觉囊派“他空大中观见”研究

发布时间：2018-02-16 07:32

本文关键词： 觉囊派他空自空大中观见　出处：《西藏大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：论文《觉囊派“他空大中观见”研究》基于比教学的研究方法主要论述了古今藏族贤者们对觉囊派“他空大中观见”的辩驳与觉囊派自身对其所持的不同观点进行驳斥。从古到今辩驳觉囊派“他空大中观见”最常见的依据有三:一是“他空大中观见”无传承系统;二是“他空大中观见”实属外道非正见;三是“他空大中观见”非正统中观派。论文针对以上三点分三个章节进行研究。第一章论述觉囊派“他空大中观见”是否有无传承来源的观点,并澄清该无传承之说源于至尊仁达瓦。至尊仁达瓦云:“自古以来在印尼藏三地没有出现过承认此观点的佛教徒……”。依据此说法,后来的藏族贤者们以为史无前例的“他空见”纯属至尊玉牟弥觉多杰自创,认为觉囊派“他空大中观见”没有正统的传承来源,对此笔者根据觉囊派历代传承上师的显密宗典籍进行分析了觉囊派的“他空大中观见”是否真属于无传承的“中观见”。第二章主要探讨觉囊派“他空大中观见”是否属邪见作为命题,文章引用了认为“他空见”是邪见之说的代表人物,至尊仁达瓦和土观洛桑曲杰尼玛的论据分析了觉囊派的“他空见”这一论点,致使,阐明了觉囊派“他空大中观见”虽与外道有相似之处,但非外道所属的见解。第三章辨析觉囊派“他空大中观见”是否属于中观派。首先,比较分析觉囊派“他空大中观见”是否与佛教四派中的有部、经部和维识派的观点相吻合;其次,使用觉囊派不以“自空见”为终极观点的原因,阐释了“他空大中观见”;最后,论证觉囊派“他空大中观见”不仅属于中观见,而且属于“大中观见”,但是,并非属于中观自续派和中观应成派任何一类。
[Abstract]:The Research on "Tsac School" "he empty and Big View" is a research method based on comparison teaching. This paper mainly discusses the arguments of ancient and modern Tibetan sages on "he empty and large view" and the different views of Chueqiao school itself on it. From ancient times to the present, there are three most common bases for refuting the theory of "his empty view of large view": first, "his empty view of large view" has no system of inheritance; Second, "he sees in the big view" actually belongs to the outside way wrong view; The first chapter discusses whether there are any sources of inheritance or not. And clarify that the doctrine of no inheritance originates from the supreme Jung Jen Dawa Wan: "there have been no Buddhists who have recognized this view in three places of Indonesia and Tibet since ancient times."... according to this statement, Later, the Tibetan sages thought that the unprecedented "his empty view" was purely the creation of the supreme jade, Mimi Chueh-tuo, and thought that the Chueh-sac faction had no orthodox source of inheritance. In this paper, the author analyzes whether "he emptiness view" really belongs to the "middle view" of Chueqiao school, according to the classical works of the leading master of Chueh-sac School. Chapter two mainly discusses the Chueh-sac School's "he empty Grand Viewpoint". Whether it is an evil opinion as a proposition, The article cites the argument that "his empty opinion" is the representative of evil opinion, the argument of the supreme Jundawa and the Tuguan Lobsang Qujnima analyzes the argument of "he empty opinion" of Chuesao School, so that, This paper expounds the views of the Chueh-pang School "he emptiness and macroscopical view", although it is similar to the outer Tao, but it is not belong to the outer Tao. Chapter three differentiates whether "he empty and large view" belongs to the middle school. First of all, This paper makes a comparative analysis on whether the "he empty and big view" of Chuesao School is consistent with the views of the four Buddhist schools of Buddhism, and secondly, the reason why it does not regard "self-view" as the ultimate point of view in the use of Chuesao School. At last, it is demonstrated that Chueqiao school "he empty and large view" not only belongs to the middle view, but also belongs to the "big and middle view", but it does not belong to any kind of the middle view self-continuation school and the middle view should form the school.
【学位授予单位】：西藏大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B948

【相似文献】