|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is Our Shared Sensory World?: Ming Dynasty Debates on Yogacara versus Huayan Doctrines=何謂「器世間」？ — 明末唯識與華嚴學家之爭論 |
|
|
|
| Author |
白立冰
|
|---|
| Source |
Journal of Chinese Buddhist Studies=中華佛學學報
|
|---|
| Volume | v.31 |
|---|
| Date | 2018.07 |
|---|
| Pages | 117 - 170 |
|---|
| Publisher | Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies=中華佛學研究所 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www.chibs.edu.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 新北市, 臺灣 [New Taipei City, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese; 英文=English |
|---|
| Note | Author Affiliations: Sheng Yen Postdoctoral Fellow in Chinese Buddhism, University of British Columbia, Vancouver |
|---|
| Keyword | Yogācāra=瑜珈行派; Consciousness-only=唯識宗; Cheng weishi lun=《成唯識論》; Ming dynasty=明朝; Bhājanaloka=器世間 |
|---|
| Abstract | This paper examines how two Ming Dynasty philosophers, steeped in the Yogācāra and Huayan 華嚴 Buddhist traditions, engaged with the question of how the world is commonly shared. It describes the debates held in the sacred Wutai Mountains between a Yogācāra scholar, Zhengui 真貴, and a Huayaninclined scholar, Zhencheng 鎮澄, on the topic of what constitutes the shared “world of sensory experience” (Sanskrit: bhājanaloka; Tibetan: snod kyi ‘jig rten; Chinese: qi shijian 器世間). This paper provides detailed analyses of the theoretical positions of the two experts who vigorously disputed the question of how, given the Yogācāra premise of individual and multiple consciousness, sentient beings share common experiences of the world. The Wutai debates illustrate how and why the question of what constitutes our shared world mattered to Buddhist scholars in the politically fractured and intellectually fractious years of the latter Ming Dynasty. Zhencheng and Zhengui’s paradigmatic analyses paint a picture of a community of scholars grappling with textual and conceptual lacunae in the touchstone doctrine by drawing not only from Yogācāra, but from other systems of Buddhist thought, in this instance, the Huayan tradition.
本文考察兩位沉浸在唯識宗和華嚴宗教義的明朝佛學家，就「有情生存世界如何為人所共享」這一問題所展開的辯論。五台山上，唯識學家真貴（1558-?）與華嚴宗傾向的鎮澄（1547-1617），二人爭論構成共同的器世間（梵語：bhājanaloka；藏語：snod kyi ‘jig rten）的原素。本文對兩位專家的立場和論證進行了詳細的剖析，他們二人以個體和多重意識的唯識教義為前提，激烈地爭論有關「眾生如何共享世界的共同經驗」的問題。在晚明政治斷裂和學術紛爭的背景下，五台辯論彰顯何以「構成器世間的原素」的問題對佛教學者關係重大。鎮澄和真貴的分析模式，繪製了一幅晚明學術群體的畫面，他們試圖不只從唯識思想，也從其他佛學系統，也就是華嚴學中，找出詮釋宇宙論的端倪。 |
|---|
| Table of contents | Introduction 119
Section One: Yogācāra and Huayan doctrines of the same world 121
The same world according to Yogācāra tradition 122
The same world according to the Huayan tradition 125
The sensory world according to the Yogācāra and Huayan traditions 126
The sensory world according the Yogācāra doctrine 130
The sensory world according to the Huayan teachings 134
The crux of the disputes between Zhencheng and Zhengui 137
The three-part syllogism: Zhengui’s defense of the same-world, different manifestations 139
Section Two: The Wutai Debates—Zhencheng and Zhengui dispute the nature of the same world 142
Zhencheng’s defense of the same world according to the Huayan doctrine 142
Zhencheng’s critique of the light metaphor: Lamps are not perfect emitters of light 143
The example of the warring states of Qin and Chu 145
The example of the pebble removed from the mountain 146
The example of the millstone 146
Zhencheng on the nature of explicit consciousness 148
“There is naught but one worldly realm” 151
Zhencheng’s concession: This is not the Huayan view 154
The heart of Zhengui’s rejoinder to Zhencheng 155
Zhengui’s defense of the lamp metaphor 155
The mountain range: Does it belong to Chu or Qin? 156
The pebble removed from the mountain: Does it disappear? 157
The example of the lumberjack 158
Defending the disharmony between the Yogācāra and Huayan doctrines 158
Conclusion: On the (in)compatibility of the Yogācāra and Huayan view of the same world 162
Acknowledgement 165 |
|---|
| ISSN | 23132000 (P); 23132019 (E) |
|---|
| Hits | 318 |
|---|
| Created date | 2018.08.13 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2022.05.18 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
