 |
|
| 『般若灯論復注』第9章におけるサーンキヤ説考察=Sāṃkhya Theory in the Prajñāpradīpa-ṭīkā chp. 9 | ||
| 作者 | 鄭祥教 (著)=Jung, Sanggyo (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.69 n.2 (總號=n.153) |
| 出版日期 | 2021.03.25 |
| 頁次 | 878 - 874 |
| 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 | 『般若灯論複注』; サーンキヤ学派; 犢子部 |
| 摘要 | The subject of criticism of Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK) chp. 9, when it criticizes A preceding subject existing prior to whole sensory organs, is known to be the Pudgalavādins in general, but is not specified in the MMK. However, the Buddhapālita-mūlamadhyamaka-vṛtti (BP), an important commentary of a somewhat later time, did not specify the subject of criticism of chp. 9, criticizing A preceding subject by a parable of the window. Since then, the Prajñāpradīpa (PP) has clarified that the subject of the BP is the Sāṃkhya school, and the Prajñāpradīpa-ṭīkā (PPṬ) succeeded to the commentary on the PP to introduce the Sāṃkhya theory in more detail. However, the PPṬ commented on the subject of criticism of the BP as rather Sāṃkhya theory, while the Pudgalavādin is also presented as a subject of criticism of chp. 9. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the differences between the commentaries in more detail in order to clarify the subject of criticism in chapter 9 of the MMK. |
| 目次 | 1．『中論』第9章の論敵 878 2．『仏護注』の論敵をめぐる『複注』の注釈 878 3．『複注』の論敵としてのサーンキヤ説と犢子部説 876 4．まとめ 875 |
| ISSN | 00194344 (P); 18840051 (E) |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.69.2_878 |
| 點閱次數 | 310 |
| 建檔日期 | 2022.11.25 |
| 更新日期 | 2022.11.25 |
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。
