Vol.64 , No.3(2016)208桂 紹隆「『集量論複注』第4章梵語写本研究報告 ａ： 『正理門論』の喩例部分の回収」

The Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies

NII-Electronic Library Service The JapaneseAssociation of Indian and Buddhist Studies

Journal

oflndian and BuddhtstStudiesVol,64,No.3,March 2o16

(195)

A

Report

on

the

Study

of

Sanskrit

Manuscript

ofthe

Pramanasamuccayattka

Chapter

4:

Recovering

the

Example

Section

of

the

INtydyamukha

KATsuRA

Sh6ry[i

1.

The

Present

Situation

ofthe

Study

ofthe

Prama""n.

asamuccayatrka-More than ten

_years

have

_passed

since

I

started editing

the

Sanskrit

manuscript ofPST chapters

3,

4,and6 and reconstructing

the

lost

sanskrit

texts

of

the

same chapters of

PS

and

PSV.

Meanwhile,

chapters 1 and 2of

PST

have

been

critically edited and

_published

by

a

_group

of scholars at

the

Austrian

Academy

of

Sciences

headed

by

Prof

Ernst

Steinkellner

(Steinkellner

2oos,

Lasic

2o13).

I

am

happy

to

report

that

we

have

completed

the

_preliminary

work

fbr

editing

PST

chapters

3,

4,

and

6

in

Kyoto

and

Tsukuba

and

that

the

critical and

diplomatic

editions will appear

in

due

course, The remaining

fifth

chapter will

be

worked out

in

Vienna.

I

have

published

two

papers

that

contain

the

reconstructed Sanskrit text of ps chapter

3

(Katsura

2009,

2011).

In

the

Appendix

of

this

_paper

I

will

_present

the

remaining

_portion

of

PS

chapter 3 and

the

whole

PS

chapter 4

in

Sanskrit.

Bold

scripts are used

for

the words

from

_pratr-kas

in

PST, normal scripts

fbr

those alluded to

in

psT

and

italics

for

those

reconstructed

from

the

two

Tibetan

translations

ofPS and

PSV.

2.

Sanskrit

Fragments

ofthe

Example

Section

ofthe

INlyttyamukha

As

a result of my study of

PSV

chapter 4,

I

would

like

to

_present

some

Sanskrit

fragments

ofthe example section of NMu

that

is

an early work ofDignaga available only

in

Chinese

translation.

As

Tomabechi

2009

and

Kan6

2012

reported,

there

exists a

Sanskrit

manuscript ofNMu at

Rwa

sgren monastery

but

it

is

stillnot accessible to any

student of

Buddhist

logic.

Isincerely

hope

that

it

will

become

_available

to

those

_who

study Buddhist

logic

in

Indiaand

China.

Until

that

time

comes itis

_probably

meaningfu1

1237

(

196) AReportontheStudyofSanskritManuscriptofthePvztrnanctsarnuccayatiltaChapter4

(KATsuRA)

tocollect asmany

Sanskrit

fragments

of

NMu

as

_possible.

2.1.

The

Structure

of

NMu

in

Comparison

with

PS

and

PSV

I.

Proof,

Pseudo-proof

(Taisho,

vol.

32,

_pp.

Ia7-3b9).

I.1.

Thesis,

Pseudo-thesis

(p.

Ia7-b4).

Cf.

PS,

PSV

3

(pararthanumana),

I.2.Reason,

Pseudo-reason

(pp.

Ib5-2c2).

Cf

PS,

PSV

3

(parartha-numa-na).

I.3.

Example,

Pseudo-example

(pp.

2c2-3b9). C£ PS,PSV 4

(drs,

_tanta).

II.

Means

ofvalid cognition

(p.

3blO-c16).

II.1.

Perception,

Pseudo-perception

(p.

3blO-c2).

Cf.

PS,

PSV

1

(pratyaksa).

II.2.Inference

(p.

3c2-16). Cf PS,PSV 2

(svarthanumana),

5

(apoha).

III.Refutation,Pseudo-refutation

(pp,

3c16-5c26).

C

£

PS,

PSV

6

gati).

IVL

The

Points

ofDefeat,

Cencluding

Remarks

(pp.

sc26-6a6).

Cf

PSV

6

gati).

NMu

is

a manual of

debate

(vada)

in

the traditionof *upetyahrdaya

(Chi.

fUngbian xin

lun

htaJLN?.),

'TUrkas'a-sua

_(Chi.

_Rushi

_lun

knff?.),

_Vadavidhi

(Chi.

_Lungui

thwt),

and

ACydyapraves'a

(Chi.

Yinming

ru zhengli

lun

pa

opJX,.iEpath),

while

ps

and

psv

make up a systematic

treatise

on epistemology and

logic,

i.e.,

_pramana

tradition,

which consists of

the

foIlowing

six chapters:

Chapter

1

Perception,

Chapter

2 Inference-for-oneselC

Chapter

3

Inference-for-others,

Chapter

4

Example,

Chapter

s

Apoha,

and

Chapter

6

False

rejoinders.

By

introducing

the

new category of "inference-fbr-others,"

Dignaga

succeeded

in

integrating

the

vada

tradition

into

the

_prama4a

tradition.

As

he

states at

the

very

beginning

of

PSV

Chapter

1,

Dignaga

reused

the

relevant

portions

of

his

early compositions such as NMu.

ConsequentlM

with the

help

of

Jinendrabuddhi

and others,we can restore or coajecture

Sanskrit

fragments

ofnearly

6o%

of

the

example section of

NMu.

Due

to

space

limitations

I shall only

_give

some samples.

2.Z.

Some

Sanskrit

Fragments

of

Example

Section

of

NMu

The

four

verses

in

this

section ofNMu are reused

in

PS

4

with some modifications.

(i)NMu

v.ii:

ntpaii}iLwa

ftft,"paJfiJtli

JH=Z#wa

eegiH

Ntl}L

C

£

PS

4.2:s5dhyendnugamo

hetolj

sadhyabhave can5stiti

1

khyapyate

yatra

drstanta}

Lsa s5dharmyetaro

dvidha

11

NMu v 11ab

is

reused as

PS

4.2ab

by

changing

the

term

_paksa

(zong

:)

to

sadlrya, which,

I

believe,

indicates

that the

fbrmer

term

belongs

to

the

vada

tradition

and

the

latter

to

the

_pramapa

tradition.

Both

terms

in

this

context refer to a

_property

to

be

-The Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies

NII-Electronic Library Service The 　Japanese 　Association 　of 工ndian and _Buddhist 二_St二udies

A　Report　on　the　Study　of　Sanskrit　Manuscript　of　the　Prama_”asamucc _の厂atik_亘

Chapter

4 （KATsuRA ）

　

（

197

）

proven

（sadhya −

dharm

の

．　

P54

、2d　

differs

　

from

　NMu 　v・11d　

because

　P5　treats　

pseudo

−

example 　_separately 　

from

　example 　

proper

． （2_）NM ロv．12：應以非 作 證其

’

常 或以無 常成所 作 若爾 應 成非所説 不遍 非樂・等合 離

＝PS　4．4：nityat 互，

krtakatvena

　nafitv 互

d

　v5tra 　

k

互rya 伍

l

　　

　　　　

syAd 　anukti 　

kpti

’

vy5piny 　ani_爭 a甲 ca　same ’nvaye 　

Il

　

　

dengheli

等合離

in

　

NMu

　_v．　12d　apPears 　

to

　

translate

“same 　’nvaya −

Vyatireke

，

”

not　“same ’

nvaye ” of　

P54

，4d ．　

Xuanzang

’s　understanding 　of　

the

　

text

，　

however

，　

is

　correct 　

because

Jinendrabuddhi

　comments 　as　

follows

：same ’nvaya 　

iti

　tu　

lye

　sδ

dharmyavaidharmy

（

ryor

anugame 　sαε

f

_ζ

y

　

arthah ．　In

　

other



words _， ‘’anvaya ”



in



P5



4

．

4d



is



interpreted



as

“

anugaMa ”（

fbllowing

　or　accompanying

）that

　includes　

both

　anvaya （the　affirmative

concomitance ）

in

　the　similar 　example 　and 　

yya

亡

ireka（

the

　negative 　concomitance ）

in

　

the

dissimilar

　example ．

（3）NMu 　v，13：如 自決 定已 稀他 決定生 説宗法相應 所立餘 遠離

＝P54 ．6_：svanigcayavad 　anye _§互rp　ni≦cayotpadanec ⊂

hay

且

I

　

　　　　pak

孚adharmatvasambandhasadhyokter 　anyavarjanam 　

11

（4_）NMu ・v．・14_：若 因唯所立 或差別相類 譬喩應 無窮 及遮遣 異 品 ＝　PS　4．IOcd −11ab_{：sahetoh 　sidhyamitrasya}tadvise

爭asya 　v互　mitau 　

11101i

　

　　　　　

nidar ≦an 互navasth 訌sy巨

d

　vy亘vrtti≦ca　vipak _爭atah　

I

（11ab _）

　　

xianglei 相 類 or　

lei

類 a且one 　

in

　

NMu

　v．

14b

corresponds 

to

“

miti”

in

　

P54

．

loc

，　which 　

is

interpreted

　

by

　

Jinendrabuddhi

　as “

upama ”

（

analogy ）．　

consequently

， 類

／

相 類

in

　

NMu

should 　mean “

（

making 　an

_）

analogy ” （

leitui

類 推

）

．

　

　

NMu 　v．14d　exactly 　corresponds 　with 　

P54

．11b　

quoted

　

in

　P5T （Ms　191a6 − 7

）

and 　

its

Tibetan

　

translation

_（

Derge

　

237b2

／

Peking

　

268b4

−

5

），　

However

，　

the

　

two

　Tibetan

translations

　_of　

P54

_．10cd − 11ab　

differ

　considerably 　

from

　

NMu

　v．　 14 ．　Kanakavarman

tranSlateS

・

it

_：

gtan

　tShigS　

bCaS

　

_pa

’am 　

b5grub

　

bya

　t5am　

11

　

d

・　

khyad

　

par

　

gyi

　

dpe

　

yin

　na　

11

　

dpe

　・

i

thug　

pa

　med 　

P

α　

d

αng　

I

　

l

　mi　mthun 　

phyogs

　

las

　

ldog

　med ’_のiur　

11

，　which 　seems 　

to

　suggest 　

the

reading 　of　

pada

　

d

　as “

Vy

ほvrにか 觚 or

塑

vipak 爭atah

”

and 　which 　makes 　a　

better

sense ．　

Vasudhararak

_寧

ita

’_s　translation　_{neither 　corresponds 　with} 　

NMu

　v．　14　nor 　

does

　

it

make 　

good

　sense 　

but

　

it

　appears 　

to

　contain　a　sentence 　

like

　LLVyav _．rttir　va（_顕” which 　

is

　a

paraphrase

　

_given

　

by

　

Jinendrabuddhi

　

in

　

P5T

（

Ms

　

181b1

）．　NMu 　_v．　14d_and

P54

・11b_make

better

　sense 　with 　a　negative 　

particle

　of　

Kanakavarman

’s　

translation

　or　with 　

the

　word

1239

　一

（】

98

）A　Report　on　the　StUdy　of　Sanskrit　Manuscript　of　the　Prama4asamucc_の，ap ’

hi

　

Chapter

　4 （KATsuRA）

“

v_碗

_y

δ” of　vasudhararak _爭ita．　However ，　

for

　

the

　

time

　

being

_，　

I

　would 　

like

　to　

take

　

pada

　

b

“

vydiv _，rttis’　ca　vipak5atah ” as　a　

kind

　of　rhetorical 　

question

　or　as　a　_sentence 　

in

　_{which 　we}

should 　read 　

in

　

the

　word “_{釵 σ}t”

from

　

_p

δ

da

　a．　

In

　any 　case _」

inendrabuddhi

　supports 　our understanding ．

（5）NMu ，　

p

，2c5−8：喩 有．「種 ．同法異 法．

Cf．　VibhUticandra’s　note 　on 　PVV　ad　PV　3．16 （

p

．292_）：ny 訌_yamukha ヨcarye _りokta _叩 s盃

dharmyarp

vaidharmyarp 　cobhayam ．

　　　　　　

『

同法 者謂 「立聲無常 ，勤 勇無間 所發性故．以 諸勤勇 無 間所發 皆見 無常． 猶如 瓶等 ⊥ 異

法者 謂 「諸有常住 見 非勤 勇 無 間所發． 如虚空等」．

＝PsV　ad　P54 ．2：sddharmyegea 　tavat− ani_り

yah

　

6

αbdαれ

prayatn

ぬnantatt _ソakatvdit_，　

yad

　

dhi

　

prayatn

互na− ntariyakarp 　tad　anitya_即

d

_牌αη1，　

yathE

　

gha

_‡a　iti．　vaidharmyepa 　tu ＿ nityam 　_aprayatnana −

ntariyakarp　

drP

_重am ，yath順

kds

’am 　iti，

　　

Dign

盃

ga

　

insisted

　on 丘）rmulating 　an　example −statement 　

in

　a　

proper

　way _；namely ，　

in

the

　similar 　example ，　

hetu

；sa

“

dhanadharma

　

is

　

followed

　

by

　

pakSa

＝sCtdhyadham ！α_，　and 　

in

the　

dissimilar

　example _，　

the

　negation 　of　

pakSa

＝ 5頁

d

耽

y

_α

dh

_αηηα

is



fbllowed



by



the

negation 　of 　

hetu

＝_{sddhanadharma ．}

He

_seems

to



be

_{aware 　of}

the



law

_{of　contraposition ．}

The

“universality”

of　an　example −statement 　

is

　expressed 　

by

　

the

‘‘

y

α重，，．

t

α

t

．．．”

construction ，　The 　

presence

　of　

the

　word “

d15

_重αpη”seems 　

to

　suggest 　

that

　

the

　universality

of 　

the

　_example 　

is

　

limited

　

to

　

the

　_world 　

that

　

has

　

been

　_observed

，　

in

　other 　words ，　the “

known

”

world

_（

v’

dft

α

）

．　

Thus

，　

the

　word “

d

_剏δηtα

”

seems 　to　mean “

the

　essence （αntα）of

［

our

_】

observation

_／

experience ．”

（6）NMu ，　_p．2c8−11：前是 遮 詮．後唯 止濫 ，

Cf

．　

PS　

4．3c： paryuddSo

　

n醇edha ‘

　

ca

　

I

　PSv

　

ad



P5



4．3c：

P1rvatra

　P

αr_）tuddsah ，　aparatru



tu

P鴈 吻αpr_螂 ε

dh

α_砂uktαm ．

由合及離比度義故．

＝　PST　_ad 　P5V　4．3cd_{：anvayavyatirekabhy 且m 　arth 吾num 訌n巨}t．

由 是雖對 不立實 有 太 虚 空等 而得顯 示 無 有宗處 無因義成 ．

⊂

f

，P5v　ad　P54 ．3cd：evaM 　ca　nityδnabhi_ソupagame _ヵ

f

　vαfdhαη_ηyα

dr

_舁命1tah　siddhah ， 　　　　　　　N

　　

The

　negative 　

particle

　

NAN

　of　the　

term

“α一_噴

y

αηゴ’

in

　the　above −

quoted

　similar

example

_（

_y

α

d

　

dhi

　

prayatna

照 ntariyakarP 亡α

d

αη

f

_重

y

α_η1　

d

_醜αm ，　

y

α

th

δ　

ghatah

）

is

　used 　

in

　

the

sense 　of　

paryud

ゐα （

implicative

　negation _／negation 　of　a　noun 　

phrase

）_，　

in

　other 　words _，

the

　negation 　of　nf_り，a

does



imply



the

eXistence ofanitya

things

．

The



term

“nityam ”

in



the

The Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies

NII-Electronic Library Service The 　Japanese 　Association 　of 工ndian and _Buddhist 二_St二udies

A　Report　on　the　Study　ofSanskrit 　Manuscript　ofヒ

he

　Prarna4asamuccayapt’

ka

　Chapter　4 （KATsuRA ）

　

（

199

）

dissimilar

　example

（

nityam 　apraya亡nanantartyakarp　

dr5t

αm _，　

yathakdS

’am

_）is

　equivalent 　

to

“

na　ani_りlam ”

and 　

the

　negative 　

particle

　

there

　

is

　used 　

in

　

the

　sense 　of　

pm5

〔或

y

α一

prattSedha

（

non −

implicative

　negation 　or　mere 　negation ／negation 　of　a　verb _／sentence _），　

in

　other

words ，　

the

　negation 　of　anitya　

does

　not　

imply

　

the

　existence 　ofnity α　

things

，

（7）NMu ，　

p

，2cll−14：復以何 縁 第

一_{説 「}

因宗 所隨逐 ⊥ 第二_{説 「宗無 因不有」．不 説 「因無宗}

不有」耶．由如是説．能顯示 「因同品定有．異 品遍無」非 顛倒 説．

＝P5V　ad 　P543 ：

kim

　

punah

　

k

巨rarpam − ekatra　

hetoh

　siiclhyenanugama 　uk 亡ah _，　

dvitiye

　tU

5諏册

_W

召

bh

ξレ¢

hetor

αbhδvα西，　na　tu　

hetvabh

δve　sδ（丑_しソaSydibh 凌va　

iti

・evarp 　

hi

　

hetoh

　sapak 亊a　eva

sattvam ，　s亘

dhyAbh

亘ve　c巨sattvam 　eva ≦akyam 　

dar

≦ayitUm ，　na　viparyayat ．

（8_）NMu ，　

p

．2c17−20： 「餘此相似⊥ 是似喩義．何謂 「此餘 ⊥ 謂於 是處 （1）所立能立 （II）及不

同 品 ［・不成不 遣］ （HI）雖有合 離 而 顳倒説． （IV）或 於是 處 不作 合離 ． 唯現 所立 能立倶 有．

異 品 倶 無．

Cf

，　

P54

，13：（1）

hetUs

盃

dhyadvay

五

yukta

り（II）tadvipak爭a叩 vina 　

krta

 

1

　　

　　

　　

　

（m ）viparit 互nvayo 　

dvedh

互tad互

bhaso

’

_py

（lv_）ananvayab 　

l

　

l

PSV　ad　PS　4．13：viparitinvaya ξca − （HL1）

yad

　anitya _ηt　tat　prayatn百nantan ’_{yakam ，}　gha_重avad 　

iti

sadharrnye _ロa．（HL2 ）

_yad

　aprayatnanantariyakarp 　tan　nityam 　

drs

_，　

tam

_，　akaS’avad 　ity　etad　vaidharrnye _ワa・ （IV）ananvayas ’　ca　−

yatra

　

hetusddhyarthayos

　tadvipaksayos’　ca　

kovalah

　sahabhavah 　

pradars

’

yate

，　

yatha

’ ρ嬲 α伽 δη αη亡  αkαm α吻 αm ，吻 ・m　aprayatnanatarfyakarp 　

ghata

’

kdsavad

　

iti

．

　　

Xuanzang

　seems 　

to

　

be

　missing 　a　

few

　characters 　

in

　

the

　above 　

passage

　of　

NMu

，　

for

otherwise 　

it

　

does

　not 　make 　sense ，　We 　must 　

insert



bucheng



buqi

_αn 不成不遣 after

丿

f

butongpin

及 不 同 品．In　this　context 　

it

　

is

　to　

be

　noted 　

that

　

_yipin

異品

／

butongpin

不同 品

for

　vipα

k

_爭

q／

a5apakSa 　

in

　

his

　

translation

　of　

NMu

stands

for



two

things

，　viz．， “

the

　

dissimilar

domain

”

_（

against 　5apak 爭a　

［

tongpin 同 品

］

）

and “

the

　opposite 　side”（i，e．_，　the　negation _／

absence ）．

（g）NMu ，　

p

．2c20−25：如是．二法 或 有隨

一 _{不成不 遣、或有二倶 不成不遣．}

如 立 「聲常無 觸 對故 」，同法喩 言 「諸 無觸 對 見彼皆常 ．如 業 ．如 極微 ．如 瓶等 」．

異 法 喩 言 「謂諸 無常 見有 觸對 ．如極微 如 業， 如虚 空等⊥

Cf，　P5V　_ad　P54 ユ3：tatra（1，1）

hetVayukta

｝_）− nityall　Sabdail_，α5pαrゴ砿〉δt，　

param

亘ロuvad 　iti．（L2）

sidhy 互_{yuktab −}

karmavad

　

iti

．（L3）

dvay

百yuktalj −

gha

_ζavad　iti．

vaidharm _匚yα

dr

_爭垣n亡e アガー

y

α

d

　anityarrl　ta亡∫_ρα αvα

d

　

dr5rom

，（

II

．1）たαrmαvαt （

IL2

）

p

ακ1η！δpuvad （

IL3

）

冱

k

おαvαccε亡f．

（10）NMu ，　

_p

．22c25− 26：由此已 説 同法喩 中 有 法不成． 謂對不許 常虚 空等．

Cf．　P5V　ad　P54 ．13：anena 　s盃

dharmyopaniten

盃

k

互

6idi

　nityam 　anabhyupagacchato 曲 army − asiddhyabhidha ’nam 　parih．rtam．（lncomplete ）

一

₁₂₄₁

　一

(200)A

Reporton theStudyofSanskntManuscript ofthePrumfi4asamuccayatika _{' chapter4(KATSURA)}

ln

this

paper

I

could not

_present

all

the

Sanskrit

fragments

ofthe example

_portion

of

NMu

that

I

could recover

fromJinendrabuddhi's

PST.

In

the

future

I

shall

_publish

a new

English

translation

of

NMu

together

with all

the

currently available

Sanskrit

fragments,

Appendix

Prama-n.

asamuccaya

Chapter

3

(continued

from

Katsura

2011)

(4)

Sarpkhya

theory

i)

of reason criticized

pramanavisqyajfianit

s5dhyadharmaS ca sadhanam

1l43cdl1

na vistaravaconoktaip

_pradhdnena

hi

_nanvayah

1

va-kye 'For

upanayo 'yuktah

pratijn"irtho

viruclliyate

114411

arryatrapy ekakaryatvam _{upEdanasya tadgatib}

1

bahir

nobhayatha'dosdd abhyupetya viruddhata

l14sll

aneka-ntas'ca

drst5ntah

sidhyahinah sandsti ca

1

ndstisiddhir vis'istac ca na nisedho

dvihetukab

1l4611

prayogo

'pi

dvidhayuktab

pariSeso

viparyaye

1

ek5pohe na

_yukto

'sau

na

paficatvarp

ca vitavat

lI4711

ekavidinisedhenapariS'esoyadisyate

[

pratyupdyamanantatvam avitana'm.

_prasctiyate

114sll

anataru:floka

(s)

vadavidhi

theory

2)_{ofpseudo-reason criticized}

asiddhabhedo nak}tyatah na capi _vyabhicarfn,ah 3}

1

viruddha

ekah siminyo 'siddho 'sa-dhararpo 'parah

1149Il1

viparyayanirnittarp ca nokeam cestavighfitakrt

lsoabl

(6)

Nyaya

theory

`)_{ofpseudo-reason criticized}

na vis'esitam anyo 'pi nanyad eva tadaTryata-

1Isocdl1

anekfintad asiddho na nyiina-n na sa-dltya-sadhanatl-siddhitah

lslabl

(7)

Vaigesika

theory S)_{ofpseudo-reason criticized}

abhavo va _{prasiddhatva-t}viparydsQx`vipan-to 'lpam ucyate

Ilslcdl1

Prama-n,

asamuccaya

Chapter

4

(1)

Exarnple

-The Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies

NII-Electronic Library Service The JapaneseAssociation of Indian and Buddhist Studies

AReportontheStudyofSanskrit ManuscriptofthePrama"asamuccayatika

Chapter4(KATSURA)(201)

trirapo

hetur

ityuktah _paksadharme tusarpsthitab

1

rudhe rupadvayarp

gesarp

drstahtena

_pradarSyate

1i111

sidhyenEnugaino

hetoh

sadhyabhave ca nastita

1

khyapyate

yatra

drstantab

sa sidharmyetaro

dvidha

l1211

6) vidhina sadhane sadhyarTi

khyapyam

sidhye 'sati tvasat

1

paryudaso nisedliaS catathasativilaksarpe

l1311

nityat5'krtakatvena

ndsitvid vitra

karyati

1

syad anukti

kui'vyApiny

anistarp ca same 'nvaye

H41l

') sadh5rapaviSistatvarp viruddhatvarp ca sidhane

1

syad ekaikadvayinuktAd udakaryam ato

dvayaJn

l1s11

svanigcayavad anye$arp niScayotpadanecchaya

1

paksadharmatvasambandhasadhyokter

anyavar

janam

ll611

8)

hetor

_yady

api

drsranto

na

_ppthagtvena

varrpyate

1

nopanayanavad _vyartho'nuktahetvarthadars'ana-t

l1711

hetob

sambandhasiddhyartharp ced udahara"advayam

1

ppthag evastu

drstantah

na

_ppthag

lokasirrryatah

11s11

udaharaqasidharmyarp tair

hi

kevalam

ucyate

1

sadhyasidhanati nokti tath5 caupamyamAtrakam

1l91l

na vaidharmyera tatrapisahacaryam vipaksayoh

I

sahetolj sidhyamitrasya tadviSesasyava mitau

11lo11

nidargananavastha syad

_vyavptiS

ca vipakgatab

1

9)

yadi

hetuij

paksadharmamat,um

syad

vyabhicary

api

1111l1

iO) na

bhaved

ubhayoktau cetsambhavo navasu

dvayoh

l12ab1

(2)

Pseudo-example

hetusidbyadvaydyuktab

tadvipaksarp

vina

krtalj

1112cdll

viparitanvayo

dveclhE

tadibhiso 'py ananvayalj

1

ahetvfidir adrstanto viparit5nvayEdikah

11131l

upasarpharaviglistab sambandhasyipradarganit

114abI

antaragloka

(3)

vddavidhi

theory ii)_{of example and}

pseudo-example

criticized tayor itina valctavyarp ma

bhUd

anyonyasidhyat5

1114cdl1

na ca sidharmyamitre4a sahacaryarp nidartyate

1

arthipattyiryad uktam cet

tan

na v5cyarp vipakscryolp

I1lsil

na s5dhyanugrahah

kas'cit

aneninyad

dhi

sdd}tyate

l

vidhina copad.rs,

_Farp

cen nityarp nes;arp _prusdyate

11161l

anyorryam avinibhavaS caprayatnotthanityayoh

1

prasakto

navinabha-vasambandhas tadyipaksayoh

l1

17ll

na caika eva

drstantadosa

ityupadarSitam

l18ab1

-

₁₂₄₃

-(202)

AReporton theStuclyofSanskntManuscriptofthe PramapasamuccayaFikdiChapter4

(KATsuRA)

(4)

Nyaya

theory

i2)_{ofexample and}

pseudo-example

criticized

naivarp sa _gamako

drsta

ubhayoktir apa'rthika-

1llscdl1

paryiyid aayatah siddheh s5dharmyarp ca na _yojyate

I

sEmirryarp

hetunaivoktarp

viSesab sviSrayEnugab

1

1

1911

pratipaksasya

cayogo viSistenipi _tadgatih

l2oabl

(s)

Vaigesika

theory

i3)_{ofexample and}

pseudo-example

criticized

khadrstintaprasarigo

va na vi vikyaikadeSata

1

12ocd1

1

anvayEnabhidhEnic ca drs.

tantapratirapakah

l

sidhanatvopamirthau ca svEtanbye saty anarthakau

1i2111

(The

end ofchapter 4) Notes

1) Fragments

from

PST Ms,:

(1)

_{parapratydyana'rtham}

anuma-nasya vit5vitabhedid

dvaividhyam,

tatravitasya yikyabh5vab

_{paficapradegab}

_{pratijfiidibhed5d}

_iti.

(2)

_yad etat samanyatodrstani

anumanarp

Se$avat,

esa

hetur

atindriyarparp

bhavanarp

samadhigame. tasya

_{prayogopacaraviSesad}

dvaiviciliyam

- _{vita avita iti.}

₍₃₎

_{asti cayam}

_{adhyatmikanam}

_bahyanarp

_ca

_bhedinam

ekajatisamanvayah.

(4)

asti

_pradhanam,

bhedanam

anvayadarSanat. adhyAtmikanarp bhedinarp

karyakararpabhatanam

ekajatisamanvayo

drstah

..,

SabdasparSaraparasagandhah

_pafica

traydnam sukhadubkhamohanarri sannivegaviSesah,

kasmat,

_paficanArp

_paficanEm

ekakaryabhavat.

(s)

sadhanasamasavacanarp

hetuh.

(6)

sarnanyapttrvakanam

loke

bhedanam

_{ekajatisamanvayo}

d;stah.

(7)

sadhyad;stantayor ekikriya.

(s)

sadhyfivadliararparp

_pratijfia.

(g)

evam ebhih

_paficabhir

vitaih

pradhanasya parigraharTi

lcTtva

punar

avitaih

karisyamah.

2)

Fragment

from

PST

Ms.:asiddha'naika-ntikaviruddhartha eva

hetudosah/hetvabhdsa-h.

. 3)

Or:nalryuktovyabhica-n'4ah.

4) blydyasatra1.2.4-8are

_quoted.

s) Fragments

from

PST Ms.:

(1)

aprasiddho 'napadeSab,

asan sandigdhaS ca; cfiVicitsesikasanu 3.1.10-11.

₍₂₎

viSesaubhayatha

darSanid

firdhvatfidivat

sam5nyam eva,

6) NMuv11:MpafiiFfve

:X..pa7f<Jfi

IEt=`M#k

eeuethltN{lL.

7) NMuv. i2:kLX-frEff#"

utLXft,."atuteP

Xtauent;Prvfst

1<fiXee\aes.

8) NMu v,13:

an

U

za

Ee

Jrc

de

ta

E]

'

!E

ut

ft'

za

di

ke

nt

"L

ec

rk

ee.

9) NMU V 14:

X

pa

ma

i"

iZ

ntESUNva

#wa

ma

ff..

fi

Npa

inM

se

n"n.

Io) Or:

_{paksadharmatvamatrasya}

hetutve

_vyabhicary

api

/

_{paksadharmatvamatram} ced

dhetuh

_sydid

zyabhicaryapi.

11) Fragments

from

PST Ms.:

₍₁₎

tayolj sambandhanidarganarp

drstdntab,

_yad

idarn

abhidhinam - _yathi

ghata

iti,

_yena va-sambandho nidargyate - _{yat prayatn5nantariyakarp} tadanityam

iti.

(2)

asiddh5rthati

drstdntadosab.yatha'

buddhivad

_ghatavac

ca.

12) IN(yttyastitizi1.1.36-38arequoted.

13) Fragrnent

from

PSTMs.:

_{prasiddhobhayo}

drstfintalj.

-The Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies

NII-Electronic Library Service The 　Japanese 　Association 　of 工ndian and _Buddhist 二_St二udies

A　Report　on　the　Study　of　Sanskrit　Manuscript　ofthe　Prama4asamuccayatika −

　

Chapter

　4 （KATsuRA ）

　

（203 ）

Abbrev 瓰tions

NMu

PSP5TPSVPVPVV

理

y

ξ

y

αm ロk赴α of　Dignaga ．　Yinming　zhengli 　men 　

lun

因 明正 理 門論．　Chinese　translation　

by

Xuanzang 玄奘 ．　Taisho　_no ．　1628

，　vol ，　32，　

PP

．1a1−6a7 ．

PramCtrpasamuccaya　ofDign 吾

ga

． Prama4αsamuccayatiha 　ofJinendrabuddhL I’_{ramapasamuccayavrtti 　ofDignaga} ． pramanav疎rttika　ofDharmakirti ， 　　　　1

“

Dharmakirti’

s　Pramapavarttika　with 　a　

Commentary

　

by

　Manorathanandin ．” Ed．　R巨

hula

Safikrty盃

_yana

．

Journal

　ofthe 　Bihar　and 　Orissa　Research　Socie_り

y

：　New　

Series

　24−26，1938− 1940． Bibliography

Lasic，　Horst　et　aL　2013．　

Jinendrabuddhi

’

s　v面 腕mα

i

αvα亡l　Pramd4asarnロccayatika −

Chapter　2．　Part　l，

　　ご面 cα昆

d

ゴ百oη．part　2，　Diplomatic　Edition．　Sanskrit　Texts _廿omtheTibetanAutonomous Region

　　　15／1， 2．

Beijing

：

china

　Tibetology　Publishing　House；vienna：Austrian　Academy 　of　sciences 　　PreSS，

Kan6　Kazuo 加 納 和 雄 ，2012，‘‘

Atisha

　ni　

yurai

　suru 　Retinji　

ky

亘zO　no 　Bonbun 　shahon ：1934　nen 　no

　　

Chibetto　ni　okeru 　

Bonpon

　ch6sa　o　

kiten

　

t

。　shite” ア テ ィ シ ャ に由来する レ テ ィ ン寺 旧蔵の梵

　　

　

文 写 本：1g34 年の チベ ッ トに お け る梵本 調査 を起 点として ，Indo　ronrigaku 　

kenkyti

イン ド論 　　　理学研 究 4：123−161．

Katsura，　Shoryu ．　2009．“Rediscovering 　Dignaga 　through 　

Jinendrabuddhi

．” In　Sanskrit　Manuscripts　in

　　　China∫Proceedings（）

fa

　Panel　at　the　2008　Beijing　Seminaron τibetan　5tudies_，　October　13　to　17，　ed ．　Ernst

　　　Steinkellner　et　aL，153−166．　Beljing：China　Tibetology　Publishing　House ・

　　　　　．

2011

．『

A　

Report

　on　the　Study　of　Sanskrit　Manuscript　of　the　Pramapαsαmucc _のyaFika　Chapter 　　　3．” IBK

　59 （3）：（163）一（170），

Steinkellner，　Ernst

　

et



al．2005．　

Jinendrabuddhi

’s　Pramduasamuc〔：_僅ソa重

ika

：（：

hapter

　1．　

Part　

1，　

Critical

　　　Edition．　Part　2

，Diplomatic　Edition．　Sanskrit　Texts　

from

　the　Tibetan　Autonomous 　Region　1．Beijing：

　　

　

China

　

Tibetology

　Publishing　House；　Vienna：Austrian　Academy 　of　Sciences　Press．

Tomabechi 　T6ru 苫 米 地等流 ．2009 ．“Rishuky_δ（HyalcugojuJiju

hannyakyo

−）_{no　shinshutsu}Sansukuritto

　　　shahon ”『理趣 経 （百五 十頌 般 若経 ）』の新出 サ ン ス ク リッ ト写 本．　Mikkyδ　Bunka　Kenkya∫

ho

　　

　

k

｛

y

σ密教 文化 研 究所紀 要22：1−17．

（This　research 　was 　supPorted 　in　

part

　

by

　a　Grant−in−Aid　

fbr

　Scienti丘c　Research （C）丘om 　

JsPs

　no ， 24520058．）

Key　words Dign百_ga，

Jinendrabuddhi

，　

Prarna

_”asamuccaya ，　

Prama4asamuccaya

_重

fk

δ，ハ

lydyamukh

α，

　　　　　　

dr5tan

亡a_，　Xuanzang

　　

　　

　　

　　

　　

　

　　

　　

　　

　　

　　

　　

　　

　　

　　

　　

（Emeritus　Professor，　Hiroshima　University，　PhD ，　D．Litt，）

一 1245 一