After summarizing some of the explanations of Noble Speech （āryavyavahāra, 聖語） in the traditional sūtras and Abhidharma treatises, this paper considers how Candrakīrti sets up the Two Truths through his discussion of Noble Truth （聖諦） and Noble Speech in the Yuktiṣaṣṭikāvṛtti.

Noble Speech in traditional Buddhism is closely related to True Speech （satyavāc, 実語） and means linguistic expressions related to people’s cognitive acts and objects, etc. For Candrakīrti, although all vyavahāras are contaminated and belong to worldly things, some of them can also be called “noble” as is the case with “Noble Speech.” Based on this very reason which does not contradict traditional Buddhist understandings, Candrakīrti regards both the Four Noble Truths and the Two Truths, which are expressed as linguistic expressions in accordance with worldly people’s minds, as conventional truths. In addition, the Four Noble Truths are defined as “truths preached by the saints” or “truths for worldly people becoming saints,” but not “truths for the saints.” The standard for distinguishing the Two Truths is the different appearances of the Truths of Cessation and the other three Noble Truths to worldly people, i.e., unconditioned, non-arisen, not deceiving, or otherwise.

抄録全体を表示

Akutobhayā（ABh）と青目釈『中論』（青目註）はいずれもMūlamadhyamaka­kārikā（MMK）の注釈書であり，MMK注釈書の中でも最古層のものとされている．ABhはチベット語訳のみが現存しており，青目註は鳩摩羅什による漢訳のみが存在する．この両注釈書はチベット語訳と漢訳という言語上の相違がありながらも，その内容に多くの共通点が見られる．

また，ABhと共通した記述が見られるのは青目註だけではなく，Buddhapālitaの注釈（BP），Prajñāpradīpa（PP），Prasannapadā（PSP）においてもABhが広く引用されている．さらに，そのようなABhの引用パターンを類型化するとBP，PP，PSPに共通してABhと同様の記述が認められ，漢訳である青目註にのみ相違が見られるという例が少なからず見受けられる．

そのような青目註の独自性については同書の序文において，羅什が青目註を漢訳する際，その内容に加筆，修正を施したと僧叡によって記されている．そのため，青目註に見られる独自の解釈については，訳者である羅什の意図が反映されている可能性も考えられる．

よって，今回は上記の類型に該当する例としてMMK第18章第6偈とその注釈を挙げ，考察を試みた．この偈頌に対する注釈ではBP，PP，PSPがABhの解釈を援用している．このことからABhは中観派においてMMKを注釈する際の伝統的解釈の典拠として扱われていたという結論に至った．

他方，青目註のみがABhとは異なった独自の解釈を示している．これについては偈頌の漢訳に明らかな意訳が認められることから，その注釈部分についても訳者である羅什によって書き換えられているという可能性を検討した．

抄録全体を表示

The Tathāgataguhyasūtra (TG) is a Mahāyāna sūtra frequently cited by śāstras, e.g., the Prasannapadā, Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, etc., for its theory (A) that the Buddha never said a single word during the period from his enlightenment to his death. In this paper, firstly I shall discuss the relationship between this theory and the early Buddhist canons, and show briefly how TG used old ideas to construct its theory of “not saying a single word.” I would also like to discuss the theory (B) that Buddha’s voice (śabda) originated from the ether (ākāśa) in TG, and illustrate that theory (B) is adopted by TG mainly for the purpose of reconciling the Buddha’s not saying a single word with Buddha’s exposition of the teachings.

抄録全体を表示

The *Sadparamita-samgraha-sutra (Sp) which is one of the stories of past lives of the Buddha distributes 91 stories to the Six Paramitas. The Sadaprarudita bodhisattva story (No. 81) in it is placed in the chapter of meditation. The Prajñaparamita-sutras (Pp) have the same kind of stories. In this paper I concentrate on the Sp. I investigate whether Sp is older than Pp with regard to the bodily features of a buddha.
In Sp, buddha was purplish gold, the back of his head emitted rays of light, and his face looked like a full moon.
But in Pp, buddha had the 32 physical characteristics and the 80 minor physical marks. They were the vocabulary which everyone had already understood.
The 32 physical characteristics and the 80 minor physical marks are variously listed. For example, ‘full moon face’ was added to the 32 physical characteristics in a later period.
Therefore, the Sadaprarudita story in Sp was written earlier than that in the Prajñaparamita-sutras.

抄録全体を表示

『プラサンナパダー』（PsP）第1章は，著者チャンドラキールティがブッダパーリタの帰謬論法を正当化することと，バーヴィヴェーカの自立的論証式に対する厳しい批判で有名である．その章は，Louis de La Vallée Poussin（LVP）による校訂本（PsP_L, 1903–1913）の出版以来，繰り返して研究されてきたが，LVPがテキスト作成当時に参照した3本の紙写本はいずれも書写年代が新しく，欠損や転写過誤が多くあるため，章の内容の読みについて紛議を起こした．2015年にAnna MacDonaldが出版したPsP第1章の新校訂本（PsP_M）は，詳細な校訂情報と訳注が充実していることで，高く評価されてきたが，まだ訂正の作業が残っている．そこで，本発表は，バーヴィヴェーカ批判の中核である§27および§28に対するいくつかの可能な訂正を試みるものである．

PsP_Mの§27および§28の読みは次の通り．

§27, p. 148: ko ’yaṃ pratijñārthaḥ | kiṃ kāryātmakaḥ svata uta kāraṇātmaka iti | kiṃ cātaḥ | kāryātmakaś cet siddhasādhanam | kāraṇātmakaś ced viruddhārthatā . . .

§28, pp. 151–152: sa cāyaṃ paraṃ prati hetudṛṣṭāsaṃbhavāt svapra­tijñāmātrasāratayaiva kevalaṃ svapratijñātārthasādhanam upādatta iti . . .

§27の-ātmakaの読みに関して，本発表は，ms Pの-ātmakaの異読が信頼できず，ms Qの-ātmana（s/ḥ）の読みを取るべきであると主張したい．

§28について，MacDonaldは「否定辞naは文脈で意味が通じない」という理由で写本に見られるnaをsaに，svapratijñātārthamātramをsvapratijñātārthasādhanamに修正したが，saとsvapratijñātārthasādhanamの読みは実は16本のサンスクリット語写本に支持されていない．また，MacDonaldの議論を吟味すると，氏が文脈としての三比量説を誤解していたことがわかる．他比量を能破として用いたのはバーヴィヴェーカではなく，チャンドラキールティである．そこで，本発表はPsPの文脈を分析する上で，§28において否定辞naとsvapratijñātārthamātramが必要であることを証明しようとする．

抄録全体を表示

Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK), Chapter 18, verse 9, discusses the characteristics of reality (tattvasya lakṣaṇam). In the Prasannapadā (PsP), Candrakīrti comments that while the characteristics of reality for the Nobles (āryas) are taught in MMK 18.9, the characteristics of reality for ordinary people (laukika-tattvalakṣaṇa) are taught in MMK 18.10. However, it is not clear what laukika-tattva is in the contexts of the PsP ad MMK 18.10.

In this paper, I first discuss Candrakīrti’s two types of teachings of dependent arising (pratītyasamutpāda), focusing especially on the concepts of idaṃpratyayatā and idaṃpratyayatāmātra. Second, I compare the views of the Nobles and ordinary people based on the discussion of the two-truths theory in Candrakīrti’s Madhyamakāvatārabhāṣya, with respect to idaṃpratyayatā and idaṃpratyayatāmātra. Finally, I reconsider laukika-tattva in the contexts of the PsP.

抄録全体を表示

The supernatural powers of the Buddha in the smaller Prajñāpāramitāsūtra guarantee that the words of the speaker are Buddhist, and do not indicate the external greatness of the Buddha. In the case of the Lotus Sūtra, the supernatural powers of the Buddha are arranged according to the progress of the scriptures. The eternal Buddha disclosed in chapter XV exerts divine power in a form that is visible to all sentient beings in chapter XX. The prologue of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā (PVP) is a collection of the Buddha’s supernatural powers. That guarantees relief and the absolute Bodhi. Considering the development from the smaller Prajñāpāramitāsūtra to PVP, it is inferred that the compilers of PVP were fully aware of the supernatural powers of the Lotus Sūtra and the theory of divine change. They intend to present a new image of the Buddha that surpasses the Buddha of the Lotus Sūtra and to strengthen its significance as a teaching of the Buddha.

抄録全体を表示

This paper attempts to locate points of contact between the Āgamas and the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras via contradictory expressions in the Pāsādika-sutta. The Pāsādika-sutta, likely complied in the later period of the Āgamas, appears to influence Mahayana literature in several points. In the Pāsādika-sutta, the Buddha answers criticisms from non-Buddhist ascetics through the following contradictory expressions.

(1) According to the Buddha, the contradictory expression “a person who sees doesn’t see” cannot work in non-Buddhist traditions, but can be properly established in Buddhism.

One also often finds such contradictory expressions in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras.

(2) The ascetics criticized the Buddha’s disciples for indulging in pleasure, but he accepts this criticism on a literal level after reinterpreting the word “pleasure” to mean “joy.” Such reinterpretations are common in Māhāyana literature.

Meanwhile, the Pāsādika-sutta does not always accept non-Buddhists’ statements. The ascetics criticize the Buddha’s teachings for being “unstable” (P. aṭṭhita-dhamma), and he outright rejects this criticism, saying that they are stable like a deeply-rooted pillar.

On the other hand, the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras do not appear to reject this particular criticism, and they positively reinterpret the word “unstable” by accompanying it with the word “immovable” (P. acala), with its negative “a” prefix.

抄録全体を表示

The story of the Dragon-king’s daughter, which appears in Chapter 11 of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra, is generally considered to teach the doctrine that women can attain Buddhahood suddenly only through sūtra worship, not by practicing the usual bodhisattva path. However, a close reading of the original text shows that this is not the case. In the story, the Dragon-king’s daughter, who has attained the tenth stage of the bodhisattva path, denies that she can attain Buddhahood suddenly. This paper examines the actual meaning of the doctrine of the rapid attainment of Buddhahood, and thereby provides a new interpretation of the story.

In fact, the authors of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra assert that bodhisattvas, after having practiced the path for three kalpas and attained the tenth Bodhisattva-stage, should then worship the sūtra in order to attain Buddhahood rapidly.

抄録全体を表示

Prajnapradipa-tika第1章においてその著者Avalokitavrataは,dharmaについて「自相を保持するからdharmaである」というように『倶舎論』と同様に定義した上で,自相を,「世俗的な諸法の自相」(kun rdzob pa'i chos rnams kyi rang gi mtshan nyid)と言い換え,さらにそれを不浄(ma dag pa)と浄(dag pa)との二つに分類する.前者に関しては色(rupa)にある「壊れる」という特徴などが挙げられ,もう一方には「無自性」と「不生」とが相当するとされる.本稿においては,Avalokitavrataの示した世俗法の有する,「無自性」や「不生」といった,ものごとの在り方に関する中観派としての立場を表す相に着目し,それを二諦説の文脈の中で論じた.また,PrajnapradipaおよびPrajnapradipa-tika第24章の世俗諦には,pudgalaに関する言明と,dharmaに関するそれが示されており,論考を通じて,BhavivekaとAvalokitavrataの世俗諦の中には複数の層が設けられていることを明らかにした.

抄録全体を表示

In chapter 13 of Nāgārjuna’s main work, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, he explains his concept of śūnyatā. However, there is a problem with verses three and four. Should we read those two verses as Nāgārjuna’s, or opponent’s? Based on commentaries, recent research takes the stance that verse three and the first half of four are not Nāgārjuna’s own. On the other hand, I point out that it is possible to reinterpret those verses as Nāgārjuna’s in light of examples taken from the Vigrahavyāvartanī.

In this paper, I reexamine the validity of this interpretation from the explanation of the word ‘‘non-essence (asvabhāva)’’ in verse three. According to this new interpretation, we can understand all verses of chapter 13 to be Nāgārjuna’s.

抄録全体を表示