Editor’s音符

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 N/A ASIAN STUDIES Acta Koreana Pub Date : 2021-11-16 DOI:10.5070/bs327161272
Don Baker, Ahn Seohyun, Bruce Fulton, Djuna, Larisa McNeil, Seung-Ah Lee, Michael C. E. Finch, James H. Grayson, Serk-Bae Suh, Janet L. Poole, Jesse D. Sloane, Barry Welsh, Jeong Eun Annabel We, Charles Montgomery, A. Muller, Andrew Jackson, Richard D. McBride, Sem Vermeersch, Michael C. Kalton, Nae-Hyun Kwon, Jin-Kyung Park, Fyodor Tertitskiy, Young-Jun Lee
{"title":"Editor’s音符","authors":"Don Baker, Ahn Seohyun, Bruce Fulton, Djuna, Larisa McNeil, Seung-Ah Lee, Michael C. E. Finch, James H. Grayson, Serk-Bae Suh, Janet L. Poole, Jesse D. Sloane, Barry Welsh, Jeong Eun Annabel We, Charles Montgomery, A. Muller, Andrew Jackson, Richard D. McBride, Sem Vermeersch, Michael C. Kalton, Nae-Hyun Kwon, Jin-Kyung Park, Fyodor Tertitskiy, Young-Jun Lee","doi":"10.5070/bs327161272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Wŏnhyo (617–686) is known to the world as Korea’s leading Buddhist thinker and scriptural commentator, mainly due to his numerous exegeses and treatises that attempted to sort out the plethora of new Buddhist ideas generated in the fifth through seventh centuries in East Asia—ideas produced both through the continued influx of newly translated Indian texts, as well as the rapid appearance of fresh East Asian interpretations of the Buddhist doctrine. Wŏnhyo is especially noted for being the only scholar among the great East Asian commentators who had neither sectarian affiliation nor took a sectarian-based approach in the interpretation of Buddhist doctrines. Thus, the privileging of a specific sectarian approach was for Wŏnhyo impossible, since he saw each of the various doctrinal streams of Buddhism as representing a distinct but valid piece of the vast Mahāyāna system—as true as any other piece, but not to be seen as some kind of “ultimate” doctrine. Wonhyo’s method—known as hwajaeng 和諍 (“harmonization”)—is characterized by the juxtaposing of two or more divergent theoretical positions, comparing them, and clarifying their distinctive assumptions and aims. Once these assumptions are properly apprehended, what on the surface appear to be contradictory opinions are shown to be commensurate with each other from a deeper perspective. This article examines in detail the range of motivations, methodologies, and approaches seen in Wonhyo’s hwajaeng project. Wonhyo’s approach will be examined in terms of three general aspects, which straddle the range of doctrinal/ scholastic, logical/philosophical, and religious, with the religious showing at least three levels of profundity.","PeriodicalId":42297,"journal":{"name":"Acta Koreana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editor’s Note\",\"authors\":\"Don Baker, Ahn Seohyun, Bruce Fulton, Djuna, Larisa McNeil, Seung-Ah Lee, Michael C. E. Finch, James H. Grayson, Serk-Bae Suh, Janet L. Poole, Jesse D. Sloane, Barry Welsh, Jeong Eun Annabel We, Charles Montgomery, A. Muller, Andrew Jackson, Richard D. McBride, Sem Vermeersch, Michael C. Kalton, Nae-Hyun Kwon, Jin-Kyung Park, Fyodor Tertitskiy, Young-Jun Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.5070/bs327161272\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Wŏnhyo (617–686) is known to the world as Korea’s leading Buddhist thinker and scriptural commentator, mainly due to his numerous exegeses and treatises that attempted to sort out the plethora of new Buddhist ideas generated in the fifth through seventh centuries in East Asia—ideas produced both through the continued influx of newly translated Indian texts, as well as the rapid appearance of fresh East Asian interpretations of the Buddhist doctrine. Wŏnhyo is especially noted for being the only scholar among the great East Asian commentators who had neither sectarian affiliation nor took a sectarian-based approach in the interpretation of Buddhist doctrines. Thus, the privileging of a specific sectarian approach was for Wŏnhyo impossible, since he saw each of the various doctrinal streams of Buddhism as representing a distinct but valid piece of the vast Mahāyāna system—as true as any other piece, but not to be seen as some kind of “ultimate” doctrine. Wonhyo’s method—known as hwajaeng 和諍 (“harmonization”)—is characterized by the juxtaposing of two or more divergent theoretical positions, comparing them, and clarifying their distinctive assumptions and aims. Once these assumptions are properly apprehended, what on the surface appear to be contradictory opinions are shown to be commensurate with each other from a deeper perspective. This article examines in detail the range of motivations, methodologies, and approaches seen in Wonhyo’s hwajaeng project. Wonhyo’s approach will be examined in terms of three general aspects, which straddle the range of doctrinal/ scholastic, logical/philosophical, and religious, with the religious showing at least three levels of profundity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Koreana\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Koreana\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5070/bs327161272\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Koreana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/bs327161272","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:Wŏnhyo(617-686)是韩国著名的佛教思想家和经书评论家,这主要是因为他撰写了大量的注释和论著,试图整理出5世纪至7世纪东亚地区产生的大量新佛教思想——这些思想是通过不断涌入的新翻译的印度文本和迅速出现的东亚对佛教教义的新解释而产生的。Wŏnhyo尤其以他是东亚伟大的评论家中唯一一位既没有宗派关系,也没有以宗派为基础来解释佛教教义的学者而闻名。因此,对于Wŏnhyo来说,特殊的宗派方法的特权是不可能的,因为他认为佛教的每一个不同的教义流都代表了庞大的Mahāyāna系统的一个独特而有效的部分——与其他部分一样真实,但不被视为某种“终极”教义。元孝的方法被称为“和谐”諍(“harmonization”),其特点是将两个或多个不同的理论立场并置,比较它们,并澄清它们独特的假设和目标。一旦这些假设被正确理解,表面上看似矛盾的观点从更深的角度来看是相称的。本文详细研究了Wonhyo 's wajaeng项目中的各种动机、方法和方法。元孝的方法将从三个方面来考察,这三个方面跨越了教义/学术、逻辑/哲学和宗教的范围,其中宗教至少表现出三个层次的深度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Editor’s Note
Abstract:Wŏnhyo (617–686) is known to the world as Korea’s leading Buddhist thinker and scriptural commentator, mainly due to his numerous exegeses and treatises that attempted to sort out the plethora of new Buddhist ideas generated in the fifth through seventh centuries in East Asia—ideas produced both through the continued influx of newly translated Indian texts, as well as the rapid appearance of fresh East Asian interpretations of the Buddhist doctrine. Wŏnhyo is especially noted for being the only scholar among the great East Asian commentators who had neither sectarian affiliation nor took a sectarian-based approach in the interpretation of Buddhist doctrines. Thus, the privileging of a specific sectarian approach was for Wŏnhyo impossible, since he saw each of the various doctrinal streams of Buddhism as representing a distinct but valid piece of the vast Mahāyāna system—as true as any other piece, but not to be seen as some kind of “ultimate” doctrine. Wonhyo’s method—known as hwajaeng 和諍 (“harmonization”)—is characterized by the juxtaposing of two or more divergent theoretical positions, comparing them, and clarifying their distinctive assumptions and aims. Once these assumptions are properly apprehended, what on the surface appear to be contradictory opinions are shown to be commensurate with each other from a deeper perspective. This article examines in detail the range of motivations, methodologies, and approaches seen in Wonhyo’s hwajaeng project. Wonhyo’s approach will be examined in terms of three general aspects, which straddle the range of doctrinal/ scholastic, logical/philosophical, and religious, with the religious showing at least three levels of profundity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Koreana
Acta Koreana ASIAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Transliteration of Korean Place Names in Colonial Times: Unveiling the Strategies of Japanese Imperialism (De)Bordering Korea: North Korea Represented in Liminal Space In Search of an Ideal Sijo (時調) Format in English: An Investigation of Kevin O’Rourke’s English Translations Kim Yongnang Reading Keats: An Intertextual Study of "Tugyon" (The cuckoo) and "Ode to a Nightingale" Embracing Filthy Tradition: Kim Suyong"s Postcolonial Enunciation in “Colossal Roots” and His Translation of Korea and Her Neighbours
×
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