토마스 하아디의 결정론과 불교의 연기설 비교 (Thomas Hardy's Determinism vs The Buddhistic Doctrine of Dependent Origination)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국근대영미소설학회
· 수록지 정보 : 근대영미소설 / 14권 / 1호 / 77 ~ 100페이지
· 저자명 : 양영수

초록

It is true that from the standpoints of Hardy and Buddha an individual's lot in the present life is subject to the strong influence of the past. We can, however, find a couple of keynotes in which these two standpoints differ from each other.
First, they are different in their interpretations of the modes and ways in which the past life determines the present one. In Hardy's view, an individual's will-power in the present course of life is quite powerless in putting to operation their genetically determined features. In contrast, Buddhism presents a theory of conditionality for the present life of the human beings, rather than a doctrine of strict determinism. Buddha advocated the principle of conditional causation of life, which implies that a thing comes into existence only if necessary conditions are met. It is to be noted that Buddhistic principle of conditional causation is similar to general systems theory currently in prevalence, for both of these principles make much of interdependent actions between the knower and the known.
Second, the two standpoints taken by Hardy and Buddha are different in their concepts of the relation between the human will and outside milieu. In Hardy's world, the effects of the human will are so often overshadowed by the powerful milieu. His works are mostly situation drama, in which human beings are helplessly frustrated by baffling situations. But, in the Buddhistic world, one's mind is able and ought to be in positive control of the influences from the physical world as conditioning forces. Such mental endeavours are imperative with a view to regenerating one's own karma, the process of which amounts to active preparation for the future life.
Third, the worlds of Hardy and Buddha are different from each other in one's outlooks on, and sentiments for, one's destined lot. In the case of Hardy's characters, most of them may well be deeply depressed and humiliated under the two-fold oppressions from unavoidable qualities of inborn genes and cruel forces of surrounding milieu. Contrastingly, the characteristic mentality of Buddhists doesn't have a right reason to grieve at one's destined lot because all of one's inborn destinies are due to one's own karma, which is originally of one's own making. According to Buddhistic philosophy, there are no unfair or accidental occurrences in the world, in which everything is causally conditioned.

영어초록

It is true that from the standpoints of Hardy and Buddha an individual's lot in the present life is subject to the strong influence of the past. We can, however, find a couple of keynotes in which these two standpoints differ from each other.
First, they are different in their interpretations of the modes and ways in which the past life determines the present one. In Hardy's view, an individual's will-power in the present course of life is quite powerless in putting to operation their genetically determined features. In contrast, Buddhism presents a theory of conditionality for the present life of the human beings, rather than a doctrine of strict determinism. Buddha advocated the principle of conditional causation of life, which implies that a thing comes into existence only if necessary conditions are met. It is to be noted that Buddhistic principle of conditional causation is similar to general systems theory currently in prevalence, for both of these principles make much of interdependent actions between the knower and the known.
Second, the two standpoints taken by Hardy and Buddha are different in their concepts of the relation between the human will and outside milieu. In Hardy's world, the effects of the human will are so often overshadowed by the powerful milieu. His works are mostly situation drama, in which human beings are helplessly frustrated by baffling situations. But, in the Buddhistic world, one's mind is able and ought to be in positive control of the influences from the physical world as conditioning forces. Such mental endeavours are imperative with a view to regenerating one's own karma, the process of which amounts to active preparation for the future life.
Third, the worlds of Hardy and Buddha are different from each other in one's outlooks on, and sentiments for, one's destined lot. In the case of Hardy's characters, most of them may well be deeply depressed and humiliated under the two-fold oppressions from unavoidable qualities of inborn genes and cruel forces of surrounding milieu. Contrastingly, the characteristic mentality of Buddhists doesn't have a right reason to grieve at one's destined lot because all of one's inborn destinies are due to one's own karma, which is originally of one's own making. According to Buddhistic philosophy, there are no unfair or accidental occurrences in the world, in which everything is causally conditioned.

참고자료

· 없음