論當代美日禪宗研究的意義與困境：以禪宗16字的心法論爭為核心=On the Significance and Predicaments of the Contemporary Chan Studies: Focused on the 4-Phrase-Definition Controversy of Chan Tradition
本文針對海因（Steven Heine）教授在2007年論文〈禪宗研究的批判性回顧：從揚波斯基至今〉（A Critical Survey of Works on Zen since Yampolsky）與2008年專書《禪皮．禪髓：真正的禪宗請挺身而出，好嗎？》（Zen Skin, Zen Marrow: will the real Zen Buddhism please stand up?）中，提及禪宗16字標誌（即「教外別傳，不立文字，直指人心，見性成佛」）長期遭受誤解、並導致禪學研究困境的問題進行探討。主要結論如下：(1)禪宗在宋代形成16字標誌的定型化說法，其意涵為禪宗法門的「目標」與「方法」，說明禪宗自菩提達摩以來的心法教學特質。(2)心法傳承的「連續性」與「同一性」，為禪宗法門存續的要件；神會「定是非」的意義即在於維持這項基本要求，因為北宗後來的教學方法已經變質。(3)不少敦煌文獻（例如《傳法寶紀》與《歷代法寶記》）均支持禪宗16字標誌，但常被忽略或誤讀。(4)重新確認16字標誌，對當代禪宗研究走出困境與改善發展前景，均極為重要。
Motivated by Steven Heine’s “A Critical Survey of Works on Zen since Yampolsky”(2007) and Zen Skin, Zen Marrow: will the real Zen Buddhism please stand up? (2008),this paper studies the significance and predicaments of the contemporary Chan studies, focused on the 4-phrase-definition of Chan tradition, i.e. “a special transmission outside the doctrines (教外別傳), not to use words and letters semantically (不立文字), directly to point to people’s original heart (直指人心), to perceive the Nature and to attain the Buddhahood (見性成佛)”. And the main conclusions are as below: (1)The 4-phrase-definition is crystalized in Sung, to signify the “aim and method” of Chan tradition since Bodhidharma. (2)Based on the 4-phrase-definition, comes the requirement of the “continuity” and the “identity” of Chan transmission. Thus, the significance of Shenhui’s (神會) “ting shih-fei”(定是非) can be understood. (3)Many Dunhuang manuscripts (e.g. ChuanFabao Ji (傳法寶紀) and Li-tai Fa-pao Chi (歷代法寶記)), support the 4-phrase-definition of Chan tradition; however, they are often overlooked or misread. (4)Reconfirmation of the 4-phrase-definition is essential to make the contemporary Chan studies leave its predicaments and have a better outlook.
