지각 논의에 내포된 인식론적 토대 : 쿠마릴라와 다르마키르티의 지각론 비교

Abstract

Dharmakīrti (ca. 600-660) and Kumārila Bhaṭṭa (fl. 7C) were contemporaries, even though there is no agreement about the exact time that both thinkers lived. Kumārila as a Mīmāṃsāka criticizes the doctrine of Dignāga, who is the founder of Buddhist logico-epistemology while Dharmakīrti is the successor of Dignāga and the defender of Buddhist doctrine. The purpose of this article is to compare and contrast the doctrine of perception between Dharmakīrti and Kumārila and examine the foundational meaning behind the discussion of perception. Kumārila and Dharmakīrti both define knowledge as non‐contradictory but the implicated meaning is different. According to Kumārila, knowledge must not be contradictory with other knowledge which is justified with the doctrine of intrinsic validity. Eventually it is to protect the doctrine of eternality on the Veda. In the case of Dharmakīrti, non‐contradictory indicates the satisfaction of human expectations. Given the different meaning on knowledge, Kumārila states that perception is the method of knowing dharma because perception can only be perceived in the present objects appropriately connected with sense‐organs. In contrast to Kumārila, Dharmakīrti advocates that perception is the only reality in the perspective of the ultimate truth, even though he accepts that perception and inference are the method of knowledge. Due to the dichotomy of the objects particularity of the objects is the object of perception and universality is the object of inference. Particularity is the momentary existence and the only reality in terms of ontology. Kumārila categorizes perception as non‐conceptualized perception and a conceptualized one. The latter is followed by the former immediately and perception has both characteristics between particularity and universality on objects. In the case of non‐conceptualized perception there is only the individual without distinction of particularity or universality, which is merely lack of capacity of the perceiver. Thus, perception in Kumārila theory is nothing but common sense in empirical realms. For Kumārila, the Veda is eternal and faultless, which is the only method of knowing dharma. Through the injunction of the Veda, human beings can achieve happiness. Dharmakīrti defines perception as excluding the possibility of conception and classifies perception into four different categorizes. Among four kinds of perceptions, Dharmakīrti’s perception is eventually inclined to yogic perception which can be known beyond sense perception. Yogic perception has double meanings; on one hand it indicates that the Buddha as the omniscience is the foundation of truth, the other is for Buddhists who can be a Buddha with awakening through meditational practice. Therefore, Kumārila and Dharmakīrti have different the epistemological foundations in the discussion of perception.