부산대학교 도서관

In the Indian vāda tradition, there are two different kinds of hetu, i.e., kārakahetu （cause of producing [a result], 生因） and jñāpakahetu （cause of making known, 了因）. While the fact that a thing has a kārakahetu can prove the impermanence of the thing because a pervasion “whatever is produced is impermanent” is commonly acknowledged, the fact that a thing has a jñāpakahetu cannot. However, in his commentary Dasheng guangbailun shilun 大乗広百論釈論 on Catuḥśataka 9.3c, Dharmapāla states that having a jñāpakahetu is also a reason for proving impermanence. This paper reveals that this unique theory is derived from Dharmapāla’s second interpretation of Catuḥśataka 9.2cd （na kadācit kvacit kaścid vidyate tena śāśvataḥ）. There he interprets vidyate as meaning “to be known” （the passive form of the second class verb √vid）, and not as meaning “to exist” （the active voice of the fourth class）. Following this interpretation, verse 9.2cd can be understood as showing vyatireka i.e., “whatever is permanent is not known,” whereby is derived the following anvaya: whatever is known, i.e., whatever has a jñāpakahetu, is impermanent.