신라하대 國內派 禪僧의 西學認識

정동락 영남대학교 민족문화연구소 2013 민족문화논총 Vol.55 No.-

The later Silla period was a period when studying in the Tang dynasty–Seohak–was dominant in order to accept a new ideology, namely Zen Buddhism. During this period, approximately 60~70% of the monks were monks who had studied abroad ; however, up to 30~40% of monks were home-grown Zen monks. It is necessary to focus on them for understanding the correct positioning of Zen Buddhism history during the later Silla period. Home-grown Zen monks dared to insist on “Seohak Bulyoron”(insistence that there is no need for studying in China), which means that “they do not need Seohak” like Sim Hi. Against the backdrop of such an insistence, there was ”Bulbeob Dongryuseol”, which means “essence of Zen Buddhism was moved to Silla”. Of course monks who had studied abroad also asserted “Bulbeob Dongryuseol” ; however, it was home-grown monks who insisted on “Seohak Bulyoron”, which was a further advancement from “Bulbeok Dongryuseol”. Home-grown Zen monks expressed the self-awakening of Haedong(海東) corresponding to China. Also “Seohak Bulyoron” was the response of Zen Buddhism to “Bulguktoseol”(viewing Silla as being deeply related to Buddhism) insisted on by the Gyojong Buddhist circles, and it implied self-awakening and self-confidence of Silla Buddhism against Chinese Buddhism. Furthermore, it was also an assertion of justification as home-grown monks. Home-grown Zen monks were a group of Buddhist monks who stuck to the independence of Silla Zen Buddhism during the later Silla period when Seohak was dominant. They insisted that they did not have to go to China to study ; however they were flexible regarding Seohak. “Seohak Bulyoron” was not a ruling perception at that time, and it is fair to point out the limitation that the home-grown monks were a minority. Nevertheless, through them, it is expected that this will provide implications for today's humanities in seeking an alternative to the project of guarding against “reckless globalization” and overcoming “narrow-minded nationalism”. 신라하대에 唐으로부터 전해진 선종은 그 이전과는 다른 새로운 불교사상이었다. 외래의 종교사상은 대체로 전래와 수용, 정착과 확산, 내재화와 재해석 등의 단계를 거치면서 발전한다. 신라하대는 선종이라는 새로운 사조를 받아들이기 위한 入唐留學―西學이 활발하게 이루어지던 시기였다. 碑文이나 僧傳 등이 전해지는 30여명의 선승 중에서 대략 60~70%가 유학승이었다. 하지만, 30~40%에 달하는 국내파 선승이 존재했다. 이들은 신라하대 선종사의 올바른 자리매김을 위해 분명 주목할 필요가 있다. 신라하대 국내파 선승들은 審希와 같이 ‘서학이 필요하지 않다’고 주장하였다. 이들이 표방한 ‘西學不要論’의 근저에는 ‘선종의 精髓가 신라로 옮겨왔다’는 ‘佛法東流說’이 자리하였다. 물론 유학파 선승도 ‘불법동류설’을 주장하였다. 그렇지만, ‘불법동류설’에서 ‘서학불요론’으로까지 한 단계 더 나아간 것이 국내파였다. 이들은 중국에 대응하는 海東에 대한 자각을 표현하였던 것이다. ‘서학불요론’은 중국불교에 대한 신라불교의 자부심과 국내파로서의 정당성을 주장한 것이었다. 이런 점에서 국내파는 신라선종의 주체성을 견지한 승려들이라 할 수 있다. 국내파 선승들은 ‘서학불요론’을 내세웠지만, 한편으로는 서학에 대한 유연성도 견지하고 있었다. ‘서학불요론’이 당시의 주류적인 인식이 아니었고, 국내파가 선종불교계를 주도하지 못했던 한계는 지적되어야 마땅하다. 그렇지만, 이들의 존재를 통해 ‘무조건적인 세계화’를 경계하고, ‘편협한 국수주의’를 극복해야 하는 과제가 주어진 오늘날의 인문학이 대안을 모색하는데 시사점을 줄 것으로 기대된다.

신라하대 "국내파(國內派)" 선승(禪僧) 연구 -현황과 존재양상을 중심으로-

정동략 ( Dong Lak Jung ) 한국사상사학회 2012 韓國思想史學 Vol.0 No.40

이 글은 지금까지 크게 주목하지 않았던 入唐留學(西學)하지 않은 禪僧―``國內派`` 선승들에 대해 살펴본 것이다. 신라하대의 碑文이나 僧傳 등을 통해 대체적인 생애를 알 수 있는 선승은 대략 30여명 가량이 된다. 그 중에서 전체의 약 60∼70%에 달하는 20여명 정도의 선승들이 중국으로 유학을 떠난 入唐求法僧, 즉 西學僧이었다. 이런 점에서 신라하대는 서학이 대세를 점했던 시기라 하겠다. 그럼에도 불구하고 유학을 떠나지 않고 국내에서 수학한 ``국내파`` 선승이 대략 10여명으로, 약 30∼40%에 달하였다. 신라하대 선종의 올바른 이해를 위해서라도 이들에 대해 주목할 필요가 있다. 국내파 선승들은 최소한 6頭品 정도의 사회·경제적 기반을 가지고 있었다. 이들은 신라선종의 初傳僧이나 開山祖 문하에서 수학하고 인가를 받았다. 그리고 왕실이나 호족세력의 귀의를 받아 명망을 쌓아 나갔으며, 불교사상계나 신라사회로부터 역량을 인정받았다. 이들이 본격적으로 활동하는 시기는 景文王대인 860년대 이후가 아닌가 한다. 국내파 선승들은 중국에서 전래된 선종불교가 정착하여 어느 정도 신라화되었음을 보여주는 증거이다. 그리고 신라사회가 자체적으로 선승을 배출할 수 있는 사상적, 사회적 시스템이 갖추어졌음을 확인하는 가늠자이기도 하다. 국내파들은 留學派에 비해 크게 차별받지 않았던 듯하다. 이는 선승들에게 있어서 서학이 필수가 아니라 선택사항이었음을 알려주는 것이다. 국내파 선승들은 자신들이 서학하지 않은 사실을 정당화하기 위해 "禪宗이 동쪽으로 왔으므로(佛法東流說), 서학이 필요하지 않다(西學不要論)"고 주장하였다. 이에 대해서는 추후 살펴볼 예정이다. This study examines the Zen Monks -``home-grown`` Zennist-who did not conduct Western learning though it has hardly been paid attention to so far. The Zen Monks whose life in general can be known through the epitaphs or Seungjeon(僧傳) in Late Silla are about 30 ones. Among them, about 20 reaching up to 60 to 70% of the whole were the Zen Monks who were the Ipdanggubeop monks(入唐求法僧) or the monks of Western learning who had studied in China. Considering this, it can be said that Late Silla was the period when Western learning was prevalent. Despite this, the ``home-grown`` Zen Monks who studied locally, not going abroad, were about 10 ones, approximately 30 to 40%. To understand the Zen Buddhism at Late Silla properly, we should pay attention to them, too. The home-grown Zen Monks had the socio-economical ground as about 6 Dupum(六頭品). They studied under Gaesanjo(開山祖) or the early monks of Zen Buddhism during Silla to get approval. And they received the royal family`s or thane`s power to accumulate their reputation. Their capacity was acknowledged by the Buddhistic world of thought or Silla society. Perhaps, the period when they appeared genuinely was after the 860`s, the period of King Gyeongmun. The home-grown Zen Monks are the evidence that shows the Zen Buddhism transmitted from China was settled down in Silla society and became Silla`s to some extent. And they are also the sight to see that Silla society itself was equipped with its own ideological and social systems to cultivate the Zen Monks. And it seems that the home-grown ones were not discriminated greatly in their growth or acquisition of fame as Zen Monks than the overseas-grown ones. This implies that Western learning was not essential to the Zen Monks but an option then.

9~10세기 신라 유학승들의 중국 유학과 활동반경

김복순 한국역사연구회 2005 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.56

Continued from 6th to 9-10th studing abroad in ancient China of Sillas monk. Of course there was one political change of ruined temple and leaved the priesthood, so called Hye-chang(841-846) Pe-bul(會昌廢佛) in Tang Dynasty, Sillas abroad monk also had to be socked. But Sillas Zen priest continuously went to ancient china. This paper approached to a scope of movement about abroad course of monk in the late Sillas period. Abroad Course means that, after reaching China, moving to go practice asceticism place, after spiritual awakening wandering many place. So We know the keynote of a movement of Sillas monk in China, it is as follows. First, they wandered to find out many zen masters whereabouts. So they had a lot of smattering knowledge, broad views and high intelligence. Second, these movement course in 9-10th had a difference in 6-8th Sillas abroad monk. Third, in this period the Zen monks was an ardent admirer of Sixth zen master Hae-neng(六祖 慧能), so the Zen sects distinction, his historical site cho-ge(曹溪) was highlighted. Forth, their talents is very excellent, therefore becoming popular the chinese zen sect remove to east place, that is Silla. After they returned to Silla, appointed the highest rank of priest in the Silla Dynasty.

新羅(신라) 倭典(왜전)의 성격

이현주 ( Hyunju Lee ) 서울대학교 국사학과 2015 韓國史論 Vol.61 No.-

This study reviews the purpose, characteristics, and changes of Waejeon(倭典) in the kingdom of Silla(新羅) in order to investigate the changes in Silla``s foreign policy towards Japan during the 7th and 8th century. The early Waejeon was a government office that is in charge of welcoming envoys, and its establishment dates back to 591, which marked the first Japanese(倭) envoy visit since Yeburyeong (禮部令) was founded. At the time, Silla was under attacks by Gogureo(高句麗) and Baekje(百濟); thus, it implemented pro-Japanese foreign policy. In 621, the first envoy from Tang Dinasty made its visit and the early Waejeon was restructured to become Yeonggaekjeon(領客典), which was a permanent government office in charge of welcoming foreign envoys. The envoy exchanges between Silla and Japan was ceased during the war of Three Kingdoms, and it re-opened in 668 before Silla-Tang war. Silla sustained the pro-Japanese foreign policy until the early 8th century when its relation with the Tang Dynasty began to improve. Also, it is confirmed that Japan had sent scholastic monks(學問僧) to Silla approximately from 685 to early 8th century. The later Waejeon appears to have held a respon5ibility of welcoming and managing these scholastic monks. Under the ruling of King Seongdeok(聖德王), the relation between Silla and the Tang Dynasty improved and Silla began to decrease the importance of its relationship with Japan(日本). At the same time, Japan, too, was seeking ways to create a direct relationship with the Tang Dynasty without involving Silla. The last record of scholastic monk sent by Japan to Silla was Monk Shinjiyou(審祥). King Kyeongdeok(景德王) is known to have refused to meet with the Japanese envoy and in Japan, Fujiwarano nakamaro(藤原仲麻呂) prepared a battle against Silla, which led to severely damaged relationship to the level of creating the war clouds. Thus, it is possible to presume how difficult it must have been for later Waejeon to carry out its function. The early Waejeon was established to welcome and receive the Japanese envoy and the later Waejeon served to receive and manage the Japanese scholastic monks. Therefore, both Waejeons were operated as a part of pro-Japanese foreign policy.

일반논문 : 원홍은 신라승려인가? -『법화경론자주』의 인용문헌을 중심으로-

김천학 ( Cheon Hak Kim ) 동아시아불교문화학회 2014 동아시아불교문화 Vol.0 No.17

본고는 세친의 저술이라고 일컬어지는 『법화경론』에 대한 저술 가운 데 『법화경론자주(法華經論子註)』 3권의 저자인 원홍(圓弘)이 신라인임 을 증명하기 위한 논문이다. 인도사상가인 세친에 의해 『법화경론』이 저술되었지만, 그것이 사상 적으로 중요한 근거로 활용된 것은 중국에서 번역된 이후이며, 나아가 동아시아에서는 『법화경』을 이해하기 위한 중요한 해석 근거로 이용되 었다. 신라의 법화사상사도 이러한 흐름 속에서 전개되었던 것은 의적 석, 의일찬의 『법화경론술기』로 확인할 수 있다. 그런데, 최근에 원홍의 『법화경론자주』가 가나자와(金澤)문고와 쇼고 조(聖語藏)에 존재함이 밝혀지고, 이것을 입수하여 자세히 분석할 수 있 게 되었다. 원홍의 저술은 731년에 이미 『원홍사장』이, 748년에 『법화경 론자주』가 필사된다. 즉 원홍은 731년 이전에 저술활동을 하였다는 것 이다. 이와 같은 원홍의 활동연대를 염두에 두고 원홍이 신라인이라는 것을 증명하기 위해 크게 두 가지 방법을 사용하였다. 첫째는 원홍에 대 한 제 자료를 통해 원홍이 신라인이라는 가설을 증명하려고 하였다. 둘 째, 『자주』의 인용문헌을 통해 원홍이 신라인임을 증명하려고 하였다. 첫째 방법의 결과를 정리하면 다음과 같다. 우선, 법상유식의 기와 대 비되는 신라인의 그룹에 원홍이 속해있다는 사실이다. 다음으로 신라 표원의 『요결문답』과 설명방식이 일치한다는 점이다. 원홍의 『원홍사 장』을 주석한 이문(理門)은 태현의 저술에도 복주를 저술한다. 이렇게 신라 법상유식을 존중한다는 점에서, 원홍 역시 신라인의 가능성을 염 두에 둘 수 있다. 둘째 방법의 결과를 정리하면 다음과 같다. 『자주』의 인용문헌을 통 해서는 의적, 원효, 의상과 일치하는 예를 각각 2회, 3회, 1회 정도를 찾 아내어 증명하였다. 그 가운데 의적의 1예는 문장이 정확히 일치하고, 원효 2회와 의상의 1예는 용어가 정확히 일치함을 확인하였는데, 앞에 서 언급한 신라 표원 저술과의 관련을 고려하면 원홍이 신라 승려의 저 술을 읽었다고 단정할 수 있다. 다만, 인용사실을 통해 원홍이 의적 등 보다 뒤의 인물이라는 증명은 될 수 없다. 동시대에 활동하였다고 볼 수 도 있기 때문이다. 따라서, 연대에 대해서는 문제가 남아 있지만, 신라 인의 저술을 보았다는 점에서 원홍이 신라인임을 증명하였다고 생각된 다. 한편, 사본을 좀 더 면밀하게 검토하면 신라승려의 문헌을 인용한 흔 적을 더 찾을 수 있을 것이다. 이러한 문제를 포함해서 향후 세밀한 주 석을 통해 또 하나의 신라인 주석서 원홍의 『법화경론자주』에 대해서 연구하고, 의적, 원효, 경흥 등 신라 승려와 비교하여 본 문헌을 신라인 의 법화사상사에 추가하고자 한다. The Fahuajinglun (the Saddharma-pundarikopadesa (妙法蓮華經憂 波提舍)) written by Vasubandhu is a commentary on the Lotus Sutra and has the meaning of a guidebook the Lotus Sutra. The Fahuajinglun was translated into Chinese two times. One translation was made by Ratnamati (勒那摩提), and the other by Bodhiruchi (菩 提留支), both of them are extant and its Sanskrit version has not been identified. The Fahuajinglun annotates “Introduction,” “Chapter on Expedient Means” and “Chapter on Parables” of the Lotus Sutra. This paper corresponds to an introduction so as to make an earnest study henceforward on the Beophwagyeongronjaju (hereinafter also referred to as “the Jaju”) as a writing of a Silla monk, on the premise that Wonhong, who wrote the Jaju, is definitely a man of Silla. the Jaju among Wonhong`s works were already transcribed in 748. This means that he wrote them earlier than 731. Two primary methods were used in order to prove that Wonhong is a man of Silla with his activity period in mind. The first method is to prove the fact through the information collected on him, and the second method through a literature cited in the Jaju. As for the first method, in the first place, Annen`s Kyojisoron describes that Wonhong belongs to a group of Silla monks who were contrasted with Kuiji who belongs to Chinese consciousness-only school transmitted from dharma characteristics school. Although the Old Consciousness-only teachings in the lineage of Paramartha stood on the center of opposing to Xuanzang`s theory of five natures distinction, most of Silla monks, whether he is Uijeok studying under Xuanzang or studying in Silla without going abroad, expressed their views opposite to Kuiji`s views. Such attitudes were not found at least in Chinese monks of Xuanzang tradition which was succeeded down from Xuanzang-Kuiji-Huizhao-Zhizhou. Further, seeing through Japanese scripts, Annen`s argument was confirmed to have some validity, and the fact that Wonhong`s expression method coincides with that of Pyowon from Silla in his yogyeol mundap was proved. And the fact that Gomyo, who had intimate relations with Silla recites the Wonhongsa-jang in his mind, is also important. Rimun (理門) annotated Wonhong`s Wonhongsa-jang and his re-annotation was found on catalogs. He also re-annotated Taehyeon`s works. Like Gomyo, Rimun though highly of works composed by Silla consciousness-only monks. Second, through Wonhong`s literature cited in the Jaju, we have found out examples of coincidence with the works of Uijeok, Wonhyo and Uisang, respectively two times, three times and one time, and examined their nature of conformity. Among the examples, we confirmed that one example regarding Uijeok is correct coincidence in sentence, two examples regarding Wonhyo and one example regarding Uisang are correct coincidences in terminology used. If considering relations between Wonhong`s literature and Pyowon`s works, we can conclude that Wonhong read works of Silla monks. According to the proving method using two primary methods mentioned above, we can also conclude that Wonhong is a man of Silla.

신라하대 선종사(禪宗史) 시기구분 시론(試論)

정동락 ( Dong Lak Jung ) 대구사학회 2011 대구사학 Vol.103 No.-

A Study on the Theory of Periods to Divide History of Zen in the Late Silla Jung, Dong-lak [Abstract] This study divides history of Zen in the late Silla into three periods and arranges the characteristics of the three periods: ``period accepting Zen(禪宗 受容期)`` ― from King Heongdeok till King Shinmu, ``period opening Zen sect(禪門 開創期)`` ― from King Munseong till Queen Jinseong, and ``period dividing Zen sect(禪門 分化期)`` ― from King Hyogong till the period of struggle between the Later Three Kingdoms of Korea. In ``period accepting Zen``, early monks of Zen including Doui(道義) or Hongchuk(洪陟) transmitted and introduced Namjongseon(南宗禪). Their periodic task was for Silla to accept the society of Silla. Doui could not gain support from the royal family of Silla but went into retirement to Mt. Buk(北山). However, he cultivated literary men and contributed to the settlement of Zen in Silla. Meanwhile, Hongchuk opened Silsangsanmun(實相山門) evaluated as the first Zen sect with the support of King Heungduk and laid the foundation for the development of Zen. ``Period opening Zen sect`` is the period to experience the farmers` strife during Queen Jinseong after King Munseong. The task of monks in that period was to settle and develop Zen in Silla. To achieve this, the monks had ties with powers all over the society to develop Zen sect. They cooperated with various social powers including the royal family of Silla as well as local Hojok(豪族). As a result, they could open so-called ``nine mountain monasteries``. And as Zen became settled and developed, there were more and more local monks growing as high priests only by doing studies inside. ``Period dividing Zen sect`` is the period when the Later Three Kingdoms of Korea founded by Gyeonhwon(甄萱) and Gungye(弓裔) during early King Hyogong was established and Wanggeon(王建) took the throne to develop severe struggle. The monks in this period made a political decision to be united with the Later Three Kingdoms of Korea according to their political pursuit. Though it had an unavoidable aspect for the periodic circumstances, the monks showed complex aspects according to their recognition on reality and pursuit. As a result, those who were in student-teacher relationship or student-student relationship in the same temple of Zen sect sometimes took a different political path. Furthermore, as the second or third generation monks cultivated under Gaechangjo began activities, the realms of Zen sect became divided actively.

新羅 下代 禪宗史 硏究動向

정동락 한국고대사탐구학회 2011 한국고대사탐구 Vol.7 No.-

Studies on the Zen history of the Late Silla had first been conducted at the level of organizing relevant data, beginning in the 20st century. Then, systematic studies had set off since the 1970s, and prepared its foundation while deducing the outcome that Zen was the religion of the powerful, local clans. After that in the 1980s, some issues were examined regarding the establishment of the denomination of Zen, whether nine mountain monasteries actually existed, the relationship with political power, and the settlement of the position of Gyo·Zen. In the 1990s, an intensive analysis of the classification of eras focusing on the acceptance of Zen, the character of middle age Buddhism, the social reformation theory of the Zen monks, and individual Zen sect was attempted. In the 2000s, the relationship between Zen and the Silla royal family was greatly highlighted, and, also, the individual review of nine mountain monasteries, the activities and Zen ideology of the Zen monks, and the relationship between Zen sect in the southwestern area of Silla and the power of Jang Bo-go. As such, studies on the Zen history of the late Silla have consistently pursued the correlation with political power and the relationship between Zen and Gyo(Hwaeumjong). This was because this issue was the key topic for revealing the Zen history of the late Silla. Also, there has been intensive research into the period of the establishment of denomination, the real existence of middle age Buddhism, individual Zen sect and Zen monks, and the analysis of Zen sect according to region. Zen monks during the late Silla were intellectuals who lived their lives by being deeply anguished over reality in the transitional period of time and by acting according to their belief. Therefore, it is necessary to identify what their assignment of the time was focusing on the Zen monks and how they perceived and responded to reality. Furthermore, there is a need for summarizing the lives and activities of the Zen monks as well as selections and critical awareness which appear at every stage of their lives. As one of those methodologies, it is deemed useful to classify the period of the Zen history of the late Silla according to the trend of the time, and to analyze the cases of the Zen monks by each period. 신라 하대 선종사 연구는 20세기에 들어오면서 자료정리 차원에서 다루어졌다. 그러다가 1970년대 이후 체계적인 연구가 시작되어, 선종은 지방호족의 종교라는 성과가 도출되면서 그 토대가 마련되었다. 이후 1980년대에는 선종의 宗派성립과 9山禪門의 실재 여부, 정치세력과의 관계, 敎ㆍ禪의 위치정립 문제가 논의되었다. 1990년대에는 선종의 수용을 중심으로 하는 시대구분과 中世佛敎의 성격, 선승의 사회개혁론, 개별 산문에 대한 집중적인 분석이 시도되었다. 2000년대에는 선종과 신라왕실의 관계가 크게 부각되었고, 9산선문의 개별적인 검토, 선승들의 활동과 선사상, 신라 西南지역 선종산문과 張保皐 세력과의 관계가 주목되었다. 이처럼 신라 하대 선종사 연구는 정치세력과의 관련성, 선종과 교종(화엄종)의 관계 등이 지속적으로 추구되었다. 이 문제가 신라 하대 선종사를 밝히는 핵심적인 주제였기 때문이었다. 그리고 종파성립의 시기와 9산선문의 실재, 선종사의 시기구분과 중세불교의 성격, 개별 산문과 선승, 지역별 선종산문의 분석 등이 시기에 따라 집중적으로 연구되었다. 신라 하대의 선승들은 시대적 전환기에 현실을 고뇌하고 행동하는 知性으로서 자신의 삶을 살아간 知識人이었다. 따라서 이들 선승들에 대해 주목하여 그들의 시대적 과제가 무엇이었고, 현실인식과 대응이 어떠했는지를 규명할 필요가 있다. 또한 선승들의 생애와 활동을 정리하고, 생의 마디마다 나타나는 선택과 문제의식을 정리해야 한다. 그 방법론의 일환으로 신라 하대 선종사를 시대적 흐름과 관련하여 시기구분하고, 각 시기별 선승들의 사례를 분석하는 것이 유용하리라 생각한다.

신라 하대 서남해 지역 禪僧과 후백제

張日圭(Chang, Il-gyu) 한국고대사학회 2014 韓國古代史硏究 Vol.0 No.74

신라 하대에 선승들은 진성왕 이전까지 지방호족과 친밀한 관계를 맺었지만, 한편으로는 왕실이나 중앙 귀족의 후원도 받았다. 선종 사찰은 대체로 서남해 지역에 주로 자리하였는데, 그곳에서는 후원 불사를 통해서 석탑과 불상 등이 조성되었다. 서남해 지역의 불교계가 다양한 세력과 관계하였기에, 이 지역 선승은 선종 사상을 내세우면서 교학 불교에 소홀할 수 없었다. 신라 하대 서남해 지역은 선종 불교의 중심지이자 교종 불교를 함께 이해하는 교섭과 융합의 장이었다. 이러한 경향은 후백제 견훤의 불교 정책에도 적지 않은 영향을 미쳤다. 이 글은 서남해 지역 선승의 활동과 사상을 시기별?지역별로 나누어 살피고, 후백제와의 관련성을 고찰한 것이다. 신라 하대에 무주와 전주 등 서남해 지역은 물론 강주와 웅주 등 주변 지역에는 여러 사찰이 자리하였다. 화엄사, 금산사, 해인사, 보원사 등은 820년대 말~890년대 말에 교학 불교계를 통제하였는데, 대체로 화엄종과 연결된 데 반해, 전주 지역만 특별히 법상종 교단과 밀접한 관계를 가졌다. 한편 820년대 말~920년대 중반에 실상산문, 동리산문, 가지산문 사찰과 승려들은 선종 불교의 성행을 이끌었다. 전주 지역은 처음부터 가장 늦게까지 선승의 활동처로 주목되었다. 다만 이 지역 선종 사찰의 분포와 선승의 활동에는 무주 지역의 영향이 적지 않았다. 무주 지역의 선종 사찰은 다른 지역보다 많이 분포하였고 선승의 활동도 활발하였다. 이 지역의 선승들은 선종 불교는 교종 불교도 함께 이해하여 ‘성상동일’, ‘교선동일’의 사상 경향을 내세웠다. 898년 전후에 무주 지역은 혼란 속에서 여생을 보내기에 알맞은 곳으로 인식되었으나 903년 이후 왕건이 궁예의 명령을 받아 나주를 공격하면서, 이러한 분위기는 갑자기 바뀌었다. 서남해 지역과 연고되지 않은 선승은 무주 지역에 귀국한 뒤 바로 다른 지역으로 이거하였지만, 서남해 지역과 연고된 선승은 무주 지역으로 귀국한 다음에도 여전히 머물면서 이 지역 선종 불교의 전통을 계승하였다. 혜철과 도윤의 법손이자 도선과 절중의 제자였던 경보가 그러한 역할을 맡았다. 912년에 견훤은 덕진포 전투에서 왕건에게 패배하였다. 선승의 귀국처는 전주 지역으로 변경되었고, 견훤의 불교 정책도 이 지역을 중심으로 운영되었다. 견훤은 921년에 전주 임피현으로 귀국한 동리산문의 경보에게 전주 남복선원에 주석하도록 요청하면서 무주 지역 선문과의 관계를 복구하려고 하였다. 아울러 미륵사 개탑 불사를 설행하고, 해인사 관혜와 관계를 맺으면서 교종 불교에 대한 통제도 강화하였다. 그는 선사상은물론 화엄사상과 유식사상을 아울렀던 서남해 지역 불교계의 ‘성상동일’, ‘교선동일’ 기조를 계승하면서 왕실의 위상을 강조하고 후백제 영역 지배를 강화하고자 하였다. This article is focused on understanding the relationship between Later Baekje(後百濟) and Zen Monks(禪僧) who were active in the southwest region in the Late Period of Silla through analyzing their activities and thought per period and by regional groups. There were a lot of typical temples of Textual Buddhism such as Hwaeomsa Temple, Geumsansa Temple, Haeinsa Temple and bowonsa temple in the southwest region. These temples had controled Textual Buddhism from the end of 830th to 890th. Most of them were connected with the Hwaeom-jong(華嚴宗) but Geumsansa Temple located in Jeonju region was associated with the Beobsang-jong(法相宗). Generally, ZenMonks of the Silsangsanmun, Donglisanmun, Gajisanmun had led Silla’s Zen Buddhism from the end of 820th to the mid-920th in the Southwest Region. By the way the interesting things is that Jeonju region was influenced byMuju region strongly even though Jeonju region received attention with the Zen monk’s activity sheets from the beginning of the Late Period of Silla. Muju region was not only the center of Zen Buddhism but also exchange place understanding Textual Buddhism. Zen Monks in this region emphasized that ‘nature and characteristics of the universal truth is same(性相同一)’ and ‘Textual Buddhism and Zen Buddhism is same(敎禪同一)’. Muju region was a stable place around 898. However, since Wang-geon(王建) attacked Naju region in 903, the situation has changed. Most of the Zen monks left Muju region but the monks based in Muju still stayed. For example, Monk GyeongBo(慶甫) was one of those people. He was a disciple of Monk DoSeon(道詵) and Monk JeolJung(折中). He was in succession to the tradition of the southwest region Buddhism. Gyeon-hwon(甄萱) was defeated by Wang-geon in the Deokjinpo(德津浦) battle in 912. After this battle, the place where Zen Monks return home from China was changed to Jeonju region and naturally Gyeon-hwon had no choice but to manage the policy of Buddhism centering around Jeonju region. In 921, Gyeon-hwon called for Monk Gyeongbo to stay at Nambokseonwon Temple in Jeonju in order to resume relations with Donglisanmun Zen Sect in Muju region. In addition, he tried to control Textual Buddhism through having a close relations with Mireuksa Temple and Haeinsa Temple. Eventually by these efforts Gyeon-hwon intended to emphasize the status of the royal family and strengthen his control over the territory of Later Baekje.

< 기획논문 1 > 불교 지성에 대한 성찰과 현대적 모색 : 신라 고승들의 "세상과의 소통법"

안경식 ( Gyeong Sik An ) 동아시아불교문화학회 2015 동아시아불교문화 Vol.0 No.23

이 논문의 주제는 7세기 전후에 활약한 신라시대 고승(高僧)들, 즉,원광을 비롯하여 자장, 원효, 의상 등의 ‘세상과의 소통법’이다. 그들의 소통법의 특징은 아래의 몇 가지로 요약할 수 있다. 첫째, 그들은 시대와 사회에 적합한 소통법을 고안하였다. 당시 고승들은 강경(講經)이나 설법(說法)과 같은 불교의 일반적이고, 전통적인 방식 뿐 아니라 무애가, 무애무, 도인(圖印)의 작성과 같은 당시로서는 완전히 새로운 방식을 도입하여 소통에 나섰다. 둘째, 주동적이고 능동적으로 세상과의 소통에 나섰다. 그들은 모든 사람에게 존경받는 고승이었지만 자신의 처소에서 ‘세상’을 기다린 것이 아니라 스스로 ‘세상’을 향해 먼저 나아갔다. 셋째, 소통과 교화의 대상으로 사회적 약자에 관심을 기울였다. 넷째, 정치적 참여의 요구를 종교적 소통 혹은 교화의 하나의 통로로 활용했다. 다섯째, 상구보리를 중시했지만 하화중생을 외면하지 않았다. 여섯째, 실생활에서의 소통 뿐 아니라 학문적 소통을 위해 노력했다. 결국, 신라 고승들의 삶은 당시, 강수(强首)가 생각했듯이 속세를 떠난 삶도아니었고, 세상을 등지고 산 삶도 아니었다. 불교를 세외교(世外敎)라고하는 일반적인 인식도 문제가 있지만 신라시대의 불교를 세외교라 규정하는 것은 타당한 인식이라 할 수 없다. 신라와는 비록 천 년이 넘는 시간을 두고 있지만 신라시대 고승들의 세상과의 소통법은 이 시대의 불교가 세상과 어떻게 소통해야 하는지를 알려주는 이정표가 될 수 있을것이다. The topic of this thesis is Venerable monks in the Silla society those took a important role in around of 7th century, Wonkwang(圓 光), Jajang(慈藏), Wonhyo(元曉), Eosang(義湘)``s communicaion activity to society. The characteristic of their communication activity could be summarized as followings : First, they invented the ways of communication that fit to generation and society. Venerable monks of those times used not only Buddhism``s general and traditional methods, but they also introduced new ways like Song of Muae(无碍 歌), Dance of Muae(无碍舞), and production of Stamp styled picture (圖印). Second, they began to communicate with secular people with active attitude. They were all respected by everybody but monks did not only wait for a believer to visit their residence, but they first spontaneously went for them. Third, they had a great interest to the social poor as a object of communication and education. Fourth, they used the request of a political participation by the ruler as a one of the religious communication. Fifth, they put emphasis on asceticism, but they never faced away from helping the poor. Sixth, they were concerned about studying other than Buddhism, doing their best to not only the communication of real life but also in academic field. After all, the life of Silla Vernerable monks is not entirely outside of the secular society like Gangsu(强首) has thought in that time, neither life that indifferent to world. Normal perception that Buddhism is the religion that unconcerned in secular life also has a problem, but treating Silla dynasty``s Buddhism to same way is not appropriate. There is more than a thousand years of time gap between modern times and Silla. But the Venerable monk``s communication activity to society in Silla Dynasty could be milestone to Buddhism in today, how to communicate to the world.

신라 하대 불교지성, 진감 선사의 삶의 교육학적 의미

안경식 한국종교교육학회 2017 宗敎敎育學硏究 Vol.54 No.-

The purpose of this research is to investigate Venerable Jingam(眞鑑)s life from the view of the education. The reason why I paid attention to the life of the Venerable monk is for his educational carrier and is not for his native ability. The Venerable monk is not to be born in a Venerable monk state since he was born. He become a Venerable monk through a process of the education. So I am interested for Venerable monk life. A Venerable monk is an intellectual person of the time and is an ideal educator of the time. We can understand what is ideal teacher of later Silla period, and what is educational model through the life of Venerable Jingam. This article is comprised of three chapters except a preface and a conclusion. I studied the process of birth of the Venerable Jingam and the life of the period of growth in Chapter 2 of the article. I considered a process of the training after having become a priest in Chapter 3 and considered the life as the educator of the Buddhism in Chapter 4. I summarized the educational meaning of the Venerable Jingams lifetime with six kinds by a conclusion as follows. It is first and points it out for the importance of parents and domestic environment. Second, The Venerable monk brought up their intelligence through studying abroad. The studying abroad was one of the learning processes that most Venerable monk of the later Silla Era. Third, Venerable Jingam utilized chanting the sutra text as a method of the education. This was the educational method that was very rare in Silla. Forth, Venerable Jingam became a master of the king(國師), and this means that Buddhism had a big influence on the education of the national leader like king. Fifth, as for the educational activity of the Venerable Jingam, we must pay attention to the point that had an influence on the local education and common people education. Sixth, Life and the educational activity of Venerable Jingam has a important meaning at the side of the Buddhist intellectual history in Silla era.