Ch'ŏnt'ae after Ŭich'ŏn: The Formative Period of the Korean Ch'ŏnt'ae Order

IF 0.2 Q4 AREA STUDIES Seoul Journal of Korean Studies Pub Date : 2020-01-25 DOI:10.1353/seo.2019.0014
S. Vermeersch
{"title":"Ch'ŏnt'ae after Ŭich'ŏn: The Formative Period of the Korean Ch'ŏnt'ae Order","authors":"S. Vermeersch","doi":"10.1353/seo.2019.0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Observing the English-language literature on Ch'ŏnt'ae, one might get the impression that Ch'ŏnt'ae begins and ends with Ŭich'ŏn (1055–1101). Most scholars agree Ŭich'ŏn was the founder of the Ch'ŏnt'ae school, the Korean counterpart of Tiantai, but what happened after him? The next figure about whom we have fairly substantial information is Yose (1163–1245), leaving a gap of nearly eighty years; and when Yose comes into his own, it is by founding the White Lotus society at Mandŏk-sa in 1216, reflecting a type of devotional practice not traditionally associated with Ŭich'ŏn. This shift is usually explained in Korean scholarship by referring to the historical background. Yose lived during a period of military rule (1170–1256) when many monks seem to have foregone the traditional bureaucratic institutions of Buddhism and founded their own faith-based societies; for example, Chinul's founding of Chŏnghye-sa in 1190 and Susŏn-sa (later Songgwang-sa) in 1200. In what sense is Yose's movement a departure from Ŭich'ŏn? Should we take Ŭich'ŏn's writings as the be-all and end-all of Korean Ch'ŏnt'ae? I argue that Ŭich'ŏn failed to put in place any clear structure, ideology, or training course for the school he founded, and hence disciples selected through the first Ch'ŏnt'ae examination of 1101 had to fend for themselves. Riven by conflict, they likely failed to develop a clear identity, perhaps because they were mostly originally trained in other schools. Ŭich'ŏn seems to have perceived the need to implement Pure Land societies as an essential component of the Tiantai tradition as it had formed in Song China, but it was only Yose who finally managed to integrate all the various practices of the Tiantai tradition into the Ch'ŏnt'ae school.","PeriodicalId":41678,"journal":{"name":"Seoul Journal of Korean Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/seo.2019.0014","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seoul Journal of Korean Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/seo.2019.0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Observing the English-language literature on Ch'ŏnt'ae, one might get the impression that Ch'ŏnt'ae begins and ends with Ŭich'ŏn (1055–1101). Most scholars agree Ŭich'ŏn was the founder of the Ch'ŏnt'ae school, the Korean counterpart of Tiantai, but what happened after him? The next figure about whom we have fairly substantial information is Yose (1163–1245), leaving a gap of nearly eighty years; and when Yose comes into his own, it is by founding the White Lotus society at Mandŏk-sa in 1216, reflecting a type of devotional practice not traditionally associated with Ŭich'ŏn. This shift is usually explained in Korean scholarship by referring to the historical background. Yose lived during a period of military rule (1170–1256) when many monks seem to have foregone the traditional bureaucratic institutions of Buddhism and founded their own faith-based societies; for example, Chinul's founding of Chŏnghye-sa in 1190 and Susŏn-sa (later Songgwang-sa) in 1200. In what sense is Yose's movement a departure from Ŭich'ŏn? Should we take Ŭich'ŏn's writings as the be-all and end-all of Korean Ch'ŏnt'ae? I argue that Ŭich'ŏn failed to put in place any clear structure, ideology, or training course for the school he founded, and hence disciples selected through the first Ch'ŏnt'ae examination of 1101 had to fend for themselves. Riven by conflict, they likely failed to develop a clear identity, perhaps because they were mostly originally trained in other schools. Ŭich'ŏn seems to have perceived the need to implement Pure Land societies as an essential component of the Tiantai tradition as it had formed in Song China, but it was only Yose who finally managed to integrate all the various practices of the Tiantai tradition into the Ch'ŏnt'ae school.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“Ŭich’ŏn之后的‘ŏnt’ae”——韩国‘ŏnt’ae秩序的形成时期
摘要:观察关于“ŏnt”网站的英文文献,人们可能会有这样的印象:“ŏnt”网站以“Ŭich”ŏn(1055-1101)开头和结尾。大多数学者都认为Ŭich'ŏn是中国天台学派的创始人,但在他之后发生了什么?下一个我们有相当多信息的人物是约斯(1163-1245),留下了近80年的空白;公元1216年,他在Mandŏk-sa创立了白莲会,这反映了一种传统上与Ŭich'ŏn无关的虔诚实践。在韩国学术中,这种转变通常是根据历史背景来解释的。Yose生活在军事统治时期(1170-1256),当时许多僧侣似乎放弃了传统的佛教官僚机构,建立了自己的信仰社团;例如1190年成立的Chŏnghye-sa和1200年成立的Susŏn-sa(后来的松光寺)。在什么意义上,Yose的运动偏离了Ŭich的ŏn?我们是否应该把Ŭich’ŏn的作品视为韩国的ŏnt’ae的全部?我认为,Ŭich'ŏn没有为他创立的学校建立任何明确的结构、意识形态或培训课程,因此,通过1101年第一次ŏnt'ae考试选拔的弟子不得不自谋生路。由于冲突的分裂,他们可能无法形成一个明确的身份,也许是因为他们最初大多是在其他学校接受培训的。Ŭich'ŏn似乎已经意识到需要将净土社会作为天台传统的重要组成部分,因为它在中国宋朝形成,但只有Yose最终成功地将天台传统的所有各种实践融入了ŏnt'ae学派。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Published twice a year under the auspices of the Kyujanggak Institute for Korean Studies at Seoul National University, the Seoul Journal of Korean Studies (SJKS) publishes original, state of the field research on Korea''s past and present. A peer-refereed journal, the Seoul Journal of Korean Studies is distributed to institutions and scholars both internationally and domestically. Work published by SJKS comprise in-depth research on established topics as well as new areas of concern, including transnational studies, that reconfigure scholarship devoted to Korean culture, history, literature, religion, and the arts. Unique features of this journal include the explicit aim of providing an English language forum to shape the field of Korean studies both in and outside of Korea. In addition to articles that represent state of the field research, the Seoul Journal of Korean Studies publishes an extensive "Book Notes" section that places particular emphasis on introducing the very best in Korean language scholarship to scholars around the world.
期刊最新文献
The Identity of Joseon Interpreters in the Qing Empire Anthology Publication at the Gyoseogwan in the Nineteenth Century: The Case of the Guamjip The Impact of Educational Migration in the Transition to a Modern City: Focusing on Bukchon as the Locus of Educational Migration to Gyeongseong Ryu Sŏngnyong, Chancellor of Chosŏn Korea: On the Battlefield and in Memory by Choi Byonghyon (review) BTS on the Road by Seok-Kyeong Hong (review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1