인도불교 초기 유식문헌에서의 언어와 실재와의 관계_瑜伽師地論의 三性과 五事를 중심으로

Abstract

Indian Buddhism has shown from the outset the tendency to the nominalistic analysis, and in this respect it differs from the orthodoxical systems of Indian philosophy, which based themselves on the realism. The criterion for dividing realism from the nominalism lies in the different views on the referential meaning of the language. The most characteristical theory that rejects the external objects and accepts only their mental images was presented by the Buddhist Mind-Only School, which is also named as Vijñānavāda or Yogācāra School. The present paper deals with the Tri-svabhāva ("Three Natures")and Pañca-vastuka theories in the Yogācārabhūmi, As far as the first theory is concerned, it was for the first time formulated in the Saṃdhinirmocana-Sūtra and is typical for the Mind-Only School, and also called "Tri-lakṣaṇa" (three Characteristics). The Tri-svabhāva consists of Parikalpita-svabhāva ("imagined Nature"), Paratantra-svabhāva ("Dependent Nature") and Pariniṣpanna-svabhāva ("Perfectly accomplished Nature"). 'Imagined Nature' means that the so-called objective referents are actually projections of consciousness. 'Dependent Nature' means that the consciousness itself is constituted by dependent origination. 'Perfectly accomplished Nature' means the absence of projection of consciousness. From the history of ideas the theory of Tri-svabhāva is said to be developed from the Yogācārabhūmi, which has five parts. In the first part, Maulī Bhūmi, there are no solid bases that show the full development of the terminologies, though they are mentioned in some passages. In the Bodhisattva-bhūmi of Maulī Bhūmi, for example, the relationship between the referential object and projection of consciousness are fully realized and their philosophical implications are discussed. But it would be too far away, if one assumes that the chapter discusses the problems in the context of the "Three Natures", though it can be regarded as a forerunner of this theory. The Problems is more complicated through the another chapter in the second part of the Yogācārabhūmi, the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī, which presents the same conceptual implications in the context of the "Five categories" (Pañca-vastuka). In the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī the same problems are discussed with the following five categories (vastu): nimitta (referential object"), nāman ("concept"), vikalpa ("projection"), tathatā ("thusness") and saṃyagjñāna ("right knowledge"). This chapter analyses the relation of these five categories through 40 aspects. Present paper aims at determining the historical priority of the five categories. In the next step, I deal with the Tri-svabhāva of the Saṃdhinirmocana-Sūtra, focusing on the extinguishment of Paratantra-svabhāva. In comparing this aspect with the standard description on Trisvabhāva presented in the Mahāyāna-Saṃgrāha, I tries to show that the Saṃdhinirmocana-Sūtra has syncretistic attitude, which was later divided and clearly formulated in the two forms of Tri-svabhāva. Recently two books, dealing with the problems in the Yogācārabhūmi, are published separately. I have examined some themes in these books and suggested my own observations.