元曉가 본 阿黎耶識의 分析心理學的 考察

• 영문명: Alayavijnana seen by Wonhyo in the Perspective of Analytical Psychology
• 발행기관: 대한신경정신의학회
• 저자명: 이죽내 김현준
• 간행물 정보: 『신경정신의학』제33권 제2호, 342~352쪽, 전체 11쪽
• 주제분류: 의약학 > 정신과학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 1994.03.30

영문 초록

This paper is to elucidate the concept of Alayavijnana seen by Wonhyo(617 — 687AD)，a great scholar of Buddhism and a well-known Zen-master in Korea, in the perspective of analytical psychology. Alayavijnana in Sanscrit denotes Mind. The concept of Alayavijnana as Mind is diverse in the traditions of Buddhism. There are, however, three representative views as true Mind or Tathata in Sanscrit, ignorant Mind or Avidya in Sanscrit, and the harmonized Mind of Tathata with Avidya. Wonhyo stands for the view of the harmonized Mind, and clarifies it with emphases on Tathata and Avidya and their relationship in his masterpieces “The Commentary on the Treatise of Awakening Mahayana Faith” and “Expository Notes on the Treatise of Awakening Mahayana Faith”. Tathata as true Mind is characterized by “understanding light” and “enlightened understanding”, generally expressed as enlightenment The characteristic features of Tathata as “understanding light” and “enlightened understanding” are considered to be identical with the absolute knowledge or understanding of the Self in analytical psychology, which is realized by revealing the so-called natural lightOumen naturae) of the Self-archetype. Such an Understanding through enlightening or disclosing the light is differentiated from making conscious the unconscious materials. The latter is of possessive and discriminative nature resulting in subject-object dichotomy, while the former is of “void” and transcendent nature resulting in subject-object oneness. Accordingly, Tathata is regarded as one with the Self in analytical psychology. As for Avidya as ignorant Mind, it is said to originate from being unaware of Tathata as enlightenment and is called non-enlightenment or “fundamental ignorance” in contrast with “peripheral ignorance” arising from the conscious ego in relation with the external world. The “fundamental ignorance” seems to be consistent with the unconsciousness in the sense of transpersonal, collective unconsciousness originally related to the Self, while the “peripheral ignorance”，with the personal unconsciousness, in analytical psychology, resulting from the repression of the conscious ego influenced by external reality. Thus, Avidya appears to be accordant with the collective nature of unconsciousness. Lastly, the relationship of Tathata with Avidya is denoted as “neither-same-nor-different” and manifested in psychic phenomena. In the perspective of analytical psychology this kind of relationship can be seen in the concept of psychic phenomenon as symbol. Symbol is the unconscious image of the Self，where the inseparable relationship of the Self with its unconsciousness can not be expressed other than “neither-same-nor-different” Consequently, Alayavijnana seen by Wonhyo is considered to correspond to the concept of collective unconsciousness in analytical psychology

목차

緒 論

研究方法

元曉가 본 阿黎耶識

分析心理學的 考察

要約 및 結論

참 고 문 헌

키워드

Wonhyo Alayavijnana Collective unconsciousness