Korea Journal of Buddhist StudiesISSN:1598-0642(Print)불교학연구회

Even though several scholars had tried to reveal parts related to practices in the Doctrines of San-lun School (Chi-tsang), it seems that such efforts have failed. That’s because it is believed that no other evidence has, yet, been presented, regardless of their frequent strong arguments that the Doctrines of San-lun School had been centered upon only theories in many theses or books. At first, in my research, I have tried to analyze existing researches one by one and finally found the reasons that it was useless or unsuccessful to find out some parts related to practical method in the Doctrines of San-lun School throughout former efforts. Next, I have presented realistic records that show figures of Chitsang as dhyāna’s practitioner, revealed that he didn’t exclude 290 ● 불교학연구 제19호 불교학연구회 제19호(2008. 4.) ● 291 selection. Next, I have taken into consideration of the reasons that he had not presented any special dhyāna’s practical method, and he had developed insight’ method particularly in his writings. These considerations have been made focusing upon importance of meaning of insight out of Buddhistic practices. Finally, I have, through the four ways to have an insight into languages (sūtra), fit a system of practices of the Doctrines of San-lun School into a framework of a system of universal practical method of Buddhism. I have come to an idea of “This very Languages itself are Emancipation” which is a unique practice’s theory of the Doctrines of San-lun School.