|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
《成唯識論》“糅譯”的假設性再探=A Hypothetical Reconsideration of the ‘Compilation’ of Cheng Weishi Lun |
|
|
|
| Author |
山部能宜 (著)=Yamabe, Nobuyoshi (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
華林國際佛學學刊=Hualin International Journal of Buddhist Studies
|
|---|
| Volume | v.3 n.1 《宗教石刻研究與玄奘研究》專刊 |
|---|
| Date | 2020.04 |
|---|
| Pages | 161 - 206 |
|---|
| Publisher | World Scholastic Publishers |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www.worldscholastic.com/
|
|---|
| Location | Singapore [新加坡] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Keyword | 《成唯識論》=Cheng weishi lun; 《〈釋大乘論〉分別秘義釋》=Vivṛtaguhyārthapiṇḍavyākhyā; 《瑜伽師地論疏》=Yogācārabhūmivyākhyā; 糅譯=compilation theory |
|---|
| Abstract | 《成唯識論》（*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi）是在東亞的唯識（法相）傳統中很重要的系統性論書。按照法相宗的傳承，這篇論書是玄奘從《唯識三十頌》之十篇註釋 “糅譯”出來的。如果我們觀察《成唯識論》的內容，會發現該書對同一個問題頻繁並列多種異說。那些異論給我們的印象是它們來自於多種註釋。然而在印度唯識學派比較後期的註釋，如《〈釋大乘論〉分別秘義釋》（Vivṛtaguhyārthapiṇḍavyākhyā）和《瑜伽師地論疏》（Yogācārabhūmivyākhyā），也多次並列所釋論書內容的不同的解釋。有的時候，這些印度註釋和《成唯識論》有相似的議論。這讓我懷疑《成唯識論》“糅譯”的傳承，和《成唯識論》現形相似的印度原本也許存在。在這次的報告中雖然不能到達確實的結論，但是我想提出假設性的議論，重新考慮這篇重要文獻的性質和背景。
Cheng weishi lun, or *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi [Establishment of Mental-Representation-Only], is a systematic work on Yogācāra Buddhism that has been treated as a fundamental text in the East Asian Yogācāra (Ch. Faxiang/Jpn. Hossō) tradition. Traditionally, this work is thought to be a compilation by Xuanzang 玄奘 (600–664) based on ten separate commentaries on Vasubandhu’s Triṃśikā vijñaptimātratāsiddhiḥ [Thirty Verses for the Establishment of Mental-Representation-Only]. If one examines the content of Cheng weishi lun, one often finds a juxtaposition of plural opinions concerning a single issue; this indeed gives the impression that they were taken from separate commentaries. Relatively late Indian Yogācāra texts, such as Vivṛtaguhyārthapiṇḍavyākhyā [A Condensed Explanation of the Revealed Secred Meaning] and Yogācārabhūmivyākhyā [An Explanation of Yogācārabhūmi], however, similarly contain different interpretations of a single issue given side by side. Sometimes these Indian texts and Cheng weishi lun even contain comparable arguments. This makes me somewhat suspicious of the traditionally accepted notion that Cheng weishi lun is a ‘compilation.’ Perhaps Cheng weishi lun is based on an Indian original that had a similar format to the current Chinese text. It is difficult to be conclusive at this stage, but I would like to present a hypothetical argument that reconsiders the textual nature and background of this important work. |
|---|
| Table of contents | 一、《成唯識論》“糅譯”的傳承 162
二、《分別秘義釋》和《成唯識論》: 關於種子、習氣的起源 163
三、《瑜伽師地論疏》和《成唯識論》: 關於真如所緣緣種子 189
四、 結論 204
參考文獻 205 |
|---|
| ISSN | 27050742 (P) |
|---|
| DOI | 10.6939/HIJBS.202004_3(1).0008 |
|---|
| Hits | 351 |
|---|
| Created date | 2021.03.05 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2021.03.19 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
