The Chinese word “bukong” 不空 appearing in the Āgama texts is a rendering of Pāli words such as aritta (not discarded), asuñña (not empty), amogha (not vain). Whereas the Madhyamika texts never affirm the term non‐empty as a counterpart of the concept emtpy, the Yogācāra texts overlay it with a slightly negative connotation as a false imagination. However, Tathāgatagarbha thought affirms that term positively, and Chinese strands of Buddhism further adopt it as an absolute affirmation by identifying emptiness with non‐emptiness, (...) thereby turning the concept of mutual dependence or counterpart into that of mutual identification. In the Huayan jing, the concepts such as aśūnya, aśūnyatā, amogha, amoghatā are equally rendered as “bukong”, and this term thus comes to have a wide range of meanings including non‐empty, without any errors, beneficial, not deluded, or fully endowed with wisdom and compassion, and so on, which are attributes of tathāgatagarbha. Therefore, we see that the Huayan jing has such diverse meaning in the word “bukong” in according to the context. In the case of the typical Chinese Buddhist text Dasheng qixin lun, “bukong” indicates the state in which the pure dharmas are fulfilled. It seems that this text regards the essence as empty while considering the function to be non‐empty. When we contemplate on the meanings of “bukong” appearing in the Huayan jing, we may say that this scripture played a role of bridging Indian Buddhism and Chinese Buddhism. In particular, the comparisons of the meanings of “bukong” in the scriptures and treatises will reveal the affirmative spirit of the Chinese Buddhists, which is implicit in Indian Mahāhyāna Buddhism. 『아함경』에서 ‘不空’이라 한역된 원어는 Pā. aritta(버려지지 않은), asuñña(비어 있지 않은), amogha(헛되지 않은) 등이다. 중관에서는 공의 상대(相待)인 불공을 절대 부정하는 반면, 유식에서는 허망 분별로 인한 부정적인 이미지가 살짝 보이다가 여래장 사상이 도입되면서 긍정적인 이미지로 전환하는데, 그것이 중국불교에서는 절대 긍정으로 바뀌어서 ‘空即不空’인 상의상즉(相依相卽)의 의미로 공과 분리가 불가능해진다. 『화엄경』에서는 ‘不空’이란 역어가 Skt. aśūnya, aśūnyatā, amogha, amoghatā로, 그 의미가 어리석지 않은 지혜와 자비가 충만한 여래장의 뜻으로 무한히 펼쳐져서 불공이란 꽃이 활짝 핀다. 이렇게 불공은 문맥에 따라 그 의미가 다르나, 중국불교의 전형적인 논인 『기신론』에서는 정법(淨法)이 만족스러우면 ‘불공’이라 하면서, 체(體)가 공이고 용(用)이 불공이라고 말하는 것으로 보인다. ‘不空’이라는 역어만을 놓고 대조해 본다면, 초기불교 경전인 『아함경』에서의 불공의 의미가 『화엄경』에서 되살아나는 듯하여 『화엄경』이 인도불교와 중국불교의 가교역할을 한다고 감히 추정할 수 있는데, 특히 경론에서 불공의 의미만 가지고 비교한다면, 『화엄경』에는 인도 대승불교 속에 자연스레 녹아 있는 긍정적인 중국 불자들의 마음이 엿보인다. (shrink)

Abstractabstract:This article explores the specific profiles of the understanding of ultimate reality in Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism to ask whether there are points of contact between the Christian-Muslim and the Christian-Buddhist conception of divine reality. Thereby, the soteriological interest of Christian trinitarian thinking and the differences to the apophatic thinking in Islam but also the personal understanding of divine reality and the transnumeric unity of God come into view. Moreover, there are Muslim positions that assign the instances of divine Word (...) and divine Spirit as eternal prestige and attributive to the essence of God, whereby a new basis for discussion could be gained. On the other hand, the differences between Buddhist thinking of emptiness and Christian apophatism boil down to the question of whether nirvāṇa as the unconditioned (asaṃskṛta) of transcendent reality (lokottara) as a notborn (ajātaṁ), a not-brought-to-being (abhūtaṁ), a not-conditioned (asaṇkhataṁ) may be understood as a reality that is not separate from, but distinct from saṃsāra. Then emptiness or "śūnyatā is non-śūnyatā (aśūnyatā); therefore, it is ultimate śūnyatā (atyanta-śūnyatā)" (Abe). In this way, Buddhist thinking of emptiness can come into conversation with Christian thinking of self-emptying (kenosis). Muslim and Buddhist thinking on the subject of transcendence invite Christians to accentuate the apophatic side of the divine, and to locate the Trinitarian differentiation both within the divine and in the history of salvation in a cataphatic movement. With these indications, the difference between the Christian, Islamic, and Buddhist galaxies of thinking ultimate reality is not abolished, but points of contact and possible mutual suggestions become visible, which allow a further and deepening conversation. (shrink)