Attā=我; Nirattā; Anattā=無我; Upaniṣad=奧義書; Indian Buddhism=印度佛教; Early Buddhism=Primitive Buddhism=原始佛教=早期佛教=初期佛教=根本佛教
摘要
The present article deals with the non-Buddhist concepts of attā and their refutation through the doctrine of anattā. This article is divided into five sections.
Section I discusses Nikāya passages which states which the attā is not existent either in the sphere of the Conditioned or in the realm of the Unconditioned. It is nothing but a figment of imagination.
Section II refers to the different opinions held by scholars as to the proper implications of the term attā. Except for the lone voice of E. Conze who found similarity between the attā and the Puruṣa of the Sāṃkhya, all other scholars who cared to ponder over this problem, seem to be preoccupied with the relationship that could exist between the attṃ and the Ātman of the Upaniṣads. This may be due to the fact that these two terms-attā and Ātman-are philologically identical. The philological identity led the scholars readily to accept the view that these terms are also philosophically identical without making any further investigation into the exact onnotations of these two terms. The need for a more objective study of the problem of equation of attā and Ātman is obvious, and a suitable methodology for such a study has been suggesed.
Section III delineates the main features of the thoughts of the Śāśvatavādins, Ekacasassatavādins, the ucchedavādins and the followers of the Satkāyadṛṣṭi. They were the chief propagators of the attā heresies rejected by the Buddha.
Section IV, Part A contations the criticism of all these heresies meant for the Buddhist monks. The validity of such a criticism mainly rests on the Buddha's claim to superior and higher knowledge of which the heretics know nothing.Part B of the same Section offers us the following two patterns of reasonings which were ultimately meant for the non-Buddhist ascetics and employed for the refutation of the different attā heresies except the Ucchedavāda: I) To reject the opponent's view by showing the internal contradictions, a method which was later followed by Nāgārjuna with great success; ii) To temporarily accept a part of the opponent's view in order to show that the view as such is unacceptable. This may be taken as an instance of skillfulness of means praised so much in the Mahāyāna.
Section V comes to the conclusion that the anattā doctrine was mainly formulated keeping in view the śāśvatavāda and the Ucchedavāda. This is in conformity with some statements in the buddhist texts that the buddha preached the anattā doctrine as a middle way between these two extremes. It is also clear that the attā concepts of the Śāśvatavādins and the Uccedavśdins cannot be identical with the Ātman of the Upaniṣads. the Buddhist sages were aware of the fact the that the attā rejected by the buddha is 'ahaṅkāra-viṣayaḥ' whereas the Upaniṣadic Ātman is 'Buddhānām viṣayaḥ'.