义注
佛教大纲 佛教主题 |
义注(巴利语:Attha-katha,意为“解释”,“评论”)[1],是指上座部佛教巴利语南传大藏经的注解。义注是对经文的传统解释。对义注的再注释,叫做复注(ṭīkā)。复注的注释,称为复复注(anutikā)。[2]
现存义注虽由觉音等人完成,但其来源为古代僧伽罗语所写就的古代注释书,再由觉音改为巴利语。僧伽罗语古义注的主要部分,则大约定型于公元2世纪初[3]。义注中的一部分在其他佛教部派的三藏经文中出现,这代表有些注释可能是来自于共通的早期来源[4]。
觉音
传统上认为是觉音所作的注解有十四部。不过,学术界通常认为只有《律藏》、《长部》、《中部》、《相应部》、《增支部》的注解,及《清净道论》一书,是觉音所编纂、著作。[6][7]
巴利三藏 | 注解 | ||
---|---|---|---|
来自于 律藏 |
律藏 | 一切善见(Samantapasadika) | |
波罗提木叉 | 疑惑度脱(Kankhavitarani) | ||
来自于 经藏 |
长部 | 吉祥悦意(Sumangalavilasini) | |
中部 | 破斥犹豫(Papañcasūdani) | ||
相应部 | 显扬真义(Saratthappakasini) | ||
增支部 | 满足希求(Manorathapurani) | ||
来自于 小部 |
小诵 | 胜义光明(Paramatthajotika (I)) | |
法句 | 法句譬喻(Dhammapada-atthakatha) | ||
经集 | 经集注(Paramatthajotika (II),[8] Suttanipata-atthakatha) | ||
本生 | 本生注(Jatakatthavannana, or Jataka-atthakatha) | ||
来自于 论藏 |
法集论 | 殊胜义(Atthasalini) | |
分别论 | 迷惑冰消(Sammohavinodani) | ||
界论 | 五论释义(Pancappakaran-atthakatha) | ||
人施设论 | |||
论事 | |||
双论 | |||
发趣论 |
法护
法护对小部的注解《胜义灯》(Paramatthadipani),包含:
其他的小部注释
- Saddhammapajotika,关于义释的注解,作者Upasena
- Saddhammappakasini,关于无碍解道的注解,作者Mahanama
- Visuddhajanavilasini,关于譬喻经的注解,作者不明
- Madhuratthavilasini,关于佛种姓经的注解,作者Buddhadatta
学术研究
注释
- ^ Rhys Davids & Stede (1921-25): 24–25. (原始内容存档于2012-06-29)., "Attha"条目定义 aṭṭhakathā as "exposition of the sense, explanation, commentary...."
- ^ aṭṭhakathā. Pāli Dictionary. [2022-01-05]. (原始内容存档于2022-01-05).
- ^ 水野弘元. 佛教文獻硏究. 水野弘元著作选集(一). 由许洋主翻译. 法鼓文化. 2003-05-01. ISBN 9575982444. (原始内容存档于2018-02-16).
- ^ 无著比丘. 註釋書對阿含經文的影響 (PDF). 正观杂志. 2009, 48 [2017-10-19]. (原始内容存档 (PDF)于2016-10-19).
- ^ Skilling, Peter. On a New edition of the Syāmaraṭṭhassa Tepiṭakaṭṭhakathā (PDF). Journal of the Pali Text Society. 2002, XXVII: 155–158 [2022-01-05]. (原始内容 (PDF)存档于2022-02-09).
- ^ For instance, regarding the Khuddha Nikaya commentaries, Hinüber (1996/2000), pp. 130–1, sect. 259, 260, writes:
- Neither Pj [Paramattha-jotika] I nor Pj II can be dated, not even in relation to each other, except that both presuppose Buddhaghosa. In spite of the 'Buddhaghosa colophon' added to both commentaries ... no immediate relation to Buddhaghosa can be recognized.... Both Ja [Jataka-atthavannana] and Dhp-a [Dhammapada-atthakatha] are traditionally ascribed to Buddhaghosa, an assumption which has been rightly questioned by modern research....
- ^ 庄国彬. 覺音論師注釋書略述—以《中部.注釋書》為例 (PDF). 圆光佛学学报. 2008 [2022-04-17]. (原始内容 (PDF)存档于2022-04-23).
- ^ In fact this commentary did not originally have this title, but it has become traditionally known by it. Hinüber (1996/2000), p. 129 sec. 255, writes:
- Neither the author nor even a title is mentioned in Pj [Paramattha-jotika] II .... Thus, originally Pj II was anonymous, and moreover like Dhp-a [Dhammapada-atthakatha] and Ja [Jataka-atthavannana] was without an individual title: Pj might have been chosen at a later date because large parts overlapped with Pj I. [That is, because much of the Khuddakapatha is taken from the Sutta Nipata]. This connected this commentary to Pj I....
- On the whole, however, Pj I and Pj II are so different that it is difficult to imagine a common author.
- ^ 蔡奇林. 第四禪「捨念清淨」一語的重新解讀—— 兼談早期佛教研究的文獻運用問題 (PDF). 台大佛学研究. 2008, 16: 1-60 [2017-12-12]. (原始内容存档 (PDF)于2017-12-13).
- ^ 書房夜話 49:巴利文獻忘失古義. [2020-07-02]. (原始内容存档于2020-07-02).
参考文献
- Oskar von Hinüber. A Handbook of Pāli Literature (PDF). Walter de Gruyter. 2000 [2018-09-21]. ISBN 978-3-11-016738-2. (原始内容存档 (PDF)于2019-02-14).