All Issue

2022 Vol.73

투고논문

31 December 2022. pp. 1~29
Abstract
In the last chapter of the Hetubindu (HB), Dharmakīrti (ca. 7th century) criticizes a theory that advocates six characteristics of a valid inferential reason (ṣaḍlakṣaṇahetu). The ṣaḍlakṣaṇahetu theory consists of the three characteristics of the Buddhist trairūpya theory (pakṣadharmatā, anvaya, and vyatireka) and three additional characteristics (abādhitaviṣayatva, vivakṣitaikasaṅkhyatva, and jñātatva). Although Dharmakīrti did not mention the name of the opponent in the controversy, this ṣaḍlakṣaṇahetu theory has been attributed to Īśvarasena (ca. 6th-7th century), a teacher of Dharmakīrti, ever since Ernst Steinkellner suggested this possibility in 1967. However, an investigation into certain Buddhist and Naiyāyika texts leads to a different supposition, according to which it is the Naiyāyika theory of inference that is most relevant for understanding the ṣaḍlakṣaṇahetu.
Based on an investigation of the texts, I propose in this paper that the ṣaḍlakṣaṇahetu theory has a close relation to the Naiyāyika theories of “five characteristics of a reason” (pañcalakṣaṇahetu) and pseudo-reason (hetvābhāsa). In conclusion, I suggest that further research is required on whether the theory of six characteristics of a valid reason can be attributed to Īśvarasena. If Steinkellner’s hypothesis regarding the attribution of this theory is overturned, what has previously been considered only an intra-Buddhist debate becomes a controversy between different philosophical and religious traditions at a crucial moment in the development of Indian pramāṇa traditions around the 7th century.
다르마끼르띠(Dharmakīrti, 7세기 경)는 Hetubindu의 마지막 장에서, ‘타당한 추론 근거(hetu)는 여섯 가지 조건 혹은 특징(lakṣaṇa)을 충족해야 한다’[ṣaḍlakṣaṇahetu]고 주장하는 6상설을 비판한다. 6상설은 불교 쁘라마나 전통에서 주장하는 ‘추론 근거의 세 가지 특징’ 이론(trairūpya)에 세 가지 추가 조건 즉 abādhitaviṣayatva, vivakṣitaikasaṅkhyatva, jñātatva를 부가한 형태이다. 그러나 다르마끼르띠는 이 HB에서 논쟁의 상대자가 누구인지 밝히지 않았다. 이 문제에 대해 에른스트 슈타인켈너(E. Steinkellner)는 6상설이 다르마끼르띠의 스승인 이쉬바라세나(Īśvarasena)의 이론이라고 주장한 바 있으며, 이러한 슈타인켈너의 견해가 지금까지는 정설로 인정되어왔다. 그러나 HB에 관한 불교 학파의 주석서 및 미맘사(Mīmāṃsā)나 후대 니야야(Nyāya) 학파 등의 텍스트를 고려할 때, 6상설이 불교 내부가 아닌 타 학파의 이론이었을 가능성이 제기된다. 여러 가능성 가운데, 본고는 6상설과 직관적으로 매우 유사한 5상설을 주장하는 후기 니야야 학파의 이론에 주목하고, 그들의 ‘타당한 추론 근거의 특징’(hetulakṣaṇa) 및 유사근거(hetvābhāsa)에 관한 이론이 Hetubindu에 나타난 6상설과 유의미한 관련성을 가지고 있음을 보일 것이다. 이를 통해, 본고는 6상설의 학파적 귀속에 관한 기존 가설을 대체하는 새로운 가능성을 제시하고자 하며, 이러한 관점이 7세기 무렵의 인도 사상계를 바라보는 새로운 조망이 될 것이라 기대한다.
References

    ◆ 약호 및 일차 문헌 ABBREVIATIONS AND PRIMARY SOURCES

     

  1. DhPr.   Paṇḍita Durveka Miśra’s Dharmottarapradīpa - Being a Sub-Commentary on Dharmottara’s Nyāyabinduṭīka, a Commentary on Dharmakīrti’s Nyāyabindu, Ed. Dalsukhbhai Malvania, (TSWS 2), Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute, 1955.
  2. HB.   Dharmakīrti’s Hetubindu, Ed. Ernst Steinkellner, et al., Beijing-Vienna: CTPH – AASP, 2016.
  3. HBṬ.   Hetubinduṭīkā of Bhaṭṭa Arcaṭa with the Sub-Commentary Entitled Āloka of Durveka Miśra, Ed. Sukhlalji Sanghavi and Muni Shri Jinavijayaji (GOS 113), Baroda: Oriental Institute. 1949.
  4. HBṬĀ.   Hetubinduṭīkāloka (Durvekamiśra): In HBṬ.
  5. NBh.   Gautamīyanyāyadarśana with Bhāṣya of Vātsyāyana, Edited by Anantalal Thakur, New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1997.
  6. NBhū.   Śrīmadācārya-Bhāsarvajña-Praṇītasya Nyāyasārasya Svopajñaṃ Vyākhyānaṃ Nyāyabhūṣaṇam, Ed. Svāmī Yogīndrānanda, Varanasi: Ṣaḍdarśanaprakāśanapratiṣṭhānam, 1968.
  7. NM.   Nyāyamañjarī of Jayanta Bhaṭṭa with the Commentary ‘Granthibhaṅga’ by Cakradhara, Ed. Śrī Gaurīnāthaśāstrī. 3 vols., Varanasi: Research Institute. 1982-1984.
  8. NM.   Nyāyamañjarī of Jayanta Bhaṭṭa with Ṭippaṇī of Saurabha, Ed. K. S. Varadacharya, Vol. 2, Mysore: Oriental Research Institute, 1983.
  9. NS.   Nyāyasūtra (Gautama): In NBh.
  10. NV.   Nyāyabhāṣyavārttika of Bhāradvāja Uddyotakara, Ed. Anantalal Thakur, New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1997.
  11. NVTṬ.   Nyāyavārttikatātparyaṭīkā of Vācaspatimiśra, Ed. Anantalal Thakur, New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1996.
  12. PSṬ II.   Jinendrabuddhi’s Viśālāmalavatī Pramāṇasamuccayaṭīkā Chapter 2. Part I, Ed. Horst Lasic, et al, STTAR 15/1, Beijing-Vienna: CTPH–AASP, 2012.
  13. RNV.   Ratnakīrtinibandhāvalī, Ed. A. Thakur, Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute, 1957.
  14. ŚV.   Ślokavārttika of Śrī Kumārila Bhaṭṭa with the Commentary Nyāyaratnākara of Śrī Pārthasārathi Miśra, Ed. by Svāmī Dvārikādāsa Śāstrī, Varanasi: Tara Publications, 1978.
  15.  

    ◆ 이차 문헌 SECONDARY LITERATURE

     

  16. FRANCO, Eli. 2017. “Dharmakīrti,” Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, edited by Karl H. Potter, XXI: 51-136. Delhi: MLBD.
  17. ______. 2021. Dharmakīrti on Compassion and Rebirth with a Study of Backward Causation in Buddhism, New Delhi: Dev Publishers & Distributors.
  18. GOKHALE, P.P. 1997. Hetubindu of Dharmakīrti (A Point on Probans), Delhi: Indian Books Centre.
  19. HAYES, R. P. 1988. Dignaga on the Interpretation of Signs, Holland: K.A.P. 10.1007/978-94-009-2899-2
  20. KANG, Sung Yong. 2009. “What Does -Sama Mean? On the Uniform Ending of the Names of the Jāti-s in the Nyāyasūtra,” Journal of Indian Philosophy, vol. 37, no. 1, 75-96. 10.1007/s10781-008-9055-7
  21. KATAOKA, Kei (片岡啓). 2014. 「インド哲学における反証可能性の議論」 [“Falsifiability in Indian Philosophy”], 『南アジア古典学』 (South Asian classical studies), vol. 9, 259-90.
  22. STEINKELLNER, Ernst. 1966. “Bemerkungen Zu Īśvarasenas Lehre Vom Grund,” Wiener Zeitschrift Für Die Kunde Süd- Und Ostasiens, vol. 10, 73-85.
  23. ______. 1967a. Dharmakīrti’s Hetubinduḥ Teil I. Tibetischer Text Und Rekonstruierter Sanskrit-Text, VKSKSO, Heft 4. Graz-Wien-Köln: Kommissionsverlag der ÖAW.
  24. ______. 1967b. Dharmakīrti’s Hetubinduḥ Teil II. Übersetzung Und Anmerkungen, VKSKSO, Heft 5. Graz-Wien-Köln: Kommissionsverlag der ÖAW.
  25. ______. 1979. Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇaviniścayaḥ - Zweites Kapitel: Svārthānumānam, Teil II Ūbersetzung und Anmerkungen, VKSKS, Heft 15. Wien: ÖAW.
  26. ______. 1988. “Remarks on Niścitagrahaṇa,” In Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata, 1427-44. Serie Orientale Roma, vol. 56, Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.
  27. ______. 2020. “Dharmakīrti and Īśvarasena,” In Archaeologies of the Written: Indian, Tibetan, and Buddhist Studies in Honour of Cristina Scherrer-Schaub, 751-66. Napoli: UniorPress.
  28. TANI, Tadashi. 1987. “Dharmakirti’s Interpretation of Antinomic Indicators (Viruddhavyabhicarin),” Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu), vol. 36, no. 1, 481-472. 10.4259/ibk.36.481
  29. TILLEMANS, Tom, 1999. Scripture, Logic, Language, Studies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism, Boston: Wisdom Publications.
  30. ______. 2000. Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇavārttika. An Annotated Translation of the 4th Chapter, vol. 1 (k.1-148). VSKS, 32. Wien: ÖAW.
  31. UEDA, Noboru. (上田昇). 2004. 「遍充と周延」 [“On Vyāpti and Distribution”], 『印度學佛教學研究』 (Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies), vol. 52, no. 2, 792-786. 10.4259/ibk.52.792
Information
  • Publisher :Korean Association of Buddhist Studies
  • Publisher(Ko) :불교학연구회
  • Journal Title :Korea Journal of Buddhist Studies
  • Journal Title(Ko) :불교학연구
  • Volume : 73
  • No :0
  • Pages :1~29