감관지의 인식대상, ‘집합체(sañcita)’에 관한 고찰

Abstract

The object of cognition by five sense organs in Dignāga’s PSV would be metaphorically expressed as the appearance reflected on the mirror in the camera inasmuch as the exterior substance is different from the object of cognition. Because cognition by the sense organs is limited to all conditions surrounding the object which we try to be aware so that we can only perceive a part of all aspects of the object. The appearance reflected on the mirror of the camera is being before understanding through combining with languages in our mind. Dignāga describes on the object of perception by sense organs as ‘blue, itself’, but ‘this is blue’ having been defined and categorized by means of words and the exclusion of different objects. On the other hand, all people under the same conditions to perceive the object should get a common result of cognition to the object, that is ‘blue itself’, although the object is for the direct perception by sense organs(indriya-pratyakṣa) called svalakṣaṇa. This common aspect of svalakṣaṇa could be understood Dignāga’s common property (sāmānya) of the aggregate (sañcita) made of a lot of atoms, is grasped as the whole in the cognition sphere (āyatana). In this paper, the three terminologies; sañcita, its sāmānya, and svalakṣaṇa, are compared to verify the relationship among them on the base of Dignāga’s PSV, Jinendrabuddhi’s PSṬ, and Dharmakīrti’s PV. Sañcita is said that it has the ability to cause knowledge (jñāna). In this case, the knowledge could be supposed to be not only indriya- pratyakṣa as the result of cognition, but also svalakṣaṇa which is one of knowledge as the object aspect in the two aspects (dvirūpatā) of knowledge. In the latter, as sañcita is located out of the cognition sphere and svalakṣaṇa is in the cognition sphere, sāmānya is acceptable as a style(rūpa), how the aspect(ākāra) to move from outside to inside the cognition sphere. Thus, sāmānya would be said to play a role in a link to connect between sañcita and svalakṣaṇa. Unlike Dignāga basically describes on the object of cognition under the condition that sañcita is one, Dharmakīrti assumes the object of cognition under multi-conditions that plural aggregates (sañcita) bring out one knowledge in one cognition sphere at the same time. Therefore, if Dignāga’s sañcita theory is said to be plain like ‘blue itself’ becomes svalakṣaṇa, Dharmakīrti’s sañcita has multiple layers like ‘blue itself' and 'yellow itself’ become one svalakṣaṇa simultaneously.