インド哲学仏教学研究 25(201703) 007王 俊淇「吉蔵の『中論』科段について」
14
0
0
全文
(2) 1978. 6. 7. 1. (T1564.30.36b18–19) (gzhung lugs, *nīti) 8. 2.. (T1564.30.36c25–26) (mdo sde’i mtha’, *sūtrānta). 9. 3.. 6. (T1564.30.39b15). 1921. 1974. 1982. Huntington 1986: 7–8. 2003. 2015. 23. 7. 23 23 26 8. 9. 27. 'dir smras pa | khyod kyis theg pa chen po'i gzhung lugs kyis don dam pa la 'jug pa ni bstan zin na | da khyod kyis nyan thos kyi gzhung lugs kyis don dam pa la 'jug pa ston cig | (D no.3829: 94b) 'dir smras pa | da khyod kyis nyan thos kyi theg pa dang mthun pa'i mdo sde'i mtha' la brten nas lta ba'i rnam pa rnams mi srid par ston cig | (D no.3829: 95b). - 98 -.
(3) Prajñāpradīpa Prasannapadā. 10. 10. (T1564.30.1b18–c7). - 99 -.
(4) (MMK1.3) 11. 11. (T1824.42.7c4–8) (T2255.65.20a18) (T1824.42.32c9). 1976: 220–223. - 100 -.
(5) 12. (MMK1.3). 13. 14. 12. 374 409 →. 19 (T2059.50.374b25–c7) (T1718.34.1c14–15) (T1767.38.42a28–29). 13. (T2255.65.20b10–19) 14. T2255.65.20a22–24 1976: 224. - 101 -.
(6) 15. 16. 17. 18. 15. (T2255.65.20a24–b6) 16. 13–15. 17. T1716.33.794b8–10 1982: 407. 18. 2006: 169–195. - 102 -.
(7) 19. 20. 1. 1.1. (Chaps.1–21). 1.1.1 1.1.1.1. (Chaps.1–17) (Chaps.1–7). 1.1.1.1.1. →. 19. 1991: 734. →. 1976: 59–72. 20. (T1824.42.7c24–8a1) (p.28). - 103 -.
(8) 1.1.1.1.2 1.1.1.1.3 1.1.1.1.4 1.1.1.1.5 1.1.1.1.6 1.1.1.1.7 1.1.1.2. (Chaps.8–17). 1.1.1.2.1. (Chaps.8–11). 1.1.1.2.1.1 1.1.1.2.1.2 1.1.1.2.1.3 1.1.1.2.1.4 1.1.1.2.2. (Chaps.12–17). 1.1.1.2.2.1 1.1.1.2.2.2 1.1.1.2.2.3 1.1.1.2.2.4 1.1.1.2.2.5 1.1.1.2.2.6 1.1.2. (Chap.18). 1.1.3. (Chaps.19–21). 1.1.3.1 1.1.3.2 1.1.3.3 1.2. (Chaps.22–25). 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 2.. (Chaps.26–27.28) 2.1 2.2. 3.. (Chap.27.29–30) 3.1 3.2. - 104 -.
(9) 21. 22. 23. 2011. 21 22 23. (T1720.34. 382b27–c23). 1969. - 105 -. 1983. 1975.
(10) 24. 25. 24. (T1824.42.8b23– c6) 25. 1976: 506–511. - 106 -.
(11) 26. 27. (buddhadhātu) 24.32 yaś cābuddhaḥ. 28. svabhāvena sa bodhāya ghaṭann api | na bodhisattvacaryāyāṃ bodhiṃ te ’dhigamiṣyati ||. 29. (T1824.42.153c3) 30. 26. (T1824.42.53c8–16) 27. (Bodhiruci). (T1519). (Ratnamati). (T1520) (T2034.49.86b26–c1) 28. T1564.30.34a24–27. 29. Poussin 1903: 511. 30. de Jong and Lindtner 2004: 76. 2011: 434 (T1824.42.153b27–c5). - 107 -. 2002: 176–177.
(12) 31. 28. 2. de Jong, J. W., and Christian Lindtner 2004. Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Prajñā Nāma. 2nd ed. Chennai: The Adyar Library and Research Centre.. Garfield, Jay L. 2006. Ocean of Reasoning A Great Commentary on Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. New York: Oxford University Press.. Huntington, Clair W. 1986. "The Akutobhayā and Early Indian Madhyamaka Vol. I." Thesis, Asian Languages and Cultures, The University of Michigan.. Poussin, Louis de La Vallée, ed. 1903. Mūlamadhyamakakārikās (Mādhyamikasūtras) de Nāgārjuna avec la Prasannapadā Commentaire de Candrakīrti, Bibliotheca Buddhica. St. Pétersbourg: Commissionnaires de l'Académie impériale des Sciences.. 2011 1991 2011. 31. ·. 1976. 2002. - 108 -. ·.
(13) 1982 pp. 239–413 1921. 5. 1987. ― 21. pp. 29–53. 2014 2006. :. 2003 51. 2. pp. 869–863. 1982. 31. 1983. 15. 1. pp. 83–88. pp. 69–88. 1974 1975. ― 23. 2. pp. 663–664. 1978 1976. ―. 2011 pp. 221–252 1969. 22. 2015. Keywords. - 109 -. pp. 35–54.
(14) On the Analytical Topic Outline of Jizang (吉藏)’s Commentary on Madhyamakaśāstra WANG, Junqi The analytical topic outline (Keduan, 科段) is an exegetical method used in Chinese Buddhism for revealing the topics and structure of a certain Buddhist text by dividing and subdividing the text into several parts. This paper shall discuss the analytical topic outline of Jizang’s commentary on Madhyamakaśāstra and how he was influenced by Piṅgala’s commentary on Madhyamakaśāstra and Saddharmapuṇḍarikasūtra. Piṅgala, based on the criterion that Hīnayāna’s pratītyasamutpāda=dvādaśāṅga and Mahāyāna’s pratītyasamutpāda=anirodhānutpāda, divided Nāgājuna’s Madhyamakaśāstra into three parts, namely the first 25 chapters, chapters 26–27.28, and vv.27.29–30 of Madhyamakaśāstra, and ascribed them to Mahāyāna, Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna separately. Piṅgala’s rudimental Keduan system of Madhyamakaśāstra seems have not attracted much attention before the age of Jizang. For example, Jizang’s predecessors and contemporaries, the Sanlun masters of northland ( 北土三論師 ) composed a totally different Keduan system of Madhyamakaśāstra which stresses the importance of theme (宗). Compared with them, Jizang adopted Piṅgala’s triple outline of Madhyamakaśāstra, and further composed a highly developed Keduan system against the Sanlun masters of northland. Furthermore, Jizang endeavored to combine his Keduan system with Saddharmapuṇḍarikasūtra by ascribing the three parts of Madhyamakaśāstra to the fundamental Dharma-wheel (根本法輪), the derivative Dharma-wheel (枝 末法輪), and the Dharma-wheel that makes derivative Dharma-wheel return to the fundamental (攝 末歸本法輪) correspondingly. Besides, Jizang adopted the Buddha-nature (仏性) thought from. Saddharmapuṇḍarikasūtra and explained Madhyamakaśāstra with Buddha-nature. His endeavor to combine Madhyamaka with Buddha-nature brought a watershed in the history of Chinese Buddhism because in later times Tiantai (天台) and Chan (禅) schools both inherited the same understanding on Madhyamaka. Therefore, this paper will at first make a brief list of Jizang’s Keduan system and discuss how Jizang positioned every chapter of Madhyamakaśāstra systematically. And then this paper will examine how Jizang combined Madhyamakaśāstra with the thought of Buddha-nature.. - 118 -.
(15)
関連したドキュメント
これは基礎論的研究に端を発しつつ、計算機科学寄りの論理学の中で発展してきたもので ある。広義の構成主義者は、哲学思想や基礎論的な立場に縛られず、それどころかいわゆ
We prove that the PAM with Weibull potential is eventually localised at a single site with overwhelming probability (complete localisation ) and, moreover, that the
Part V proves that the functor cat : glCW −→ Flow from the category of glob- ular CW-complexes to that of flows induces an equivalence of categories from the localization glCW[ SH −1
This paper presents an investigation into the mechanics of this specific problem and develops an analytical approach that accounts for the effects of geometrical and material data on
The most far reaching generalisation of the Artin primitive root conjecture was considered by Lenstra [292], in the context of his research on Euclidean number fields: Let K be a
p≤x a 2 p log p/p k−1 which is proved in Section 4 using Shimura’s split of the Rankin–Selberg L -function into the ordinary Riemann zeta-function and the sym- metric square
Analysis of the results suggested the following: (1) In boys, there was no clear trend with regard to their like and dislike of science, whereas in girls, it was significantly
経済学研究科は、経済学の高等教育機関として研究者を
