韓國 쉬르레알리즘 文學 硏究

천소화 성심여자대학교 대학원 1981 국내석사

There are two fundamental views of the problem of defining surrealisme into Korean modern poetic history: one is a sceptical definition in which there is doubt whether, under the situation of our people's emotion, we can settle on the ideal technique of surrealism or not; the other is a positive opinion in which, as the illogical and emotional consciousness of our people is changing to a logical consciousness with the influence of modern civilization, surrealism is not only accepted in itself but has an influence on the technique of Korean modern poetry. Following the latter opinion, in this thesis I attempt to begin the basic work for the definition of poetic surrealism. With the theory of Dadaism we can see the surrealistic elements in Ko Han Yong's theory of Dadaism which appeared in the early Korean literary theory come 1920's. In his theory, even though he insists on destruction and negation he does so in the pursuit of a world of new life and new art to which he gives value, whereas the original Dadaism only insists on destruction, nihilism, and negation themselves. We may say, therefore, that such elements make the acceptability of the subsequent surrealism in Korean literature easier. Even though the surrealism formed in Korean literature shows us its clear literary aspect through the theories and works of many writers, it has not been considered an independent literary Phenomenon in the Korean literary history but regarded it as a new psychology or as a product of a kind of intellectual medernism. But the modernist theory of Kim Gee Lim, which is representative of Korean modernism in the 1930's, and surrealistic theory should be distinguished. When we look at his essay on poetry, we come to know not only his outlook on language but we find that in the pursuit of literature his theory has different characteristics from surrealistic theory. Above all, he is critical of surrealism. Accordingly, surrealism should be defined as an independent literary phenomenon through an objective evaluation of Korean modern poetic history. When we read the works of Lee Sang which are representative of Korean surrealism, the poems and poetic theory of Sam Sa Moon Hak's members, or the poems and poetic theory of Cho Hyang in the 1950's, we can find two streams in Korean surrealistic literature. One is that the Korean surrealistic literature presents us with a complete phase wherein Lee Sang attempts not only to use this new technique but also to use it to stuey of the human person's inner nature. The other is that the Korean surrealistic literature was developed by the members of Sam Sa Moon Hak and Cho Hyang as a technique of literary ofrmation for the purpose of developing Korean poetry as the new modern poetic region rather than as a pursuit of humanity, which was the original aspect of surrealism. Accordingly, since in the case of its development Korean surrealistic literature not only clearly distinguishes itself from other literary froms but gives an impetus to the subsequent Korean modern literature it seems that its literary-historical value is considearble. Granted that the opinion of whether the influence of surrealistic literature was poistive or negative is different in terms of the prejudices of Each critic's viewpoint, the existence of Korean surrealistic literature should reveal its independent phase through an objective evaluation.

佛性의 本質에 관한 硏究

천소화 全南大學校 1996 국내석사

본고에서는 佛敎 哲學을 접하게 되면서 우리에게 근본적으로 제기되는 '存在- 佛性'에 대한 문제를 불교 이론- 中觀, 唯識, 佛性 思想 - 에 의거하여 살펴 보았다. 즉 佛敎에서는 存在에 대한 立論을 어떻게 체계화시키고 있는가, 또한 '一切衆生皆有佛性'이라는 붓다의 설함이 無自性과 無我를 강조하는 佛敎 理論 속에서 어떻게 그 타당성을 입증해 내고 있을까 하는 것이 본고의 관심사였다. 따라서 본고는 먼저 佛敎的 입장에서의 存在論을 확립했다고 볼 수 있는 大乘의 이론인 唯識과 中觀 思想을 통하여 一切 存在를 어떻게 究明해 내고 있는가를 살펴 보았다. 그리고 그 存在 究明이 곧 佛性의 本質을 드러내줄 수 있다고 보고, 이어 世親의『佛性論』을 통하여 佛性의 本質을 파악하고자 하였다. '생명적 존재(我)'란 보통 '자기', '자신' 등으로 칭하는 것을 말하지만, 넓게는 '생명 있는 것'을 의미한다. 일반적으로 印度 哲學에서는 변하는 일이 없이 언제나 존재하고 있는 자신의 중심체를 '아트만(atman)'이라 부르며, 그것을 輪廻의 주체로 간주한다. 하지만 佛敎에서는 그러한 실체적 자기는 존재하지 않는 '無我'를 주장한다. 또한 '사물적 존재(法)'란 생명적 존재를 구성하는 육체와 정신, 더 나아가면 산이나 강 등의 외계의 자연을 말한다. 아비다르마 佛敎의 일파인 說一切有部에서는 존재하는 구성 요소로 75 종류를 세우고 그것들은 어느 것이든 실재한다고 생각했으나, 唯識派에서는 識一元論의 입장에서 그런 사물적 존재의 실재를 부정하였다. 즉 法은 無我라는 '法無我'를 주장한 것이다. '識의 轉變'이란 '마음의 활동'을 말하는 것인데, 이것은 世親의 독자적인 술어이다. 초기 佛敎 이래 一切諸法은 緣起에 의해 顯現한다고 간주해 왔다. 그런데 世親은 唯識이라는 識一元論의 입장에서 그러한 因緣所生의 法을 '識의 轉變'이라는 말로 표현하려고 했다. 그리고 모든 존재를 이 識의 轉變 속으로 포섭한다. 그래서 일체의 사물, 즉 자기의 마음, 자기의 육체, 산, 강, 대지 등의 자연을 지각하지만 그들은 모두 마음 자체 내부에서 지어낸 표상에 지나지 않으며, 그들 표상에 대응하는 사물이 외계에 존재하는 것은 아니라고 생각한다. 우리는 보통 육체나 자연이 마음을 떠나 독립적으로 존재한다고 소박하게 생각한다. 또 유물론이나 현대의 자연 과학에서는 사물의 최소 단위가 素粒子라고 생각한다. 그러나 唯識 思想에 의하면 그렇게 생각되는 것은 단지 마음의 활동, 즉 識의 轉變 속에 상정되어진 妄分別된 存在態를 가진 것에 지나지 많으며, 결코 마음으로부터 독립하여 존재하는 것은 아니라고 보고 있다. 결국 轉變이란 '변화하는 것'이며, '원인의 찰나가 滅함과 동시에 그 원인의 찰나와 양상을 달리한 결과가 生하는 것'이다. 이 찰나생멸성을 世親은 '轉變'이라는 말로 표현하였고, 識一元論의 입장에서 '識의 轉變'이라는 용어를 만들었다. 또한 그는 중생을 포함한 一切諸法이 존재하는 현상을 遍計所執自性, 依他起自性, 圓咸實自性의 三自性으로 설명하였다. 그리고 바로 그 存在에 대한 이론적 설명은『佛性論』에서 구체화되고 있음을 볼 수 있었다. 즉 三自性論은 存在에 대한 唯識的 설명인 동시에, 佛性이 자리할 근거를 마련해 주고 있는 것이다. 또한 依存性(緣起), 즉 空性이라고도 표현되는 龍樹의 空觀 속에서도 佛性의 本質을 파악할 수 있었다. 龍樹의『中論』에서는 주객의 대립을 근본부터 깨뜨리는 입장에 서서 사유하고 있다. 龍樹의 緣起는 시간을 달리하여 存在하는, 두 개의 것 사이에 있는 生成 관계에서 일어나는 因果 관계를 의미하지 않는다. 同時的인 상호 작용과 공존의 관계, 나아가서는 同一性 相對性 등의 논리적 관계까지 포함한다. '존재한다'는 것을 나타내기 위해서는 緣起라고 말하면 충분하다. 즉 '존재한다'는 것은 '幻影처럼 虛妄하게 存在'합을 뜻한다. 그래서 緣起된 것을 空이라고 하며, 본고는 바로 이러한 空性 속에서 佛性의 本質을 파악할 수 있었다. 그 결과 세 가지 存在態, 즉 三自性이 곧 '二空이 드러난 眞如'로서의 佛性의 本質이며, 三自性-佛性은 緣起-空性으로 그 존재성을 드러낸다는 것을 파악할 수 있었다. 결국 唯識과 中觀 思想, 그리고『佛性論』은 붓다가 설한 '一切衆生皆有佛性'이라는 인류의 無限한 가능성을 논리적으로 체계화시키고 있으며, 그것을 근본으로 하여 깨달음을 통한 菩薩行과 利他行으로의 실천적 삶을 권유하고 있다는 데에서 그 理論的 價値를 인정 받을 수 있다고 보아진다. An essential problem of 'being of the Buddha nature', which has always been raised in every study on 'being of the Buddha nature', is surveyed on the basis of Middle Path, Consciousness-Only, and Buddha Nature. This research is mainly concerned how theorization of being has been systematized in the doctrine of Buddhism, or how Buddhia's teaching, "All the sentient beings have Buddha nature", has proved its validity in the anatman doctirine of Buddhism. Accordingly, it is studied in this research how 'being' is defined from the perspective of Buddhism treatise - treatise of Consciousness-Only and Middle Path. Under the condition of that formation of being, it is possible to elucidate the being of Buddha nature. Subsequently, I tried to understand the essence of Buddha nature through the body revealing part. Though vital personality is usually regarded as self or ego, its inclusive meaning, however, is sentient being. In general Indian philosophy, 'atman', which means an everlasting archetype of self, is regarded as the substance of metempsychosis. Nevertheless, such an authentic self means 'anatman' that does not exist in real according to the Buddhism doctrine. An Objective phenomenon includes both a body and a spirit as well as visible nature like mountains or rivers. In 'Sarvaastivada', a sect of Abhidharma Buddhism, they think that each of the seventy-five components of the universe is real, while in 'Vijnaptimatra' sect, such a reality of any objective phenomena is negated because of their belief in consciousness monism: 'phenomena anatma', which means non-being of any phenomena, is advocated. The Vicissitude of consciousness, which is an activity of mind, is a personal description of Vasubandhu. Since the primitive Buddhism, every phenomenon has been considered as the generated by cause and condition - as the generation of the phenomena of cause and condition. But Vasubandhu has always tried to express the phenomena of cause and condition generation in terms of the Vicissitude of consciousness from the perspective of the consciousness monism, that is, the Consciousness-Only; all the beings are connoted within this vicissitude of consciousness. So the pheonominal world of the various things like mind, flesh, mountains, rivers, or land, is nothing but an idea; the visible objects of which are not thought to be real. People naively think that the flesh or the phenomenal world exists apart from the mind. The materialists or the modern pure-scientists think that an elementary particle is the smallest unit of an object. But the Consciousness-Only thought is different. No phenominal world exists apart from mind. It is nothing but an activity of mind, that is, a vainly discerned form of being laid in the vicissitude of consciousness. Consequently, vicissitude means current. A 'ksana' of a cause disappears simultaneously with its appearance in a different shape. 'Vasubandhu' expressed this ksana nature of disappearance and appearance as "vicissitude", and coined the phrase, "vicissitude of consciousness" from the standpoint of consciousness monism. According to his thought, the existence form is fractionhated into four types of nature: the nature of imagination, the nature of interdependence, the nature of perfect(ture nature) and the tri-self-nature. The theoretical explanation of the existence phases is followed by understanding the essence of the Buddha nature in『the Treatise on the Buddha Natures』. The 'tri-self-nature theory' is an explanation of being on the viewpoint of the Consciousness-Only, as well as a basis for the Buddha nature to be rooted in. Moreover the essence of the Buddha nature is to be understood from the standpoint of the dependence nature(dependent origination), namely 'Nagarjuna', which is also possibly expressed as "void nature". The thinking methodology in『the Madhyamika Sastra』of 'Nagarjuna' is based on the standpoint on which every contradiction between a subject and an object is frustrated. the dependence origination of 'Nagarjuna' does not mean any cause and effect relationship, which takes place in the generation relationship between the two at each different time. It includes the logic relationships like a simultaneous interreaction, coexistence, and identity relativity. "Dependent Origination" is an enough phrase to express that something "exists". In other words, every being exists as a nihil like an illusion, Thus the dependent origination is said to be emptiness, and in this nature of void, the Buddha nature is understood. As the ontology of the Consciousness-Only and of the Middle Path has been surveyed, three existence forms have been studied. Now it became evident that the Tri-Self-Nature is the essence of the Buddha Nature and the tri-self-nature of the Buddha nature is proved to be the nature of void. Consequently the thought of the Consciousness-Only, the thought of the Middle Path, and the thought of the Buddha nature have systematized the Buddha's doctrine of the infinite human possibility, which says, "All the sentient beings have Buddha nature". This teaching of Buddha is highly evaluated in its theoretical value because it is recommended that people should make that doctrine their practical life as a 'Bodhisattva Visista-carita' and an altruist in awakening.