Journal of Korean Religions

Two Interpretations of Fifteenth-century Vernacular Translations of Buddhist Texts

It was only several years after the invention of the vernacular script han'gŭl in 1443, during the reign of King Sejong, that about 40 books were published in this new writing system. Other than these books, most of the remaining han'gŭl books were translations of Sinitic (literary Chinese) Buddhist texts. However, only 26 are now extant, and of these, 18 are translations of Buddhist scriptures or scriptural commentaries.¹

Owing to the high proportion of Buddhist texts among the fifteenth-century vernacular translations, these texts have attracted the attention of scholars from a variety of fields, including linguistics, bibliographic studies, Buddhism, and history. In particular, they are invaluable primary sources on Korean linguistics because they provide a variety of examples of the vocabulary, phonemes, and grammar of middle Korean (Kim Yŏngbae 2000, 429). For example, the 24-volume Episodes from the Life of the Buddha (Sŏkpo sangjŏl 釋譜詳節, 1447; hereafter Life of the Buddha) and the 25-volume Episodes from the Life of the Buddha Like the Reflections of the Moon (Wŏrin sŏkpo 月印釋譜, 1459; hereafter Reflections of the Moon) are written records of the spoken colloquial language of the time. Other vernacular translations of Buddhist texts published by the Directorate of Sūtra Publication (Kan'gyŏng togam 刊經都監) were written using formal styles. Therefore, these translations offer essential data from both informal and formal middle Korean (An 2009, 63).

Apart from the field of Korean linguistics, most of the previous studies of fifteenth-century vernacular translations of Buddhist texts have focused on the purpose and significances of these translations published by the Directorate of Sūtra Publication. Many of the prefaces and postscripts in these books clearly reveal their ideas on the two major purposes of these publications: 1) to commemorate the deceased king, queen, and crown prince, and 2) to encourage the people to use the new vernacular script. However, in taking the surrounding circumstances into consideration, scholars have long assumed that there must have been purposes other than these that were overtly claimed, purposes related to political and cultural intentions. Some scholars claim that vernacular [End Page 76] translations of Buddhist texts were aimed at enhancing the authority of King Sejo (r. 1455–1468) (Chin 2007; Kim Jongmyung 2010; Kwŏn 1993; Pak 1996), while others assert that they were done in order to revitalize and popularize Buddhism (Yi Pongch'un 1980; 2001). For example, Pak Chŏngsuk (1996, 65) argues that Sejo intended to secure the power of his kingship by endeavoring to continue and promote King Sejong's legacy, namely, the invention and dissemination of the han'gŭl script. Similarly, Kim Jongmyung (2010, 144) argues that Sejo attempted to emphasize his legitimacy by propagating the concept of Buddhist karma and that this political intention was the underlying aim of Sejo's translation project.²

However, despite either the interpretations of religious faith for such dissemination of the vernacular script or the overt political intentions as in the above, these rulers deserve nuanced interpretations. This is called for when upon close examination of the genres of Buddhist texts, an interesting aspect is revealed—most of the original Buddhist texts that were translated into han'gŭl were Sinitic commentaries on the Mahāyāna Buddhist scriptures. Notable examples are the vernacular translations of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra (Ch. Lengyan jing, K. Nŭngŏmgyŏng 楞嚴經) and the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment (Ch. Yuanjue jing, K. Wŏn'gakkyŏng 圓覺經), published in 1462 and 1465, respectively, by the Directorate. The Śūraṅgama Sūtra translation was of the Essential Understanding of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra (Ch. Lengyan jing yaojie,K. Nŭngŏmgyŏng yohae 楞嚴經要解), a commentary on the Śūraṅgama Sūtra by the Song dynasty monk, Jiehuan 戒環 (d.u.). The Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment translation was of the Great Exegesis on the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment (Ch. Dajuejing dashuchao 圓覺經大疏鈔) by the Chinese monk Zongmi 宗密 (780–841).

Whether it was part of a policy aimed at the masses or to emphasize that the policy of disseminating the vernacular system was being continued, it is doubtful whether it was necessary to go to the extent of translating the commentaries of the scriptures. Moreover, whether the vernacular translations of the Buddhist text by the Directorate of Sūtra Publication was aimed at popularization of Buddhism or the restoration of Buddhist tradition of doctrinal thought is questionable when considered in light of the societal context at the time of "elevating Confucianism and suppressing Buddhism" (sungyu ŏkpul 崇儒抑佛). [End Page 77] Furthermore, such elements beg the question of what Sejo actually intended through his translation project of Buddhist texts.

Therefore, by focusing on the vernacular translations of the Buddhist text by the Directorate of Sūtra Publication, this paper will examine the reasons and the significances of the fifteenth-century translations of the Sinitic Buddhist texts from a different perspective than the previous pro- or anti-Buddhist perspective. This is done by examining the historical accounts written in the Sejo sillok (Annals of King Sejo) regarding Sejo's overall Buddhist policy and the comprehensive characteristics of the Directorate of Sūtra Publication. Furthermore, the contents and discernible features of vernacular translations of Buddhist texts are examined. Before starting the examination, it should be noted that the analysis presented in this paper is based on an assumption that the Buddhist policy of King Sejo (r. 1455–1468) was not a significant departure from that of his father, King Sejong (r. 1418–1450).

King Sejo's Buddhist Policy and the Establishment of the Directorate of Sūtra Publication

Many scholars maintain that King Sejo had a positive attitude, and in effect policy, toward Buddhism based on the reasoning that his policies were an attempt to preserve and revitalize Buddhist beliefs and practices. To a certain extent this reasoning seems true—there were various state-sponsored Buddhist events that were staged and various projects established in support of Buddhism during his reign. State records indicate that the government financially supported Buddhist temples, sponsored and hosted Buddhist ceremonies, advocated for the rights of the monastics, and established the Directorate of Sūtra Publication, which resulted in the publication of numerous Buddhist texts (Han 1993, 198–257; Kwŏn 1993, 199–216).

However, I argue that it is debatable whether these events were actually aimed at preserving and promoting Buddhism. This is because the interpretations presented thus far have all been limited to an either pro- or anti-Buddhist discourse, and ignored other possible interpretations. On the one hand, it is indeed apparent that King Sejo unveiled policies favorable to Buddhism. For [End Page 78] example, he prohibited Confucian officials and scholars from visiting Buddhist temples which resulted in protecting the monks and temples from unnecessary conflict and even maltreatment. He also exempted monks from paying miscellaneous taxes and land taxes as well as tribute goods.³ Furthermore, he reconstructed the royal Buddhist nunnery, Chŏngŏpwŏn 淨業院, that had been demolished in 1448 and constructed other temples such as the Chŏnginsa Temple and the Wŏngaksa Temple.⁴

On the other hand, it was also during Sejo's rule that strict regulations on the monastics and temples were applied by the state. It was Sejo's court that placed a severe prohibition on women visiting Buddhist temples and strictly monitored monks for any violation of laws or regulations on lewd misconduct. In addition, married monks were forcibly laicized (Sejo sillok 12 [1458/4/19]; Sejo sillok 28 [1462/6/10]). However, in some sense, it is arguable that the anti-Buddhist policy enacted by the previous kings T'aejong (r. 1400–1418) and Sejong continued to be enforced during Sejo's reign. Thus, we have to re-interpret Sejo's Buddhist policy in a more nuanced light—including his advocacy of monastic rights and Buddhist texts translation projects—which have been interpreted by many scholars as clear and indisputable indications of King Sejo's support for Buddhism.

Some of the most notable evidence cited by scholars of Sejo's favorable policies towards Buddhism are monastic certification (toch'ŏp 度牒) and the monastic identification system (sŭnginho 僧人号) that were enacted to ensure legislative monastic rights and to provide a system that protected government-recognized institutions of Buddhism. These institutions are covered in detail in the Sejo sillok as follows:

First, if a government-owned slave desires to be a monk, he should inform the Buddhist sect of his intentions. Then, the Buddhist order will conduct an examination by making him recite the Diamond Sūtra, Heart Sūtra, and Saldalt'a 薩怛陁⁵ from memory and verify his attitude and behavior to make sure they are befitting a Buddhist monk. The order will then report the successful candidates to the Ministry of Rites, which will in-turn report it to His Majesty. After collecting a fee in lieu of military service [from the candidate], the Ministry of Rites will give him a monastic certificate. [End Page 79]

A government-owned female slave who wants to be a nun should follow the same procedure, except that she does not need to pay a fee because a nun does not receive a certificate. Second, if candidates cannot memorize even one Buddhist scripture in the examination, they are not permitted to become Buddhist clergy.

(Sejo sillok 23 [1461/3/9])

This excerpt above concerns an episode that occurred in March 1461, when the Ministry of Punishments informed the king of the revised Monastic Certification Law. The revised certification law was supplementary to the triennial monk examination of the meditational school and doctrinal school that had been drafted by the Ministry of the Rites in July 1460. Later, the regulations governing the examination and certification of Buddhist clergy were included and enshrined in the Kyŏngguk taejŏn 經國大典 (National Code, 1474).⁶ The Monastic Certification Law, revised during Sejo's reign, permitted government-owned and privately-owned slaves to be ordained as monks.

According to another account in the Sejo sillok, the fee for military exemption for those who wanted to become monks decreased to twenty rolls of hemp cloth in 1461. This amount was quite low compared to the fees charged before 1461; in comparison, the yangban (aristocratic class) had to pay the local government 100 rolls of hemp cloth, commoners, 150 rolls, and slaves, 200 rolls (T'aejo sillok 2 [1392/9/24]). Taking these two events, that is, the revision of the monk certification system and the reduction in the certification fee into consideration, it can be surmised that official Buddhist policy during King Sejo's reign was revised favorably for the members of the Buddhist community.

However, when noting the above state actions that appear to be favorable towards Buddhism, it also needs to be pointed out that according to the afore-mentioned Monastic Certification Law, the qualifications for monks were upgraded. Here we can notice a nuanced action of the state in that it also made it more difficult to become a monastic. For instance, if a monk candidate failed to memorize the Diamond Sūtra, Heart Sūtra, and Saldalt'a mantra, and if he failed to conduct himself properly, he was not able to be ordained as a monk even if he were able to pay the certification fee. In other words, the government, while reducing the fees for a monk candidate to a level that was significantly lower than for even those of the gentry class, at the same time strengthened the qualification requirements by adding memorizations of sūtra [End Page 80] recitations and a high code of conduct. It also needs mentioning that later, during King Yejong's reign (r. 1468–1469), the monk certification system was tightened even further; the fee payable in lieu of military service was increased from 20 rolls of hemp cloth to 50 rolls, and the recitation of another sūtra, the Lotus, was added to the sūtras that a monk had to memorize (Yejong sillok 8 [1469/10/27]). We can notice the increasing qualification standards in becoming a monastic.

These heightened standards may initially appear to be anti-Buddhist moves for the purpose of inhibiting people from becoming monastics and thus to reduce the size of the Buddhist community. However, another interpretation is that they were an effort to increase state control over the monastics and the increase in the qualification standards as an effort to heighten standards for monastics, in turn an effort to purify the Buddhist community.⁷

Such increase in the qualifications extended to the Monastic Identification Law that was established after discussions over three meetings between Sejo and the Ministry of Rites and other relevant ministries in August and October of 1461 and January of 1463. The main purpose of this law was in effect to strengthen government supervision of Buddhist clergy. According to the Monastic Identification Law, each temple was required to submit a roster of resident monks of their temple to the local government office, and monks were required to visit the local office bringing with them their monastic certificates. After checking their certificates against the rosters, the local office would issue identification badges to the monks. This law also specified the form and written content of the badge, procedures governing the loss and reissuance of the badge, and the period of validity (Sejo sillok 30 [1463/1/12]). Special attention should be paid to an additional condition—according to legislation, the recitation of Buddhist sūtras from memory and decent conduct were again required to obtain a badge. The law stated,

Those who demonstrate a decent attitude and proper conduct as Buddhist clergy will be given the identification badge, even though they do not hold a monastic certificate. Also, those who express a reckless attitude, and conduct themselves inappropriately as a Buddhist clergy and fail to memorize the specified Buddhist scriptures, will not qualify for the monastic certificate or the identification badge.

(Sejo sillok 25 [1461/8/12]) [End Page 81]

Because the laws increased qualifications for the monastic, it can be concluded that the two laws—the Monastic Certification Law and the Monastic Identification Law—were not just intended to protect Buddhist monks and preserve the practice of Buddhism. It needs to be noted that, although the government guaranteed legitimate status for the monastics in society by making them state-licensed monks, and thus state-recognized, the monastics and their temples were, by the same token, unwittingly under the strict supervision and control of the state. In other words the actions of the state that can be interpreted as supportive of Buddhism may in fact be not for the sole purpose of supporting Buddhism, but also as a method of attaining other aims.

Content and Characteristics of the Vernacular Translations of Buddhist Texts

As mentioned earlier, the Directorate of Sūtra Publication printed and published Buddhist texts in both Sinitic as well as han'gŭl. For the printing of Sinitic Buddhist texts, the Directorate engraved new woodblocks while also making use of old blocks by repairing those that were reusable (An 2009, 67). Among the extant woodblocks used by the Directorate, the old woodblocks that were produced during the Koryŏ period outnumbered newly carved woodblocks. In the time of the Koryŏ dynasty, the Directorate for Buddhist Scriptures was established at Hŭngwangsa Temple in 1086 upon the request of the well-known State Preceptor Ŭich'ŏn 義天 (1055–1101). Most of the old woodblocks from the Koryŏ period that were reused by the Directorate of Sūtra Publication were for reprinting the copies of the Tripiṭaka (three "baskets": Sūtra, the Vinaya, and the Abhidharma) that were originally carved under the guidance and watch of the Koryŏ monastics (Ch'ŏn 1991, 24). [End Page 84]

With regard to these Sinitic Buddhist texts, many scholars have asserted that, although the Directorate of Sūtra Publication published a variety of genres of Buddhist texts, most publications were the Vinaya texts and Sŏn texts, or the meditational tradition texts. In addition, scholars have pointed out that many vernacular translations were also related to Sŏn thought and practices (Kim Mubong 2015, 198; Pak 1996, 56–58). However, it seems that these scholars overlooked many other Buddhist scriptures from diverse genres that were also published. The old woodblocks repaired and re-used by the Directorate consisted mostly of the printing blocks from the Tripiṭaka, which meant that the genre of Sinitic Buddhist texts that came to be published comprised a wide variety of scriptures from categories including the Vinayas and the Abhidharma scriptures. Thus, although reprinted scriptures included the Diamond Sūtra, Śūraṅgama Sūtra, Lotus Sūtra, Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment, Avataṃsaka Sūtra, and Nirvana Sūtra, other texts printed in large quantity included Abhidharma texts such as the Verses on the Treasury of Abhidharma (Skt. Abhidharmakośakārikā), Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, and Treatise on the Perfection of Consciousness Only (Ch. Cheng weishi lun 成唯識 論). From the Vinaya texts, the Directorate published one treatise on the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya (Four-part Vinaya) (Kim Kijong 2015, 216–217).

Aside from the genre of printed texts, there are two notable characteristics of the texts published by the Directorate: first, some sūtras overlapped such that both the Sinitic Buddhist texts and vernacular translations were published; second, while the Directorate translated Sinitic commentaries into vernacular script, the Sinitic commentaries were not published as separately published books. For example, the Directorate published five different commentaries on the Lotus Sūtra and also a vernacular translation of the Lotus Sūtra, the Pŏphwagyŏng ŏnhae. The original Sinitic Buddhist text of this vernacular translation was the Miaofa lianhua jingxie 妙 法蓮華經解 (Explanation of the Lotus Sūtra), by the Chinese monk Jiehuan. However, the Directorate never published the Miaofa lianhua jingxie. It also did not publish the Sinitic commentaries on the Śūraṅgama Sūtra and the commentaries on the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment, although the Directorate published the vernacular translations of these two scriptures. In this context, there appears to be a pattern leading to a conjecture that the Directorate set a deliberate criterion [End Page 85] that governed what Buddhist texts would be published in Sinitic and which would become translated into the vernacular script. Below is the bibliographic information about the Directorate's translations of the Buddhists texts.

Click for larger view
View full resolution

Table 1.

Vernacular Translations of Buddhist Texts by the Directorate of Sūtra Publication

As seen in Table 1, the Directorate printed and published nine vernacular translations, all currently extant. Three of the books, the Collected Works of Yongjia of the Chan School (K. Sŏnjong yŏngga chip 禪宗永嘉集), Secrets of Cultivating the Mind (K. Susimgyŏl 修心訣), and the Four Dharma Talks (K. Sapŏbŏ 四法語), were specifically Sŏn texts. King Sejo himself participated in adding the phonetic formulas (kugyŏl) to facilitate the reading and the analysis of the Sinitic Buddhist texts. Confucian scholars Kim Suon 金守温 (1410–1481) and Han Kyehŭi 韓繼禧 (1423–1482), who had both worked at the Hall of Worthies, and the renowned Buddhist monk Sinmi 信眉 (d.u.) participated as translators. According to the postscript of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra translation and the Diamond Sūtra (K. Kŭmganggyŏng ŏnhae), a certain procedure was followed in producing the vernacular translations: first, King Sejo put the phonetic formulas down after which the translators launched into the actual translation. Next, Confucian scholars and Buddhist monks who had studied the original texts reviewed the translations, comparing them with the [End Page 87] original texts. Sometimes, scholar monks were involved in the process wherein discussions took place between the scholars and the monks.⁸

The Directorate used a method of direct translation to translate the chosen Buddhist texts. When initially the phonetic formulas were inserted to aid the reading and analysis of the original texts, the translators sectioned long passages of the original texts into shorter paragraphs for a more effective translation. In the actual process of translating, a paragraph of the original text is marked with the phonetic formulas such that these phonetic markers written in han'gŭl were inserted between phrases and sentences. This is then followed by the translation of the original paragraph in Sinitic by using an admixture of han'gŭl and sinographs. In addition, a circle "b" was used to separate passages in the original texts, marking annotations and commentaries, and separating the han'gŭl translation from each other. The translators also added literary pronunciations for sinographs in the translations in accordance with the system that was established in the Dictionary of Proper Korean Pronunciations (Tongguk chŏngun 東國正韻, 1448).

When compared to the style and pattern of translations of previous vernacular texts, such as the Life of the Buddha, the Reflections of the Moon, and the Dharma Talks of Mengshan (Mongsan pŏbŏ 蒙山法語, 1459), it can be seen that the vernacular translations of Buddhist texts by the Directorate had become more complicated. Furthermore, because the original paragraphs were aligned with the translated paragraphs in the layout of the pages, the Directorate stressed direct translation more than before. Considering these aspects, along with the point that annotations and commentaries on the Buddhist texts were also translated, we can assume that the target audience King Sejo had in mind from the beginning of his translation project did not consist of ordinary people.

Generally speaking, the goal of translating is to convey the contents of a text by converting the text from one language to another. Therefore, the choice of the style of translation, that is, either liberal translation or literal translation, is usually based on targeted readership.⁹ If translators consider that their intended readers will be familiar with the original texts and wish them to deepen their understanding of the contents of the texts through translation, it is likely that they would choose the literal translation style. Based on the fact that most of the translations adopted this style, it can be argued that the [End Page 88] Directorate's target audience did not consist of laypeople but rather of Buddhist clerics.

In addition, according to the genres of Buddhist texts selected for translation, we can also surmise the target audience. Many scholars assert that the purpose of vernacular translations was to propagate Sŏn thought. They explain that, among original texts, the Collected Works of Yongjia of the Chan School (Ch. Chanzong yongjia ji, K. Sŏnjong yŏngga chip 禪宗永嘉集) and the Secrets of Cultivating the Mind were expositions of Sŏn (meditation) thought and, moreover, the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, Diamond Sūtra, Lotus Sūtra, and Amitabha Sūtra were the most basic and influential scriptures that were used in the Sŏn schools. However, despite the popular use of the Lotus Sūtra and the Amitabha Sūtra, they were not considered core Sŏn scriptures. Nevertheless, these scholars understood that, given the forcible merger of Buddhist schools enforced by the previous kings—from eleven schools to seven in 1406 during T'aejong's reign and from seven schools to two (Sŏn and Kyo) in 1424, during Sejong's reign—Sejo aimed to promote Sŏn thought through the translation project (Pak 1996, 62–63; Yi Pongch'un 1980, 59–61).

However, Sejo did not reign for long after the merger and it is doubtful that these newly established schools had enough time to require that monks read specific Buddhist scriptures based on their separate affiliations. Thus, in order to understand the reason for the selection of Buddhist texts, a novel approach is needed, which differs from those generally applied in previous research methods, particularly those perspectives that depart from interpretations based on the acceptance of the sectarian division of the Sŏn and Kyo schools of thought.

Here, it would be pertinent to recall the aforementioned Monastic Certification Law, which was enacted three months before the Directorate of Sūtra Publication was established in 1461. According to this law, monks were required to memorize Buddhist scriptures in order to obtain their certificates. The sūtras that appeared in the state monastic examination were the Heart Sūtra, Diamond Sūtra, and a mantra from the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, all of which were also included as the original texts that were translated into the vernacular script by the Directorate. It is no coincidence that with the addition of the Lotus Sūtra to the monastic examination in 1469, a high ratio of four out of six scriptures in King Sejo's translation project were topics on the monk examinations. [End Page 89] In this sense it is worth noting that these scriptures were selected for the monastic examination because they were officially recognized as primary texts for monks, without any regard for such sectarian divisions as Sŏn or Kyo. In other words, it can be concluded that the scriptures were also later selected for Sejo's vernacular translation project, not because the government preferred the Sŏn school over the Kyo and thereby intended to propagate Sŏn thought, but simply because they were basic texts used across the monastic communities at the time for the monastic curriculum.

It is also likely that other original Sŏn texts—the Collected Works of Yongjia of the Chan School, Secrets of Cultivating the Mind, and the Four Dharma Talks—were included in the translation project because they were introductory texts for monks regardless of their affiliation. The postscripts from the Heart Sūtra translation composed by Han Kyehŭi and the postscript from the Collected Works of Yongjia of the Chan School translation by Sinmi support this assertion as they explicitly claim the reason those texts were translated into the vernacular script. For instance, Han Kyehŭi, a Confucian scholar and translator, writes that the translation was carried out because the monks did not even know what they were reciting. Han claims,

Because this scripture was popular among laity as well as Buddhist clergy, His Majesty felt pity for those who recited the scripture every morning and night without understanding its meaning. This is why His Majesty ordered the translation of the scripture into the vernacular.

(Sejong taewang kinyŏm saŏphoe 2009, 82)

The monk Sinmi also mentions in his postscript that the translation was conceived as a way for monks to master written works through the vernacular language and ultimately to comprehend the full meaning of their readings (Sejong taewang kinyŏm saŏphoe 2007, 2:126). There is in the postscripts a sense of urgency of the need for foundational learning and no sense of affiliational leaning or favoritism towards any particular school of thought.

Through these postscripts, we can discern King Sejo's purpose for launching the Buddhist translation project, and who the target audience was for the translations. In short, King Sejo considered the intended readership of his project of vernacular translations to be Buddhist clerics (An 2009, 72; Kim Mubong 2015, 102). [End Page 90] Of the two purposes, the first was religious: to disseminate basic Buddhist teachings to the Buddhist clergy. This is to an extent related to the Law for the State Regulation of Monk and Nun Ordination (Tosŭngbŏp 度 僧法), which dictated the training and conduct of the monastics, including the recitation of scriptures. The second was political; the translation project was related to the Monastic Certification Law under Sejo's overall Buddhist policy, which will be examined in more detail later in this paper.

Returning to the Directorate, it existed for a little over a decade, being abolished shortly after the death of Sejo. However, the translation of Buddhist texts into vernacular texts continued during the reigns of the following two kings, Sŏngjong and Yŏnsan'gun, even after the abolishment of the Directorate. During the reign of King Sŏngjong (r. 1469–1494), the Three Interpretations of the Diamond Sūtra (Kŭmganggyŏng samgahae 金剛經三家解, hereafter Three Interpretations), Collected Works of Nanming (Nammyŏng chip 南明集), Buddha Crown Heart Sūtra (Puljŏng simgyŏng 佛頂心經), and Five Great Mantras (Odae chinŏn 五大眞言) were published in vernacular script.¹⁰ During the reign of Yŏnsan'gun (r. 1494–1506), the Sixth Patriarch's Dharma Jewel Platform Sūtra (Yukjo pŏppo tan'gyŏng 六祖法寶 壇經) and Donating Food and Making Offerings (Sisik kwŏn'gong 施食勸供) were translated and published. These Buddhist publications were supported and sponsored by two royal women, Sejo's queen Chŏnghŭi (1418–1483) and Sejo's daughter-in-law, Queen Sohye (1437–1504). These vernacular translations followed the pattern and style of translations done by the Directorate. In this way, the Directorate's translation project continued even after the abolishment of the office (An 2009, 32).

The vernacular translations after Sejo's death can also be seen as a continuation in the contents and the genres of texts. Among the six translations that took place after Sejo's death, the Three Interpretations, Collected Works of Nanming, and Sixth Patriarch's Dharma Jewel Platform Sūtra are Sŏn texts, while the Buddha Crown Heart Sūtra, Five Great Mantras, and Sisik kwŏn'gong are scriptures for Buddhist ceremonies and rites. The Three Interpretations consists of collected expositions of the Diamond Sūtra compiled from the writings of the Song period monks Yefu 冶父 (d.u.) and Zongjing 宗鏡 (d.u.) and the Chosŏn monk, Kihwa 己和 (1376–1433). The Collected Works of Nanming is [End Page 91] a commentary by the Song dynasty monk Naming 南明 (d.u.) on the Zheng dao ge 證道歌 (Song of the enlightened way) by Xuanjue 玄覺 (died 713). The Sixth Patriarch's Dharma Jewel Platform Sūtra comprises the teachings and stories of the sixth Chan patriarch Huineng 慧能 (638–713) as compiled by Huineng's disciples. The Buddha Crown Heart Sūtra and the Five Great Mantras are collections of mantras recited for Buddhist rites, and the Sisik kwŏn'gong is a manual for the performances of Buddhist rituals.¹¹

In summary, vernacular translations of Buddhist texts during the reigns of King Sŏngjong and Yŏnsan'gun were aimed at the same target audience as King Sejo's translation project, namely, the Buddhist clergy. In addition, the main purpose of the translations was to educate Buddhist clergy, and, given that the ritual performers in the Buddhist rites were monastic clerics, it can be argued that the translations of Buddhist ritual texts were aimed at better instructing the Buddhist clergy in order that the rituals might be performed properly.

Implications and Significance of the Vernacular Translations of Buddhist Texts

The Chosŏn dynasty upheld the principle of "elevating Confucianism and suppressing Buddhism" from the beginning of the dynastic foundation and carried out various political and religious policies in accordance with this principle. As a notable anti-Buddhist policy, the government reduced the number of sects and also attempted to decrease the number of temples and monks. It also confiscated temple-owned lands and prohibited state-sponsored Buddhist rituals. As noted earlier, in 1406 eleven Buddhist sects were forcibly coalesced into seven schools (T'aejong sillok 11 [1406/3/27]), and further reduced into the two schools, Sŏn and Kyo, in 1424. The government in addition declared that the individual sects could each only possess eighteen registered temples (Sejong sillok 24 [1424/4/5]).

However, despite such Buddhist policies of the government, Buddhism was nevertheless remained deeply rooted throughout Chosŏn society and widely accepted by the common population, while also maintaining a large number of adherents among Confucian literati. Furthermore, the actual number of [End Page 92] Buddhist temples and monks did not decrease abruptly. During the reign of King Sŏngjong, Confucian officials estimated the total number of monks to be anywhere from 400,000 at the lowest to 500,000 to 600,000 at the highest (Yang 2019, 416). According to the Augmented Survey of the Geography of Korea (Sinjŭng tongguk yŏji sŭngnam 新增東國輿地勝覽, 1530), there were around 1,650 temples in the early sixteenth century (Son 2019, 430). It was also common for monks to perform various Buddhist rituals and host religious events that were sponsored by private wealthy patrons as much as had been the case during the previous Koryŏ dynasty (Yi Yŏnghwa 1993, 38–42). The Office of the Censor-General (Saganwŏn 司諫院), which consistently insisted on anti-Buddhist policies, admitted in 1421, "Buddhism has been overly widespread and deeply rooted for too long to be removed suddenly. We cannot eradicate all Buddhists in a single day" (Sejong sillok 12 [1421/7/2]). As the Office of the Censor-General acknowledged, anti-Buddhist policies had their limitations in terms of effectiveness given the pervasiveness of Buddhism in Chosŏn society and culture.

In 1438, King Sejong changed the governmental stance on Buddhism from one of oppression to one of expediency (Han 1993, 153). This change signified that the Chosŏn dynasty had successfully laid a solid foundation for a Confucian state by reforming rites and institutions. After the early Chosŏn government had established and come to fully control Buddhist institutions, King Sejong was able to adopt a more relaxed approach toward Buddhism. In addition, King Sejong realized that despite the previous oppressive policy, Buddhism was still pervasive among all social classes and the number of temples and monks had not decreased significantly. In short, King Sejong attempted to "accommodate" the Buddhists and thereby utilize Buddhism within the framework of a Confucian ideology so that Buddhism would be beneficial to the state. To further aid this intent, he published the vernacular Buddhist texts: Life of the Buddha (1447) and Songs of the Moon's Reflection on a Thousand Rivers (Wŏrin ch'ŏn'gang chi kok 月印千江之曲, 1448; hereafter Songs of the Moon).

The Life of the Buddha translation—the first Buddhist text to be published in han'gŭl in Korean history—contained the story of the Buddha's life and teachings, compiled by Prince Suyang (later King Sejo) in order to pray for [End Page 93] the repose of his deceased mother, Queen Sohŏn (1395–1446), and in obedience to the order from his father, King Sejong. The translation of the Life of the Buddha, along with the Reflections of the Moon, were written in a mixture of han'gŭl and Sinitic form, without excerpts from the original texts. Literary pronunciations for the sinographs were also indicated in han'gŭl in this text. The translation of the Life of the Buddha contained episodes from the Genealogy of Śākyamuni (Ch. Shijia pu 釋迦譜), one of the prominent biographies of the Buddha in Chinese literature, written by the Chinese monk Sengyou 僧祐 (445–518), as well as episodes from other Mahāyāna scriptures including the Lotus Sūtra, Amitabha Sūtra, Medicine Buddha Sūtra, and Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva Pūrvapraṇidhāna Sūtra.

The Songs of the Moon composed in han'gŭl by King Sejong, who is credited with inventing the Korean script, was comprised of 583 cantos of Buddhist hymns concerning contents from the Life of the Buddha. It consisted of three volumes, among which only the first volume, consisting of cantos 1 to 194, survives today.¹² However, the remainder of the cantos were included in the translations of Reflections of the Moon, which is made-up of a collection of two works, Songs of the Moon and Life of the Buddha. The Songs of the Moon translation is a panegyric to the life of the Buddha, highlighting and encouraging trains of social morality, such as selflessness, devotion, mercy, and filial piety (Kim Kijong 2010, 263–264).

Based on the assumption that many people would have gathered, recited, and sang Songs of the Moon and Episodes from the Life of the Buddha, it seems that Sejong intended two things through the publication of these texts. First, he had it in mind to edify the people through Buddhism, the most prevalent and widespread religion among the populace at the time. This was the reason that excerpts of Buddhist scriptures related to filial piety, compassion, and loyalty, which were also important virtues in Confucianism, were deliberately selected and included in the compilations. Second, he wanted to educate Buddhist clerics, some of whom were not trained well and were often known to commit infractions, possibly the result of a deprivation of resources including proper education, which would have been the makings of state policy of suppression towards Buddhism in the early days of the dynasty. [End Page 94]

Concluding Reflections

In order to provide the fundamentals of Buddhist education for the Buddhist clergy, Sejong published the story of the Buddha's life and teachings¹³ and emphasized selflessness, mercy, and devotion as the essential virtues for the Buddhist clergy to cultivate. In other words, Sejong aimed to harmonize Buddhism with Confucianism by stressing their common virtues, while, at the same time, educating Buddhist clerics in a way that would rectify the general corruption of the monastics. It appears the ultimate aim of vernacular Buddhist publications was not to revitalize or popularize Buddhism, but rather to stabilize the state and consolidate Chosŏn society and its people.

Sejong's "Buddhist cultural policy" was continued by Sejo, as seen in postscripts to the translations of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra and Diamond Sūtra, in which Sejo emphasized the continuity of the legacy of Sejong. The Reflections of the Moon translation, published in 1459 prior to the establishment of the Directorate of Sūtra Publication, was a combined and revised edition of the Life of the Buddha and Songs of the Moon. Yet, this combined and revised text was quite different from the two texts because it took the style of direct translation and contained more Sinitic Buddhist texts than vernacular. In addition, it added new annotations, in particular about the Jātaka tales (stories about Gautama Buddha's birth or former reincarnations) and other Buddhist terms associated with offerings, which did not appear in Life of the Buddha (Kim Kijong 2010, 116).

The new annotations added to Reflections of the Moon dealt with many technical terms that the ordinary lay Buddhists were unable to understand. For example, Chapters 14 to 57 of Volume 25 explain "the three pieces of garment and the six articles" (samŭi yungmul 三衣六物), which can be explained as the three robes to cover the body and the six personal belongings a Buddhist cleric needs to live sufficiently. These chapters contain the types, materials, and sizes of the three robes and also contain instructions on how to make them, when and how to wear them, and so on, information that the laity did not require. Therefore, it can be speculated that, when Reflections of the Moon was published in the reign of Sejo, the education of Buddhist clergy was much more emphasized than the harmonization of Confucianism and [End Page 95] Buddhism, while Sejong placed emphasis equally on both of these in his policy on Buddhist culture. In other words, considering that Reflections of the Moon was in a transitional period between Sejong's first vernacular Buddhist texts and Sejo's vernacular translation project, these annotations make a case for the real intentions of King Sejo's project.

Vernacular translations of Buddhist texts by the Directorate during King Sejo's reign were carried out in this context. As mentioned earlier, Buddhist texts for translation were deliberately chosen in conformity with the twin purposes laid out in the state policy on Buddhist culture. Of these two purposes, education of Buddhist clergy was the ultimate aim of Sejo's translation project. In summary, while the Monk Certification Law was aimed at enhancing state control over Buddhist institutions, vernacular translations of Buddhist texts need to be understood in terms of Sejo's intellectual and cultural policy, which was to purify the Buddhist clergy in a way that conformed with Confucian rules, something done mainly through education. This conjecture is also supported by the fact that the phonetic formulas used in Sinitic Buddhist texts published after the fifteenth century consistently maintained the same pattern that are evident in the translations by the Directorate (Yi Chŏn'gyŏng 2014, 267). During King Sejo's reign, harmonization between Confucianism and Buddhism—the first purpose of Sejong's vernacular publications—had been less stressed. Considering other aspects, such as the Directorate's administration and structure, Confucian scholars' involvement in the translation of Buddhist texts, and discussions between Confucian scholars and Buddhist monks regarding translation, it is not difficult to discern what Sejo was aiming at.

The fifteenth-century vernacular translations, including those by the Directorate of Sūtra Publication, were published and distributed as part of a policy of cultural control and purification of what was seen as corrupted Buddhism, and which was carried out for the purpose of stabilizing and consolidating period society. This I would argue needs to be differentiated characteristically from what has thus far been claimed as either an effort to popularize or revive Buddhism. [End Page 96]