|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
絕對無與哲學觀念的典範=Absolute Nothingness and the Paradigms of Philosophical Concepts |
|
|
|
| Author |
吳汝鈞 (著)=Ng, Yu-kwan (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
正觀雜誌=Satyabhisamaya: A Buddhist Studies Quarterly
|
|---|
| Volume | n.56 |
|---|
| Date | 2011.03.25 |
|---|
| Pages | 105 - 292 |
|---|
| Publisher | 正觀雜誌社 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www.tt034.org.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 南投縣, 臺灣 [Nantou hsien, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Keyword | 花岡永子=Hanaoka Eko; 世界的表現性的證成=realization of the establishment of the world.; 虛無=mere emptiness; 相對有=relative being; 西谷啟治=Nishitani Keiji; 相對無=relative nothingness; 絕對有=absolute being; 絕對無=absolute nothingness; 典範=Paradigm; 自我的目的性的證成=teleological establishment of the self |
|---|
| Abstract | 本文是對京都學派第四代的花岡永子對西田幾多郎的絕對無觀念的理解，和她要建立的哲學觀念的典範的說明，這兩方面的論述與批判。在花岡看來，哲學典範有終極真理的意思，是概括整套哲學體系的總原則。她提出五個哲學觀念的典範：相對有、相對無、絕對有、虛無和絕對無。她的理解是，相對有只關連到有限的世界，而且不真實，有如對於實物來說的影子。相對無與相對有為一體，是前者的內相，都不能講真理的絕對的、終極的性格。絕對有是永恆不變的實體，如作為理性的原理的理型、絕對精神和作為人格神的上帝。虛無是徹底的否定的取向，能摧破一切執著與邪見，但過於消極，不能建立妙有的世界。絕對無則是通過對一切二元性、相對性、分化性的突破而展示出來的真理的世界，從自我的形成、證成達於世界的表現性的形成、證成。作者通過對花岡所提出的哲學典範所涉及的問題所作的周延的理解，提出多點批判。其中最重要的有以下三點。第一，花岡以為人的生命個體是絕對有的表現，通過絕對的自我否定和大死一番而獲致的。但這是禪的做法，所謂“大死一番，殁後復甦”。這是預認一動感性、空靈性的主體才可能，而禪是屬於非實體主義的思維方式，它可以建立這種動感性、虛靈性的主體，卻與絕對有的實體主義的思維背景不協調。第二，虛無作為一終極典範，有摧破一切迷執、邪說的作用，另方面它能轉出妙有的世界，故不完全是消極的，花岡未能充分地注意到這點。第三，絕對無可以突破一切二元性，相對性、差異性與分化性，從自我的有的目的性的形成走向世界的表現性的證成。但絕對無作為一個與無自性、空為同一層次的真理典範，並不具有足夠的動感，讓自我的證成轉化為世界的證成。後者需要普渡眾生，絕對無缺乏這種動感。
This is a critical study of the ideas of absolute nothingness put
forward by Hanaoka Eko generally regarded to belong to the fourth
generation of the Kyoto School. The study also deals with
Hanaoka’s conceptions of the philosophical paradigms. This concept
embraces the meaning of ultimate truth and thereby is the general
principle of an overall philosophical system. She proposed five
paradigms as follows：relative being , relative nothingness , absolute
being , mere emptiness and absolute nothingness. Her understanding
was , relative being concerns merely the finite and unreal world ,
like the shadow of a real entity. Relative nothingness is the other
side of relative being . and stays on the same level. Both relative
being and relative nothingness have nothing to do with the
realization of the absolute and ultimate truth. Absolute being is an
eternal substance , such as Plato’s Idea , Hegel’s Spirit and the
personal God of Christianity. Mere emptiness is exclusively negative
in nature , which destroys all attachments and false views , without
carrying any positive elements that can build up a wondrous world
of entities. With regard to absolute nothingness , Hanaoka
maintained that it is the world of truth attained by overcoming and
transcending doctrinal limitations such as duality , relativism and
differentiation and, by doing so, one can uplift himself from self
establishment onto world establishment. In response to Hanaoka’s
conception of the philosophical paradigm, the author raised three
critical points. First , Hanaoka took the human life to be the
manifestation of absolute being , this is attained by means of the
absolute self-negation and the great death , as held in Zen Buddhism.
However , this presupposes the existence of a dynamic and
transparent subjectivity. In view of that Zen pertains to the way of
thinking of non-substantialism , it can establish a dynamic and
transparent subjectivity, but is not on a par with the standpoint of
non-substantialism. Second , mere emptiness , as an ultimate
paradigm , can destroy all kinds of delusion and false views , and yet
has the ability to initiate the wondrous world of entities.
Consequently , it is not entirely negative in nature. Hanaoka has not
paid full attention to this understanding. Third , absolute nothingness
is able to breakthrongh all kinds of duality , relativism and
differentiation , but unable to realize the manifestation of the world
from the teleology of the self. This is because absolute nothingness ,
with the Buddhist concept of non-substantial emptiness as its basis ,
does not possess sufficient dynamic or power to achieve this
difficult goal , which is , in short , the universal salvation of all
sentient being
|
|---|
| Table of contents | 一、花岡永子與哲學觀念的典範 6
二、哲學的典範觀念與相對有、相對無 8
三、絕對有 10
四、關於虛無問題 11
五、絕對無與絕對矛盾的自我同一 14
六、絕對無作為典範與宗教體驗 17
七、靈性問題 19
八、靈性與典範 21
|
|---|
| ISSN | 16099575 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 869 |
|---|
| Created date | 2013.06.21 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2017.09.06 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
