• (The) Research of the performance art and culture
• /
• no.37
• /
• pp.391-435
• /
• 2018

This is the first study in Musicology that discusses the features of Kangwon Sangkangrye(the pre-lecture ritual in Buddhism). In this thesis, I reviewed and compared the similarity and uniqueness between Kangwon Sangkangrye in "Seokmunuibom" and the one being performed these days. The musical relation between the performance shown in the historical record and the one in contemporary ritual was illustrated here based on the findings derived from the anlaysis on its bell(小鐘) performance. The analysis made upon musical sources recorded on-site shows the characteristics of contemporary Kangwon Sangkangrye. Following is a brief summary of this study. The review and comparison between Kangwon Sangkangrae in "Seokmunuibom" and the one being performed these days showed that the second type, which was significantly different from the first type, was closer to that of the historical record. The performers at Unmunsa Temple and Chungamsa Temple seemed to be following the tradition bell(小鐘) performance style which was found in the text of the historical record. Through the analysis on Kangwon Sangkangrae, I found that it has musical characteristics as follows. The vocal range of type 1 and type 2 was mostly performed within Minor 7th and didn't exceed the perfect 8th. The melodic structure of type 1 starts with do'-la of naedeureum and ended with the melody which downscaled from do' and finalized from mi to la. Usually the mode was in menari-tori but at some lecture halls a few cases found to be upscaled from sol to la which differentiates it from the typical menari-tori of folk songs. Like the typical way of traditional rites, the singing was divided into two parts: the leading call and the following choral response. Most were sung to be one syllable on one or two tones or one syllable lasting for several tones and the musical forms were varied by musical pieces. Meantime, Sangkangrae at Haeinsa Temple was differed from that of the other temples in terms of ritual procedure and vocal style. It added Korean version of and the lead vocal skipped the first phrase of the Sasul. The melodic structure of Type 2 started with do'-la of naedeureum and was finalized as the same way of Type 1. The mode of was not the same as typical menari-tori but the Jeongrye(prostration) and Balweon(a great vow) were identical to the menari-tori of folk songs. The singing was done in two forms, solo and unison, and the lyric-attachment of Gesong was one syllable for one or two tones and that of Jeongrye and Balweon were one syllable for one or two tones + one syllable for several tones. The musical form of Jeongrye is A-B-C and A-C. Balweon didn't display a certain periodicity but still maintained sense of unity and formality through repetition of the finalizing melody.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.225-256
• /
• 2010

The two school $M{\bar{a}}dhyamika$ and $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ act as a representative of $Mah{\bar{a}}y{\bar{a}}na$ Buddhism in India. But the two school disputed with each other insisting ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nyat{\bar{a}}-v{\bar{a}}da$ and $vij{\tilde{n}}aptim{\bar{a}}trav{\bar{a}}da$ separately. To introduce the disputation shortly is as follow. $N{\bar{a}}g{\bar{a}}rjuna$ explained the world and truth by two truth theories(二諦說) which carry out truth of a word and the dimension(spiritual enlightenment) which is absolute(ultimate) to it being lokasaṁvṛtisatya(世俗諦) about the truth which can be expressed verbally, and which is phenomenon-like (everyday) at paramaarthasatya(勝義諦). By the way, lokasaṁvṛtisatya and paramaarthasatya are actually distinction of the recognition which is not an ontological distinction. That is, lokasaṁvṛti(世俗) is paramaartha(勝義) as it is the time of seeing by the eyes of those who have realized. The two truth theories of $N{\bar{a}}g{\bar{a}}rjuna$ was developed logical more precisely by his successors. With an everyday language, the position of Candrakīrti(月稱) that it cannot be expressed as the position of $Bh{\bar{a}}vaviveka$(淸辨) that paramaarthasatya can be expressed logically is opposed to each other, and dissociates by $Sv{\bar{a}}tantrika$(自立論證派) and $P{\bar{a}}rsagika$(歸謬論證派). Confrontation of $Sv{\bar{a}}tantrika$ and $P{\bar{a}}rsagika$ is the dispute about the ability of s which is the highest truth to be proved logically. The $P{\bar{a}}rsaga$ of Candrakirti thinks that people exist truly, and is because it claims not existing in the world where a favorite thing is actually actual. However, $Bh{\bar{a}}vaviveka$ proved Sunyata(空性)을 positively based on the reliance to language and logic. Also the mokṣa of $M{\bar{a}}dhyamika$ is not recovery of original condition of $vij{\tilde{n}}apti$ which is pure in itself as $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ saying, as well as obtaining a thing which is dravya-sat as $Sarv{\bar{a}}stiv{\bar{a}}din$ saying. The mokṣa of $M{\bar{a}}dhyamika$ means a condition of liberated from karma and pains through extinction of $prapa{\tilde{n}}ca$ and discrimination by realizing the real aspect of all dharma which is said by pratītyasamutpāda, $praj{\tilde{n}}apti$, niḥsvabhāva, ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nya$, $madhyam{\bar{a}}pratipad$.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.117
• /
• pp.35-55
• /
• 2011

This article purports to clarify the doctrinal characteristics of the $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ school's hermeneutic interpretations of the "theory of the three turns of the Dharma Cakra" in the Saṃdbinirmocana-sūtra through early Indian $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ treatises such as the $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}rabb{\bar{u}}mi-vy{\bar{a}}kby{\bar{a}}$ and the. $Vy{\bar{a}}khy{\bar{a}}yukti$. It will probe how these interpretations apply co the theory of two truths or that of three natures($trisvabh{\bar{a}}va$) among the main doctrines of the $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ school. Especially, the peculiar characteristic of the "theory of the three turns of the Dharma Cakra" is such chat the thought of ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nyat{\bar{a}}$ in the lineage of $Praj{\bar{n}}{\bar{a}}p{\bar{a}}ramita-s{\bar{u}}tras$ is regarded as incomplete, as the early school of Madhyamaka represented by $N{\bar{a}}g{\bar{a}}rjuna$ is conceived of as belonging to the second period of turn. Speaking of the further details of the "theory of the three turns of the Dharma Cakra", the $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ school subdivides the realm of saṃvṛti satya in $N{\bar{a}}g{\bar{a}}rjuna^{\prime}s$ theory of two truths; that is, it divides the saṃvṛti into merely linguistic existence and actual existence, and the thus-created structure of the theory of three natures on the basis of ocher-dependent nature(paratantra-$svabh{\bar{a}}va$) makes it possible to establish the doctrinal system of the thought of ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nyat{\bar{a}}$ that is not subject to "nihilism or ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nyat{\bar{a}}$ attached to evil." In effect, the above hermeneutic interpretation of the "theory of the three turns of the Dharma Cakra" is inherited into the structure of the $abh{\bar{u}}taparikalpa$ in the $Madhy{\bar{a}}nta-vibh{\bar{a}}ga$ so that, as seen in the commentary of Sthiramati, it is ascertained to apply to later doctrines through its secure establishment. To summarize its characteristics succinctly, firstly the $abh{\bar{u}}taparikalpa$ newly established as a saṃvṛti-satya is set up as the other-dependent nature, which is seen to have been set up particularly in order to sublate both the $Sarv{\bar{a}}stiv{\bar{a}}da^{\prime}s$ realist "view of being" and the Madhyamaka's "view of ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nyat{\bar{a}}$" that impairs the ocher-dependent nature as a samvṛti-satya. In other words, according to the five kinds of views suggested in Sthiramati's commentary, the three natures are seen to be presented as the fundamental truth in order to unify all the doctrinal systems available ever since the beginning of Buddhism. Then, the theory of three natures is established principally on the basis of the $abh{\bar{u}}taparikalpa$, while the two truths of the $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ school are clearly ascertained to have been embedded in the structure of the $abh{\bar{u}}taparikalpa$. In fact, this might be understood to reflect the unique ontological view of reality or truth in the $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ School.