<華嚴經問答> 硏究 = A study on the Hwaeomgyeong-mundap

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study intends to illuminate the philological and philosophical positions of Hwaeomgyeong-mundap(華嚴經問答, HM ). The first part of this thesis, Chapter Ⅱ and Ⅲ, deals with philological problems related to this text, and Chapter Ⅳ, Ⅴ, and Ⅵ primarily discuss the thoughts and expositions of HM. From the analysis of HM, it is clarified that HM is composed of about 163 questions and answers, which can be classified as thirty-seven topics under the three major categories.
Chapter Ⅱ reveals the fact that the text of HM is closely related to Jitong-gi(智通記) which is less sophisticated and considered original form. Therefore, the date of compilation of HM can be traced back up to the time of Jitong(智通) about 683 C.E. when Uisang(義相) gave lectures on Hwa-eom thoughts for ninety consecutive days at Chudong valley of Mt. Sobaek. At least, its compilation date had to be before the mid 9th century when Gyeondeung(見登) had quoted from HM in his Ilseung-seongbul-myoui(一乘成佛妙義).
Remarkably, HM shows no evidence of Hwa-eom thoughts of Fazang(法藏), while few scholars asserted his influence on it. Moreover, it seems highly probable that HM had been formed on the basis of the original version of Jitong-gi. Therefore, considering the delivery date of Fazang’s works to Uisang in Silla(新羅) when was around 690s C.E., HM ’s compilation had to be done before that.
From the comparison of the existent records between HM, Jitong-gi and Dosin-jang(道身章), it is identified that twenty-three questions of nine topics are matched, which is equivalent to a quarter of HM ’s contents. Though it is believed that both Jitong-gi and Dosin-jang recorded Uisang’s direct teaching, only the records of Jitong-gi are almost identical to the texts of HM. Dosin-jang seems to have undergone considerable changes from the original form of teaching. So it is estimated that HM was compiled in the close lineage to Jitong-gi without significant exaggerations or redactions of the following generations.
In the next place, the problem that must be solved is to make clear the relationship between the thoughts of HM and Uisang’s idea mainly presented in Ilseoungbeopgyedo(一乘法界圖, IBD), which was written after Zhiyan’s(智儼) last work, Kongmuzhang(孔目章) and before the introduction of Fazang’s first work, Wujiaozhang(五敎章).
The thought of HM have to be observed under the three major categories. It is not clear for now whether the three subjects were presented from the time when the lectures were given or recorded for the first time, or classified later when it was edited.
However, it is noteworthy that the three subjects of HM are significantly divided each other according to their thoughts. Each category deals with independent subject; 1) the meaning of ‘Ilseung-bobeop’(一乘普法) as an interpretation system and the ‘Non-abiding Dependent-arising’(無住緣起) as the basis of logic system of Middle-way(中道) [Chapter Ⅳ], 2) the ideas of ‘Endless ten-stages’(無盡十地) and ‘Self-buddha’(自體佛) [Chapter Ⅴ], and 3) the thought of ‘True-nature Dependent-arising’(眞性緣起) and ‘Dharma-nature Nature-arising’(法性性起) [Chapter Ⅵ].
Chapter Ⅳ discusses the interpretation system of HM focusing on ‘Ilseung-bobeop’ in contrast to Samseung(三乘, triy&#257;na). The term ‘Ilseung-bobeop’ only appears in IBD, HM, and Daegi(大記) in Chongsurok(叢隨錄), that is mainly associated with practical meanings in these texts. Therefore, it manifests a clue that there was a sort of tradition related to the thought of ‘Bobeop’(普法), the connotations of which was regarded very importantly in Samkyekyo(三階敎). Zhiyan was the first person in reality who brought the teaching of ‘Bobeop’ into the Hwa-eom thought which already possessed ‘Ilseung’(一乘, ekay&#257;na). Uisang succeeded to the Zhiyan’s tradition and developed the idea of practical aspects of the Hwa-eom thought in his own way.
Uisang regarded Bobeop as every teaching entering into Ilseung or Nature-arising and applied the concept broadly with both ‘Same teaching’ and ‘Separate teaching.’ The ‘Same teaching’ is connotative aspect of the Ilseung and is related to the teachings of the Samseung, but the ‘Separate teaching’ only refers to Ilseung’s teaching itself. From this standpoint, all teachings and existences realized in the Ilseung are identical with the teachings of ‘Ilseung-bobeop.’
Moreover, the interpretation systems of ‘Five teachings’ and ‘Same and Separate teachings’ in HM are also inherited and developed from the ideas of Zhiyan and Uisang. HM contains the idea of middle-way which is common with Uisang’s IBD. The logic of Middle-way of both HM and IBD is associated with ‘Awakening’(證) and ‘Teaching’(敎) or ‘Li’(理, principle) and ‘Sa’(事, phenomenon). In addition, they both regard the core logic of Middle-way as ‘Non-abiding’(無住). So ‘Awakening’ and ‘Teaching’ or ‘Li’ and ‘Sa’ arise in the need of all such occasions without abiding, namely ‘Non-abiding Dependent-arising.’ Besides, since all dh&#257;rmas arising through ‘Non-abiding’ implies that they are able to abide everywhere, ‘Non-abiding’ can be considered same as ‘endless’ or ‘limitless’(無盡).
In Chapter Ⅴ, HM explains the practice stages of Ilseung-bobeop centering on ‘Ten-stages’(da&#347;a bh&#363;mi) and the core ideas of ‘Endless ten-stages’(無盡十地). Each stage is not fixed in Ilseung-bobeop unlikely Samseung. Since ‘endless’ practice stages are required equally corresponding to myriad conditions of countless sentient beings, stages in Bobeop should be appeared in fifty-two stages in order or Ten-stages or Three lives stages(三生位). Such idea of ‘Endless ten-stages’ directly follows the idea of ‘Ilseng-bobeop.’
In other words, the purpose of suggesting various practice stages in ‘Ilseung-bobeop’ is intended to enter into the realm of Ilseung through the ‘Returning-mind.’(廻心) As it is stated in IBD that non-returning-mind is not excellent method for converting beings, HM emphasizes the importance of Returning-mind. Practitioners need to hold returning-mind in oder to enter into the Ilseung, even though one reached the ultimate stage of Samseung.
In addition, on the buddhahood, the Miraebul(未來佛) or ‘future Buddha’ in HM who practices for enlightenment by himself at present and the Guraebul(舊來佛) or ‘past Buddha’ in IBD share common aspects. Guraebul is not a buddha of any special time in the past and Miraebul is also not a buddha of any fixed time in the future. Various times of the past, present and future are included in one moment or one thinking(念). Therefore, everybody in the three times is a buddha, namely Self-buddha, attaining buddhahood in the present body here and now. Uisang’s descendants of course emphasized the thought of Self-buddha.
Finally, Chapter Ⅵ deals with the ideas of ‘Dependent-arising’ and Nature-arising. Dependent-arising in Ilseung is dependent on the ‘Non-abiding,’ namely ‘Non-abiding Dependent-arising.’ On the other hand, in Samseung it is arising dependently on the fixed place. Zhiyan criticized the ‘Dependent-arising’ in Samseung and suggested the ‘Dependent-arising from Dharmadh&#257;tu’(法界緣起), including both Dependent-arising of Ilseung and that of Samseung. Zhiyan said the ‘Nature-arising’ is the perfection of the ‘Dependent-arising of Ilseung’. He insisted that the ‘Nature-arising’ is included in the ‘Dependent-arising.’
On the other hand, Uisang placed ‘Dependent-arising’ abreast with ‘Nature-arising’ on the basis of Teaching(Dependent-arising) and Awakening(Enlightened reality). He considered that ‘Dependent-arising of Ilseung’ is identical to ‘True-nature’ and ‘Nature-arising’ is equal to ‘Dharma-nature.’ According to the Middle-way of ‘Non-abiding,’ both ‘Teaching’ and ‘Awakening’ are brought back to the ‘Dharma-nature.’ Therfore, Uisang includes ‘Dependent-arising’ in ‘Nature-arising.’ Interestingly, HM also connects the relation of ‘Dependent-arising’ and ‘Nature-arising’ from the stand point of ‘Non-abiding,’ which shows contextual similarity with the thought of ‘Dharma-nature Nature-arising’ of Uisang.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 緖論 = 1
• 1. 硏究目的과 先行硏究 = 1
• 2. 硏究範圍와 硏究方法 = 9
• Ⅱ. <華嚴經問答>의 成立과 流通 = 14
• 1. <華嚴經問答>의 流通狀況 = 14
• 1) 日本의 유통상황 = 14
• 2) 義相의 傳敎와 <智通記>의 성립 = 19
• 3) <智通記>의 유통과 <華嚴經問答>의 성립 = 24
• 2. 逸文의 對照와 引用 = 30
• 1) 流通逸文의 현황 = 30
• 2) <智通記> 일문 대조 = 34
• 3) <道身章> 일문 대조 = 46
• 4) <華嚴一乘成佛妙義>의 인용 = 52
• Ⅲ. <華嚴經問答>의 構成과 內容 = 55
• 1. <華嚴經問答>의 구성과 引用經論 = 55
• 1) 問項의 내용과 주제 = 55
• 2) 인용경론의 종류와 傾向 = 59
• 3) <法界圖>의 인용경향 = 64
• 4) <華嚴經> 구조의 이해 = 66
• 2. 인용경론의 분석 = 71
• 1) <華嚴經>의 인용 = 71
• 2) <十地經論>의 인용 = 74
• 3) 智儼 著述의 인용 = 81
• Ⅳ. 一乘普法과 無住中道思想 = 88
• 1. 一乘普法의 敎判 = 88
• 1) 圓&#8228;頓과 一乘의 관계 = 88
• 2) 普法思想의 수용과 계승 = 93
• 3) 一乘普法과 三乘의 비교 = 99
• 2. 五敎判과 同別二敎判 = 103
• 1) 五敎判의 始&#8228;終 分化 = 103
• 2) 同敎와 別敎一乘의 判別 = 112
• 3) 如來藏의 비판과 수용 = 116
• 3. 無住緣起의 中道思想 = 121
• 1) 證과 敎의 中道 = 121
• 2) 理와 事의 中道 = 126
• 3) 言과 義의 中道 = 134
• Ⅴ. 無盡十地와 自體佛思想 = 137
• 1. 一乘普法의 修行階位와 十地 = 137
• 1) 華嚴의 수행계위 = 137
• 2) 十地와 五乘 = 143
• 3) 十信初心과 初地 = 148
• 4) 六相의 十地 = 149
• 5) 證과 敎의 十地 = 157
• 2. 廻心과 不退 = 161
• 1) 定性二乘의 廻心과 向&#8228;背 = 161
• 2) 三乘極果廻心의 肯定 = 165
• 3) 退&#8228;不退와 一乘淨土 = 169
• 3. 自體佛思想 = 172
• 1) 十佛과 舊來佛 = 172
• 2) 現身成佛의 긍정 = 180
• 3) 未來佛의 敎化 = 183
• 4) 自體佛에 대한 禮敬 = 186
• Ⅵ. 一乘緣起와 法性性起思想 = 190
• 1. 一乘緣起와 三乘緣起 = 190
• 1) 三乘과 一乘의 緣起 = 190
• 2) 返情과 一乘緣起法 = 194
• 2. 法界緣起와 法性性起 = 196
• 1) 法界緣起의 체계 = 196
• 2) 緣修因果와 性起因果 = 200
• 3) 眞性緣起와 法性性起 = 205
• Ⅶ. 結論 = 212
• 參考文獻 = 218
• 別添資料 = 224
• Abstract = 249