印度佛教和耆那教的拯救观之比较——以阿阇世王故事为例

A Comparative Study of Indian Buddhist and Jaina Soteriologies--The Case of the Legends of King Ajāta?atru/Kūnika

佛教和耆那教是发源于同一时期、同一地域的两个古代印度宗教。就伦理观和拯救观而言,尽管印度佛教徒和耆那教徒都倡导"非暴力"原则,但他们对于业(karma)的运作、业与解脱的关系、实现解脱的条件等核心问题的看法存在重要差异。考察该差异的必要手段是对佛教和耆那教的传世文献进行比较解读。印度佛教和耆那教的现存文献中都含有关于阿阇世(亦名库尼卡)囚禁父王、篡夺王位和发露忏悔的故事,但是两个宗教在是否拯救阿阇世这一问题上有着截然不同的态度。印度佛教对该人物的拯救和耆那教对该人物的不救,这个差别并非偶然,究其原因是由两个宗教的不同业报观念以及对实现解脱所需条件的不同理解所决定的。

Buddhism and Jainism are two ancient Indian religions that emerged roughly at the same time (ca.5th century BCE) from the same geographical milieu of Northeast India. In terms of ethics and soteriology,although both Indian Buddhists and Jainas promoted the principle of nonviolence,they held significantly different views on some key issues including the workings of karma,the relationship between karma and liberation,the requisites for liberation and so on. In investigating such differences,a necessary approach is to examine comparatively Indian Buddhist and Jaina literature. Taking the Magadhan king Ajāta?atru for example,this paper compares Indian Buddhist and Jaina narrative traditions concerning his patricide,repentance and/or future rebirths,particularly focusing on the contrastive attitudes of Buddhists and Jainas about whether or not to have Ajāta?atru (or its Jaina counterpart Kūnika) saved. It will be demonstrated that the contrast between the Buddhist salvation of Ajāta?atru and the Jaina non-salvation of Kūnika is by no means accidental. The reason for such a contrast ultimately lies in the different karmic theories of Buddhists and Jainas,as well as in their different understandings of the necessary conditions for spiritual liberation.