본문 바로가기
  • Home
Basic Search

The Characteristics of Wonhyo’s Logic of Hwajaeng regarding the Interpretation of Catuṣkoṭi: Focusing on the Comparison with a Deleuzian New Dialectic

  • 불교학리뷰
  • Abbr : Critical Review for Buddhist Studies
  • 2017, (22), pp.221-256
  • DOI : 10.29213/crbs..22.201712.221
  • Publisher : Geumgang Center for Buddhist Studies
  • Research Area : Humanities > Buddhist Studies
  • Received : November 12, 2017
  • Accepted : December 5, 2017
  • Published : December 31, 2017

Kim taesoo 1

1서울대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

This research examines the characteristics of Wonhyo’s logic of hwajaeng, reflected in his interpretation of the catuṣkoṭi, while comparing it with Deleuze’s new dialectics, which criticizes the ‘Four shackles of representation.’ The main focus will be on the 4th koti, i.e., the view of ‘neither existence, nor non-existence’ in the catuṣkoṭi, which was used for interpreting the major tenets of Doctrinal Essentials of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, Doctrinal Essentials of the Perfection of Ultimate Wisdom and Preface to the Exposition of the Sūtra on the Adamantine Absorption. After categorizing the concept of ‘neither existence, nor non-existence’ according to two different approaches, namely (1) a negation of both while revealing the middle path, and (2) an ultimate truth, the research concluded that Wonhyo’s approach is closer to case (1) in its structure of thought. Further, when analyzing the Deleuze’s new dialectics, which criticizes the concept of identity in Hegelian dialectics, it also shows a similarity to case (1). Both Wonhyo and Deleuze’s systems reveal congruence with regard to the inter-penetrative accommodation of differences between reality and foundation, by raising the latter to the surface of the former, without positing Idea (Idée) as the final end in the vertical or sequential hierarchy. They both reveal a positive ontology of ‘becoming’ which depicts an answer to reality through a series of synthesis and differentiation, in an open space. Problems are posited as inter- penetrative multiplicities without implying any negation. By transcending the answer, the problem is presented as being no different from the solution, and as containing answers to all series of differences within itself. Likewise, one mind (一心) matches an Idea, while drawing its concrete determination (peras) as hwajaeng through differentiation and inter-penetration between True-suchness and the Phenomenal aspect of mind. The return of one mind shows the congruent synthesis of question and answer, based on the affirmation of catuṣkoṭi, while revealing Univocity (Univocité) as a true reality of all phenomena. The phrase, “it corresponds to all aspects since it is not one, and to one taste in all aspects because it is not different”, unravels the non-dual nature of the tenet, in the sense that the 4th koṭi equals the affirmation of the 3rd koṭi, when seen from different aspects. In turn, it reveals a process of recovering true nature through desexualization and univocity by breaking the representational bounds of catuṣkoṭi.

Statistics

  • 452 Viewed
  • 205 Downloaded

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Basic Search Advanced Search