Loading...
日本古代華厳宗における『起信論』及びその註釈書の受容 [The Accommodation of The Awakening of Faith Sutra and its Commentaries in the Ancient Japanese Huayen School ]
Kim, Cheon-hak
Kim, Cheon-hak
Author(s)
Kim, Cheon-hak
Author(s) (Additional)
Illustrator(s)
Producer(s)
Contributor(s)
Contributor(s) (Other)
Editor(s)
Advisor(s)
Contact(s)
Data Collector(s)
Collections
Files
Loading...
n09.pdf
Adobe PDF, 1.29 MB
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Online Access
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to clarify the process of how the Japanese Huayen school considered Qixinlun (The Awakening of Faith Sutra) and Fa-zang‟s Qixinlun Yiji through Qixinlun and its commentaries from ancient Japanese Huayen. Firstly, it could be confirmed on the basis of ancient records that comments on the Qixinlun came from China and Shilla to Japan at around 700 AD. As a result, the numerous commentaries by Won-hyo from Shilla and Fa-zang became the main source of research at the time. Based on the thought of Qixinlun, Daijo-kishinron-doiryakushu (大乗起信論同意略集) mostly criticized Yogācāra thought, but it also served to reconcile the thought of Mādhyamika and Yogācāra, which was at the same time regarded as the doctrine of Huayen. In terms of doctrinal classification, however, it emphasized the actual causes of Tathāgatagarbha thought in Qixinlun. Daijo-kishinron-doiryakushu is defined as the Final Teachings in the doctrinal classification, but it harmonized the Elementary Teachings to Abrupt Teachings and distinguished Huayen‟s Tathāgatagarbha thought, which was the Special Teachings. On the other hand, Doiryakushu centered on Wonhyo and Fa-zang but practically, the theory of Fa-zang was the core, while the theory of Wonhyo was subsidiary. This tendency continued in the Nara era, which informs us that China was the center of Buddhism. In Kegon-gokyosho-shiji (華厳五教章指事), Qixinlun also took the role from the elementary teachings to abrupt teachings, but formally defined as “One Vehicle of the same teaching”. Considering the “One Vehicle of the same teaching” and “One Vehicle of the Special teaching” as the same was the feature of Kegon-gokyosho-shiji. This means that Qixinlun can also be understood as “One Vehicle of the Special teaching”. But Fa-zang was also in the center while Wonhyo was auxiliary in Kegon-gokyosho-shiji. In time of the Heian era, Qixinlun is presented as the evidence of the Final Teachings and perfect teaching through Kegon-shu-shoritsu-gokyojitshu-daiiryakusho (華厳宗所立五教十 宗大意略抄), which means that the role of Qixinlun was posed as the best doctrinal classification. On the other hand, in Kegon-ichijo-kaishinron (華厳一乗開心論), Shi-mo-he-yan-lun ( 釈摩訶衍論 ) was considered as the commentary of Qixinlun with the principle of winning the world. This kind of tendency toward attaching importance to Qixinlun in Japanese Huayen passed through the Edo era to modern times.
Note(s)
Topic
Type
Article
Date
2014-01
Identifier
ISBN
DOI
Copyright/License
With permission of the license/copyright holder