earticle

영어

Bulbeopdongryuseol means that ‘the teaching of Chinese Zen Buddhism flows into the east,’ and the idea was mostly popular during the periods of late Silla Dynasty and early Goryeo Dynasty. However, after the early Goryeo Dynasty, the idea was not passed down, and by the Joseon period, it was not accepted as a ‘trustworthy claim.’ Further, the idea is hardly mentioned in Chinese records. However, it is deemed that the idea was first formed in China during the late Tang Dynasty. As Chinese Buddhism weakened during the turmoil of the time, the idea was circulated as a kind of prophesy, and then expanded and reproduced by Buddhist priests from the east who came to China to study. Previous research on the idea is lacking in many regards, and in this paper, I would like to make the following arguments. First, the term ‘Bulbeopdongryuseol’ is hardly fitting and should be replaced with ‘Seonmagdongryuseol(禪脈東流說).’ The reason is because the idea in the late Silla and the early Goryeo periods was limited to Zen Buddhism, and what spread to the east was not teachings or rituals of Zen Buddhism, but beopin (法印; truthfulness and perpetuity of Buddhism) and seonmag (禪脈; pulse of Zen Buddhism). Compared to other Buddhist sects, Zen Buddhism put great importance on legitimacy. For this peculiarity, the term ‘Seonmagdongryuseol ’ would be more fitting. Second, the cutting accident where an attempt was made to steal the head of the mummified priest HuiNeng(慧能) can be seen within the context of ‘Bulbeopdongryuseol.’ It is because stealing a dead body’s head is equivalent to stealing priest’s robe. The culprit was a Silla priest, Kim Daebi, which suggests that he committed the crime in response to emergence of ‘Bulbeopdongryuseol’ in China. ‘Bulbeopdongryuseol’ is part of historical view, which claims that Buddhism spread from the west to the east; that is, Buddhism first emerged in India, and flowed into China and Korea, and to Japan. This historical view gave birth to a self-oriented perspective that ‘our country’s Buddhism is the center of East Asian Buddhism.’ The examples include ‘Samgukbulbeopjeontongyeongi (三國佛法傳通緣起)’ written by Gyonen in Japan(1240~1322) and Choi Namsun(1890~1957) who saw Korean Buddhism as ‘Hoetongbulgyo(會通佛敎).’ The historical view itself arose in China during the 7th and 8th century, but self-centered historical views of the countries began to gain traction in the middle age. In comparison, ‘Seonmagdongryuseol’ emerged earlier, different from this historical view in terms of its nature and time period.

한국어

불법동류설은 나말여초에 주로 유행한 것으로, ‘중국선의 법맥이 해동으로 흘러간다’ 는 설을 말한다. 그러나 우리나라에서는 고려초 이후는 계승되지 못하였고, 특히 조선시대에는 ‘신뢰할만한 주장’으로서 인정받지 못하였다. 또한 중국의 문헌 속에도 거의 찾아볼 수 없다. 하지만 불법동류설은 당말에 중국에서 처음 생성되었다고 생각된다. 당말의 혼란기에 중국불교가 쇠퇴하자 참언(예언)으로서 유통되었다가, 중국에 유학한 해동승들에 의해 확대, 재생산된 것이다. 불법동류설에 대한 기존의 연구에는 부족한 점이 많은데, 필자는 다음의 점을 주장하고자 한다. 첫째. 불법동류설이라는 용어는 타당하지 않고 ‘선맥동류설(禪脈東流說)’이라고 불러야 한다. 그 이유는 나말여초의 불법동류설이 선종에 한정되어 나타나며, 선종의 가르침이나 의식 등의 동류가 아니라 ‘법인(法印)’ ‘선맥(禪脈)’이 동류하는 것이기 때문이다. 선종은 다른 종파에 비해 법통을 대단히 중요시한다. 이러한 선의 특수성을 이해한다면 ‘선맥동류설’이라는 명칭이 타당하다. 둘째. 혜능의 미이라의 목을 훔치려고 했다는 절취사건(切取事件)도 불법동류설의 하나이다. 왜냐하면 목을 훔친다고 하는 것은 결국 전법가사(傳法袈裟)를 빼앗는 것이기 때문이다. 또 그 범인이 신라승 김대비(金大悲)라는 것도 당말에 중국에서 불법동류설이 생기자 이에 응하여 나타난 사건이라고 생각된다.