경량부 종자설에 대한 중현과 무착의 비판, 그리고 세친의 딜레마

Abstract

This thesis surveyed the relationship between Sthavira Śrīlāta, Saṃghabhadra and Asaṅga who was the known master of Sautrāntika, Sarvāstivāda, and Yogācāra respectively in regards to the Vasubandhu’s theory of seeds(bīja) argued in Abhidharmakośabhāṣya. Seen through Saṃghabhadra’s criticism, Vasubandhu’s theory of seeds is in a close relation with the theory of ‘previous accompanied-elements(pūrvānudhātu)’ by Sautrāntika’s Sthavira Śrīlāta. It seems like that is a Vasubandhu’s own understanding based on the Sthavira’s theory. Saṃghabhadra criticize their theory of seeds and ‘previous accompanied-elements’ roughly in two ways. (1) If the seeds are not separate beings with consciousness which is the basis(āśraya) of seeds, it should be said that un-good mind(不善心) can emerge from good mind(善心) because there are an immeasurable number of seeds of good, evil and etc. in a unity. (2) If both are not together at the same time, a mutual relationship(saṃbandha) is impossible. According to Saṃghabhadra’s criticism, to argue the theory of seeds, following two conditions have to satisfy at least. That (1) seeds (or the basis of seeds) have to exist as separate beings to current six consciousness, (2) but also have to exist simultaneously. The concept ‘ālayavijñāna’ suggested by Yogācāra satisfied these conditions. So Asaṅga could also criticized Sthavira’s theory of the serial continuity(saṃtati) of seeds in the same logic with Saṃghabhadra’s. Vasubandhu defended Sautrāntika’s theory of the serial continuity of seeds as a very common sense, while calling Saṃghabhadra as ‘a fool(devānām priya)’. However, as he himself converted to Mahāyāna Yogācāra, he had to criticize the Sautrāntika’s theory of seeds, which he declared before as the best opinion, in the same logic with Saṃghabhadra’s. To Vasubandhu, this would be an irony and dilemma personally. Though at a guess, following his intellectual journey, his irony was inevitable and the later criticism calling him as li chang wei zong(理長爲宗, i.e. taking the best theory as his own regardless of whom it came from) may also be the rhetoric which to explain that.