성담(性潭) 송환기(宋煥箕)의 불교인식

Abstract

This manuscript started with the purpose of producing research that investigated and verified how Buddhism was understood by Seongdam (性潭) Song Hwan-gi (宋煥箕), the founder (宗匠) of Horon (湖論) who was active around the early 19th century. Song Hwan-gi, Uam (尤菴) Song Si-yeol (宋時烈)’s fifth generation, was a scholar who had a deep sense of duty to inherit the Theory of Uam (尤菴學), and he adhered to the Confucian theory of genealogy (道統論) and Anti-Heresy Discourses. Thus, this manuscript expressed curiosity about Song Hwan-gi’s understanding of Buddhism, which was the representative heresy. This manuscript examined the naming method of Buddhist clergy (僧侶), degree of pedagogical knowledge, and critical statements that were made concerning Buddhist tales (說話). Meanwhile, it is noticeable that the terms of address for Buddhist clergy were composed of four categories: general terms, honorific forms, palanquins [輿], and miscellaneous terms of address. This scheme conforms to the Buddhist-friendly aspects of Song Hwan-gi. Examples of these terms of address include Danseung (擔僧) and Yeoseung (輿僧), both of which were Buddhist clergy who carried palanquins. Naturally, Song Hwan-gi was helped by Buddhist clergy when he went sightseeing on famous mountains. In the meantime, Song Hwan-gi’s pedagogical knowledge can be shown to be not especially profound based on his understanding of The Diamond Sutra, The Avatamska Sutra, and The Shurangama Sutra. Cheongnyansan Travel Records (淸凉山遊覽錄) and Dongyu Diary (東遊日記) make it clear that Song Hwan-gi had no interest in taking refuge in the three treasures of Buddhism (佛法僧 三寶). It is rather the case that he was deeply critical of Buddhism. On the other hand, Song Hwan-gi expressed profound sadness when he encountered the dilapidated remains (古蹟) of Buddhist temples and hermitages. Consequentially, it can be concluded that Song Hwan-gi’s understanding of Buddhism contained examples of affirmation, acceptance, denial, and exclusion.