WEKO3
インデックスリンク
アイテム
『大智度論』の著者はやはり龍樹ではなかったのか : その独自の般舟三昧理解から羅什著者説の不成立を論ずる
https://doi.org/10.15056/00000265
https://doi.org/10.15056/000002658acba498-ad62-4718-85b8-3447e749b250
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
『大智度論』の著者はやはり龍樹ではなかったのか : その独自の般舟三昧理解から羅什著者説の不成立を論ずる (1.5 MB)
|
.png)
|
| Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2013-09-10 | |||||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||||
| タイトル | 『大智度論』の著者はやはり龍樹ではなかったのか : その独自の般舟三昧理解から羅什著者説の不成立を論ずる | |||||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||||
| タイトル | The Authorship of the Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra | |||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||||
| 言語 | ||||||||||||
| 言語 | jpn | |||||||||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||||||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||||||||
| ID登録 | ||||||||||||
| ID登録 | 10.15056/00000265 | |||||||||||
| ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||||||||
| アクセス権 | ||||||||||||
| アクセス権 | open access | |||||||||||
| アクセス権URI | http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 | |||||||||||
| 著者 |
武田, 浩学
× 武田, 浩学
KAKEN - 研究者検索
70390763
|
|||||||||||
| 抄録 | ||||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||||||||
| 内容記述 | Who was the author of the Mahaprajnaparamitasastra大智度論(T1509)? Traditionally it was believed to be Nagarjuna龍樹, and scholars until fairly recently thought that Kumarajiva鳩摩羅什only modified the text. Currently, however, the opinion that Kumarajiva was himself the author is gaining ground. This opinion is based on circumstantial evidence, though, and is not supported by any textusl evidence. In this paper, I would like to go back to the original view and argue that Nagarjuna was in fact the author, based on textual evidence. There are a number of original ideas in the Sastra, but of these, Pratyutpannabuddhasammukhavasthiasamadhi般舟三眛(Buddhanusmrtisamadhi念仏三眛), in particular, deserves careful attention. The author of the Sastra defined this Pratyutpannasamadhi as "Upaya." Usually Upaya (i.e., Upaya-kausalya善巧方便) refers to the means for Sattva-paripacana教化衆生. On the other hand, "Upaya" (i.e., Pratyutpannasamadhi in the Sastra) is the presupposition of Upayakausalya, "Pre-upaya"前方便, as it were. This definition in the Sastra matches the description in the Bodhisambharasastra菩提資糧論(T1660), which has been proven to be of Nagarjuna's authorship. However, this definition cannot be found in books of Kumarajiva (i.e., the Tchou wei mo kie king注維摩詰経(T1775) and the Kieou mo lo che fa che to yi大乗大義章(T1856)). In addition, the author of the Sastra regarded Prajnaparamita般若波羅密fa che as more important than Upaya, whereas Kumarajiva in the Tchou wei mo kie king regarded Upaya as more important than Prajnaparamita. In conclusion, I maintain that Nagarjuna was the author of Sastra and that Kumarajiva only made modifications. | |||||||||||
| bibliographic_information |
ja : 国際仏教学大学院大学研究紀要 en : Journal of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies 巻 3, p. 211-244, ページ数 34, 発行日 2000-03-31 |
|||||||||||
| 出版者 | ||||||||||||
| 出版者 | 国際仏教学大学院大学 | |||||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||||
| item_10002_source_id_9 | ||||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | 1343-4128 | |||||||||||
| item_10002_source_id_11 | ||||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | AA11260687 | |||||||||||
| item_10002_description_12 | ||||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||||
| 内容記述 | 110006481956 | |||||||||||
| 出版タイプ | ||||||||||||
| 出版タイプ | VoR | |||||||||||
| 出版タイプResource | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 | |||||||||||
