Home > Explore Content > All Issues > Article View
Essay on *Kumāraśarman(鳩摩羅設摩)’s Wensong(文頌, kāvya) and *Śaṇḍīlya(扇帙略)’s Lunmen(論門, *vāda-marga)
불교학리뷰
Abbr :
Critical Review for Buddhist Studies
2010, (8), pp.107-165
DOI : 10.29213/crbs..8.201012.107
Publisher : Geumgang Center for Buddhist Studies
Research Area : Buddhist Studies
2010, (8), pp.107-165
DOI : 10.29213/crbs..8.201012.107
Publisher : Geumgang Center for Buddhist Studies
Research Area : Buddhist Studies
1경상대학교
-
In the history of Buddhist thought, Sautrāntika/Dārṣṭāntika is still behind a veil. This assay is the speculation of their origin and development through *Kumāraśarman’s Wensong(文頌) and *Śaṇḍīlya’s Lunmen(論門) referred by Saṃghabhadra. Following are summaries. 1. Saṃghabhadra referred *Kumāraśarman’s Wensong and *Śaṇḍīlya’s Lunmen in the nuance that they’re Sthavira Śrīlāta’s previous master(so to speak pūrvācārya) on the Abhidharmanyāyānusāraśāstra, as he reproached the Śrīlāta’s critique to the theory of five cause of the Sarvāstivāda. 2.1. According to the Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣaśāstra Wensong(文頌) is beyond the truth because it is discussion of style which explain tripiṭaka of the holy truth by the worldly metaphors(dṛṣṭānta), or which is like a hymn to Buddha that poet himself integrated in exaggerating metaphors. And according to the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya the latter one is translated words of ‘kāvya’. 2.2. In light of these Wensong is the worldly truth distinguished the holy truth, so to speak metaphors, fable etc style like a Kumāralāta’s Kalpanāmaṇḍitikā( or Mahālaṁkārasūtraśāstra) or kāvya style like a Aśvaghoṣa’s Buddhacarita. Thus kavi(文頌者) *Kumāraśarman which Saṃghabhadra referred could be inferred that it is forerunner of Dārṣṭāntika, Sthavira Śrīlāta etc. 3.1. *Śaṇḍīlya is referred in an episode of sthāpanīya-vyākaraṇa(a question which one should not answer), in the course of discussing about four kinds of dialogue methods(四種問記) in the Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣa. And *Śaṇḍīlya’s definition of question in his treatise(śāstra) is quoted in the course of discussion talking about dialogue methods between Saṃghabhadra and someone(Rāma, according to Yaśomitra etc) in the Abhidharmanyāyānusāra. 3.2. A Lunmen(論門) according to Harivarman, mean ways of discussion, and his the theory of Two Truth(二諦說) is based on the way of worldly common(世間門) and the way of ultimately truth(第一義門) which are one of ways. Following this “Self exist”(saṁvṛti-satya) or “Self do not exist” (paramārtha-satya), those words are all possible. 3.3. *Śaṇḍīlya also says that none of them aren’t denied based on two meanings in his definition of question. (So his Lunmen too could be about ways of discussion/dialogue.) Rāma who told this also said “Self can be what exist or what do not exist”, Harivarman and Kumāralāta explained these through metaphor of ‘tiger put his cub on his mouth(牝虎銜子)’ 4.1. Dārṣṭāntika on the Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣa neither did only use metaphor(dṛṣṭānta) nor did use a lot more metaphor than any other sects, although they criticized Sarvāstivāda’s holy truth(tripiṭaka) by the metaphors. Nevertheless they were called Dārṣṭāntika is because it originated from kavi like *Kumāraśarman. 4.2. Dārṣṭāntika on the Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣa and the Abhidharmanyāyānusāra has no little discordance. Saṃghabhadra also call Dārṣṭāntika not only in singular term but also in specific term and generic term, or indicate Sthavira Śrīlāta as ‘some present Dārṣṭāntika’. So Dārṣṭāntika on the Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣa is not Sautrāntika directly, and Dārṣṭāntika also maybe not the singular pedigree. 4.3. Presumably, in Dārṣṭāntika there are at least ① kavi(文頌者) pedigree of worldly metaphors(dṛṣṭānta) which succeed to *Kumāraśarman- Kumāralāta/Aśvaghoṣa, ② pedigree that emphasize a method of discussion/ dialogue which succeed to *Śaṇḍīlya-Vasumitra(the author of Paripṛcchā)- Harivarman(-Rāma), ③ Sautrāntika pedigree which succeed to *Kumāraśarman/ Śaṇḍīlya-some Dārṣṭāntika on the Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣa-Sthavira Śrīlāta-Sthavirapākṣika such as Rāma/Vasuvarman. Although these three have different pedigrees and views, they had common basis, ‘Dārṣṭāntika’, so their relevance may not be denied. 4.4. However considering their prominent tendency, Kumāralāta and Aśvaghoṣa continuously succeeded tendency of Wensong(kāvya), a worldly metaphors(dṛṣṭānta). In contrast to Harivarman claiming ‘all existence are empty(一切皆空)’ according to the way of ultimately truth, Sthavira Śrīlāta’s sect denied theory of Buddha-śāsana of the Sarvāstivāda, and called themselves as Sautrāntika under the motto of ‘we only take the sūtras which revealed by Buddha himself as a valid means of cognition’.
245 Viewed
Print this page
Download PDF