佛教「超越論題」（The Transcendency Thesis）在英語世界的論爭與反思

佛教「超越論題」是關大眠對佛教中有關涅槃超善惡論述的稱謂，該論題為許多佛教學者所支持，認為道德在佛教中僅為工具性的，而非目的。但關大眠反對此說，認為該論題是學者們對佛典斷章取義的誤解，他為了超越「超越論題」，將涅槃與道德化約為kusala（善）和puñña（福）之間的關係。然而，關大眠的論證也有自相矛盾之處，其後受到Abraham Velez de Cea、Martin Adam、Stephen A. Evans等學者的批判。雖然如此，這些研究也沒有解決「超越論題」，反倒遺留了新的學術問題。最後，我們從兩方面對此論爭作了反思：一方面，藉助佛典中佛陀和阿羅漢的道德行為證明解脫者仍然具有日常道德行為；另一方面，從價值哲學層面反思kusala和puñña的關係，即將佛典中出現的kusala與puñña的重合狀態理解為價值詞和體現價值的事實詞之間的重合。由此澄清了英語世界這場「超越論題」論爭的問題所在和理解該論題的新思路。

關鍵字

超越論題；關大眠；價值哲學； Kusala ； Puñña

並列摘要

The transcendency thesis of Buddhism, referring to the discourse that nibbāna goes beyond good and evil in Buddhist classics, is named by Damien Keown; many Buddhist scholars favor the discourse, maintaining that morality plays the role not as an end but as a means. However, Damien Keown himself is opposed to that view and points to scholars' fallacy of quoting out of context. He reduces nibbāna and morality to the relation between kusala and puñña. However, there is a paradox in his discussion, as is criticized by Abraham Velez de Cea, Martin Adam and Stephen A. Evans. Their studies do not actually settle the transcendency thesis; rather new academic questions arise. This paper makes a reflection on this problem from two aspects. On the one hand, we argue that liberated beings still take daily moral actions by virtue of the moral action of Buddha and Arhant in Buddhist classics. On the other hand, we reflect on the relation of kusala and puñña in the sense of philosophy of value; that is to say, the coincidence of kusala and puñña in Buddhist classics should be understood as the relation of value word and fact word. In this way, what underlies the transcendency thesis of Buddhism in English Literature and how we could interpret the themes and controversies are clarified.