初期文法学派のダルマ論序 : 日常世界と祭式世界における知行

Early Grammarians on dharma: Knowledge and Practice in the Ordinary and Vedic Worlds

川村 悠人

比較論理学研究

The Annals of the Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic

[PISSN] 1880-6376

[NCID] AA12025285

Kātyāyana’s Vārttika begins with the following statement:

vt. 1 (Paspaśā): siddhe śabdārthasambandhe lokato ’rthaprayukte śabdaprayoge śāstreṇa dharmaniyamo yathā laukikavaidikeṣu ||

Let me cite here Cardona’s lucid explanation of this statement and Patañjali’s Bhāṣya thereon:

It is given from every day communication in the world that there is an established relation between words and meanings; it is also given that the use of a word is prompted by a meaning in that one uses words in order to convey meanings. This being so, a restriction intended for merit (dharmaniyamaḥ) is established by the grammar. Kātyāyana says such a restriction has parallels in every day life and in practices based on Vedic lore. Two examples that Patañjali gives will suffice to illustrate. Smṛti texts provide that certain animals may be eaten and that others may not be eaten. It is forbidden, for example, to eat a domestic fowl or pig. Now, one consumes something in order to do away with hunger, and this can be done by eating anything, including dog meat. A restriction is set down, then: such and such may be eaten, such and such may not be eaten. In ritual practice, a sacrificial pole is used; an animal being offered is tied to this pole. The animal may be tied to any piece of wood, which one may set erect or not. A restriction is established, whereby the sacrificial pole is not only to be erected but is to be made of Bilva or Khadira wood . . . . Patañjali goes on to show how the same situation obtains with respect to language use. Both a correct speech form (śabdena) and an incorrect speech form (apaśabdena) serve to produce the same understanding of a meaning (samānāyām arthagatau). A restriction intended for merit is made in the grammar: The meaning in question should be conveyed only by a correct speech form, not by an incorrect one. And usage in conformity with this restriction produces felicity, prosperity. (Cardona 1997: paragraph 830)

In vārttikā 9 of the Paspaśā: śāstrapūrvake prayoge ’bhyudayas tat tulyaṃ vedaśabdena, Kātyāyana sets forth that the use of correct speech forms, preceded by a knowledge of grammar (śāstrapūrvake prayoge), results in prosperity (abhyudaya). In his Bhāṣya on the vārttika Patañjali elaborates on this theme, comparing śāstrapūrvaka-prayoga to Vedic norms (MBh on vt. 9 [Paspaśā] [1.10.22–26]).
In Kātyāyana’s and Patañjali’s discussions the following causal sequence is assumed:

śāstrapūrvaka-prayoga → dharma is produced → abhyudaya (in heaven)

They propose śāstrapūrvaka-prayoga in the everyday world as a means of gaining merit and, through this, as a means of achieving prosperity; they intend this means to serve as an alternative to ritual activities (tat tulyaṃ vedaśabdena). This idea is a close reflection of the linguistic situation of their time, in which Middle Indic vernacular forms are observed to be used. It goes without saying that in their views such forms are to be regarded as incorrect (asādhu).

中国語 [ 820 ]

日本語

広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター

[ISSN] 1880-6376

[NCID] AA12025285