Site mapAbout usConsultative CommitteeAsk LibrarianContributionCopyrightCitation GuidelineDonationHome        

CatalogAuthor AuthorityGoogle
Search engineFulltextScripturesLanguage LessonsMuseumLinks
 
Bookmark and Share


Extra service
Tools
Export
天台哲學底「形上學」詮釋與省思 — 以智顗與牟宗三之「佛教」詮釋為主的考察=The Reflection on the "Metaphysical" Interpretation of T'ien-t'ai Philosophy:Inquiries Based on Chih-I's and Mo-tsung-san's Interpretations of "Buddhism"
Author 尤惠貞 (著)=You, Huey-jen (au.)
Source 揭諦=Aletheia
Volumen.5
Date2003.06.01
Pages1 - 31
Publisher南華管理學院哲學研究所
Publisher Url http://philos.nhu.edu.tw/front/bin/home.phtml
Location嘉義縣, 臺灣 [Chia-i hsien, Taiwan]
Content type期刊論文=Journal Article
Language中文=Chinese
Note作者為南華大學哲學系副教授
本文初稿於2002/05/04華梵大學哲學系主辦的「第六屆儒佛會通學術研討會」發表,修訂增補後于南華大學哲研所主辦之「第三屆比較哲學研討會」
Keyword天臺哲學=T'ien-t'ai philosophy; 智顗=Chih-I; 牟宗三=Mo-tsung-san; 批判佛教=Japanese Critical Buddhism; 形上學詮釋=metaphysical interpretation
Abstract從佛教思想的傳衍與問展而觀,相應於佛教的教義與修證,存在著許多不同的觀點建立與義理詮釋. 基于如此的思想脈絡與不同詮釋,本文之省思主是環繞著天臺哲學是否為形上學的詮釋?又此種形上學詮釋是否為實體的存有論?論文主從兩方面進行探討,亦即藉日本「批判佛教」及支那內學院對中國大乘佛學中有關如來藏或本覺思想之批判,針對智者大師依「一念三千」所建構的圓教系統. 與牟宗三先生所提出的「天臺圓教存有論」之佛教詮釋作一省察,具體地檢討此兩種佛教詮釋究竟是客觀而相應的理解與詮釋?抑或是令佛教之義理又復歸為根本佛教或日本批判佛教所批判的形上學或本體論?希冀經由如此的探討,對上述兩種佛教詮釋系統之分位與義涵有所釐清與辨正.

Accord with the Buddhist doctrines and practices, people in different historical periods constructed lots of different perceptions and interpretations on Buddhism. Based on its intellectual contexts and different inte rpretations, the author in this paper tries to argue whether T'ien-t'ai philosophy is a metaphysical interpretation or not. If the answer is "yes",is it a certain kind of substantial ontology? Both Japanese "Critical Buddhism" and 支那內學院 criticized Chinese Buddhism on the subject of ju-lai tsang or original bodhi. The author stands on the interpretations constructed both by Master Chih-I's system of yuan-tun chiao-chung which was constituted by the notion of "i-nien san chian" and the interpretations of the "Buddhist Ontology of the perfect teaching of T'ien t'ai Buddhism" brought up by Mo-tsung-san,in order to evaluate these two interpretations, to see if they were objective and correspondent understanding,or were it went back to the Metaphysics criticized by fundamental Buddhism or Japanese critical Buddhism. After re-examining all these,we can make clear and clarify these two buddhistic interpretative systems.
Table of contents一、前言 2
二、從批判「佛教」與「佛教」詮釋談起 5
三、天臺智颽「一念三千」之「佛教」詮釋 9
四、牟宗三佛教式的存有論之「佛教」詮釋 13
五、天臺哲學底「形上學」詮釋之省思及其意義 19
六、結論 25
後記 28
參考書目 29
ISSN10284583 (P)
Hits319
Created date2003.10.31
Modified date2020.09.15



Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE

Notice

You are leaving our website for The full text resources provided by the above database or electronic journals may not be displayed due to the domain restrictions or fee-charging download problems.

Record correction

Please delete and correct directly in the form below, and click "Apply" at the bottom.
(When receiving your information, we will check and correct the mistake as soon as possible.)

Serial No.
274370

Search History (Only show 10 bibliography limited)
Search Criteria Field Codes
Search CriteriaBrowse