|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
關於《阿含經》與《尼柯耶》的對讀=The comparison of Āgama and Nikāya |
|
|
|
| Author |
郭忠生=Kuo, Chung-sheng
|
|---|
| Source |
正觀雜誌=Satyabhisamaya: A Buddhist Studies Quarterly
|
|---|
| Volume | n.55 |
|---|
| Date | 2010.12.25 |
|---|
| Pages | 105 - 292 |
|---|
| Publisher | 正觀雜誌社 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www.tt034.org.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 南投縣, 臺灣 [Nantou hsien, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Note | 作者為悲廣文教基金會董事 |
|---|
| Keyword | 口口相傳=Oral tradition; 佛典結集=compilation of Buddhist canon; 具見釋尊弟子=the Blessed One's disciple endowed with vision; 長行與偈頌的關係=the relation between prose and verse; 池喻=simile of the pond; 誦者謬誦=reciter’s error; 一次性事緣=narrative on a particular event; 施頌=Verse on Gifting; 月喻=simile of the moon; 修福增=Verse on Cultivating Merits; 經文表述類型化=stereotyping of narrating; 十 四無記=avyAkRta（avyAkata）; 世間=loka; 不違法性=not contrary to dharmadhAtu |
|---|
| Abstract | 釋尊與弟子開示教法的言詞，乃至嗣後所結集出來的佛典，有相當長的期間，都是口口相傳，後來雖筆諸文字，還是口傳與文書併行。口口相傳，本來就有可能發生訛誤，《大毘婆沙論》就說到「誦者謬誦」的事例。「經律是在不斷結集中成立的」，現代所看到的經律，如同考古遺址一樣，是不同時期的層層積累，錯綜複雜。以菴婆羅婆提女（Ambapali）供養園林為例，此一事緣只發生一次（「一次性事緣」），我們看到了形色各異的傳述，可是從內容來看，這些資料確實傳述同一事緣。本文提出這樣的思考：除了敘事的部分外，同一教法在不同的情境中，重複出現，其用語措詞，表達方式，是否必然相同？《雜含》第464 經等，固然讚歎「大師及弟子，同句，同味，同義」，但從《雜含》「如上廣說，差別者」，「亦如上說，差別者」之類的經文，顯示同一教法，其用語措詞，不必然相同；在《雜含》第1164 經，諸比丘對於「中道」各抒己見，釋尊給予認可，這是以不同的文句，不同的角度，來解說相同的論題。以「十四無記」為例，即可看出多樣的文本差異現象。舍利弗能針對問題，「異句、異味而解說」，顯示不同解說的多種可能性；質多羅（Citta）長者解說法義，見證佛法「自由解說」的開放態度，但都要立基於「不違法性」，即使是《道行般若經》的「承佛威神」，還是如此。同樣的教法，可能針對不同的對象，以不同的方式表現出來，不同旨趣的「月喻」，也是如此。佛典的偈頌有多樣的功能，在不同情境下的〈施頌〉、〈修福增〉，文字有差異，內容也可能有調整；附在長行之後的偈頌，有可能是長行的要點，也可能別有所本。考量了這一些複雜的因素，《阿含經》與《尼柯耶》的對讀，除了文句的逐一對應關係外，如果所對讀的，其實不是具有「同一性」的經文，如何給予適當的評價？
For a long period of time, The teachings of the Buddha and his disciples, and the Buddhist texts that was compiled after, has always been transmitted by oral tradition. Later, even after it was written down it still was transmitted both in writing and in oral. By oral tradition, it is possible to make mistakes, like the examples of the reciter's error that was said in *Abhidharmamah āvibhā sā-śāstra. " sutra and vinaya is established by the continuing compilations.", The sutras and vinayas that we see in their present form is just like archaeological sites, layer upon layers accumulating from different
times, very complex. For example, the garden offering made by lady Ambapali, this event only happened once, (narrative on a particular event) we have seen all different kinds of narratives, but from the contents, these information indeed report the same event. This article proposes this idea: Except for the narrative parts, when one and the same teaching repeatedly appears in different situations, does its terms and ways of interpreting, have to be the same?
Sajyukt āgama sutra no. 464 and others, admittedly praises "master and disciples has the same word, same style, same meaning." but Sajyukt āgama also saw the expression such as “Same as detailed above, differences were…", "Like said as above, differences were…" These kind of sutras present the same teaching but its terms doesn’t have to be the same; In Sajyukt āgama sutra no 1164 , different wording are said by disciples regarding the "middle way", The Buddha gives them approval, this is by different words and different angles to talk about the same topic. for example in "fourteen avyakata" , you can see a diversity of differences in text. Śāriputra（S āriputta）can use " different wordings, different styles of explanations" in contrary to the questions, showing possibilities of various explanations. The way Hoseholder Citta explains the teaching witnesses the open minded attitude of "freely explain" in Buddhism, but it all has to be based on "not contrary to dharmadhatu", the same is true for" Basing on Buddha's powers" said in Dao Xing Buo Re Jing. A particular teaching can be presented different ways in contrary to different people, also in line with this is various versions of "simile of the moon" with diverse emphasis .
Verses in Buddhist texts have multi-features, Both in Verse on Gifting and Verse on Cultivating, wording and contents vary under kinds of situations ; verse that is attached after a prose, may possibly be the restatement of the former, it's also possible for other meanings. Considering these many complex reasons, other than the verbatim comparison , in case the compared actually isn't one and the same text of Āgama and Nikāya, then how to give an appropriate evaluation? |
|---|
| ISSN | 16099575 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 997 |
|---|
| Created date | 2013.06.21 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2017.09.06 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
