|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
弥勒論書の三性説 ─ 識の相分等との関連において ─=On the Tri-svabhava Doctrine in Maitreya's Works |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
竹村牧男 (著)=Takemura, Makio (au.)
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
哲学・思想論集=Studies in Philosophy=テツガク・シソウ ロンシュウ
|
|---|
| 巻号 | n.15 |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 1990.03 |
|---|
| ページ | 155 - 188 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 筑波大学哲学・思想学系 |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
http://www.logos.tsukuba.ac.jp/Nlogoskhp.html
|
|---|
| 出版地 | 桜村, 茨城県, 日本 |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 日文=Japanese |
|---|
| 抄録 | It is said that there were two types of theories in the Yogacara-school, that is, Nirakaravada and Sakalravada. According to Bodhibhadra's Jnanasarasamuccayanibandhana, the difference between the two theories was in their understancling of akara (objective images) in the vijnana (cognition). Asanga asserted the former theory and understood the akara as parikalpita-svabhava (nothing other than not true existence). Dignaga and his followers, on the otherhand, held the latter view and took it as paratantra-svabhava (a somewhat real phenomenon). This interpretation of the two theories is widely accepted among presentday-buddhist scholars. In his "Die Philosophie des Buddhismus," Frauwallner states a similar opinion that Maitreya and Vasbandhu are Nirakaravadin, while Asanga is Sakaravadin.
Then a question arises whether or not the old philosophers of the Yogacara school such as Maitreya really said that akara in vijnana is parikalpita-svabhava? In this paper, I try to clear up this problem by investigating the Tri-svabhava doctrine especially in Maitreya's Mahayanasutralarpkara and Madhyantavibhaga.
My conclusion is that the assertion that tha akara is parikalpita-svabhava is not found in these Maitreya's works at the start of the Yogacara-school. |
|---|
| 目次 | 問題の所在 155
一、『大乗荘厳経論』の三性説 160
二、『弁中辺論 』の三性説 169
結び 181 |
|---|
| ISSN | 02867648 (P) |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 447 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2010.03.16 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2020.06.24 |
|---|
 |
Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac)での検索をお勧めします。ＩＥではこの検索システムを表示できません。
|
|
|
