从《正理门论》看陈那的因明体系
|
摘要
公元5世纪末,印度各派哲学思想盛行,其中不乏一些外道理论,使佛教学说的正统地位受到威胁。为破斥外道,弘扬佛法,陈那论师在其代表作《正理门论》一书中对古因明理论进行改革,提出九句因、因三相、三支论式等学说,并对古因明的过失论进行梳理,使佛教因明学说形成一套完整的理论体系。印度逻辑学家将陈那以前的因明学说称为古因明,而将陈那所创建的因明学说称为新因明。可见,《正理门论》在印度因明发展史上是具有里程碑意义的著作。
学术界把《正理门论》分为两大部分:能立和似能立、能破和似能破。其中,能立是指正确的宗、因、喻三支;似能立是指有过失的、不能成立的宗、因、喻三支,即似宗、似因和似喻。能破是正确的反驳,在《正理门论》中是指建立一套符合因三相规则的三支论式;似能破是指违反因三相规则,在破斥对方观点中所犯下的各种过失。
本文一改以往学术界对《正理门论》的分类方法,将全书分为三个部分:
第一部分从梳理同品和异品的概念入手,详细介绍了九句因学说和因三相学说,并运用欧拉图和数理逻辑的方法分析九句因之间的对当关系、因三相之间的推导关系及九句因与因三相的关系。九句因和因三相学说构成了陈那新因明学说的理论基础,是建立三支论式的依据,也是划分过失论的标准,在整部论著中具有奠基石的作用。
第二部分在总结古因明论式利弊的基础上对三支论式学说进行阐述,着重强调喻支的变化在从归纳到演绎转变中的重要作用,并对学术界对三支论式逻辑性质的争议提出自己的一些看法。
第三部分是总结违背由九句因发展而来的因三相规则所犯的各种错误,即过失论学说。包括宗过5种、因过14种、喻过10种。本文沿用了陈那对各种似能立的分类,并用形象的事例对各种过失进行解释。
该分类方法将《正理门论》的几种学说看成是理论基础和正反两种上层建筑的制约关系,这对于正确认识陈那因明体系具有一定的意义和价值。
At the end of the 5th century A.D,there were kinds of philosophic thinkings were populared in India,but also many mal theories, even made a enormous threaten to the Buddhist’legitimacy status. In order to denounce heterodoxy’s theories and consolidate Buddhist’legitimacy statu, DIGNāGA innovated the fomer Hetuvidyātheories in his representative work《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》,advanced some new theories such as the Nine-Hetu、Trirūpya、the three part inference model, and sort out the fomer Hetuvidyātheories.Made the Buddhist’Hetuvidyātheories to be a complete system. Logicians named Hetuvidyātheories before DIGNāGA as old Hetuvidyā, and after DIGNāGA as new Hetuvidyā. It is observed that《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》have a a milestone mean in indian logic’history.
Academicians divide《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》into two parts: can stand and can not stand; can refute and can not refute. The“can stand”is the correct topic、reason and comparison.The“can not stand”is the wrong topic、wrong reason and wrong comparison.The“can refute”is a correct refute,in《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》it means that establish a suit of three part inference model which accord with the regulations of three characteristics of the middle terms. The“can not refute”is a mistake which is contrary to the regulations of three characteristics of the middle terms.
This thesis is different with the fomer classification method made by most Academicians, divide this treatise into three parts:
The first part begin by regulating conceptions of“same type”and“different type”,make a detailed introduce about the Nine-Hetu and Trirūpya, make euler diagram and mathematical logic methods to analyse relations among the Nine-Hetu.The Nine-Hetu and Trirūpya constitute the DIGNāGA new Hetuvidyā’theory base.It is the basis for the three part inference model, and is also the standard to divide the fault theories.It has a cornerstone’function.
The second part explains the three part inference model which is based on summing up the old Hetuvidyā’advantages and disadvantages. Emphasizes the action of the figure part’s change from inductive inference to the deductive inference.And put forward some individual opinions for academicians’disputes about the nature of the three part inference model.
The third part sums up all kinds of mistakes which are contrary to Trirūpya.It consists of 7 kinds of wrong topic’mistake、14 kinds of wrong reason’mistake and 10 kinds of wrong comparison’mistake. This thesis continues to use DIGNāGA’s classification about“can not stand”,and use vivid documentation to explain all kinds of mistakes.
This classification method take the several theories in《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》as arestrict relation between the theoretical basis and the superstructure.It is meaningful and valuable for recognizing DIGNāGA’s Hetuvidyāsystem.
学术界把《正理门论》分为两大部分:能立和似能立、能破和似能破。其中,能立是指正确的宗、因、喻三支;似能立是指有过失的、不能成立的宗、因、喻三支,即似宗、似因和似喻。能破是正确的反驳,在《正理门论》中是指建立一套符合因三相规则的三支论式;似能破是指违反因三相规则,在破斥对方观点中所犯下的各种过失。
本文一改以往学术界对《正理门论》的分类方法,将全书分为三个部分:
第一部分从梳理同品和异品的概念入手,详细介绍了九句因学说和因三相学说,并运用欧拉图和数理逻辑的方法分析九句因之间的对当关系、因三相之间的推导关系及九句因与因三相的关系。九句因和因三相学说构成了陈那新因明学说的理论基础,是建立三支论式的依据,也是划分过失论的标准,在整部论著中具有奠基石的作用。
第二部分在总结古因明论式利弊的基础上对三支论式学说进行阐述,着重强调喻支的变化在从归纳到演绎转变中的重要作用,并对学术界对三支论式逻辑性质的争议提出自己的一些看法。
第三部分是总结违背由九句因发展而来的因三相规则所犯的各种错误,即过失论学说。包括宗过5种、因过14种、喻过10种。本文沿用了陈那对各种似能立的分类,并用形象的事例对各种过失进行解释。
该分类方法将《正理门论》的几种学说看成是理论基础和正反两种上层建筑的制约关系,这对于正确认识陈那因明体系具有一定的意义和价值。
At the end of the 5th century A.D,there were kinds of philosophic thinkings were populared in India,but also many mal theories, even made a enormous threaten to the Buddhist’legitimacy status. In order to denounce heterodoxy’s theories and consolidate Buddhist’legitimacy statu, DIGNāGA innovated the fomer Hetuvidyātheories in his representative work《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》,advanced some new theories such as the Nine-Hetu、Trirūpya、the three part inference model, and sort out the fomer Hetuvidyātheories.Made the Buddhist’Hetuvidyātheories to be a complete system. Logicians named Hetuvidyātheories before DIGNāGA as old Hetuvidyā, and after DIGNāGA as new Hetuvidyā. It is observed that《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》have a a milestone mean in indian logic’history.
Academicians divide《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》into two parts: can stand and can not stand; can refute and can not refute. The“can stand”is the correct topic、reason and comparison.The“can not stand”is the wrong topic、wrong reason and wrong comparison.The“can refute”is a correct refute,in《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》it means that establish a suit of three part inference model which accord with the regulations of three characteristics of the middle terms. The“can not refute”is a mistake which is contrary to the regulations of three characteristics of the middle terms.
This thesis is different with the fomer classification method made by most Academicians, divide this treatise into three parts:
The first part begin by regulating conceptions of“same type”and“different type”,make a detailed introduce about the Nine-Hetu and Trirūpya, make euler diagram and mathematical logic methods to analyse relations among the Nine-Hetu.The Nine-Hetu and Trirūpya constitute the DIGNāGA new Hetuvidyā’theory base.It is the basis for the three part inference model, and is also the standard to divide the fault theories.It has a cornerstone’function.
The second part explains the three part inference model which is based on summing up the old Hetuvidyā’advantages and disadvantages. Emphasizes the action of the figure part’s change from inductive inference to the deductive inference.And put forward some individual opinions for academicians’disputes about the nature of the three part inference model.
The third part sums up all kinds of mistakes which are contrary to Trirūpya.It consists of 7 kinds of wrong topic’mistake、14 kinds of wrong reason’mistake and 10 kinds of wrong comparison’mistake. This thesis continues to use DIGNāGA’s classification about“can not stand”,and use vivid documentation to explain all kinds of mistakes.
This classification method take the several theories in《NYāYA DVāRAāSTRA》as arestrict relation between the theoretical basis and the superstructure.It is meaningful and valuable for recognizing DIGNāGA’s Hetuvidyāsystem.
引文
①陈那(约440-520),梵名Dignāga,意译"方象","域龙","大域龙","童授".因明学的集大成者.古印度中期大乘佛教瑜伽行派论师,佛教新因明学创始人,被后人称为"中世纪正理学之父".
②解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2):56
①黄志强. "因明研究"指误.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(7):12
①解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2):57
②郑伟宏.佛家逻辑通论.上海:复旦大学出版社,1996:275
①解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2):57
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:5
②巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:6
③巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:6
④巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:7
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:8
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:11
②巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:12
③巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:13
④张忠义,淮芳.第二相新解.南亚研究,2007,(2):24
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:67
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:70
①张忠义.因明蠡测.北京:人民出版社,2008:59
①曾昭式.论因明学之喻与墨辩之理类.南都学坛(哲学社会科学版)第16卷,1996,(1):47
①张忠义.中国逻辑史研究.哈尔滨:黑龙江教育出版社,1985:12-15
②黄志强.三支论式规则探析.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(3):15
③黄志强.三支论式规则探析.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(3):16
①刘纯.因明采薇.成都:科学文化艺术出版社,2009:24
②高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究,2008,(1):204
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:23-24
②张家龙.逻辑学思想史.长沙:湖南教育出版社,2004:216
①高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究,2008,(1):204
①高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究,2008,(1):205
①吕澂.因明入正理论讲解.北京:中华书局,1983:127
①张晓翔.论新因明的宗过.燕山大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(2):62
①林鸿伟. "因三相"﹑"九句因"及诸"过"与因明的实质.哲学研究,2008,(2):58
①沈剑英.佛家逻辑.北京:开明出版社,1992:136-164
②末木刚博.因明谬误论.孙中原译.兰州:甘肃人民出版社,1989:174
1陈那.因明正理门论.玄奘译.南京:金陵刻经处,1957
2巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:北京三联书店,1994.10
3阿特里雅.印度论理学纲要.北京:商务印书馆,1936
4刚晓.汉传因明二论.北京:宗教文化出版社,2003
5棍山雄一.印度逻辑学的基本性质.北京:商务印书馆,1980
6黄明信.因明新探.兰州:甘肃人民出版社,1989
7窥基.因明大疏.南京:金陵刻经处,1896
8刘纯.因明采薇.成都:科学文化艺术出版社,2009
9吕澂.吕澂佛学论著选集.济南:齐鲁书社,1991
10吕澂.因明入正理论讲解.北京:中华书局,1983
11末木刚博.因明谬误论.孙中原译.兰州:甘肃人民出版社,1989
12商羯罗主.因明入正理论.玄奘译.北京:文物出版社,1989
13舍尔巴茨基.佛教逻辑.北京:商务印书馆,1980
14沈剑英.因明学研究.上海:东方出版中心,2002
15沈有鼎.沈有鼎集.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2006
16石村.因明述要.北京:中华书局,1981
17汤用彤.印度哲学史略.北京:中华书局,1988
18姚南强.因明学说史纲要.上海:上海三联书店,2000
19姚南强.因明辞典.上海:上海辞书出版社,2008
20虞愚.因明学.北京:中华书局,2006
21张家龙.逻辑学思想史.长沙:湖南教育出版社,2004
22张忠义,光泉,刚晓.因明新论.北京:中国藏学出版社,2006
23张忠义.中国逻辑史研究.哈尔滨:黑龙江教育出版社,1995
24张忠义.因明蠡测.北京:人民出版社,2008
25郑伟宏.因明正理门论直解.北京:中华书局,2008
26周礼全.逻辑百科辞典.成都:四川教育出版社,1994
27阿旺旦增,关于九句因和因三相的逻辑问题探讨.中国藏学,1998(3)
28高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究.2008,(1)
29解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2)
30黄志强."因明研究"指误.广西师院学报,2000, (3)
31黄志强.论因明比量.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),1999 ,(1)
32黄志强.三支论式规则探析.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(3)
33周文英.陈那的因明体系述略.江西教育学院学报(社会科学版),2000,(8)
34沈剑英.因明的语用学.哲学研究,1998,(1)
35孙丽娜.从"论式"看因明的逻辑性质.黔南民族师范学院学报,2008,(l)
36谢佛荣.试论因明学与三段论之异同.大庆师范学院学报,2006,(12)
37郑伟宏."因三相"正本清源.北京:哲学研究.逻辑专刊,2003,(6)
38曾昭式.论因明学之喻与墨辩之理类.南都学坛(社会科学版),1996,(1)
39张晓翔.论新因明的宗过.燕山大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(6)
40张忠义,侯玉娟.过论划分之我见.燕山大学学报(哲社版),2006,(2)
41张忠义,李伟.因明论式只有第一格AAA式吗?.佳木斯师专学报,1994,(1)
42张忠义,张家龙.从现代逻辑观点看印度新因明三支论式.哲学研究,2008,(1)
43张忠义.因明的"合离"与"分离规则".社会科学战线,1992,(3)
44 Anantlal Thakur.Ratnakīrtinibandhāvalī. Tibetan Sanskrit Works SeriesⅢ,Patna,1957
45 A.C.Senape McDermott.An Eleventh-century Buddhist Logic of“Exist”Ratnakrti’s K?a?abha?gasiddhi? Vyatirekātmikā.Dordrecht-Holland,1967
46 Bahadur.The Wisdom of Nyaya. Motilal Banarsidass,NewDeli,1978
47 Dhirendra Sharma.The differentiation theory of meaning in Indian logic, Hague,1969
48 F.Th.Stcherbatsky.Buddhist logic,vol.2,Dover Publications,lnc.New York,1962
49 Giuseppe Tucci. The Nyāyamukha of Dignāga,Heidelberg:Materialien zur Kunde des Buddhismus,1930
50 R.S.Y.Chi.Buddhist Formal Logic.Motilal Banarsidass,NewDel,1984
51 S.C.Vidyabhusana.History of the Medieval School of Indian Logic.Calcutta:Calcutta University,1909
52 T.S.Efiot Notes toward the Definition of Culture.Faber and Faber, London,l948
53 T.Verrer.Dharmakīrti’s pramā?avini?caya?1.Kapitel:Pratyak?am,Wien,1966
②解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2):56
①黄志强. "因明研究"指误.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(7):12
①解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2):57
②郑伟宏.佛家逻辑通论.上海:复旦大学出版社,1996:275
①解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2):57
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:5
②巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:6
③巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:6
④巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:7
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:8
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:11
②巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:12
③巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:13
④张忠义,淮芳.第二相新解.南亚研究,2007,(2):24
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:67
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:70
①张忠义.因明蠡测.北京:人民出版社,2008:59
①曾昭式.论因明学之喻与墨辩之理类.南都学坛(哲学社会科学版)第16卷,1996,(1):47
①张忠义.中国逻辑史研究.哈尔滨:黑龙江教育出版社,1985:12-15
②黄志强.三支论式规则探析.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(3):15
③黄志强.三支论式规则探析.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(3):16
①刘纯.因明采薇.成都:科学文化艺术出版社,2009:24
②高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究,2008,(1):204
①巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:生活﹑读书﹑新知三联书店,1994:23-24
②张家龙.逻辑学思想史.长沙:湖南教育出版社,2004:216
①高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究,2008,(1):204
①高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究,2008,(1):205
①吕澂.因明入正理论讲解.北京:中华书局,1983:127
①张晓翔.论新因明的宗过.燕山大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(2):62
①林鸿伟. "因三相"﹑"九句因"及诸"过"与因明的实质.哲学研究,2008,(2):58
①沈剑英.佛家逻辑.北京:开明出版社,1992:136-164
②末木刚博.因明谬误论.孙中原译.兰州:甘肃人民出版社,1989:174
1陈那.因明正理门论.玄奘译.南京:金陵刻经处,1957
2巫寿康.因明正理门论研究.北京:北京三联书店,1994.10
3阿特里雅.印度论理学纲要.北京:商务印书馆,1936
4刚晓.汉传因明二论.北京:宗教文化出版社,2003
5棍山雄一.印度逻辑学的基本性质.北京:商务印书馆,1980
6黄明信.因明新探.兰州:甘肃人民出版社,1989
7窥基.因明大疏.南京:金陵刻经处,1896
8刘纯.因明采薇.成都:科学文化艺术出版社,2009
9吕澂.吕澂佛学论著选集.济南:齐鲁书社,1991
10吕澂.因明入正理论讲解.北京:中华书局,1983
11末木刚博.因明谬误论.孙中原译.兰州:甘肃人民出版社,1989
12商羯罗主.因明入正理论.玄奘译.北京:文物出版社,1989
13舍尔巴茨基.佛教逻辑.北京:商务印书馆,1980
14沈剑英.因明学研究.上海:东方出版中心,2002
15沈有鼎.沈有鼎集.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2006
16石村.因明述要.北京:中华书局,1981
17汤用彤.印度哲学史略.北京:中华书局,1988
18姚南强.因明学说史纲要.上海:上海三联书店,2000
19姚南强.因明辞典.上海:上海辞书出版社,2008
20虞愚.因明学.北京:中华书局,2006
21张家龙.逻辑学思想史.长沙:湖南教育出版社,2004
22张忠义,光泉,刚晓.因明新论.北京:中国藏学出版社,2006
23张忠义.中国逻辑史研究.哈尔滨:黑龙江教育出版社,1995
24张忠义.因明蠡测.北京:人民出版社,2008
25郑伟宏.因明正理门论直解.北京:中华书局,2008
26周礼全.逻辑百科辞典.成都:四川教育出版社,1994
27阿旺旦增,关于九句因和因三相的逻辑问题探讨.中国藏学,1998(3)
28高艾华.试论因明论式中的"喻".宗教学研究.2008,(1)
29解志敏.汉传因明弘传史略.佛教史话,2007,(2)
30黄志强."因明研究"指误.广西师院学报,2000, (3)
31黄志强.论因明比量.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),1999 ,(1)
32黄志强.三支论式规则探析.广西师院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,(3)
33周文英.陈那的因明体系述略.江西教育学院学报(社会科学版),2000,(8)
34沈剑英.因明的语用学.哲学研究,1998,(1)
35孙丽娜.从"论式"看因明的逻辑性质.黔南民族师范学院学报,2008,(l)
36谢佛荣.试论因明学与三段论之异同.大庆师范学院学报,2006,(12)
37郑伟宏."因三相"正本清源.北京:哲学研究.逻辑专刊,2003,(6)
38曾昭式.论因明学之喻与墨辩之理类.南都学坛(社会科学版),1996,(1)
39张晓翔.论新因明的宗过.燕山大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(6)
40张忠义,侯玉娟.过论划分之我见.燕山大学学报(哲社版),2006,(2)
41张忠义,李伟.因明论式只有第一格AAA式吗?.佳木斯师专学报,1994,(1)
42张忠义,张家龙.从现代逻辑观点看印度新因明三支论式.哲学研究,2008,(1)
43张忠义.因明的"合离"与"分离规则".社会科学战线,1992,(3)
44 Anantlal Thakur.Ratnakīrtinibandhāvalī. Tibetan Sanskrit Works SeriesⅢ,Patna,1957
45 A.C.Senape McDermott.An Eleventh-century Buddhist Logic of“Exist”Ratnakrti’s K?a?abha?gasiddhi? Vyatirekātmikā.Dordrecht-Holland,1967
46 Bahadur.The Wisdom of Nyaya. Motilal Banarsidass,NewDeli,1978
47 Dhirendra Sharma.The differentiation theory of meaning in Indian logic, Hague,1969
48 F.Th.Stcherbatsky.Buddhist logic,vol.2,Dover Publications,lnc.New York,1962
49 Giuseppe Tucci. The Nyāyamukha of Dignāga,Heidelberg:Materialien zur Kunde des Buddhismus,1930
50 R.S.Y.Chi.Buddhist Formal Logic.Motilal Banarsidass,NewDel,1984
51 S.C.Vidyabhusana.History of the Medieval School of Indian Logic.Calcutta:Calcutta University,1909
52 T.S.Efiot Notes toward the Definition of Culture.Faber and Faber, London,l948
53 T.Verrer.Dharmakīrti’s pramā?avini?caya?1.Kapitel:Pratyak?am,Wien,1966