パーリ仏教文献における「自殺観」の扱い方

――『ヴィナヤ』と『サンユッタニカーヤ』を中心として――

抄録

In this paper, I propose that there is an inconsistency between the Vinayas and the Nikāyas in Pāli literature by showing examples from both. Because some episodes relating to suicide in Nikāyas are not found in the Vinayas and some episodes relating to suicide in the Vinayas are not found in the Nikāyas, we can see that the Vinayas and the Nikāyas have different roles in the Buddhist literature, which should be taken into consideration when we interpret some stories in both collections.

To illustrate these contradictory statements, I will examine a series of episodes regarding suicide in the section of Pārājika three in the Vinayas, which led to the Buddha indirectly circumscribing suicide to maintain order in the sangha. Secondly, in contrast with the first episode, the episode from the Saṃyutta-nikāya regarding three monks who committed suicide but are declared by the Buddha to have achieved nirvana seems to point to the conclusion that the suicide of monks is permissible, because the purpose of the Saṃyutta-nikāya is to teach the Buddha’s doctrine. Thirdly, also from the Saṃyutta-nikāya, I will explain two stories in which Mahā-Kassapa harshly criticized Ānanda. Even though Mahā-Kassapa’s statement includes a falsehood, Mahā-Kassapa himself was not to blame and this episode is not found in the Vinayas.