基於「差別性故」相關詮釋的漢傳因明學術史考察

本文以奘譯《因明入正理論》宗支定義中的「差別性故」為焦點，探討唐代及明清相關詮釋中的一致與差異之處，藉此對漢傳因明學術史進行綱要式地考察。唐代注釋者均將宗支的能別與有法一併作為宗依，將「差別性」作為宗體，其同一之處顯示唐疏普遍以玄奘傳授的間接的印度知識作為基礎。唐疏中「性故」與「為性」兩種異文的分歧則集中體現在窺基對文軌的批評中，展現了窺基對自身詮釋正統性的強調。明清注釋者以當時漢傳佛教所保存的有限文獻資料為基礎，嘗試沿襲唐代詮釋，卻將有法作為宗依，將能別作為宗體，並吸收其他相關資料中的「差別」概念解釋「差別性」。明清因明雖於唐代有所乖離，但構建了自己的新詮釋，形成了一個獨立的新階段。

關鍵字

《因明入正理論》；差別性故；唐代因明；明清因明；詮釋

並列摘要

This paper considers the phrase chabie xing gu in Xuanzang's Chinese translation of the Nyāyapraveśa, focusing on the consistencies and discrepancies related to Tang and Ming-Qing interpretations. This enables an historical investigation into Chinese scholarship on Buddhist logic. All Tang commentators regarded both the qualifier and the property-possessor as substrata of the thesis, and chabie xing as the essence of the thesis. This similarity points to indirect Indian knowledge from Xuanzang's teaching as a universal basis of Tang commentaries. Meanwhile, the divergence between xing gu and wei xing is presented intensively in Kuiji's criticism of Mungwe, which shows Kuiji's emphasis on his own orthodoxy. Ming-Qing commentators attempted to continue Tang interpretations on the limited basis of available Chinese Buddhist literature at their time, but considered the property-possessor as the substratum of the thesis, and the qualifier as the essence of the thesis. They also adopted the concepts of chabie from relevant sources to expound chabie xing. Although Chinese Buddhist logic during the Ming-Qing period deviated from the Tang conception, it developed its own interpretations to form a new and independent phase.