WEKO3
アイテム
ダルマキールティにおける非認識因の諸類型の意義を探る
https://doi.org/10.15027/0002040423
https://doi.org/10.15027/0002040423988cd283-532b-4be9-9478-4738a45d3844
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
Ann-ResProjCent-CompStudLogic_23_153.pdf (648 KB)
|
|
| Item type | デフォルト(1) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2025-04-25 | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | ダルマキールティにおける非認識因の諸類型の意義を探る | |||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | Exploring the Significance of Various Classifications of Logical Reasons as Non-cognition (anupalabdhihetu) in Dharmakīrti | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 作成者 |
道元, 大成
× 道元, 大成
|
|||||||||
| 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 | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | Dharmakīrti and post-Dharmakīti Buddhist Logicians employ a logical reason as non-cognition (anupalabdhihetu) for proving a negative judgment. For instance, “[Proposition] There is no pott in a specific place. [Reason] Because it is not cognized though it has attained the characteristics of cognition.” It is well known that there are various types of classification of anupalabdhihetu. The Tarkabhāṣā classifies it into as many as 16 types, whereas Dharmakīrti himself lists a maximum of 11 types of anupalabdhihetu in the Nyāyabindu. Even among Dharmakīrti’s works, there seems to be some difference in the treatment of the non-cognition of an effect (kāryānupalabdhi) as well as in the classification criteria. Therefore, this paper examines several problems that are concerned with various treatments of a particular anupalabdhihetu or various classifications of anupalabdhihetu in Dharmakīrti’s works to explore their significance that may perhaps include conceptual development within Dharmakīrti. The first is the validity of kāryānupalabdhi. In the Pramāṇavārttikasvavṛtti, kāryānupalabdhi was not considered anupalabdhihetu because the absence of an effect does not necessarily imply the absence of its cause. However, in the Pramāṇaviniścaya, by limiting the cause to a causal complex in the final state just before the effect occurs, this non-cognition type was incorporated into the framework of anupalabdhihetu. On the other hand, in the case of the cognition of an effect of what is incompatible with the thing (viruddhakāryopalabdhi), applying such a limitation creates room to recognize it as a valid type of anupalabdhihetu. Nevertheless, Dharmakīrti argues that a cause with such limitations becomes equivalent to the effect itself, making it unnecessary to explicitly use viruddhakāryopalabdhi, as the argument can be omitted. Additionally, in the Pramāṇavārttikasvavṛtti, eight types of anupalabdhihetu are listed. Among them, four are classified as fundamental types: 1) Cognition of what is incompatible with the thing itself (svabhāvaviruddhopalabdhi), 2) cognition of an effect of what is incompatible with the thing (viruddhakāryopalabdhi), 3) non-cognition of a cause (kāraṇānupalabdhi), and 4) non-cognition of the thing itself (svabhāvānupalabdhi). Four derivative types are then listed: 1a) Cognition of what is incompatible with a pervader (vyāpakaviruddhopalabdhi), 3a) cognition of what is incompatible with the cause (kāran. aviruddhopalabdhi), 3b) cognition of an effect of what is incompatible with the cause (kāraṇaviruddhak āryopalabdhi), and 4a) non-cognition of the pervader (vyāpakānupalabdhi). However, the classification criteria for 1) svabhāvaviruddhopalabdhi and its derivative 1a) vyāpakaviruddhopalabdhi, as well as for 4) svabhāvānupalabdhi and its derivative 4a) vyāpakānupalabdhi, differ from those for 3) kāraṇānupalabdhi and its derivatives, 3a) kāraṇaviruddhopalabdhi, and 3b) kāraṇaviruddhakāryopalabdhi. In the former classification, if the properties to be established (sādhyadharma) are proven for the fundamental type, the properties to be established for the derivative type can also be proven. This classification focused on expanding the properties to be established. In contrast, the latter classification functions such that when a logical reason of the fundamental type is imperceptible, derivative types are used to infer that logical reason, focusing on the expansion of the logical reason. There is also another interpretation that restructures these eight types of anupalabdhihetu, which differ in classification criteria, based on essential connections (svabhāvapratibandha). In this classification, 1) kāraṇānupalabdhi, 2) vyāpakānupalabdhi, and 3) svabhāvānupalabdhi are treated as the fundamental types, while the cognition of what is incompatible with svabhāva/kāraṇa/vyāpaka and the cognition of the effect of what is incompatible svabhāva/kāraṇa/vyāpaka are treated as derivative types. This fundamental classification is also found in the Hetubindu. Furthermore, in the Vādanyāya, four types of classification are mentioned. These four are svabhāvānupalabdhi, kāraṇānupalabdhi and vyāpakānupalabdhi, with svabhāvaviruddhopalabdhi added to them. This classification indicates that the relationships involved in the use of anupalabdhihetu were being systematically listed, suggesting that the concept of incompatibility became increasingly important, second only to essential connections. |
|||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | 広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター研究成果報告書（2024年度） | |||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | The Annals of the Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic (2024) | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 出版者 | ||||||||||
| 出版者 | 広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター | |||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||
| 出版者 | ||||||||||
| 出版者 | Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic,Hiroshima University | |||||||||
| 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 | |||||||||
| 出版タイプ | ||||||||||
| 出版タイプ | VoR | |||||||||
| 出版タイプResource | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 | |||||||||
| ID登録 | ||||||||||
| ID登録 | 10.15027/0002040423 | |||||||||
| ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||||||
| 助成情報 | ||||||||||
| 助成機関識別子タイプ | Crossref Funder | |||||||||
| 助成機関識別子タイプURI | https://doi.org/10.13039/501100001691 | |||||||||
| 助成機関名 | 日本学術振興会 | |||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||
| 助成機関名 | Japan Society for the Promotion of Science | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 研究課題番号URI | https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/ja/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-23K20420/ | |||||||||
| 研究課題番号 | 21H00472 | |||||||||
| 研究課題名 | インド哲学における「無」の思想 | |||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||
| 研究課題名 | The concept of absence and negation in Indian philosophy | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 助成情報 | ||||||||||
| 助成機関識別子タイプ | Crossref Funder | |||||||||
| 助成機関識別子タイプURI | https://doi.org/10.13039/501100001691 | |||||||||
| 助成機関名 | 日本学術振興会 | |||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||
| 助成機関名 | Japan Society for the Promotion of Science | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 研究課題番号URI | https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/ja/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-23K20420/ | |||||||||
| 研究課題番号 | 23K20420 | |||||||||
| 研究課題名 | インド哲学における「無」の思想 | |||||||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||||||
| 研究課題名 | The concept of absence and negation in Indian philosophy | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | ||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | 1880-6376 | |||||||||
| 書誌情報 |
ja : 比較論理学研究 en : The Annals of the Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic 号 23(特別号), p. 153-176, ページ数 24, 発行日 2025-03-25 |
|||||||||
