인도 세친 『아비달마구사론』의 지각이론 연구 = A study on perception in Abhidharmakosabha sya of Vasubandhu, India

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this paper, I will attempt to examine the perspective of Sarvastivada and Sautrantika on ``To see(drsti, 見)`` through their argument about perception component : subject, object, process. Because the basic proposition that Right view(Samyagdrsti, 正見) precedes for Supreme perfect enlightenment(Sambodhi, 正覺). As you can see in the summary above, Sarvastivada stands opposite side to Sautrantika as to understanding epistemological phenomena and the grounds of essential confrontation. Examining argument of both schools shows this opposite polarity well. First, due to differences in interpretation on grounds by scriptures, the development of epistemological phenomena between Sarvastivada and Sautrantika take different steps. By interpreting epistemological phenomena following it``s own category system, Sarvastivada assumes the reality of features and functions as basic elements (dharma). Second, Focusing on understanding epistemological phenomena within the framework of categorical realism and forming theory based on it, Sarvastivada developed circular logic. Focusing on , it starts the theory from the category theory. Also, Samghabhadra, who responds to Sautrantika with a new concept of genuine Sarvastivada, reaches the limits of the circular logic. It is because the theory follwed system of the category theory. Third, Sautrantika, unlike Sarvastivada, exceeds the limit of circular theory. It sets epistemological phenomena only by the regularity of cause and effect. Also it derives the theory much closer to Impermanent(Anitya, 無常), No-soul(Anatman, 無我) based on Dependent arising(pratitya-samutpada, 緣起). Like this, Sarvastivada and Sautrantika show different perspectives on epistemological phenomena. However we can not conclude that it is the Dependent arising, Impermanent and No-soul which are Buddha``s preaching in their system. Therefore, rather distinguishing between right and wrong, it might be desirable to focus on inevitable deduction of epistemological phenomena. Also we need to concentrate on theoretical advance. Research on argument of two schools can be said to be more important because it is the cornerstone of research on Yogacara scholar or late Buddhism epistemology.