대론(對論)의 메커니즘: 『브라흐마 수뜨라 주석』의 경우

Abstract

The debates found in Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya consist of contents that criticize the metaphysics of other schools such as Sāṃkhya, Vaiśeṣika, Buddhism, Jainism etc in those days centering around the second section in chapter 2. The commentator i.e. Śaṅkara(AD 700-750) tries to discriminate Vedāntic metaphysics called ‘Brahma-kāraṇa-vāda’ from other’s metaphysics such as ‘Pradhāna-kāraṇa-vāda’, ‘Paramāṇu-kāraṇa-vāda’ etc by means of the two tracks which can be named ‘logical fallacy’ belonging to all opponents and ‘interpretative fallacy’ belonging to Sāṃkhya alone. This very discrimination is the preliminary purpose of debates. However, the final purpose of debates can be better understood through the relationship between ‘reasoning’ (yukti, tarka, upapatti, puruṣabuddhi, anumāna etc) inclusive of debates and ‘revelation’ (veda, śruti, āgama, śāstra, upadeśa, śabda, vākya etc) i.e. sacred word. Before anything else, it seems like the role of reasoning has limits at first glance, because the commentator accepts only reasoning consistent with revelation itself. But it is necessary to pay attention to the soteriological activity of reasoning, since reasoning is bound up not only with proof but also with knowledge i.e. the means of Liberation in Advaita Vedānta. Consequently, relative reasoning as a preliminary discourse can be soteriologically an important means to transform ‘the truth of revelation’ into the ‘direct knowledge’ (anubhava) in the process of backing up absoluteness of principal discourse on Brahman. As debates in Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya are a sharply embodied form of this very reasoning, so these are a high-level ‘logical performance’ to execute the role of reasoning in the lead. In other words, debates are not exactly a voice externally to criticize opponents but closer to a voice internally to convince of proponent himself i.e. the commentator or of all Vedāntins in the light of opponents. After all, the final purpose of debates consists in justification and reinforcement of revelation. This kind of debates becomes an essential interlink between theory and practice in the way that intellectual completion is to go forward soteriological application.