로 설명한다.
Seung-rang presumes that neither truth nor convention is the middle way of non-duality, a stage of enlightenment, by regarding existence and non-existence as the conventional truth and neither existence nor non-existence as the absolute truth. Seung-rang delivered the idea to Zhou Yong, that ‘existence and non-existence are mutual identification’ is ‘conventionally designated emptiness which reveals the middle way of non-duality. The ideas of Seung-rang, who established the middle way of non-duality, are summarized as ‘dual categorism, the theory to awaken to the way of nothing to be attained, skillful edifications, the theory of true characteristics of mutual identification.’ On the other hand, Wonhyo suggests in the Exposition of the Vajrasamādhi Sūtra that the absolute truth is pariniṣpanna-svabhāva [of initial enlightenment], the conventional truth is parikalpita-svabhāva, that is, the secular law, the middle way from the standpoint of the absolute truth is pariniṣpanna-svabhāva [of original enlightenment], the middle way from the stand point of conventional truth is paratantra-svabhāva, and the middle way free from dualistic extremes is the stage at which the middle way from the standpoint of conventional truth and the middle way from the standpoint of the absolute truth coexist. A gatha of four lines interpreted by Wonhyo in the Exposition of the Vajrasamādhi Sūtra, is that ‘production is in fact extinction and extinction is in fact production,’ is the stage of production and extinction are mutual identification. After all, Seung-rang advocates ‘existence and non-existence are mutual identification’ as conventionally designated emptiness and Wonhyo preaches ‘production and extinction are mutual identification’ as the real state of all elements when he clarifies a gatha of four lines in the Exposition of the Vajrasamādhi Sūtra. |
|---|
| Table of contents | I 서론. 138
II 승랑의 상즉론. 140
III 원효의 상즉론. 156
IV 승랑의 유무상즉론과 원효의 생멸상즉론의 비교. 160
V 결론. 162
|
|---|
| ISSN | 12263230 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 53 |
|---|
| Created date | 2023.10.29 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2023.10.29 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
