the goryeo sokjanggyeong in medieval japanese buddhism

at the end of the 11th century, the korean scholar-monk uicheon (1055-1101) of the goryeo dynasty (918-1392) collected buddhist scriptures from song and liao china, goryeo korea, and japan and compiled the supplementary collection of the buddhist canon from the goryeo dynsaty (k., goryeo sokjanggyeong; j., kōrai zokuzōkyō). this paper explores the circumstances under which this collection was brought to japan and how it influenced japanese buddhism.

(1) classifications of the sokjanggyeong texts

the goryeo supplementary collection of the buddhist canon (hereafter, sokjanggyeong) was imported to japan in large quantities at the beginning of the 12th century, however, most of these scriptures have been lost, and today, six types of sokjanggyeong texts remain in japan. these texts can be further classified into three categories: pure land texts, huayan commentaries (all by the tang-dynasty monk, chengguan (738-839)), and esoteric scriptures (by liao-dynasty monks).

(2) the process in which the sokjanggyeong sutras were brought to japan

monks of nara temples (kōfuku-ji and tōdai-ji) and kyoto’s imperial monastery ninna-ji were largely responsible for bringing the sokjanggyeong to japan. the abbots of ninna-ji (priests from the japanese imperial family) were particularly instrumental in this importation.

(3) the receptivity of the sokjanggyeong in japan

shingon priests in japan used the sokjanggyeong to study chinese buddhism developed during the liao dynasty. as a result, esoteric buddhism developed doctrinally in japan. the kegon temples, centering on the priests of tōdai-ji, used the sokjanggyeong for doctrinal studies. the kamakura-period kegon priest myōe (1173-1232) also studied the buddhism of the liao dynasty through these texts and developed a new huayan (kegon) thought.

(4) the authority of the sokjanggyeong

the dafangguang fo huayan jing suishou yanyi chao by chengguan from an original set of the sokjanggyeong has been preserved at tōdai-ji. bibliographical research on this text shows that it was used as the foremost authoritative commentary on the huayan jing in eighty volumes at tōdai-ji during the kamakura period.