A Monk’s Double Identity and the Issue of Clerical Marriage: An Examination of Kim Chŏnghae’s Household Registers in Colonial Korea
Concerning clerical marriage during Korea’s colonial period, two laws were applied to Korean monks. As colonial subjects, they were governed by colonial civil law which stipulated the freedom to marry, while, as members of monastic communities, they had to observe the temple laws which conferred con...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
University of Hawai'i Press
2020
|
| In: |
Journal of Korean religions
Year: 2020, Volume: 11, Issue: 1, Pages: 155-187 |
| Further subjects: | B
clerical marriage
B Kim Chŏnghae B Kang Taeryŏn B colonial Korea B household registers (minjŏk or hojŏk) B modern Korean Buddhism |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Concerning clerical marriage during Korea’s colonial period, two laws were applied to Korean monks. As colonial subjects, they were governed by colonial civil law which stipulated the freedom to marry, while, as members of monastic communities, they had to observe the temple laws which conferred considerable disadvantages on married monks. One of the restrictions imposed on married monks by the temple laws was that they were not allowed to advance to higher clerical positions, such as that of head monk or abbot. Because it was the colonial government that drafted temple laws and approved the appointment of head monks, the government had to oversee the practice of clerical marriage. However, some monks knew how to evade its surveillance. This paper revisits the issue of clerical marriage and colonial Buddhist policies by examining the double identity of Kim Chŏnghae, a Korean monk who studied in Japan in the 1910s and served as head monk of the Chŏndŭng-sa parish in the 1920s. His double identity is recorded in two household registers: one in which he is listed as a celibate monk and the other in which he appears as a married layman. These records provide evidence of the relationship between the colonial Buddhist policies and the reality of the practice of clerical marriage among Korean monks. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2167-2040 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of Korean religions
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1353/jkr.2020.0005 |