「政治義務」與抵抗權行使－原始佛教觀點的討論

Political Obligation and the Right to Resist: Discussion of Early Buddhist Views

曾志隆(Chih-Long Tseng)

《玄奘佛學研究》 15期 (2011/03) Pp. 65-98

https://doi.org/10.29955/HCJBS.201103.0003

摘要

近幾年來，幾個以佛教爲主要宗教信仰的國家或地區，如緬甸、泰國及圖博(Tibet)等接連出現大規模反政府的示威活動。這些事例，涉及政治學上的「政治義務」與抵抗權行使的問題。只是，在佛教的經典或教義中，是否有證成「政治義務」與抵抗權行使之理據？ 本文嘗試以政治學的角度，從佛教的經典與教義中，討論以下的問題：首先，在佛教的經典或教義中，對於「政治義務」及抵抗權之行使採取何種立場？何種政權是人民行使抵抗權的對象？另外，如果行使抵抗權的過程會造成過多的殺戮，又該如何？有何種方式或手段可資參酌？

關鍵字

佛教 ； 政治義務 ； 抵抗權 ； 社會契約論

並列摘要

In recent years, civil uprisings broke out subsequently in the Buddhist countries of Myanmar, Thailand and Tibet. These events can usually be analyzed in terms of western political concepts such as political obligation and civil disobedience. However, are these concepts to be found in the Buddhist sutras or doctrines? If yes, how are they to be verified or justified?
This paper intends to find equivalent expressions or idioms of these two concepts in Early Buddhist teachings and texts by asking the following questions: First, what could be the Buddha's attitude toward ”political obligation” and the right to resist? Second, what kinds of political authorities should be resisted by the citizens? And, finally, what should be done if exercising the right to resist shall lead to slaughters and bloodshed? Are there any ways or methods to be consulted for such cases?

並列關鍵字

Buddhism ； Political Obligation ； the Right to Resist ； the Social Contract Theory

參考文獻

陳思賢(2009)。「一樣自然權利，兩種政治」？─霍布斯與平等黨人。政治與社會哲學評論。29

()。

()。

()。

()。