유식(唯識)의 ‘동시 지각의 필연성’ 개념에 대한 요가 철학의 비판
A Study on Sahopalambha-niyama as the Reason of Vijñaptimātra: in the Case of Being Criticized by the Commentators of Yoga Philosophy
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
요가 철학의 일부 주석자들은 요가주에서는 직접 언급하지 않은‘동시 지각의 필연성’을 유가행파에서 주장하는 유식(唯識)의 근간으로간주하여 상당히 심도 있게 비판했다. 이 비판의 내용을 면밀히 고찰해보면, ‘동시 지각의 필연성’을 둘러싼 쟁론의 연원은 불교 논리학으로부터 전개되어 유식설로 비화된 불교학의 전통에 있었음을 확인할 수 있다. 요가 철학의 주석자인 Vācaspati Miśra가 이러한 전통 중에서 참고했을 가능성이 현저한 것으로는 Vasubandhu의 유식설과 Dharmakīrti의불교 논리학을 들 수 있다. 그리고 후대의 문헌인 전철학강요는 불교학의 전통을 개설하는 과정에서 이러한 정황을 충분히 입증한다. 요가철학에서 ‘동시 지각의 필연성’을 비판한 것은, 불교 내부의 쟁론을 끌어들여 상키야 및 요가 철학의 실재론, 특히 순수정신의 독자성을 강화하는 데 기여한 것으로 평가할 수 있다. Sāṃkhya-sūtra의 주석자인 Vij ñāna Bhikṣu는 요가주를 해설하면서 Vācaspati Miśra의 해설을 수용한 점에서, 유식설을 비판하여 요가 철학을 옹호한 Vācaspati Miśra의논의가 후대의 상키야 철학에도 적용되었을 것으로 추정할 수 있다.
Abstract
Some commentators in the Yoga philosophy regard sahopalambha-niyama(the necessity of being perceived simultaneously) that was not directly designated in the Yogasūtra-bhāṣya as one of the foundational theories for Vijñaptimātra, which is the doctrine of Yogācāra school of Buddhism. And they caustically criticize the sahopalambha-niyama. The instance of the concept ‘being perceived simultaneously’ is mentioned in Sāṃkhya philosophy, which is part of the same lineage of Yoga philosophy. In this case, however, the term’s usage indicates the simultaneous existence of beings and their objects of awareness. On the other hand, the term ‘simultaneous’ in the case of sahopalambha-niyama indicates the contemporaneous nature of subjectivity and objectivity of awareness. Therefore, Yoga School’s treatment of sahopalambha-niyama can be understood as taking advantage of Buddhist debates in order to advocate their school’s theory. The only uncompromising theory in Yoga philosophy is the solitude of ‘pure consciousness’(Puruṣa), the unique subjectivity of awareness. Thus, ‘pure consciousness’ cannot be compatible with sahopalambha-niyama. It is the reason that Yoga philosophers decline it. This article explores the hypothesis that the arguments of sahopalambha-niyama(the necessity of being perceived simultaneously) in Yoga philosophy are derived from the logico-epistemology school and elaborated as a theory of Viñaptimātra in Buddhist traditions. It is a reasonable inference that Vācaspati Miśra(900～980 CE) in the Tattva-vaiśāradī noticeably adopted Vasubandhu's doctrines, particularly in the Vimśatikā-vijñaptimātratā-siddhi and the logic of Dharmakīrti(ca. 7th century). For instance, the Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha of Mādhava(1199～1278 CE) fully adduces the state of things which are introduced the Buddhist philosophical doctrines. Eventually, the reason that Yoga philosophy criticizes the concept of sahopalambha-niyama in Buddhists’ debates is to strengthen its own position on realism, particularly with respect to bolstering the notion of pure spirituality in Sāṁkhya-Yoga philosophy. This evaluation can be found in later literature such as the Sāṃkhya-sūtra and its commentary, the Sāṁkhya-pravacana-bhāṣya by Vijñāna Bhikṣu (1550～1600 CE).. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the discussion in the Tattva-vaiśāradī criticizing Buddhist Yogācāra doctrine and advocating Yoga philosophy would be applied to later Sāṃkhya philosophy.
참고문헌 (37)
- Dharmakīrti, "Nyāya-bindu"
- Vetter, "Dharmakīrti의 Pramāṇaviniścaya, Ⅰ"
- Dharmottara, "Dharmottara의 Pramāṇaviniścaya-ṭikā"
- Mahāmahopādhyāya Vasudev Shastri Abhyankar, "Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha, 3rd ed" (1978), Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute
- Vijñāna Bhikṣu, "Sāṃkhya-pravacana-bhāṣya"
- "Sāṃkhya-sūtra", ~
- "大正新脩大藏經", ~
- Swami Dwarikadas Shastri, "Kamalaśīla의 Tattvasaṃgraha-pañjikā, In Tattvasaṅgraha of Ācārya Shāntarakṣita with the Commentary ‘Pañjikā’ of Shri Kamalashīla, Vol. 2" (1968), Bauddha Bharati
- Vācaspati Miśra, "Tattva-vaiśāradī"
- Rajaram Shastri Bodas, "The Yogasūtras of Patañjali with the Scholium of Vyāsa and the Commentary of Vācaspatimiśra, 2nd ed" (1917), The Government General Press
- "Pātañjala-yogasūtrāṇiḥ" (1978), Ānandāśrama
- Vyāsa, "Yogasūtra-bhāṣya 또는 Yoga-bhāṣya"
- Albrecht Wezler, "Yukti-dīpikā, In Yuktidīpikā: The Most Significant Commentary on the Sāṃkhyakārikā" (1998), Steiner
- Patañjali, "Yogasūtra"
- Vijñāna Bhikṣu, "Yoga-vārttika"
- Vasubandhu, "Viṁśatikā-kārikāḥ(唯識二十頌)"
- 강형철, "상키야와 불교의 찰나멸에 관한 대론 연구 : Yuktidīpikā를 중심으로", 박사, 인도철학과, pp.2013
- 計良龍成, "paryudāsaとprasajya-pratişedha : 非知覚因におけるその両者の無区別性について", インド哲学仏教学研究, 2, pp.36~52 (1994), 東京大学文学部 インド哲学仏教学研究室
- 高木訷元, "古典ヨ-ガ體系の硏究" (1991), 法藏館
- 梶山雄一, "唯識二十論, 大乘佛典", 世親論集, 15 (1981), 中央公論社
- 金倉圓照, "ヨ-ガ․ス-トラの成立と佛敎との關係", 印度學佛敎學硏究, 1, pp.1~10 (1953), 日本印度學佛敎學會
- 岩田孝, "同時認識について", 東洋の思想と宗敎, (創刊), pp.1~25 (1984), 早稻田大學東洋哲學會
- 宇井伯壽, "四譯對照唯識二十論硏究" (1953), 岩波書店
- 三枝充悳, "インド佛敎人名辭典" (1987), 法藏館
- 中村元, "インド論理學の理解にために, Ⅰ ダルま-キルティ『論理學小論』(Nyāya-bindu)", 法華文化硏究, (7) (1981), 立正大學法華經文化硏究所
- 中村元, "インド論理學の理解にために, Ⅱ インド論理學․術語集成--邦譯のこころみ", 法華文化硏究, (9) (1983), 立正大學法華經文化硏究所
- 中村元, ", 第28卷" (1994), 春秋社
- 정승석, "요가수트라 주석" (2010), 소명출판사
- 정승석, "요가 철학에서 비판한 절멸론자의 다의성", 인도철학, (35), pp.249~277 (2012), 인도철학회[DOI]
- Chari, S. M. Srinivasa, "Fundamentals of Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta: A study based on Vedānta Deśika's Tattva-muktā-Kalāpa, Corrected ed." (2004), Motilal Banarsidass
- Dasgupta, S. N., "Yoga as Philosophy and Religion, 1st ed" (1973), Motilal Banarsidass
- Garbe, Richard, "Sāṃkhya-pravacana-bhāṣya or Commentary on the Exposition of the Sāṃkhya Philosophy" (1943), The Harvard University Press
- Matsumoto, Shiro, "Sahopalambha-niyama", 曹洞宗硏究員硏究生硏究紀要, (12), pp.265~298 (1980)
- Prasāda, Rāma, "Pātañjali's Yoga Sūtras with the commentary of Vyāsa and the gloss of Vāchaspati Miśra. 1st ed" (2000), Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
- Rukmani, T.S., "Yogavārttika of Vijñānabhikṣu, Vol. 4" (1989), Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd
- Sinha, Jadunath, "Indian Realism, 1st ed" (1972), Motilal Banarsidass
- Woods, James Haughton, "Yoga-System of Patañjali Or the Ancient Hindu Doctrine of Concentration of Mind. 1st ed" (1973), Gordon Press