현수법장의 교판론과 퇴옹성철의 불교관 비교 연구

석길암 ( Seok Gil-ahm ) 성철사상연구원 2021 퇴옹학보 Vol.18 No.-

This thesis is a comparative review of Xian Shou Fazang(643-712)’s Huayan Classification of Buddhist teachings and Toeong Sungchol(1912-1993)’s view of Buddhism. In particular, it deals with the characteristics of Toeong҆s interpretation of Huayan Classification and the view of Buddhism appeared at the Sermon of One Hundred Days(百日法門). Toeong proposed the view that “among the Buddhas of the past, present, and future, all saints of the past were awakened by their minds to achieve Buddha-hood. No one has gained awakening through relying on language and script.״ In his Sermon of One Hundred Days, the middle way is presented as a basic view point that marks the legitimacy of Buddhist teaching, which is thought to be an understanding based on the Huayan Thought. Toeong attempted to understand the Buddhist doctrines by applying the Huayan thought, which is the theoretical basis of Seon. The middle way of the dharma and the world of true suchness, emphasized in his book, was used as his framework for understanding the entire Buddhist doctrines. His understanding of Buddhism has deeply been related to his recognition of Seon Buddhist tradition, centered on sudden awakening with sudden practice. Indeed, he was paying more attention to revealing his view of the middle way through Huayan thought as well as its classification of Buddhist teachings rather than to revealing his original intention. Toeong is thought to have devoted to pay attention to secure the contemporary legitimacy of Korean Buddhism. In Toeong’s point of view, it has believed that a certain amount of consideration was given to the situation of his time when the Buddhist tradition was weakened. He was responding to the newly emerged modern Buddhism, and to the social role of Buddhism in the contemporary multi-religious era. This could be the reason why his Sermon of One Hundred Days was placed as his recipe for the contemporary Korean Buddhist situation where there was a gap between traditional Buddhist monks and lay Buddhists.

돈오돈수(頓悟頓修)의 기원(起源)과 주장자(主張者)및 불교역사상(佛敎歷史上)의 평가(評價)

朴商洙 ( Park¸ Sang Su ) 성철사상연구원 1994 백련불교논집 Vol.4 No.-

퇴옹(退翁) 성철(性徹)의 선사상(禪思想)에 대한 연구

원소 성철사상연구원 2006 백련불교논집 Vol.16 No.-

퇴옹(退翁) 성철(性徹)의 천태종사상(天台宗思想)과 화엄종사상관(華嚴宗思想觀) ― 중도사상을 중심으로 ―

도대현 성철사상연구원 2006 백련불교논집 Vol.16 No.-

One of the most important contributions of Master Song-chol's Seon thought in the history of Buddhism lies in the fact that he clarified the supreme principle of both Tien-tai school and Hua-yen school was the Middle Path where both sides of one's viewpoint are blocked up totally and illuminated completely. The distinguishing points of Master Song-chol's view on the philosophies of Tien-tai and Hua-yen are as follows: First, according to Master Song-chol, Tien-tai philosophy expounded the truth of the Middle Path by means of the two doctrines; 1) the three thousand realms are contained in one mind, and 2) there is the perfect harmony among the three truths. It is also said that the meaning of the Middle Path is identical with those of conditioned arising (pratītyasamutpāda) and emptiness (śūnyatā), and that the Middle Path in Tien-tai school is expressed in terms of blocking up both sides of one's viewpoint and illuminating the two sides totally, and blocking up and illuminating the two simultaneously. In Tien-tai school, the Middle Path is also called One Mind Dharma realm, Dharma realm without hindrance, non-dual Dharma realm. According to Master Song-chol, on the basis of the doctrines that the six characteristics of a thing influence one another and are perfectly blended, and that the ten characteristics of the world in which phenomena are interdependent, Hua-yen school clarified the doctrine of pratītyasamutpāda of dharma-dhātu on the basis of the principle of the Middle Path. Second, Master Song-chol pointed out the differences between the two schools, Tien-tai and Hua-yen with regard to their views of human nature; while Tien-tai school asserts that self-nature is inherent in man from the first, Hua-yen school insists that self-nature is developed later. As a result of such a difference, Tien-tai school emphasized the need of practice, whereas Hua-yen school stressed the importance of theory. However, in spite of such differences both schools are equally prominent and we can not make any discrimination between the two because both are on the basis of the Middle Path. Third, Master Song-chol criticized the two school in respect that they regarded the Āgamas, Source of the Teaching of the original Buddhism, as Hīnayāna or Lesser Vehicle when they classified the various tenets of Buddhism from their standpoints. Furthermore, Master Song-chol insisted that the original Buddhism is both the starting point and foundation of Buddhism.

『백일법문』에 나타난 퇴옹 성철의 유식사상 -심소법(변행·별경)을 중심으로-

김명우 ( Kim¸ Myung-woo ) 성철사상연구원 2020 퇴옹학보 Vol.17 No.-

This paper deals with the concept of vijñaptimātratā appeared in the Baegilbeobmun 『百日法門』 by Toeong Sungchol(性徹, 1912-1993). In the Baegilbeobmun, jñaptimātratā has been explained by Sungchol through two different concepts and sources. Firstly, he explains it through the quotations and commentaries from the texts related to the vijñaptimātratā in terms of the Madhyamika. Secondly, he illustrates the core thoughts of vijñaptimātratā based on the commentary of vijñaptimātratā by Hānshān(憨山, 1546-1622). In this paper I am going to summarize briefly on the contents of vijñaptimātratā in terms of Madhyamika according to the Baegilbeobmun. There have been some parts where the explanations given at the Baegilbeobmun were different from the original texts. It also deals with the 51 kinds of caittas appeared in the Baegilbeobmun through the clarification of them in terms of 5 sarvatraga caittas and 5 viniyata caittas. Here is the brief description of Sungchol’s discourse on sarvatraga citta and viniyata caitta. First of all, a caitta called manaskāra moves the mind (citta) pay attention to object (viṣaya). Through the contact (sparśa) of the mind (citta) and object (viṣaya), there are feeling (vedanā) which is accepting the object (viṣaya); concept (samjñā) which is building up of the object (viṣaya) and is giving linguistic awareness; and intentions (cetanā) which lead to either good (kuśala) or bad (akuśala) actions (karma). He also explains chanda as caitta wanting to do what one likes, adhimokṣa as caitta meaning excellent wisdom, smṛti as caitta defining clear memory, samādhi as caitta meaning one pointedness, and prajñā as caitta clarifying very subtle wisdom.

승조(僧肇)와 성철(性徹)의 중도(中道)사상 비교

양순애 ( Yang Soon-ae ) 성철사상연구원 2021 퇴옹학보 Vol.18 No.-

This paper is aiming at comparing the differences between Seungzo’s middle way and that of Sungchol, though their period is quite a part. The comparison has centered around their understanding as well as their practice of middle way. Seungzo seems to put more weight on Indian Buddhist tradition, especially on the Madhyamaka of Nāgārjuna. He tried to improve Chinese Buddhism through the correct understanding of Nāgārjuna’s middle path. By contrast, Sungchol seems to lean to the traditional Chinese Buddhist tradition, especially to Chan Buddhism of Hyeneung. Based on Hyeneung’s idea, Sungchol tried to understand the whole Buddhist teachings through middle way. In terms of practice, Seungzo focused on correcting the misunderstanding of the middle way, which made him concentrate more on its understanding rather than its practice. Sungchol instead has put more stress on the practice of the middle way. In his understanding of Korean Buddhism, enforcing correct seon practice could be the key to clear problems of contemporary Korean Buddhism. In this paper, I am going to discuss the background of their thoughts especially in their reaction to the real world and of their academic tendencies.

선어록 해석의 몇 가지 문제점

박영록 ( Park Young-rok ) 성철사상연구원 1999 백련불교논집 Vol.9 No.-

禪宗語錄很難理解, 一般人幾乎不能接受. 不只是一般人, 專家或者僧人也會碰到不能理解的地方. 所以很久以前, 就有了解釋禪宗語錄的書. 特別近來陸續問世. 這樣的解說書, 雖然有許多優點, 但是也有一些缺點. 首先, 我提出了“禪不是一種思想”的槪念. 一般說的‘思想’是精神活動, ‘禪’不是精神活動, 起碼它可以包括心的活動. 所以, ‘禪’跟‘思想’不能竝列的. 第二個問題, 也是最關鍵的問題, 是象徵式解釋. 人們常說, 禪宗語錄語言是一種象徵式文字, 這個說法, 半對半錯. 象徵, 應該有象徵的對象, 禪師的語言不一定有指示的對象, 它要做的只是打破對方的固定觀念. 這就是一般說的“打破理性思考作用.” 可是, 用象徵式語言的看法來解釋禪宗語錄, 從頭到尾都可以合理地解釋, 結果, 不能打破讀者的固定觀念, 特別是以邏輯爲主的想法. 第二, 解釋的文字也有幾個問題. 首先, 解釋時, 修飾性的詞彙太多, 讓讀者抓不到重點, 有的時候, 比本來的說法更難以理解的. 定語, 本來可以修飾別的詞彙, 可是有的時候它可以改變被限定槪念的性質, 我們應該注意到這點. 其次, 爲了說明方便擧的例子, 有的時候太不合適, 甚至也有不能相信的例子. 再次, 解說書的作者, 一般來講, 不是得道解脫的人, 而且他不是當時的當人; 他雖然有提出自己觀念的權力, 但却他沒有權力罵當時參與禪問答的人們. 對禪宗語錄的解釋和系統的硏究, 都應該必要的. 可是這個解釋, 不是自己的小品文. 解釋的方法․行文都應該細心注意.

우주 및 역사전개의 동인(動因)으로서의 업(業)의 이해

崔鳳守 ( Ch'oi¸ Bong-su ) 성철사상연구원 1991 백련불교논집 Vol.1 No.-

왕양명(王陽明)과 퇴옹(退翁)의 심성론·수행론 비교 -퇴옹의 양명학 논의를 단서로 한 시론(試論)-

최재목 ( Choi¸ Jae-mok ) 성철사상연구원 2020 퇴옹학보 Vol.17 No.-

This paper aims at studying the mind and performance theory comparatively between Wang Yangming and Toeong Sungchol. Wang Yangming, one of the well known Neo-confucian thinkers during the Ming Dynasty in China, is famous for his understanding of the mind called Shim Hak, while Toeong Sungchol, one of the most famous Seon masters in contemporary Korea, leaves a rich legacy of Korean Seon contemplative meditation tradition especially in the Sudden Awakening and Sudden practice. Both Yanming and Toeong, having accomplished their awakening of the mind, started to establish their theory of the mind by philosophically theorizing, systematizing, and storytelling on the basis of their awakening experience. Interestingly there are similar patterns on their way of thinking on the mind and its performance. First of all, both are in favor of the Sudden Awakening and Sudden Practice. They both dedicated their life on systematizing as well as philosophically theorizing this perspective on the process of awakening or enlightenment. Secondly, both are in favor of the innate goodness of the individuals. While Yanming was following along with the Confucius theory of self suggested by Mencius, Toeong was agree on the Buddha-Nature theory meaning every living creatures have capability to become awakened. Thirdly, while Yangming preferred naturalistic as well as literalistic attitude on discipline, Toeong adhered to strict, solemin, and pious attitude on discipline. Fourthly, Yangming opened a path for radical dissolution of the conservative Neo-Confucianism, whereas Toeong initiated a mind practice on inner purity among the conservative Korean Buddhists. Lastly, there are differences in their understanding of the mind and its performance. While Toeong was silent the discussion on the mind, Yangming caused lots of debate on diverse understanding of the mind in terms of its developments.

제경전(諸經典)에 보이는 해인삼매(海印三昧) 소고(小考)

全海住 ( Chǒn¸ Hae-ju ) 성철사상연구원 1991 백련불교논집 Vol.1 No.-