조선시대 선사상연구의 현황과 몇 가지 논점에 대하여

Abstract

Most research on ‘Zen(禪)’ during Joseon Dynasty have been undertaken by historians, and few studies have dealt with its philosophical aspect, and stayed in the scope of research conducted by Takahashi Toru(高橋亨) in ‘Yijobulgyo(Buddhism in Joseon Dynasty)’ and Nukariya Kaiten(忽滑谷快天) in ‘Joseonseongyosa(History of Zen Buddhism in Joseon Dynasty)’ during the period of Japanese colonization. In investigating Zen Buddhism in Joseon Dynasty, I attempt to raise three arguments as below. First, Zen Buddhism by priest Bojojinul(普照知訥) does not contradict Zen Buddhism in Joseon Dynasty that regarded Imjejong(臨濟宗) as legitimate. In the past, researchers largely thought that the two contradicted each other because priest Jinul advocated the idea of sudden enlightenment(donojeomsu; 頓悟漸修), while the idea of more gradual enlightenment and completing ‘Gyo(敎)’ to move up to the realm of ‘Zen(禪)’(頓悟頓修, 捨敎入禪) was advocated in Joseon Dynasty. However, in my opinion, the latter does not capture the core idea of Imjejong. They are merely a propaganda that argues for the superior status of ‘Zen’ over ‘Gyo’. These two cannot be separated, and yet, too much emphasis has been put on the idea of ‘sagyoibseon(捨敎入禪)’, particularly in Zen discourses(禪論爭) during the late Joseon period, and it came to be misinterpreted as a core idea of Imjejong. Second, some Buddhist priests during Joseon Dynasty believed in a ‘true self that never dies,’ which I think is a misleading idea. Yet there are reasons for this misunderstanding in philosophy of Imjejong. Muwijinin Sosoyoungryeong(無位眞人, 昭昭靈靈) was interpreted as a ‘true self that never disappears’ and thus rouses perception and cognition. However, in general, Buddhism regards knowledge obtained by perception as delusion(妄想) or mere sensibleness(分別). Thus, muwijinin Sosoyoungryeong that rouses perception is not a true self but merely fleeting. Even if there is something like a ‘true self’, it would be wrong to argue that ‘a person may die but the true self never dies.’ Third, it is not a contradiction that Zen priests believed in a physical dimension of ‘pure land(淨土).’ Since priest HuiNeng(慧能) argued that our mind is the very pure land(心則淨土), Josaseon(祖師禪) emphasized the idea of yushimjeongto(唯心淨土) and strongly opposed to the idea of seobangjeongto(西方淨土). However, Josaseon does not represent all Zen ideas, and many Zen priests accepted and prayed for the ‘pure land’ before priest HuiNeng. Moreover, ‘Zen’ and ‘pure land’ have much in common philosophically(禪觀思想). Presumably, Buddhist priests in Joseon Dynasty prayed for the pure land of seobangjeongto as it was difficult to reach enlightenment through Zen practice and thus they instead wished to be accepted in the pure land after death.