| Summary: | 碩士 === 玄奘大學 === 宗教與文化學系碩士班 === 104 === Dharmatrāta was a highly regarded master of the Sarvastivadah Sect. He was known as a master of analogy (Dārṣṭāntika). How did Vaibhāṣika deal with views and arguments of Dharmatrāta, a senior master of his own Sect? This thesis explores Dharmatrāta’s views and that of Vaibhāṣika, the writer of Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra, on the four areas of: Dharma; afflictions, karma and retribution; theories of practice; and other. The author analysed Vaibhāṣika’s comments on Dharmatrāta, and compared and analysed both the similarities and differences in the two masters’ views on these four aspects, so as to deduce Dharmatrāta’s views and ideologies that Vaibhāṣika accept or reject.
The ideology development of various sects was complex. It was not a straight forward development. Amidst these complicated sectarian ideologies, this thesis tried to examine the textual information and related hypotheses. The author discovered Vaibhāṣika’s main doubt on Dharmatrāta’s ideology was: “if there is no form in the mental object, there should be no non-expressed form”. This is because this difference would lead to different explanations on continuity of sentient beings’ karma and retribution, and cycle of life. This is also the main reason that led to the parting of Dārṣṭāntika and Vaibhāṣika.
Vaibhāṣika believed that karma was the non-expressed form of mental objects. However, Dharmatrata did not mentioned form in mental object. This showed that he has alternative explanation for the continuation of karma and retribution. This led to differences in their interpretations on many aspects, including forms, viprayukta-saṃskāra, asamskrta dharma, theory of mind consciousness, theory of recognition, or views on afflictions, karma and retribution, and practice.
While dealing with Dharmatrāta’s views, the Vaibhāṣika skillfully referenced various masters; he questioned Dharmatrāta’s views for being different to the teaching in the Tripitaka; he used argument from his own school to explain and compromise; he gave comments and criticisms. All these showed Vaibhāṣika’s carefulness in responding to Dharmatrāta’s ideology.
While writing this thesis, the author benefited greatly from Venerable Yin Shun’s studies and research on Sectarian Buddhism. Venerable Yin Shun pointed out that there were two main streams of ideology in Sectarian Buddhism, they were: establishing self based on aggregates, and establishing self based on mind.
It was by analysing the similarities and differences of Dharmatrāta and Vaibhāṣika’s ideologies according to the natural development of these two main streams of thoughts, that allowed the author to identify clearly and master the fundamental problem amidst the many arguments and sayings.
|
|---|
