불교인식논리학에서 유사지각과 자증지 해석에 관한 지각 논쟁
Debate on Perception between Sued-Perception and Self-Awareness in the Buddhist Pramāṇa School
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
디그나가(Dignāga) 사상의 계승자로 일컬어지는 다르마키르티(Dharmakīrti)는 NB에서 지각의 종류는 감각지각(indriyajñāna), 의지각(mānasa-pratyakṣa), 자증지(svasaṃvedana), 요가행자의 지각(yogiprayakṣa)의 4가지를 각각 독립된 직접지각의 종류로 분류한다. 그렇다면 디그나가도 이들 4가지 직접지각을 독립된 종류로 분류하고 있는가? 이 물음에 대해 학자들의 의견은 일치하지 않는다. 현대 학자들의 논쟁은 디그나가는 지각의 종류를 3가지로 분류하고 있다는 주장과 4가지로 분류한다는 견해로 양분된다. 전자는 핫토리(Hattori), 나가토미(Nagatomi), 프랑코(Franco) 등의 학자들이 주장하는 견해이고, 웨이만( Wayman)과 야오(Zhihua Yao)는 후자를 주장한다. 논쟁에서의 핵심은 디그나가의 사상에서 자증지가 독립된 지각의 한 종류로 분류될 수 있는가에 있다. 근거를 두는 게송과 주석서에 따라 다양한 해석의 가능성이 열려있고, 또한 불명료한 부분이 있기 때문에 여러 학자들 사이에서 여전히 논쟁의 중요한 주제 중의 하나이다. 학자들의 주장을 분석하면 불교인식논리학에서 ‘디그나가의 논서는 소위 위대한 주석자라고 하는 논사들의 주석과는 별개로, 디그나가 그 자체로 읽고 해석해야 한다.’는 결론에 이른다. 다르마키르티가 위대한 주석자이며 디그나가의 사상을 계승 발전시켰을지라도 디그나가의 사상은 디그나가 논서 그 자체에 의해서만 이해되어져야만, 디그나가와 다르마키르티 사상의 차별성도 부각될 수 있으며, 이는 다른 논사들의 경우에도 마찬가지이다.
Abstract
Dharmakīrti clearly states that there are four types’ perception, namely sense perception, mental perception, self-awareness, and yogic perception. However, there is no agreement whether Dignāga accepts the four type’s perceptions. The purpose of this paper is to exam this discussion and elaborate the limited solution by each scholar. On the argument about the number of perception in Dignāga’s definition scholars opinions are divided into two camps. The first group agrees that Franco’s interpretation and argument is quite reasonable. They advocate Dignāga only approves three kinds of perception. These scholars are Masaaki Hattori, Masatoshi Nagatomi, and Eli Franco. The second one is that like Dharmakirti, Dignāga also consents four types of perception. This debate is suggested by Alex Wayman and Zhihua Yao. Based on Sanskrit text and previous research, Eli Franco argues that Dignāga only accepts three type’s perception in which self-awareness is not an independent perception. He principally insists that apart from the annotations of the so-called great commentators, Dignāga’s thought must be understood the framework of Dignāga’s literature not other commentators’ interpretation. In other words, even though Dharmakīrtiis a great commentator and succeeded Dignāga’s thought, Dignāga’s thought can be distinguished only by Dignāga. In contrast, Zhihua Yao strongly states that Dignāga also accepts four types perception and so in his framework self-awareness is an independent. The evidences of his discussion are based on Chines and Tibetan literatures. Yao also reaches the agreement of Franco’s one but reminders the fact that there is no existing Sanskrit literature in Dignāga’s literatures. Before two scholars’ discussion, several scholars involved in this matter. Nevertheless, it is still an important topic of controversy because of the inarticulacy of the possibilities of various interpretations based on the verses and commentaries. Therefore, it would be said that the intellectual explore in epistemological discourse is necessary to be limited and inclined to on a certain bias.
참고문헌 (29)
- D. Malvania, (1955)
- "Dignāga’s Nyāyamukha", ~
- "Dignāga's Pramāṇasamucchaya", ~
- Ram Chandra Pandeya, "The Pramāṇvāttikam of Ācārya Dharmakīti" (1989), Motilal Banarsidas
- R. Sāṅkrityāyana, "PVBh: Pramāṇavarttikabhāshyam of Prajñakaragupta" (1953)
- "Pramāṇavinścaya , Chapter I : T.Vetter", ~ (1966)
- "Śāntarakṣita's Tattvasaṅgraha. cf. TSP", ~
- Embar Krishnamacharya, "Tattvasaṅgraha of Śāntarakṣita with commentary of Kamalaśīla, Vol.1" (1984), M.S. University of Baroda Press
- "大正新修大藏經", ~
- 김성옥, "‘자기인식’에 관한 유식학파와 중관학파의 논쟁", 인도철학, (39), pp.235~264 (2013), 인도철학회[DOI]
- 박기열, "지넨드라붓디의 현량론 연구", 박사, pp.2015
- 戶琦宏正, "佛敎認識論の硏究" (1978), 大同出版社
- Arnold, Dan, "Buddhists, Brahmins, and Belief: Epistemology in South Asian Philosophy of Religion" (2005), Columbia University Pres
- Arnold, Dan, "Self-Awareness (svasaṃvitti) and Related Doctrines of Buddhists Following Dignāga: Philosophical Characterizations of Some of the Main Issues", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 38, pp.323~378 (2010)
- Dreyfus, G. B. J., "Recognizing reality: Dharmakīrti's philosophy and its Tibetan interpretations" (1997), State University of New York Press
- Dreyfus, Georges, "Self, No Self? Perspectives from Analytical, Phenomenological, & Indian Tradition" (2011), OUP
- Franco, Eli, "Did Dignāga accept four types of perception", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 21(3), pp.295~299 (1993), Springer Nature[DOI]
- Franco, Eli, "Dharmakīrti on Compassion and Rebirth" (1997), Arbeitskreis fur Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien
- Franco, Eli, "Aviīta and āvīta", Asiatische Studien, 53, pp.563~578 (1999)
- Kellner, Birgit, "Self-Awareness (svasaṃvedana) in Dignāga’s Pramāṇasamuccaya and –vṛtti: A Close Reading", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 38, pp.203~231 (2010)
- Kellner, Birgit, "Self-awareness (svasaṃvedana) and Infinite Regresses: A Comparison of Arguments by Dignāga and Dharmakīrti", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 39(4), pp.411~426 (2011)
- Kobayashi, Hisayashi, "Self-Awareness and Mental Perception", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 38, pp.233~245 (2010)
- Hattori, Masaaki, "Dignāga, On Perception" (1968), Harvard University Press
- Matilal, B. K., "Perception : An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge" (1986), Clarendon Press
- Yao, Zhihua, "Dignāga and Four Types of Perception", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 32(1), pp.57~79 (2004)
- Yao, Zhihua, "The Buddhist theory of Self-Cognition" (2005), Routledge
- Wayman, Alex, "A reconsideration of Dharmakīrti's 'deviation' from Dignāga on pratyakṣābhāsa", ABORI, 58, pp.59 (1991), 387~396
- Wayman, Alex, "Dharmakīrti and the Yogācara theory of bīja, Studies in the Buddhist Epistmological tradition", pp.419~429 (1999), Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften