유식(唯識)의 ‘동시 지각의 필연성’ 개념에 대한 요가 철학의 비판=A Study on Sahopalambha-niyama as the Reason of Vijñaptimātra: in the Case of Being Criticized by the Commentators of Yoga Philosophy
요가 철학의 일부 주석자들은 『요가주』에서는 직접 언급하지 않은‘동시 지각의 필연성’을 유가행파에서 주장하는 유식(唯識)의 근간으로간주하여 상당히 심도 있게 비판했다. 이 비판의 내용을 면밀히 고찰해보면, ‘동시 지각의 필연성’을 둘러싼 쟁론의 연원은 불교 논리학으로부터 전개되어 유식설로 비화된 불교학의 전통에 있었음을 확인할 수 있다. 요가 철학의 주석자인 Vācaspati Miśra가 이러한 전통 중에서 참고했을 가능성이 현저한 것으로는 Vasubandhu의 유식설과 Dharmakīrti의불교 논리학을 들 수 있다. 그리고 후대의 문헌인 『전철학강요』는 불교학의 전통을 개설하는 과정에서 이러한 정황을 충분히 입증한다. 요가철학에서 ‘동시 지각의 필연성’을 비판한 것은, 불교 내부의 쟁론을 끌어들여 상키야 및 요가 철학의 실재론, 특히 순수정신의 독자성을 강화하는 데 기여한 것으로 평가할 수 있다. Sāṃkhya-sūtra의 주석자인 Vij ñāna Bhikṣu는 『요가주』를 해설하면서 Vācaspati Miśra의 해설을 수용한 점에서, 유식설을 비판하여 요가 철학을 옹호한 Vācaspati Miśra의논의가 후대의 상키야 철학에도 적용되었을 것으로 추정할 수 있다.
Some commentators in the Yoga philosophy regard sahopalambha-niyama(the necessity of being perceived simultaneously) that was not directly designated in the Yogasūtra-bhāṣya as one of the foundational theories for Vijñaptimātra, which is the doctrine of Yogācāra school of Buddhism. And they caustically criticize the sahopalambha-niyama. The instance of the concept ‘being perceived simultaneously’ is mentioned in Sāṃkhya philosophy, which is part of the same lineage of Yoga philosophy. In this case, however, the term’s usage indicates the simultaneous existence of beings and their objects of awareness. On the other hand, the term ‘simultaneous’ in the case of sahopalambha-niyama indicates the contemporaneous nature of subjectivity and objectivity of awareness. Therefore, Yoga School’s treatment of sahopalambha-niyama can be understood as taking advantage of Buddhist debates in order to advocate their school’s theory. The only uncompromising theory in Yoga philosophy is the solitude of ‘pure consciousness’(Puruṣa), the unique subjectivity of awareness. Thus, ‘pure consciousness’ cannot be compatible with sahopalambha-niyama. It is the reason that Yoga philosophers decline it. This article explores the hypothesis that the arguments of sahopalambha-niyama(the necessity of being perceived simultaneously) in Yoga philosophy are derived from the logico-epistemology school and elaborated as a theory of Viñaptimātra in Buddhist traditions. It is a reasonable inference that Vācaspati Miśra(900～980 CE) in the Tattva-vaiśāradī noticeably adopted Vasubandhu's doctrines, particularly in the Vimśatikā-vijñaptimātratā-siddhi and the logic of Dharmakīrti(ca. 7th century). For instance, the Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha of Mādhava(1199～1278 CE) fully adduces the state of things which are introduced the Buddhist philosophical doctrines. Eventually, the reason that Yoga philosophy criticizes the concept of sahopalambha-niyama in Buddhists’ debates is to strengthen its own position on realism, particularly with respect to bolstering the notion of pure spirituality in Sāṁkhya-Yoga philosophy. This evaluation can be found in later literature such as the Sāṃkhya-sūtra and its commentary, the Sāṁkhya-pravacana-bhāṣya by Vijñāna Bhikṣu (1550～1600 CE).. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the discussion in the Tattva-vaiśāradī criticizing Buddhist Yogācāra doctrine and advocating Yoga philosophy would be applied to later Sāṃkhya philosophy.
目次
I 서론. 117 II 유식(唯識)의 명제. 120 III ‘동시 지각의 필연성’의 개념적 연원. 125 IV 동시 지각의 필연성에 대한 비판. 132 V 결론 142
