|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
漢語律本名相的詞彙研究=A Lexicographical Research：Technical Terms of Vinaya Texts |
|
|
|
| Author |
安賀門 (著)=Heirman, Ann (au.)
;
安易
|
|---|
| Source |
普門學報=Universal Gate Buddhist Journal
|
|---|
| Volume | n.18 |
|---|
| Date | 2003.11.01 |
|---|
| Pages | (1) - (28) |
|---|
| Publisher | 佛光山文教基金會=Fo Guang Shan Foundation for Buddhist Culture & Education |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
https://www.fgs.org.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 臺北市, 臺灣 [Taipei shih, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Note | 作者為比利時甘特大學中文系副教授= The Author is the Assistant Professor of Chinese Language and Culture Ghent University, Belguim |
|---|
| Keyword | 漢語律本=Vinaya Text; 語言學=Linguistic science; 戒律=Precepts=Vinaya=Sila; 佛學名相=Buddhist Terms |
|---|
| Abstract | 西元一世紀，佛教的傳戒儀軌傳入中土，其所根據者乃譯自印度語的數種漢律本，其中,《四分律》這支逐漸成流佈最廣的律藏. 研讀律本猶如研讀哲學論文，務須精確通曉其「名相」(佛教的專業術語)，唯其如此，才能瞭解印度乃至中國的早期教團是本諸何種戒律. 然而，在研究早期中土的律本時，經常會遇到隱晦含糊的名相. 本文之宗旨在提出一套方法學，讓我們一者得以精確辨識名相，再者能更深入領會其語源及內容; 由此我們將瞭解，唯有將現存所有的印度語及漢語律本做一通盤的對照比較，才能達此目的. 如果能做這樣的功夫，不但對一些家喻戶曉的名相如「白衣」等能真正地瞭解其意義所在，對許多詞義曖昧的名相，如「[初法]，應捨[僧伽婆尸沙]」([初犯即獲罪的僧伽婆尸沙]應捨棄). 「象牙杙」(hasidanta, 牆上的釘 子)等，也能得到正確的認識. 此外，這種方法論也讓我們在一些中. 印的基礎佛學名相方面，如波羅夷. 僧伽婆尸沙/僧殘. 波逸提等，具更清楚的看法.
In the first centuries of the common era, the Buddhist dination tradition came to China. It was based on several disciplinary (vinaya) texts translated from an Indian language. Gradually，one tradition-the Dharmaguptaka tradition - became the prominent one. In disciplinary texts, as well as in philosophical treatises, an accurate understanding of the technical terminology is essential. Only then can we understand what disciplinary rules the early communities, both Indian and Chinese，relied on. However，when studying these early Chinese disciplinary texts, one is constantly confronted with technical terms the exact meaning of which remains more or less obscure. It is the aim of this paper to propose a methodology that enables us, on the one hand，to obtain a precise identification of technical terms, and on the other hand，to gain a better understanding of their etymology and content. As we will see，this is only possible through a thorough comparison of all extant vinaya texts, Indian as well as Chinese. Doing so，many technical terms can be identified，such as the commonly known 白衣 (agarika, a lay person )，but also various obscure terms, such as [初法] 應捨 [僧伽婆尸沙] ([an immediate rule，a samghavesesa] that has to be given up) or 象牙杙 (hastidanta, a pin in the wall). The methodology also provides a clearer insight into how Indian and Chinese Buddhists interpreted basic vinaya terms, such as parajika, samghavasesa, or pacittika. |
|---|
| ISSN | 1609476X (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 664 |
|---|
| Created date | 2003.11.14 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2018.03.12 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
