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

This article examines the circulation of the Hwaŏmgyŏng mundap (華嚴經問答) in Japan and its ideological influence on Japanese Huayan thought. Since 2015, two new manuscripts of the Hwaŏmgyŏng mundap have been discovered, and a critical edition has been completed, thereby enabling new modes of textual interpretation. With respect to its ideological influence, this study addresses two issues: entry from the Three Vehicles (三乘) into the One Vehicle (一乘), and entry from the Two Vehicles (二乘) into the One Vehicle. The former issue is discussed in detail in Gyōnen’s (凝然) Gokyōshō tsurōki (五敎章通路記), where he criticizes the theory of “conversion at nirvana” presented in the Hwaŏmgyŏng mundap. At the same time, however, Gyōnen attempts a doctrinal reconciliation between the Hwaŏmgyŏng mundap and Fazang’s Tanxuan ji (探玄記) by drawing on Chengguan’s (澄觀) theories of the “teaching path” (敎道說) and the “realization path” (證道說), as well as the interpretive method found in the Ichijōgi shiki (一乘義私記), which proceeds by dismantling the textual structure and reconstructing the intended meaning. After Gyōnen, a variety of interpretations proliferated. Danei (湛睿), while adopting a conciliatory attitude within Japanese Huayan thought toward these diverse views, ultimately accepted the doctrine of conversion at nirvana of the Three Vehicles. Nevertheless, Danei himself adhered to a traditional interpretation grounded in Fazang’s Tanxuan ji. Subsequently, Danei’s conciliatory position came to be broadly accepted within Japanese Huayan thought.
The issue of the “direct entry of the Two Vehicles” (二乘直入) is examined primarily through the rongi (論義) materials of Tōdaiji (東大寺). In the Kegon tekagami (華嚴手鏡), a representative rongi text of the Tōdaiji lineage, the debate topic of “whether practitioners of the Two Vehicles can enter or not” denies that the Two Vehicles directly enter the Distinct Teaching of the One Vehicle (別敎一乘). However, because the text does not completely reject Chengguan’s view that there are also theories asserting direct entry into the One Vehicle, it leaves this controversial issue open to further debate. A survey of Tōdaiji rongi titles concerning the theme of the “direct entry of the Two Vehicles” reveals that the Hwaŏmgyŏng mundap is currently cited only in discussion 104-11 from the Kamakura period. In fact, this passage affirms that the Two Vehicles directly enter the Distinct Teaching of the One Vehicle. Discussion 104-11 cites numerous sources, including the interpretation found in Huiyuan’s (慧苑) Kanding ji (刊定記), which accords with the doctrinal position of the Hwaŏmgyŏng mundap. Further research is needed to clarify how these passages were understood and interpreted, especially because they appear potentially to conflict with the orthodox interpretation of the tradition.