:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:「迦羅」(Kāla)或「三摩耶」(Samaya)?--以「時間」議題論《大智度論》批判實在論的哲學問題
書刊名:臺大佛學研究
作者:嚴瑋泓 引用關係
作者(外文):Yen, Wei-hung
出版日期:2010
卷期:20
頁次:頁1-57
主題關鍵詞:迦羅三摩耶時間大智度論說一切有部KālaSamayaTimeMahāprajñāpāramitopadeśaSarvāstivāda
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(1) 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:393
  • 點閱點閱:52
本文聚焦於《大智度論》中所記載論主與設問方對於「迦羅」 (kala)與「三摩耶」(samaya)兩個關於時間之語詞的論辯。筆者將以設問方引用《時經》之偈頌的問難作為線索,探究時間的概念在印度哲學的脈絡中反映著怎樣的哲學問題,以及為何《大智度論》要批判這樣的哲學立場。 據此,本文指出《大智度論》批判「迦羅」的理由,在於此語詞相較於「三摩耶」而言,容易使人衍生趨向於實在論的見解,甚至引發自性見,其並進一步主張應說「三摩耶」來避免實在論立場。從文本的論證可知,《大智度論》不僅批駁了時間為客觀實 在的立場,也不承認時間作為知識對象。然而,《大智度論》仍需接受時間作為世俗知識之認知結構的條件。簡言之,本文作出以下結論: (一)雖然《大智度論》無梵、藏本留世,本文發現設問方引 用《時經》的偈頌,可於《阿闥婆吠陀》、《邁瞿犁奧義 書》、《摩訶婆羅多》、《數論頌》……等印度哲學典籍中, 找出類似或對應的偈頌。在佛教文獻中,亦可在月稱之《淨明句論》找到對應的偈頌。據此,本文認為此段偈頌反應出時間作為實體或萬物之生因的觀點,乃是基於婆羅門思想的傳統,表現為形上實在論的立場。而預設時間為實在的觀點,除了學者們所認為屬於正理-勝論學派的可能性之外,亦可能為「說一切有部」的主張。 (二)《大智度論》回應問難的論證大多以應成與兩難的方式回 應,就論證本身來說,此與中觀學的論證是一致的。此外,設問方具備豐富的哲學背景,單就本文聚焦的這段文本而言,設問方極可能具有「說一切有部」的背景。 (三)針對時間的議題,本文認為《大智度論》以時間作為假名的主張,僅迴避了時間的客觀實在性,並無否定時間作為知識結構中的某種條件。在佛教哲學,不論是早期佛教剎那滅或中觀學時間假名論,均否定了時間表現為某種實體形上學型態。但在世俗知識的結構中,並沒有否定時間的工具性意義。
This paper focuses on the debates on the two terms of time(kala, samaya) that recorded in Mahaprajñaparamitopadesa (hereafter abbreviated as MPPU). In this paper, I will take the debater cited the verses form Kala-Sutra as clues to investigate into the issue of time in the context of Indian philosophy, and try to figure out what philosophical problems are represented in the light of the context, further, to explore why MPPU criticized kala but samaya. Accordingly, I point out that the main criticism against kala is that this term tends toward realism, which is inconsistent with the Buddhist doctrines of dependent co-arising (pratityasamutpada) and emptiness (sunyata). Moreover, the MPPU argues that samaya is a more appropriate term than kala, since it avoids this tendency towards realism. From the arguments presented in the text, it becomes clear that MPPU not only negates time as an objective reality, but even more so as an epistemic object. However, the MPPU still may not avoid the acceptance of time as a condition for the cognitive structure of conventional knowledge. Briefly, my conclusions are as follows, 1. Though lacking Sanskrit or Tibetan versions of the MPPU for comparative purposes, I have located verses from the Kala-Sutra cited in certain Indian philosophical texts. I confirm the existence of a number of similar verses and even corresponding verses in the Atharva Veda, Maitayaṇiya Upaniṣad, Mahabharata, and Saṁ khya-Karika. The same verse, in Buddhist text, may be found in Candrakirti’s Prasannapada. Hence, this paper reveals a view of time based on the Brahmanical tradition in which it is considered a substance or the cause of all creations. Moreover, it reflects a metaphysical realist position. Although many scholars define a realist notion of time as a doctrine of the Nyaya-Vaiseṣika, I suggest that this view might also be a stance of the Sarvastivada. 2. Most arguments in the MPPU follow the reductio ad absurdum form of argument (prasavga) or dilemma rule, which is consistent with Madhyamika reasoning. In addition, the debater’s arguments in the MPPU reflects a rich combination of philosophical backgrounds, hence if we were to examine the debates over the issue of time in a simple and explicit manner, it is quite possible that the debater might have been a Sarvastivadin. This paper points out that the view of time as designation or concept (prajñapti) in the MPPU merely avoids the objective reality of time, but it never denies the view of time as a pre-condition for the structure of knowledge. It also indicates that, in Buddhist philosophy, both the theory of momentariness in early Buddhism and the theory of time as designation in the Madhyamika system negated the view of time as a form of substantial metaphysics. Neither negated the instrumental meaning of time in conventional knowledge.
期刊論文
1.釋厚觀、郭忠生(19980900)。「大智度論」之本文相互索引。正觀,6,5-321。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.郭忠生(19970900)。試論「大智度論」中的「對談者」。正觀,2,63-177。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.林鎮國(20060700)。龍樹《迴諍論》與基礎主義知識論的批判。國立政治大學哲學學報,16,163-196。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.周伯戡(19921200)。庫車所出「大智度論」寫本殘卷之研究--兼論鳩摩羅什之翻譯。國立臺灣大學歷史學系學報,17,65-106。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.嚴瑋泓(20060300)。論《般若經》的「假名」概念--以《大般若波羅蜜多經.第四會》〈妙行品〉與《第二會》〈善現品〉的對比作為考察的基礎。中華佛學研究,10,43-70。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.(1963)。Saddharma-Lavkavatara-Sutram,。Buddhist Sanskrit Texts,No. 3。  new window
7.康特(2008)。中觀學的時間觀--以《中論》與《肇論》為主。正觀雜誌,46,39-80。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.郭忠生、Lamotte, Etienne(199007)。大智度論之作者及翻譯。諦觀,62-69。  延伸查詢new window
9.Lancaster, Lewis R.(1974)。Discussion of time in Mahayana texts。Philosophy East and West,24.2,pp. 209-214。  new window
10.Kalupahana, David J.(1974)。The Buddhist Conception of Time and Temporality。Philosophy East and West,24(2),181-191。  new window
11.Inada, Kenneth K.(1974)。Time and Temporality: A Buddhist Approach。Philosophy East and West,24.2,pp. 171-179。  new window
學位論文
1.林建德(2007)。《老子》與《中論》之哲學比較--以語言策略、對反思維與有無觀為線索(博士論文)。國立臺灣大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.陳世賢(2008)。「法體」與「時間」關係之研究--以《俱舍論》與《順正理論》對「三世實有」之論辯為主(博士論文)。中國文化大學,臺北。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Niiniluoto, Ilkka(1999)。Critical Scientific Realism。New York:Oxford University Press。  new window
2.Yao, Zhi-hua(2005)。The Buddhist Theory of Self-Cognition。Routledge。  new window
3.梶山雄一、吳汝鈞(1993)。印度中觀哲學。台北:圓明出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.Prasad, H. S.(1991)。Essays on Time in Buddhism。Delhi:Sri Satguru Publication。  new window
5.佐佐木現順(1958)。阿毘達磨思想研究--佛教實在論の歷史的批判的研究。東京:弘文堂。  延伸查詢new window
6.釋僧佑(1924)。出三藏記集。東京:大正一切經刊行會。  延伸查詢new window
7.Honderich, Ted(1995)。The Oxford Companion to Philosophy。Oxford University Press。  new window
8.釋印順(1981)。初期大乘佛教之起源與開展。正聞出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.牟宗三(1977)。佛性與般若。臺灣學生書局。  延伸查詢new window
10.Kant, Immanuel、Guyer, Paul、Wood, Allen W.(1998)。Critique of Pure Reason。Cambridge University Press。  new window
11.Greco, John and Sosa, Ernest(1999)。The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology。Massachusetts。  new window
12.Monier-Williams(1974)。A Sanskrit-English Dictionary。London:Oxford University Press。  new window
13.Sosa, Ernest and Kim, Jaegwon(2000)。Epistemology: An Anthology。Massachusetts。  new window
14.東晉.瞿曇僧伽提婆(1924)。《中阿含經》。《大正藏》冊1。東京。  延伸查詢new window
15.求那跋陀羅(1924)。雜阿含經。東京:大正一切經刊行會。  延伸查詢new window
16.劉宋.求那跋陀羅(1924)。《楞伽阿跋多羅寶經》。《大正藏》冊16。東京。  延伸查詢new window
17.元魏.菩提流支(1924)。《入楞伽經》。《大正藏》冊16。東京。  延伸查詢new window
18.唐.實叉難陀(1924)。《大乘入楞伽經》。《大正藏》冊16。東京。  延伸查詢new window
19.姚秦.鳩摩羅什(1924)。中論。《大正藏》冊30。東京。  延伸查詢new window
20.姚秦.鳩摩羅什(1924)。《大智度論》。《大正藏》冊25。東京。  延伸查詢new window
21.元魏.菩提流支(1924)。《提婆菩薩釋楞伽經中外道小乘涅槃論》。《大正藏》冊32。東京。  延伸查詢new window
22.北涼.浮陀跋摩、釋道泰等(1924)。《阿毘曇毘婆沙論》。《大正藏》冊28。東京。  延伸查詢new window
23.唐.釋義淨(1924)。《根本說一切有部毘奈耶》。《大正藏》冊23。東京。  延伸查詢new window
24.唐.釋玄奘(1924)。《阿毘達磨發智論》。《大正藏》冊26。東京。  延伸查詢new window
25.唐.釋玄奘(1924)。《阿毘達磨識身足論》。《大正藏》冊26。東京。  延伸查詢new window
26.唐.釋玄奘(1924)。《阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論》。《大正藏》冊27。東京。  延伸查詢new window
27.唐.釋玄奘(1924)。《阿毘達磨順正理論》。《大正藏》冊29。東京。  延伸查詢new window
28.唐.釋玄奘(1924)。《異部宗輪論》。《大正藏》冊49。東京。  延伸查詢new window
29.唐.釋玄奘(1924)。《勝宗十句義論》。《大正藏》冊54。東京。  延伸查詢new window
30.南朝陳.真諦(1924)。《部執異論》。《大正藏》冊49。東京。  延伸查詢new window
31.南朝陳.真諦(1924)。《金七十論》。《大正藏》冊54。東京。  延伸查詢new window
32.唐.釋普光(1924)。《俱舍論記》。《大正藏》冊41。《大正藏》(東京。  延伸查詢new window
33.唐.釋玄奘(1924)。《大唐西域記》。《大正藏》冊51。東京。  延伸查詢new window
34.(1933)。Samkhya Karika: Isvara Krsna’s Memorable Verse on Samkhya Philosophy with the Commentary of Gaudapadacarya。Poona Oriental Series。Poona。  new window
35.Johannes Adrianus Bernardus Van Buitenen(1962)。The Maitayamiya Upanisad: A Critical Essay, with Text, Translation and Commentary。The Hague。  new window
36.楊惠南(1977)。龍樹與中觀哲學。臺北。new window  延伸查詢new window
37.釋印順(2006)。說一切有部為主的論書與論師之研究。新竹。new window  延伸查詢new window
38.中山延二(1976)。佛教に於ける時の研究。京都。  延伸查詢new window
39.佐佐木現順(1978)。佛教における時間論の研究。東京:清水弘文堂。  延伸查詢new window
40.Hippocrates G. Apostle、Aristotle(1966)。Metaphysics。Aristotle’s Metaphysics。Bloomington。  new window
41.Balslev, Anindita Niyogi(1983)。A Study of Time in Indian Philosophy。Wiesbaden:Otto Harrassowitz。  new window
42.Bhikkhu Dhammajoti, K. L.(2007)。Sarvastivada Abhidharma。Hong Kong。  new window
43.Brock, Stuart and Mares, Edwin(2007)。Realism and Anti-Realism。Stocksfield。  new window
44.Dolev, Yuval(2007)。Time and Realism: Metaphysical and Antimetaphysical Perspectives。Cambridge, Massachusetts。  new window
45.Dasgupta, Surendranath(1975)。A history of Indian philosophy vol. 1.。Delhi。  new window
46.Datta, D. M.(1997)。The Six Ways of Knowing: A Critical Study of the Advaita Theory of knowledge。Calcutta:University of Calcutta。  new window
47.Inada, Kenneth K.(1993)。Nagarjuna, A Translation of his Mulamadhyamakakarika with an Introductory Essay。Delhi, India。  new window
48.Kantorovich, Aharon(1993)。Scientific Discovery: Logic and Tinkering。Albany, NY:State University of New York Press。  new window
49.Lamotte, Etienne(1944)。Le Traite de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nagarjuna。Louvain。  new window
50.Lamotte, Etienne(1970)。Le Traite de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nagarjuna。Louvain。  new window
51.Trevor Leggett, Sengakul Mayeda, Taitetz Unno and Others、Nakamura, Hajime(1983)。A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy, Part One。Delhi。  new window
52.Prasad, Hari Shankar(1992)。Time in Indian Philosophy: A Collation of Essays。Delhi。  new window
53.Stcherbatsky, Theodore(1962)。Buddhist Logic Vol. 1。New York。  new window
54.Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro(2003)。The Laṅkavatara Sutra: A Mahayana Text。Delhi。  new window
55.Thera, Nyanaponika(2006)。Abhidhamma Studien: Die Buddhistische Erforschung des Bewusstseins und der Zeit。Berlin。  new window
56.Ui, Hakuju(1962)。The Vaiseshika Philosophy According to the Dasapadartha-sastra。Varanasi。  new window
57.釋祖蓮(1999)。《中論》「觀時品」初探。福嚴佛學院第八屆高級部學生論文集。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.Borchert, Donald(2006)。Encyclopedia of Philosophy,Detroit。  new window
圖書論文
1.平川彰(1991)。原始佛教とアビダルマ佛教。平川彰著作集。東京:春秋社。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE