불교의 業과 作者의 관계 硏究 : 『第一義空經』에 나타난 '有業報而無作者'에 대한 해석을 중심으로 = A Study on the Relation between Karma and Its Subject|RISS 상세보기

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

One of the most important Buddhist doctrines is the theory of karma and rebirth. In the Maha￣vastu, Buddha even said, "I teach only one thing, karma." However, unlike other theories of rebirth, Buddhist theory doesn't admit the substance of karma.
Most people, however, think that, when a phenomenon happens, there must be the substance to bring about the phenomenon. It is difficult for people like this to understand the Buddhist theory of non-self rebirth easily. Thus the Buddh- ists needed a suitable term to explain the continuity of reincarnation to them.
The Early Buddhism used the theory of consciousness (Vijn~n~a￣na, 識) as a germ of the continuity of reincarnation. Consciousness is not immutable nor everlasting; but it appears and disappears in a moment, and is nothing but one of many mental phenomena. However, the Early Buddhist monks thought the consciousness as like the subject of reincarnation, a￣tman, rather than a sort of mental phenomenon. After Buddha's entering Nirvana, Buddhist sects tried to explore the thing which put all transitory dharmas together and offered the unity and continuity of personality. As a result, there appeared many theories such as the fundamental consciousness (根本識) theory of Maha￣saa￣ghika or the existence cause consciousness (有分識, bhavaa￣ga-vijna￣na) theory of Theravada.
Japanese Buddhism which accepted the western philosophy earlier than Korea used the term of 'subject' on these theories. However, we can't find the term of subject in any Buddhist script. Western idea of subject is similar with self, substance, spirit and so on. So it is necessary to reconsider how this idea of subject was used in order to understand the Buddhist theory of non-self rebirth: is it proper or does it make confused?
In this respect, I examined core examples on the idea of subject in the Sutra on Absolute and Ultimate Emptiness (第一義空經, Diyiyikingjing) contained in the Za-ahanjing (雜阿含經) vol.13. In this sutra, Buddha said about karma and its doer, "there exist karma and its rebirth, but there doesn't exist its doer." Buddha's utterance of 'not exist' doesn't mean relative relation with 'exist,' for Buddha teaches the middle way. Substantial self which is identical and immutable during three times, cannot be admitted. However, the situational state of causal karma which explains the present retribution must be supposed and the continuity of karma be admitted.
As for the theory of rebirth which says karma and its retribution continue from this life to the next life, most people understand very simply and personally, that is, they think on the basis of the western idea of identical subject that, when one dies, one's something continues to the next life unchangingly. Yet, this western philosophical idea of identical subject, from beginning, contradicts Buddhist idea based on the dependent arising (緣起, Prata￣tya-samutpa￣da). Most of all, Buddhist rebirth does not transit from this place to other but transforms and succeeds continuously.
Buddhist view of subject is that the functional subject in the changing progress does exist, but the immovable and immutable does not, and that the subject in terms of 'how' does exist, but the subject of 'what' does not. This is the very idea of middle way taught by Buddha.
Western philosophy of subject have collapsed. Although western people sought the alternation of God in the absolute self immovable and immutable, the instant God was denied and the self was revealed just to the false ideal image in modern times, the substantial idea of subject has lost its pretext to exist. Thus, reinterpreting the relation between karma and its doer through Buddha's idea of middle way, will go far toward establishing the desirable morality in present times where the substance have collapsed.

번역하기

목차 (Table of Contents)

I. 서론 = 1
1. 연구목적 = 1
2. 연구방법 및 범위 = 4
1) 선행연구 = 4
2) 연구방법 및 범위 = 7

I. 서론 = 1
1. 연구목적 = 1
2. 연구방법 및 범위 = 4
1) 선행연구 = 4
2) 연구방법 및 범위 = 7
II. 주체개념의 형성과 의미 = 9
1. 주체개념의 역사 = 9
1) 그리스적 원형 = 9
2) 라틴적 변형 = 11
3) 근대적 주체개념 형성 = 13
2. 주체개념의 의미 = 22
1) 실체론적 의미 = 22
(1) 제일원리로서의 주체 = 22
(2) 자기동일성으로서의 주체 = 25
2) 비실체론적 의미 = 32
(1) 관행으로서의 주체 = 32
(2) 과정으로서의 주체 = 38
3. 불교에서 주체의 용법 = 42
1) '我'와 'a￣tman' = 42
2) pudgala = 49
3) a￣laya識 = 54
III. 佛敎의 業思想에서 作者의 문제 = 62
1. 「雜阿含經」「第一義空經」에 나타난 '有業報而無作者' = 62
1) 五蘊無我 = 62
(1) 五蘊 = 63
(2) 中道的無我 = 69
2) 蘊의 相續 = 73
(1) 相續理論과 因果關係 = 74
(2) 相續理論과 同一性 = 82
2. '有業報而無作者'의 해석논란 = 86
1) 전통 윤회설과의 차이 문제 = 86
(1) 전통 윤회설 일반의 전제 = 88
(2) 전통 윤회설 전제의 한계 = 89
2) 因果의 연계 문제 = 93
(1) 因果의 법칙 = 94
(2) 因果의 기준 = 96
3) 修行의 주체 문제 = 98
(1) 修行과 깨달음에 관한 難問 = 98
(2) 붓다의 태도 = 101
4) 無作者의 성립 문제 = 104
(1) 作者의 상정 = 104
(2) 作者 없는 緣起的 과정 = 107
IV. 有業報而無作者의 재해석 = 110
1. 作者의 이중성 = 110
1) 실체적 존재 부정 = 112
(1) 常一主宰적 존재 부정 = 112
(2) 五取蘊적 존재 부정 = 117
2) 사태적 실상 인정 = 122
(1) 행위의 自我 = 122
(2) 調御해야 할 我 = 127
2. 불교적 주체론의 의의 = 133
1) 業說과 中道的 주체 = 134
(1) 業報說 = 134
(2) 業과 作者의 연속성 = 140
2) 행위론과 중도적 주체 = 146
(1) 행위론 = 146
(2) 행위주체와 일반 시스템 이론 = 151
V. 결론 = 155
參考文獻 = 161
ABSTRACT = 167

상세검색

RISS 보유자료

상세검색

해외전자자료

불교의 業과 作者의 관계 硏究 : 『第一義空經』에 나타난 '有業報而無作者'에 대한 해석을 중심으로 = A Study on the Relation between Karma and Its Subject

부가정보

분석정보

이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

나만을 위한 추천자료