|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
『般若波羅蜜多心経幽賛』における「空」の解釈について=On the Interpretation of śūnya on the Bore boluomiduo xin jing youzan |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
吉村誠 (著)=Yoshimura, Makoto (au.)
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
印度學佛教學研究 =Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies=Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū
|
|---|
| 巻号 | v.66 n.2 (總號=n.144) |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 2018.03.20 |
|---|
| ページ | 547 - 553 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 日本印度学仏教学会 |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
http://www.jaibs.jp/
|
|---|
| 出版地 | 東京, 日本 [Tokyo, Japan] |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 日文=Japanese |
|---|
| キーワード | 慈恩大師; 唯識; 三性三無性; 中観; 如来蔵 |
|---|
| 抄録 | Kuiji’s 窺基 Youzan 幽賛 (T1710) is one of the earliest commentaries on the Heart Sūtra 心経 translated by Xuanzang 玄奘. In the introduction to this text, Kuiji insists, based on the theory of three periods of teaching 三転法輪 in the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra 解深密経, that emptiness (śūnya 空) and existence (bhava 有) are not contradictory, but rather neither existent nor non-existent according to the Middle Way 中道.In the commentary he interprets śūnya in terms of the three approaches of: (1) the three non-natures 三無性, (2) negation of the imaginary nature (parikalpita-svabhāva 遍計所執性), and (3) śūnyatā 空性 as the fully accomplished nature (pariniṣpanna-svabhāva 円成実性), based on the theory of three natures 三性 articulated in the Cheng weishi lun 成唯識論.
The Youzan contains Mādhyamika comments on śūnya, which is interpreted from the perspective of the two truths 二諦.However, all of them are criticized from the Yogācāra perspective of the theory of three natures. The remarkable point is this: while Madhyamaka insists that ordinary persons (bāla 凡夫) originally being noble ones (ārya 聖者) depends on the interpretation that form (rūpa 色) is originally emptiness (śūnya 空), Yogācāra insists that there is a difference in ordinary and noble depending on the understanding that there is also difference in form and emptiness.
The difference is clear by the interpretation of practice (caryā 行). Madhyamaka interprets this term to mean “taking nothing as practice,” but the Yogācāras criticize this interpretation, asserting that “there is something as practice.” Kuiji, who was concerned that the Mādhyamika interpretation of śūnya might undermine the theoretical basis for practice, insists that the argument for the usefulness of practice could be supported by the Yogācāra’s expanded interpretation of śūnya.
Thus, it can be said that the emphasis of practice by the Yogācāra interpretation of ‘śūnya’ is a main feature of the Youzan. This explains why the Yogācāra comments on caryā account for the bulk of the arguments made in the Youzan. |
|---|
| 目次 | はじめに 55
一 『幽賛』の構成 547
二 三転法輪説による非有非空中道の立場 548
三 三性説による「空」の解釈 548
四 勝空者と如応者の「空」の解釈 549
五 勝空者と如応者の「行」の解釈 551
おわりに 552 |
|---|
| ISSN | 00194344 (P); 18840051 (E) |
|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.66.2_547 |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 219 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2022.08.02 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2022.08.02 |
|---|
 |
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。
|
|
|
