Yīnmíng sìzhǒng xiāngwéi sījì 因明四種相違私記
Private Notes on the Four Contradictions in Hetuvidyā by 觀理 (Guānlǐ / Kanri, 記)
About the work
A three-fascicle private gloss-collection (sī-jì 私記) by the late-Heian Hossō scholar 觀理 (Kanri), bearing the rank 東南觀理權大僧都 (“Kanri of the Southeastern Cloister, Provisional Senior Sōzu”), on the doctrine of the Four Contradictions (四相違 sì xiāngwéi) as expounded in KR6o0003 Yīnmíng rù zhèng lǐ lùn 因明入正理論 by Śaṅkarasvāmin and KR6o0008 Kuījī’s Dà-shū. Preserved in Taishō vol. 69 (no. 2275). The Japanese title is Inmyō shi-shu sōi shiki.
Prefaces
The transmitted text has no formal authorial preface; the body opens immediately in koto-by-koto topical form (“四種相違私記上”) and proceeds through the standard order of the four contradictions: 法自相相違 (the dharma-svalakṣaṇa contradiction), 法差別相違 (the dharma-viśeṣa contradiction), 有法自相相違 (the dharmin-svalakṣaṇa contradiction), 有法差別相違 (the dharmin-viśeṣa contradiction).
Two later colophons preserve the transmission history. The first records the Eishō 10 (永正十年癸酉, 1513) copy by 英訓 Eikun, “śramaṇa of Sanron-and-Inmyō, age 38” (三論兼因明沙門英訓生年三十八), prepared as part of his preparation for the Hokke-e 法華會 debate-ceremony; Eikun records that he received the manuscript from “Heiei” 沙門平榮 the previous year. The second colophon, dated Hōei 4 (寶永四丁亥年, 1707), records the restoration of the damaged manuscript by Shisei 四聖坊法印晋性. The medieval line-of-transmission is thus: Kanri (original) → Heiei → Eikun (1513) → Ryūkei 隆慶 (Sonkō-in) → Shisei (1707).
Abstract
The Four Contradictions are the four-membered classification of fallacious reasons (hetu-ābhāsa 似因) of the “contradicting” (相違 xiāng-wéi) type — that is, hetus that, although formally well-formed (i.e., they satisfy the three lakṣaṇa of pakṣadharmatva, anvaya, and vyatireka), in fact establish the opposite of what the proponent intended. They are the most demanding chapter of the East-Asian yīnmíng curriculum, and consequently generated a vast specialist literature in both Chinese and Japanese.
Kanri’s sī-jì treats each of the four in turn, addressing such standard problems as: (1) the distinction between yán-xiǎn 言顯 (the explicit statement) and yì-xǔ 意許 (the implied intention) in determining when a reason “contradicts” — a problem traceable to 文軌 (Wénguǐ) and contested between him and 窺基 (Kuījī); (2) the analysis of “the common-non-common reason” (共不共因) and its bearing on the dharma-viśeṣa contradiction; (3) the special problem of self-contradiction in the inference about dharmin (有法). Kanri’s discussions cite by short title the Myōtō shō of 善珠 (Zenju) KR6o0009 and the now-lost Heian-Hossō commentary literature.
The work was composed sometime in the late Heian period. The composition window c. 1050–1150 reflects this internal evidence; no precise authorial date is available.
Translations and research
- Takemura Shōhō 武邑尚邦. Inmyōgaku — sono genri to tenkai 因明學――その原理と展開. Kyoto: Hyakkaen, 1986. — Treats the Heian sōi-specialist literature including Kanri’s sī-jì.
- Iida Yūei 飯田祐英, Hossō-shū inmyō-gaku no kenkyū 法相宗因明學の研究, Kyoto: Hyakkaen, 1975.
Other points of interest
The proliferation of specialised Four Contradictions literature in the late Heian period — Kanri’s sījì (the present text), Genshin’s Sìxiāngwéi luè zhùshì KR6o0015, Shinkō’s Sìzhǒng xiāngwéi luè sījì KR6o0016 and Sìzhǒng xiāngwéi duàn luè jì KR6o0017 — reflects the special status of the Four Contradictions in the Kōfuku-ji Hokke-e and Yuima-e monastic debate (rongi 論義) cycles. Candidates for the senior debater (ryūgi 立義) position were examined on precisely this material; the surviving “sōi-literature” thus documents both Hossō scholastic doctrine and the medieval Japanese monastic examination system.