玄奘對《觀所緣論》第三頌的改譯及其對論證式之重構

Xuanzang's Adaptation Translation of the Ālambanaparīkṣā Verse Three and Reconstruction of the Argument

茅宇凡(Yufan MAO)

所緣 ； 陳那 ； 極微 ； 和集相 ； Object-Support (Ālambana) ； Dignāga ； Atom (Paramāṇu) ； Aggregate Form

哲學與文化

50卷6期（2023 / 06 / 01）

47 - 65

繁體中文;英文

誠如山口益所指出，根據《觀所緣論》的藏譯本以及調伏天和護法的注釋，第三頌應當被理解為論敵為原子論的辯護；而玄奘的翻譯並非忠實的直譯而是改譯。玄奘的翻譯增加了對第三種原子論的解釋，並將原來論敵的自我辯護改寫為陳那對原子論的駁論證。儘管玄奘的改譯或許是出於對第三頌的誤讀，但他的理解很可能來自陳那本人或其後學，因為在《集量論》和勝主覺的《集量論注疏》中可以找到與玄奘所增添內容類似的對原子論的描述和辯駁。另外，第三頌論敵原來的論證過於簡單，無法被視為一個滿足因三相的論證，這或許是玄奘將它理解為陳那駁論證的原因。玄奘的改譯在邏輯上重構了「所立法」（即非所緣）與「因」（即極微相眼等識上無彼相）之間不相離的遍充關係；但是，這個重構的因三相也默許了因第一相（聚集相即是極微相，它不在識上顯現），這其實是論敵所不能接受的，也是雙方爭議之所在。

As pointed out by Yamagucchi, according to the Tibetan translation of the Ālambanaparīkṣā, Vinītadeva's and Dharmapāla's commentaries, the third verse is a report of the opponent's position of atomism. Xuanzang's translation of the Verse Three is not a faithful translation but an adaptation because he adds some explanations to elaborate the opponent's position and reconstructs the argument as Dignāga's own refutation of the atomism. Although Xuanzang's translation might be a misreading of the original meaning of the Verse Three, his additions and understandings probably come from Dignāga and his disciples because there are some similar descriptions of the opponent's atomism can be found in the Pramāṇasamuccaya-vṛtti and Jinendrabuddhi's Pramāṇasamuccaya-ṭīkā. Moreover, the original argument of the opponent is too simple to compose a syllogism. This might the reason that Xuanzang rewrites it as Dignāga's own refutation. Xuanzang reestablishes the logical relationship between the sādhya (i.e., not being an object-support) and the hetu (i.e., the forms of atoms do not appear in cognition). The reconstructed syllogism also assumes the minor premise that the aggregate forms are the same as the forms of atoms that do not appear in cognition; however, this premise would not be accepted by the opponents.

1. ĀP/ĀPV-Ālambanaparīkṣāvṛtti. Frauwallner, E. Dignāgas Ālambanaparīkṣā, Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Morgenlandes 37(1930): 174-194.
2. (2014).Taishō Shinshu Daizōkyō.Taipei:Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association.
3. Chu, Junjie(2006).On Dignāga’s Theory of the Object of Cognition as Presented in PS(V)1.Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies,29,211-235.
4. Dhammajoti, K. L.(2007).Abhidharma Doctrines and Controversies on Perception.Hong Kong:Centre of Buddhist Studies, University of Hong Kong.
5. Duckworth, D.(2016).Dignāna’s Investigation of the Percept.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
6. Hattori, M.(1968).Dignāna on Perception.Cambridge, Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.
7. Lin, Chen-kuo(2007).Object of Cognition in Dignāga’s Ālambanaparīkṣāvṛttii: On the Controversial Passages in Paramārtha's and Xuanzang’s Translations.Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies,30,117-138.
8. Mikogami, E.(1986).Śubhagupta no Bāhyārthasiddhikārikā.Ryūkoku Daigaku Ronsh,429,2-44.
9. Pradhan, P.(Ed.)(1967).Abhidharmakośabhāṣya of Vasubandhu.Patna:K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.
10. PSṬ, D-Pramāṇasamuccaya-ṭīkā (Tibetan translation). Yangs ba dang dri ma med pa dang ldan pa zhes bya ba tshad ma kun las btus pa'i 'grel bshad, Derge ed., Tshad ma, vol. 20, no. 4268, Ye 1b1-314a7.
11. PS/PSV-Pramāṇasamuccaya-vṛtti. Ed. by Steinkellner, E. Dignāga’s Pramāṇasamuccaya, Chapter 1. A hypothetical reconstruction with the help of the two Tibetan translations on the basis of the hitherto known Sanskrit fragments and the linguistic materials gained from Jinendrabuddhi’s Ṭīkā. 2005. Available online http://ikga.oeaw.ac.at/Mat/dignaga_PS_1.pdf. (Retrieved 2023.5.14)
12. Yong, Tsun Nyen(2020).Re-examining the Value of Dharmapāla’s Commentary on the Third Verse of the Ālambanaparīkṣā.Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies,68(3),106-109.
13. 山口益、野澤靜證(1953)。世親唯識の原典解明。京都:法蔵館。
14. 呂澂、釋印滄編，《觀所緣釋論會譯》，收於《內學》第四輯，支那內學院刊行，1928，頁 1-42。
15. 林鎮國，〈《觀所緣緣論》詞條〉，2023 年 2 月 8 日，華文哲學百科網（2020），http://mephilosophy.ccu.edu.tw/entry.php?entry_name=观所缘缘论（檢索於 2023年 2 月 8 日）。