宋代 看話禪과 默照禪의 비교 연구 = (A) comparative study on k'an-hua seon and mo-chao-seon in Sung Dynasty

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

K'an-hua seon(看話禪) and mo-chao seon(默照禪) were established in the Chinese Sung dynasty. The former was systematized by Ta-hui Tsung-kao(대현종고) who belonged to the branch of Yang-ch'i(楊岐派) of the Chinese Lin-chi seon(臨濟禪) school, and the latter by Hung-chih Cheng-chuh(宏智正覺) who was a member of the Chinese Ts'ao-tung(曹洞宗) school. What, then, make these two traditions differentiate in the history of the Chinese seon Buddhism?
The division of k'an-hua seon and mo-chao seon was originated from the difference in the realm of seon practice. This is the reason we ought to scrutinize the systems of practice observed by each tradition. Both sects were basically initiated by a movement which aimed at a restoration of the true spirit of the patriarchal seon developed in the T'ang dynasty. However, they took different ways to achieve the same goal. K'an-hua seon focused on the deliverance of sentient beings here and now. On the other hand, mo-chao seon which was based on the transcendental truth tended to be individually oriented.
k'an-hua seon begins with denial of the mo-chao seon's tenet: first, the advocates of mo-chao seon, according to those of k'an-hua seon, seemed to ignore enlightenment; second, they do not employ Hua-t'ou(話頭) in the course of practice; third, they misunderstood true meaning of enlightenment. Practitioners of mo-chao seon, sitting quiet and concentrated, only tried to maintain original, innate enlightenment. Masters of k'an-hua seon, on the other hand, endeavored to eliminate their fallacies: first, in order to eradicate confusion and torpor, one should rely on practice of Hua-t'ou; second, they underlined the positive function of concentration on Hua-t'ou, which is samadhi.
Summing up, as to the difference between k'an-hua seon and mo-chao seon, we may safely conclude as follows:
First, with reference to kung-an, advocates of k'an-hua seon regard it as the same meaning as Hua-t'ou which serves as practical means to achieve enlightenment. To the contrary, those of mo-chao seon, kung-an(公案) signifies the truth itself which reveals itself everywhere and everytime.
Second, with reference to sitting meditation. In the system of k'an-hua seon, sitting itself is not an ultimate purpose but a subordinate means of practice. In mo-chao seon, however, sitting meditation itself is of importance. Right sitting meditation, they thought, guarantees right enlightenment. The stage of enlightenment is equivalent to that of sitting meditation. This is called 'chi-kuan-ta-chuo(只管打坐)'.
Second, with reference to psychological features, k'an-hua seon emphasizes one pointedness on Hua-t'ou, that is Hua-t'ou samadhi in which Hua-t'ou and practitioner is no more separate two. In mo-chao seon tradition, what is significant is 'no thought' in which discriminative and fabricating thought processes are totally absent. The instance of 'no thought' demonstrates the innate enlightenment which is awaken to the practitioner. This is the goal of sitting menditation in mo-chao seon tradition.
Even though their ultimate goal is not different, there are methodological distinctions in attaining enlightenment between k'an-hua seon and mo-chao seon. It is evident with regard to historical development of seon schools: Sharing the same tradition, that is the Southern school, Lin-chi school(臨濟宗) developed k'an-hua seon and the Ts'ao-tung(曹洞宗) school, mo-chao seon. In this work, we examined the doctrine of seon practice and the feature of enlightenmet by means of a comparative study on k'an-hua seon and mo-chao seon.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 目次 = 3
• Ⅰ. 緖言 = 1
• 1. 연구의 목적 = 1
• 2. 연구의 방법 및 범위 = 1
• Ⅱ. 看話禪과 默照禪의 성립 = 3
• 1. 간화선의 성립 = 3
• 1) 역사적 배경 = 3
• 2) 無事禪에 대한 오해 = 7
• 3) 묵조에 대한 大慧의 입장 = 8
• 4) 묵조선법에 대한 비판 = 12
• 5) 간화선의 성립 = 19
• 2. 묵조선의 성립 = 20
• 1) 曹洞宗의 형성 = 20
• 2) 묵조선의 성립배경 = 21
• (1) 純粹禪으로의 회귀 = 21
• (2) 묵조선법의 대두 = 24
• 3) 묵조선의 성립 = 26
• Ⅲ. 看話禪과 默照禪의 수행체계 = 28
• 1. 간화선의 수행체계 = 28
• 1) 간화선의 등장 = 28
• 2) 간화선 수행의 원칙 = 31
• (1) 話頭의 의의 = 31
• (2) 화두수행의 원칙 = 32
• (3) 화두참구의 자세 = 38
• 2. 묵조선의 수행체계 = 43
• 1) 묵조선의 등장 = 43
• 2) 묵조선의 수행 = 44
• (1) 只管打坐 = 46
• (2) 本證自覺 = 50
• (3) 身心脫落 = 53
• 3) 묵조선의 수행구조 = 56
• Ⅳ. 看話禪과 默照禪의 비교분석 = 58
• 1. 公案觀 = 58
• 2. 坐禪觀 = 60
• 3. 心理觀 = 62
• Ⅴ. 結語 = 66
• 〈인용 및 참고문헌〉 = 69
• ABSTRACT = 73