고려 전기 금석문과 法相宗

• 영문명: Beobsang-jong and Inscription of the early Goryeo-dynasty
• 발행기관: 한국불교연구원
• 저자명: 남동신(Nam, Dong Sin)
• 간행물 정보: 『불교연구』佛敎硏究 第30輯, 153~189쪽, 전체 37쪽
• 주제분류: 인문학 > 불교학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2009.02.25

국문 초록

본고는 고려 전기에 2,30년의 간격을 두고 찬술된 법상종 관련 비문 8점을 비교 분석한 것이다. 그 결과 앞으로 고려 전기 법상종을 연구하는 데서 해결해야 할 몇 가지 과제를 제기할 수 있었다. 첫째는 법상종 교단의 구성 문제이다. 경주 중심의 太賢系 교학 전통과 지방의 眞表系 실천 수행 전통이 나말여초에 합쳐져서 고려 전기 법상종단을 형성하였다는 견해가 근래 통용되고 있지만, 진표계의 존재를 위의 고려 전기의 법상종 계통 금석문 자료에서는 전혀 확인할 수 없다. 따라서 앞으로는 법상종과 합류하기 이전과 이후를 나누어서 진표계 점찰법의 특징과 그 변화를 단계별로 이해할 필요가 있다. 둘째는 법상종의 법통설 문제이다. 무엇보다도 금산사비에서는 基(632~682)가 강조되고 있다. 이와 관련하여 본고에서는 현재 학계에서 관행적으로 사용하는 ‘窺基’라는 호칭이 부정적 의미를 띤다는 점을 지적하고, 앞으로는 ‘基’라고 부를 것을 제안하였다. 또한 금산사비에서 뚜렷하게 드러나듯이, 중국적 전통(玄奘과 基)과 신라적 전통(海東六祖)을 내세우고 있는바, 지금까지는 해동육조에 元曉가 으레 포함된다고 이해하여 왔다. 그런데 금산사비(법상종)만이 아니라, 같은 시기의 靈通寺碑(화엄종)와 僊鳳寺碑(천태종)에서도 원효를 종조로 추앙하였다. 공교롭게도 이들 세 비에 보이는 원효 중시의 불교사인식은 義天의 원효 인식을 일정하게 반영한다. 원효 중시가 고려 중기 전체 불교교단의 공통된 인식이었는지, 아니면 의천의 불교사 인식이 일시적으로 반영된 것인지는 추후의 연구 과제로 남겨 두고자 한다. 셋째, 금석문에서 고려 전기 법상종의 소의 경전 가운데 가장 빈번하게 등장하는 경전이 『金光明經』이다. 기왕에는 금광명경을 호국경전으로 간주하였기 때문에, 금광명경을 중시하는 고려 법상종 역시 호국불교적 성격이 있다고 이해하여왔다. 그런데 본고에서 새로 밝혔듯이, 금광명경은 자비행의 소의경전으로도 법상종 승려들에 의하여 중시되었다. 이와 관련하여 고려 전기 󰡔金光明經󰡕의 유통과 그 내용에 대한 구체적인 검토가 있어야 할 것이다.

영문 초록

In this article, 8 pieces of inscription, which have been created over the course of 20 to 30 years, in the early half period of the Goryeo dynasty, are compared to each other and analyzed in details. As a result, several issues, which would have to be addressed and resolved in future studies, in terms clarifying some things regarding the history of Beobsang-jong in the early Goryeo period, suggested themselves. First, there is the issue of the composition of the Beobsang-jong order. It is usually believed that the scripture studies tradition of the Taehyeon line(‘太賢系’) members of the Gyeongju area, and the tradition of character building exercises of the Jinpyo line(‘眞表系’) members in the local regions, were ‘merged’ to form the Beobsang-jong order, during the transitional period between Shilla and Goryeo. Yet the existence or presence of the Jinpyo line is nowhere to be found from the epigraphic materials mentioned above, which were all affiliated with the Beobsang-jong order in the early Goryeo period. So in the future, the characteristics of the Jinpyo-line’s ‘Jeomchalbeob’ technique should be examined not as a whole but ‘separately’ in multiple periods, such as ‘before’ its joining with the Beobsang-jong order, and ‘after’ of such joining. Second, there is the issue of the ‘theory of legitimacy’ that would have been shared inside the Beobsang-jong order. Most of all figures, ‘JI’(基: 632~682) is emphasized in the Geumsan-sa temple monument’s inscription. In this article, the problem that the term ‘Gyugi/窺基’(which is currently used by scholars) seems to bear a somewhat negative nuance and meaning, is pointed out, and at the same time a suggestion is made to refer to it as simply ‘Ji/基’ in the future. Also, as we can see clearly from the Geumsan-sa inscription,the Chinese tradition(from Hyeon- jang /玄奘 and Ji/基) and the Shilla tradition (from the Six ancestral figures of the East side of the sea: 海東六祖) are presented, and it was a general presumption that Weonhyo/元曉 was definitely counted in those ‘6 figures’. Yet not only in the Geumsan-sa inscription(from the Beobsang-jong order), but also in the inscriptions of the Yeongtong-sa temple’s monument(靈通寺碑: from the Hwa- eom-jong order) and the Cheonbong-sa temple’s monu- ment(僊鳳寺碑: from the Cheontae-jong order), we can see that Weonhyo was worshipped and honored as the ultimate founding ancestor(by all those orders in that particular point). So all three inscriptions were harboring the sentiment of the time that considered Weonhyo to be very important, and it also accidently reveals how Euicheon /義天 perceived Weonhwo. So, whether this kind of perception was shared by most of the members of the mid-Goryeo Buddhist society, or was a temporary reflection of the personal opinion of Euicheon, should be determined in the future. Third, the fact that the most frequently commented scripture in the Soeui scripture inscriptions of the Beob sang-jong order in the early Goryeo period is the 『Geum gwangmyeong-gyeong/金光明經』, should be noted. The scripture was previously believed as a scripture that contributed to state defense, and scholars naturally presumed that the Beobsang-jong of Goryeo, which considered this script very importantly, also shared a sentimentality considering the issue very critically. Yet, as newly revealed in this article, this Geumgwang myeong-gyeong scripture was also valued by the Beobsang-jong priests as a Soeui scripture for the ‘Jabi-haeng’ practice. So, the actual circulation process of this scripture in the early Goryeo period, and the exact contents of it, should be further explored in the future.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말

Ⅱ. 敎祖와 敎團, 그리고 信仰

Ⅲ. 所衣經典과 敎理

Ⅳ. 맺음말

참고문헌

초록

키워드

法相宗 玄化寺 金山寺 基(Ji) 太賢 眞表 韶顯 金光明經 占察法 Beobsang-jong/法相宗 Hyeonhwa-sa/玄化寺 temple Geumsan-sa/金山寺 temple ‘Ji(基)’ Taehyeon/太賢 Jinpyo/眞表 Sohyeon/韶顯 Geumgwangmyeong-gyeong/金光明經 script Jeomchal-beob/占察法 technique