佛教「意業為重」之分析與探究

An Analysis of the Claim that 'Mental Karma is the Most Significant' in Buddhism

10.6258/bcla.2014.80.05

林建德(Chien-Te Lin)

意業 ； 身口 ； 思 ； 行 ； 佛教倫理學 ； mental karma ； body and speech ； "cetanā" ； "saṃskāra" ； Buddhist ethics

臺大文史哲學報

80期（2014 / 05 / 01）

145 - 178

繁體中文

本文對佛教「意業為（最）重」此命題進行分析與探究。全文主要分五個部份：首先，對《阿含經》經文出處做分析，可知佛教「意業為重」之基本觀點和立場。其次，以《成實論》為例解析正反見解，指出佛教特重「意業」，在於強調「心為法本」，一切由心念為前提而有所謂的善惡業可言。第三，指出佛教之強調「意業」，在於意本身即是業（身口則不然），此可從意、思、行、業此四者的密切連結看出；然而，此不代表身口行為並不重要，相對的，身口在業的造作中，具有增上助長之作用，而擴大業的效應，並增進意念的深度、強度。第四，佛教之重「意業」，顯示出善惡對錯的判定標準，有其獨到的倫理學特色而可特別注意；同時其中可能之限制，文末也提出初步反思。最後在結語指出，佛教之強調「意業」，不只挑戰古印度傳統，對應於現今倫理學暨哲學探討，亦多有省思及對話空間，值得進一步抉發及深化，而有更多論述的開展。

This paper is an investigation of the claim in Buddhism that 'mental action (”manaskarman”) is the most reprehensible for the performance of evil action.' There are five parts to the analysis: Firstly, I analyze the chapter in the ”agama” sutra where the claim first appears, so as to illuminate the basic view substantiating the claim that 'mental karma is the most significant (of the three karmas)'. Secondly, I analyze arguments for and against this claim given in the ”Satyasiddhiśāstra”, pointing out that the emphasis on 'mental karma' is to stress the 'mind as the root of everything.' All dharmas have mind as their basic premise onto which follows the formation of good or bad karma. Thirdly, I point out that the emphasis on 'mental karma' stems from the view that, unlike actions of body and speech, mental processes are karmic processes in themselves. This is illustrated by the close connection between ”manas”, ”cetana”, ”saṃskāra”, and karma. This does not however imply that actions of body and speech are unimportant. On the contrary, body and speech facilitate the formation of karma, expanding its effects and reinforcing the depth and strength of the agent's intention. Fourthly, the emphasis on 'mental karma' functions as an important criterion for judgments of good/evil and right/wrong, which carries its own ethical implications worthy of consideration. Towards the end of this section, I offer a preliminary reflection on the possible limitations of the claim. Lastly, I suggest that the emphasis on 'mental karma' not only challenges the philosophical tradition of ancient India, but further allows for reflection and dialogue within the study of contemporary ethics and philosophy. As such, further research on this topic is both meaningful and worthy of pursuit.

1. 孫效智(2002).On the Moral Irrelevance of Intention.臺大文史哲學報,56,393-436.
   連結：
2. (1983)。大正新修大藏經。台北:新文豐書局。
3. Davids, C.A.F. Rhys. A Buddhist Manual of Psychological Ethics. London: PTS, 1900. doi: 10.1093/mind/IX.36.420
4. (1975)。卍新纂續藏經。台北:新文豐。
5. Banamoli, Bhikkhu(trans.),Bodhi, Bhikkhu(trans.)(1995).The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya.Boston:Wisdom Publications.
6. Buddharakkhita, Acharya、了參法師譯、明法法師注釋(2001)。法句經。台南:和裕出版社。
7. Collins, Steven(1990).Selfless Persons: Imagery and Thought in Theravada Buddhism.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
8. Dalai Lama XIV(2005).The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science And Spirituality.New York:Three Rivers Press.
9. Flanagan, Owen(2011).The Bodhisattva's Brain: Buddhism Naturalized.Boston:MIT Press.
10. Gombrich, Richard F.(1988).Theravada Buddhism: Social History from Ancient Benares to Modern Colombo.London:Routledge.
11. Gombrich, Richard F.(2009).What the Buddha Thought.London:Equinox Publishing Ltd.
12. Gombrich, Richard F.(1996).How Buddhism Began: The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings.London:Taylor & Francis.
13. Hamilton, Sue(1996).Identity and Experience: The Constitution of the Human Being According to Early Buddhism.London:Luzac Oriental.
14. Harvey, Peter(2007).'Freedom of the Will' in the Light of Theravāda Buddhist Teachings.Journal of Buddhist Ethics,14,34-98.
15. Harvey, Peter(2000).An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics: Foundations, Values and Issues.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
16. Keown, Damien(1992).The Nature of Buddhist Ethics.London:Macmillan Press.
17. Keown, Damien(2000).Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
18. Luis, Pier Luigi(2008).The Two Pillars of Buddhism: Consciousness and Ethics.Journal of Consciousness Studies,15(1),84-107.
19. Repetti, Riccardo(2010).Earlier Buddhist Theories of Free Will: Compatibilism.Journal of Buddhist Ethics,17,279-310.
20. Wallace, B. Alan(2011).A Buddhist View of Free Will: Beyond Determinism and Indeterminism.Journal of Consciousness Studies,18(3-4),217-33.
21. Webster, David(2005).The Philosophy of Desire in the Buddhist Pali Canon.London:Routledge.
22. 水野弘元、釋惠敏譯(2000)。水野弘元著作選集。臺北:法鼓文化。
23. 舟橋一哉、余萬居譯(1993)。業的研究。臺北:法爾出版社。
24. 佐佐木現順、周柔含譯(2003)。業的思想。臺北:東大書局。
25. 李明輝(1994)。康德倫理學與孟子道德思考之重建。臺北:中央研究院。
26. 李明輝(1989)。儒家與康德。臺北:聯經出版社。
27. 孫效智(1996)。兩種道德判斷─論「道德善惡」與「道德正誤」的區分。哲學論評，19，223-254。
28. 孫效智(1995)。從倫理學行為理論談結果主義。哲學雜誌，12，86-113。
29. 孫效智(1995)。道德論證問題在基本倫理學上的發展─目的論與義務論之爭。哲學與文化，251，317-331。
30. 蔡奇林編(2012)。從修行到解脫─巴利佛典選集。臺北:南山佛教文化。
31. 釋印順(1993)。華雨集。新竹:正聞出版社。
32. 釋印順(1992)。說一切有部為主的論書與論師之研究。新竹:正聞出版社。
33. 釋印順(1992)。印度之佛教。新竹:正聞出版社。
34. 釋印順(2000)。成佛之道。新竹:正聞出版社。
35. 釋印順(2000)。佛法概論。新竹:正聞出版社。
36. 釋印順(1994)。原始佛教聖典之集成。新竹:正聞出版社。

1. 陳志強(2015)。一念陷溺—唐君毅與陽明學者「惡」的理論研究。中國文哲研究集刊，47，91-136。
2. 林建德(2015)。從意識經驗到道德良知─儒佛觀點的初步思考。新世紀宗教研究，14(1)，193-220。
3. 林建德(2017)。初探佛教心理學之思想起源與現代意義：以「軸心突破」為線索。思與言：人文與社會科學雜誌，55(4)，181-230。
4. 林建德(2018)。佛教輪迴說之哲學反思。生命教育研究，10(1)，41-66。
5. 林建德(2019)。「同志婚姻」的佛學反思－印順法師觀點的啟發。臺灣宗教研究，18(2)，47-78。
6. (2024)。佛教慈善資源分配的倫理反思──從佛典教示到慈濟慈善。玄奘佛學研究，42，27-58。