|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
緣起之「此緣性(idappaccayata)」="Idappaccayata" in Dependent Origination |
|
|
|
| Author |
楊郁文 (著)=Yang, Yu-wen (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
中華佛學學報=Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal=Journal of Chinese Buddhist Studies
|
|---|
| Volume | n.9 |
|---|
| Date | 1996.07 |
|---|
| Pages | 1 - 34 |
|---|
| Publisher | 中華佛學研究所=Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www.chibs.edu.tw/publication_tw.php?id=12
|
|---|
| Location | 新北市, 臺灣 [New Taipei City, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese; 英文=English |
|---|
| Keyword | 緣起說=paticca-samuppada-katha; 法住性=dhamma-tthitata; 法定性=dhamma-niyamata; 此緣性=idapaccayata; 緣起法則=paticca-samuppada-naya; 如性=tathata; 不他性=avitathata |
|---|
| Abstract | 緣起法門為佛法的重心，然而緣起甚深，難於現觀；從古及今經，律，論多所談論，現代學界亦然。日本佛學泰斗宇井伯壽氏將「idappaccayata」譯作「相依性」，並依「識緣名色，名色緣識」經句，解釋原始經典之緣起說為「相依性」；此後，日本學界有贊成者亦有異議者，經過數十年尚在討論中. 筆者有緣看到增田英男氏「空と緣起」一文，主在評論「緣起空說」：意圖以「緣起」為理由，為「空」立說，特別是將「緣起」作「相依」解；並「以相依性故，一切存在無實體」 作為現代的解釋。增田氏上溯原始緣起說來檢討它，多所論述，卓見俯拾即是；然而亦有所見與筆者相異者，或須說明清楚者在。有關早期佛教「緣起」之「此緣性 (idappaccayata) 」由宇井伯壽氏譯作「相依性」為始作俑，引導許多追隨者，亦引發不同的聲音，投入「緣起相依性」的討論；筆者將有所發言，除對增田英男氏之評論再評議外，亦將對三枝充惪氏之評議，加上拙見以供大家參考。 首先，討論「種種緣起說」，其次 評論「緣起的相依性」之錯誤，當以「法住性，法定性」了解此緣性，其次由「緣起法則認識此緣性：緣起」，繼之「由因果法透視此緣性：如性、不違如性、不他性」，最後 提出「結言」。
The theory of Dependent Origination is the essence of Buddha dharma. However, Depend Origination is very profound and hard to penetrate. From ancient time until today, there have been many discussions in sutras, vinayas, and sastras. Contemporary scholars do the same. The leading Buddhist scholar of modern Japan Ui-Hakuju(宇井伯壽)translated the term "idappaccayate" as "inter-dependence". He also interpreted the theory of Dependent Origination in primitive Buddhist sutras as "inter-dependence" by quoting the sentences in sutras："With consciousness as condition there is mentality-materiality. With mentality-materiality as condition there is consciousness." Henceforth, in Japanese academic circle, some agreed with him while the others didn't. After several decades, it is still under discussion without definite conclusion. The author is lucky enough to read Masuda-Hideo's(增田英男)article entitled "Dependent Origination and Voidness".He attempts to comment on "the theory of voidness with dependent origination as its cause", "dependent origination as inter-dependence", "because of inter-dependence, all existences have no real essence" as the modern interpretation. Masuda-Hideo traces the primitive theory of dependent origination to examine this subject. He has outstanding views everywhere.However, some of his views differ from mine or need elaboration.As regards the theory of dependent origination in primitive Buddhism, Ui-Hakuju is the first one to translate the term "idappaccayata" as "inter-dependence". He thus guides many followers to join the discussion of "dependent origination and inter-dependence." Of course, some scholars echo with different opinions. I will express my humble views to comment on Masuda-Hideo's comment and Mitsuyoshi Saigusa's(三枝充惪) evaluation.Firstly, I will review the various theories of dependent origination. Secondly, I will comment on themistake of interpreting dependent origination as inter-dependence. I opine that "idappaccayata" should be understood as "relatedness" of states", and"regularity of states." I also suggest that we should try to understand "idappaccayata" through the law of"dependent origination", and to penetrate"idappaccayata" through reality, not unreality, and not otherness. Last part is the conclusion. |
|---|
| ISSN | 10177132 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 1807 |
|---|
| Created date | 1998.04.28
|
|---|
| Modified date | 2017.06.16 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
