Abstract
Detailed criticisms of Buddhism by Confucian scholars in China were initiated in the writings of Han Yu (768–824), who lambasted Buddhism as a foreign religion whose practices were intrinsically deleterious to society and state. Tensions grew much stronger in the Song period after the appearance of Neo-Confucianism, especially in the philosophical form crystallized in the works of Cheng Yi (1033–1107), Cheng Hao (1032–1085), and Zhu Xi (1130–1200), all of whom attacked Buddhism strongly on philosophical grounds. In late-Goryeo and early-Joseon Korea, these tensions were brought to new heights as the Neo-Confucian polemic became the central component of the movement to oust Buddhism from its position as the state religion. The gamut of arguments that had been made against Buddhist throughout this long history were drawn together in the essay of noted Confucian statesman Jeong Dojeon: Bulssi japbyeon (“An Array of Critiques of Buddhism”). These arguments would be met with a commensurate Buddhist response in the Hyeon jeong non (“Exposition of Orthodoxy”) by the Seon monk Gihwa (1376–433), considered by many as one of the sharpest thinkers and writers in the entire Korean Buddhist tradition. Thus, as one of the rare cases in the history of religions, a full-scale debate took place between these two distinct religious groups.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The extensive mutual influence that occurred between Buddhism and Daoism is examined in depth in Sharf, Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism.
- 2.
Charles Hartmanʼs Han Yü and the Tʼang Search for Unity (Princeton, 1986), provides an excellent study of Hanʼs life and works.
- 3.
A translation by Bryan Van Norden is online at: http://faculty.vassar.edu/brvannor/Phil210/HanYu/On the Origin of the Way.pdf.
- 4.
Translated in many anthologies: see, for example, de Bary, Sources of Chinese Tradition, pp. 583–585. Jeong Dojeon makes extensive use of these two essays in the final passages of his Bulssi japbyeon.
- 5.
See Gregory, Inquiry into the Origin of Humanity, pp. 35–36.
- 6.
See Message of the Mind, p. 17.
- 7.
The point is often made in present-day Chan historical scholarship that despite Chanʼs anti-textual rhetoric, Chan adherents ended up composing a voluminous literature that would be studied by succeeding generations. While this is true, we must still pay due consideration to the actual message of this literature, which points to a Buddhist teaching that emphasizes simplicity, intuitiveness, and directness in daily activity and which invariably casts “sutra-lecturers” in an inferior role to Chan masters of the “great function” 大用.
- 8.
The four books of Confucian learning selected by Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130–1200) as a core curriculum during the Song period. These are the Analects (Lunyu 論語) the Mencius (Mengzi 孟子), the Great Learning (Daxue 大學), and the Doctrine of the Mean (Zhongyong 中庸).
- 9.
This canon was authorized by the emperor in 51 BCE and included the Book of Poems (Shijing 詩經), the Book of Documents (Shujing 書經), the Book of Changes 易經 (Yijing), the Spring and Autumn Annals (Chunchiu 春秋), and the Record of Ritual (Liji 禮記).
- 10.
For a study of Zhou Dunyi, especially in the all-important context of his relationship to Zhu Xi, see Adler, Reconstructing the Confucian DAO.
- 11.
It must be kept in mind here that when we say “Buddhism,” we are referring specifically to the Chan Buddhism of the Song, which is a distinctive form of Buddhism.
- 12.
The works of these two scholars are available in Chinese, but so far we do not have any full translations of their works, only small selected portions contained in anthologies. The largest is that contained in Wing-tsit Chanʼs Source Book, pp. 518–571.
- 13.
See ibid, 554–555.
- 14.
See Elizabeth Morrison, The Power of Patriarchs, esp. pp. 95–100, for Qisongʼs dealings with Confucianism.
- 15.
In using the term “exclusivism” here, I refer especially to the landmark work done on this topic by John Goulde in his 1984 Ph.D. dissertation, “Anti-Buddhist Polemic in Fourteenth and Fifteenth Century Korea: The Emergence of Korean Exclusivism.” In this work Goulde traces the developments of the Neo-Confucian polemic from their Chinese roots, through their failures and successes in Korea, to their final culmination in the creation of the Joseon dynasty (1392–1910).
- 16.
See Goulde, “Anti-Buddhist Polemic,” pp. 166–192 for a detailed description of the lives and works of the five above-mentioned figures, and others.
- 17.
For a comprehensive treatment of Jeong Dojeon, see Han Yeong-u, Jeong Dojeon sasang ui yeon-gu. In English, see Chai-shik Chung, “Chŏng Tojŏn: ‘Architect’ of Yi Dynasty Government and Ideology.” Also see the discussion of Jeong in the chapter “The Ideology of Reform” in John Duncan, The Origins of the Chosŏn Dynasty.
- 18.
My English translation of this text has been published in the Korean Classics Library series with the title Koreaʼs Great Buddhist-Confucian Debate.
- 19.
Translated into English a few times, most recently and capably by Peter Gregory in 1995 with the title, “Inquiry into the Origin of Humanity.”
- 20.
The Sutra of Trapuṣa and Bhallika. Not extant, but cited in many old texts. It is a Chinese indigenous sutra composed by Tanjing 曇靖 of the Northern Wei dynasty during the reign period of Emperor Xiaowu of the Liu-Song dynasty (453–464) in two fascicles. The text takes its name from its two main protagonists, merchants called Trapuṣa and Bhallika. These merchants are known elsewhere in the tradition. In the Diwei Boli jing, the two are described as well-versed in knowledge of yin and yang, divination using tortoise-shells, and the Yijing. They meet the Buddha immediately after his awakening, and he teaches them that those who keep the five precepts will be reborn as human, while those who do the ten good deeds will be reborn in a heaven as a god (hence the name of the teaching, rentian jiao 人天教, for which the text was known in the doctrinal taxonomies of the period; see below); persons who commit various misdeeds will be born into the unfortunate destinies. The ten good deeds are correlated with the five Confucian virtues 五常; they are also correlated with various other sets of five, after the manner of the tradition of correlative cosmology native to Chinese culture.
- 21.
The present-day Seongyun-gwan University in Seoul traces its roots to this academy.
- 22.
A reference to Zhou Gongdan 周公旦 and Shao Gong 召公, two worthies who are said to have cooperated in the establishment of the Zhou dynasty. This passage is from the biographical sketch of Gihwa, entitled “Hamheo tang Deuktong hwasang haengjang,” HBJ 7.250c, pp. 6–11.
- 23.
Gihwaʼs extant writings are contained in volume seven of the Hanguk Bulgyo Jeonseo. One of his major works, his commentary on the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment, is translated and published by Muller with the same title, and his Hyeonjeong non is translated in a forthcoming volume in the Korean Classics series together with the Bulssi japbyeon. In terms of Gihwaʼs connection with Zongmi, the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment is of great significance, as it was Zongmiʼs favorite text, which he commented on extensively. In Korea, it was Gihwa who wrote the definitive commentary on the sutra. Thus, Gihwa and Zongmi are closely linked in terms of mutual interest.
- 24.
I stress this point in view of the fact that Han Yeong-u explicitly stated that “the Hyeonjeong non is not a refutation of the Bulssi japbyeon.” See Hanʼs Jeong Dojeon, p. 53, note. I see Hanʼs view as being accurate only in a very strict sense. It is no doubt true that Gihwa did not sit down upon the publication of the Japbyeon and write an immediate, point-by-point rebuttal. In 1398, when Jeong wrote the Japbyeon, Gihwa would have been twenty-two, a mere novice in Buddhism. Yet even though Gihwa never directly names Jeong or his treatise, the fact Jeong was a faculty member of the Seongyun-gwan at the time that Gihwa was a student would make it a virtual impossibility for Gihwa not to have read the text. Furthermore, in the HJN Gihwa directly replies to all of the Japbyeonʼs accusations, using mimicry that directly alludes to Jeongʼs text.
- 25.
In Zhu Xiʼs Chuanxilu 體用一原、顯微無間 is identified as a citation from Cheng Yi, but I have not yet located it.
- 26.
“Correcting the internal with reverence, correcting the external with due-giving.” is a repeated aphorism found in the texts of the Cheng brothers, Zhu Xi, and many other Neo-Confucianism writers, originally drawn from the Yijing: in the text of kun 坤, the second hexagram. See Wilhelm, p. 393.
- 27.
Note that unlike the Bulssi japbyeon, the Hyeonjeong non does not have its own section headings supplied by its author. The heading titles below are my own suggestions.
- 28.
Henan Er Cheng yishu, p. 15. Also see Wing-tsit Chan, A Sourcebook in Chinese Philosophy, p. 530, sec. 11. No doubt Gihwa focuses on this particular citation partly because it comes from the same section of Cheng Haoʼs Yishu that contains most of the philosophical arguments that form the basis for Jeongʼs arguments in the Japbyeon.
- 29.
Analects 7:27 says: “When fishing, the Master would not use a net; when hunting, he would not shoot at a perched bird.”
- 30.
Mencius 1A:7 says: “The Superior Man keeps his distance from the kitchen, for if he hears the screams of slaughtered beasts, he cannot stand to eat their meat.”
- 31.
A good example for this point is the Inquiry, which includes an important chapter on the relationship of the three teachings. While Zongmi includes Confucianism and Daoism in the status of a lower order than the Buddhist teachings, they are nonetheless taken to be part of a continuum of ultimately valid teachings. Like Gihwa, Zongmi was noted for the depth of his Confucian learning prior to his entering the Buddhist order.
- 32.
Those who are familiar with the influential little book The Secular as Sacred, written a generation ago by Herbert Fingarette, will recognize that I am here disagreeing with the central tenet expressed in that work—that it is the concept of propriety that is most fundamental to the world-view of the Confucian classics, with ren having only secondary significance. Fingarette was duly praised for his interesting and profound analyses regarding the pervasiveness of the unconscious uses of propriety, not only in ancient Chinese society, but society in general. But in his prioritization of li over ren, he ignores a mountain of evidence in the Confucian classical texts that belies his position, as the textual evidence in the Analects that points to a greater “psychological interiority” for ren than the other virtues of the sage or junzi is overwhelming. And to merely state that ren is more internal, deeper than the other virtues is to stop short—as the relation between ren and the other virtues is quintessentially tiyong in its nature.
- 33.
It is notable that in traditional East Asian thought, the relationship of black and white markedly distinguished from the common association seen in the West where black tends to be associated with evil and white with good. From the earliest periods of East Asian history, black (also written with the ideograph xuan 玄) has the connotations of depths, profundity, mastery, etc., while white tends to be associated with superficiality.
- 34.
On the role of li in Chinese thought, see Ziporyn, “Coherence.”
- 35.
For those who have an interest in the ti-yong paradigm, I have published a few articles devoted to this topic that are available through my web site at http://www.acmuller.net/articles-shisou.html. Sung Bae Park has published a full-length work devoted to this discussion of ti-yong: One Korean’s Approach to Buddhism: The Mom/Momjit Paradigm, with mom/momjit being the equivalent Korean vernacular terms.
- 36.
A recent solid treatment of this issue can be seen in Sem Vermeersch, “Yi Seong-gye and the Fate of the Goryeo Buddhist System.”
- 37.
English translation by Lee Yong-ho (1993).
Bibliography
Abbreviations
HBJ = Hanguk Bulgyo Jeonseo 韓國佛教全書
SBJ = Sambong Jip 三峯集
T = Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō 大正新脩大藏經
Digital Texts
All Citations from the Thirteen Classics and Chinese Histories were found in the Academia Sinica on line Text Database at <http://hanji.sinica.edu.tw.>
All Citations from Zhou Dunyi, Zhang Zai, and Zhu Xi were located in the texts distributed by the Chinese Philosophical Etext archive at <http://sangle.web.wesleyan.edu/etext/index.html.>
All Citations from the Taishō Canon were found in the SAT Daizōkyō Text Database at <http://21dzk.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/SAT/ddb-bdk-sat2.php/.>
Classical Texts
Buddhist
Daebanggwang wongak sudara youigyeong seorui 大方廣圓覺修多羅了義經説誼 (Commentary on the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment). Gihwa 己和.
Dafangguang yuanjue xiuduluo liaoyi jing 大方廣圓覺修多羅了義經 (Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment).
Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論 (Treatise on Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith).
Hamheo tang Deuktong hwasang eorok 涵虚堂得通和尚語録 (The Record of the Teachings of the Reverend Hamheo Deuktong).
Hamheo tang Deuktong hwasang haengjang 涵虚堂得通和尚行状 (The Life of Reverend Hamheo Deuktong).
Hyeonjeong non 顯正論 (Exposition of Orthodoxy). Gihwa.
Yuanren lun 原人論 (Inquiry into the Origin of Humanity). Zongmi.
Non-Buddhist
Er Cheng ji 二程集. 1981. Collected Works of the Two Chengs. Beijing: Zhonghwa shu ju.
Henan Er Cheng yishu 河南二程遺書 (The Remaining Writings of the Two Cheng brothers of Honan). Taipei: Guoxue zhiben shu-cong si bai zhong, Taiwan shangwu yinshu kuan45,
Xunzi dong shi. Taipei: Guoxue zhiben shu-cong si bai zhong, Taiwan shangwu yinshu kuan34,
Yijing. <http://hanji.sinica.edu.tw>: Academia Sinica Text Archives,
Zhuzi yulei. <http://sangle.web.wesleyan.edu/etext/song-qing/song-qing.html>: Confucian Etext Archive,
Modern Works
Adler, Joseph A. 2014. Reconstructing the Confucian DAO: Zhu XIʼs Appropriation of Zhou Dunyi. Albany: State University of New York Press.
An Gyehyeon. 1982. Han-guk bulgyo sasang sa yeon. Seoul: Dongguk University Press.
Ch’en, Kenneth. 1964. Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey. Princeton: Princeton UP.
Ch’ien, Edward T. 1988. “The Neo-Confucian Confrontation with Buddhism: A Structural And Historical Analysis.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 15.
Chan, Wing-tsit, ed. 1986 Neo-Confucian Terms Explained. New York: Columbia University Press.
----. 1969. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Choe, Yeongseong. 1995. “Jeong Dojeon, Gweon Geun ui haksul sasang gwa yuhak sajeok wi chi.” Han-guk yuhak sasang sa, vol. II (Joseon jeongi pyeon). Seoul: Asea munhwasa.
Chung, Chai-shik. 1985. “Chŏng Tojŏn: Architect’ of Yi Dynasty Government and Ideology.” The Rise of Neo-Confucianism in Korea. New York: Columbia University Press.
de Bary, Wm. Theodore. 1989. The Message of the Mind in Neo-Confucianism. New York: Columbia University Press.
----, ed. 1969. The Buddhist Tradition. New York: The Modern Library.
----, ed. 1960. Sources of Chinese Tradition. New York: Columbia University Press.
---- and Jahyun Haboush Kim, eds. 1985. The Rise of Neo-Confucianism in Korea. New York: Columbia University Press.
Duncan, John B. 2000. The Origins of the Chosŏn Dynasty. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Fingarette, Herbert. 1972. Confucius: The Secular as Sacred. New York: Harper and Row.
Fu, Charles. 1973. “Morality or Beyond: The Neo-Confucian Confrontation with Mahayana Buddhism.” Philosophy East and West XXIII: 3.
Gim, Jangdae. 1994. “Jeong Dojeon ui byeokbullon gwa gyeongse non.” Hanguk yuhaksa ui yihae. 18–24, Seoul: Minjok munhwa sa.
Goulde, John Isaac. 1985. Anti-Buddhist Polemic in Fourteenth and Fifteenth Century Korea: The Emergence of Confucian Exclusivism. Cambridge: Harvard University.
Gregory, Peter N. 1995. Inquiry into the Origin of Humanity: An Annotated Translation of Tsung-miʼs Yuan jen lun with a Modern Commentary. Honolulu: University of Hawai`i Press.
Han, Yeong-u. Jeong Dojeon sasang ui yeon-gu. Seoul: Han-guk munhwa yeon-gu so, 1973. Han-guk munhwa yeon-gu chongseo15,
----. 1980. “Jeong Dojeon ui ingan gwa sahoe sasang.” Jindan hakbo 50.
----. 1985. Jeong Dojeon sasang ui yeon-gu. Seoul: Seoul National University Press.
Hartman, Charles. 1986. Han Yü and the Tʻang Search for Unity. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Jeong Dojeon. 1987. Sambong jip. Seoul: Gyeong-in munhwasa.
----. 1997. Sambong jip. Seoul: Minjok munhwa ch’ujinhoe.
Lee, Peter H., ed. 1993. Sourcebook of Korean Civilization. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lee, Young-ho (Jinwol). 1995. “The Ideal Mirror of the Three Religions (Samga Kwigam) of Ch’ŏnghŏ Hyujŏng.” Buddhist-Christian Studies pp. 139–187.
Morohashi, Tetsuji. 1930. Dai kanwa jiten. Tokyo: Taishūkan.
Morrison, Elizabeth. 2010. The Power of Patriarchs: Qisong and Lineage in Chinese Buddhism. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
Muller, A. Charles, trans. The Analects of Confucius. <http://www.acmuller.net/con-dao/analects.html>: 2012.
----, trans. Daode jing. <http://www.acmuller.net/con-dao/daodejing.html>: 2009.
----, trans. Doctrine of the Mean. <http://www.acmuller.net/con-dao/docofmean.html>: 2012.
----, trans. The Great Learning. <http://www.acmuller.net/con-dao/greatlearning.html>, 2012.
----. 1993. Hamhŏ Kihwa: A Study of his Major Works. Stony Brook: SUNY.
----. 1999. “Essence-Function (t’i-yung): Early Chinese Origins and Manifestations.” Bulletin of Toyo Gakuen University 7.
----. (1999, September). “The Buddhist-Confucian Conflict in the Early Chosŏn and Kihwaʼs Syncretic Response: The Hyŏn jŏng non.” The Review of Korean Studies 2.
----. 1999. The Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment: Korean Buddhismʼs Guide to Meditation. Albany: SUNY Press.
----. 2000. “Tiyong and Interpenetration in the Analects of Confucius: The Sacred as Secular.” Bulletin of Toyo Gakuen University 8: 93–106.
----. 2003. “The Centerpiece of the Goryeo-Joseon Buddhist-Confucian Confrontation: A Comparison of the Positions of the Bulssi japbyeon and the Hyeonjeongnon” Journal of Korean Buddhist Seminar: Memorial Edition for the Late Professor Kim Chigyŏn 9.
----. 2007. “The Great Confucian-Buddhist Debate.” In Buswell, Robert E., ed., Religions of Korea in Practice. Princeton: Princeton University Press. pp. 177–204.
----. Koreaʼs Great Buddhist-Confucian Debate: The Treatises of Chŏng Tojŏn (Sambong) and Hamhŏ Tŭktʼong (Kihwa), (Honolulu: University of Hawai`i Press, 2015): Korean Classics Library: Philosophy and Religion.
Park, Sung Bae. 2009. One Korean’s Approach to Buddhism: The Mom/Momjit Paradigm. Albany: SUNY Press.
Sasaki, Ruth Fuller, et al. 1976. A Man of Zen: The Recorded Sayings of Layman P’ang. New York/Tokyo: Weatherhill.
Sharf, Robert H. 2002. Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise. Honolulu: University of Hawai`i Press.
Shimada, Kenji. 1967. Shushigaku to Yōmeigaku. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten.
Vermeersch, Sem. 2013. “Yi Seong-gye and the Fate of the Goryeo Buddhist System.” Korea Journal 124–154.
Wilhelm, Richard. 1973. The I-Ching. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wu Joung-Sang. 1966. Joseon jeongi bulgyo sasang sa yeon-gu (Studies of the Buddhist Thought of the Early Joseon). Seoul: Dongguk University Press.
Yun Sasun. 1980. “Jeong Dojeon seongnihak ui teukseong gwa pyeongga munje.” Jindan hakbo 50.
Ziporyn, Brook. 2003. “Li (Principle, Coherence) in Chinese Buddhism.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 501–524.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Muller, A.C. (2019). Philosophical Bases of the Goryeo-Joseon Confucian-Buddhist Confrontation: The Works of Jeong Dojeon (Sambong) and Hamheo Deuktong (Gihwa). In: Ro, Yc. (eds) Dao Companion to Korean Confucian Philosophy. Dao Companions to Chinese Philosophy, vol 11. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2933-1_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2933-1_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-2932-4
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-2933-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)