{"title":"意识的奇迹:Jñānaśrīmitra的Sākārasiddhiśāstra中的存在与表现","authors":"Tomlinson, Davey K.","doi":"10.1007/s10781-021-09501-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper considers Jñānaśrīmitra’s defense of manifestation (<i>prakāśa</i>) as the criterion of ultimate existence (<i>paramārthasat</i>). In the first section, \"<i>Asatkhyāti</i> and <i>Adhyavasāya</i>: making sense of manifestation as the criterion of the real\", I show the way that, in response to Ratnākaraśānti’s Nirākāravāda, Jñānaśrīmitra argues for a sharp distinction between manifestation and determination (<i>adhyavasāya</i>) in an effort to establish that the manifestation of something unreal (<i>alīka</i>, <i>asat</i>) is incoherent. The unreal, he thinks, is only ever determined; it is never manifest to consciousness, properly speaking. In the second section, “To be manifest is to be locked away in a single awareness-event”, I turn to one of the consequences of this view that Jñānaśrīmitra embraces: what manifests is only what appears in a single moment of conscious awareness. In the third section, “The scope of neither-one-nor-many: Jñānaśrīmitra’s Interpretation of PV 3.220–221”, I consider one of the problems this raises: how is it that an appearance with mutually opposed parts (a so-called <i>citrākāra</i>, for instance a variegated butterfly’s wing that is both blue and yellow) manifests in one and the same unitary moment of awareness? Jñānaśrīmitra solves this problem by appealing to the nature of manifestation and its distinction from determination: what is manifest, even if it is variegated, is nondual and indivisible; distinctions arise only on the basis of determination. I trace the details of this solution in the context of his discussion of an important pair of verses from Dharmakīrti. Finally, in the last section, “The marvelous nonduality of variegated awareness-events”, I turn to the surprising buddhological consequences of this solution.</p>","PeriodicalId":51854,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Marvel of Consciousness: Existence and Manifestation in Jñānaśrīmitra’s Sākārasiddhiśāstra\",\"authors\":\"Tomlinson, Davey K.\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10781-021-09501-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper considers Jñānaśrīmitra’s defense of manifestation (<i>prakāśa</i>) as the criterion of ultimate existence (<i>paramārthasat</i>). In the first section, \\\"<i>Asatkhyāti</i> and <i>Adhyavasāya</i>: making sense of manifestation as the criterion of the real\\\", I show the way that, in response to Ratnākaraśānti’s Nirākāravāda, Jñānaśrīmitra argues for a sharp distinction between manifestation and determination (<i>adhyavasāya</i>) in an effort to establish that the manifestation of something unreal (<i>alīka</i>, <i>asat</i>) is incoherent. The unreal, he thinks, is only ever determined; it is never manifest to consciousness, properly speaking. In the second section, “To be manifest is to be locked away in a single awareness-event”, I turn to one of the consequences of this view that Jñānaśrīmitra embraces: what manifests is only what appears in a single moment of conscious awareness. In the third section, “The scope of neither-one-nor-many: Jñānaśrīmitra’s Interpretation of PV 3.220–221”, I consider one of the problems this raises: how is it that an appearance with mutually opposed parts (a so-called <i>citrākāra</i>, for instance a variegated butterfly’s wing that is both blue and yellow) manifests in one and the same unitary moment of awareness? Jñānaśrīmitra solves this problem by appealing to the nature of manifestation and its distinction from determination: what is manifest, even if it is variegated, is nondual and indivisible; distinctions arise only on the basis of determination. I trace the details of this solution in the context of his discussion of an important pair of verses from Dharmakīrti. Finally, in the last section, “The marvelous nonduality of variegated awareness-events”, I turn to the surprising buddhological consequences of this solution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51854,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-021-09501-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-021-09501-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
本文将Jñānaśrīmitra对显化的辩护(prakāśa)作为最终存在(paramārthasat)的标准。在第一部分“Asatkhyāti和Adhyavasāya:把表现作为真实的标准的意义”中,我展示了,作为对Ratnākaraśānti的Nirākāravāda的回应,Jñānaśrīmitra主张在表现和决定(adhyavasāya)之间有一个明显的区别,以努力建立一些不真实的表现(al ka, asat)是不连贯的。他认为,不真实的东西永远是确定的;确切地说,它永远不会显现在意识中。在第二部分,“被显化就是被锁在一个单一的意识事件中”,我转向Jñānaśrīmitra所包含的这个观点的一个结果:所显化的只是在意识意识的单个时刻出现的东西。在第三部分“非一非多的范围:Jñānaśrīmitra对PV 3.220-221的解释”中,我考虑了其中一个问题:一个相互对立的部分的外观(所谓的citrākāra,例如一个蓝色和黄色的杂色蝴蝶的翅膀)是如何在同一个单一的意识时刻表现出来的?Jñānaśrīmitra通过诉诸于显示的本质及其与决定的区别来解决这个问题:显示的东西,即使它是多样化的,也是非二元的和不可分割的;差别只是在规定的基础上产生的。我在他讨论达摩? rti的一对重要诗句的背景下追溯了这个解决方案的细节。最后,在最后一节“不同意识事件的不可思议的非二元性”中,我转向这个解决方案的令人惊讶的佛学后果。
The Marvel of Consciousness: Existence and Manifestation in Jñānaśrīmitra’s Sākārasiddhiśāstra
This paper considers Jñānaśrīmitra’s defense of manifestation (prakāśa) as the criterion of ultimate existence (paramārthasat). In the first section, "Asatkhyāti and Adhyavasāya: making sense of manifestation as the criterion of the real", I show the way that, in response to Ratnākaraśānti’s Nirākāravāda, Jñānaśrīmitra argues for a sharp distinction between manifestation and determination (adhyavasāya) in an effort to establish that the manifestation of something unreal (alīka, asat) is incoherent. The unreal, he thinks, is only ever determined; it is never manifest to consciousness, properly speaking. In the second section, “To be manifest is to be locked away in a single awareness-event”, I turn to one of the consequences of this view that Jñānaśrīmitra embraces: what manifests is only what appears in a single moment of conscious awareness. In the third section, “The scope of neither-one-nor-many: Jñānaśrīmitra’s Interpretation of PV 3.220–221”, I consider one of the problems this raises: how is it that an appearance with mutually opposed parts (a so-called citrākāra, for instance a variegated butterfly’s wing that is both blue and yellow) manifests in one and the same unitary moment of awareness? Jñānaśrīmitra solves this problem by appealing to the nature of manifestation and its distinction from determination: what is manifest, even if it is variegated, is nondual and indivisible; distinctions arise only on the basis of determination. I trace the details of this solution in the context of his discussion of an important pair of verses from Dharmakīrti. Finally, in the last section, “The marvelous nonduality of variegated awareness-events”, I turn to the surprising buddhological consequences of this solution.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Indian Philosophy publishes articles on various aspects of Indian thought, classical and modern. Articles range from close analysis of individual philosophical texts to detailed annotated translations of texts. The journal also publishes more speculative discussions of philosophical issues based on a close reading of primary sources.