Earticle

중국과 오리엔트(근동, 중동)지역의 페르시아권은 기원전부터 오랫동안 교류 를 맺어왔다. 고대 한국 역시 중국을 매개로 하여 페르시아권과 직간접적으로 연 결되어 있다. 고대 한국과 중국은 다양한 학문 분야를 비롯해 페르시아 문명의 혜택을 받았다. 본 논문에서는 고대 페르시아권의 발크(아프가니스탄의 북부) 지역에서 발견 된 틸리야 테페 금관이 신라 금관의 기원이라는 점을 다양한 경로를 통해 밝히면 서 고대 한국에 대한 페르시아 문명의 직접적인 영향을 거론하고 있다. 고대 페 르시아권은 아프가니스탄을 비롯해 이란, 파키스탄, 중앙아시아 지역으로 구성되 어 있는데, 아프가니스탄 서부의 헤라트 지역과 더불어 발크 지역은 고대 페르시 아인들의 보금자리였다. 신라의 고승 혜초 또한 페르시아 불교의 중요한 터전이 었던 발크를 순례한 바 있다. 한 문헌에 그의 이름은 푸낙티예(Fu nak ti yeh)라 고 언급되어 있다. 한중과 고대 페르시아 지역과는 상고 시대부터 긴밀한 관계를 유지했는데, 세 시풍속과 신화의 영향관계에서도 잘 드러난다. 세시풍속과 신화는 학문의 근간을 이루는 가장 중요한 분야 중의 하나로서 상호간에는 밀접한 연관성이 있다. 이란 고원의 원주민, 수메르 민족은 메소포타미아로 건너가서 인류 최초의 문명을 성 립시켰고, 이후 바빌로니아-앗시리아-신바빌로니아로 전개되는 셈족의 위대한 문명의 토대가 되었다. 페르시아의 세시풍속과 신화는 아리안족이 이란 고원에 유입되기 이전의 수메르와 엘람 시대로 거슬러 올라간다.

The exchange of civilization has been accomplished from the ancient times between China and the realm of Persia. The ancient Persia had been consisted of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and central Asia. The ancient Korea was connected with realm of Persia in the medium of China, in particular Western Region. Persian civilization had given a great impact on China and Korea in the various spheres of academics including material civilization. Compared with the Crown of Tiliya Teppe in Afghanistan and Silla Crown, the influence of Persian civilization is shown and written in this article. The Crown of Tiliya Teppe had been excavated in the territory of Balkh called Bactria in ancient era. The Silla Crown is true of evidence of exchange between two civilizations. A famous monk from Silla, Hyecho, had gone on a pilgrimage to the Balkh region where was the important site in Persian Buddhism. According to the document, his name was written in Fu nak ti yeh. The exchange of East and West Asia had been accomplished in the field of seasonal customs and myth for ages, as well. Two fields are true of the basis of academics. The Iranian plateau had been the home of Sumer before entering the Mesopotamia originated from the first myth. Seasonal customs and myth in Persia date back to the Sumer Era alongwith the myth of Elam situated at western region of Iran.

In 1908, Hyecho’s travel book Wangocheonchukgukjeon found from a cavern in Dunhuang, China has five ‘Hansi’. He was a monk from Silla, korea. These poetry affords proof of his sensibilities: he was bathed in tears when he was faced with a pathetic matters and beamed with joy when a happy ones. In spite of being a monk retiring from the world, he was more sensible than any others as a poet. So, Jodomgil made mention of Hyecho’s poetry that the monk going to India to obtain a Buddhist canon couldn’t overcome both solitude and anguish as a man. Hyecho didn’t write about his own sufferings at all. To stay in India might be harder than China. There might be lots of hardship such as the problem of communication, the insufficiency of road construction, the discomfortable bed under a foreign sky, and the foreign meals and water against his appetite. With the snowstorm from a mountainous district as cold as hell and the sand storm from a very large desert, Hyecho put his sentiments into a poetry. Hyecho learned perfectly how to write a poetry consisting of five poetries per line and eight lines in total when he went to Dangnara to study. This kind of poetry was very famous over there. He could write this kind of poetry as good as the poets from Dangnara. However, this kind of his poetry has been excluded from the history of the classical literature. That should be corrected. As there are no ‘Hansi’in the history of the classical literature before Hyecho’s poetry, his poetry will be much more valuable in the history of Korean literature. ‘Hansi’consisting of five letters has artistic quality, the harmony between a scenery sketch and feeling, and the balance between a form and a content. In the history of the classical literature, his ‘Hansi’ should be dealt with.

This paper aims to shed light on the origin of -l coda in Sino-Korean by examining the transliteration of Sanskrit place names in Wang o Cheonchuk guk jeon 往五天竺國傳 (Memoir of the Pilgrimage to the Five Kingdoms of India) written by Hyecho 慧超 (704-783 AD). By comparing the transliteration in Xuanzang's 玄奘 Datang Xiyuji 大唐西域記 (Records on the Western Regions) and that in Wang o Cheonchuk guk jeon, we find that the alveolar consonant (non-nasal) coda in Hyecho’s language is rather close to the [l] sound. We propose that the [t] coda in Middle Chinese has been probably pronounced as [l] (or [r]) in the phonological system of the language spoken in Silla 新羅 (57BC-935 AD) in the early 8th century. The result of this research, to a certain extant, argues against the influential hypothesis that the -l coda in Sino-Korean originated from the –r in the northwestern dialect of Middle Chinese in the late Tang Dynasty.

혜초의 행적과 그의 󰡔왕오천축국전󰡕은 그야말로 하나의 충격에 가까울 정도로 관심을 불러일으킨다. 우선 그가 서기 719년 어린 소년의 나이로 당나라로 배움의 길을 떠난 것과 또 곧 이어 천축국(인도)으로 떠나 거의 4년에 걸쳐 두 발로 걸어 천축국뿐만 아니라 서역과 중앙아시아의 수많은 나라들(40개국)을 꿰뚫는 순례여행을 감행한 것이 경탄스럽다. 세상과 맞부딪치는 현사실적인 여행은 인간 현존재의 실존적인 경험과 깊이 관련된다. 여행하고 사유하며, 기도하고 염려하며 깨달음을 향한 행보에서 그는 크고 작은 깨달음과 일상세계를 초월하는 존재경험을 체득했을 것이다. 그런데 혜초와 그의 󰡔왕오천축국전󰡕에 대한 연구는 대부분 그에 대한 전기나 기행문 및 기행의 행로, 당대의 지리적 상황 등에 집중되어 있고, 문학적・철학적 탐구에는 빈약한 상태이다. 필자는 이 소고(小考)에서 혜초의 구법여행과 기행문을 하이데거의 현사실성의 해석학과 존재사유에 입각하여 재조명해보았다. 또한 혜초의 4대 성지여행과 불탑들에 대한 여행경험을 하이데거의 그리스 신전 해석과 관련지어보았다. 혜초의 여행목적은 이런저런 존재자를 목격하는 것이 아니라 깨달음을 향한 구법(求法)여행이기에, 그의 행보는 존재자의 세계에 구속되지 않는 여행이었다. 󰡔왕오천축국전󰡕은 물론 논증을 바탕으로한 철학적 텍스트는 아니다. 그러나 문학적⋅철학적으로 읽고 해석할 수 있는 영역이 있으며, 그러한 해석이 ―마치 칸트가 󰡔판단력 비판󰡕에서 공통감(sensus communis)에 의해 보편타당성을 구축할 수 있는 것처럼― 결코 합리성을 벗어난 추측이 아님을 인식할 수 있다.

Hyecho’s life and his Wangocheonchukgukjeon (‘An account of travel to the five Indian kingdoms’) stir up nearly shocking interest. To begin with, it is marvelous that Hyecho set out on a journey of learning as a child in 719 CE and that he started out for ‘Cheonchukguk (India)’ and walked on two legs for nearly four years, completing an audacious pilgrimage through a number of (forty) countries not only in India but also in the region bordering Western China and Central Asia. A factic travel that braves the world is deeply connected to the philosophy of the anti-metaphysical experience by human Dasein as shown in Heidegger’s early thinking. Through his traveling, thinking, praying, worrying, and realizing, Hyecho must have obtained the experience of existence. But most of the research on Hyecho and Wangocheonchukgukjeon focuses on his biography, travelogues, the route of his travel, and the contemporary geographical information among others and remains quite meager in terms of investigation into his philosophy. Accordingly, this study revisits Hyecho’s journey in search of the truth and travelogues by enlarging on the Heideggerian thought about Being. Specifically, the study relates Hyecho’s experience of travels grounded in facticity, the philosophical meaning of the direct experience, and his experience in traveling to the four holy places and Buddhist stupas, to Heidegger’s interpretation of the Greek temple. However, Hyecho’s travel was carried out in search of the truth, toward his enlightenment instead of various Beings. In this light, Hyecho is believed to have experienced the ekstatic (ekstatisch) thinking that involved the transcending of the world of Beings and standing in the middle of Being. Of course, Wangocheonchukgukjeon is not a philosophical text based on logical arguments. But there is a literary and philosophical area to read and interpret, and it can be recognized that such interpretation is not a guess beyond rationality, as if Kant can build universal validity by “sensus communis” in the Criticism of Judgment.

혜초의 왕오천축국전에는 사실에 입각한 여행기록만 있는 것이 아니라 다섯 편의 시(詩)도 있다. P. 펠리오(Paul Pelliot)와 같은 이는 이 시들이 특별한 문학적 가치를 갖지 못하고, 심지어 “그것은 아예 수록하지 않은 것만못하다”는 식으로 혹평을 가했지만, 그러나 이러한 혹평은 퍽 지나친 것으로 보이며 문학적⋅철학적 의미를 읽지 못한 소이인 것으로 보인다. 물론 횔덜린(F. Hölderlin)과 같은 시인은 당대에 괴테와 쉴러로부터도 인정을 받지 못했지만, 철학자 하이데거로부터 “시인 중의 시인”으로 거듭난 사실을 참조할 때, 펠리오 한 사람의 평가에 휘청거릴 필요는 없는 것이다. 펠리오의 견해와는 정반대로, 혜초의 이 다섯 편의 시야말로 그의 왕오천축국전을 역사적인 기행문의 차원을 넘어 문학적⋅철학적 가치를 읽게 하고 그의 사유세계와 순례정신을 엿보게한다. “인간은 시적으로 거주한다.”고까지 규명한 하이데거는 시작(詩作)과 사유의 근친적 관계를 통찰하고 시적 언어의 특수한 위상과 역할을 밝힌다. 우선 하이데거는 시원적 언어의 의미를 고대 그리스어인 로고스(λόγος)에서 찾는데, 이 로고스는 존재개현을 가능하게 하는 “보게 함(sehen-lassen)”이라는 본질적 기능을갖고있다. 언어의 이러한 독특한 본질과 기능으로부터 “언어는 존재의 집이다.”고 하이데거는 규명한다. 특히 하이데거에게서 시작(詩作)은 “정적의 소리 없는 울림(das lautlose Geläut der Stille)”과 같은 존재의 “침묵언어(sigetische Sprache)”에 대한 응답하는 행위로서, 이러한 시작(詩作)에 “존재의 진리”가 개시되는 사건이 일어나는 것이다. 따라서 시적인 언어는 존재의 경험을 가능하게 하는 언어라는 사실을 염두에 둘 때, 우리는 혜초의 시작(詩作)세계에서 의미심장한 문학적⋅철학적 의미를 읽을 수 있다. 그런데 하이데거의 시작(詩作)해석은 그 어떤 자신의 이론이나 주장을 전개하는 것이 아니라, 시인의 편에서 시구를 심층적으로 읽고 사유하는 것이다.

Wangocheonchukgukjeonby Hyecho includes not only factual travelogues but also five poems. People including Paul Pelliot harshly criticized the poems as not holding any significant literary value, often even going so far as to describe them as "what would have been better if not included". Such harsh criticism seems to go overboard and originate from the failure to descry their literary and philosophical meanings. Contrary to Pelliot's view, the five poems by Hyecho let us read the literary and philosophical value of Wangocheonchukgukjeonthat reaches beyond a historic travelogue and peek at his thought and pilgrim spirit. Having gone so far as to declare, "Man dwells poetically", Heidegger demonstrates insight into the close relationship between poeticizing and thought and sheds light on the extraordinary status and role of poetic language. To begin with, Heidegger traces the meaning of the primitive language to logos (λ?γο?), an ancient Greek word. Taking his cue from such unique essence and function of language, Heidegger states, "Language is the house of Being". Especially, poeticizing for Heidegger is the act of responding to "the silent language (sigetische Sprache)" of Being which is like "the silent peal of tranquility (das lautlose Gelaut der Stille)", and serves as the venue of the event in which "the truth of Being" begins in such poeticizing. Therefore, only by remembering that poetic language is the language that enables the experience of Being, can we read the significant literary and philosophical meanings from the world of poeticizing by Hyecho.

혜초는 8세기 전반에 인도와 중앙아시아 일대를 순력한 후 『往五天竺國傳』을 남겼다. 현존하는 필사본은 앞뒤가 떨어져 나간 일부분의 짧은 분량으로서 草稿일 가능성이 많지만 현존본만으로도 『왕오천축국전』의 8세기의 유일한 주요 순례기이고 海路로 가서 陸路로 돌아온 유일한 기록이라는 등의 중요한 의미를 갖는다. 현존 『왕오천축국전』에는 인도 지역보다 중앙아시아에 대한 서술이 상대적으로 많은 분량을 차지한다. 이는 혜초가 佛蹟 순례를 위한 인도 여행 못지않게 중앙아시아 지역에 대한 관심이 컸음을 의미한다. 이 시기 중앙아시아는 아랍의 지배가 굳어지는 격변을 겪던 시기였고, 혜초는 아랍 주도 시기의 정치적 질서의 변화를 작은 분량이지만 생생하게 담아냈다. 이는 『대당서역기』나 『불국기』등과 비교할 때 두드러진 특징이다. 인도 지역의 서술에서 『왕오천축국전』은 오천축에 대한 서술이 이곳저곳에 나뉘어 있고, 불교 유적에 대한 기술도 정연하지 않는 등 아직 구조화되지 않은 모습을 보인다. 아랍의 지배력이 확대되는 격변기의 중앙아시아를 순력한 혜초가 남긴 아랍과 페르시아와 비잔틴제국, 소그드 제국과 투르크 등 중앙아시아 일대의 광범위한 나라들에 대한 탐방과 인상적인 傳聞 기록은 동서문화 교류의 관점에서 중요한 의미를 갖는다. 특히 『왕오천축국전』에는 다른 순례기에서 볼 수 없는 詩가 5편 실려 있다. 혜초는 주관적 편견을 제거하고 여행지의 사실을 객관적으로 기술하는 산문 부분에 중점을 두면서도, 순례 중 만났던 여러 난관을 헤쳐 나가 순례의 誓願을 완성하고자 하는 생생한 감정을 시에 진솔하게 담아 구도자의 정서를 표현함으로써 전편에 걸쳐 견실한 짜임새를 갖추게 되었다.

It is recorded that Vajrabodhi, who is one of the Three Transmitters, and also who are considered as the Great Three Masters of the Chinese Esoteric Buddhism. Amoghavajra was a disciple of Vajrabodhi, and in the record, it is said that Hyecho studied under Amoghavajra, and became one of the Six Philosophers with whom Amoghavajra left his last Dharma transmission will. Other than this, Hyecho's name and lifetime achievements appears in the title of 'OknyodamkiUpyo' 'Naedoryangjisong'. Hyecho's existence is confirmed again in the preface of 『大乘瑜伽金剛性海曼殊室利千臂千鉢大敎王經』, which is known as a translation by Amoghavajra. Hyecho was an esoteric Buddhist monk who lived during the time of transmission of Indian Esoteric Buddhism to the Tang Dynasty China, however his existence was hardly known until the 20th century. In the early years of 20th century, the French explorer P. Pellot brought back some documents from Dun-Huang(敦煌) and one of the documents was the 『往五天竺國傳』 that immediately drew the attention of the world. It is by the Japanese scholar Takakusu Junjiro, who confirmed that Hyecho is the author of 『往五天竺國傳』, and he is one of the disciples who appears in the Amoghavajra's Dharma transmisison will. After the World War II, some research on Hyecho were undertaken with great interest. Nevertheless, most of the research were done on the basis of inference referring to the 『一切經音義』, or 『往五天竺國傳』, and the contents from the Amoghavajra's <Title Compilation> and historical facts. This paper will delve into the world of Hyecho and his achievements using the compiled title which is recorded as 'Shilla Hyecho', as the Six Philosophers of Amoghavajra, the one who established the Esoteric Buddhism. This will enable highlight Hyecho as one of the Four Great Chinese Translators, and as one of the Six Philosophers and disciples of Amoghavajra. However, there is an obstacle that very limited material is available to do research on him. As one can see in Takakusu Junjiro's comments saying that people generally conceive Hyecho as an author of 『往五天竺國傳』, with lacking examination or prove against research as the expression known as 'Shiila Hyecho' determined pre-conception and this always confines him. Hyecho existed historically, however, he could be more than one individual with same name, or probability is there that he is one individual with different names. The understanding and value of Hyecho will be reshaped if any materials can be found to explore more about him, and his position in the history will be repositioned.

Hyecho(慧超) made a pilgrimage to India, and wrote a record WangOcheonchukgukJeon(往五天竺國傳). Hyecho expressed the vigor and passion of Silla's Buddhist ascetics. Hyecho travelled India and east middle Asia from circa 720 to 728. In WangOcheonchukgukJeon Hyecho wrote the circumstances of Buddhism, geography, customs, products, language and political condition of each countries he passed. This book is the unique description in early 8th century. And this book contains several poems which express the emotion of the pilgrimage. After Hyecho's pilgrimage to India, Subhakarasimha, Vajrabodhi and Amoghavajra came to Tang and introduce New Vajradana(密敎). And then New Vajradana in Tang was established. Hyecho learned New Vajradana from Vajrabodhi and Amoghavajra, and he became a prominent Vajradana master in Tang. Hyecho took part in translation the Dacheng Yuja Manshushili Qianbeiqianbo DajiaowangJing(大乘瑜伽曼殊室利千臂千鉢大敎王經) sutra with Vajrabodhi. He studied that sutra for forty eight years. Hyecho made an outline of that sutra, which is still useful nowadays. With this philosophical and executive ability, Hyecho became a master of palace temple and took a important part in national ceremony of praying for rain at Yunutan(玉女潭) pond. In middle and late 8th century, Hyeoncho(玄超), Uirim(義林), Bulgasaui(不可思議), Hyeil(慧日) and Ojin(悟眞) learned New Vajradana continuously, and some of them returened Silla to introduce it. After them, there was a remarkable spread in Silla Vajradana. In Seokbulsa(石佛寺) temple, we can find several aspects of Vajradana. At that time, Silla Buddhism harmonized various thoughts, for example with Hwaeom(華嚴) and other thoughts.

In this article, I attempted to investigate two issues in relation to Hyecho's Memoir which is a travelogue written by a Silla monk Hyecho. The first issue I intended to examine is how Paul Pelliot determined that this text was indeed the legitimate Hyecho's Memoir. This issue is important to understand, because Pelliot discovered only a handwritten copy, and the section containing the title of the text and the identity of the author was lost. Particularly, in relation to the discovery of Hyecho's Memoir, I considered the circulation of Huilin's Yitqiejing yinyi to be very important, because it is the only Buddhist text that mentions Hyecho' Memoir. And second themes I intended to deal with in this paper is the Eight Great Stupas. As the ultimate objective of his pilgrimage to India was to pay respect to the Eight Great Stupas, so he documented the names and locations of the Eight Great Stupas, composed of 4 sacred stupas and 4 other great stupas. It was ascertained that Hyecho's Memoir is the oldest extant text indicating the identities and locations of those eight great stupas. I utilized written texts and archaeological survey reports to shed light on those stupas. By accomplishing this task, I hoped to answer the following two questions: how East Asian pilgrims perceived Indian Buddhism in the early 8th century, and how such Indian Buddhism was understood and consumed throughout the East Asian Buddhist community. The Eight Great Stupas Hyecho referred to were not the so-called Eight Original Stupas, each containing 1/8th of Buddha's sar?ra. Instead, they were the stupas or temples that A?oka erected at Eight Sacred Buddhist Places throughout India. A?oka also erected stone pillars around the stupas he created, and engraved inscriptions upon them. Consequently, the Eight Great Stupas came to symbolize the Eight Sacred places, and the A?okan pillars came to serve as markers of those Eight Great Stupas. The pilgrims were able to identify the eight great stupas with those pillars, and by paying respect to the great stupas, they found themselves inspired by the greatness of Sakyamuni, and had a deep spiritual experience.

이 논문은 혜초 천축행의 목적과 귀로, 재당활동에 관한 내용으로 구성하였다. 첫째로 혜초가 천축행을 하게 된 배경으로 『왕오천축국전』에 반복적으로 나오는 몇몇 용어들에 천착하여 그의 신라에서의 성장기를 밝혀보았다. 둘째로 혜초의 천축행의 목적은 8대 영탑의 순례라는 표면적인 목적과 함께 밀교경전의 이운이라는 더 큰 목적이 있었다고 보았다. 이는 그의 오언시 분석을 통해 혜초의 천축행이 스승 금강지삼장이 내어 준 미션의 수행이라는 관점을 제시하였다. 그 내용은 먼저 천축으로 간 중국스님을 만나 그가 수집하고 사경하여 둔 범본 밀교경전을 가지고 함께 당나라로 이운해 오는 것이었지만, 중국스님이 이미 입적하였기 때문에 혜초는 그가 수집해 두었던 밀교 경전의 이운을 혼자서 감당하게 된 것이다. 셋째로 혜초는 스승이 내 준 미션 완수를 위해 빠르고 안전한 귀로를 찾아야 했는데 그것이 여의치 않자 다양한 귀로를 찾으려는 노력이 『왕오천축국전』에 나오는 서역의 많은 나라들을 지나야 했던 것으로 보았다. 넷째로 혜초가 금강지삼장에게 8년간 전수받고 번역한 경전은 아마도 그가 가져왔을 경전의 하나로, 그의 고행에 대한 스승의 배려로 보았다. 이상의 사실들은 『왕오천축국전』 속의 오언시, 중국스님을 찾아가는 여정, 그리고 귀로 탐색의 기록 등을 분석하여 얻어진 결론이다.

Overall this study will consist of the following three aspects. The first is to clarify the background and purpose of Hyecho's pilgrimage to Cheonchuk. The second aspect is about various efforts to find the way back to the Tang Dynasty. The third aspect is about the religious activities in the Tang Dynasty. The basic critical mind of this study is that the contents and stories submerged on the back side are closer to the truth appearance of Hyecho and 『WangOcheonchukgukjeon』 than the outwardly revealed contents of the above three aspects. The contents that stimulated my intellectual curiosity in Hyecho and his book, 『WangOcheonchukgukjeon』 can be summarized into four categories as follows. The first were several unfamiliar terms that appeared repeatedly in this writing. The unfamiliar terms he used were terms that were not used by Buddhists or intellectuals in China at the time. It would be reasonable to see this as the influence of the language habits Hyecho learned while studying in Silla before going to study abroad. So, if I review the references and usage of these terms, I thought I could expose information about his growth process in Silla. Second, there is always verses with five words to each line in the dramatic scene in 『Wang Ocheonchukgukjeon』. Analyzing the contents of these verses with five words to each line and the circumstances in which the verses were written, it can be seen that the purpose of his trip was not simply to visit the 8 Great Stupas. It can detect easily that his real mission doesn't appear on the surface. This mission was received from his mentor, Geumgangji, Tripitaka. Third, Hyecho attempted to complete the mission given by the teacher hastily moving the esoteric scriptures collected by a Chinese monk who died in the field, and carefully transferred to China. Paradoxically, it can be said that his various efforts to find his way back enriched the contents of 『WangOcheonchukgukjeon』. Fourth, after Hyecho was handed down to Geumgangji Tripitaka for 8 years, the translated scripture is likely one of the scriptures he brought, and should be viewed as the teacher's consideration for his contributions. The above facts are the conclusions obtained through the analysis of his poem in 『WangOcheonchukgukjeon』, the journey to visit a Chinese monk, and the record of the search for a return trip.

This study examined Hyecho(慧超)'s characteristics as a Esoteric Buddhist monk, a different side of him, who is known as the author of the Wangocheon Chukgukjeon(往五天竺國傳). For this, this study paid attention to the fact that Hyecho wrote the preface of Dacheng Yuja Manshushili Qianbeiqianbo DajiaowangJing sutra(大乘瑜伽曼殊室利千臂千鉢大敎王經). So this study analyzed Hyecho's activities, ideological trends, and the ideological characteristics of scriptures by examining the preface. Furthermore, it suggested that Hyecho's activities and ideological trends influenced the Buddhist community of Silla. According to the preface, Hyecho participated in the translation process of Dacheng Yuja Manshushili Qianbeiqianbo DajiaowangJing sutra, continued to study the scriptures, and received scripture-related instruction from Vajrabodhi(金剛智) and Amogha-vajra(不空). Hyecho was one of the greatest disciples of Amogha-vajra and was involved in activities related to the Tang Dynasty's imperial family, so it is believed that his status in the Tang Dynasty was high. Hyecho spent a long time trying to understand the meaning of the this sutra, and wrote down his position on the scriptures through the preface. This sutura exhibits the transitional characteristics of the Vajra-yana Esoteric Buddhism, and contains faith of the Thousand- armed Thousand bowl Mañjuśrī. The Vajra-yana Esoteric Buddhism dogma influenced the establishment of Five‐directional Buddhas, and Hyecho's teacher Amogha-vajra spread the faith of Mount Odae cult throughout the country based on befief of Mañjuśrī. Therefore, it is highly likely that Hyecho's activities and ideas influenced the spread of Mount Odae cult in Silla, and the introduction of the Vajra-yana Esoteric Buddhism, which led to the production of five‐directional Buddhas.

‘往五天竺國傳’은 신라시대의 승려 慧超가 서기 723년부터 4년에 걸쳐 당나라를 통해 인도 5개국을 여행하면서 기록한 紀行文이다. 서기 1908년 프랑스의 동양학자 펠리오(Pelliot)에 의해 그 존재가 알려진 후 ‘往五天竺國傳’에 관한 많은 연구가 이루어져 왔다. 그러나 그동안 ‘往五天竺國傳’에 관한 세계 古典 紀行文學史的 位相에 관한 연구가 제대로 이루어진 적이 없었기 때문에 이 紀行文의 세계 古典 紀行文學的 含意나 評價를 놓고는 막연한 주장들이 이어져오고 있다. 5세기부터 8세기까지 慧超의 ‘往五天竺國傳’ 이외에도 많은 동양인들이 여행기를 남겼는데, 5세기 法顯의 ‘佛國記’, 6세기 송운의 ‘宋雲行記’, 7세기 玄奘의 ‘大唐西域記’와 義淨의 ‘南海寄歸內法傳’ 그리고 엔닌(圓仁)의 ‘入唐求法巡禮行記’가 있다. 동양에 이와 같은 여행기가 있다면, 서양에서도 13세기와 14세기에 걸쳐 카르피니의 ’몽골사‘, ’루브룩의 여행기‘,마르코 폴로의 ‘東方見聞錄’, 오도릭의 ‘東遊記’, ‘이븐바투타여행기’와 같은 古典 旅行記들이 쓰여졌다. 따라서 論者는 이 論文을 통해 ‘往五天竺國傳‘을 중심으로 하여 5세기부터 14세기 사이에 쓰여 진 東西洋 古典 紀行文들의 旅行目的, 旅行時期, 旅行期間, 旅程 등을 비교 분석해 봄으로써 ’往五天竺國傳‘의 세계 古典 紀行文學史的 相對的 位相과 그 含意를 평가하여 보았다. 그 결과 ‘往五天竺國傳’은 세계 4대 여행기로 평가되는 것은 무리이나 동양의 5대 여행기로 평가될 수는 있을 것이다.

Wang-o-cheon-chuk-guk-jeon (Wangwutianzhuguochuan), written by Budhhist monk Hyecho (Huichao) of the Shilla Dynasty, is a record of five ancient Indian countries in the eighth century. It represents the first Korean work of travel literature in history. Even though there have been many studies on Wang-o-cheon-chuk-guk-jeon since it was found by Paul Pelliot at Mogao Caves in Gansu province, China, in 1908, there have been no studies on the relative position of the work among other classic works of travel literature in the world. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to find the relative position of Wang-o-cheon-chuk-guk-jeon among the world’s classic works of travel literature. Some of the major works of world travel literature include those written by Marco Polo, Odoric, and Ibn Battuta in Western literature and five famous travel works including Wang-o-cheon-chuk-guk-jeon in the East. Many Korean history scholars and journalists insist that Wang-o-cheon-chuk-guk-jeon is one of the four greatest classic works of travel literature, which this paper refutes. However, it might be considered as one of the five greatest Eastern travelogues.

This article intends to illuminate the characteristics and significance of the Wangochonchukkukchon, the records of experiences of travel to Chonchuk --the old name of India-- by Hyecho(704-780), a Buddhist monk of Silla. As Hyecho's travel to India and its records go, there are two notable points which will be focused on in this article. One is that Hyecho's travel was done at the age of twenty which was young age compared to other monks' cases, and the other is that the Wangochonchukkukchon is differentiated from other travel literatures by Buddhists monks in including some poems within the text. Unlike other studies on the Wangochonchukkukchon which have mainly been established around bibliographical approach, this article is distinctive in employing a comparative method which covers other similar texts by Buddhist monks such as the Pulgukki by Peophyun, the Taedang seoyuk kubeop koseungchon and the Namhaegigwinae peopchon by Uijeong, the Taedang seoyukki by Hyunjang, and the Iptang kubeop sunnye hanggi by Japanese monk Yennin. When we classify travel literature, according to the purpose of the travel such as pilgrimage, sightseeing, and business trip, the Wangochonchukkukchon falls into the category of pilgrimage travel literature. Since Chonchuk was conceived of to be the sacred place by Buddhists which Buddha had been born, achieved Enlightenment, and preached on the four holy truth--birth, aging, illness, death--, it can be characterized by a form of pilgrimage to visit holy places and worship the Buddhist relics in India, It, however, was a risky attempt fraught with a quantity of difficulties and dangers to make a trip to India in the 8th century. The experience of pilgrimage to India, which signified an accomplishment of a holy mission, brought a tremendous changes to Hyecho both in inner and in outer life. On one hand he became to form his self identity as a real Buddhist monk, and on the other hand he could consolidate his religious standing in the Tang period. In other words, it can be said that the pilgrimage to India functioned the rite of passage to him. As for the writing style of the Wangochonchukkukchon, it can be categorized as ‘poem-inserted type’ among various types of the mixed-style texts: those which prose and verse are mixed in a text. This article considers this characteristic of the Wangochonchukkukchon to be one influenced by Uijeong's travel literature.

천축구법승의 사상사는 천축과 중국의 불교사상사의 변화와 궤를 같이 하고 있다. 계율을 중시하던 백제의 겸익이 계율을 연구하고 율장을 도입하기위해 6세기 초에 천축을 다녀 온 후, 아리야발마, 현태, 혜륜, 현유, 원표, 혜초등의 구법행이 줄을 잇는다. 그들은 불적지를 순례하고 불학을 심화시키고자구법의 길을 떠났다. 그 가운데서 본고에서는 혜륜, 원표, 혜초라는 세 명의인물을 통해 그들의 천축유학과정과 그들이 추구했던 불교사상을 살펴본다. 『왕오천축국전』은 20대의 청년 혜초가 9년 여의 중국, 동남아, 천축, 서역의 순례 및 순방을 마치고 자신의 견문을 적은 기행문이다. 그런데 그것은 80 여 세를 산 혜초의 행적 중 일부에 불과하다. 그 후 혜초는 장안으로 가서 스승인 금강지, 불공 등으로 부터 인정받았을 뿐 아니라 밀교의식에 정통한 밀교승이 되었으므로 황제의 명을 받아 기우제의 제문을 작성하고 의식을 주관하기도 하였다. 그런데 우리나라 불교사상사에서 볼 때 혜초와 같은 인물은 한둘이 아니었다. 혜초보다 200여년을 앞서서 渡竺한 겸익을 필두로, 아리야발마, 현태, 혜각, 혜륜, 현유, 원표 등의 활동이 줄을 잇는다. 그들의 활동상은 충분히 되새겨 볼 가치가 있으며, 따라서 천축구법승에 대한 연구는 양적으로나 질적으로확대되어야 한다. 이에 본고에서는 삼국통일 전에 당승 현조와 함께 토번, 네팔을 거쳐 천축으로 간 혜륜, 삼국 통일초기에 새로 완성된 범본 80권 본 『화엄경』을 구하기위해 우전국으로 간 원표, 통일 후 발전 과정에서 구법행을 한 혜초라는 세인물을 통해 그들의 행적과 사상을 살펴보고자 한다.