 The next major trend of thought of Korean Buddhism, Yogācāra (Consciousness-Only) Buddhism, would not have been possible without the Chinese master Xuanzang (602–664). Wŏnchŭk 圓測 (613–696), originally from Silla but who was active and died in Tang China, was a member of his inner circle but their relation might have eroded as time passed. But in view of the fact that Wŏnchŭk thoroughly subscribed to Xuanzang’s translated Cheng weishi lun (成唯識論), it is hard to see his position as fundamentally in conflict with Xuanzang or for that matter the latter’s Chinese disciple Kuiji (窺基). The most important contribution on the part of Xuanzang was the introduction of the doctrine of five distinct [spiritual] lineages  (C. wuzhong xing  五種性,  S. pañcagotra) of sentient beings, which was entailed by his view of ālayavijñāna as his new translations amply showed. Unfortunately this doctrine was regarded as contradictory to the tathāgatagarbha theory because virtually everybody assumed that the tathāgatagarbha theory necessarily entails that the Buddha-nature is universally innate in all sentient beings. Given this controversial implication, Wŏnchŭk was determined to reconcile the two seemingly contradictory positions. How did Wŏnchŭk accept both tathāgatagarbha as well as five different lineages including icchantikas, the lineage of beings who are beyond the possibility of salvation and lose forever the capacity to achieve nirvāṇa? First, for him, the Buddha-nature belongs to the level of principle while the five different lineages belong to the level of practice with their own Buddha-nature. This has the consequence that the indeterminate lineages can pursue enlightenment (other than pratyekabuddhas (the self-enlightened), śrāvaka (the voice-hearer) and bodhisattvas). But unfortunately this does not apply to the fifth lineages, i.e., icchantikas. Instead, Wŏnchŭk tried to interfuse the Buddha-nature at the level of principle and the Buddha-nature at the practical level, thus giving rise to the resolution that both are right at their own level. The Buddha-nature should be acknowledged at the level of principle, to be sure. And he can accept the view of tathāgatagarbha. But at the level of practice, we have to acknowledge the existential reality of evil and allow the possibility not only of indeterminate lineages but also icchantikas. Icchantikas are incapable of enlightenment outright but still they are viewed as pursuing upgrading their status into the human status or heavenly status if and when they practice five precepts and ten good conducts, etc. Thus Wŏnchŭk could hold that, because of our tathāgatagarbha working for our salvation, we all are able to obtain salvation by way of the distinction between the Buddha-nature in practice and that in principle (S. Lee forthcoming).