All Issue2002 Vol.5 Preview PageNext Page
Sorry, not available.
Click the PDF button.
I wish to account for a characteristic viewpoint of Wonhyo(元曉) about the relation of ‘mind’s aspect of true suchness and False Phenomenal’ in this paper. It may be told that Wonhyo's understanding of the thoughts of The Awakening of Faith(大乘起信論) is almost similar to those of Hua-yen.However, Fazang's understanding of those is different from Wonhyo's view. Because Fazang(法藏) regards The Awakening of Faith as a text based on the thought of the tathāgatagarbha. Wonhyo and Fazang are not different in saying Mind’s dimension of ‘true suchness and False phenomenal are mutual identified. But, concerning the process to prove it and the meaning contained in that viewpoint, an opinion of Wonhyo is different from Fazang's. Above all, two thinkers have different opinions regarding how to ‘three greatness(三大)’ is distributed to ‘the two aspects(二門)’.Wonhyo insists that ‘Great Substance’(體大) belongs to ‘mind’s true suchness’, and ‘Great Attribute’(相大) and ‘Great Function’(用大) belong to ‘mind's false phenomenal’. On the other hand Fazang insists that ‘Great Substance’ belongs to ‘mind’s true suchness’, and ‘Great Substance’ and ‘Great Attribute’ and ‘Great function’ to ‘mind's false phenomenal’. A difference of these two assertions is as follows; The relation between ‘the two aspects' is considered to be symmetric in the case of Wonhyo's thought. In other words, Wonhyo understands thoughts of The Awakening of Faith as symmetric structure. However, Fazang regards the substance(體) of ‘the two aspects' as the same thing. In this case, ‘True Suchness’ is subordinate to ‘False phenomenal’. Hui-yuan(慧遠) understands that ‘Great Substance’ is higher dimension of ‘phenomenal mind’. Unlike Wonhyo, Fazang and Hui-yuan are to understand thoughts of The Awakening of Faith have vertical structure. ‘True Suchness’ corresponds to the principle(理) and ‘False Phenomenal’ to the phenomenon(事) of Hua-yen philosophy. Hua-yen school insists on ‘Non-Obstruction between Li(理) and Shih(事)’(理事無碍)'. It is thought that the viewpoint of Wonhyo about the relation between ‘the two aspects' is same as ‘Non-Obstruction between Li and Shih’(理事無碍)' of Hua-yen school.The principle is not the ultimate existence in this case. Wonhyo insists that One Mind of The Awakening of Faith is not the ultimate existence. On the contrary, Fazang and Hui-yuan assume One Mind of The Awakening of Faith as the ultimate existence. Wonhyo's view about the relation between ‘two aspects' is same as ‘Non-Obstruction between Li and Shih’ of Hua-yen school in insisting that the principle(理) is not the ultimate existence. I think that Wonhyo and Fazang are mostly different concerning.
Click the PDF button.
- Publisher :Korean Association of Buddhist Studies
- Publisher(Ko) :불교학연구회
- Journal Title :Korea Journal of Buddhist Studies
- Journal Title(Ko) :불교학연구
- Volume : 5
- No :0
- Pages :125~155