오위백법
(64) 신(身)
한편, 몸[身]이라고 하면 이러한 촉각적 인식기관으로서의 작용 뿐만 아니라 다른 중요한 작용인 운동 즉 몸의 움직임이라는 작용과 안근이근비근설근이 놓이는 장소로서의 작용이 있는데, 이 작용들은 부진근(扶塵根)으로서의 몸[身]에 속한다. 달리 말해, 불교 문헌에서 신근이라고 하면 촉각적 인식기관으로서의 몸[身], 즉, 승의근(勝義根)으로서의 몸을 뜻한다. 불교 문헌에서 그냥 '몸[身]'이라고 하면 승의근을 뜻하는지 부진근을 뜻하는지 둘 다를 통칭하는지 문맥에 따라 구별해야 한다. 또한 불교 용어로서 뿐만 아니라 중국의 유가 사상 등의 철학 전통에 따라 신(身)에는 다른 여러 뜻도 있으므로 그 문맥적 의미에 대해 유의할 필요가 있다. 예를 들어, 불교 용어 유신견(有身見)에서의 신(身)은 영원한 자아 즉 아트만을 뜻한다. 유가 사상에서 신(身)은 자신을 뜻하는데 몸으로서의 자신과 자아로서의 자신을 통칭한다. "身", DDB.《Digital Dictionary of Buddhism》. Edited by A. Charles Muller. 2022년 7월 21일에 확인: 身 Basic Meaning: body Senses: Especially designated in contrast to the mind. Person, life, container. Myself, I, me (Skt. kāya, kāyika, śarīra, gātra, deha, ātman). [Charles Muller; source(s): Nakamura] (1) The early Chinese sense of the character 'shen' 身 is deeply informed by Confucian influence, referring to a body and self that are one and the same. As Roger Ames explains, the physical body participates in Chinese Confucian ritual practice and thereby also in the community in general, thus becoming the social self, which can be refined and cultivated to achieve full humanity, physically, morally, aesthetically, intellectually and spiritually.1 But Buddhism, which uses this same classical Chinese language in East Asia, does not regard body (kāya, rūpa) and self (ātman) as synonymous, nor does it even recognize a self. Buddhist scholars tend not to pay special attention to questions regarding the body, because in the context of Buddhist doctrine, which lays stress on the questions regarding the existence of a distinct individual self. [G. Chin] (2) Western discussions of the concept of body usually refer to the human being, but in Buddhism the concept is far more complex. For example, to anthropologists, the body is a locus of culture, but in the Buddhist philosophical sense it is a means of knowing and identifying aspects and levels of consciousness or mind that inhabit and create the universe.2 The nomenclature of different bodies signifies the different aspects of being that characterizes the dwellers of the Mahāyāna Buddhist cosmos, such as animal, human, bodhisattva or Buddha. There are ten types in total, which are designated as the 'Ten Worlds of Mahāyāna Buddhism.' In certain contexts, the usage of the term body (esp. as the Sanskrit kāya) is a metaphor for a sense of self — analogous with the Western notion of ego. The sense of identity and difference created by naming these different body types is an upāya, an skillful means of teaching to the unenlightened. Defining as such the bodies of the Buddha or the arhat, or the human, can lead to strenuous religious disputation, as each school and sect views 'bodies' in innumerable different ways to suit its views of the world in which teaching is to be conveyed. What follows are brief general definitions of the bodies of the Buddha and bodhisattvas and of the human body. [G. Chin] (3) The word 身 or 身體 is used most often to refer to the human body in classical Chinese, but as mentioned above Buddhists make use of the word in quite a different manner than Confucians. Buddhists tend to reject the concrete physical body that is viewed as the source of desire and sexual feelings that engender passion and the continuation of life through procreation. All sentient beings possess the physical aspect of the body, which is subject to birth, decay, and death. While there is no eternal 'self' or soul, Buddhists believe that the sentient being is formed of the five aggregates, or skandhas, having a physical body (Skt. rūpa) and consciousness (nāma), which together are referred to as nāma-rūpa.3 At the simplest level, nāma is considered to be the appearance of rūpa; nāma is feelings, perceptions, intentions, etc. that identify rūpa, hence 'name' and 'consciousness.' 4 All sentient beings, including buddhas, are made of name and consciousness, referred to in Chinese as 名色. As a single word, this term loosely refers to the unity of body and mind; Buddhists do not regard the mind and body as separate dual functioning parts, but rather the body contains the mind, which is regarded as one of the senses of sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell and consciousness. In cases where Buddhism construed by Western academics as a type of psychology, mind is mistakenly considered to rule the body, but if one understands the body as a thing that is lived in the phenomenological sense of Western philosophers, such as Edmund Husserl, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and others, then one will see it as a medium of sensation that experiences the world.5 [G. Chin] (4) To state that one possesses a body or an eternal self is referred to as 身見 /我見, or 'seeing the body,' which is considered to be non-Buddhist. Sometimes the Japanese monks Dōgen (道元 1200–1253) and Shinran (親鸞 1173–1263) are considered to have believed in the existence of a 'spirit,' or tamashii 靈, but most scholars of Buddhism would dispute this. Belief in an eternal self is one of the five (mistaken) views 五見. [G. Chin] (5) Although the Buddha is not thought of as being a rūpa body, during his lifetime, he suffered the vicissitudes of birth and death. Having achieved enlightenment, he shed his physical aspect and assumed a Tathāgata body that was no longer subject to the forces of karma; he was eternal, though lacking in substance, and a supernal entity that offers itself to the world through two of his three bodies (trikāya 三身), according to Mahāyāna schools of thought. Using these two bodies, he can remain in nirvāṇa, while he sends forth his nirmāṇa-kāya 化身, a transient physical body to help others, and allows others to see his body in visions and dreams that generates pleasure and ease, referred to as the saṃbhoga-kāya 應身, but most of all the eternal body, or dharma-kāya 法身, is without fear or impairment that is supreme and remains aloof. For further discussion of the three bodies, see 三身. [G. Chin] (6) The eternal bodies of the Buddha are born of pure mind or consciousness, thus mind-made-bodies 意生身 (manomaya-kāya) not composed from the five skandhas 五蘊.6 In the Mahāyāna tradition, bodhisattvas also possess salvific supernormal qualities to help sentient beings. Though they have the ability to achieve nirvāṇa, they have chosen to remain in the defiled world. The bodies by which they use to conjure miracles and rescue humans and other creatures are also created of pure consciousness at certain levels of consciousness; this is a body that is created at will. [G. Chin] (7) The sentient being who perceives, also possesses the gross body that is subject to birth, illness, old age and death, and follows the laws of karma. Many modern scholars of Buddhist literature and art view the human body as 'flesh' that is subject to the vicissitudes of social attitudes and consequent gender politics, often under the influence of postmodernism in the thought of Michel Foucault and others.7 According to Buddhists, the body is an impermanent thing, therefore caution should be taken not to become attached to it, as well it is the source of desire of all types, especially sexual desire, and should be denied, although enough care should be taken so that the believer is able to practice the tenets of Buddhism and meditate. The Vimalakīrti-sūtra 維摩經 is an interesting Mahāyāna Buddhist entry into the topic of the body, as it is the skillful means 方便 by which the layman, Vimalakīrti expounds the Dharma to the defiled world. He feigns illness, proof of corporeal vulnerability, to gain an audience in order to teach. The body is considered to be innately sick in the Buddhist mind, according to the layman. The body, whether female or male, is considered to be the root of desire, which causes suffering. Ending suffering is the ultimate goal of Buddhist practice therefore a thing that engenders continuous suffering is to be despised. This is clearly discussed in the Vimalakīrti-sūtra during the debate between the layman and the bodhisattva, Mañjuśrī. Mañjuśrī asks, "What is root of good and not good?" Vimalakīrti answers, "The body is the root." To which the bodhisattva again asks, "What is the root of the body?" To which, the layman says: "Desire and greed are the root." 8 In this simple parley the central Buddhist teaching about the corporeal reality of sentient beings is set forth. Then he says: "this body is impermanent, without durability...it suffers." 9 If the human form is a terrible thing, then he urges his audience to seek "the Buddha body:..Because the Buddha body is the Dharma body." 10 The corporeal body and the Dharma body are diametrical opposites. This sets the stage for the unfolding of the sermon. For the early Indian background to these thoughts found in the Vimalakīrti, see Liz Wilson, Chapter 2, pp.41-76. All bodies are considered to be the source of defilement, especially that of the female, which has been much discussed in text and image, see 九想圖, Wilson, Kanda. The goal of Buddhism is extinction of the mortal body, so the female body that procreates new life is viewed as antithetical to its goals. In other ways, the female body also distracts monks away from their practice, inducing sexual desire. These are among the reasons for the Buddhist dislike of women and consequent discrimination between the sexes. Buddhist discrimination against women is also a cultural accumulation that varies in the different societies that it has entered. [G. Chin] (8)The Sanskrit word śarīra 舍利 refers to the body, meaning the relics of the Buddha and other holy persons.11 There are three types of relics, of which bodily relics are primary to the sense of remains of the body. As mentioned above, the Buddha had overcome the physical body in order to achieve mahāparinirvāṇa, hence death had been conquered, yet at the same time, his relics were a sign of his former presence and they remain the expression of his bodily presence on earth now. The bodily relics and the other accoutrements of the Buddha were enshrined at stūpas and worshiped, enabling those who made offerings to them to acquire merit. Relics were carried across Asia and prized as they conferred earthly and spiritual power upon the owners, thus the reason for royal patronage in various Buddhist countries, whose rulers claimed to be the protectors of the Buddha's body. [G. Chin] In the Daoxing jing 道行經, shen 身 is used as a translation of skandha in the literal sense of a 'heap' of things. 「...於有 餘功德自致無餘. 諸有般泥洹佛. 於其中所作功德. 至有淨戒身三昧身智慧身已脫 身脫慧所現身. 」 "All those other merits, the merits of self-achieved without-remainder parinirvāṇa of a buddha, from within which are produced merits including the heaps of pure śīla, heaps of samādhi, heaps of wisdom, heaps of liberation, and the heap manifested by liberated wisdom." T 224.8.438a23. [Will Giddings; source(s): Nakamura] When it translates the Sanskrit kāya, 身 can have the meaning of 'group, collection, kind of' as in the case of the compound pañca-vijñāna-kāyāḥ = 五識身, which Lambert Schmithausen renders as "five kinds of [sense-]perception." See Schmithausen, p. 650 and Edgerton, p.177. [A. Todeschini] Transliterated as 提訶. [Charles Muller] (Skt. ātma-bhāva; aṅga, aṅga-pratyaṅga, adhiṣṭhāna, ātmaka, āśraya, indriya, upādāna, kaḍebara, kaḍevara, *kalevara, kāyêndriya, janman, tad-deha, tanu, *tanū, dehin, dhātu, dhātu-vigraha, nikāya, piṇḍa, pratikṛti, bhāva, *mūrti, vapus, vigraha, viṣpanda, veśa, veṣa, śarīratā, śarīrika, saṃkalā, saṃtati, saṃtāna, samuccaya, samucchraya, samūha*, sāṃtānika, skandha, sparśana, svabhāva-vigraha, sva-śarīra) [Charles Muller; source(s): Hirakawa] References: Edgerton, Franklin. 1977. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary: Volume II Dictionary. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Heendeniya, Kingsley. 2004. “On Understanding Namarupa.” In Sri Lanka Daily News. http://www.dailynews.lk; Accessed June 15, 2006 Kanda, Fusae. 2005. “Behind the Sensationalism: Images of a Decaying Corpse in Japanese Buddhist Art.” Art Bulletin 87, no. 1 Kasulis, Thomas, Roger Ames and Wimal Dissanayake. 1993. Self as Body in Asian Theory and Practice. Albany: State University of New York. Makransky, John. 2004. “Buddhahood and Buddha Bodies.” In Buswell, Robert E., Jr., ed. Encyclopedia of Buddhism. New York: MacMillan. 76–79. Schmithausen, Lambert. 1987. Ālayavijñāna: On the Origin and the Early Development of a Central Concept of Yogâcāra Philosophy. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies. Watson, Burton, trans. 1997. The Vimalakīrti-sūtra. New York: Columbia University Press. Wilson, Liz. 2004. “Perspectives on the Body.” In Robert Buswell,, ed. Encyclopedia of Buddhism. New York: MacMillan. 63–66. [G. Chin]