서울미슐랭토토교

안녕하십니까.

토토사이트 철학과에서는 고마자와미슐랭토토의 후지이 준(藤井淳) 교수님을 모시고 「일체법으로서의 법계(dharmadhātu)—대승불교 사상의 일원론적 이해와 “일념상응혜"(一念相應慧) 개념—」이라는 주제로 초청 강연을 갖습니다. 
관심있는 분들의 많은 참여 바랍니다.


서울미슐랭토토교 철학과 불교철학 초청강연
SNU Department of Philosophy Invited Lecture in Buddhist Philosophy

일체법으로서의 법계(dharmadhātu)—대승불교 사상의 일원론적 이해와 “일념상응혜"(一念相應慧) 개념—
Dharmadhātu as “All Dharmas”: Monistic Understanding and Instantaneous Insight in Mahāyāna Buddhist Thought

후지이 준(藤井淳) 교수, 고마자와미슐랭토토
Professor Jun FUJII, Komazawa University

서울미슐랭토토교 6동 403호 철학사상연구소
Bldg. 6 Room 403, SNU Institute of Philosophy

2026년 11월 19일 수요일 오후 4:00-6:00
Wednesday November 19th 2025, 4:00PM-6:00PM

강연 초록:
This presentation reexamines the concept of dharmadhātu in Mahāyāna Buddhism by demonstrating its fundamental meaning as (1) “all dharmas” (sarvadharma) and (2) the essence or nature of all dharmas. Through analysis of Sanskrit, Chinese, and Tibetan sources spanning from second-century translations by Lokakṣema to Yogācāra treatises, the lecture challenges conventional interpretations of dharmadhātu as merely “realm of truth” or a spatial concept.

The presentation argues that dharmadhātu must be understood within a monistic doctrinal framework, characterized by terms such as “one taste” (4한국학 통일학지원), “non-duality” (4연구실 안전관리), and “single characteristic” (ekalakṣaṇa). Central to this framework is the concept of “instantaneous insight” (ekacittakṣaṇasamāyuktā prajñā)—the Buddha’s momentary awakening to all dharmas—which appears extensively in Mahāyāna sutras including the Prajñāpāramitās, Gaṇḍavyūha, and related texts, yet is notably rejected by the Sarvāstivādin school.

The lecture reveals a striking doctrinal proximity between Mahāyāna Buddhism and the Mahāsāṃghika tradition, particularly regarding instantaneous insight and the inherent purity of mind. By tracing the conceptual development from “purity of all dharmas” in early Mahāyāna sutras to “purity of dharmadhātu” in Yogācāra literature (Madhyāntavibhāga, Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, and related commentaries), the presentation illuminates how this monistic understanding provided a systematic critique of Abhidharma’s categorical classifications while shaping distinctively Mahāyāna approaches to soteriology and epistemology.