화쟁의 원류로서의 교판 - 사유구조의 연속성을 중심으로-

Abstract

This paper explores the continuous cognitive structures present in East Asian Buddhist texts, specifically the simultaneous affirmation and denial of the logically contradictory propositions that "each doctrine is differentiated" and "all doctrines are indiscriminate." In Wonhyo's Yŏlbanjongnyo (涅槃宗要), the concluding section extensively appropriates Jingying Huiyan's Zhongjingjiaojiyi (衆經敎迹義), presenting the doctrinal discourses of the Southern and Northern dynasty as opposing extremes. He articulates the idea that "if one clings to one extreme, all is wrong; if one does not cling, all is correct," thereby advocating the principle of Hwajaeng. Both Jingying Huiyan's Zhongjingjiaojiyi and its source text Fashang’s Jiaojiyi, propose the Liuqiu’s Sectional view and the Bodhiruci’s monolithic view on the Buddha’s teaching as opposing extremes. They aim to simultaneously affirm and deny the views that "all doctrines are gradual" and "all doctrines are ultimate" through an analysis of the texts and the positions of the Buddha as the speaker and sentient beings as the audience. Liuqiu, known for advocating the Sectional view Buddha’s teaching, presents the teachings of sudden (頓) and gradual (漸) as opposing extremes. In his work Wuliangyijing-shu (無量義經序), he asserts that both the sudden and the gradual teachings cannot be schematized. According to Liuqiu, though the Wuliangyijing is considered to be belong to the category of gradual (漸), it is mere a skillful means of the Buddha. He argues that since the core teaching of the Wuliangyijing is the formless (無相), it can be rightly considered as representing the ultimate realization of sudden teachings. In Conclusion, the East Asian Buddhist thinkers, despite their contextual and methodological differences, share a tendency to frame previous discussions as opposing extremes while seeking to overcome and unify these two perspectives. This underscores the necessity of a broader view of East Asian Buddhism for a more accurate assessment of the significance of Wonhyo’s thought.