|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
『五蘊論釈』の法処所摂色におけるスティラマティの註釈態度について=Sthiramati’s Commentary on the Content of Dharmāyatana in the Pañcaskandhakavibhāṣā |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
清水尚史 (著)=Shimizu, Naofumi (au.)
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
印度學佛教學研究 =Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies=Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū
|
|---|
| 巻号 | v.68 n.1 (總號=n.149) |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 2019.12.20 |
|---|
| ページ | 390 - 387 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 日本印度学仏教学会 |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
http://www.jaibs.jp/
|
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 日文=Japanese |
|---|
| キーワード | 安慧; スティラマティ; 五蘊論釈; 法処所摂色 |
|---|
| 抄録 | This essay studies Sthiramati’s view of dharmāyatana in the Pañcaskandhakavibhāṣā (PSkV). Sthiramati accepts five types of dharmāyatana, just as does Asaṅga in the Abhidharmasamuccaya (AS). However, Vasubandhu explains only avijñapti in the Pañcaskandhaka (PSk). The five types of dharmāyatana are ābhisaṅkṣepika, ābhyavakāśika, sāmādānika, parikalpita, and vaibhūtvika. Among them, sāmādānika corresponds to avijñapti. Sthiramati commented on why the four types were not mentioned in PSk. First, Sthiramati commented that ābhisaṅkṣepika and ābhyavakāśika were not re-explained as dharmāyatana because they were not different from paramāṇu. Next, for parikalpita and vaibhūtvika, both are the same as vijñāna, so it is interpreted that it was not explained as dharmāyatana. Therefore, Sthiramati understands that Vasubandhu did not deny the four kinds of dharmāyatana, but didn’t dare to explain it. There is no negative attitude toward Vasubandhu in Sthiramati’s commentarial attitude in the PSkV, and this clearly shows the character of PSk as a short text (saṃkṣepita). |
|---|
| 目次 | 『五蘊論釈』の法処所摂色に関するスティラマティ註について 390
極略色と極䋽色が説かれない理由 390
遍計所起色と自在所生色が説かれない理由 388
結論 388 |
|---|
| ISSN | 00194344 (P) |
|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.68.1_390 |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 127 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2022.09.23 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2022.09.23 |
|---|
 |
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。
|
|
|
