Korea Journal of Buddhist Studies ISSN:1598-0642(Print) 불교학연구

Daehyeon, the “patriarch of Yogācāra” (K. yuga jo 瑜珈祖), and his Yogācāra thought have not been carefully studied for his historical and Buddhological significance. One of the reasons for the relative paucity of research on Daehyeon is associated with the problem of placing Daehyeon within the broader tradition of East Asian Yogācāra Buddhism. Typically, the East Asian Yogācāra tradition is divided into two doctrinally antagonistic systems, Tathāgatagarbha and Yogācāra, or the Old and New Yogācāra systems. Daehyeon’s Yogācāra views, however, are not always consistent with this dialectic, since Daehyeon’s extant works show that he advocates the main tenets of New Yogācāra while also defending doctrinal views that belong to the Old Yogācāra. In this context, whether Daehyeon is to be identified as an exegete belonging to the former or the latter group has been controversial. This article discusses how or in what way Daehyeon’s paradoxically dualistic doctrinal system may be approached and what kind of doctrinal and historical significance Daehyeon’s system has, through the Daeseung gisillon naeui yaktamgi 大乘起信論內義略探記, Daehyeon’s commentary on the Awakening of Mahayana Faith (C. Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論). The Daeseung gisillon naeui yaktamgi consists mostly of citations from Wonhyo’s 元曉 (617-686) and Fazang’s 法藏 (643-712) commentaries on the Awakening of Faith, and thus I will analytically investigate the ways in which Daehyeon selectively edits these two exegetes in the text. I will first discuss the reason why Daehyeon accepts Fazang’s five-leveled taxonomy (C. wu jiaopan 五敎判) in organization of Buddhist teachings, and then examine Daehyeon’s perspective on Buddha-nature (C. foxing, K. pulsŏng 佛性) to elucidate Daehyeon’s “Middle Way” view, which is beyond the traditional bifurcation between the Tathāgatagarbha and Yogācāra, or the Old and New Yogācāra systems.