WEKO3
アイテム
『順正理論』における引果と取果
https://doi.org/10.15083/00036981
https://doi.org/10.15083/00036981b85f3931-2807-4600-911c-661a23fa7837
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
ib019004.pdf (910.7 kB)
|
|
| Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2013-09-24 | |||||
| タイトル | ||||||
| タイトル | 『順正理論』における引果と取果 | |||||
| 言語 | ||||||
| 言語 | jpn | |||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||
| 資源 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
| タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||
| ID登録 | ||||||
| ID登録 | 10.15083/00036981 | |||||
| ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||
| その他のタイトル | ||||||
| その他のタイトル | On *phalākṣepa and phalapratigraha in the *Nyāyānusāriṇī | |||||
| 著者 |
一色, 大悟
× 一色, 大悟 |
|||||
| 著者別名 | ||||||
| 識別子Scheme | WEKO | |||||
| 識別子 | 87793 | |||||
| 姓名 | Isshiki, Daigo | |||||
| 著者所属 | ||||||
| 著者所属 | 東京大学大学院 | |||||
| 抄録 | ||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
| 内容記述 | Sarvāstivādins assert all factors (dharma) exist in all times. In their ontology, the way factors pass through the present time seems problematic if they “exist” in the three times : future, present, and past. To answer this problem, the Abhidharma scholar Vasumitra defined the present time as the time when factors have their activities (kāritra). Although his theory was accepted by Sarvāstivādins in general, it was still unclear what he meant by the word “activity”. Therefore, another Abhidharma scholar, Saṃghabhadra, the author of *Nyāyānusāriṇī, redefined it “the power to project its own effect (*phalākṣepaśakti)” that all conditioned (saṃskṛta) factors must have in the present. Modern scholars such as G. Sasaki explained *phalākṣepa as phalapratigraha, an ability that a conditioned factor fixes itself as a cause of its own effect. Contrary to this explanation, T. Fukuda reasoned that not every phalapratigraha is *phalākṣepa, and concluded that *phalākṣepa corresponds only to those phalapratigraha affecting the effect that arises after its cause arose (“*phalākṣepa≠phalapratigraha theory”). The present article reconsiders Fukuda’s hypothesis. By this reconsideration the article clarifies that his understanding unconsciously presupposes a few notions Saṃghabhadra does not accept. From this discussion, it is concluded that every phalapratigraha is *phalākṣepa which Saṃghabhadra regarded as deciding the present. | |||||
| 書誌情報 |
インド哲学仏教学研究 巻 19, p. 73-89, 発行日 2012-03-31 |
|||||
| ISSN | ||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||
| 収録物識別子 | 09197907 | |||||
| 書誌レコードID | ||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||
| 収録物識別子 | AN10419736 | |||||
| 出版者 | ||||||
| 出版者 | 東京大学大学院人文社会系研究科・文学部インド哲学仏教学研究室 | |||||
| 出版者別名 | ||||||
| Department of Indian Philosophy and Buddhist Studies, Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology, University of Tokyo | ||||||
