《阿含经》对存有之定义

The Definition of Being in The Agama Sutras

蔡礼政(Li-Chen Tsai)

《正覺學報（簡體版）》 1期 (2009/07) Pp. 23-48

https://doi.org/10.29667/JTE.200907.0001

摘要

本文综观东西方宗教、哲学中，西方哲学、京都学派、梵我思想及道教，与佛教对存有的定义，有极大的差别。其中最关键的差异在于：佛教是以经验主义的实证精神作为定义之核心，而东西方其他所有的宗教、哲学体系则皆主张存有是不可知、不可证的。
根据《阿含经》佛陀所定义的存有，具有宇宙及生命根源的意义，并且是以人人皆可实证生命本原而定义。佛教此种特有的存有定义，在佛教经典中不是一个孤证，是符合佛教的缘起教义。本文分析此种实证意义的存有定义，有三个成立要件，并且引申出三个具操作性意义的判断原则，对于想要实证生命本来面目的人，提供判断是否亲证生命本原之依据，是极具启发性的判断原则。
对于关键论点－实证的可能性，本文对于哲学史上主张存有是不可知、不可证的理由中，归纳出三种重要的理由：
1、人类的生命、能力仅具有限性，故无法实证具无限性的宇宙根源。
2、具有无限性者必是宇宙的根源。
3、康德的先验哲学认为道德公设足以作为实践理性宗教的充分理由，不必以事实验证论证的前提。
上述三种理由错误的原因，皆是忽视实证的重要性所致。《阿含经》中提出实证主义的存有定义，主张将一切哲学理论回归事实的检验，对于宗教及哲学注入突飞猛进的契机。

關鍵字

存有 ； 本体论ontology ； 梵我不二 ； 京都学派 ； 先验哲学 ； 二律背反antinomy

並列摘要

This article studies the definitions of ”being” in both Eastern and Western, religious and philosophic worlds, including Western philosophy, the Kyoto School, the theory of Brahma-atma-aikya, Taoism and Buddhism, and also explores the crucial differences among them. Among these differences, the most critical one is, ”Buddhism takes positivism (positivus) of empiricism as its kernel of definition. However, all other religions and philosophic systems claim that being cannot be recognized and realized.”
According to Buddha's definition of being in The Agama Sutras, being has the meaning of the origin of the universe and life, and it is personally realizable for everybody. This kind of unique definition in Buddhism has lots of evidence in the Buddhist sutras and conforms to the Buddhist dependent-arising doctrine. This article concludes that the definition of being, which is personally realizable, has three necessary conditions. This paper also proposes three judging rules that can be really operated and provide the criteria to ascertain if someone personally realizes the origin of life or not. For those who want to personally realize the origin of life, these rules are very inspirational.
Regarding the key argument, the possibility of personally realizing the origin of life, this article outlines three important reasons to explain why philosophic scholars claim that being cannot be recognized and realized. Those reasons are,
1. The origin of the universe, which has the unlimitedness property, cannot be realized because the life and capability of human beings have their limitations.
2. The one that possesses the property of unlimitedness must be the origin of the universe.
3. Kant's transcendental philosophy claimed that moral postulates themselves were enough to be the reasons to achieve rational religions, not necessarily based on the verification of facts.
The above three reasons are wrong because they all neglect the importance of the personal realization. The Agama Sutras bring up the definition of being from positivism and claim that all philosophic theories should return to the inspection by facts. This key subject will speed up the progress of the research in the religious and philosophic worlds.

並列關鍵字

being ； ontology ； Brahma-atma-aikya ； Kyoto School ； transcendental philosophy ； antinomy