聲聞戒와 菩薩戒의 兩立 問題 = On the Coexistence of Śrāvaka-śīla and Bodhisattva-śīla

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

After the Mahāyāna Buddhism rose greatly in India,
the Mahāyānikas accepted and observed two precepts
simultaneously, Śrāvaka-śīla handed down from the
Nikāya-sangha and Bodhisattva-śīla from the Bodhisattvagana.
Then, why did the Mahāyāna Buddhism in India
attempt to keep Śrāvaka-śīla and Bodhisattva-śīla
together? How did China try to overcome this problem?
And does Bodhisattva-śīla still hold good these days? This
paper aims at examining these questions.
The early Mahāyāna Buddhism in India did not accept
Śrāvaka-śīla transmitted from the Nikāya-sangha. The
Mahāyāna Buddhism started by denying both dhamma andvinaya of the traditional Buddhism from the very beginning.
But the middle Mahāyāna Buddhism got the system almost
the same as that of the Nikāya-sangha. Consequently, the
need to organize the system of the Mahāyāna by absorbing
pātimokkha of the Nikāya-sangha was arisen. The fruit
obtained from these circumstances was none other than
trividhāni-śīlani. It is an understanding of various sūtras
that absorbed Śrāvaka-śīla together with Bodhisattva-śīla
in a superior position.
Chinese Buddhism that inherited the tradition of
the Mahāyāna Buddhism accepted both Hīnayānavinaya(
Śrāvaka-śīla) and Mahāyāna-śīla(Bodhisattva-śīla)
from the beginning. Because of this acceptance, both an
indifferent attitude to Buddhist precepts and a tendency to
neglect sīlas and vinayas were widespread in China. In order
to correct this drift, Doseon(道宣, 596~667) completed
Namsanyuljong(南山律宗). He conducted a revival campaign
of Buddhist precepts by setting up a way of understanding
various Buddhist sīlas called “Buntongdaeseung(分通大乘)”
that means Caturvarga Vinaya(四分律) is closely related to
the Mahāyāna Buddhism. However, Namsanyuljong declined
after Doseon passed away as the fusion of Hīnayāna-vinaya
and Mahāyāna-śīla was not possible from the beginning.
In conclusion, the ideals Bodhisattva-śīla tries to pursueare very high. But, as Bodhisattva-śīla lacks compulsory
vinaya and karmavācā, it is hard to expect its effectiveness
these days. On account of these reasons, even in the present
Mahāyāna Buddhist Sangha, Bodhisattva-śīla is often
ignored. In a word, it is impossible for Śrāvaka-śīla and
Bodhisattva-śīla to exist together.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 사사키 시즈카, "출가: 세속의 번뇌를 놓다" 54-5,

2 사사키 시즈카, "출가: 세속의 번뇌를 놓다" 56-57,

3 사사키 시즈카, "출가: 세속의 번뇌를 놓다" 54-, 2007

4 히라카와 아키라, "초기대승불교의 종교생활"

5 히라카와 아키라, "초기대승불교의 종교생활" 민족사 1989

6 키무라 키요타카, "중국불교사상사" 49-, 1989

7 사사키 시즈카, "인도불교의 변천" 409-446, 2007

8 李秀昌, "상좌불교의 비구니승가 복구 문제" 한국불교학회 50 : 406-, 2008

9 平川彰, "비구계의 연구(Ⅰ)" 58-,

10 李秀昌, "남·북방 계율의 상호보완성 탐색" 동국대학교 불교사회문화연구원 8 : 131-153, 2007

11 "望月佛敎大辭典 3권, ‘小乘戒’, 2651下-2652上; 4권, ‘大乘戒’, 3253中-3255上"

12 李秀昌, "小乘戒와 大乘戒의 兩立에 관한 問題" 동국대학교 불교사회문화연구원 7 : 314-, 2006

13 李秀昌, "小乘戒와 大乘戒의 兩立에 관한 問題" 292-,

14 拙稿, "小乘戒와 大乘戒의 兩立에 관한 問題" 동국대학교 불교사회문화연구원 7 : 298-301, 2006

15 李秀昌, "小乘戒와 大乘戒의 양립에 관한 問題" 308-,

16 大野法道, "大乘戒經の硏究" 理想社 413-420, 1954

17 任京美, "大乘戒と南山律宗-受戒儀式を中心に-" 花園大學大學院 2007

18 平川彰, "大乘佛敎槪說" 210-,

19 平川彰, "大乘佛敎槪說"

20 平川彰, "大乘佛敎槪說"

21 平川彰, "大乘佛敎槪說" 227-8,

22 "『解深密經』,『 大正藏』 16, 705c"

23 "『 菩薩戒?磨文』 『( 大正藏』 24, 1104c-1106c) 1편"

24 "『 菩薩善戒經』, 권4,『 大正藏』 30, 982c"

25 "『 瑜伽師地論』,『 大正藏』 30, 511a"

26 "『 瑜伽師地論』 권40,『 大正藏』 30, 511a"

27 "『 淸淨毘尼放光經』,『 大正藏』 24, 1077c"

28 "『 深密解脫經』,『 大正藏』 16, 682a"

29 "『 決定毘尼經』,『 大正藏』 12, 39c"

30 "『 根本說一切有部毘奈耶』 권1 『( 大正藏』 23, 629b)"

31 "『 摩訶僧祇律』 권1『( 大正藏』 22, 228c)"

32 "『 寂調音所問經』「 調伏聲聞, 調伏菩薩」,『大正藏』 24, 1083a"

33 "『 大方廣佛華嚴經』,『 大正藏』 9, 513a-b"

34 "『 大寶積經』 ‘우바리회’,『 大正藏』 11, 516c"

35 "『 十誦律』 권1『( 大正藏』 23, 1c)"

36 尸羅達摩譯, "『 十地經』 권2,『 大正藏』10"

37 "『 五分律』 권1『( 大正藏』 22, 3b-c)"

38 "V inaya-pi?aka (PTS), vol. Ⅲ, 21쪽"

39 望月信亨, ",『 佛敎經典成立史論』(1946), 441쪽 이하; 望月信亨,『 淨土敎の起源及發達』(1972), 155쪽 이하; 大野法道,『 大乘戒經の硏究』(東京: 理想社, 1954), 274쪽"