불교의 궁극적인 목적은 깨달음을 성취하여 괴로움으로부터 해탈하는 것이다. 이러한 목적에 따라 불교의 진리관은 어떻게 깨달음을 얻어 해탈할 것인가에 초점을 두고 있다. 대승불교의 확립자인 龍樹(Nāgārjuna)는 붓다의 無我說과 中道說에 입각하여 아비달마불교의 法有說(三世實有 法體恒有)을 空과 二諦說에 의해 비판적으로 종합함으로서 대승불교의 진리관과 깨달음의 길을 논리적으로 체계화 하였다. 그 결과 공과 이제설은 대승불교의 진리관과 깨달음의 길을 대표하는 교리가 되었다. 용수에 의해 확립된 공과 이제설은 대승불교의 근간이 되어 이후 공과 이제설에 바탕한 中觀學派(Mādhyamika)가 형성되며, 또한 이를 비판적으로 수용한 唯識學派(瑜伽行派, Yogācāra)가 나타나 ‘공과 이제설’을 둘러싸고 두 학파 간에 치열한 논쟁이 전개되었다. 본 논문은 용수의 공관과 이제설의 중심 내용을 살펴본 후, 이에 대한 중관학파와 유가행파의 논쟁이 어떻게 치루어졌는지, 또 그 비판의 핵심 내용이 무엇인지를 고찰하고자 하는 것이다. 용수는 『반야경』의 공사상을 계승하여 공이 緣起･中道･假名･無自性임을 이제설의 진리관에 의거하여 밝히고 있다. 이러한 용수의 이제설은 淸辯(Bhvaviveka)과 月稱(Chandrakīrti)을 비롯한 중관학파에 의해 보다 체계적으로 다듬어져 대승불교의 진리관으로 수용되었다. 중관학파의 이제설의 핵심은 모든 존재는 자성을 갖지 않은 공한 것으로, ‘무자성 공’을 주장하는데 있다. 그러나 유식사상에 근거하여 識과 空性의 존재를 인정하는 유가행파는 중관학파의 ‘무자성 공’을 궁극적인 진실로서 인정하지 않는다. 즉, 일체법이 ‘무자성 공’으로 단지 가명에 지나지 않는다고 주장하는 것은 극단적인 허무론이며 공성의 존재를 인정하지 않는 것은 惡取空이라고 중관학파를 비판하였다. 이와 같은 유가행파의 비판에 대해 중관학파는 승의로서 識의 존재를 주장하는 것은 연기설에 어긋나며, 나아가 승의로서 공성의 존재를 주장하는 것이야말로 허무론이라고 반박하였다.

The two school Mādhyamika and Yogācāra act as a representative of Mahāyāna Buddhism in India. But the two school disputed with each other insisting śūnyatā-vāda and vijñaptimātravāda separately. To introduce the disputation shortly is as follow. Nāgārjuna explained the world and truth by two truth theories(二諦說) which carry out truth of a word and the dimension(spiritual enlightenment) which is absolute(ultimate) to it being lokasaṁvṛtisatya(世俗諦) about the truth which can be expressed verbally, and which is phenomenon-like (everyday) at paramaarthasatya(勝義諦). By the way, lokasaṁvṛtisatya and paramaarthasatya are actually distinction of the recognition which is not an ontological distinction. That is, lokasaṁvṛti(世俗) is paramaartha(勝義) as it is the time of seeing by the eyes of those who have realized. The two truth theories of Nāgārjuna was developed logical more precisely by his successors. With an everyday language, the position of Candrakīrti(月稱) that it cannot be expressed as the position of Bhāvaviveka(淸辨) that paramaarthasatya can be expressed logically is opposed to each other, and dissociates by Svātantrika(自立論證派) and Pārsagika(歸謬論證派). Confrontation of Svātantrika and Pārsagika is the dispute about the ability of s which is the highest truth to be proved logically. The Pārsaga of Candrakirti thinks that people exist truly, and is because it claims not existing in the world where a favorite thing is actually actual. However, Bhāvaviveka proved Sunyata(空性)을 positively based on the reliance to language and logic. Also the mokṣa of Mādhyamika is not recovery of original condition of vijñapti which is pure in itself as Yogācāra saying, as well as obtaining a thing which is dravya-sat as Sarvāstivādin saying. The mokṣa of Mādhyamika means a condition of liberated from karma and pains through extinction of prapañca and discrimination by realizing the real aspect of all dharma which is said by pratītyasamutpāda, prajñapti, niḥsvabhāva, śūnya, madhyamāpratipad.

The two school Mādhyamika and Yogācāra act as a representative of Mahāyāna Buddhism in India. But the two school disputed with each other insisting śūnyatā-vāda and vijñaptimātravāda separately. To introduce the disputation shortly is as follow. Nāgārjuna explained the world and truth by two truth theories(二諦說) which carry out truth of a word and the dimension(spiritual enlightenment) which is absolute(ultimate) to it being lokasaṁvṛtisatya(世俗諦) about the truth which can be expressed verbally, and which is phenomenon-like (everyday) at paramaarthasatya(勝義諦). By the way, lokasaṁvṛtisatya and paramaarthasatya are actually distinction of the recognition which is not an ontological distinction. That is, lokasaṁvṛti(世俗) is paramaartha(勝義) as it is the time of seeing by the eyes of those who have realized. The two truth theories of Nāgārjuna was developed logical more precisely by his successors. With an everyday language, the position of Candrakīrti(月稱) that it cannot be expressed as the position of Bhāvaviveka(淸辨) that paramaarthasatya can be expressed logically is opposed to each other, and dissociates by Svātantrika(自立論證派) and Pārsagika(歸謬論證派). Confrontation of Svātantrika and Pārsagika is the dispute about the ability of s which is the highest truth to be proved logically. The Pārsaga of Candrakirti thinks that people exist truly, and is because it claims not existing in the world where a favorite thing is actually actual. However, Bhāvaviveka proved Sunyata(空性)을 positively based on the reliance to language and logic. Also the mokṣa of Mādhyamika is not recovery of original condition of vijñapti which is pure in itself as Yogācāra saying, as well as obtaining a thing which is dravya-sat as Sarvāstivādin saying. The mokṣa of Mādhyamika means a condition of liberated from karma and pains through extinction of prapañca and discrimination by realizing the real aspect of all dharma which is said by pratītyasamutpāda, prajñapti, niḥsvabhāva, śūnya, madhyamāpratipad.

The two truth theories, lokasaṁvṛtisatya, paramaarthasatya, pratītyasamutpāda, Sunyata