Nobuyoshi YAMABE received his M.A. in Indian Philosophy from Osaka University in 1987 and Ph.D. in Religious Studies from Yale University in 1999. After teaching at Kyushu Ryukoku Junior College and Tokyo University of Agriculture, currently he is Professor of Asian Philosophy at Waseda University, Japan. While his primary research interests include Indian Yogācāra and the development of Buddhist philosophical thought and meditational practices through Central and East Asia, Yamabe’s numerous publications—in English, Japanese, Chinese, and one in French—covers various aspects of Buddhism, ranging from the analysis of philosophical concepts in Buddhist meditational practice to comparative research on Japanese Buddhist traditions. He is also attempting to shed light on Buddhist practice through observations of Buddhist art and remains of Buddhist monasteries in India and Central Asia. Yamabe’s most recent publications include “A Comparative Study of the Methods of Practice in the Tendai and Zen Traditions in Medieval Japan (in Japanese),” “A Hypothetical Reconsideration of the ‘Compilation’ of Cheng weishi lun,” “Ālayavijñāna in a Meditative Context,” a chapter in The Oxford Handbook of Meditation (“Concentration and Visualization Techniques in Buddhist Meditation”), and “Vimalakīrti Sūtra Painting: Digital Restoration of Stein Painting 57.”
According to Gregory Schopen and Jeffrey Bass, the vinaya of the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition places more importance on the recitation of texts, and the practice of meditation in monasteries is not particularly encouraged. Nevertheless, Bass also notes that the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition recognizes communal practice of meditation in monasteries as well and stipulates how meditation halls should be constructed. In this article, referring to both textual passages and on-site observations of Indian rock-cut monasteries, I would like to reconfirm that meditation was indeed practiced in Indian Buddhist monasteries and discuss the location of meditational practice within the monasteries. Although the relevant texts primarily discuss surface monasteries (vihāra), I assume they are applicable to rock-cut monasteries as well. A Sanskrit manuscript corresponding to the Chinese Madhyamāgama, no. 139 clearly shows that monks practiced meditation on a decomposing corpse on a bed in their monastic cell. On the other hand, as pointed out by Bass, passages from the Poṣadhavastu of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya describe the concrete structure of meditation halls. According to this text, these “meditation halls” (prahāṇaśālā) have cells (layana). These “meditation halls” seem to be similar in structure to what is usually called “vihāra caves.” This suggests that small cells in the vihāra-type caves could have been used for zracticing meditation. In addition, the episodes of some monks making noise and disturbing the meditating monks found in the Abhisamācārikā of the Mahāsāṅghika tradition give us the impression that monks meditated together in a large hall. Some of the relevant passages have parallels in vinaya texts of other Buddhist traditions. I suspect this “large hall” may well have been the central hall of the vihāra cave. Since it is not always easy to match textual descriptions with actual monastic sites, the apparent agreements between the texts and caves are significant. Through comparison between the textual passages and cave sites, I attempt to shed light on the manner of meditative practices in Indian cave monasteries.
目次
Abstract 20 Introduction 21 A Sanskrit Manuscript Corresponding to the Madhyamāgama, no. 139 25 Meditational Practice in the Meditation Hall with Cells 26 Conclusion 40 References 56
