「顚倒の考察」（Viparyāsaparīkṣā，Phyin ci log brtag pa，観顚倒品）という章題で知られる『中論』第23章では冒頭の第一偈を含む，三つの偈でśubha（浄）とaśubha（不浄）とviparyāsaḥ（顚倒）の三つの単語からなるśubhāśubhaviparyāsāḥという複合語が確認されるが，この語に関する情報は非常に限られ，この語の語義の決定を困難にしている．『無畏論』，『仏護註』，『般若灯論』において，この語はśubhaとaśubhaとのviparyāsaḥ (sdug dang mi sdug pa’i phyin ci log)，と解釈されているが，『プラサンナパダー』ではśubhaとaśubhaとviparyāsaという並列複合語として解釈されており，諸註釈者とチャンドラキールティには解釈に異同が確認される．本稿ではチャンドラキールティの複合語解釈とそれを前提にした彼の第23章理解を考察する．

チャンドラキールティは第23章の主題を「

」とし，第23章は「原因に縁って生じるの無自性性」（1，2偈），「が帰属する拠り所の否定」（3，4偈），「と心の同時生起の否定」（5偈），「の原因の否定」（6偈〜22偈），「を滅する方法の否定」（23，24偈）の5つの視点からの存在を否定する章としてこの章を理解する．6偈から23偈を「の原因の否定」として解釈する際に前提となっているのが彼の複合語解釈であり，śubhaṃとaśubhaṃとviparyāsāḥそれぞれを一偈に説かれる貪欲（rāga）・瞋恚（moha）・愚痴（dveṣa）の原因として対応させている．

彼の複合語解釈は他の『中論』註釈者と異なるものであり，彼の第23章理解に示される「

」という第23章の主題も「顚倒の考察」という章題の示す主題と異なるものである．しかし，彼のśubhāśubhaviparyāsāḥ解釈を前提とした第23章理解には章全体を統一的に理解しようとする意図があると考えられ，そこからは伝統的に伝えられてきた章題や先行する註釈者たちの理解にかならずしも左右されない彼の註釈態度がうかがわれる．

抄録全体を表示

In this paper, I examine philologically all the nibbāna-related words in Suttanipāta (Sn), a unique and famous Pāli sutta that contains the oldest strata of Pāli Buddhist texts. And the meanings of the nibbāna-related words in Sn are compared with their interpretations of the commentary, Paramatthajotikā (Pj). In analyzing each nibbāna-related word, when it is about the state of a person, I also focus on whether each word in the context of the sutta [I] implies nibbāna in the present life, [II] implies nibbāna at and after the end of life, or [III] does not make clear the timing of nibbāna. As a result, I find that a relatively large number of nibbāna-related words in Sn, although the contexts clearly indicate a living person, [III] do not make clear the timing of nibbāna. This suggests a new understanding that the Sn author, unlike the commentator, does not intend to differentiate between [I] nibbāna in the present life and [II] nibbāna at and after the end of life, but only intends to show, with no concern of its timing, the fact of the attainment of nibbāna. Pj takes these “two types of nibbāna” as a premise and reflects orthodox Theravada ideas of nibbāna, which are evidently a later development. The two are called “nibbāna with remainder” (in life) and “nibbāna without remainder,” and in this case, the remainder means khandha (Skt. skandha), the constituents of the person, or roughly speaking, the body.

抄録全体を表示

(1) Buddhism is a religion founded about five or six centuries before the Christian era by Gautama, the Buddha, who was born in Central India.
According to H. G. Wells' Outline of History published in 1920, it is about a half century since the life and teachings of the Buddha was clarified. His teachings are simple and plain easily understood even by the modern.
(2) During the few centuries following the death of the Buddha, however, the Buddhist order lost its elasticity assuming a state of ossification. It lost sight of the real raison d'etre and came to hold its maintenance and prosperity as its highest aim.
The ossification was due to the fact that the four factors which formed the Buddhist order-priests and lay believers of both sexes-lacked harmonious co-operation for the furtherance of their common end. In the days of the Buddha, there was teamwork among these four factors and they together strove for the realization of the supreme objective of Buddhism-the attainment of Buddhahood. In later times the priests, having been held in great reverence by lay believers, came to consider themselves as superior beings, and in order to sustain their respect and also to show a strong front to other religions then in existence, built up a sort of philosophy of great complicity. Such philosophy was foreign to Buddhism in its original form. It aimed at the salvation of one's own self through the renouncement of the world.
(3) To relieve the situation, there arose the so-called Mahayana Buddhism. It rejected the sense of superiority and the self-complacency of the priests and insisted that those who had grasped the essence of the faith, be they laymen, were more in accord with the will of the Buddha than the priests who adhered to the fixed formalities. Thus it was that the idea of Buddhisattiva, the prominent feature of Mahayana Buddhism, was born.
(4) As its characteristic, the idea of Boddhisattiva treats man as a social being. In this connection the Sutra of the Lotus, one of the scriptures of Mahayana Buddhism, says, “Not stained by the ways of the world like the lotus in water.” In this context both “the world” and “water” signify society. Man, being a social being, so teaches the idea of Boddhisattiva, he could not achieve his own salvation independent of society. Here strong emphasis is laid on the ethics of creative altruism. May this not be interpreted as a discovery of “society” in Buddhist thought ?

抄録全体を表示