 |
|
| 智蔵と吉蔵との二諦説の差異について=The Difference in the Theories of the Two Truths of Zhizang 智蔵 and Jizang 吉蔵 | ||
| 作者 | 中井本勝 (著)=Nakai, Honsho (au.) |
|---|---|
| 出處題名 | 印度學佛教學研究 =Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies=Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū |
| 卷期 | v.68 n.2 (總號=n.150) |
| 出版日期 | 2020.03.20 |
| 頁次 | 778 - 783 |
| 出版者 | 日本印度学仏教学会 |
| 出版者網址 | http://www.jaibs.jp/ |
| 出版地 | 東京, 日本 [Tokyo, Japan] |
| 資料類型 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
| 使用語言 | 日文=Japanese |
| 關鍵詞 | 成実宗; 三論宗; 二諦; 『二諦章』 |
| 摘要 | This paper compares the theories of the Two Truths of Jizang (吉蔵, 549–623) and Zhizang (智蔵, 458–522), and considers the differences between them. Jizang criticized Zhizang’s theory of the Two Truths intensely. The reason is that Zhizang was influenced by the Sanlun school. At first, the Paramārtha satya (ultimate truth) was made the essence of the Two Truths, but Zhizang changed the essence of the Two Truths to the Middle Path, in accord with Sanlun ideas. So the theories are same, but the contents differ. Zhizang’s Middle Path is the truth which transcends the Two Truths (the Third Truth). It is the first cause from which all others are created. On the other hand, Jizang’s Middle Path is inseparable from the Two Truths. Zhizang considered the ultimate truth and worldly truth (lokasaṃvṛti satya) as “Truth,” but Jizang considered them as “Doctrine.” Therefore Jizang differs from Zhizang, and does not consider the Third Truth. |
| 目次 | 一 はじめに 778 二 『二諦章』における智蔵の二諦説 778 三 『二諦章』における吉蔵の批判 780 四 小結 783 |
| ISSN | 00194344 (P); 18840051 (E) |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.68.2_778 |
| 點閱次數 | 106 |
| 建檔日期 | 2022.09.27 |
| 更新日期 | 2022.09.27 |
建議您使用 Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) 瀏覽器能獲得較好的檢索效果，IE不支援本檢索系統。
