:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:二諦之區別與空之三要點--以《明句論》第二十四章為主
書刊名:法鼓佛學學報
作者:釋見弘 引用關係
作者(外文):Shi, Jien-hong
出版日期:2010
卷期:7
頁次:頁67-106
主題關鍵詞:CandrakīrtiSatyadvayavibhāgaŚūnyatārthaPrasannapadāMadhyamakāvatārabhāṣya月稱入中論注明句論二諦之區別
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:69
本論文旨在闡述月稱( Candrakīrti ) 於其重要著作《明句論》 ( Prasannapadā ) 第二十四章的注釋中, 對「二諦之區別」 (satyadvayavibhāga)一詞的理解,與此和「空之三個要點」的關連性。丹治 昭義教授以為月稱忽略了第七詩偈到第八詩偈的文意之連結,也就是忽略了 「二諦之區別」與「空之三要點」的關連性。同時,他還將月稱對「二諦之區 別」一詞之理解,說明為是在表達言語、教說(=世俗諦)和不可說的實在 (=勝義諦)此二者間的乖離、斷絕乃至相互矛盾之關係性。因為勝義是不可 說的,不能用言語來表達的,只要一旦進入言語表達或心思所能擬及的範圍, 任何超俗的境界就不再是勝義諦而是世俗諦了。因此,二諦是斷絕之存在,這 一點正是二諦必須被區別之處。然而,根據筆者對《明句論》與《入中論注》 (Madhyamakāvatāra-bhāṣya)的調查,發現「二諦之區別」一字並非如丹治 教授所理解般,只使用在表達世俗諦和勝義諦間之乖離、斷絕乃至相互矛盾之 關係上。月稱使用「二諦之確立」(satyadvayavyavasthā)一詞作為「二諦之區 別」的同義字,強調二諦之次第性,重視世俗諦的積極功能,強調唯有透過世 俗諦才能正確理解空,也就是理解勝義諦。故「二諦之區別」一詞,與中觀學 派真理觀的設定也就是確立有關,它多次出現在月稱與其他學派議論真理的場合。再者,月稱也未忽視「二諦之區別」與「空之三要點」的關連性。這從他 提到:因為不知道「二諦之確立」(=「二諦之區別」),故未能正確地了解 「空」、「空義」和「空用」(=「空之三要點」)一文,可以得到印證。
Abstract This paper mainly sets out the understanding of the term “differentiation of the Two Truths” and the connection between that term and the “three points of Emptiness.” These discussion ideas were indicated in the commentary of the twenty-forth chapter in Prasannapadā, one of the most significant book written by Candrakīrti. Professor Teruyoshi Tanji believes that in Prasannapadā, Candrakīrti overlooks the link between the context of the seventh verse and the eighth verse. This means that he overlooked the association between “differentiation of the Two Truths” and the “three points of Emptiness.” Professor Tanji also clarifies the meaning of the term “differentiation between the Two Truths,” which is mentioned by Candrakīrti. Tanji explains that the term is depicting the deviation, the cut off, and even the contradictory of the relationship between the truth that can be expressed and taught with language (the conventional truth) and the truth which is beyond words (the ultimate truth). Because the ultimate truth is unspeakable and indescribable with words, once it gets to the limit where it can be reached by language and thought, any spiritual realm would no longer be the ultimate truth but become the conventional truth. Therefore, the Two Truths have no connection with one another. This point distinguishes the Two Truths. However, according to my research on Prasannapadā and “The Complementary of Entering the Middle Way” (Madhyamakāvatāra-bhāṣya), I found out that the term “differentiation of the Two Truths” is not what professor Tanji thought it was. He believes that the term is only used to depict the deviation, the cut off and the contradictory of the relationship between the conventional truth and the ultimate truth. Candrakīrti had used the term “establishment of the Two Truths” (satyadvayavyavasthā) as a synonym of “differentiation of the Two Truths.”He emphasized that the Two Truths has an order and valued the positive function of the conventional truth. He also emphasized that only through the conventional truth can one properly understand Emptiness, which is understanding the ultimate truth. Therefore, the term “differentiation of the Two Truths” is linked with the establishment of the middle way school’s view on the concept of Truth. In the discussion The term is mentioned many times on the occasion when Candrakīrti holds discussions of the Truth with other schools. Furthermore, Candrakīrti did not neglect the correlation between “differentiation of the Two Truths” and the “three points of Emptiness.” This statement can be proved by the following points he mentioned in one of his articles: because people misinterpret the “establishment of the Two Truths” (“differentiation of the Two Truths”), they would not be able to correctly understand “Emptiness,” “the meaning of Emptiness” and “the function of Emptiness,” which is the “three points of Emptiness.”
期刊論文
1.江島惠教(1990)。Bhāvaviveka / Bhavya / Bhāviveka。印度學佛教學研究,38(2),838-846。  延伸查詢new window
2.吉水千鶴子(1997)。Upādāyaprajñaptiについて─Mūlamadhyamakakārikā XXIV 18を考える。成田山佛教研究所紀要,20,95-155。  延伸查詢new window
3.松本史朗(1978)。Jñānagarbha の二諦說。佛教學,5,109-137。  延伸查詢new window
4.(1911)。Madhyamakāvatāra, Introduction au Traité du milieu du l'Ācārya Candrakīrti avec le commentaire de l'auteur, traduit d'aprés la version tibétaine。Muséon,12,235-328。  new window
5.北畠利親(1963)。清辨と月稱の二諦論。印度學佛教學研究,11(1),66-71。  延伸查詢new window
6.江島惠教(1967)。中觀論者を虛無論者とする批判─それに對する中觀派の反論。東方學,34,62-75。  延伸查詢new window
7.那須真裕美(1999)。中期中觀派の二諦說─勝義へ志向させる方法論を中心に。印度學佛教學研究,55,87-109。  延伸查詢new window
8.松下了宗(1983)。ジュナーナガルヴァの二諦分別論─和譯研究(上)。龍谷大学大学院文学研究科紀要,5,27-49。  延伸查詢new window
9.松下了宗(1983)。ジュナーナガルヴァ(JG)の二諦分別論(二)─その著作態度。印度學佛教學研究,32(1),186-187。  延伸查詢new window
10.森山清徹(1993)。JñānagarbhaとŚāntarak.sitaの自己認識批判─Śākyabuddhiの理論と三性說及び因果論。佛教文化研究論集,38,19-43。  延伸查詢new window
11.奧住毅(1985)。中論言語實在問題。印度學佛教學研究,33(2),477-481。  延伸查詢new window
12.齋藤明(1998)。空と言葉─《中論》第二十四章.第七偈の解釋をめぐって。宗教研究,316,27-52。  延伸查詢new window
13.釋見弘(2006)。關於Candrakīrti的二諦說中的幾個問題(上)。中華佛學學報,19,293-324。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.釋見弘(2007)。關於Candrakīrti的二諦說中的幾個問題(下)─以世俗諦與自性為中心。中華佛學學報,1,1-33。  延伸查詢new window
15.榎本文雄(2009)。『四聖諦』の原意とインドにおける『聖』。印度哲學佛教學,24,336-354。  延伸查詢new window
16.Arnold, D.(2005)。Materials for a Mādhyamika Critique of Foundationalism: An Annotated Translation of Prasannapadā 55.11 to 75.13。印度学仏教学研究,28(2),411-467。  new window
17.船山徹(2000)。Two Notes on Dharmapāla and Dharmakīrti。Zinbun,35,1-11。  new window
18.Lindtner, Chr.(1981)。Atīśa's Introduction to the Two Truths, and Its Sources。Journal fo Indian Philosophy,9,161-214。  new window
19.Saito, Akira(1985)。Textcritical Remarks on the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā as Cited in the Prasannapadā。印度学仏教学研究,33(2),842-846。  new window
20.Uryuzu, R.(1971)。Bhāvaviveka's Prajñāpradīpa (Chapter 24)。Bulletin of the Faculty of General Education, Kinki University,2(2),15-56。  new window
21.Harvey, P.(2009)。The Four Ariya-saccas as 'True Realities for the Spiritually Ennobled'-the Painful, its Rigin, its Cessation, and the Way Going to This-Rather than 'Noble Truths' Concerning These。Buddhist Studies Review,26(2),197-227。  new window
圖書
1.小川一乘(1976)。空性思想の研究:入中論の解讀。京都:文榮堂。  延伸查詢new window
2.安慧(1966)。中邊分別論釋疏。中邊分別論釋疏。東京。  延伸查詢new window
3.Nagao, G. M.(1964)。Madhyāntavibhāgabhā.sya: a Buddhist philosophical treatise edited fro the first time from a Sanskrit manuscript。Tokyo:Suzuki Research Foundation。  new window
4.(1978)。sDe dge Tibetan Tripi.taka bsTan .hgyur-preserved at the Faculty of Letters, University of Tokyo (Dbu ma)。sDe dge Tibetan Tripi.taka bsTan .hgyur-preserved at the Faculty of Letters, University of Tokyo (Dbu ma)。Tokyo。  new window
5.安井廣濟(1970)。中觀思想の研究。京都:法藏館。  延伸查詢new window
6.Tauscher, H.(1995)。Die Lehre von den Zwei Wirklichkeiten in Tso^n kha pas Madhyamaka-werken。Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 36。Wien:Arbeitskreis fur Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien。  new window
7.Suzuki, Koshin(1994)。Index to the Sanskrit Fragments and Tibetan Translation of Candrakiirti’s Bodhisattvayogoaacaaracatu.h’sataka.tiika, Sanskrit-Tibetan; Tibetan-Sanskrit。Tokyo。  new window
8.上田昇(1994)。チャンドラキールティ著『四百論注』第一~八章和譯。東京。  延伸查詢new window
9.丹治昭義(1988)。中論釋 明らかなことば。大阪:關西大學出版部。  延伸查詢new window
10.Poussin, Louis de la Vallee(1901)。Prajñākaramati's Commentary to the Bodhicaryāvatāra of Śāntideva。Calcutta。  new window
11.Poussin, Louis de la Vallee(1977)。Muulamadhyamakakaarikaas de Naagaarjuna avec la Prasannapadaa Commentaire de Candrakiirti。St. Petersbourg。  new window
12.Poussin, Louis de la Vallee(1907)。Madhyamakāvatāra par Candrakīrti。St. Pétersbourg。  new window
13.Monier-Williams, Monier、Leumann, E.、Cappeller, C.(1899)。A Sanskrit-English Dictionary。Oxford:Clarendon Press。  new window
14.丹治昭義(1992)。實在と認識:中觀思想研究。吹田:關西大學出版部。  延伸查詢new window
15.吉藏(1983)。中觀論疏。臺北:新文豐。  延伸查詢new window
16.長尾雅人(1978)。中觀と唯識。東京:岩波書店。  延伸查詢new window
17.Sthiramati、Yamaguchi, Susumu(1966)。Madhyāntavibhāgaṭīkā: exposition systématique du Yogācāravijñaptivāda。Tokyo:Suzuki Research Foundation。  new window
18.(1992)。The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary。The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary。Kyoto。  new window
19.(1997)。Śūnyatāsaptativ.rtti Candrakīrits Kommentar zu den "Siebzig Versen über die Leerheit" des Nāgarjuna。Śūnyatāsaptativ.rtti Candrakīrits Kommentar zu den "Siebzig Versen über die Leerheit" des Nāgarjuna。Stuttgart。  new window
20.山口益(1951)。般若思想史。般若思想史。京都。  延伸查詢new window
21.丹治昭義(2006)。中論釋明らかなことばⅡ。中論釋明らかなことばⅡ。大阪。  延伸查詢new window
22.瓜生津隆真(1982)。中觀派における空。佛教思想(7)――空(下)。京都。  延伸查詢new window
23.江島惠教(1983)。アティーシャの二真理說。龍樹教學の研究。東京。  延伸查詢new window
24.岸根敏幸(2001)。チャンドラキールテイの中觀思想。チャンドラキールテイの中觀思想。東京。  延伸查詢new window
25.野澤靜證(1956)。中觀兩學派の對立とその真理觀。佛教の根本真理─佛教における根本真理の歷史的諸形態。東京。  延伸查詢new window
26.奧住毅(1988)。中論注釋書の研究。中論注釋書の研究。東京。  延伸查詢new window
27.塚本啟祥(1990)。梵語佛典研究(3)論書篇。梵語佛典研究(3)論書篇。日本。  延伸查詢new window
28.Arnold, Dan(2005)。Buddhists, Brahmins, and Belief: Epistemology in South Asian Philosophy of Religion。New York:Columbia University Press。  new window
29.Eckel, M. D.(1992)。J~naanagarbha's Commentary on the Distinction between the Two Truths。J~naanagarbha's Commentary on the Distinction between the Two Truths。New York。  new window
30.May, J.(1992)。Candrakīrti Prasannapadā Madhyamakav.rtti。Candrakīrti Prasannapadā Madhyamakav.rtti。Kyoto。  new window
31.Ruegg, David S.(2002)。Two Prolegomena to Madhyamaka Philosophy (Part 2)。Two Prolegomena to Madhyamaka Philosophy (Part 2)。Wien。  new window
其他
1.辯中邊論述記。  延伸查詢new window
2.Madhyamakāvatāra-bhā.sya。  new window
3.Madhyamakāvatāra.tīkā。  new window
4.Madhyamakāvatāra。  new window
5.釋法尊(1991)。入中論,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.萬金川(1998)。《中觀論頌.24.7》在解讀上的幾個問題。詞義之爭與義理之辨--佛教思想研究論文集。南投:正觀出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關博士論文
 
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE