Site mapAbout usConsultative CommitteeAsk LibrarianContributionCopyrightCitation GuidelineDonationHome        

CatalogAuthor AuthorityGoogle
Search engineFulltextScripturesLanguage LessonsLinks
 


Extra service
Tools
Export
진제의 {十八空論}에 나타난 공성의 분류의 특징=Meaning and Significance of the Differentiation of the Emptiness in Paramārtha’s Treatise on Eighteen Emptiness
Author 안성두 (著)=Ahn, Sung-doo (au.)
Source 불교연구=佛教研究=Bulgyo-Yongu
Volumev.51 n.0
Date2019.08.30
Pages77 - 107
Publisher韓國佛教研究院
Publisher Url http://kibs.or.kr/xe/
LocationKorea [韓國]
Content type期刊論文=Journal Article
Language韓文=Korean
Note저자정보: 서울대학교 철학과 교수
Keyword공성의 분류=Differentiation of the Emptiness; 법무아=Non-substantiality of all factors; 진제=Paramārtha; 십팔공론=Treatise on Eighteen kinds of Emptiness; 본성공=Emptiness of its own Nature=svabhāva-śūnyatā); 불성=Buddha Nature
Abstract이 논문은 『대반야경』 등의 대승불전에 나타난 다양한 공성의 분류가 가진 의미를 특히 진제의 『十八空論』에 초점을 맞추어 살펴본 것이다. 공성의 구별이란 주제는 『해심밀경』(SNS VIII.29) 등을 위시한 유식문헌에서 중요하게 다루어지고 있는데, 여기서는 특히 MAVBh 및 MAVT의 해석과 비교해서 제시하면서, 진제 해석이 보여주는 특징을 살펴보았다. 그의 공성 해석의 특징은 내용적인 면에서 3성설의 용어로 몇 가지 공성을 설명하려는 것이며, 이런 점에서 그는 유식학의 관점에서 각각의 공성 이해를 충실히 보여주었다고 말할 수 있다. 나아가 진제는 本性空을 불성 개념을 갖고 설명하려고 하는데, 이를 관련된 MAVT에서의 안혜의 설명과 연관하여 볼 때 이런 해석은 당시 인도유식 내부의 흥미로운 사상사적 전개의 하나였다고 간주할 수 있다고 보인다.

In this paper, my aim is to deal with meaning and significance of the concept of Emptiness in the works of Yogācāra Buddhism, particularly in Paramārtha (CE. 499-569)’s Treatise on Eighteen kinds of Emptiness (十八空論).
Among the Yogācāra works, there are many texts, such as SNS (VIII.29-31) etc., which discuss the meaning of the Emptiness by giving different subdivision and categorization for this concept. In this occasion I like to mention particularly two texts, MAVBh and MAVT, respectively attributed to Vasubandhu and Sthiramati, because of their intimate relationship with Treatise on Eighteen kinds of Emptiness of Paramārtha. By comparing the explanations given in these two texts with Paramārtha, the meaning and significance of his interpretation can be extracted on a solid basis. I like to summarize two important points of Paramārtha’s discussion of the Emptiness as follows:
(1) In his interpretation of some subdivision of the Emptiness, he use the words of Three Nature (trisvabhāva), and in this sense he demonstrate himself to be the true follower of traditional Yogācāra.
(2) His interpretation deviates from the so-called orthodox Yogācāra in case of the ‘Emptiness of its own Nature (svabhāva-śūnyatā, 性空)’. He wants to stress on the more positive aspect of that concept, and interprets it as ‘Buddha Nature (buddhadhātu, 佛性)’. In this context, it is highly interesting to see the parallel passage of MAVT 55,19-56,6, which mentions another interpretation that the tathāgatagarbha idea is meant for that Emptiness. This shows clearly that in Paramārtha’s period some Indian Yogācāras must have felt the necessity to subsume the tathāgatagarbha idea under the traditional Yogācāra concept of the Suchness (tathatā).

Table of contentsⅠ. 들어가는 말 79
Ⅱ. 『十八空論』에 나타난 18종 공성 81
Ⅲ. 『十八空論』의 본성공의 해석에 나타난 특징 95
Ⅳ. 나가는 말 102
ISSN12253154 (P)
DOI10.34275/kibs.2019.51.077
Hits234
Created date2021.12.23
Modified date2021.12.24



Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE

Notice

You are leaving our website for The full text resources provided by the above database or electronic journals may not be displayed due to the domain restrictions or fee-charging download problems.

Record correction

Please delete and correct directly in the form below, and click "Apply" at the bottom.
(When receiving your information, we will check and correct the mistake as soon as possible.)

Serial No.
631333

Search History (Only show 10 bibliography limited)
Search Criteria Field Codes
Search CriteriaBrowse