불교학리뷰 2021 KCI Impact Factor : 0.38

Korean | English

pISSN : 1975-2660

http://journal.kci.go.kr/crbs
Home > Explore Content > All Issues > Article List

2012, Vol., No.11

  • 1.

    The Tridandi-sūtra and the two Lohitya-sūtras in the Gilgit Dīrghāgama manuscript

    최진경 | 2012, (11) | pp.9~36 | number of Cited : 2
    Abstract PDF
    Since the Sanskrit Gilgit Dīrghāgama manuscript found its way into an antique book store in London in the late 1990s, the members of the Schøyen Collection, especially Prof. Jens-Uwe Hartmann in Munich, Germany, have been investing a great deal of effort on its edition, and great results have been accomplished. However, detailed information on this research and its publications are not yet widespread among scholars. In this article, I shall begin with some basic information on the Dīrghāgama manuscript and then provide a brief overview on the current status of this manuscript project, based on the previous research carried out predominantly by Prof. Hartmann. Along with a brief introduction to several important previous works, especially focusing on their analyses of sīlakkandha or śīlaskandha elements in the Dīghanikāya and the Dīrghāgama,I shall conclude with a few observations I have made so far along with a list of further tasks laying ahead.
  • 2.

    Inexpressibility and Buddhist Teaching with Reference to the Ultimate of the Yogācāra Buddhism

    Ahn, Sungdoo | 2012, (11) | pp.39~80 | number of Cited : 3
    Abstract PDF
    The present paper has the aim at dealing with the problematic whether the mahāyānic interpretation of the ultimate can be traced back to Buddha's fundamental idea on reality. It is well-known that Buddha, asked by the Brahma to teach for the living beings, refused at first to teach his experience of the Enlightenment, because it was too difficult and profound to deliver it in language. After trice request of Brahma, Buddha finally resolved to teach for the sake of living beings. Whether it be true or not, this story shows clearly that Buddha calls attention to the tension between the inexpressibility of his Enlightenment and the Teachings, which have to be expressed by means of concepts and language. The point of departure of the present paper is intimately connected with this tension observable in Buddha's attitude, and to examine whether the definition of the ultimate as inexpressible (anabhilāpya) in the mahāyāna texts can be joined with this tension. As a starting point I base myself on Vetter's analysis of ‘Dhammacakka-ppavattanasutta’, traditionally ascribed as the first sermon of Buddha, and ‘Anattalakkhanasutta’, the second discourse in Vinaya. Vetter sees these two texts respectively representing the ‘dhyāna-meditation’ and ‘discriminating insight’. Though it was generally accepted in the philological studies that the two methods were quite different in form and content from each other, I take it for granted that the two methods should be regarded from Buddha’s perspective as leading to the same goal, ie., the extinction of craving. Otherwise, it would be difficult to understand why Buddha chose one method after another, if these two have totally different contents and functions. Then, there must be a linkage connecting these two with each other. What I suggest as a kind of linking point is the function of normal consciousness. The state of normal consciousness is characterized by the subject-object duality. However, in the concentration, this duality is overcome; what is more decisive in the Buddhist meditation is that one is aware of his being in that state through the ‘mindfulness’ (smṛti). This method seems to be in contrast with the realization of non-self through discriminating insight in that these two methods base themselves on different approaches to reality. However, the analysis of 18 elements shows clearly that it rests also on the realization that our normal state is constituted by the subject-object dichotomy. In this sense, one can name the method “negative-intellectualist currents” using the phraseology of Schmithausen. These two methods, which were clearly differentiated and separately practised in the following Abhidharma period, came to be integrated into one whole process in the Yogācāra Buddhism. For me, the clue for the ‘new’ attempt may be found in the well-known, but few known with regard to the contents, phrase of ‘śamatha-vipaśyanā-yuganaddha’, which was relatively well explained in some passages of Śrāvakabhūmi. In addition, I suggest the transition from the simple compassion to the ‘Great Compassion’ in Mahāyāna Buddhism could be explained within the tension mentioned before.
  • 3.

    Dharma Master Ji's Da yi zhang (Peking 8392) and the She lun zhang Fascicle 1 (Stein 2048) Copied in Sui Renshou 1 (601 C.E.) – Mingji and Zhining

    池田 將則 | 2012, (11) | pp.81~144 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract PDF
    The present study aims to investigate an instance of the reception of Paramārtha's 眞諦(499-569) translation of Vasubandhu's Mahāyānasa- ṃgrahabhāṣya 攝大乘論釋 in the North under the Sui, taking as source material two texts unearthed at Dunhuang, namely, the Da yi zhang 大義章 by Dharma Master Ji 及法師 (Peking 8392, hong 洪 53, BD00453 verso) and She lun zhang, Fascicle 1 『攝論章』 卷第一 (Stein 2048; Taishō 2808). In brief, the content of each section is as follows. 1. Dharma Master Ji's Da yi zhang is a text thought to belong to the genre of compendia of the essentials of various Buddhist doctrines. The first line of the manuscript gives the name of its author as “Dharma Master Ji” (及法師撰). The precise details of its year of composition and so forth are unknown, but the Da yi zhang criticises the positions of “certain persons”, and wording matching that of these foils can be found in texts thought to have been composed at the end of the Northern Dynasties through to the early Sui, such as Jingying Huiyuan's 淨影慧遠 (523-592) Dasheng yi zhang 大乘義章 and the She dasheng lun chao 攝大乘論抄 (provisional title; Moriya collection copy + Stein 2254). For this reason, the Da yi zhang is thought to be a text composed in roughly the same period. The She lun zhang Fascicle 1 is a commentary in zhang 章 format to Paramārtha's translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgrahabhāṣya. Its author is unknown, but it bears an editorial note stating that it was copied at Biancai Temple 辯才寺 in Chang'an 長安 in Renshou 1 仁壽元年 of the Sui dynasty (601 C.E.), and it is thus thought to be an accurate record of Mahāyānasaṃgraha (“Shelun”) studies in Chang'an under the Sui. 2. The first section 章 at the opening of these two documents, entitled “On the Three Jewels” 三寶義, is almost verbatim the same in each. However, if we compare the organisation of each text as a whole, the She lun zhang is more finely divided into small sections than the Da yi zhang, and its logical structure is therefore clearer. Further, in terms of the thought of the text, we notice particularly that in the explanation of the notion that “the Three Jewels are essentially one” 一體三寶, the She lun zhang alone features doctrines based upon the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. By contrast, extant portions of the Da yi zhang do not contain a single citation from the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. It is therefore safe to posit that the Da yi zhang is a text from a stage at which the Mahāyānasaṃgraha was not yet known, and that the section “On the Three Jewels” of the She lun zhang was composed as a section of the zhang-style commentary on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha by modification of the “On the Three Jewels” section of the Da yi zhang. In this process, the author basically relied on the Da yi zhang, but tinkered piecemeal with parts of the organisation, and in places added elements from the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. 3. The She lun zhang was copied at Biancai Temple, which was constructed for Zhining 智凝 (ca. 565 – ca. 612), an influential Shelun scholar in Chang'an under the Sui. The biography of Zhining in the Xu gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳 features, as a figure with whom Zhining had close relations, a Dharma Master Mingji 明及法師. We thus suppose that it is probable that the “Dharma Master Ji” who authored the Da yi zhang was this same Mingji (? – after 598). Analysis of accounts in the Xu gaoseng zhuan shows that Mingji was originally a Northern Dynasties scholar of the *Daśabhūmika-sūtra-śastra 十地經論 or “Dilun”. It is unknown with whom he studied, but he subsequently took up the study of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (“Shelun”), and was active in Sui Chang'an. We can surmise that the Da yi zhang is a text composed at a stage when Mingji had not yet studied the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, and the “On the Three Jewels” section of the She lun zhang was a revision of that work, whether by Mingji himself or some other person. The relationship of dependence and development that can thus be observed between the “On the Three Jewels” sections of the Da yi zhang and the She lun zhang can therefore be regarded as an exceptionally clear example of the reception of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha by scholars of the North in that period, and of the methods by which they worked.