There are many suttas related to so-called the anicca-dukkha-anattan doctrine in the Khandha-saṃyutta. My exhaustive research of suttas in the Khandha-saṃyutta makes it clear that the theme of the Khandha-saṃyutta may be summarized as follows; rūpa [vedanā saññā saṃkhārā viññāṇa] which is anicca, dukkha and unstable by nature should be regarded as it really is, by right insight, “this is not mine, I am not this, this is not the Self of me.” Anicca and dukkha are preached as an introductory guide to anattan. Therefore the anicca-dukkha-anattan doctrine is simply the anattan doctrine. The meaning of anattan is not “no Self,” but “not Self.”

抄録全体を表示

The Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣā argues on the basis of a sūtra which maintains that something is called mundane (*laukikī) because it changes and perishes. It takes up the question whether the noble path (āryamārga) is mundane so long as it is also conditioned. The noble path is never mundane. But the Abhidharmamahāvibhāṣā only presents the differences between the noble path and mundaneness, and it does not show any reasons for the differences.

The Abhidharmakośabhāṣya cites suffering (duḥkha), the world (loka) and so on as synonyms for appropriative aggregates (upādānaskandha). It defines suffering as follows: suffering is because Āryas have an abhorrence of it, and the world, and suffering is because it perishes (lujyate). The Abhidharmakośabhāṣya argues that all conditioned things are suffering by suffering inherent in conditioning (saṃskāraduḥkhatā). The aspect of impermanent nature draws the aspect of suffering, but the path is not abhorrent to Āryas as it makes them quiet.

The Dharmaskandha, an early Sarvāstivādin text, mentions that the five appropriative aggregates are suffering since perishableness and change are inherent in them. It follows that appropriative aggregates attribute suffering because they are not calm, and against the mind of Āryas.

抄録全体を表示

In the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya Vasubandhu agrees with the Ābhidharmikas’ assertion that pleasure exists, in contrast to the assertion that pleasant sensations do not exist. Comparing Vasubandhu’s argument with that of Saṅghabhadra in the Nyāyānusāra, it becomes evident that the respective arguments differ, though they are mutually based on the idea of three types of suffering.

Quoting different sūtras on neither suffering nor pleasure, Vasubandhu explains that all conditioned phenomena have the nature of arising and ceasing, and that the aspect of impermanent nature draws the aspect of suffering. On the other hand, Saṅghabhadra associates suffering with the lack of wisdom.

Both hold that external objects alone are not the sole causes of suffering and pleasure; instead, they argue that these sensations depend on the state of the supporting basis. Saṅghabhadra explains that special changes in the transformation of the body-stream cause pain or pleasure of the external object. Vasubandhu illustrates that whenever a certain bodily state is attained, the object becomes the cause of pain or pleasure in a similar manner.

The Sthavira, who asserts that suffering alone exists, cites a sūtra which addresses false representations （saṃjñāviparyāsa）. He mentions that improper mental application （ayoniśomanaskāra） and ignorant contact （avidyāsaṃsparśa） cause pleasant sensations.

抄録全体を表示

The charm and power of the Lotus Sutra is found in the fact that it entrusts the task of personal and societal benefit to human beings themselves. Yet, why would the Sutra propose to do this if these same human beings are people who are not buddhas, and who are constantly misled by their own in tentions and desires?
The Sutra's ideal concept, as seen in from the perspective of the Buddha, is that the whole human life situation, i. e., physical and social matters as well as spiritual ones, can be changed or improved through development of their own awareness and subsequent reformation of their spritual condition. However, if one takes the compilers of the sutra to be the actual authors of the explanation, the contents of the sutra can be seen as an aggressive criticism of those who hold views opposing those of the followers of this sutra. The correct reading can be grasped through a comprehensive understanding of the entire text.
The final repetition of its admonition to humanity reflects the actual condition of human society during the time of the compilation of the text. The condition is all the same in our modern society. The value and importance of the sutra's perspective is underlined through its premise that human beings possess a basic and essential nature of goodness, and that, through their own actions and attitudes, they can engineer the improvement of themselves and their society.

抄録全体を表示

This article discusses how the lives of elderly laypeople in Cambodia relate to Buddhist beliefs and practices by shedding light on a new practice that has emerged in urban areas, in which elderly people learn the theories of Abhidhamma, one of the philosophical divisions in Tripiṭaka of Thēravāda Buddhism. By focusing on learners’ personal experiences, the author attempts to determine the essential characteristics of “learning in old age.” Through class observations and interviews, a significant switch to a new set of ideologies can be observed: Elderly learners actively struggle with Buddhist philosophies in an intellectual manner, and are not merely satisfied with the conventional lay practice of “merit making,” which involves provision of material support to temples and monks and observation of lay precepts. These learners have endured two decades of suffering since the 1970s and therefore, seem to have a strong motivation to study Abhidhamma, something that they call “analyses of the mind.” Abhidhamma not only provides elderly learners with a theoretical method to overcome “suffering” but also induces an inner strength gained from contentment due to the learning activity itself.

抄録全体を表示