透過您的圖書館登入
IP:34.239.154.201
  • Journals
  • OpenAccess

〈聲聞地〉中「唯」之用例考察

An Examination of the Examples of "Matra" in Sravakabhumi

Abstracts


以「唯」(matra)來表現的佛教思想用例中,如「唯心」、「唯識」等是眾所皆知的。但是,主張「唯識」思想的初期瑜伽行派之根本論書《瑜伽師地論》中,所有的「唯」之用例是否都是與「唯識」思想有關?這是一個值得重視的問題。若以〈瑜伽師地論〉中之第十三地〈聲聞地〉為主,可將其「唯」之用例的表現意義分析為下列 三點:(1) 說明相似 (pratirupaka) 所緣 (禪定對象) 的用語,如「唯智」(jñanamatra)、「唯見」 (darsana-matra)、「唯正憶念」(pratismrta-matra)等諸表現,它們是用來說明禪定中的對象 ( 所緣 ) 是意識之作用對象,有別於五識之藉外感官所認識的外界對象。這從南方上座部系統的《解脫道》、Vism等所述「彼分相」( = 似相,patibhaga-nimitta) 等的用語之比較研究中也可得到證明。從此觀點,「唯智」、「唯見」、「唯正憶念」等諸用例,或許可說是《解深密》、《攝論》等所說的於三摩地中影像之唯識思想的先驅思想,但是在〈聲聞地〉中還沒有明顯提出否定外境的 「唯識無境」的術語。(2) 大多數「唯」的用例是用來否定作者、受者、我、我所等的。如:「唯行」(saṃskara-Inatra)、「唯法」(dharma-matra)、「唯事」(vastu-matra)、「唯因」 (hetu-matra)、「唯果」(phala-matra)、「唯蘊」(skandha-matra)等。而且這些術語是依於共通於所有佛教部派之緣起與五蘊的思想而來,不是瑜伽行派所特有的思想。(3) 第二點用以否定作者、受者、我、我所等的「唯」之用例中,「唯事」(vastu-matra) 是比較值得重視的術語。因為它似乎只能於《瑜伽論》等瑜伽行派論書中發現,或許可以說是表現瑜伽行派思想特色的用語之一。所謂「唯事」之「事」的觀念是說一切有部阿毘達磨論師們為討論「法」(dharma)、「自性」(svabhava) 等實在性而創說的,其內容為色、心、心所、心不相應行、無為等五事,它們是淵源於原 始佛教的五蘊、六處、十八界。但是瑜伽行派一方面接受此色等五事 (法) 之說,更進而發展出相、名、分別、正智、真如等五事 (法) 之說,而且與「三自性說」相結合。〈聲聞地〉中「唯事」的「事」,以色、心、心所、心不相應行、無為等五事為內容是比較恰當。相對於此,〈菩薩地〉中「唯事」的「事」主要則以相、名、分別、正智、真如等五事為其內容。

Keywords

《瑜伽論》 唯識 唯事 所緣 五事

Parallel abstracts


"Citta-matra" (mind-only) and "vijñapti-matra" (consciousness-only) are the best known of the many expressions of "matra" (only) in Buddhist thought. However, in Yogacarabhumi the basic text of the early Yogacara School who maintained the concept of "vijñapti-matra" (consciousness-only), are all of the uses of "matra" in accordance with the principles of "vijñapti-matra"? This is an issue worthy of careful examination. If we take the thirteenth step in the Yogacarabhumi, the sravakabhumi, as our criterion, we find that the main uses of "matra" fall into three categories. The first is the explanation of terms relating to the resemble (pratirupaka) meditative objects, such as expressions of "jñana-matra", "darsana-matra", and "pratismrtamatra". These are used to explain that the object of meditation is an object of inner consciousness, different from the external phenomena percieved by the five sense organs. This point may be proved by comparison and examination of terms such as "patibhaga-nimitta" (counterpart-sign) found in the Visuddhimagga and Vimuttimagga in the southern Theravada tradition. Seen in this light, "jñana-matra", "darsana-matra", and "pratismrta-matra", might be forerunners of the "vijñapti-matra" philosophy influenced by the experience on "samadhi" found in. the Samdhinirmocana-sutra and Mahayanasamgraha-sastra. Nonetheless, there are in Sravakabhumi no terms clearly relating to the negation of external realities. Second, in the majority of cases, "matra" is used to negate the actor, the receiver, the self (atman), and the self-hood (atmiya). This is evidenced by such terms as samskaramatra, dharma-matra, vastu-matra, hetu-matra, phala-matra, skandha.matra. These terms relate to the thought of the dependent origination and five aggregates common to all traditions of Buddhism, and is by no means unique to the Yogacara School. Third, of the terms employing "matra" to negate the actor, the receiver, the self, and the self-hood, "vastu-matra" is especially worth scrutinizing, because "vastu-matra" seems to appear only in the works of the Yogacara School, such as Yogacarabhumi. This could be said to be due to this term's expressing a characteristic of the Yogacara philosophy. The "vastu" of "vastu-matra" means that Abhidharma scholars of the Sarvastivadin School developed their theories in order to extrapolate on the reality of the "dharma", and "svabhava". Its contents ( cited as A group ) are form, mind, mental factors, non-associated compositional factors, uncreated dharma, and their origin can be traced to the five aggregates, six entrances, and eighteen elements of early Buddhism. But the Yogacara School not only accepted this five reality ( pañcavastuka/ dharmaka ), but also used as a base for developing their own treatises ( cited as B group ) concerning five reality ( pañca-vastuka/dharmaka ) of sign, name, discrimination, right wisdom, and such ness, agreeing thereby with the theory of three "svabhava". But the contents of "vastu" of "vastu-matra" of Sravakabhumi should be seen as A group. In contrast, the contents of "vastu" of "vastu-matra", of Bodhisattvabhumi should be mainly seen as B group.

Parallel keywords

No data.

References


?山雄一(1983)。佛教????存在?知識
上田義文(1958)。佛教思想史研究
小谷信千代(1980)。『大乘莊嚴經論』第19章(功德品)第50偈????。印佛研。29(1),61-65。
山田龍城(1957)。?????五位?創唱。文化。21(5),15-30。
今西順吉(1976)。品類足論?成立試論(2)。三藏集。120

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
古景伊(2015)。漢譯《金剛經》的語言風格研究──以羅什和玄奘譯本的詞彙、虛詞、句法的比較為中心〔碩士論文,國立中央大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0031-0412201512072220

Read-around