2000 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
RECONSIDERING THE CATEGORIZATION OF THE BUDDHIST CANONICAL SCRIPTURE IN INDIA
| Project/Area Number |
11610019
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
印度哲学(含仏教学)
|
|---|
| Research Institution | UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
SHIMODA Masahiro UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO, GRADUATE SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIOLOGY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, 大学院・人文社会系研究科, 助教授 (50272448)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
1999 – 2000
|
| Keywords | Buddhism in India / Categorization of Buddhist Scriptures / Modern Buddhist Studies / Tripitaka / Mahayana / Hinayana / Mahayana Mahaparinirvanasutra / Saddharmapundarikasutra / Buddhology |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
This research has its main focus on the reconsideration of the traditional ways of classification of Buddhist saiptures in India represented by the terms of "Tripitaka" and "Mahayana/Hinayana, " which have at the same time been functioning as a framework for the Buddhist studies. This investigation has been performed with the methods of a comparative study of the scriptures belonging to traditional Buddhism with those of mahayana Buddhism such as the Saddharmapundarka or Mahaparinirvana, based on the result obtained from critical analysis of the methodologies of modern Buddhist studies. The results of this research are :
(1) Given that we are provided with the only materials which are the products by the attempts of "canonization, " one-sided selection and compilation of saaed scriptures, we must be careful in using any of the extant scriptures as materials by which to reconstruct the historical reality. The materials of the Southern tradition reflects more institutional factors as compared with those of the Northern tradition which are much more colored with idealistic elements separated from institution.
(2) As the existing materials go, there is no difference between the images of the Buddha that appear in the scriptures of traditional Buddhism and in those of Mahayana Buddhism ; both of them are more or less "deified" or "mythologized." The scholars of modern Buddhist studies have been showing a tendency to extremely overvalue the investigation of "the historical Buddha" in canonical scriptures. As an ideal example for reconsidering this issue, this research illustrates the common structure underlying both the story of "the lord Brahman's request for the Buddha's first sermon" and "the upayakausalya chapter of the Lotus Sutra, " the former belonging to the Hinayana tradition whereas the latter to Mahayana.
|
