|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
釈尊はなぜ答えなかったのか：「無記」の意味=Why did the Buddha not Answer? Meaning of avyākata (Unexplained) |
|
|
|
| Author |
藤本晃 (著)=Fujimoto, Akira (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
印度學佛教學研究 =Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies=Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū
|
|---|
| Volume | v.68 n.1 (總號=n.149) |
|---|
| Date | 2019.12.20 |
|---|
| Pages | 491 - 485 |
|---|
| 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 |
|---|
| Keyword | 無記; 諸行無常; 一切行苦; 諸法無我 |
|---|
| Abstract | Why did the Buddha not answer the ten questions (four on life after death, four on the end and limit of the world, and two on the relation of body and soul) asked by other religious thinkers? His reason has not been clear yet.
A most popular opinion is that Buddhism is a way of empirically pursuing enlightenment, and thus it does not play with metaphysical questions. But Buddhism analyses all dharmas (things/matters), including imaginary ideas. Metaphysical aspects are naturally included.
Some scholars understand that avyākata means silence or the cessation of judgment to the ten questions as they are unknowable. But the Buddha allowed his disciples to name him sabbaññu (the omniscient). Is it plausible that there remained somethings unknowable to him?
On the contrary, the Buddha often preaches to his disciples that the ten questions do not make sense. That would mean that the ten questions themselves do not logically stand up from the Buddhist viewpoint, which consists of the three aspects: all constituent matters are unstable, all constituent matters are meaningless, and all matters are unsubstantial.
From the Buddhist viewpoint, the four questions on life after death do not understand the point that a “person” does not exactly exist, but mental and physical activities dependently originate.
The four questions on the end and limit of the world do not stand either, because perception of the world is the world for sentient beings. One can perceive nothing beyond his/her perception. The end and limit of the world means the end and limit of his/her perception.
Finally, because an eternal and unchangeable “soul” does not exist, such an imaginary concept cannot be subject to speculation. |
|---|
| Table of contents | 1．はじめに 491
2．総論： 十の問いは問いとして成り立っていない 491
3．各論①： 如来に関する問い 490
3.1. 如来を有情と見る場合（諸行無常，一切行苦，諸法無我） 490
3.2. 如来を覚者と見る場合（諸行無常） 489
4．各論②： 世界に関する問い（一切行苦） 488
5．各論③： 命に関する問い（諸法無我） 487
6．おわりに――十の問いは実体論に基づく誤謬―― 485 |
|---|
| ISSN | 00194344 (P); 18840051 (E) |
|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.68.1_491 |
|---|
| Hits | 397 |
|---|
| Created date | 2022.09.23 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2022.09.23 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
