Have library access?
IP:18.207.255.67
  • Journals

「轉依」理論探析—以《成唯識論》及窺基《成唯識論述記》為中心

A Study of the Theory of the "Transformation of the Basis(Āśraya-parivrtti or Āśraya-parāvrtti)": Focusing on the "Cheng weishi lun" and Kuiji's "Cheng weishi lun shuji"

Abstracts


本論文,乃在探析中國法相唯識宗的「轉依」理論,特別以《成唯識論》(Vijnaptimatratasiddhi-sastra)及法相宗實際創始人窺基(A.D. 632~682)《成唯識論述記》的解釋為中心。而本文要探究的重點,有下面幾點:(1)論述國際學界關於「轉依」兩種梵文原文之意義的爭辯。(2)「轉依」的「依」字,據《成唯識論》的解釋是「依是緣義」,因此《成唯識論》區分出心、心所有三種意義的「依」(即「所依」),也就是:「因緣依、等無間緣依、增上緣依」;而窺基認為這樣的區分是「以緣為目」,亦即以「緣」為其綱目,而作分類(另一種分類是根據「能依」、「所依」同、不同時而有的「俱有所依」與「不俱有所依」),但值得注意的是,此分類並沒有與「四緣」中「所緣緣」相對應的「所緣緣依」,因此雖然《成唯識論》中說「依是緣義」,但「所依」與「所緣」仍有所不同;另外,依據《成唯識論》「非離所依有能依故」,「唯識」的意義,應該理解成一切有為法離不開作為基礎的「所依」(特別是「根本依」之「阿賴耶識」)。(3)說明《成唯識論》及窺基《成唯識論述記》的「轉依」義,也就是「六種轉依位別」和「四種轉依義別」的說法;並且,與「轉依」兩種梵文之意義的爭辯相關,反映在《成唯識論》中,是指「持種依」(阿賴耶識)與「迷悟依」(真如)這兩種「所依」,本文特別論述「持種依」(阿賴耶識)=「二分依他起性」=「轉依」的說法。(4)介紹Alan Sponberg 所提出關於「轉依」與「三性」的理論,並對其說法進行審視。

Parallel abstracts


This article is a study of the Chinese Yogācāra theory of the ”transformation of the basis (āśraya-parivrtti or āśraya-parāvrtti)”, and will focus on Dharmapāla (護法, fl. c. 6th century)'s ”Cheng weishi lun” (《成唯識論》) and Kuiji (窺基,632-682C.E.)'s ”Cheng weishi lun shuji” (《成唯識論述記》). My main points are summarized as follows: (1) Introduce the debate on the two Sanskrit words(āśraya-parivrtti and āśraya-parāvrtti) of the ”transformation of the basis” in the international academia. (2) According to ”Cheng weishi lun”, the word ”basis(āśraya)” of the ”transformation of the basis” is ”the basis is the condition.” Therefore, ”Cheng weishi lun” lists three kinds of meanings of the ”basis” in the cognition [or consciousness] (citta) and the mental function (caitasika or caitta); these are the ”basis of the causes and conditions, and basis of the incessant causation, basis of the causes beyond direct empowerment.” In Kuiji's opinion, these three kinds of meanings are ”based on the condition.” But if we put these three kinds of meanings into the context of the ”four conditions,” there is no ”basis of the object as condition” here. So, we have to notice that there are differences between the ”basis” and the ”condition”. (3) From the perspective of ”Cheng weishi lun” and Kuiji's commentaries, analyze the ”six stages of the 'transformation of the basis' ” and the ”four meanings of the 'transformation of the basis.' ” And the debate on the two Sanskrit words of the ”transformation of the basis” in Cheng weishi lun means the ”basis of the holding seeds” (i.e. ālayavijnāna) and the ”basis of delusion and enlightenment” (i.e. tathatā). Hence I argue that the ”basis of the holding seeds” (i.e. ālayavijnāna) equals to ”two aspects of the 'dependent nature (paratantra-svabhāva)' ” equals to the ”transformation of the basis.” (4) Introduce Alan Sponberg's study(1982) about the ”transformation of the basis” and three models of the ”theory of the three natures” (there are: ”The Pivotal Model,” ”The Progressive Model,” and ”A Model of K'uei-chi (Kuiji)'s Interpretation.”) And I also offer some of my criticism.

References


MasaakiHattori,Hattori(1985).The Transformation of the Basis (Asraya-parivrtti) in the Yogācāra System of Philosophy.All-Einheit Wege eines Gedankens in Ost und West.(All-Einheit Wege eines Gedankens in Ost und West).:
國際佛學研究中心編譯(1991)。國際佛學譯粹。台北:靈鷲出版社。
Davidson, Ronald Mark(1985).Buddhist System of Transformation: asrayaparivrtti/paravrtti Among the Yogacara.Berkley:University of California.
Kalupahana, David J.(1987).The principle of Buddhist psychology.Albany:State University of New York Press.
Lusthaus, Dan(2002).Buddhist phenomenology: a philosophical investigation of Yogācāra Buddhism and the Ch'eng Wei-shih lun.London:Routledge Curzon.

Cited by


鄭剛(2017)。以禪修檢視與超越認知之障礙——以阿含經典與《解深密經》為主要依據〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201700537
趙東明(2011)。轉依理論研究—以《成唯識論》及窺基《成唯識論述記》為中心〔博士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2011.01420

Read-around