신라불교에서의 혜원 수용 양상―『대승의장』을 중심으로 (The Acceptance of Dashengyizhang 大乘義章 in Silla Buddhism)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 불교학연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 불교학연구 / 40권 / 41 ~ 81페이지
· 저자명 : 김천학

초록

신라불교의 전개는　다양한　중국불교사상의　유입에　의해　가능하였다. 따라서　신라불교의　정확한　이해를　위해서는　이러한　중국불교 사상의　수용 의의에　대해서　정리할 필요가 있다. 본고는 그 일환으로 지론종 후기　인물인 혜원의 『대승의장』을 선택하여 신라불교에서의 수용양상에 대해서 논하였다. 이것은　신라불교에 미친 혜원의 영향과 나아가 동아시아 불교에서의 신라불교의 글로컬적 특징을 고찰하기 위한 중요한 작업이다.
혜원의　문헌은　신라시대에　7종류의　유통이　확인된다. 그런데, 경흥과　같이　신랄하게　비판하는　경우도　있으나　대부분의　문헌에서는 긍정적으로　수용한다. 신라불교에서의 『대승의장』 수용　양상을　검토하면, 원효의　경우　인용명과　인물명　없이　『대승의장』　각의(各義)에 대해서　과문의　형식을　활용하여　인용하는　케이스, 과문의　명목만을 취하는　케이스, 문장을　인용하지　않고　취의하는　케이스　등으로　나누어 지는데, 『열반종요』와　『대혜도경종요』를　조사한　결과, 혜원을 적극적으로　비판한　흔적은　없다. 그럼에도　불구하고　경종(經宗)을 논함에 있어 『법화경』의　경종을　일승이라고　본　것은, 그것을 삼매로 본　『대승의장』과는　다른　견해를　보인다. 또한　남지사의　5시교와 신유식의　삼전법륜설　가운데　『반야경』과　『법화경』과의　시간적　관계에 대한　입장을　동시에　비판한　것은　교판적으로　『대승의장』 　보다 진일보한　해석이　아닐　수　없다.
표원은 『요결문답』에서　법장　화엄학을　중심으로　전개하면서도 『대승의장』을　25회 정도　적극적으로　인용한다. 비록, 『대승의장』을 비판하는　예는　없지만, 그　가운데　육상설에서는　화엄종　정통의　견해와는 다른　설을　수용하는　예도　있다. 이것은　화엄과　지론의 융합 형태라고 부를 수 있는 새로운 화엄사상의 구축이라는 관점에서 이해할　수　있다. 　한편, 법상종 둔륜(遁倫)의 『유가론기』에서는　혜원의　『지지론의기』를　중시한다고　보이지만, 6회정도　『대승의장』 인용예가　확인된다. 비록　『유가론기』에　혜원의　설을　비판하는　예도　2회 정도　확인되지만, 『대승의장』의　인용패턴은 『유가사지론』의　설을　보충하기　위한 것으로　이해할　수　있다. 　이상의　검토를　통해　신라불교에서　경흥에　의해　정토　관계　저술이 강하게　비판되기는　하지만, 『대승의장』은　원효, 표원, 　둔륜의　사상 형성에　다대한　영향을　끼쳤다고　보인다. 다만, 경종, 교판, 육상의 해석 예는　신라불교가　『대승의장』을　수용하면서도, 새로운　사상　조류를 탄생시키려　했던　움직임으로　볼　수　있으며, 이것이야말로　신라불교의 글로컬적　특징의　일면이라고　할　수　있다.

영어초록

The development of Silla Buddhism was made possible through the importation of various Chinese Buddhist theories. On account of this fact, it is necessary to categorize the significance of the importation of Chinese Buddhism to correctly understand Silla Buddhism. To this end, this paper examines the Dashengyizhang 大乘義章, written by Huiyuan 慧遠 of the later Dilun school, and discusses its acceptance and interpretation in Silla Buddhism. This is a task essential to studying not only the influence of Huiyuan in Silla buddhism, but also the unique characteristics of Silla Buddhism within the global context of East Asian Buddhism.
Huiyuan's seven works are confirmed to have circulated during the Silla period. Although there were detractors such as Gyeongheung 憬興, most of his works were readily accepted in a positive light. In the case of Dashengyizhang, Wonhyo 元曉, Pyowon 表員 and Dullyun 遁倫 all affirmatively adopted the theories found in the work.
Although Wonhyo does not specify the name of Huiyuan or Dashengyizhang, he nevertheless makes use of many theories found in the work. However, Wonhyo has a different explanation than Huiyan on the main theme of Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra and also shows a more developed doctrinal taxonomy. This implies that Wonhyo developed his own theory atop an assimilation of Huiyuan's thought.
While the Hwaeomgyeong mun-ui yogyeol mundap 華嚴經文義要決問答 by Pyowon of the Hwaeom 華嚴 school is based on Fazang's Huayan thought, it also actively cites Dashengyizhang about 25 times. Among these citations, some cases do not correspond to orthodox Huayan thought. This can be understood from the perspective of new Hwaom doctrines coming into being through the syncretic combination of Huayan and Dilun thought.
Dullyun's Yugarongi 瑜伽論記 of the Faxiang school 法相宗 cites Dashengyizhang about 6 times as a supplementary material to Yuqieshidilun 瑜伽師地論. This proves that Dullyun regarded Huiyuan as a Yogacāra master.
To summarize, the Dashengyizhang was highly influential to Silla Buddhist scholars such as Wonhyo, Pyowon, and Dullyun.
However, it is clear that there was a parallel movement by these scholars to forge their own novel doctrinal path upon the foundation provided by the adoption of the Dashengyizhang. This is an example of the unique characteristics of Silla Buddhism within the global context of East Asian Buddhism.

참고자료

· 없음