Nettippakara.na=引導論; Hermeneutics=詮釋學; Interpretation=解釋; hāra=範疇; Naya-vada, Buddhism and Jainism=佛教和耆那教方法學
摘要
Since the German philosopher Schleiermacher (1768-1834) Western philosophy has adopted a distinction between problems of "interpretation" and problems of "hermeneutics". "Interpretation" is the application of rules to an object (for example，a text) in order to distinguish wrong from correct interpretations. "Hermeneutics" does not share this applied character of "interpretation". "Hermeneutics" does not aim at explaining texts but instead relates to the act of understanding itself. The questions asked by the hermeneutician precede the work of the interpreter. What conditions must be fulfilled so that an act could be an act of understanding? Hermeneutics consists of "principles"; interpretation of "rules". The Nettippakara.na (Guide) is an extra-canonical Buddhist scripture，ascribed to the Buddha's disciple Kaccana. It intends to be a manual for commentators on the Buddhist scriptures. The Nettippakara.na does not intend to be a commentary itself，nor is it merely a set of rules which the commentator can turn to whenever commenting on a difficult section in the scriptures. Modern Buddhist scholarship often uses the term "hermeneutics" in connection with the Nettippakara.na, however，with no or little regard to the strong philosophical underpinning which the concept of hermeneutics has received over the last two centuries. This paper attempts to indicate in what sense the Nettippakara.na may have hermeneutical value. In a first section I discuss the difference between the two categories of principles in the Nettippakara.na, the "haaras" and the "nayas". Both offer a number of angles from which one can investigate the text for "implications". The main section of the paper takes a closer look at the first class of principles, the haaras. I wish to confront the haaras with one specific question. One of the principles of hermeneutics is the idea that meaning is inexhaustible. In other words, it would be naive to suppose that complete understanding of everything is possible，if only we had sufficient rules of interpretation. Understanding is an ideal rather than an immediate goal. How do the haaras in the Nettippakara.na safeguard this "surplus of meaning"?
