『섭대승론』의 삼신설(三身說) = The Trikaya Doctrine in Mahayanasamgraha

국문 초록 (Abstract)

대승의 불타관이 삼신설에서 이론적으로 완성되었음은 이론의 여지가 없다. 미륵의 『대승장엄경론』에서 처음 제기된 삼신설이 그 안에서 이미 완결적 모습을 보이고, 그럼으로써 후대의 삼신에 관한 논의에서 일종의 전범이 되었기 때문이다. 무착의 『섭대승론』도 그 삼신에 관한 논의에서 『대승장엄경론』의 절대적 영향 아래에 있다. 그러나 『섭대승론』은 『대승장엄경론』을 단지 답습하지 않는다. 중요한 차이.발전이 있는 것이다. 그 차이의 출발점은 『대승장엄경론』이 삼신을 깨달음 그 자체인 법계의 전개로 파악하였음에 대해, 『섭대승론』은 이를 무분별지의 인격적 구현으로서 법신의 문제로 이해한 점이다. 이에 따라 『대승장엄경론』의 경우 삼신설의 논의를 구체적 ‘불신론’으로 접근할 때, ‘자성->수용->변화’의 논리적 순서가 아니라 ‘종교적 경험의 대상[초세간적인 제불, 수용신] -> 제불이 향유하는 진리[법계 그 자체, 자성신] -> 진리의 다양한 전개[제불의 화작/석가모니불, 변화신]’이라는 형태를 취하게 된다. 이에 대해 『섭대승론』은 불신의 문제를 무분별지의 결과로 이해함으로써, 삼신의 내적 관계에 무분별지의 구조가 반영된다. 구체적으로 가행지가 근본지에 이르는 예비적 단계라면 핵심은 뒤의 두무분별지에 있다. 이에 따라 삼신은 ‘근본지가 구현된 인격[법신, 자성신]->근본지에 근거한 후득지[법신의 등류, 초세간적 수용신] -> 동일한 후득지의 다른 모습[법신의 변화, 세간의 변화신.석가모니불]’의 의미를 갖는다. 이러한 차이는 『대승장엄경론』의 삼신이 수용신을 중심으로 구성된 것임에 반해, 『섭대승론』의 삼신은 법신으로서의 자성신이 기반이 되어 조직된 것, 보다 포괄적으로는 법신 일원론의 토대가 『섭대승론』에서 제시되고 있음을 보여준다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

It does not need to empahasize the importance of the buddhakaya doctrine or buddhology in Buddhist tradition especially after Buddha Sakyamuni ’ s entering to the nirvana. And it is well known that the buddhakaya doctrine has been developed to or culminated in the trikaya doctrine which has appeared firstly in Mahayanasutralamkara(MSA), and has been inherited to Mahayanasamgraha(MS). On the other hand, it is not so ascertained whether MS simply follows MSA or MS shows any kind of progressive differences in comparison with MSA. The main object of this essay lies in confirming this problem. To speak the result in advance, MS, especially in the problem of trikaya doctrine, has not duplicated that of MSA, though there are so many similarities between them. The basic difference between them can be said as follow; MSA has regarded trikaya as the threefold embodiment of dharmadhatu, and on the contrary MA as the three aspects of dharmakaya which is the result of nirvikalpajnana. To say more exactly, the trikayas in MSA are closely related with the fact that MSA has analyzed the vrttis or the functions of dharmadhatu into svabhava, sambhoga and nirmana in karika X.59. And after making these words into secondary derivatives which denote adjective forms as svabhavika, sambhogika, nairmanika, MSA in karika X.60 has made them to modify kaya, which results threefold embodiment of the Buddhas in essence, in communal enjoyment and in manifestation respectively. Although it would be very logical to arrange the sequence as , svabhavikakaya-> sambhogikakaya -> nairmanikakaya' in that respect, MSA starts the argument from the s？mbhogikakaya and continues to the svabhavikakaya and the nairmanikakaya in succession. This order of argument may be understood as follows; (l)MSA starts from the encounter with the objects of religious experience: the Buddhas in supernatural world who enjoying various mahayana dharmas and buddha lands, (2)then excavates the inner natures or the truths which make them as such Buddhas: dharmadhatu itself, (3)finally finds the various manifestations of the dharmadhatu: diverse creatures and the Buddha Sakyamuni in this world. On the contrary, because of the MS’s understanding of the trikaya doctrine as the three aspects of dharmakaya which is the result of nirvikalpajnana as mentioned above, the structure of the nirvikalpajnana, which shows the three stages of procedure, has permeated into the trikaya doctrine. Among the three stages of nirvikalpajnana which are named as the accumulative, the fundamental and the subsequent, the last two non-discriminative knowledges are interrelated deeply with the trikaya doctrine. The result is as follows; (l)svabhavikakaya is the personal embodiment of the fundamental non-discriminative knowledge and it is recognised as dharmakaya which functions as a basis for the other two kayas, (2)sambhogikakaya is the embodiment of the subsequent pure knowledge which is resulted from the fundamental non-discriminative knowledge, and it is personified as various other worldly Buddhas, (3)nairmanikakaya is also the embodiment of the same subsequent pure knowledge but it is personified only as Buddha Sakyamuni in this world To sum up these discussions, (1)svabhavikakaya in MSA denotes the dharma realm, the impersonal basis of sambhogikakaya, though its nature is thought to be an enlightenment; on the other hand, that of MS is considered as the personal dharmakaya which is the result of the fundamental knowledge and the basis for two other kayas at the same time. (2)Sambhogikakaya in MSA is self- interested as is written explicitly in the text; but that of MS can be regarded as other-interested or altruistic according to the context.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 문제의 소재
• Ⅱ. 삼신설의 원형, 『대승장엄경론』
• Ⅲ. 『섭대승론』의 삼신설
• Ⅳ. 맺음말

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김성철, "초기유가행파의 무분별지 연구" 동국대 2004

2 정호영, "섭대승론의 알라야식 존재논증" 충북대학교 인문학연구소 32 : 2006

3 김성철, "섭대승론 증상혜학분 연구" 도서출판 씨․아이․알 2008

4 정호영, "불신론(佛身論)의 문제 - 삼신(三身)의 성립과정" 충북대학교 인문학연구소 35 : 2007

5 佐佐木月樵, "漢譯四本對照 攝大乘論" 臨川書店 1977

6 世親菩薩造 玄奘譯, "攝大乘論釋"

7 世親菩薩造 眞諦譯, "攝大乘論釋"

8 無著菩薩造 玄奘譯, "攝大乘論本"

9 長尾[하] : 長尾雅人, "攝大乘論, 和譯と注解 下"

10 長尾[상] : 長尾雅人, "攝大乘論, 和譯と注解 上"

11 "大正新脩大藏經"

12 內藤昭文, "大乘莊嚴經論｢菩提品｣の講讀" 永田文昌堂 2009

13 長尾雅人, "大乘莊嚴經論和譯と註解-長尾雅人硏究ノート (1)" 長尾文庫 2007

14 無著菩薩造 波羅頗蜜多羅譯, "大乘莊嚴經論"

15 長尾雅人, "佛身論をめぐりて" (521) : 1971

16 Habito, Ruben L. F, "佛身論の展開" 東京大學 52 (52): 1978

17 長尾雅人, "中觀と唯識" 岩波書店 1978

18 Habito, Ruben L. F, "The Trikāya Doctrine in Buddhism" University of Hawaii 6 : 1986

19 Whitney, William D, "Sanskrit Grammar, 2nd ed" Harvard Univ. Press 1889

20 Sylvain Lévi, "MSA : Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra Tome Ⅰ" Rinsen Book Co. 1983

21 Edgerton, Franklin, "Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary, Vol.Ⅱ" Yale Univ. Press 1977

22 Makransky, John J, "Buddhanhood Embodied, Source of Controversy in India and Tibet" Sri Satguru Publications 1997