Site mapAbout usConsultative CommitteeAsk LibrarianContributionCopyrightCitation GuidelineDonationHome        

CatalogAuthor AuthorityGoogle
Search engineFulltextScripturesLanguage LessonsLinks
 


Extra service
Tools
Export
漢訳『廻諍論』の六句議論解釈:梵本における第2句の問題点をめぐって=The Interpretation of ṣaṭkoṭika vāda in the Huizheng lun 廻諍論: The Problem of the Second koṭi (Controversy) in the Sanskrit Edition
Author 児玉瑛子 (著)=Kodama, Eiko (au.)
Source 印度學佛教學研究 =Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies=Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū
Volumev.68 n.2 (總號=n.150)
Date2020.03.20
Pages982 - 979
Publisher日本印度学仏教学会
Publisher Url http://www.jaibs.jp/
Location東京, 日本 [Tokyo, Japan]
Content type期刊論文=Journal Article
Language日文=Japanese
KeywordVigrahavyāvartanī; 廻諍論; ṣaṭkoṭiko vādaḥ; Nāgārjuna
AbstractThis paper examines a textual problem in the second koṭi (controversy) of the ṣaṭkoṭika vāda (six-fold controversy) in the Vigrahavyāvartanīvṛtti ad Vigrahavyāvartanī k. 2. Johnston and Kunst’s edition (JK) has been read as the most common edition of the Vigrahavyāvartanī(-vṛtti). JK make a partial emendation of the second koṭi of the ṣaṭkoṭika vāda based on the Chinese translation of the Vigrahavyāvartanī(-vṛtti), the Huizheng lun (廻諍論). However, previous researches conducted to interpret the meaning of the ṣaṭkoṭika vāda do not consider the validity of JK’s emendation.

The first interpretation of the ṣaṭkoṭika vāda is that it is an objection by a realist depending on the assumption that “emptiness cannot negate the svabhāva of all things” refers to the Śūnyatāvādin’s statement (sarvabhāvāḥ śūnyāḥ). Nevertheless, according to JK, contrary to this assumption, the second koṭi derives the conclusion that “the statement cannot negate svabhāva” from the reason that “it is not empty.”

To discuss this doubtful emendation, I compared the two ṣaṭkoṭika vādas, i.e., the Chinese translation on which JK depends and the Sanskrit manuscript. As a result, it became clear that logical context of the Chinese translation is different from that of the Sanskrit original not only in the second koṭi but also for the whole ṣaṭkoṭika vāda. Therefore, it is difficult to adopt only a part of the second koṭi from the Chinese translation and apply it to the Sanskrit edition. Hence, JK’s emendation is not valid, and previous researches according to JK also should be reexamined.
Table of contents1.問題の所在 982
2.梵本における六句議論 982
3.漢訳における六句議論 981
4.結論 980
ISSN00194344 (P); 18840051 (E)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.68.2_982
Hits51
Created date2022.09.29
Modified date2022.09.29



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.
650217

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