오온의 무아(無我)와 그 너머: 개아론(個我論, Pudgalavāda)의 발단

초록

The typical example of the early Buddhist theory of selflessness in Nikāya is that the empirical elements of the five aggregates (五蘊) cannot be regarded as ‘I’ or the self. This is just a rejection of the identification between the five aggregates and the self. Denying five aggregates as ‘I’ or the self' has an aspect rather highlighting ‘I’ or the self as the subject of perception and action. When selflessness is viewed as a simple ontological denial of the self, the problems arise in which it becomes difficult to explain the subject of the action. Person (個我, pudgala) is a concept corresponding to the subject, and the subject of moral action can be explained only when its existence is premised. In addition, only through this concept, it is possible to actively express the state of enlightenment after overcoming self-conception. From the standpoint of the opposition to Personalism, it shows an attitude to adhere to only the ontological view of denial of the self. I do not deny that it can also be useful in blocking selfishness rooted in self-conception. However, such a standpoint can dismantle even the notion of karma and reincarnation, make the practice of benevolence meaningless, and fall into the contradictory that suffering itself still persists even though the self who is distressed does not exist. This paper argues that Personalism can solve these problems that the ontological interpretation of selflessness can cause, and above all, there is an aspect that Personalism allows us to look at our own real experiences honestly. In addition, since personalism is presented based on a solid scriptural grounds (典據), it must be considered in the proper understanding of the theory of selflessness. Personalism had the largest number of followers during Indian Buddhism, but it did not spread to outside of India, and as a result, it disappeared from the stage of history along with the extinction of Indian Buddhism. Furthermore, in later generations, there was a strong tendency to interpret the theory of selflessness in the way of ontological denial of the self. As a result, Personalism, which is only passed down to the literature, is reduced to the target of criticism. However, I insist on that the awareness of the problems that personalism had is still justified, and that the need to fully clarify their position also persists.

키워드