지눌 전집 (Collected Works of Chinul — Founder of Korean Seon)

cretism the attempted reconciliation or union of different principles, practices, or schools of thought and the adaptation of these insights to Sŏn practice inspired the entire future development of Korean Buddhism. It was Chinul who established the philosophical basis and practical foundations for a revitalized Korean tradition that still prevails today in the modern Chogye Order. In the process, he became one of the most revered of Korean teachers and indisputably the most important thinker of the medieval tradition. Indeed, Chinul’s thought is the key to a comprehensive understanding of the mature Korean church.

Chinul’s attempts to validate a syncretic approach to Buddhist thought not only give us insights into the subsequent course of Korean Buddhism; they provide as well an overview of the philosophical debates current in the East Asian tradition of his era. Since these debates were carried on via the philosophical writings of the period, we find in Chinul’s works extensive quotations, trenchant synopses, and cogent critiques of the seminal thinkers of the greater East Asian tradition—including the Zen dialecticians Kuei-feng Tsung-mi, Ta-hui Tsung-kao, and Yung-ming Yen-shou, as well as the Hua-yen figures Li T’ung-hsüan, Ch’eng-kuan, and Ŭisang. Hence Chinul’s writings cover the entire expanse of the Chinese and Korean traditions and are recognized as some of the finest examples of medieval scholastic composition. To the possible surprise of Western students who might only have been exposed to the iconoclastic aspect of Zen commonly presented in Western writings, the mature tradition discussed by Chinul reveals the profound intellectual side of Zen, where precise investigation of epistemological, etiological, and hermeneutical questions was welcomed, not denounced. Indeed, the fact that Chinul intended his works to serve as handbooks shows the mastery of Buddhist and Zen philosophy he expected of his students.

Chinul’s intellectual acumen and command of the literature challenge the resources of a translator continually. Chinul assumes familiarity with the doctrines and terminology of the major schools of Chinese Buddhism—each of which is a field of study in its own right—and his writings are peppered with quotations from the works of teachers in the Ch’an, Hua-yen, and T’ien-t’ai schools. Given the highly technical nature of much of the material, I have had to tread a fine line between being overly literal—which would make the discussion all but unintelligible to anyone who does not read classical Chinese—and overly interpretative—which would distort the texts by construing them from a Western philosophical standpoint. The reader, I hope, will be a lenient judge of my efforts.

Korean scholarship on Chinul remains primarily interpretative. Since this is the first attempt at a critical vernacular translation of his works in any language, I have been on my own in regard to tracking down the literary allusions, sūtra a canonical scripture of Buddhism references, and quotations from Zen and doctrinal masters