일본의 기념비적 불상과 불교전래연도와의 관계

Abstract

With three national monumental Buddhist statues that were listed on the national treasure of Japan or UNESCO World Heritage List, introduced without falling into Japanese secondary school textbooks, and acknowledged as the representative works of each era in Japanese art history, this study investigates their backgrounds of the development and historical significances. In this paper, Great Buddha of Todaiji(東大寺)-temple in Nara period, Amitabha Buddha of Byodoin(平等院)-temple in Heian period, and Great Buddha of Kamakura Kotokuin(高徳院)-temple in Kamakura period are selected. I examined the precedent studies regarding the introduction of Buddhism in Japan and attempted to understand the development background of the three monumental Buddhist statues by paying attention to the fact that Japanese government and Buddhist Circles established the year of 552 as the trigger period of Buddhism of Japan. First, Great Buddha of Todaiji-temple was built to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the introduction of Buddhism, and five hundred years after the Buddhist tradition, Amitabha Buddha of Byodoin-temple was constructed in order to prepare Malbeop(末法)-era and 60th birthday of Fujiwara-no-yorimichi(藤原頼道). With Kamakura Great Buddha built to celebrate the 700th anniversary of Buddhist tradition, I could derive the historical significance of the Kamakura Shogunate(鎌倉幕府)'s declaration of victory from Kyoto(京都) government(朝庭), in terms of the 500th anniversary from the establishment of Great Buddha of Todaiji-temple and the 60th anniversary of Kamakura Shogunate. In this way, the three monumental Buddhist statues representing Japan are ‘made-up art works’ with influence of ‘created’ history not of ‘true’ history which was made up over 700 years by the collaboration between the government and the Buddhist circles. Japanese history textbooks are frequently a problem not only in Japan but also in Korea and China and I could also research such aspect in Buddhist art. With urging the necessity of the right perception of history and its education, I would like to reflect on the meaning of ‘made-up art history’.