칸트 이율 배반과 붓다 무기설(無記設)의 논쟁구조

Abstract

In this paper I will investigate the structure of arguments between Kant’s antinomy and the dialogue on the metaphysical problems between the Buddha and Vacchagotta, Malunkyaputta. In Early Buddhism, the term “avyākata(無記)” refers to a set of ten metaphysical questions on which Buddha has kept silence. It is widely acknowledged that the Buddha gave not the answers to the questions of the avyākata because they are not helpful to solve the problems of life. The Saṃyutta-Nikāya is organized around such questions. Here Vacchagotta asked the question to Buddha whether the self existed or not, Buddha still kept silence. Buddha always and repeatedly taught that all dharmas are without self-nature(諸法無我). This silence of Buddha should be interpreted in the same way as the refusal to give answers to the questions of the avyākata. Buddha tried to give the eternal truths to a wide range of people of different levels in various circumstances. Therefore he was required to express this message through the various versions of the truth. If Buddha has given the answers to him, Vacchagotta with common levels must have misunderstood the answers. If the Buddha has believed that all the truths were to be spoken to all the people in the same way without regarding their levels, and if he did so, Vacchagotta would have the wrong opinion on the problems. If Vacchagotta will be more spiritually mature, Buddha would have explained ‘Insight into Nonself(無我論, anattā-vāda), he would at once find that the metaphysical problems were wrong problems which could not be established. Therefore Buddha would keep silence on the series of the metaphysical problems by Vacchagotta, because they could not be established. This is the way of the dissolution, not solution, of the metaphysical problems which Buddha would want to show to people.