《雜阿含》「無我相經」勘正：「文獻學」vs.「教義學」的解決方案

Philology Versus Dogmatics: A Comparative Study of the Anattalakkhana Sutta of the Samyutta Nikāya

蔡奇林(Tsai Chilin)

《臺灣宗教研究》 6卷2期 (2007/06) Pp. 121-147

摘要

「無我相經」是佛成道以後，繼初次說法（轉法輪經）之後，對五比丘所作的開示。據記載，五比丘聽聞此經之後，便證得了聲聞弟子的最高成就－－阿羅漢果。因此，此經不管是在佛教的歷史上，或是佛法的修學上，都有著甚為殊勝的地位。但是這部重要經典，在巴利本與漢譯《雜阿含》二個傳本中，對於「無我」這個關鍵論題的論述，卻出現了「完全相反」的二個說法。究竟哪一個才是佛的原說？目前學界仍無定論。本文的目的就是要解決這個問題，以還原「無我相經」的原貌與原意。本文首先說明這個文本差異的情形，接著介紹兩位日本學者（水野弘元與平川彰）對此問題的看法。二人同樣認為，「哪個才是佛陀原說」的問題，目前無法驟然判斷，因而擱置文獻爭議，遂行教義層面的詮解。本文則認為，在進行教義解釋之前，應先進行更加審密的文獻處理。因此，第三節以下，採用「文獻學」方法，對於「無我相經」的種種相關文本，進行比較細緻的考察與分析。其中總共檢核了三個層次的13項文證，包括「無我相經」諸傳本、《瑜伽師地論》對「無我相經」的解釋文、以及與「無我相經」論述結構一致的「薩遮尼犍子經」諸傳本。通過層層的考辯分析，結果顯示，巴利本所傳才是佛的原說，而現行《雜阿含》「陰相應」的「無我相經」則是個「誤傳」。最後並嘗試辨明這個誤傳產生的原因和年代。

關鍵字

初期佛教 ； 無我相經 ； 薩遮尼犍子經 ； 無我 ； 文獻學 ； 教義學

並列摘要

The first discourse the Buddha gave following his enlightenment was the Dhamm-acakkappavattana Sutta, which was addressed to his first five monk disciples. It is said that when the Buddha preached his second sermon, the Anattalakkhana Sutta, to these same five monks they all attained arahantship, the highest goal of Buddhist practice. Thus the Anattalakkhana Sutta occupies a key position in both the history and doctrine of Buddhism. Yet the Pali and Chinese versions of the Anattalakkhana Sutta give completely opposite interpretations of the key term of this sutta: anatta. There is still no conclusion amongst scholars as to which one was the original teaching of the Buddha. This paper proposes to solve this problem by recovering the original form and meaning of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. This paper begins with an explanation of the differences between the versions, followed by a summary of the views put forth by the Japanese scholars Mizuno Kōgen and Hirakawa Akira. Believing that at present is not possible to conclusively determine the Buddha's original teaching on anatta, these two scholars have decided the best approach is to put aside the textual controversy and try to solve the problem from the standpoint of doctrinal exegesis. It is the premise of this paper, however, that a more thoroughgoing textual investigation should be carried out before resorting to doctrinal exegesis. Thus the third section of this paper makes a detailed philological investigation and analysis of the various versions of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. A total of 13 documents are examined on three levels, including 9 versions of the Anattalakkhana Sutta, the explanatory passages on the Anattalakkhana Sutta found in the Yogācāra-bhūmi-sāstra, as well as 3 versions of the Cūlasaccaka Sutta, since their narrative structure closely resembles that of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. The results of this multilevel analysis shows that the Pali version is in fact the original teaching of the Buddha, and that the Chinese version of the Anattalakkhana Sutta in the Khandhavagga of the Samyutta Nikāya is corrupt. The final section is an attempt to determine when and how this corruption came about.

並列關鍵字

early Buddhism ； Anattalakkhana Sutta ； Cūlasaccaka Sutta ； anatta ； philology ； dogmatics