본문 바로가기
  • Home
Basic Search

On the interpretation of ekāyano mārgah - focusing on analyses and similes

Youngjin LEE 1

1금강대학교

ABSTRACT

The scholars who are domestic and abroad as well have had a tendency to consider Catvāri upasthānāni to be ‘the only way’ to realize Nirvāṇa since the early Buddhism had begun to be studied. On the basis of this tendency, there would be the ‘ekāyana formula’, in which Catvāri upasthānāni is defined to be ‘ekāyano mārgah (Skt, ekāyano maggo : Pāli)’ that has been interpreted as the ‘only way’ by many scholars. However, this interpretation has denied since Gethin(2001: first ed. 1992) asserted that it cannot be understood to be the only way. Subsequently, Natier(2007) and Tse-fu(2008) strengthened Gethin’s assertion by suggesting it’s meaning as ‘unified or direct way’ and ‘a comprehensive way’ respectively. In this article, I tried to examine their interpretations of ‘ekāyano mārgah’ could be adjust to other traditions, especially to the Sarvāsativādins. Because, there are various kinds of interpretations of 一趣道, the translation of ‘ekāyano mārgah or ekāyanamārgah ’ by Xuanzang, in Mahāvibhāṣya and a short interpretation in Nyāyānusāra. To my knowledge, all the three scholars who has denied the possibility of interpretation of ‘the only way’ have resorted on the Buddhaghosa’s gloss on the ‘ekāyano maggo’ in which he clearly denied the possibility of its being interpreted as ‘only way’ by adding ‘does not functioned as a forked way (na dvedhāpathabhūto)’. Therefore, it needs to be examined whether their interpretations could be fit to Northern Abhidharma tradition and Mahāyana commentary tradition as well. The results of this examination are as follows: First, Sarvāstivādins accepted the possibility of its being interpreted as the ‘only way’ in Mahāvibhāṣya and Nyāyānusāra. However, according to Sarvāstivādins in Mahāvibhāṣya, the only way must be understood to be ‘āryamārgah’, not to be Catvāri upasthānāni alone. 37 Bodhipakṣyā dharmāh including Catvāri upasthānāni could be interpreted as ‘one way, i.e., the only way’ from the point of its function by which the practitioners can go to Nirvāṇa. In Nyāyānusāra, Saṅ- ghabhadra who thoughts a path that leads to [Nirvāna] (趣道: [nirvāṇa] ayanamārga) as prajñā that is svabhāvasmṛtyupasthānam also seems to have accepted the possibility of its being interpreted as ‘the only way’ on the basis of an idea that ‘the only way’ should refer to ‘the only best way among others that can destroy defilements and lead to the Nirvāna’. Second, Mahāyāna commentaries have different interpretations of ekāyanamārgah common to Buddhaghosa’s interpretation. For example, in Abhisamayālaṅkāra[kārikāśāstra]vṛtti, the commentary of 25,000 Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra by Ārya Vimuktiṣeṇa, there is a simile where Cittotpāda accompanied by ekāyanamārgah is compared to a stream of river. Here ekāyanamārgah seems to be interpreted as a ‘direct path’ because the steam of river implies to ‘that which flows to the goal without interruption’. In Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā, ekāyanamārgah showing the overall meaning of Pratyekabuddhas implies to ‘the path to be traversed alone’ In conclusion, ‘ekāyano mārgah’ could be interpreted differently such as an ‘one way’, a ‘narrow path’, and a ‘path that leads to one’ according to its context. And the meaning of ‘one way’ could be divided into two. That is to say, a ‘not forked way’ as Buddhagosa suggests and the ‘only way’ as Sarvāstivādins show. But, the only way should be either that which consists of the 37 bodhipakṣyā dharmāh or prajñā which is the only best way among others.

Statistics

  • 389 Viewed
  • 194 Downloaded

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

This paper was written with support from the National Research Foundation of Korea.
Basic Search Advanced Search