Earticle

This paper investigates the transcription system of mantra pro-nunciation characterized of Buddhist transcription language, and studies the difference between the Sanskrit Fifty Consonants/Vowels and the actual mantra transcription. centered on the <Mantras> of Manyeonsa issue published in the Chosun Dynasty.It is also con-cerned with discussing the changes in mantra transcription focusing on the literatures of the 18th~19th centuries which had mostly been excluded from studies. All of the <Mantras> issues published by major temples such as Anshimsa, Manyeonsa, and Mangwolsa used the "Siddhamātṛkā →Chinese transliteration → Korean transliteration," trying to spell out as close to the Sanskrit pronunciation as possible, with occasional notes on those having discrepancies with the original Sanskrit pronunciation. However, in the 18~19th century literatures dealt in the present study, mostly published for reciting purpose by minor temples, there are many spellings with strong individual dialects.In all of them the Siddhamātṛkā transcription is hardly found, with some presence of Chinese transcription, but with mostly Korean transcription.Also, as these mantras were used for ceremonial recit-ing purpose at temples, various phonemic phenomena are naturally observed such as palatalization, nasal sound assimilation, consonant assimilation, and wrong separate liaisonspellings, which are ob-served in pure Korean.

The traditional account on the quarrel of the monks in Kosambi does notexplain the true cause of the conflict and almost all of the works which have been studied repeatedly state that the incident happened between two Bhikkhu groups. However, it seems that the cause of the quarrel is the dis-sension of the Bhānaka according to the Dhammapadatthakathā. The Buddhist principles in action cannot be said to be wrong unless the offender consciously intends it. Nevertheless, the Dhammkathika monk was excommunicated by a group of Vinayadharā, At first this was a dispute between two individuals but it became serious conflict between two groups. There must has been a dissension between two groups in devel-oping the difference of the Bhānaka. On the ground of the fact, we can see a deep conflict between the two, Vinayadharā and Dhammakathikā. This incident was probably the quarrel in the early stage in de-veloping their differences. And Pāli Atthakathā state that there are references to the different views held by the Vinayadharā and Dhammakathikā or Suttantikā The original purpose for which the Bhānaka was established was a very useful one. But for this division of labour, it would have been impossible to hand down orally the teachings of the Buddha from the time of his Parinibbāna to this time. However, as time went on, the Bhānaka system tended to create factions among the bhikkhus. It should be said that the incident at Kosambi shows the early stage of a dissension between Bhānakas and the true cause of the quarrel exists in the dissension between Bhānaka.

僧侶이면서 천재적인 과학자 一行(683-727)은 어릴 때부터 총명하고 특히 기억력이 비상하여 책을 한번 읽으면 다시 보지 않아도 그 내용을 암송할 수 있었다. 그러한 그가 촌음을 아껴서 공부하였기 때문에 일반 모든 학예에 빼어난 재능을 가진 귀재였음을 일행의 傳記는 전하고 있다. 때문에 이러한 재능을 살려 중국의 전통적인 학문에 통달하였는데 특히 道敎와 數學에 통달해 있었다. 일행은 21세 때 갑자기 부모를 연이어 여의게 되었다. 이것은 영명한 젊은 일행에게 있어서는 크나큰 충격이었다. 죽음과 삶에 대한 많은 고민을 한 후 그는 출가하기로 결심하게 된다. 출가하고서는 荊州의 弘景으로부터 天台를 수학하고, 옥천사 神秀禪師의 제자이며 北宗禪의 제7조인 普寂禪師에게禪을 배우고, 惠眞으로부터 律을 배워 불교의 제반 사상을 두루 통달하여 명성을 떨쳤다. 이와 같이 불교전반에 대해 두루 섭렵을 하고, 이를 바탕으로 719년 인도에서 건너온 金剛智로부터金剛頂經界의 밀교를 수학하고, 뒤이어 善無畏를 스승으로 삼고 『大日經』의 번역과 『大日經疏』를 저작하였다. 일행은 이렇게 『大日經』을 번역하고 『大日經疏』를 저작한 업적에 의해 大日經界密敎의 전문가로 평가되고 있다. 그런데 일행선사는 密敎와 접촉한 기간이 매우 짧았다. 719년 金剛智를 통해서 밀교와 만났던 일행은 727년 그 생애를 마칠 때까지 밀교와 인연한 것은 불과 8년간의 기간뿐이었다. 또한 末年에 玄宗으로부터 改曆을 勅命받고 ꡔ開元大衍曆ꡕ을 저작한 천문학자이기도 하다. 이처럼 일행은 불교와 道敎뿐만 아니라 天文學과 數學 및 風水에도 그의 능력을 인정받고 있을 정도로 천재적인 인물이다. 일행이 어떤 경로를 통하여 密敎의 역법을 배웠는지 정확하지는 않지만, 저술 목록에서 나타나듯이 密敎의 역법에 해박한 지식을 가지고 있었음을 알 수 있다. 이러한 밀교의 역법사상은 『大日經疏』와 『대연력』을 제작하는데 많은 이론적인 배경이 되기도 하였다. 이러한 천문역법사상은 풍수사상과도 결부되어 唐代를 대표하는 인물로 일행이 자주 언급되는데, 그의 풍수 사상의 특징은 산천의 형세에 따라 활용 용도를 정하고, 형세에 따른 吉凶禍福을 판단하는 독특한 풍수의 이론을 전파하였다. 밀교의 역법과 풍수사상은 바로 『대연력』을 제작하는 사상적인 밑바탕이 되기도 하였다. 이와 같은 연구를 통하여 일행의 密敎사상의 특징과 과학사에 남긴 족적을 살펴 볼 수 있었다.

Ilhaeng (683-727) who was a monk and gifted scientist was bright from the time when he was young. In particular, since he had a good memory, he was able to memorize any book, he had read once, without the book. The biography of ILhaeng describes that, since he studied so hard without wasting a single moment, he could become a remarkable talent who was outstanding in all arts and sciences. With such talent, he became well versed in Chinese tradi-tional scholarship, in particular, Taoism and mathematics. When in his age 21, lhaeng suddenly had his parents consecutively. This greatly shocked him who was wise and bright, but young. Suffering from death and life a lot, he decided to become a bonze (or leave home). Leaving home, he was taught Cheontae (天台) by Hong-gyeong from Hyeongju; Zen by Bosukseonsa (or Saint Bosuk), who was a disciple of Sinsuseonsa (or Saint Sinsu) from Okcheonsa (or Okcheon Temple) and the 7th forefather of Bukjongseon (Bukjong Zen Family); and law by Hyejin. Like this, he gained fame by being well versed in Buddhism's various thoughts. Based on the knowledge studied throughout Buddhism, Ilhaeng was taught the Esoteric Buddhism of the Geumgangjeonggyeong-gyeo (or Geumgangjeonggyeong Domination) by Geumgangji, and he trans-lated "Daeilgyeong" and authored "Daeilgyeongso" under the in-struction of Seonmuyoi. He is rated as an expert in the Esoteric Buddhism of Daeilgyeong-gyeo (or Daeilgyeong Domination). for his translation of "Daeilgyeong" and authorship of "Daeilgyeongso". In the meantime, the period for which Saint Ilhaeng got access to Esoteric Buddhism was very short. As Ilhaeing who got to know Esoteric Buddhism through Geumgangji in 719, his association with Esoteric Buddhism until 727 when he ended his life was only 8 years. Also, he was an astronomer who authored "Gaewon-daeyeol-lyeok" under Hyeonjong's (or King Hyeonjong) order to revise the calendar system in his last phase of his life. Like this, he was a gifted talent whose ability is honored in astronomy, mathematics and pungsu-seol (or a theory of configuration of the ground) as well as Buddhism and Taoism. Even though it is not evident through which course he was taught the calendar of Esoteric Buddhism, the bibliography shows that he had extensive learning about it. The calendar ideas of Esoteric Buddhism provided theoretical background in preparing "Daeilgyeongso" and "Daeyeollyeok". Since this astrological idea was associated with pungsu-seol, Ilhaeng was often cited as a repre-sentative person of Tang Dynasty. The characteristics of his pung-su-seol lie in determining applicability, applications and forture de-pending on the configuration of mountains and streams. The idea spread greatly and provided the ideological basis to make "Daeyeollyeok". This study examined the features of Ilhaeng's Esoteric Buddhistic thoughts and his performances in the history of science.

This study is about a relationship karma andkleśa in the Abhidharmakośabhāsya. Like other abhidarma books, there are streams of thought through the system of dharmas in many ways. The Sarvāstivādins insisted on prāpti and avijñapti theory in a real existent(dravyasat). The Sautrāntikas say that the avijñapti does not really exist on as a substance; because it solely consists of not doing an action af-ter having undertaken not to do it; because one designates a thing which would exist by reason of past primary elements as avijñapti; now past dharmas no longer exist; and because avijñapti does not have the nature of rūpa; the nature of rūpa is rūpyate and since the avijñapti is not "susceptible of destruction"(apratigha), it cannot be rūpa. they did not accept the idea that all dharmas exist in the three time periods and maintained that there was no difference between the intrinsic nature of a dharma and its activities. Through karma andkleśa theories, we can think as a ability to enlightenment and our life aspects.

They are instructed in these conditions Let us note now some institutional factors in early Buddhism, in addition to the absence of one supreme head, which may have promoted the development of rival traditions on interpretation and practice, and eventually rival schools. I have argued that for Buddhism doctrinal differences are not a serious matter in the way they are for religions where salvation is based primarily on faith. Schism, however, is classed as one of the most serious monastic offence, and we have also seen that the ap-pearance after the death of the Buddha. I do seem to have thought of his teaching as a massive and monolithic dogmatic structure. According to the account of the Buddha's last days contained in the Mahāparinirbbāna Suttanta the Lord gently told his attendant, Ananda. First, the company of the bhikkhu is assembled often, and fre-quent the formal meeting of the Order. Second, so long as they meet together in concord, and rise in concord, and carry out in concord the duties of Order. Third, so long as the bhikkhu shall establish nothing that has not been already prescribed, and abrogate nothing that has not been already prescribed, and abrogate nothing that has been already es-tablished, and act in accordance with the rule of the Order as now laid down. Fourth, so long as the bhikkhu honor and esteem and revere and support the elders of experience and long standing, the fathers and leaders of the Order, and hold it a point of duty to hearken to their words. Fifth, so long as the bhikkhu fall not under the influence of that craving which, springing up within them, would give rise to re-newed existence-so long as the bhikkhu delight in a life of solitude. Sixth, so long as the bhikkhu so train their fellow disciples shall come to them, and those who have come shall dwell at ease. Seventh, so long may the bhikkhu be expected, not to decline, but to prosper. So long as these seven conditions shall continue to exist among the bhikkhu, so long as the are well instructed in these condition, so long as may the bhikkhu be expected not to decline, but to prosper. Also, another seven condition of welfare of community would Buddha teach bhikkhu. First, So long as the bhikkhu shall not engage in, or be fond of, or be connected with business. Second, so long as the bhikkhu shall not be in the habit of, or be fond of, or be partakers in idle talk. Third, so long as the bhikkhu shall not be addicted to, or be fond of, or indulge in slothfulness. Fourth, so long as the bhikkhu shall not frequent, or be fond of, or indulge in society. Fifth, so long as the bhikkhu shall neither have, nor fall under the influence of, wrong desires. Sixth, so long as the bhikkhu shall not become the friends, com-panions, or intimates of evildoers. Seventh, so long as the bhikkhu shall not come to a stop on their way because they have attained to any lesser thing. So long as may the bhikkhu be expected not to decline, but to prosper. Also, seven condition of welfare of community would Buddha teach bhikkhu. We should note that initially there appears to have been a rela-tive flexibility in the rules of discipline. According to Mahāpar-inirvāna Sūtra, the monastic rules were defined but not codified at the time of the Buddha, and there is evidence that the Buddha him-self was willing to adapt the rules to fit in with particular personal or group circumstances. It seems clear to me that the Buddha would not have been averse to later doctrinal innovation if it occurred within the fundamental structure of the bhikkhu's community. Adaptation was possible to suit particular local conditions and it ap-pears that a well-controlled monk could be permitted greater free-dom than his ill-disciplined bhikkhu.

According to documentary records in China and Japan, Esoteric Buddhism monks in Silla after Myeongnang(明朗) and Hyetong(惠通) went to China, learned Buddhism there from SunmuisamJang(善無畏), GeumgangjisamJang(金剛智), BulgongsamJang(不空) and other Chinese monks and came back to Silla. Since further information than these documents is needed to fully study Esoteric Buddhism monks, research was done on the formative arts. Our research re-sult tells us that the most of Vairocana holds their hands in the bodhi‐śri mudrā(智拳印) on Chilsajajwa(七獅子座), suggesting corre-spondence between the bodhi‐sattva form in the bodhi‐śri mudrā of Vajradhātu (金剛界大日如來) and iconography. Iconography of Ekadasamukha(十一面觀音菩薩像) and Ten ThouSands Armed Bodhi‐sattva(千手觀音菩薩像), both established with Sinjudokseong (神呪讀誦, an evil‐repelling incantation) were introduced into United Silla at the end of 7th Century and were made during the 8th and 9th Century. Among embossed work on stone pagodas, images of the Four Guardian Kings(四天王像) and twelve zodiac figures(十二支像) are expected to be closely related with Myeongnang’s(明朗) Sininjong(神印宗). And other Sinjangsang(神將像) was also expectedly built to preserve relics of the Buddha and to protect a nation. In particular, Sinjangsang embossed on a base rock of stone pagoda in Gyeongju Fortress(慶州邑城) was ana-lyzed and found to be Myeongwang Sang(明王像, vidyā[dhara]rāja, suggesting that Sinjangsang appeared after other previously em-bossed work on stone pagodas in the site of Sach’ŏnwangsa Temple(四天王寺) and Wonwon Temple(遠願寺) might be affected by Esoteric Buddhism.