삼론학의 삼종중도(三種中道)와원효의 무이중도(無二中道) 비교연구 (A comparative study in three kinds of middle way in the Sanlun school and the middle way free from dualistic extremes of Wonhyo)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 동아시아불교문화학회
· 수록지 정보 : 동아시아불교문화 / 46호 / 139 ~ 173페이지
· 저자명 : 김영미

초록

깨달음인 진제와 세속인 속제의 이제(二諦)를 어떻게 이해하는가에 의해 붓다의 깨달음은 여러 가지로 해석되어질 수 있다. 『마하반야바라밀경』에서는 세 가지의 이제설이 보인다. 첫째, 승의제와 세속제를 교설의 형식으로 하는 이제설은 승랑에게 전수되어서 이제시교론(二諦是教論)․삼종중도론(三種中道論)으로 발전하여 사중이제설(四重二諦說)로 귀결된다. 둘째, 승의제(勝義諦)를 불가언공성(不可言空性)으로 하고, 붓다의 교설을 이 ‘불가언공성(不可言空性)’의 방편인 세속제(世俗諦)로 하는 이제설은 원효에게 무이중도(無二中道)로 발전되어진 것으로 보인다. 셋째, 세속제와 승의제와의 상즉(相卽)을 설하는 이제설은 원효에게 생멸상즉(生滅相卽)으로, 승랑에게 유무상즉(有無相卽)으로 계승되고 있다.
중국의 삼론학에서는 이제의 체가 중도임을 밝혀 중도위체론(中道為體論)을 성립하고, 승조의 유무상즉 사상에서 유래한 가명공(假名空) 이론이 삼론학의 이제합명중도(二諦合明中道) 사상으로 계승되어, 이제각론중도(二諦各論中道)[세제중도․진제중도]와 이제합명중도(二諦合明中道)의 삼종중도(三種中道)로써 깨달음을 드러내고 있다. 이에 대해 한국의 원효는 『금강삼매경론』에서 속제중도(俗諦中道)․진제중도(眞諦中道)․무이중도(無二中道)라는 용어로써 깨달음의 경지를 나타낸다. 무이중도는 중관학의 이제(二諦)[속제, 진제]와 유식학의 삼성(三性)[변계소집성, 원성실성(시각), 의타기성, 원성실성(본각)]을 서로 융합하고 있다.

영어초록

Buddha's enlightenment can be interpreted in various ways by how to perceive the twofold truth, which are the absolute truth of enlightenment and the conventional truth of the mundane world. Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra manifests three different types of the twofold truth. First, the twofold truth, which is the form of the ultimate truth and conventional truth as a doctrinal teaching, was passed down to Senglang, and now is developed into ‘the logic that the twofold truth is the teaching(二諦是教論)․‘the logic for three kinds of middle way(三種中道論), resulting in ‘the sermon of four levels of the twofold truths(四重二諦說)’. Second, the twofold truth, which made the ultimate truth as ‘the nature of emptiness cannot be called(不可言空性)’ and conventional truth as Buddha's preaching is a temporary expedient of ‘the nature of emptiness cannot be called’, was inherited by Wonhyo and expanded into the middle way free from dualistic extremes(無二中道). Third, the twofold truth, which preaches integration of all phenomena with one another of the ultimate truth and conventional truth, was inherited by Wonhyo as production and extinction are mutual identification, and by Senglang as existence and non-existence are mutual identification.
The Sanlun school in China established ‘the middle way as their essence(中道為體論)’ by revealing that the essence of the twofold truth is the middle way and ‘the theory of conventionally designated emptiness(假名空 理論)’ derived from existence and nonexistence are mutual identification(有無相卽) of Sengzhao is inherited as ‘the middle way clarificating the twofold truths synthetically(二諦合明中道)’ of the Sanlun school, denoting enlightenment as ‘the three kinds of middle way(三種中道)’ including ‘the middle way discussing the twofold truth separately(二諦各論中道)’[the middle way from the standpoint of the conventional truth․the middle way from the standpoint of the absolute truth] and ‘the middle way clarificating the twofold truths synthetically(二諦合明中道)’. In response, Wonhyo of Korea employed the terms, the middle way from the standpoint of the conventional truth․the middle way from the standpoint of the absolute truth․the middle way free from dualistic extremes to represent the stage of enlightenment in Wonhyo's Exposition of the Vajrasamādhi Sūtra. The middle way free from dualistic extremes is converged into the twofold truth[the conventional truth and absolute truth] in Madhyamaka and the three natures of cognition in Yogâcāra[parikalpita-svabhāva, pariniṣpanna-svabhāva(initial enlightenment), paratantra-svabhāva, pariniṣpanna-svabhāva(original enlightenment)].

참고자료

· 없음