陳那是佛教量論體系的集大成者。在陳那之後，佛教哲學加速進入到量論化的時代。在這個量論風行的大潮流中，6 世紀的中觀派論師月稱在《明句論》中罕見地批評了陳那量論。關於這一印度佛教史上的公案，學界已有頗多研究。然而，由於存在著這樣那樣的若干缺陷與學術成見，對於這一重要的佛教哲學論爭，先行研究並沒有給出簡單、清晰、合理的解釋。因此，本文將在分析月稱《明句論》文本的基礎上，考察月稱與陳那的論辯細節，闡明月稱對於量論的複雜立場。簡要而言，月稱與陳那之間的主要分歧不在於勝義的「聖默然」以及量的世俗身份，而是在如何於世間的言語表現中安立量的問題上。月稱批評陳那的量論並不是為了摧毀量，而是為了保衛世俗的量。

Dignāga is the master of the epistemological school of Buddhism. After him, Buddhist philosophy accelerated into the era of pramāṇa. In the midst of this trend, the 6th century Madhyamaka philosopher Candrakīrti made a rare criticism of Dignāga’s pramāṇa theory in his Prasannapadā. This case in the history of Indian Buddhism has been studied extensively. However, due to a number of flaws and academic prejudices, the previous studies have not given a simple, clear, and reasonable explanation of this important Buddhist philosophical controversy. Therefore, this paper will examine the details of the debate between Candrakīrti and Dignāga on the basis of an analysis of the Prasannapadā, in order to clarify Candrakīrti’s complex position on pramāṇa. Briefly, this paper argues that the main disagreement between Candrakīrti and Dignāga is not over the ultimate truth and the conventional status of pramāṇa, but rather over the question of how to establish pramāṇa in conventional expressions. Candrakīrti criticizes Dignāga’s theory of pramāṇa not for the purpose of destroying it, but for the purpose of defending conventional pramāṇa.