$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$
  • 검색어에 아래의 연산자를 사용하시면 더 정확한 검색결과를 얻을 수 있습니다.
  • 검색연산자
검색연산자 기능 검색시 예
() 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine))
공백 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (나노 기계)
예2) 나노 장영실
| 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역)
예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실
! NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 예1) (황금 !백금)
예2) !image
* 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 예) semi*
"" 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 예) "Transform and Quantization"
쳇봇 이모티콘
안녕하세요!
ScienceON 챗봇입니다.
궁금한 것은 저에게 물어봐주세요.

논문 상세정보

누가 대승(mahāyāna) 경전을 창작하였는가? — 대중부(大衆部) 그리고 방등(方等, vaitulya) 경전

Who Composed the Mahāyāna Scriptures?: The Mahāsāṃghikas and Vaitulya Scriptures

불교학리뷰 no.16 , 2014년, pp.9 - 96  
가라시마 세이시
초록

In this paper, I demonstrated that the earlier composers of the so-called Mahāyāna sūtras had named their texts vevulla / vaitulya / vaipulya (cf. Pāli vedalla), and only later were these titles changed to mahāyānasūtra. By investigating the earlier Chinese translations as well as the Chinese Buddhist catalogues, I also demonstrated the transition from vevulla (2nd century C.E.) to vaitulya (3rd century∼616 C.E.), and then to vaipulya (5th century onwards) and finally to mahāyānasūtra (5th century onwards). I assume that the original form of these variants could have been *vedulla, a Middle Indic form corresponding to vaitulya (> vetulla > *vedulla), which might mean ‘not’ (vi) ‘of the same kind’, i.e. ‘unusual, irregular’. This name *vedulla (Pā. vedalla) was used todesignate ‘unusual’ scriptures consisting of repeated questions and answers between an inferior and a superior person, such as between Indra and the Buddha or between disciples. Probably, those who had composed the new scriptures, thought that they were composing unique texts, whose contents and forms were not found in orthodox scriptures, named these texts as *vevulla, vaitulya, meaning as ‘incomparable, peerless’. The <大方等大集經>(*Mahāvaitulya-Mahāsannipāta), which was compiled in 586 C.E, is apparently a collection of the vaitulya-cummahāyāna- scriptures. In this collection, there is passages which describe the various Buddhist schools, among which the description concerning the Mahāsāṃghikas is expressed in a positive way, while other schools are described negatively. We may assume that the composer of this vaitulya-scripture belonged to the school of the Mahāsāṃghikas. The close relationship between the Mahāsāṃghikas and the Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā, Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra, Samādhirājasūtra, Mahāparinirvāṇa mahāsūtra and Daśabhūmikasūtra have been already pointed out. The close relationship between the Mahāsāṃghikas and Mahāyāna in Pāṭaliputra is also recorded. Also, Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti, Śāntideva and Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna, who quoted Mahāyāna scriptures in their texts, are assumed to have been monks of the Mahāsāṃghikas. Vasubandhu, who was a monk of the Sarvāstivāda school and wrote the Abhidharmakośa, a compendium of its doctrines, but later also wrote commentaries on some Mahāyāna scriptures, was criticised as ‘a dropout from the Sarvāstivāda school’ in the Abhidharmadīpa of the same school. I also pointed out none of Mahāyāna scriptures are referred to in the whole Abhidharma texts, which were composed by the Indian Sarvāstivādins. Thus, the Sarvāstivādins were originally antagonistic to Mahāyāna Buddhism. In conclusion, I assume that members of the Mahāsāṃghikas composed new scriptures, often consisting of questions and answers, thus condemning the conservative thoughts on Buddhist doctrines, and called these newly-composed texts as vedulla / vaitulya, in the meaning of their being ‘irregular’ as Buddha’s scripture but ‘incomparable, peerless’. Later, they came to be called in a more positive way as vaipulya ‘full development, abundance, plenty, fullness’. Much later still, they came to be called mahāyāna-sūtra as well. Those who composed, copied, read, recited, proclaimed these ‘new scriptures’, did not call themselves ‘mahāyanists’ at the beginning. They were after all members of the Mahāsāṃghikas and therefore, it is quite natural that the name mahāyāna does not occur in early Indian inscriptions. Much later on, when the Mahāyāna scriptures and doctrine became much more popular, members of other schools acknowledged them and absorbed them as well.

참고문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문의 참고문헌 없음

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음

원문보기

원문 PDF 다운로드

  • KCI :

원문 URL 링크

  • 원문 URL 링크 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.
상세조회 0건 원문조회 0건

DOI 인용 스타일