백일 법문에 나타난 퇴옹 성철의 중도(中道) 해석 연구 = A Study on Toe-ong Seong-cheol’s Interpretation of the Middle Path In Baegil Beomun

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This article examines Toe-ong Seong-cheol’s interpretation of the Middle Path as presented in his Baegil Beomun (Sermon of One Hundred Days), with particular attention to how he systematically understands and articulates Buddhist teachings as a whole from this perspective. The Baegil Beomun encompasses a wide range of traditions—from Early Buddhism to Cheontae (Tiantai), Hwaeom (Huayan), and Seon (Chan, Zen)—while consistently organizing them around the category of the Middle Path. Taking this characteristic as its point of departure, the present study analyzes how Seong-cheol presents the Middle Path not as a doctrine confined to a particular school, but as a fundamental cognitive structure that informs the entirety of the Buddhist tradition.
In the section on Early Buddhism, this paper examines Seong-cheol’s interpretation of the Middle Path taught in the First Turning of the Wheel of Dharma. He understands it as a teaching that departs from the two extremes of sensual indulgence and ascetic self-mortification, while further presenting dependent origination as a central expression of the Middle Path. For Seong-cheol, the Middle Path consists in a mode of cognition that relinquishes attachment to both existence and non-existence, made possible through the establishment of Right View. In this sense, the Middle Path is understood not as an understanding confined to methods of practice or practical disciplines, but as a fundamental perspective for perceiving reality as it truly is.
The sections on Cheontae and Hwaeom examine Seong-cheol’s interpretation of Cheontae's doctrine of the perfect interfusion of the Three Truths(emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle) and Hwaeom’s teaching of the realm of mutual non-obstruction as doctrinal articulations of the Middle Path principle. Although differing in expression and systematic formulation, these traditions are understood to share a common orientation grounded in insight into dependent origination. Seong-cheol explicitly rejects interpretations of the Middle Path as compromise or moderation, instead describing it as a form of wisdom that simultaneously negates and encompasses both extremes.
The discussion of Seon examines how Seong-cheol understands it not as a practice tradition separate from doctrinal Buddhism, but as a lineage that seeks to realize the mind-seal of the Middle Path taught by the Buddha. Through his interpretations of the Platform Sūtra, Mazu’s teaching of “ordinary mind” (pingchang xin), and the discourse records of the patriarchal Seon tradition, he emphasizes that the core of Seon lies in the establishment of Right View grounded in the Middle Path transcending dualistic distinctions such as existence and non-existence or the mundane and the sacred.
In conclusion, this study demonstrates that in Seong-cheol’s Baegil Beomun, the Middle Path is consistently articulated from Early Buddhism through Cheontae, Hwaeom, and Seon, thereby presenting it as a universal principle that informs both Buddhist doctrine and practice. In doing so, the article contributes to a renewed understanding of the theoretical significance of Seong-cheol’s Baegil Beomun within the broader context of modern Korean Buddhist thought.