印順導師之部派佛教思想論（I）－－三世有與現在有

印順導師以「探源明變，抉擇洗鍊」的方法，對於部派佛教思想探究，主要有1940-44年（35-39歲）《唯識學探源》、1942-43年（37-38歲）《印度之佛教》、1944-50年（39-45歲）《性空學探源》等作品。以本文的考察為例，可看出印老的思想體系在此期間已經大致成熟，論證的基調也大慨確定了。之後，從1967-68年（62-63歲）起，寫作出版印度佛教各階段思想主題的專書，到1987-88年（82-83歲）時，以《印度佛教思想史》作為「對印度佛教思想發展研究的結論」。印老對於「佛法」的分化為不同部派的大綱是：在《印佛教》（1943）時，以「二部、三系、四派」名稱，《唯識》（1944）也沿用；但在《有部》（1968）則改稱為「二部、三部、四部」，此用語於《初期大乘》（1981）也沿用，進而將部派分化的本末先後，以不同意義的四階段，推算西元年代為（1）B.C.300大眾、上座二部（戒律的問題）、（2）B.C.270思想的分化（以教義為部派的名稱）、（3）B.C.230分出部派以地區、寺院為名。（4）B.C.100說轉部也是依教義（十八部全部成立）。印老也依據般若在北方的普及與流行的西元50年「下品般若」集出年代，將約西元前300～西元50年期間稱為「佛法的部派時代」。印老參考《成實論》之「十論」，對於各部派的眾多異義，在《印思史》（1988）則以「三世有與現在有」、「一念見諦與次第見諦」、「補特伽羅與一心」作為綱領。針對「三世有與現在有」的部派異義，印老是從「諸行無常」的生滅無常、剎那生滅現象中，「無我論」佛教如何於「法體」建立因緣而生果的關係關係來解釋：說一切有系以「法體不變而作用變異」的意義而主張「法體恆有，而說性非常」。相對於說一切有系之「體、用義」，印老分析「現在有」的學派時，則說明大眾系以「理、事義」，主張「事唯現在」，是以「曾有、當有」建立「過去、未來」，而經部則以「種、現」義建立「酬前、引後」而說明「過去、未來」，並且也將「曾有、當有」與「種、現」二義連接，成為「過去曾有（熏），未來當有（種）」的發展關係。此外，印老將「三世實有」的主張比喻為「如珠珠之相累」與人群在「甲屋、走廊、乙屋」的行進；將「現在實有」的主張比喻為「如明珠之旋轉反側，自空而下，似相續而實唯一珠」。最後，印老將「現在有」的部派思想，與大乘唯識家之「現在幻有」（過去未來是假）相對應；將「三世有」的部派思想，與大乘中觀家之「三世如幻」思想相對應。

關鍵字

印順導師；部派佛教；三世有；現在有；實體；作用；曾有；當有；薰習；種子

並列摘要

Ven. Yinshun uses the method of 「exploring origins to illustrate change, and selection as a discipline」 in his writings on sectarian Buddhist thought. Main works include: Weishi xue tanyuan (A study of the origins of consciousness-only thought), written 1940-44, age 35-39; Yindu zhi Fojiao (Indian Buddhism), written 1942-43, age 37-38; Xingkong xue tanyuan (A study of the origins of sunyata thought), written 1944-50, age 39-45. As will become evident in this paper, Ven. Yinshun's thought had already matured by this period, and his method of argumentation had been established. Following this period, beginning in 1967-68 (at age 62-63), he wrote and published monographs on each of the main stages of development of Indian Buddhist thought. In 1987-88 (age 82-83), he completed Yindu Fojiao sixiang shi (History of Indian Buddhist thought) as 「a conclusion to my research on the development of Indian Buddhist thought.」 The main outline of Ven. Yinshun's classification of sectarian divisions is as follows: In his Yindu zhi Fojiao of 1943, he uses the terms 「two sects, three divisions, and four schools,」 also used in his Weishi xue tanyuan of 1944. In his Shuoyiqieyoubu zhi lunshu yu lunshi zhi yanjiu (A study of Sarvastivadin treatises and treatise-masters) of 1968, this becomes 「two sects, three schools, and four schools,」 which is also used in his Chuqi Dasheng Fojiao zhi qiyuan yu kaizhan (The origins and development of early Mahayana Buddhism) of 1981. Then, using different criteria for classification, he re-periodizes sectarian Buddhism: 1. 300 BCE: two sects: Mahasamghika and Sthaviravada (Vinaya issues); 2. 270 BCE: divisions on the basis of doctrine (sects were named for their doctrinal positions); 3. 230 BCE: sects are named after regions and monasteries; 4. 100 BCE: Samkrantivadins are also named on the basis of doctrine (all eighteen sects have been established). Ven. Yinshun, in accordance with his dating the second period (of four) of prajnaparamita thought to 50 CE, a time when prajna was widespread and popular in northern India, demarcates the period from 300 BCE to 50 CE as 「the sectarian period of Buddhism.」 Ven. Yinshun refers to the Satyasiddhi sastra's 「Ten Disputes」 regarding to the varying theories of sectarian Buddhism, and the main structure of his Yindu Fojiao sixiang shi (A history of Indian Buddhist thought) makes use of the following rubrics: 「existence in the three periods and existence in the present,」「seeing the truth in one moment and seeing the truth in stages,」 and 「pudgala and one mind.」 With respect to the sectarian differences regarding 「existence in the three periods and existence in the present,」 Ven. Yinshun, starting from the 「impermanence of samkaras」 (the phenomena of impermanence in terms of arising and ceasing, and arising and ceasing in terms of momentariness) and the doctrine of non-self, explains how Buddhism establishes the relationship of causes and conditions producing fruition in connection with a 「dharma essence」: the Sarvastivada system uses the concept of 「it is not dharma essence that changes, but its functioning」 to advocate the position 「dharma essence exists eternally, but the nature of its verbal expression is impermanent.」 Regarding the Sarvastivada system of essence and function, Ven. Yinshun's analysis of the 「existence in the present」 school explains that the Mahasamghikas use 「principle and phenomena」 to advocate 「phenomena only in the present,」 while using 「previously existed and will exist」 to establish 「past and future.」 The Sautrantikas use the concepts of 「seeds and manifestation」 to establish 「recompense from the previous and inducing the subsequent,」 thus explaining 「past and future.」 They also connect 「previously existed and will exist」 with 「seeds and manifestation,」 thus completing the development into the form of 「previously existing in the past (perfuming) and will be existing in the future (seeds).」 Additionally, Ven. Yinshun uses the similes 「just as pearl after pearl accumulates」 and people advancing through the 「main room, hallway, and secondary room」 for the position advocating 「actual existence in the three periods.」 Specifically, 「just as a bright pearl turns around and around, at the moment when the self is empty, the appearance of continuity is actually just one pearl」 is used as a simile for the position advocating 「actual existence in the three periods.」 Finally, Ven. Yinshun takes the sectarian concept of 「existence in the present」 to correspond with the Mahayana consciousness-only position of 「illusory existence in the present」 (past and present are provisional); and 「existence in the three periods」 to correspond with the Madhyamaka 「three periods are like an illusion.」

並列關鍵字

Ven. Yinshun ； sectarian Buddhism ； existence in the three periods ； existence in the present ； essence ； function ； previous existence ； future existence ； perfuming ； seeds