We can find some of the works of Indian Buddhist philosophers that prove the authenticity of the Mahāyāna sutras within Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Chinese textual sources. *Jayasena’s critique of *Asvabhāva’s proof was first introduced in the commentaries of Kuiji. Numerous references to *Jayasena in Chinese Yogācāra scriptures indicate that he was regarded as a Yogācāra master. His revised proof was further revised by Xuanzang. According to Xuanzang’s biographies, *Jayasena was an Indian lay Buddhist scholar who had many non-Buddhist disciples. It (...) is, therefore, possible that he discussed the authenticity of the Mahāyāna sutras with his disciples. Following Kuiji’s introduction of *Jayasena’s proof in East Asia, this proof and Xuanzang’s critique have been widely discussed. Wonhyo, one of the most famous Silla Buddhist scholars, critiqued Xuanzang’s revision and published his revised formula. Zenju, a representative Yogācāra master of the Nara period, pointed out some logical problems to be seen in Wonhyo’s revision, but did not provide any alternative. Proof of the authenticity of the Mahāyāna sutras was originally developed as a result of interactions between Mahāyāna and non-Mahāyāna Buddhists. However, the purpose of the proof seems to have shifted from being based on arguments with actual opponents to internal discussions among Mahāyāna Buddhists, especially within East Asia. (shrink)

玄奘はインドで何を証明したのか―玄奘にまつわる論理式「唯識比量」を巡る、国や時代をまたいだ議論の探究を通じ、論理と歴史の「共生」構造を解き明かす。.