上座部大寺派とアバヤギリ派における頭陀支の解釈：『解脱道論』の所属部派に関連して=Interpretations of the Ascetic Practice (dhutaṅga) According to the Mavāvihāravāsins and the Abhayagirivihāravāsins: On the School Affiliation of the Vimuttimagga (解脱道論)
パーリ学仏教文化学会=SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF PALI AND BUDDHIST CULTURE
出版地
大阪, 日本 [Osaka, Japan]
資料類型
期刊論文=Journal Article
使用語言
日文=Japanese
關鍵詞
パーリ註釈文献; ブッダゴーサ; Visuddhimagga; アッタカター; 概念（仮法）
摘要
Buddhaghosa introduces unorthodox views of anonymous ones in his Visuddhimagga (Vism) and other Pāli commentaries, while Dhammapāla in his sub-commentaries sometimes identifies them as the Abhayagirivihāravāsins’. It has been pointed that some of the views are found in the Vimuttimagga (Vim), and consequently the Vim has been considered to be the work of this school. Nevertheless, some scholars threw doubts about the relevance of the coincidence of the three facts, that is, the anonymous ones’ views known to Buddhaghosa, the Dhammapāla’s identification and the doctine in the Vim. It seems, however, not fair if we, reputing that a theory is not enough proven, attempt to make an alternative explanation besed on a pile of hypotheses without verification and further investigation, while there is no rebuttal. It has to be more carefully weighed that if a sigle dhamma as a constituent element is different, it affects the basis of the elaborate system of the Theravāda Abhidhamma philosophy. In this sense, a placement of dhutaṅga (ascetic practice) in the Abhidhamma categories can be of great significance as one of the criteria to characterize the Abhayagirivihāravāsins. Taking that into account, I reexamined the controversy over the definition of dhutaṅga in the Vism and the Vim, and then considered how and why the Mahāvihāravāsins and the Abhayagirivihāravāsins classified it into a different category. Overviewing the references in the Vism and the Vim and especially looking closely the passage in the Vim: “[Dhutaṅga] should not be stated to be wholesome, unwholesome or indeterminate,” one may challenge their concordance. However, there is a further crucial evidence to link the Vim to the Abhayagirivihāravāsins, that in the Vim dhutaṅga is explicitly mentioned in the list of concept (paññatti) which has been unknown to the scholars. Looking into the Pāli canon, we often meet ascetic practitioners who are of evil wishes, pursue a reputation, and so on. There are philosophical gaps between the Vism and Pāli commentaries, too, regarding the understanding of dhutaṅga. Furthermore, we notice that the definition of dhutaṅga in the Vism was not given by Buddhaghosa, but was quoted from “Aṭṭhakathā” as an old commentary. It seems reasonable to suppose that discussions as to dhutaṅga arose in the Sīhaḷa-sources of Pāli commentaries and bhāṇakas (reciters), and that these two schools built their definitions of dhutaṅga, receiving the preceding discussions and trying to refuse the view that it can be unwholesome.
