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

This article examines perceptions of Uisang (義相), the founding patriarch of Haedong (Korean) Hwaeom, within the Buddhist community of the Joseon period; the interpretive tendencies and characteristics associated with Uisang’s Ilseung beopgyedo 一乘法界圖 (hereafter Beopgyedo); the trajectory and features of twentieth-century scholarship on Uisang’s Hwaeom thought; and the debates surrounding the identification of Uisang’s Hwaeom with the doctrine of nature-origination (seonggi; 性起). During the Joseon period, Uisang was remembered, alongside Wonhyo (元曉), as the founder of several monasteries and as a Hwaeom patriarch, and his legacy was clearly remembered in Buddhist historical writings. At the same time, debate arose over whether the final character in his name should be written as 相 or 湘. Notably, two commentaries on the Beopgyedosi 法界圖詩 of Uisang’s Beopgyedo have been transmitted: Seoljam 雪岑 Kim Si-seup’s 金時習 (fl. 15th century) Dae Hwaeom beopgyedo jubyeongseo 大華嚴法界圖註幷序 and Dobong Yumun’s 道峰有聞 (fl. 18th century) Beopseong ge gwaju 法性偈科註. Their interpretive tendencies can be characterized, respectively, as a synthesis of Seon and Hwaeom and as an emphasis on dharma-nature. In the case of Kim Si-seup, one can discern affinities with the position of Bojo Jinul 普照知訥, who understood Uisang’s notion of dharma-nature in terms of the unity of Seon and Gyo and the framework of sudden awakening followed by gradual cultivation.
An examination of modern scholarship further shows that, in the first half of the twentieth century, the identification of the founding patriarch of Haedong Hwaeom developed in three stages: first Wonhyo alone, then Wonhyo and Uisang together, and finally Uisang alone. It is also noteworthy that the Daejang byeollok 大藏別錄, compiled during the carving of the Goryeo canon, mentions the Bunhwang school associated with Wonhyo in addition to the Uisang lineage of Hwaeom. As Korean and Japanese scholars subsequently illuminated the distinctive features of Uisang’s Hwaeom thought, its practical dimension and its orientation toward the Middle Way came to be increasingly emphasized. Finally, this article reviews the arguments for and against the influential view, prominent since the 1980s, that Uisang’s Hwaeom is fundamentally a doctrine of nature-origination. It also notes that, as the Hwaeomgyeong mundap 華嚴經問答 has come to be firmly established as a work by Uisang, the claim that nature-origination and dependent origination are inseparably related has gained increasing support. By tracing the major tendencies in the Joseon-period transmission of Uisang’s Hwaeom and providing a periodized overview of modern and contemporary scholarship, this article offers a foundational analysis for identifying new directions in future research.