Abstract

During the seventh to eighth centuries, China was the site of confluence and lively debate between two major streams within Yogacara studies which solidified into two main sects---the Tz'u-en and the Hsi-ming, which were led by two scholars, K'uei-chi and Won-cheuk, respectively. K'uei-chi, who was Hsuan-tsang's successor, enjoyed the reputation of being one of the most authoritative Yogacara, scholars in Chinese Buddhist history, and was acknowledged as the founder of the Chinese Yogacara School or the Fa-hsiang School. On the other hand, Won-cheuk was marginal as a Korean monk, and suffered the reputation of being the doctrinal divergent of the mainstream Fa-hsiang School. The debate between K'uei-chi and Won-cheuk forms one of the central focus of this thesis. Involved in this debate is not only personal reputation but distinct doctrinal differences as well. ;An examination of Won-cheuk's biography and his works presents an alternative than that found in previous scholarship. The evidence reveals an erudite scholar who was Hsuan-tsang's peer, and who likely received from Hsuan-tsang the original Sanskrit commentaries on Vasubandhu's Trim&dotbelow;sika-vijniapti-karika . Won-cheuk's own systematic, analytical and carefully cited works were based upon his knowledge of these Sanskrit texts, resulting in a unique doctrinal perspective which contrasted with Chinese scholars whose terminology and conceptions were heavily influenced by Confucianism. For example, Won-cheuk's perspective of the Buddha's turning of the Dharma-wheel was not to be viewed in terms of a hierarchical or temporal classification, but rather, the first two turnings should be viewed as "skill-in-means." Won-cheuk defined a "middle path" of scholarship, navigating between the old and the new Yogacara studies. Through this selective process, Won-cheuk could evaluate old and new Yogacara canons, some of which he conserved, some of which he discarded. He analyzed doctrinal differences, yet the overall effect was a welding of what appeared to be incompatible perspectives. In this way, he created his harmonious and syncretic Buddhist thought